161 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34593056)
1. Bacterial mutagenicity test data: collection by the task force of the Japan pharmaceutical manufacturers association.
Hakura A; Awogi T; Shiragiku T; Ohigashi A; Yamamoto M; Kanasaki K; Oka H; Dewa Y; Ozawa S; Sakamoto K; Kato T; Yamamura E
Genes Environ; 2021 Sep; 43(1):41. PubMed ID: 34593056
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. Comparison of the computer programs DEREK and TOPKAT to predict bacterial mutagenicity. Deductive Estimate of Risk from Existing Knowledge. Toxicity Prediction by Komputer Assisted Technology.
Cariello NF; Wilson JD; Britt BH; Wedd DJ; Burlinson B; Gombar V
Mutagenesis; 2002 Jul; 17(4):321-9. PubMed ID: 12110629
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. Screening for Ames mutagenicity of food flavor chemicals by (quantitative) structure-activity relationship.
Honma M; Kitazawa A; Kasamatsu T; Sugiyama KI
Genes Environ; 2020 Nov; 42(1):32. PubMed ID: 33292765
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. Identification of the structural requirements for mutagencitiy, by incorporating molecular flexibility and metabolic activation of chemicals. II. General Ames mutagenicity model.
Serafimova R; Todorov M; Pavlov T; Kotov S; Jacob E; Aptula A; Mekenyan O
Chem Res Toxicol; 2007 Apr; 20(4):662-76. PubMed ID: 17381132
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Assay of 855 test chemicals in ten tester strains using a new modification of the Ames test for bacterial mutagens.
McMahon RE; Cline JC; Thompson CZ
Cancer Res; 1979 Mar; 39(3):682-93. PubMed ID: 371791
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Carbamates and ICH M7 classification: Making use of expert knowledge.
Hemingway R; Fowkes A; Williams RV
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2017 Jun; 86():392-401. PubMed ID: 28385577
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Bacterial mutagenicity assays: Vehicle and positive control results from the standard Ames assay, the 6- and 24-well miniaturized plate incorporation assays and the Ames II™ assay.
Pant K; Bruce S; Sly J; Klug Laforce M; Springer S; Cecil M; Andrus E; Dakoulas E; Wagner VO; Hewitt NJ; Kulkarni R
Environ Mol Mutagen; 2016 Jul; 57(6):483-96. PubMed ID: 27198925
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. An evaluation of in-house and off-the-shelf in silico models: implications on guidance for mutagenicity assessment.
Jolly R; Ahmed KB; Zwickl C; Watson I; Gombar V
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2015 Apr; 71(3):388-97. PubMed ID: 25656493
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Mutagenicity assessment strategy for pharmaceutical intermediates to aid limit setting for occupational exposure.
Araya S; Lovsin-Barle E; Glowienke S
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2015 Nov; 73(2):515-20. PubMed ID: 26454093
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. In-silico screening of high production volume chemicals for mutagenicity using the MCASE QSAR expert system.
Klopman G; Chakravarti SK; Harris N; Ivanov J; Saiakhov RD
SAR QSAR Environ Res; 2003 Apr; 14(2):165-80. PubMed ID: 12747573
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Prediction of genotoxic potential of cosmetic ingredients by an in silico battery system consisting of a combination of an expert rule-based system and a statistics-based system.
Aiba née Kaneko M; Hirota M; Kouzuki H; Mori M
J Toxicol Sci; 2015 Feb; 40(1):77-98. PubMed ID: 25743748
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Extrapolation of in vitro structural alerts for mutagenicity to the in vivo endpoint.
Tennant RE; Guesné SJ; Canipa S; Cayley A; Drewe WC; Honma M; Masumura K; Morita T; Stalford SA; Williams RV
Mutagenesis; 2019 Mar; 34(1):111-121. PubMed ID: 30281100
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Evaluation of QSAR models for predicting mutagenicity: outcome of the Second Ames/QSAR international challenge project.
Furuhama A; Kitazawa A; Yao J; Matos Dos Santos CE; Rathman J; Yang C; Ribeiro JV; Cross K; Myatt G; Raitano G; Benfenati E; Jeliazkova N; Saiakhov R; Chakravarti S; Foster RS; Bossa C; Battistelli CL; Benigni R; Sawada T; Wasada H; Hashimoto T; Wu M; Barzilay R; Daga PR; Clark RD; Mestres J; Montero A; Gregori-Puigjané E; Petkov P; Ivanova H; Mekenyan O; Matthews S; Guan D; Spicer J; Lui R; Uesawa Y; Kurosaki K; Matsuzaka Y; Sasaki S; Cronin MTD; Belfield SJ; Firman JW; Spînu N; Qiu M; Keca JM; Gini G; Li T; Tong W; Hong H; Liu Z; Igarashi Y; Yamada H; Sugiyama KI; Honma M
SAR QSAR Environ Res; 2023; 34(12):983-1001. PubMed ID: 38047445
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Integration of structure-activity relationship and artificial intelligence systems to improve in silico prediction of ames test mutagenicity.
Mazzatorta P; Tran LA; Schilter B; Grigorov M
J Chem Inf Model; 2007; 47(1):34-8. PubMed ID: 17238246
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. 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]
20. Assessment of the sensitivity of the computational programs DEREK, TOPKAT, and MCASE in the prediction of the genotoxicity of pharmaceutical molecules.
Snyder RD; Pearl GS; Mandakas G; Choy WN; Goodsaid F; Rosenblum IY
Environ Mol Mutagen; 2004; 43(3):143-58. PubMed ID: 15065202
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
