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 *

124 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31774671)

  • 1. Density Functional Theory Transition-State Modeling for the Prediction of Ames Mutagenicity in 1,4 Michael Acceptors.
    Townsend PA; Grayson MN
    J Chem Inf Model; 2019 Dec; 59(12):5099-5103. PubMed ID: 31774671
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Using Transition State Modeling To Predict Mutagenicity for Michael Acceptors.
    Allen TEH; Grayson MN; Goodman JM; Gutsell S; Russell PJ
    J Chem Inf Model; 2018 Jun; 58(6):1266-1271. PubMed ID: 29847119
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Reactivity prediction in aza-Michael additions without transition state calculations: the Ames test for mutagenicity.
    Townsend PA; Grayson MN
    Chem Commun (Camb); 2020 Nov; 56(88):13661-13664. PubMed ID: 33073273
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Reaction energies computed with density functional theory correspond with a whole organism effect; modelling the Ames test for mutagenicity.
    Leach AG; Cann R; Tomasi S
    Chem Commun (Camb); 2009 Mar; (9):1094-6. PubMed ID: 19225647
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. A multiple in silico program approach for the prediction of mutagenicity from chemical structure.
    White AC; Mueller RA; Gallavan RH; Aaron S; Wilson AG
    Mutat Res; 2003 Aug; 539(1-2):77-89. PubMed ID: 12948816
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Comparative evaluation of 11 in silico models for the prediction of small molecule mutagenicity: role of steric hindrance and electron-withdrawing groups.
    Ford KA; Ryslik G; Chan BK; Lewin-Koh SC; Almeida D; Stokes M; Gomez SR
    Toxicol Mech Methods; 2017 Jan; 27(1):24-35. PubMed ID: 27813437
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. About the mutagenicity of chlorine-substituted furanones and halopropenals. A QSAR study using molecular orbital indices.
    Tuppurainen K; Lötjönen S; Laatikainen R; Vartiainen T; Maran U; Strandberg M; Tamm T
    Mutat Res; 1991 Mar; 247(1):97-102. PubMed ID: 2002808
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Frontier orbital energies, hydrophobicity and steric factors as physical QSAR descriptors of molecular mutagenicity. A review with a case study: MX compounds.
    Tuppurainen K
    Chemosphere; 1999 Jun; 38(13):3015-30. PubMed ID: 10230045
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Mechanistic Reactivity Descriptors for the Prediction of Ames Mutagenicity of Primary Aromatic Amines.
    Kuhnke L; Ter Laak A; Göller AH
    J Chem Inf Model; 2019 Feb; 59(2):668-672. PubMed ID: 30694664
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Towards quantitative read across: Prediction of Ames mutagenicity in a large database.
    Benigni R
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2019 Nov; 108():104434. PubMed ID: 31374229
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Development of new structural alerts suitable for chemical category formation for assigning covalent and non-covalent mechanisms relevant to DNA binding.
    Enoch SJ; Cronin MT
    Mutat Res; 2012 Mar; 743(1-2):10-9. PubMed ID: 22260876
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A knowledge-based expert rule system for predicting mutagenicity (Ames test) of aromatic amines and azo compounds.
    Gadaleta D; Manganelli S; Manganaro A; Porta N; Benfenati E
    Toxicology; 2016 Aug; 370():20-30. PubMed ID: 27644887
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Comparative evaluation of in silico systems for ames test mutagenicity prediction: scope and limitations.
    Hillebrecht A; Muster W; Brigo A; Kansy M; Weiser T; Singer T
    Chem Res Toxicol; 2011 Jun; 24(6):843-54. PubMed ID: 21534561
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Improvement of quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) tools for predicting Ames mutagenicity: outcomes of the Ames/QSAR International Challenge Project.
    Honma M; Kitazawa A; Cayley A; Williams RV; Barber C; Hanser T; Saiakhov R; Chakravarti S; Myatt GJ; Cross KP; Benfenati E; Raitano G; Mekenyan O; Petkov P; Bossa C; Benigni R; Battistelli CL; Giuliani A; Tcheremenskaia O; DeMeo C; Norinder U; Koga H; Jose C; Jeliazkova N; Kochev N; Paskaleva V; Yang C; Daga PR; Clark RD; Rathman J
    Mutagenesis; 2019 Mar; 34(1):3-16. PubMed ID: 30357358
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. In silico prediction of chemical Ames mutagenicity.
    Xu C; Cheng F; Chen L; Du Z; Li W; Liu G; Lee PW; Tang Y
    J Chem Inf Model; 2012 Nov; 52(11):2840-7. PubMed ID: 23030379
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. In Silico Prediction of Chemically Induced Mutagenicity: How to Use QSAR Models and Interpret Their Results.
    Mombelli E; Raitano G; Benfenati E
    Methods Mol Biol; 2016; 1425():87-105. PubMed ID: 27311463
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. In silico prediction of chromosome damage: comparison of three (Q)SAR models.
    Morita T; Shigeta Y; Kawamura T; Fujita Y; Honda H; Honma M
    Mutagenesis; 2019 Mar; 34(1):91-100. PubMed ID: 30085209
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Resolution of contradiction between in silico predictions and Ames test results for four pharmaceutically relevant impurities.
    Gunther WC; Kenyon MO; Cheung JR; Dugger RW; Dobo KL
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2017 Dec; 91():68-76. PubMed ID: 29061373
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.