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 *

255 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32119890)

  • 1. The way forward for assessing the human health safety of cosmetics in the EU - Workshop proceedings.
    Rogiers V; Benfenati E; Bernauer U; Bodin L; Carmichael P; Chaudhry Q; Coenraads PJ; Cronin MTD; Dent M; Dusinska M; Ellison C; Ezendam J; Gaffet E; Galli CL; Goebel C; Granum B; Hollnagel HM; Kern PS; Kosemund-Meynen K; Ouédraogo G; Panteri E; Rousselle C; Stepnik M; Vanhaecke T; von Goetz N; Worth A
    Toxicology; 2020 Apr; 436():152421. PubMed ID: 32119890
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Alternative (non-animal) methods for cosmetics testing: current status and future prospects-2010.
    Adler S; Basketter D; Creton S; Pelkonen O; van Benthem J; Zuang V; Andersen KE; Angers-Loustau A; Aptula A; Bal-Price A; Benfenati E; Bernauer U; Bessems J; Bois FY; Boobis A; Brandon E; Bremer S; Broschard T; Casati S; Coecke S; Corvi R; Cronin M; Daston G; Dekant W; Felter S; Grignard E; Gundert-Remy U; Heinonen T; Kimber I; Kleinjans J; Komulainen H; Kreiling R; Kreysa J; Leite SB; Loizou G; Maxwell G; Mazzatorta P; Munn S; Pfuhler S; Phrakonkham P; Piersma A; Poth A; Prieto P; Repetto G; Rogiers V; Schoeters G; Schwarz M; Serafimova R; Tähti H; Testai E; van Delft J; van Loveren H; Vinken M; Worth A; Zaldivar JM
    Arch Toxicol; 2011 May; 85(5):367-485. PubMed ID: 21533817
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The use of non-animal alternatives in the safety evaluations of cosmetics ingredients by the Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety (SCCS).
    Vinardell MP
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2015 Mar; 71(2):198-204. PubMed ID: 25555996
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Safety evaluation of cosmetics in the EU. Reality and challenges for the toxicologist.
    Pauwels M; Rogiers V
    Toxicol Lett; 2004 Jun; 151(1):7-17. PubMed ID: 15177635
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. [Assessment of the sensitizing potency of cosmetic ingredients and commodities. How will the ingredients of cosmetics and commodities be tested in Europe today and tomorrow?].
    Peiser M; Platzek T; Luch A
    Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz; 2012 Mar; 55(3):373-9. PubMed ID: 22373851
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A tiered approach to the use of alternatives to animal testing for the safety assessment of cosmetics: eye irritation.
    McNamee P; Hibatallah J; Costabel-Farkas M; Goebel C; Araki D; Dufour E; Hewitt NJ; Jones P; Kirst A; Le Varlet B; Macfarlane M; Marrec-Fairley M; Rowland J; Schellauf F; Scheel J
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2009 Jul; 54(2):197-209. PubMed ID: 19393279
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Continuing animal tests on cosmetic ingredients for REACH in the EU.
    Knight J; Rovida C; Kreiling R; Zhu C; Knudsen M; Hartung T
    ALTEX; 2021; 38(4):653-668. PubMed ID: 34402521
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Current opinion on risk assessment of cosmetics.
    Kim KB; Kwack SJ; Lee JY; Kacew S; Lee BM
    J Toxicol Environ Health B Crit Rev; 2021 May; 24(4):137-161. PubMed ID: 33832410
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The SCCS Notes of Guidance for the testing of cosmetic ingredients and their safety evaluation, 11th revision, 30-31 March 2021, SCCS/1628/21.
    ;
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2021 Dec; 127():105052. PubMed ID: 34653552
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Insights on in vitro models for safety and toxicity assessment of cosmetic ingredients.
    Almeida A; Sarmento B; Rodrigues F
    Int J Pharm; 2017 Mar; 519(1-2):178-185. PubMed ID: 28104405
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Screening of repeated dose toxicity data in safety evaluation reports of cosmetic ingredients issued by the Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety between 2009 and 2019.
    Gustafson E; Debruyne C; De Troyer O; Rogiers V; Vinken M; Vanhaecke T
    Arch Toxicol; 2020 Nov; 94(11):3723-3735. PubMed ID: 32839844
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Human health safety evaluation of cosmetics in the EU: a legally imposed challenge to science.
    Pauwels M; Rogiers V
    Toxicol Appl Pharmacol; 2010 Mar; 243(2):260-74. PubMed ID: 20006634
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Is the replacement strategy, as it exists today in the EU for cosmetics, the way forward ?
    Rogiers V
    Arch Toxicol; 2011 May; 85(5):363-4. PubMed ID: 21528384
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. A tiered approach to the use of alternatives to animal testing for the safety assessment of cosmetics: skin irritation.
    Macfarlane M; Jones P; Goebel C; Dufour E; Rowland J; Araki D; Costabel-Farkas M; Hewitt NJ; Hibatallah J; Kirst A; McNamee P; Schellauf F; Scheel J
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2009 Jul; 54(2):188-96. PubMed ID: 19393278
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Changes in European legislation make it timely to introduce a transparent market surveillance system for cosmetics.
    Lodén M; Ungerth L; Serup J
    Acta Derm Venereol; 2007; 87(6):485-92. PubMed ID: 17989885
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Current EU regulatory requirements for the assessment of chemicals and cosmetic products: challenges and opportunities for introducing new approach methodologies.
    Pistollato F; Madia F; Corvi R; Munn S; Grignard E; Paini A; Worth A; Bal-Price A; Prieto P; Casati S; Berggren E; Bopp SK; Zuang V
    Arch Toxicol; 2021 Jun; 95(6):1867-1897. PubMed ID: 33851225
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Safety evaluations under the proposed US Safe Cosmetics and Personal Care Products Act of 2013: animal use and cost estimates.
    Knight J; Rovida C
    ALTEX; 2014; 31(2):177-208. PubMed ID: 24468774
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Assuring consumer safety without animal testing: a feasibility case study for skin sensitisation.
    Maxwell G; Aleksic M; Aptula A; Carmichael P; Fentem J; Gilmour N; Mackay C; Pease C; Pendlington R; Reynolds F; Scott D; Warner G; Westmoreland C
    Altern Lab Anim; 2008 Nov; 36(5):557-68. PubMed ID: 19025323
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. A tiered approach to the use of alternatives to animal testing for the safety assessment of cosmetics: genotoxicity. A COLIPA analysis.
    Pfuhler S; Kirst A; Aardema M; Banduhn N; Goebel C; Araki D; Costabel-Farkas M; Dufour E; Fautz R; Harvey J; Hewitt NJ; Hibatallah J; Carmichael P; Macfarlane M; Reisinger K; Rowland J; Schellauf F; Schepky A; Scheel J
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2010; 57(2-3):315-24. PubMed ID: 20382194
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Risk assessment of nanomaterials in cosmetics: a European union perspective.
    Henkler F; Tralau T; Tentschert J; Kneuer C; Haase A; Platzek T; Luch A; Götz ME
    Arch Toxicol; 2012 Nov; 86(11):1641-6. PubMed ID: 23052193
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 13.