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 *

145 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31676095)

  • 1. Commentary: An open appeal to the EPA for Superfund ERA reform.
    Tannenbaum LV
    Environ Pollut; 2020 Feb; 257():113308. PubMed ID: 31676095
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Ecological risk assessment in the United States environmental protection agency: a historical overview.
    Suter GW
    Integr Environ Assess Manag; 2008 Jul; 4(3):285-9. PubMed ID: 18321143
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The future direction of ecological risk assessment in the United States: reflecting on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's "Examination of risk assessment practices and principles".
    DeMott RP; Balaraman A; Sorensen MT
    Integr Environ Assess Manag; 2005 Jan; 1(1):77-82. PubMed ID: 16637151
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Framework for metals risk assessment.
    Fairbrother A; Wenstel R; Sappington K; Wood W
    Ecotoxicol Environ Saf; 2007 Oct; 68(2):145-227. PubMed ID: 17889701
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's activities to prepare for regulatory and risk assessment applications of genomics information.
    Benson WH; Gallagher K; McClintock JT
    Environ Mol Mutagen; 2007 Jun; 48(5):359-62. PubMed ID: 17567849
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. How to rebuild the US Environmental Protection Agency.
    Nature; 2020 Dec; 588(7838):369-370. PubMed ID: 33328685
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Significant shortcomings of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's latest draft risk characterization for dioxin-like compounds.
    Starr TB
    Toxicol Sci; 2001 Nov; 64(1):7-13. PubMed ID: 11606796
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The Environmental Protection Agency's Use of Community Involvement to Engage Communities at Superfund Sites.
    Zaragoza LJ
    Int J Environ Res Public Health; 2019 Oct; 16(21):. PubMed ID: 31671731
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. An end in sight.
    Nature; 2007 Jun; 447(7147):886. PubMed ID: 17581542
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Computational toxicology as implemented by the U.S. EPA: providing high throughput decision support tools for screening and assessing chemical exposure, hazard and risk.
    Kavlock R; Dix D
    J Toxicol Environ Health B Crit Rev; 2010 Feb; 13(2-4):197-217. PubMed ID: 20574897
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's examination of its risk assessment principles and practices: a brief perspective from the regulated community.
    Stahl RG; Guiseppi-Elie A; Bingman TS
    Integr Environ Assess Manag; 2005 Jan; 1(1):86-92. PubMed ID: 16637153
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Scientific issues in the U.S. EPA Framework for Metals Risk Assessment.
    Bradham K; Wentsel R
    J Toxicol Environ Health A; 2010; 73(2):108-13. PubMed ID: 20077282
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. NEPA, EPA and risk assessment: Has EPA lost its way?
    Calabrese EJ
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2012 Nov; 64(2):267-8. PubMed ID: 22940525
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Assessment of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency methods for identification of hazards to developing organisms, Part II: The developmental toxicity testing guideline.
    Claudio L; Bearer CF; Wallinga D
    Am J Ind Med; 1999 Jun; 35(6):554-63. PubMed ID: 10332508
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Lessons learned in applying the U.S. EPA proposed cancer guidelines to specific compounds.
    Andersen ME; Meek ME; Boorman GA; Brusick DJ; Cohen SM; Dragan YP; Frederick CB; Goodman JI; Hard GC; O'Flaherty EJ; Robinson DE
    Toxicol Sci; 2000 Feb; 53(2):159-72. PubMed ID: 10696764
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Cross-species coherence in effects and modes of action in support of causality determinations in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Integrated Science Assessment for Lead.
    Lassiter MG; Owens EO; Patel MM; Kirrane E; Madden M; Richmond-Bryant J; Hines EP; Davis JA; Vinikoor-Imler L; Dubois JJ
    Toxicology; 2015 Apr; 330():19-40. PubMed ID: 25637851
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. In vitro and modelling approaches to risk assessment from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ToxCast programme.
    Judson R; Houck K; Martin M; Knudsen T; Thomas RS; Sipes N; Shah I; Wambaugh J; Crofton K
    Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol; 2014 Jul; 115(1):69-76. PubMed ID: 24684691
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Use of genetic toxicology data in U.S. EPA risk assessment: the mercury study report as an example.
    Schoeny R
    Environ Health Perspect; 1996 May; 104 Suppl 3(Suppl 3):663-73. PubMed ID: 8781402
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Risk management frameworks for human health and environmental risks.
    Jardine C; Hrudey S; Shortreed J; Craig L; Krewski D; Furgal C; McColl S
    J Toxicol Environ Health B Crit Rev; 2003; 6(6):569-720. PubMed ID: 14698953
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's risk assessment guidelines.
    Jarabek AM; Farland WH
    Toxicol Ind Health; 1990 Oct; 6(5):199-216. PubMed ID: 2274984
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.