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 *

152 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22740780)

  • 1. Changing the Risk Paradigms Can be Good for Our Health: J-Shaped, Linear and Threshold Dose-Response Models.
    Ricci PF; Straja SR; Cox AL
    Dose Response; 2012; 10(2):177-89. PubMed ID: 22740780
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Universality of J-shaped and U-shaped dose-response relations as emergent properties of stochastic transition systems.
    Cox LA
    Dose Response; 2006 May; 3(3):353-68. PubMed ID: 18648616
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Hormesis without cell killing.
    Cox LA
    Risk Anal; 2009 Mar; 29(3):393-400. PubMed ID: 18793280
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Systems Cancer Biology and the Controlling Mechanisms for the J-Shaped Cancer Dose Response: Towards Relaxing the LNT Hypothesis.
    Lou IC; Zhao Y; Wu Y; Ricci PF
    Dose Response; 2012; 11(3):301-18. PubMed ID: 23983661
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. LNT and cancer risk assessment: Its flawed foundations part 1: Radiation and leukemia: Where LNT began.
    Calabrese EJ
    Environ Res; 2021 Jun; 197():111025. PubMed ID: 33744270
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Modeling Dose-response at Low Dose: A Systems Biology Approach for Ionization Radiation.
    Zhao Y; Ricci PF
    Dose Response; 2010 Mar; 8(4):456-77. PubMed ID: 21191485
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. A review of low-dose arsenic risks and human cancers.
    Lamm SH; Boroje IJ; Ferdosi H; Ahn J
    Toxicology; 2021 May; 456():152768. PubMed ID: 33781801
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Low-dose radiation risk extrapolation fallacy associated with the linear-no-threshold model.
    Scott BR
    Hum Exp Toxicol; 2008 Feb; 27(2):163-8. PubMed ID: 18480143
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Re-evaluation of the linear no-threshold (LNT) model using new paradigms and modern molecular studies.
    Tharmalingam S; Sreetharan S; Brooks AL; Boreham DR
    Chem Biol Interact; 2019 Mar; 301():54-67. PubMed ID: 30763548
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Predicting the effect of ozone on vegetation via linear non-threshold (LNT), threshold and hormetic dose-response models.
    Agathokleous E; Belz RG; Calatayud V; De Marco A; Hoshika Y; Kitao M; Saitanis CJ; Sicard P; Paoletti E; Calabrese EJ
    Sci Total Environ; 2019 Feb; 649():61-74. PubMed ID: 30172135
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Black rain in Hiroshima: a critique to the Life Span Study of A-bomb survivors, basis of the linear no-threshold model.
    Sutou S
    Genes Environ; 2020; 42():1. PubMed ID: 31908690
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Linear-No-Threshold Default Assumptions for Noncancer and Nongenotoxic Cancer Risks: A Mathematical and Biological Critique.
    Bogen KT
    Risk Anal; 2016 Mar; 36(3):589-604. PubMed ID: 26249816
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Review of chinese environmental risk assessment regulations and case studies.
    Meng X; Zhang Y; Zhao Y; Lou IC; Gao J
    Dose Response; 2012; 10(2):274-96. PubMed ID: 22740787
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Threshold dose response for tumor induction by genotoxic carcinogens modeled via cell-cycle delay.
    Lutz WK; Kopp-Schneider A
    Toxicol Sci; 1999 May; 49(1):110-5. PubMed ID: 10367348
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Health risks of low photon energy imaging.
    Redpath JL
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2006; 122(1-4):528-33. PubMed ID: 17261539
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The linear no-threshold model is less realistic than threshold or hormesis-based models: An evolutionary perspective.
    Costantini D; Borremans B
    Chem Biol Interact; 2019 Mar; 301():26-33. PubMed ID: 30342016
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Temporal stability of chemical hormesis (CH): Is CH just a temporary stop on the road to thresholds and toxic responses?
    Mushak P
    Sci Total Environ; 2016 Nov; 569-570():1446-1456. PubMed ID: 27396315
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Ethyl methanesulfonate toxicity in Viracept--a comprehensive human risk assessment based on threshold data for genotoxicity.
    Müller L; Gocke E; Lavé T; Pfister T
    Toxicol Lett; 2009 Nov; 190(3):317-29. PubMed ID: 19443141
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The LNT model for cancer induction is not supported by radiobiological data.
    Scott BR; Tharmalingam S
    Chem Biol Interact; 2019 Mar; 301():34-53. PubMed ID: 30763552
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Linear-No-Threshold Default Assumptions are Unwarranted for Cytotoxic Endpoints Independently Triggered by Ultrasensitive Molecular Switches.
    Bogen KT
    Risk Anal; 2017 Oct; 37(10):1808-1816. PubMed ID: 28437864
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.