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 *

111 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2627673)

  • 1. The interpretation of equivocal or marginal animal carcinogenicity tests.
    Squire RA
    Cell Biol Toxicol; 1989 Dec; 5(4):371-6. PubMed ID: 2627673
    [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. Weighted multiplicity adjustments for animal carcinogenicity tests.
    Westfall PH; Soper KA
    J Biopharm Stat; 1998 Mar; 8(1):23-44; discussion 45-53. PubMed ID: 9547426
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Toxicology and carcinogenesis studies of pyrogallol (CAS No. 87-66-1) in F344/N rats and B6C3F1/N mice (dermal studies).
    National Toxicology Program
    Natl Toxicol Program Tech Rep Ser; 2013 Feb; (574):1-167. PubMed ID: 23518671
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. On the use of historical control data for trend test in carcinogenicity studies.
    Sun J
    Biometrics; 1999 Dec; 55(4):1273-6. PubMed ID: 11315082
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Data quality in predictive toxicology: reproducibility of rodent carcinogenicity experiments.
    Gottmann E; Kramer S; Pfahringer B; Helma C
    Environ Health Perspect; 2001 May; 109(5):509-14. PubMed ID: 11401763
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Weighted p-value adjustments for animal carcinogenicity trend test.
    Chen JJ; Lin KK; Huque M; Arani RB
    Biometrics; 2000 Jun; 56(2):586-92. PubMed ID: 10877321
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Statistical evaluation of mortality in long-term carcinogenicity bioassays using a Williams-type procedure.
    Herberich E; Hothorn LA
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2012 Oct; 64(1):26-34. PubMed ID: 22749913
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Examination of low-incidence brain tumor responses in F344 rats following chemical exposures in National Toxicology Program carcinogenicity studies.
    Sills RC; Hailey JR; Neal J; Boorman GA; Haseman JK; Melnick RL
    Toxicol Pathol; 1999; 27(5):589-99. PubMed ID: 10528639
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Re: pulmonary tumor types induced in Wistar rats of the so-called "19-dust study".
    Morfeld P; Borm P
    Exp Toxicol Pathol; 2007 Aug; 58(6):407; author reply 409. PubMed ID: 17560773
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Toxicology and carcinogenesis studies of p-nitrotoluene (CAS no. 99-99-0) in F344/N rats and B6C3F(1) mice (feed studies).
    National Toxicology Program
    Natl Toxicol Program Tech Rep Ser; 2002 May; (498):1-277. PubMed ID: 12118261
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. From exposure to effect: a comparison of modeling approaches to chemical carcinogenesis.
    van Leeuwen IM; Zonneveld C
    Mutat Res; 2001 Oct; 489(1):17-45. PubMed ID: 11673088
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Mouse-specific carcinogens: an assessment of hazard and significance for validation of short-term carcinogenicity bioassays in transgenic mice.
    Battershill JM; Fielder RJ
    Hum Exp Toxicol; 1998 Apr; 17(4):193-205. PubMed ID: 9617631
    [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. 2-Acetylaminofluorene mechanistic data and risk assessment: DNA reactivity, enhanced cell proliferation and tumor initiation.
    Verna L; Whysner J; Williams GM
    Pharmacol Ther; 1996; 71(1-2):83-105. PubMed ID: 8910950
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Risk from low-dose exposures.
    Portier CJ; Lucier GW; Edler L
    Science; 1994 Nov; 266(5188):1141-2. PubMed ID: 7973685
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Analysis of chloroethane toxicity and carcinogenicity including a comparison with bromoethane.
    Holder JW
    Toxicol Ind Health; 2008 Nov; 24(10):655-75. PubMed ID: 19141570
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The Tg rasH2 mouse in cancer hazard identification.
    Morton D; Alden CL; Roth AJ; Usui T
    Toxicol Pathol; 2002; 30(1):139-46. PubMed ID: 11890467
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Ratio estimates, the delta method, and quantal response tests for increased carcinogenicity.
    Bieler GS; Williams RL
    Biometrics; 1993 Sep; 49(3):793-801. PubMed ID: 8241374
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Comparisons of false negative rates from a trend test alone and from a trend test jointly with a control-high groups pairwise test in the determination of the carcinogenicity of new drugs.
    Lin KK; Rahman MA
    J Biopharm Stat; 2019; 29(1):128-142. PubMed ID: 29781779
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.