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 *

161 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34506881)

  • 21. Evaluation of Existing QSAR Models and Structural Alerts and Development of New Ensemble Models for Genotoxicity Using a Newly Compiled Experimental Dataset.
    Pradeep P; Judson R; DeMarini DM; Keshava N; Martin TM; Dean J; Gibbons CF; Simha A; Warren SH; Gwinn MR; Patlewicz G
    Comput Toxicol; 2021 May; 18():. PubMed ID: 34504984
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Assessing the impact of expert knowledge on ICH M7 (Q)SAR predictions. Is expert review still needed?
    Jayasekara PS; Skanchy SK; Kim MT; Kumaran G; Mugabe BE; Woodard LE; Yang J; Zych AJ; Kruhlak NL
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2021 Oct; 125():105006. PubMed ID: 34273441
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. In Silico Prediction of Chemically Induced Mutagenicity: A Weight of Evidence Approach Integrating Information from QSAR Models and Read-Across Predictions.
    Mombelli E; Raitano G; Benfenati E
    Methods Mol Biol; 2022; 2425():149-183. PubMed ID: 35188632
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Integrated in silico and in vitro genotoxicity assessment of thirteen data-poor substances.
    Tran YK; Buick JK; Keir JLA; Williams A; Swartz CD; Recio L; White PA; Lambert IB; Yauk CL
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2019 Oct; 107():104427. PubMed ID: 31336127
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. 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]  

  • 26. Use of in silico systems and expert knowledge for structure-based assessment of potentially mutagenic impurities.
    Sutter A; Amberg A; Boyer S; Brigo A; Contrera JF; Custer LL; Dobo KL; Gervais V; Glowienke S; van Gompel J; Greene N; Muster W; Nicolette J; Reddy MV; Thybaud V; Vock E; White AT; Müller L
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2013 Oct; 67(1):39-52. PubMed ID: 23669331
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. The Consultancy Activity on In Silico Models for Genotoxic Prediction of Pharmaceutical Impurities.
    Pavan M; Kovarich S; Bassan A; Broccardo L; Yang C; Fioravanzo E
    Methods Mol Biol; 2016; 1425():511-29. PubMed ID: 27311479
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Data-based review of QSARs for predicting genotoxicity: the state of the art.
    Benigni R; Bossa C
    Mutagenesis; 2019 Mar; 34(1):17-23. PubMed ID: 30260416
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Testing strategies in mutagenicity and genetic toxicology: an appraisal of the guidelines of the European Scientific Committee for Cosmetics and Non-Food Products for the evaluation of hair dyes.
    Kirkland DJ; Henderson L; Marzin D; Müller L; Parry JM; Speit G; Tweats DJ; Williams GM
    Mutat Res; 2005 Dec; 588(2):88-105. PubMed ID: 16326131
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Evaluation of the ability of a battery of three in vitro genotoxicity tests to discriminate rodent carcinogens and non-carcinogens II. Further analysis of mammalian cell results, relative predictivity and tumour profiles.
    Kirkland D; Aardema M; Müller L; Makoto H
    Mutat Res; 2006 Sep; 608(1):29-42. PubMed ID: 16769241
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Chemistry-Wide Association Studies (CWAS): A Novel Framework for Identifying and Interpreting Structure-Activity Relationships.
    Low YS; Alves VM; Fourches D; Sedykh A; Andrade CH; Muratov EN; Rusyn I; Tropsha A
    J Chem Inf Model; 2018 Nov; 58(11):2203-2213. PubMed ID: 30376324
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Validation of Toxtree and SciQSAR in silico predictive software using a publicly available benchmark mutagenicity database and their applicability for the qualification of impurities in pharmaceuticals.
    Contrera JF
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2013 Nov; 67(2):285-93. PubMed ID: 23969001
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Characterization and validation of an in silico toxicology model to predict the mutagenic potential of drug impurities.
    Valerio LG; Cross KP
    Toxicol Appl Pharmacol; 2012 May; 260(3):209-21. PubMed ID: 22426359
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Construction and application of (Q)SAR models to predict chemical-induced in vitro chromosome aberrations.
    Hsu CW; Hewes KP; Stavitskaya L; Kruhlak NL
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2018 Nov; 99():274-288. PubMed ID: 30278198
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. New in silico models to predict in vitro micronucleus induction as marker of genotoxicity.
    Baderna D; Gadaleta D; Lostaglio E; Selvestrel G; Raitano G; Golbamaki A; Lombardo A; Benfenati E
    J Hazard Mater; 2020 Mar; 385():121638. PubMed ID: 31757721
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Use of In Silico Methods for Regulatory Toxicological Assessment of Pharmaceutical Impurities.
    Kovarich S; Cappelli CI
    Methods Mol Biol; 2022; 2425():537-560. PubMed ID: 35188646
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Evaluation of the ability of a battery of three in vitro genotoxicity tests to discriminate rodent carcinogens and non-carcinogens I. Sensitivity, specificity and relative predictivity.
    Kirkland D; Aardema M; Henderson L; Müller L
    Mutat Res; 2005 Jul; 584(1-2):1-256. PubMed ID: 15979392
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. The new ISSMIC database on in vivo micronucleus and its role in assessing genotoxicity testing strategies.
    Benigni R; Bossa C; Tcheremenskaia O; Battistelli CL; Crettaz P
    Mutagenesis; 2012 Jan; 27(1):87-92. PubMed ID: 21965461
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. The comet assay with multiple mouse organs: comparison of comet assay results and carcinogenicity with 208 chemicals selected from the IARC monographs and U.S. NTP Carcinogenicity Database.
    Sasaki YF; Sekihashi K; Izumiyama F; Nishidate E; Saga A; Ishida K; Tsuda S
    Crit Rev Toxicol; 2000 Nov; 30(6):629-799. PubMed ID: 11145306
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. ToxAlerts: a Web server of structural alerts for toxic chemicals and compounds with potential adverse reactions.
    Sushko I; Salmina E; Potemkin VA; Poda G; Tetko IV
    J Chem Inf Model; 2012 Aug; 52(8):2310-6. PubMed ID: 22876798
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.