These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

131 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22568851)

  • 1. Quantifying skin sensitization potency.
    Roberts DW
    Contact Dermatitis; 2012 Jun; 66(6):356-7. PubMed ID: 22568851
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Novel approach for classifying chemicals according to skin sensitizing potency by non-radioisotopic modification of the local lymph node assay.
    Takeyoshi M; Iida K; Shiraishi K; Hoshuyama S
    J Appl Toxicol; 2005; 25(2):129-34. PubMed ID: 15744759
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Skin sensitization potency of methyl methacrylate in the local lymph node assay: comparisons with guinea-pig data and human experience.
    Betts CJ; Dearman RJ; Heylings JR; Kimber I; Basketter DA
    Contact Dermatitis; 2006 Sep; 55(3):140-7. PubMed ID: 16918612
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Methyldibromoglutaronitrile: skin sensitization and quantitative risk assessment.
    Basketter DA
    Cutan Ocul Toxicol; 2010 Mar; 29(1):4-9. PubMed ID: 19883218
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Quantitative relationship between the local lymph node assay and human skin sensitization assays.
    Schneider K; Akkan Z
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2004 Jun; 39(3):245-55. PubMed ID: 15135206
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Estimation of relative skin sensitizing potency using the local lymph node assay: a comparison of formaldehyde with glutaraldehyde.
    Hilton J; Dearman RJ; Harvey P; Evans P; Basketter DA; Kimber I
    Am J Contact Dermat; 1998 Mar; 9(1):29-33. PubMed ID: 9471984
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Updating the skin sensitization in vitro data assessment paradigm in 2009--a chemistry and QSAR perspective.
    Roberts DW; Patlewicz GY
    J Appl Toxicol; 2010 Apr; 30(3):286-8; discussion 289. PubMed ID: 20131408
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The local lymph node assay compared with the human maximization test as an indicator of allergic potency in humans using patch test clinic populations.
    Zaghi D; Maibach HI
    Cutan Ocul Toxicol; 2009; 28(2):61-4. PubMed ID: 19514928
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The impact of vehicle on the relative potency of skin-sensitizing chemicals in the local lymph node assay.
    Jowsey IR; Clapp CJ; Safford B; Gibbons BT; Basketter DA
    Cutan Ocul Toxicol; 2008; 27(2):67-75. PubMed ID: 18568891
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The local lymph node assay and skin sensitization testing.
    Kimber I; Dearman RJ
    Methods Mol Biol; 2010; 598():221-31. PubMed ID: 19967517
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Assessment of the skin sensitization potency of eugenol and its dimers using a non-radioisotopic modification of the local lymph node assay.
    Takeyoshi M; Noda S; Yamazaki S; Kakishima H; Yamasaki K; Kimber I
    J Appl Toxicol; 2004; 24(1):77-81. PubMed ID: 14745850
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The reduced local lymph node assay: the impact of group size.
    Ryan CA; Chaney JG; Kern PS; Patlewicz GY; Basketter DA; Betts CJ; Dearman RJ; Kimber I; Gerberick GF
    J Appl Toxicol; 2008 May; 28(4):518-23. PubMed ID: 17879259
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Contact allergenic potency: correlation of human and local lymph node assay data.
    Gerberick GF; Robinson MK; Ryan CA; Dearman RJ; Kimber I; Basketter DA; Wright Z; Marks JG
    Am J Contact Dermat; 2001 Sep; 12(3):156-61. PubMed ID: 11526521
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Comparative analysis of skin sensitization potency of acrylates (methyl acrylate, ethyl acrylate, butyl acrylate, and ethylhexyl acrylate) using the local lymph node assay.
    Dearman RJ; Betts CJ; Farr C; McLaughlin J; Berdasco N; Wiench K; Kimber I
    Contact Dermatitis; 2007 Oct; 57(4):242-7. PubMed ID: 17868217
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Induction of skin sensitization is augmented in Nrf2-deficient mice.
    van der Veen JW; Gremmer ER; Vermeulen JP; van Loveren H; Ezendam J
    Arch Toxicol; 2013 Apr; 87(4):763-6. PubMed ID: 23143620
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Potency and risk assessment of a skin-sensitizing disperse dye using the local lymph node assay.
    Betts CJ; Dearman RJ; Kimber I; Maibach HI
    Contact Dermatitis; 2005 May; 52(5):268-72. PubMed ID: 15899000
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Potency values from the local lymph node assay: application to classification, labelling and risk assessment.
    Loveless SE; Api AM; Crevel RW; Debruyne E; Gamer A; Jowsey IR; Kern P; Kimber I; Lea L; Lloyd P; Mehmood Z; Steiling W; Veenstra G; Woolhiser M; Hennes C
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2010 Feb; 56(1):54-66. PubMed ID: 19733604
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Chemical load as a factor in skin sensitization risk assessment: rodent versus man.
    Anigbogu AN; Maibach HI
    Contact Dermatitis; 2001 Feb; 44(2):125-6. PubMed ID: 11205398
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The local lymph node assay and the assessment of relative potency: status of validation.
    Basketter DA; Gerberick F; Kimber I
    Contact Dermatitis; 2007 Aug; 57(2):70-5. PubMed ID: 17627643
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Predictive identification of human skin sensitization thresholds.
    Basketter DA; Clapp C; Jefferies D; Safford B; Ryan CA; Gerberick F; Dearman RJ; Kimber I
    Contact Dermatitis; 2005 Nov; 53(5):260-7. PubMed ID: 16283904
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.