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 *

246 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28006899)

  • 61. QSPR/QSAR models for prediction of the physico-chemical properties and biological activity of polychlorinated diphenyl ethers (PCDEs).
    Hui-Ying X; Jian-Wei Z; Gui-Xiang H; Wei W
    Chemosphere; 2010 Jul; 80(6):665-70. PubMed ID: 20488504
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 62. The Tox21 10K Compound Library: Collaborative Chemistry Advancing Toxicology.
    Richard AM; Huang R; Waidyanatha S; Shinn P; Collins BJ; Thillainadarajah I; Grulke CM; Williams AJ; Lougee RR; Judson RS; Houck KA; Shobair M; Yang C; Rathman JF; Yasgar A; Fitzpatrick SC; Simeonov A; Thomas RS; Crofton KM; Paules RS; Bucher JR; Austin CP; Kavlock RJ; Tice RR
    Chem Res Toxicol; 2021 Feb; 34(2):189-216. PubMed ID: 33140634
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 63. Uncertainty quantification in ToxCast high throughput screening.
    Watt ED; Judson RS
    PLoS One; 2018; 13(7):e0196963. PubMed ID: 30044784
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 64. Revisiting the general solubility equation: in silico prediction of aqueous solubility incorporating the effect of topographical polar surface area.
    Ali J; Camilleri P; Brown MB; Hutt AJ; Kirton SB
    J Chem Inf Model; 2012 Feb; 52(2):420-8. PubMed ID: 22196228
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 65. Identifying uncertainty in physical-chemical property estimation with IFSQSAR.
    Brown TN; Sangion A; Arnot JA
    J Cheminform; 2024 May; 16(1):65. PubMed ID: 38816859
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 66. Kinetic distribution model for chemicals based on results from a standard environmental system.
    Figge K; Klahn J; Koch J
    Ecotoxicol Environ Saf; 1986 Jun; 11(3):320-38. PubMed ID: 3720623
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 67. In Silico Study of In Vitro GPCR Assays by QSAR Modeling.
    Mansouri K; Judson RS
    Methods Mol Biol; 2016; 1425():361-81. PubMed ID: 27311474
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 68. Validation of CHEMEST, an on-line system for the estimation of chemical properties.
    Boethling RS; Campbell SE; Lynch DG; LaVeck GD
    Ecotoxicol Environ Saf; 1988 Feb; 15(1):21-30. PubMed ID: 3359953
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 69. Multiple machine learning algorithms assisted QSPR models for aqueous solubility: Comprehensive assessment with CRITIC-TOPSIS.
    Zhu T; Chen Y; Tao C
    Sci Total Environ; 2023 Jan; 857(Pt 2):159448. PubMed ID: 36252662
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 70. Predicting Organ Toxicity Using in Vitro Bioactivity Data and Chemical Structure.
    Liu J; Patlewicz G; Williams AJ; Thomas RS; Shah I
    Chem Res Toxicol; 2017 Nov; 30(11):2046-2059. PubMed ID: 28768096
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 71. Environmental Hazard Screening of Heterocyclic Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons: Physicochemical Data and In Silico Models.
    Çelik G; Beil S; Stolte S; Markiewicz M
    Environ Sci Technol; 2023 Jan; 57(1):570-581. PubMed ID: 36542499
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 72. Novel Bayesian Method to Derive Final Adjusted Values of Physicochemical Properties: Application to 74 Compounds.
    Rodgers TFM; Okeme JO; Parnis JM; Girdhari K; Bidleman TF; Wan Y; Jantunen LM; Diamond ML
    Environ Sci Technol; 2021 Sep; 55(18):12302-12316. PubMed ID: 34459590
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 73. A review on machine learning methods for in silico toxicity prediction.
    Idakwo G; Luttrell J; Chen M; Hong H; Zhou Z; Gong P; Zhang C
    J Environ Sci Health C Environ Carcinog Ecotoxicol Rev; 2018; 36(4):169-191. PubMed ID: 30628866
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 74. Hierarchical dose-response modeling for high-throughput toxicity screening of environmental chemicals.
    Wilson A; Reif DM; Reich BJ
    Biometrics; 2014 Mar; 70(1):237-46. PubMed ID: 24397816
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 75. Prediction of environmental parameters of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons with COSMO-RS.
    Schröder B; Santos LM; Rocha MA; Oliveira MB; Marrucho IM; Coutinho JA
    Chemosphere; 2010 May; 79(8):821-9. PubMed ID: 20371097
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 76. History of EPI Suite™ and future perspectives on chemical property estimation in US Toxic Substances Control Act new chemical risk assessments.
    Card ML; Gomez-Alvarez V; Lee WH; Lynch DG; Orentas NS; Lee MT; Wong EM; Boethling RS
    Environ Sci Process Impacts; 2017 Mar; 19(3):203-212. PubMed ID: 28275775
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 77. QSPR prediction of n-octanol/water partition coefficient for polychlorinated biphenyls.
    Lü W; Chen Y; Liu M; Chen X; Hu Z
    Chemosphere; 2007 Sep; 69(3):469-78. PubMed ID: 17568650
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 78. Machine learning models for predicting endocrine disruption potential of environmental chemicals.
    Chierici M; Giulini M; Bussola N; Jurman G; Furlanello C
    J Environ Sci Health C Environ Carcinog Ecotoxicol Rev; 2018; 36(4):237-251. PubMed ID: 30628533
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 79. The partition behavior of tributyltin and prediction of environmental fate, persistence and toxicity in aquatic environments.
    Bangkedphol S; Keenan HE; Davidson C; Sakultantimetha A; Songsasen A
    Chemosphere; 2009 Nov; 77(10):1326-32. PubMed ID: 19846204
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 80. Target-specific toxicity knowledgebase (TsTKb): a novel toolkit for in silico predictive toxicology.
    Li Y; Idakwo G; Thangapandian S; Chen M; Hong H; Zhang C; Gong P
    J Environ Sci Health C Environ Carcinog Ecotoxicol Rev; 2018; 36(4):219-236. PubMed ID: 30426823
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 13.