116 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2234543)
21. Is the acceptable daily intake as presently used an axiom or a dogma?
Galli CL; Marinovich M; Lotti M
Toxicol Lett; 2008 Aug; 180(2):93-9. PubMed ID: 18588960
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Use of benchmark dose and meta-analysis to determine the most sensitive endpoint for risk assessment for dimethoate.
Reiss R; Gaylor D
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2005 Oct; 43(1):55-65. PubMed ID: 16099569
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Regulatory cancer risk assessment based on a quick estimate of a benchmark dose derived from the maximum tolerated dose.
Gaylor DW; Swirsky Gold L
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 1998 Dec; 28(3):222-5. PubMed ID: 10049793
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. A qualitative retrospective analysis of positive control data in developmental neurotoxicity studies.
Crofton KM; Makris SL; Sette WF; Mendez E; Raffaele KC
Neurotoxicol Teratol; 2004; 26(3):345-52. PubMed ID: 15113596
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Review of the U.S. Army's health risk assessments for oral exposure to six chemical-warfare agents. Introduction.
J Toxicol Environ Health A; 2000 Mar; 59(5-6):281-526. PubMed ID: 10742829
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Incidence and severity in relation to magnitude of intake above the ADI or TDI: use of critical effect data.
Renwick AG
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 1999 Oct; 30(2 Pt 2):S79-86. PubMed ID: 10597618
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Health assessment of phosgene: approaches for derivation of reference concentration.
Gift JS; McGaughy R; Singh DV; Sonawane B
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2008 Jun; 51(1):98-107. PubMed ID: 18440110
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Analysis and integration of developmental neurotoxicity and ancillary data into risk assessment: a case study of dimethoate.
DeSesso JM; Watson RE; Keen CL; Hazelden KP; Haws LC; Li AA
J Toxicol Environ Health A; 2009; 72(2):94-109. PubMed ID: 19034799
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. The benchmark dose method--review of available models, and recommendations for application in health risk assessment.
Filipsson AF; Sand S; Nilsson J; Victorin K
Crit Rev Toxicol; 2003; 33(5):505-42. PubMed ID: 14594105
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Deriving a data-based interspecies assessment factor using the NOAEL and the benchmark dose approach.
Bokkers BG; Slob W
Crit Rev Toxicol; 2007 Jun; 37(5):355-73. PubMed ID: 17612951
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Assessing the risks of exposures to multiple chemicals with a common mechanism of toxicity: how to cumulate?
Wilkinson CF; Christoph GR; Julien E; Kelley JM; Kronenberg J; McCarthy J; Reiss R
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2000 Feb; 31(1):30-43. PubMed ID: 10715222
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Cancer risk assessment for 1,3-butadiene: data integration opportunities.
Preston RJ
Chem Biol Interact; 2007 Mar; 166(1-3):150-5. PubMed ID: 16647696
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Comparison of aldicarb and methamidophos neurotoxicity at different ages in the rat: behavioral and biochemical parameters.
Moser VC
Toxicol Appl Pharmacol; 1999 Jun; 157(2):94-106. PubMed ID: 10366542
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Estimating the safe starting dose in phase I clinical trials and no observed effect level based on QSAR modeling of the human maximum recommended daily dose.
Contrera JF; Matthews EJ; Kruhlak NL; Benz RD
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2004 Dec; 40(3):185-206. PubMed ID: 15546675
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. A probabilistic framework for non-cancer risk assessment.
Chen JJ; Moon H; Kodell RL
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2007 Jun; 48(1):45-50. PubMed ID: 17166641
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Method for calculating ADI-derived guidance values for drug carryover levels in medicated feeds.
Nestmann ER; Lynch BS
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2007 Apr; 47(3):232-9. PubMed ID: 17150293
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Dose-response modeling of in vivo genotoxicity data for use in risk assessment: some approaches illustrated by an analysis of acrylamide.
Allen B; Zeiger E; Lawrence G; Friedman M; Shipp A
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2005 Feb; 41(1):6-27. PubMed ID: 15649824
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Use of human data for the derivation of a reference dose for chlorpyrifos.
van Gemert M; Dourson M; Moretto A; Watson M
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2001 Apr; 33(2):110-6. PubMed ID: 11350194
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Categorical regression of toxicity data: a case study using aldicarb.
Dourson ML; Teuschler LK; Durkin PR; Stiteler WM
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 1997 Apr; 25(2):121-9. PubMed ID: 9185888
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Strategy for genotoxicity testing: hazard identification and risk assessment in relation to in vitro testing.
Thybaud V; Aardema M; Clements J; Dearfield K; Galloway S; Hayashi M; Jacobson-Kram D; Kirkland D; MacGregor JT; Marzin D; Ohyama W; Schuler M; Suzuki H; Zeiger E;
Mutat Res; 2007 Feb; 627(1):41-58. PubMed ID: 17126066
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
