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 *

162 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25953400)

  • 1. IWGT report on quantitative approaches to genotoxicity risk assessment I. Methods and metrics for defining exposure-response relationships and points of departure (PoDs).
    MacGregor JT; Frötschl R; White PA; Crump KS; Eastmond DA; Fukushima S; Guérard M; Hayashi M; Soeteman-Hernández LG; Kasamatsu T; Levy DD; Morita T; Müller L; Schoeny R; Schuler MJ; Thybaud V; Johnson GE
    Mutat Res Genet Toxicol Environ Mutagen; 2015 May; 783():55-65. PubMed ID: 25953400
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. IWGT report on quantitative approaches to genotoxicity risk assessment II. Use of point-of-departure (PoD) metrics in defining acceptable exposure limits and assessing human risk.
    MacGregor JT; Frötschl R; White PA; Crump KS; Eastmond DA; Fukushima S; Guérard M; Hayashi M; Soeteman-Hernández LG; Johnson GE; Kasamatsu T; Levy DD; Morita T; Müller L; Schoeny R; Schuler MJ; Thybaud V
    Mutat Res Genet Toxicol Environ Mutagen; 2015 May; 783():66-78. PubMed ID: 25953401
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Derivation of point of departure (PoD) estimates in genetic toxicology studies and their potential applications in risk assessment.
    Johnson GE; Soeteman-Hernández LG; Gollapudi BB; Bodger OG; Dearfield KL; Heflich RH; Hixon JG; Lovell DP; MacGregor JT; Pottenger LH; Thompson CM; Abraham L; Thybaud V; Tanir JY; Zeiger E; van Benthem J; White PA
    Environ Mol Mutagen; 2014 Oct; 55(8):609-23. PubMed ID: 24801602
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Empirical analysis of BMD metrics in genetic toxicology part II: in vivo potency comparisons to promote reductions in the use of experimental animals for genetic toxicity assessment.
    Wills JW; Long AS; Johnson GE; Bemis JC; Dertinger SD; Slob W; White PA
    Mutagenesis; 2016 May; 31(3):265-75. PubMed ID: 26984301
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Next generation testing strategy for assessment of genomic damage: A conceptual framework and considerations.
    Dearfield KL; Gollapudi BB; Bemis JC; Benz RD; Douglas GR; Elespuru RK; Johnson GE; Kirkland DJ; LeBaron MJ; Li AP; Marchetti F; Pottenger LH; Rorije E; Tanir JY; Thybaud V; van Benthem J; Yauk CL; Zeiger E; Luijten M
    Environ Mol Mutagen; 2017 Jun; 58(5):264-283. PubMed ID: 27650663
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Quantitative approaches for assessing dose-response relationships in genetic toxicology studies.
    Gollapudi BB; Johnson GE; Hernandez LG; Pottenger LH; Dearfield KL; Jeffrey AM; Julien E; Kim JH; Lovell DP; Macgregor JT; Moore MM; van Benthem J; White PA; Zeiger E; Thybaud V
    Environ Mol Mutagen; 2013 Jan; 54(1):8-18. PubMed ID: 22987251
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Strategy for genotoxicity testing: hazard identification and risk assessment in relation to in vitro testing.
    Thybaud V; Aardema M; Clements J; Dearfield K; Galloway S; Hayashi M; Jacobson-Kram D; Kirkland D; MacGregor JT; Marzin D; Ohyama W; Schuler M; Suzuki H; Zeiger E;
    Mutat Res; 2007 Feb; 627(1):41-58. PubMed ID: 17126066
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Determination of potential thresholds for N-ethyl-N-nitrosourea and ethyl methanesulfonate based on a multi-endpoint genotoxicity assessment platform in rats.
    Zhu X; Huo J; Zeng Z; Liu Y; Li R; Chen Y; Zhang L; Chen J
    Environ Sci Pollut Res Int; 2022 Dec; 29(56):85128-85142. PubMed ID: 35793016
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Quantitative Interpretation of Genetic Toxicity Dose-Response Data for Risk Assessment and Regulatory Decision-Making: Current Status and Emerging Priorities.
