BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

209 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3222488)

  • 21. Expanding the reference dose concept to incorporate and optimize beneficial effects while preventing toxic responses from nonessential toxicants.
    Calabrese EJ
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 1996 Aug; 24(1 Pt 2):S68-75. PubMed ID: 8921559
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Human biomonitoring as a pragmatic tool to support health risk management of chemicals--examples under the EU REACH programme.
    Boogaard PJ; Hays SM; Aylward LL
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2011 Feb; 59(1):125-32. PubMed ID: 20933039
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Comparison of noncancer risk assessment approaches for use in deriving drinking water criteria.
    Gibson MC; deMonsabert SM; Orme-Zavaleta J
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 1997 Dec; 26(3):243-56. PubMed ID: 9441915
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Human health risk assessment of endosulfan: II. Dietary exposure assessment.
    Silva MH; Carr WC
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2010 Feb; 56(1):18-27. PubMed ID: 19733202
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Toxicology and human health assessment of decabromodiphenyl ether.
    Hardy ML; Banasik M; Stedeford T
    Crit Rev Toxicol; 2009 Nov; 39 Suppl 3():1-44. PubMed ID: 19874087
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Human health risk assessment of endosulfan. Part III: Occupational handler exposure and risk.
    Beauvais SL; Silva MH; Powell S
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2010 Feb; 56(1):28-37. PubMed ID: 19854234
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Biomonitoring equivalents for 2,2',4,4',5-pentabromodiphenylether (PBDE-99).
    Krishnan K; Adamou T; Aylward LL; Hays SM; Kirman CR; Nong A
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2011 Jul; 60(2):165-71. PubMed ID: 21466829
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. 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]  

  • 29. Purpose-Driven Risk Assessment.
    Lipscomb JC
    Toxicol Pathol; 2019 Dec; 47(8):1027-1034. PubMed ID: 31581901
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Assessing human health response in life cycle assessment using ED10s and DALYs: part 1--Cancer effects.
    Crettaz P; Pennington D; Rhomberg L; Brand K; Jolliet O
    Risk Anal; 2002 Oct; 22(5):931-46. PubMed ID: 12442990
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Low dose responses.
    Wilson R
    Risk Anal; 2000 Jun; 20(3):297-9. PubMed ID: 10949407
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Uncertainties in the reference dose for methylmercury.
    Dourson ML; Wullenweber AE; Poirier KA
    Neurotoxicology; 2001 Oct; 22(5):677-89. PubMed ID: 11770889
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Risk assessment initiatives for noncancer endpoints: implications for risk characterization of chemical mixtures.
    DeRosa CT; Dourson ML; Osborne R
    Toxicol Ind Health; 1989 Oct; 5(5):805-24. PubMed ID: 2683224
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. 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]  

  • 35. The unsteady state and inertia of chemical regulation under the US Toxic Substances Control Act.
    Krimsky S
    PLoS Biol; 2017 Dec; 15(12):e2002404. PubMed ID: 29252997
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Informing 21st-Century Risk Assessments with 21st-Century Science.
    Birnbaum LS; Burke TA; Jones JJ
    Environ Health Perspect; 2016 Apr; 124(4):A60-3. PubMed ID: 27035154
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. 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]  

  • 38. Toxicity testing in the 21st century: how will it affect risk assessment?
    Rhomberg LR
    J Toxicol Environ Health B Crit Rev; 2010 Feb; 13(2-4):361-75. PubMed ID: 20574908
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Improving the use of epidemiologic data in health risk assessment.
    Erdreich LS; Burnett C
    Toxicol Ind Health; 1985 Dec; 1(4):65-81. PubMed ID: 3843512
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Advancing exposure characterization for chemical evaluation and risk assessment.
    Cohen Hubal EA; Richard A; Aylward L; Edwards S; Gallagher J; Goldsmith MR; Isukapalli S; Tornero-Velez R; Weber E; Kavlock R
    J Toxicol Environ Health B Crit Rev; 2010 Feb; 13(2-4):299-313. PubMed ID: 20574904
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.