171 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3470540)
1. Cancer risk-assessment models: anticipated contributions from biochemical epidemiology.
Alavanja M; Aron J; Brown C; Chandler J
J Natl Cancer Inst; 1987 Apr; 78(4):633-43. PubMed ID: 3470540
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Epidemiology and the inference of cancer mechanisms.
Hoel DG
Natl Cancer Inst Monogr; 1985 May; 67():199-203. PubMed ID: 4047148
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Understanding population and individual risk assessment: the case of polychlorinated biphenyls.
Shields PG
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 2006 May; 15(5):830-9. PubMed ID: 16702358
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Environmental and chemical carcinogenesis.
Wogan GN; Hecht SS; Felton JS; Conney AH; Loeb LA
Semin Cancer Biol; 2004 Dec; 14(6):473-86. PubMed ID: 15489140
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Chloroform mode of action: implications for cancer risk assessment.
Golden RJ; Holm SE; Robinson DE; Julkunen PH; Reese EA
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 1997 Oct; 26(2):142-55. PubMed ID: 9356278
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Epidemiologic evidence for assessing the carcinogenicity of acrylamide.
Erdreich LS; Friedman MA
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2004 Apr; 39(2):150-7. PubMed ID: 15041146
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. A cancer risk assessment of di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate: application of the new U.S. EPA Risk Assessment Guidelines.
Doull J; Cattley R; Elcombe C; Lake BG; Swenberg J; Wilkinson C; Williams G; van Gemert M
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 1999 Jun; 29(3):327-57. PubMed ID: 10388618
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Identification, characterization, and control of potential human carcinogens: a framework for Federal decision-making.
Calkins DR; Dixon RL; Gerber CR; Zarin D; Omenn GS
J Natl Cancer Inst; 1980 Jan; 64(1):169-76. PubMed ID: 6928042
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. American Society of Clinical Oncology policy statement update: genetic testing for cancer susceptibility.
American Society of Clinical Oncology
J Clin Oncol; 2003 Jun; 21(12):2397-406. PubMed ID: 12692171
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. A simple approach to performing quantitative cancer risk assessment using published results from occupational epidemiology studies.
van Wijngaarden E; Hertz-Picciotto I
Sci Total Environ; 2004 Oct; 332(1-3):81-7. PubMed ID: 15336893
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Symmetry, identifiability, and prediction uncertainties in multistage clonal expansion (MSCE) models of carcinogenesis.
Cox LA; Huber WA
Risk Anal; 2007 Dec; 27(6):1441-53. PubMed ID: 18093045
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Regulatory cancer risk assessment based on a quick estimate of a benchmark dose derived from the maximum tolerated dose.
Gaylor DW; Swirsky Gold L
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 1998 Dec; 28(3):222-5. PubMed ID: 10049793
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Role and limitations of epidemiology in establishing a causal association.
Franco EL; Correa P; Santella RM; Wu X; Goodman SN; Petersen GM
Semin Cancer Biol; 2004 Dec; 14(6):413-26. PubMed ID: 15489134
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Incorporating additional biological phenomena into two-stage cancer models.
Sielken RL; Bretzlaff RS; Stevenson DE
Prog Clin Biol Res; 1994; 387():237-60. PubMed ID: 7972250
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Challenges to default assumptions stimulate comprehensive realism as a new tier in quantitative cancer risk assessment.
Sielken RL; Bretzlaff RS; Stevenson DE
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 1995 Apr; 21(2):270-80. PubMed ID: 7644717
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. New developments in exposure assessment: the impact on the practice of health risk assessment and epidemiological studies.
Nieuwenhuijsen M; Paustenbach D; Duarte-Davidson R
Environ Int; 2006 Dec; 32(8):996-1009. PubMed ID: 16875734
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Update of potency factors for asbestos-related lung cancer and mesothelioma.
Berman DW; Crump KS
Crit Rev Toxicol; 2008; 38 Suppl 1():1-47. PubMed ID: 18671157
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Cancer risk assessment at the crossroads: the need to turn to a biological approach.
Clayson DB; Iverson F
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 1996 Aug; 24(1 Pt 1):45-59. PubMed ID: 8921545
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Bioassay designs for validating biologically based mathematical models of carcinogenesis for risk assessment.
Kodell RL
Drug Metab Rev; 1996; 28(1-2):219-23. PubMed ID: 8744598
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Introduction and overview. Perinatal carcinogenesis: growing a node for epidemiology, risk management, and animal studies.
Anderson LM
Toxicol Appl Pharmacol; 2004 Sep; 199(2):85-90. PubMed ID: 15313581
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
