149 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25542092)
21. Effect of lithocholic acid on the mutagenicity of some substituted aromatic amines.
Kawalek JC; Hallmark RK; Andrews AW
J Natl Cancer Inst; 1983 Aug; 71(2):293-8. PubMed ID: 6348361
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Characterization of false positive, contaminant-driven mutagenicity in impurities associated with the sotorasib drug substance.
Coppi A; Davies R; Wegesser T; Ishida K; Karmel J; Han J; Aiello F; Xie Y; Corbett MT; Parsons AT; Monticello TM; Minocherhomji S
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2022 Jun; 131():105162. PubMed ID: 35331777
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Avoidance of the Ames test liability for aryl-amines via computation.
McCarren P; Bebernitz GR; Gedeck P; Glowienke S; Grondine MS; Kirman LC; Klickstein J; Schuster HF; Whitehead L
Bioorg Med Chem; 2011 May; 19(10):3173-82. PubMed ID: 21524589
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Use of the bacterial reverse mutation assay to predict carcinogenicity of N-nitrosamines.
Trejo-Martin A; Bercu JP; Thresher A; Tennant RE; Thomas RF; Cross K; Czich A; Waese K; Nicolette JJ; Murray J; Sonders P; Kondratiuk A; Cheung JR; Thomas D; Lynch A; Harvey J; Glowienke S; Custer L; Escobar PA
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2022 Nov; 135():105247. PubMed ID: 35998738
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. A deep dive into historical Ames study data for N-nitrosamine compounds.
Tennant RE; Ponting DJ; Thresher A
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2023 Sep; 143():105460. PubMed ID: 37495012
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. A core in vitro genotoxicity battery comprising the Ames test plus the in vitro micronucleus test is sufficient to detect rodent carcinogens and in vivo genotoxins.
Kirkland D; Reeve L; Gatehouse D; Vanparys P
Mutat Res; 2011 Mar; 721(1):27-73. PubMed ID: 21238603
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. In silico prediction of genotoxicity.
Wichard JD
Food Chem Toxicol; 2017 Aug; 106(Pt B):595-599. PubMed ID: 27979779
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Assessing the impact of expert knowledge on ICH M7 (Q)SAR predictions. Is expert review still needed?
Jayasekara PS; Skanchy SK; Kim MT; Kumaran G; Mugabe BE; Woodard LE; Yang J; Zych AJ; Kruhlak NL
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2021 Oct; 125():105006. PubMed ID: 34273441
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Dietary modulation of the carcinogenicity of the heterocyclic amines.
Weisburger JH; Rivenson A; Kingston DG; Wilkins TD; Van Tassell RL; Nagao M; Sugimura T; Hara Y
Princess Takamatsu Symp; 1995; 23():240-50. PubMed ID: 8844815
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Comparison of the Ames II and traditional Ames test responses with respect to mutagenicity, strain specificities, need for metabolism and correlation with rodent carcinogenicity.
Kamber M; Flückiger-Isler S; Engelhardt G; Jaeckh R; Zeiger E
Mutagenesis; 2009 Jul; 24(4):359-66. PubMed ID: 19447896
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Mutagenicity of cytochrome P450 2E1 substrates in the Ames test with the metabolic competent S. typhimurium strain YG7108pin3ERb5.
Emmert B; Bünger J; Keuch K; Müller M; Emmert S; Hallier E; Westphal GA
Toxicology; 2006 Nov; 228(1):66-76. PubMed ID: 16978761
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Utility of published DNA reactivity alerts.
Myden A; Guesne SJ; Cayley A; Williams RV
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2017 Aug; 88():77-86. PubMed ID: 28549899
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. 2-Hydroxypyridine-N-oxide (HOPO): Equivocal in the ames assay.
Dobo KL; Cheung JR; Gunther WC; Kenyon MO
Environ Mol Mutagen; 2018 May; 59(4):312-321. PubMed ID: 29481708
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. A compilation of genotoxicity and carcinogenicity data on aromatic aminosulphonic acids.
Jung R; Steinle D; Anliker R
Food Chem Toxicol; 1992 Jul; 30(7):635-60. PubMed ID: 1521839
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Assay of 855 test chemicals in ten tester strains using a new modification of the Ames test for bacterial mutagens.
McMahon RE; Cline JC; Thompson CZ
Cancer Res; 1979 Mar; 39(3):682-93. PubMed ID: 371791
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. EURL ECVAM Genotoxicity and Carcinogenicity Database of Substances Eliciting Negative Results in the Ames Test: Construction of the Database.
Madia F; Kirkland D; Morita T; White P; Asturiol D; Corvi R
Mutat Res Genet Toxicol Environ Mutagen; 2020; 854-855():503199. PubMed ID: 32660827
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Evaluation of the Vitotox and RadarScreen assays for the rapid assessment of genotoxicity in the early research phase of drug development.
Westerink WM; Stevenson JC; Lauwers A; Griffioen G; Horbach GJ; Schoonen WG
Mutat Res; 2009 May; 676(1-2):113-30. PubMed ID: 19393335
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Predicting mutagenicity of aromatic amines by various machine learning approaches.
Leong MK; Lin SW; Chen HB; Tsai FY
Toxicol Sci; 2010 Aug; 116(2):498-513. PubMed ID: 20507879
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Comparison of the computer programs DEREK and TOPKAT to predict bacterial mutagenicity. Deductive Estimate of Risk from Existing Knowledge. Toxicity Prediction by Komputer Assisted Technology.
Cariello NF; Wilson JD; Britt BH; Wedd DJ; Burlinson B; Gombar V
Mutagenesis; 2002 Jul; 17(4):321-9. PubMed ID: 12110629
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Genotoxicity studies of a desealant solvent mixture, SR-51.
Oakes DJ; Ritchie HE; Woodman PD; Narup E; Moscova M; Picker K; Webster WS
Toxicol Ind Health; 2009 Feb; 25(1):5-13. PubMed ID: 19318500
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
