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 *

120 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 378109)

  • 1. The predictive value of rodent carcinogenicity tests in the evaluation of human risks.
    Tomatis L
    Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol; 1979; 19():511-30. PubMed ID: 378109
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Predicting chemicals causing cancer in animals as human carcinogens.
    Huff J
    Occup Environ Med; 2010 Oct; 67(10):720. PubMed ID: 20837652
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Animal carcinogenicity studies: implications for the REACH system.
    Knight A; Bailey J; Balcombe J
    Altern Lab Anim; 2006 Mar; 34 Suppl 1():139-47. PubMed ID: 16555967
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. In vitro perturbations of targets in cancer hallmark processes predict rodent chemical carcinogenesis.
    Kleinstreuer NC; Dix DJ; Houck KA; Kavlock RJ; Knudsen TB; Martin MT; Paul KB; Reif DM; Crofton KM; Hamilton K; Hunter R; Shah I; Judson RS
    Toxicol Sci; 2013 Jan; 131(1):40-55. PubMed ID: 23024176
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Prospects of short-term tests in primary cancer prevention.
    Khudoley VV; Pliss GB
    Neoplasma; 1984; 31(4):475-8. PubMed ID: 6472519
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Species susceptibilities to chemical carcinogens: a critical appraisal of the roles of sex hormones (endocrine status) and nutritional influences.
    Toth B
    In Vivo; 2002; 16(3):161-6. PubMed ID: 12182110
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Extrapolation of animal studies to the human situation.
    Zapp JA
    J Toxicol Environ Health; 1977 Jul; 2(6):1425-33. PubMed ID: 886632
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. Epidemiological and experimental applications to occupational cancer prevention.
    Vainio H; Hemminki K
    J UOEH; 1989 Mar; 11 Suppl():323-45. PubMed ID: 2664947
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Prediction of rodent carcinogenic potential of naturally occurring chemicals in the human diet using high-throughput QSAR predictive modeling.
    Valerio LG; Arvidson KB; Chanderbhan RF; Contrera JF
    Toxicol Appl Pharmacol; 2007 Jul; 222(1):1-16. PubMed ID: 17482223
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. Comparison of cancer risks projected from animal bioassays to epidemiologic studies of acrylonitrile-exposed workers.
    Ward CE; Starr TB
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 1993 Oct; 18(2):214-32. PubMed ID: 8278643
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Inter-species comparisons of carcinogenicity.
    Purchase IF
    Br J Cancer; 1980 Mar; 41(3):454-68. PubMed ID: 7387835
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 2nd International symposium of the Society of Toxicologic Pathologists. Design of carcinogenicity studies: considerations in pathology interpretation. May 9-11, 1983, Arlington, Virginia.
    Toxicol Pathol; 1983; 11(1):28-95. PubMed ID: 6681393
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. [Current status of the problem of testing drugs for carcinogenicity].
    Shashkina LF; Ivanova VM; Liubimov BI
    Farmakol Toksikol; 1985; 48(3):107-13. PubMed ID: 3896842
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Design of animal carcinogenicity studies for goodness-of-fit of multistage models.
    Portier CJ; Hoel DG
    Fundam Appl Toxicol; 1984 Dec; 4(6):949-59. PubMed ID: 6519375
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Evaluation of carcinogenicity studies of medicinal products for human use authorised via the European centralised procedure (1995-2009).
    Friedrich A; Olejniczak K
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2011 Jul; 60(2):225-48. PubMed ID: 21513764
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. [Criteria, rules and procedures adopted by IARC in evaluating risks from different carcinogenic agents for humans].
    IARC
    Vopr Onkol; 2007; 53(6):621-41. PubMed ID: 18416130
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Prediction of carcinogenicity from two versus four sex-species groups in the carcinogenic potency database.
    Gold LS; Slone TH
    J Toxicol Environ Health; 1993 May; 39(1):143-57. PubMed ID: 8492327
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.