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 *

151 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 37477941)

  • 1. Multiple Instance Learning Improves Ames Mutagenicity Prediction for Problematic Molecular Species.
    Feeney SV; Lui R; Guan D; Matthews S
    Chem Res Toxicol; 2023 Aug; 36(8):1227-1237. PubMed ID: 37477941
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Mechanistic Reactivity Descriptors for the Prediction of Ames Mutagenicity of Primary Aromatic Amines.
    Kuhnke L; Ter Laak A; Göller AH
    J Chem Inf Model; 2019 Feb; 59(2):668-672. PubMed ID: 30694664
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. A knowledge-based expert rule system for predicting mutagenicity (Ames test) of aromatic amines and azo compounds.
    Gadaleta D; Manganelli S; Manganaro A; Porta N; Benfenati E
    Toxicology; 2016 Aug; 370():20-30. PubMed ID: 27644887
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Extending (Q)SARs to incorporate proprietary knowledge for regulatory purposes: A case study using aromatic amine mutagenicity.
    Ahlberg E; Amberg A; Beilke LD; Bower D; Cross KP; Custer L; Ford KA; Van Gompel J; Harvey J; Honma M; Jolly R; Joossens E; Kemper RA; Kenyon M; Kruhlak N; Kuhnke L; Leavitt P; Naven R; Neilan C; Quigley DP; Shuey D; Spirkl HP; Stavitskaya L; Teasdale A; White A; Wichard J; Zwickl C; Myatt GJ
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2016 Jun; 77():1-12. PubMed ID: 26879463
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. Computational identification of structural factors affecting the mutagenic potential of aromatic amines: study design and experimental validation.
    Slavov SH; Stoyanova-Slavova I; Mattes W; Beger RD; Brüschweiler BJ
    Arch Toxicol; 2018 Jul; 92(7):2369-2384. PubMed ID: 29779177
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. A QSAR investigation of the role of hydrophobicity in regulating mutagenicity in the Ames test: 1. Mutagenicity of aromatic and heteroaromatic amines in Salmonella typhimurium TA98 and TA100.
    Debnath AK; Debnath G; Shusterman AJ; Hansch C
    Environ Mol Mutagen; 1992; 19(1):37-52. PubMed ID: 1732103
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. Identification of the structural requirements for mutagenicity by incorporating molecular flexibility and metabolic activation of chemicals I: TA100 model.
    Mekenyan O; Dimitrov S; Serafimova R; Thompson E; Kotov S; Dimitrova N; Walker JD
    Chem Res Toxicol; 2004 Jun; 17(6):753-66. PubMed ID: 15206896
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. Multitask Deep Neural Networks for Ames Mutagenicity Prediction.
    Martínez MJ; Sabando MV; Soto AJ; Roca C; Requena-Triguero C; Campillo NE; Páez JA; Ponzoni I
    J Chem Inf Model; 2022 Dec; 62(24):6342-6351. PubMed ID: 36066065
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Prediction of aromatic amines mutagenicity from theoretical molecular descriptors.
    Gramatica P; Consonni V; Pavan M
    SAR QSAR Environ Res; 2003 Aug; 14(4):237-50. PubMed ID: 14506868
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Predicting Ames Mutagenicity Using Conformal Prediction in the Ames/QSAR International Challenge Project.
    Norinder U; Ahlberg E; Carlsson L
    Mutagenesis; 2019 Mar; 34(1):33-40. PubMed ID: 30541036
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Machine learning - Predicting Ames mutagenicity of small molecules.
    Chu CSM; Simpson JD; O'Neill PM; Berry NG
    J Mol Graph Model; 2021 Dec; 109():108011. PubMed ID: 34555723
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Application of QSARs in identification of mutagenicity mechanisms of nitro and amino aromatic compounds against Salmonella typhimurium species.
    Jillella GK; Khan K; Roy K
    Toxicol In Vitro; 2020 Jun; 65():104768. PubMed ID: 31926304
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Computing similarity between structural environments of mutagenicity alerts.
    Chakravarti SK; Saiakhov RD
    Mutagenesis; 2019 Mar; 34(1):55-65. PubMed ID: 30346583
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Towards quantitative read across: Prediction of Ames mutagenicity in a large database.
    Benigni R
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2019 Nov; 108():104434. PubMed ID: 31374229
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Mutagenicity of aromatic amines and amides with chemical models for cytochrome P450 in Ames assay.
    Inami K; Okazawa M; Mochizuki M
    Toxicol In Vitro; 2009 Sep; 23(6):986-91. PubMed ID: 19563884
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Avoidance of the Ames test liability for aryl-amines via computation.
    McCarren P; Bebernitz GR; Gedeck P; Glowienke S; Grondine MS; Kirman LC; Klickstein J; Schuster HF; Whitehead L
    Bioorg Med Chem; 2011 May; 19(10):3173-82. PubMed ID: 21524589
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.