158 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2340975)
1. Two-stage models of carcinogenesis, classification of agents, and design of experiments.
Portier CJ; Edler L
Fundam Appl Toxicol; 1990 Apr; 14(3):444-60. PubMed ID: 2340975
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Are tumor incidence rates from chronic bioassays telling us what we need to know about carcinogens?
Gaylor DW
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2005 Mar; 41(2):128-33. PubMed ID: 15698536
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Liver tumor promoters and other mouse liver carcinogens.
Ward JM; Diwan BA; Lubet RA; Henneman JR; Devor DE
Prog Clin Biol Res; 1990; 331():85-108. PubMed ID: 2179967
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Types and amounts of carcinogens as potential human cancer hazards.
Weisburger JH; Williams GM
Cell Biol Toxicol; 1989 Dec; 5(4):377-91. PubMed ID: 2627674
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Carcinogenicity categorization of chemicals-new aspects to be considered in a European perspective.
Bolt HM; Foth H; Hengstler JG; Degen GH
Toxicol Lett; 2004 Jun; 151(1):29-41. PubMed ID: 15177638
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Statistical properties of a two-stage model of carcinogenesis.
Portier CJ
Environ Health Perspect; 1987 Dec; 76():125-31. PubMed ID: 3447890
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Classification schemes for carcinogenicity based on hazard-identification have become outmoded and serve neither science nor society.
Boobis AR; Cohen SM; Dellarco VL; Doe JE; Fenner-Crisp PA; Moretto A; Pastoor TP; Schoeny RS; Seed JG; Wolf DC
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2016 Dec; 82():158-166. PubMed ID: 27780763
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Bioassays of shortened duration for drugs: statistical implications.
Kodell RL; Lin KK; Thorn BT; Chen JJ
Toxicol Sci; 2000 Jun; 55(2):415-32. PubMed ID: 10828275
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Case study of carcinogenicity by initiation-promotion model.
Mutai M; Aoki T
J Toxicol Sci; 1996 Dec; 21(5):489-92. PubMed ID: 9035060
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. An enhanced thirteen-week bioassay as an alternative for screening for carcinogenesis factors.
Cohen SM
Asian Pac J Cancer Prev; 2010; 11(1):15-7. PubMed ID: 20593920
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Technical modification of the Balb/c 3T3 cell transformation assay: the use of serum-reduced medium to optimise the practicability of the protocol.
Hayashi K; Sasaki K; Asada S; Tsuchiya T; Hayashi M; Yoshimura I; Tanaka N; Umeda M
Altern Lab Anim; 2008 Dec; 36(6):653-65. PubMed ID: 19154092
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Receptor-mediated biological processes: implications for evaluating carcinogens.
Silbergeld E
Prog Clin Biol Res; 1994; 387():273-93. PubMed ID: 7972252
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Novel naïve Bayes classification models for predicting the carcinogenicity of chemicals.
Zhang H; Cao ZX; Li M; Li YZ; Peng C
Food Chem Toxicol; 2016 Nov; 97():141-149. PubMed ID: 27597133
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. How well can in vitro data predict in vivo effects of chemicals? Rodent carcinogenicity as a case study.
Anthony Tony Cox L; Popken DA; Kaplan AM; Plunkett LM; Becker RA
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2016 Jun; 77():54-64. PubMed ID: 26879462
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. The results of assays in Drosophila as indicators of exposure to carcinogens.
Vogel EW; Graf U; Frei HJ; Nivard MM
IARC Sci Publ; 1999; (146):427-70. PubMed ID: 10353398
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Interaction between two carcinogens in the two-stage clonal expansion model of carcinogenesis.
Zielinski J; Kodell R; Krewski D
J Epidemiol Biostat; 2001; 6(2):219-28. PubMed ID: 11434501
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. In Vitro-In Vivo Carcinogenicity.
Steinberg P
Adv Biochem Eng Biotechnol; 2017; 157():81-96. PubMed ID: 27506831
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. The effect of different tumor groupings on findings of anticarcinogenic responses in long-term rodent bioassays.
Gray GM; Huang H; Linkov I; Polkanov M; Wilson R
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2002 Oct; 36(2):139-48. PubMed ID: 12460748
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Characterizing and predicting carcinogenicity and mode of action using conventional and toxicogenomics methods.
Waters MD; Jackson M; Lea I
Mutat Res; 2010 Dec; 705(3):184-200. PubMed ID: 20399889
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Issues in the design and interpretation of chronic toxicity and carcinogenicity studies in rodents: approaches to dose selection.
Rhomberg LR; Baetcke K; Blancato J; Bus J; Cohen S; Conolly R; Dixit R; Doe J; Ekelman K; Fenner-Crisp P; Harvey P; Hattis D; Jacobs A; Jacobson-Kram D; Lewandowski T; Liteplo R; Pelkonen O; Rice J; Somers D; Turturro A; West W; Olin S
Crit Rev Toxicol; 2007; 37(9):729-837. PubMed ID: 17957539
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
