246 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24407057)
1. Categorization of chemicals according to their relative human skin sensitizing potency.
Basketter DA; Alépée N; Ashikaga T; Barroso J; Gilmour N; Goebel C; Hibatallah J; Hoffmann S; Kern P; Martinozzi-Teissier S; Maxwell G; Reisinger K; Sakaguchi H; Schepky A; Tailhardat M; Templier M
Dermatitis; 2014; 25(1):11-21. PubMed ID: 24407057
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. Fragrances Categorized According to Relative Human Skin Sensitization Potency.
Api AM; Parakhia R; OʼBrien D; Basketter DA
Dermatitis; 2017; 28(5):299-307. PubMed ID: 28691948
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. 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]
6. Skin sensitization testing in potency and risk assessment.
Kimber I; Basketter DA; Berthold K; Butler M; Garrigue JL; Lea L; Newsome C; Roggeband R; Steiling W; Stropp G; Waterman S; Wiemann C
Toxicol Sci; 2001 Feb; 59(2):198-208. PubMed ID: 11158712
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. 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]
9. Correlation between experimental human and murine skin sensitization induction thresholds.
Api AM; Basketter D; Lalko J
Cutan Ocul Toxicol; 2015; 34(4):298-302. PubMed ID: 25430073
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. Evaluation of the skin sensitizing potency of chemicals by using the existing methods and considerations of relevance for elicitation.
Basketter DA; Andersen KE; Liden C; Van Loveren H; Boman A; Kimber I; Alanko K; Berggren E
Contact Dermatitis; 2005 Jan; 52(1):39-43. PubMed ID: 15701129
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. Development of a peptide reactivity assay for screening contact allergens.
Gerberick GF; Vassallo JD; Bailey RE; Chaney JG; Morrall SW; Lepoittevin JP
Toxicol Sci; 2004 Oct; 81(2):332-43. PubMed ID: 15254333
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. 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]
16. Comparison of dose-responses of contact allergens using the guinea pig maximization test and the local lymph node assay.
van Och FM; Vandebriel RJ; Prinsen MK; De Jong WH; Slob W; van Loveren H
Toxicology; 2001 Oct; 167(3):207-15. PubMed ID: 11578800
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The local lymph node assay: current position in the regulatory classification of skin sensitizing chemicals.
Basketter DA; Gerberick GF; Kimber I
Cutan Ocul Toxicol; 2007; 26(4):293-301. PubMed ID: 18058304
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. 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]
20. Assessment of the skin sensitising potency of the lower alkyl methacrylate esters.
Kimber I; Pemberton MA
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2014 Oct; 70(1):24-36. PubMed ID: 24956587
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