    White PA; Long AS; Johnson GE
    Environ Mol Mutagen; 2020 Jan; 61(1):66-83. PubMed ID: 31794061
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Quantitative in vitro to in vivo extrapolation of genotoxicity data provides protective estimates of in vivo dose.
    Beal MA; Audebert M; Barton-Maclaren T; Battaion H; Bemis JC; Cao X; Chen C; Dertinger SD; Froetschl R; Guo X; Johnson G; Hendriks G; Khoury L; Long AS; Pfuhler S; Settivari RS; Wickramasuriya S; White P
    Environ Mol Mutagen; 2023 Feb; 64(2):105-122. PubMed ID: 36495195
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Empirical analysis of BMD metrics in genetic toxicology part I: in vitro analyses to provide robust potency rankings and support MOA determinations.
    Wills JW; Johnson GE; Doak SH; Soeteman-Hernández LG; Slob W; White PA
    Mutagenesis; 2016 May; 31(3):255-63. PubMed ID: 26687511
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Quantitative dose-response analysis of ethyl methanesulfonate genotoxicity in adult gpt-delta transgenic mice.
    Cao X; Mittelstaedt RA; Pearce MG; Allen BC; Soeteman-Hernández LG; Johnson GE; Bigger CA; Heflich RH
    Environ Mol Mutagen; 2014 Jun; 55(5):385-99. PubMed ID: 24535894
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Strategies in genotoxicology: Acceptance of innovative scientific methods in a regulatory context and from an industrial perspective.
    Steiblen G; Benthem JV; Johnson G
    Mutat Res Genet Toxicol Environ Mutagen; 2020 May; 853():503171. PubMed ID: 32522346
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. Addressing nonlinearity in the exposure-response relationship for a genotoxic carcinogen: cancer potency estimates for ethylene oxide.
    Kirman CR; Sweeney LM; Teta MJ; Sielken RL; Valdez-Flores C; Albertini RJ; Gargas ML
    Risk Anal; 2004 Oct; 24(5):1165-83. PubMed ID: 15563286
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Comparing BMD-derived genotoxic potency estimations across variants of the transgenic rodent gene mutation assay.
    Wills JW; Johnson GE; Battaion HL; Slob W; White PA
    Environ Mol Mutagen; 2017 Dec; 58(9):632-643. PubMed ID: 28945287
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Recommended approaches in the application of toxicogenomics to derive points of departure for chemical risk assessment.
    Farmahin R; Williams A; Kuo B; Chepelev NL; Thomas RS; Barton-Maclaren TS; Curran IH; Nong A; Wade MG; Yauk CL
    Arch Toxicol; 2017 May; 91(5):2045-2065. PubMed ID: 27928627
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Contributions of DNA repair and damage response pathways to the non-linear genotoxic responses of alkylating agents.
    Klapacz J; Pottenger LH; Engelward BP; Heinen CD; Johnson GE; Clewell RA; Carmichael PL; Adeleye Y; Andersen ME
    Mutat Res Rev Mutat Res; 2016; 767():77-91. PubMed ID: 27036068
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Qualitative and quantitative approaches in the dose-response assessment of genotoxic carcinogens.
    Fukushima S; Gi M; Kakehashi A; Wanibuchi H; Matsumoto M
    Mutagenesis; 2016 May; 31(3):341-6. PubMed ID: 26152227
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Dose-Response for Multiple Biomarkers of Exposure and Genotoxic Effect Following Repeated Treatment of Rats with the Alkylating Agents, MMS and MNU.
    Ji Z; LeBaron MJ; Schisler MR; Zhang F; Bartels MJ; Gollapudi BB; Pottenger LH
    Mutagenesis; 2016 May; 31(3):297-308. PubMed ID: 26040483
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.