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 *

304 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 35239444)

  • 1. Assessing chemical carcinogenicity: hazard identification, classification, and risk assessment. Insight from a Toxicology Forum state-of-the-science workshop.
    Felter SP; Bhat VS; Botham PA; Bussard DA; Casey W; Hayes AW; Hilton GM; Magurany KA; Sauer UG; Ohanian EV
    Crit Rev Toxicol; 2021 Sep; 51(8):653-694. PubMed ID: 35239444
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Hazard identification, classification, and risk assessment of carcinogens: too much or too little? - Report of an ECETOC workshop.
    Felter SP; Boobis AR; Botham PA; Brousse A; Greim H; Hollnagel HM; Sauer UG
    Crit Rev Toxicol; 2020 Jan; 50(1):72-95. PubMed ID: 32133908
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Chemical carcinogen safety testing: OECD expert group international consensus on the development of an integrated approach for the testing and assessment of chemical non-genotoxic carcinogens.
    Jacobs MN; Colacci A; Corvi R; Vaccari M; Aguila MC; Corvaro M; Delrue N; Desaulniers D; Ertych N; Jacobs A; Luijten M; Madia F; Nishikawa A; Ogawa K; Ohmori K; Paparella M; Sharma AK; Vasseur P
    Arch Toxicol; 2020 Aug; 94(8):2899-2923. PubMed ID: 32594184
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. International regulatory needs for development of an IATA for non-genotoxic carcinogenic chemical substances.
    Jacobs MN; Colacci A; Louekari K; Luijten M; Hakkert BC; Paparella M; Vasseur P
    ALTEX; 2016; 33(4):359-392. PubMed ID: 27120445
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Increased Cell Proliferation as a Key Event in Chemical Carcinogenesis: Application in an Integrated Approach for the Testing and Assessment of Non-Genotoxic Carcinogenesis.
    Strupp C; Corvaro M; Cohen SM; Corton JC; Ogawa K; Richert L; Jacobs MN
    Int J Mol Sci; 2023 Aug; 24(17):. PubMed ID: 37686053
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Rethinking chronic toxicity and carcinogenicity assessment for agrochemicals project (ReCAAP): A reporting framework to support a weight of evidence safety assessment without long-term rodent bioassays.
    Hilton GM; Adcock C; Akerman G; Baldassari J; Battalora M; Casey W; Clippinger AJ; Cope R; Goetz A; Hayes AW; Papineni S; Peffer RC; Ramsingh D; Williamson Riffle B; Sanches da Rocha M; Ryan N; Scollon E; Visconti N; Wolf DC; Yan Z; Lowit A
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2022 Jun; 131():105160. PubMed ID: 35311659
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Integrated approach to testing and assessment for predicting rodent genotoxic carcinogenicity.
    Petkov PI; Schultz TW; Donner EM; Honma M; Morita T; Hamada S; Wakata A; Mishima M; Maniwa J; Todorov M; Kaloyanova E; Kotov S; Mekenyan OG
    J Appl Toxicol; 2016 Dec; 36(12):1536-1550. PubMed ID: 27225589
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Are tumor incidence rates from chronic bioassays telling us what we need to know about carcinogens?
    Gaylor DW
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2005 Mar; 41(2):128-33. PubMed ID: 15698536
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Towards achieving a modern science-based paradigm for agrochemical carcinogenicity assessment.
    Hilton GM; Corvi R; Luijten M; Mehta J; Wolf DC
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2023 Jan; 137():105301. PubMed ID: 36436696
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Assessing human carcinogenicity risk of agrochemicals without the rodent cancer bioassay.
    Goetz A; Ryan N; Sauve-Ciencewicki A; Lord CC; Hilton GM; Wolf DC
    Front Toxicol; 2024; 6():1394361. PubMed ID: 38933090
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Approaches to evaluating the toxicity and carcinogenicity of man-made fibers: summary of a workshop held November 11-13, 1991, Durham, North Carolina.
    McClellan RO; Miller FJ; Hesterberg TW; Warheit DB; Bunn WB; Kane AB; Lippmann M; Mast RW; McConnell EE; Reinhardt CF
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 1992 Dec; 16(3):321-64. PubMed ID: 1293648
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The 2-year rodent bioassay in drug and chemical carcinogenicity testing: Performance, utility, and configuration for cancer hazard identification.
    Suarez-Torres JD; Orozco CA; Ciangherotti CE
    J Pharmacol Toxicol Methods; 2021; 110():107070. PubMed ID: 33905862
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Analyses of Transcriptomics Cell Signalling for Pre-Screening Applications in the Integrated Approach for Testing and Assessment of Non-Genotoxic Carcinogens.
    Oku Y; Madia F; Lau P; Paparella M; McGovern T; Luijten M; Jacobs MN
    Int J Mol Sci; 2022 Oct; 23(21):. PubMed ID: 36361516
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Classification schemes for carcinogenicity based on hazard-identification have become outmoded and serve neither science nor society.
    Boobis AR; Cohen SM; Dellarco VL; Doe JE; Fenner-Crisp PA; Moretto A; Pastoor TP; Schoeny RS; Seed JG; Wolf DC
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2016 Dec; 82():158-166. PubMed ID: 27780763
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Opportunities for an alternative integrating testing strategy for carcinogen hazard assessment?
    Doktorova TY; Pauwels M; Vinken M; Vanhaecke T; Rogiers V
    Crit Rev Toxicol; 2012 Feb; 42(2):91-106. PubMed ID: 22141324
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Towards a mechanism-based approach for the prediction of nongenotoxic carcinogenic potential of agrochemicals.
    Heusinkveld H; Braakhuis H; Gommans R; Botham P; Corvaro M; van der Laan JW; Lewis D; Madia F; Manou I; Schorsch F; Wolterink G; Woutersen R; Corvi R; Mehta J; Luijten M
    Crit Rev Toxicol; 2020 Oct; 50(9):725-739. PubMed ID: 33236972
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. A feasibility study: Can information collected to classify for mutagenicity be informative in predicting carcinogenicity?
    Petkov PI; Patlewicz G; Schultz TW; Honma M; Todorov M; Kotov S; Dimitrov SD; Donner EM; Mekenyan OG
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2015 Jun; 72(1):17-25. PubMed ID: 25792138
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. A perspective on current and future uses of alternative models for carcinogenicity testing.
    Goodman JI
    Toxicol Pathol; 2001; 29 Suppl():173-6. PubMed ID: 11695554
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Issues in the design and interpretation of chronic toxicity and carcinogenicity studies in rodents: approaches to dose selection.
    Rhomberg LR; Baetcke K; Blancato J; Bus J; Cohen S; Conolly R; Dixit R; Doe J; Ekelman K; Fenner-Crisp P; Harvey P; Hattis D; Jacobs A; Jacobson-Kram D; Lewandowski T; Liteplo R; Pelkonen O; Rice J; Somers D; Turturro A; West W; Olin S
    Crit Rev Toxicol; 2007; 37(9):729-837. PubMed ID: 17957539
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Mouse-specific carcinogens: an assessment of hazard and significance for validation of short-term carcinogenicity bioassays in transgenic mice.
    Battershill JM; Fielder RJ
    Hum Exp Toxicol; 1998 Apr; 17(4):193-205. PubMed ID: 9617631
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 16.