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 *

109 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3787657)

  • 1. A methodology for assessing carcinogenic hazards of chemicals.
    Brown HS; Bishop DR; West CR
    Toxicol Ind Health; 1986 Sep; 2(3):205-18. PubMed ID: 3787657
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Guidelines for the evaluation of chemicals for carcinogenicity. Committee on Carcinogenicity of Chemicals in Food, Consumer Products and the Environment.
    Rep Health Soc Subj (Lond); 1991; 42():1-80. PubMed ID: 1763238
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Reducing uncertainty in risk assessment by using specific knowledge to replace default options.
    McClellan RO
    Drug Metab Rev; 1996; 28(1-2):149-79. PubMed ID: 8744594
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. Prediction of carcinogenic potency by short-term genotoxicity tests.
    Ennever FK; Rosenkranz HS
    Mutagenesis; 1987 Jan; 2(1):39-44. PubMed ID: 3331693
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. A methodology for assessing mutagenic hazards of chemicals.
    Brown HS; Bishop DR; West CR
    Toxicol Ind Health; 1986 Sep; 2(3):163-82. PubMed ID: 3787655
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The results of assays in Drosophila as indicators of exposure to carcinogens.
    Vogel EW; Graf U; Frei HJ; Nivard MM
    IARC Sci Publ; 1999; (146):427-70. PubMed ID: 10353398
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Carcinogenicity categorization of chemicals-new aspects to be considered in a European perspective.
    Bolt HM; Foth H; Hengstler JG; Degen GH
    Toxicol Lett; 2004 Jun; 151(1):29-41. PubMed ID: 15177638
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. [Carcinogenic risk assessment of chemicals].
    Hayashi Y
    Eisei Shikenjo Hokoku; 1990; (108):1-16. PubMed ID: 1364333
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Proposed changes in the classification of carcinogenic chemicals in the work area.
    Neumann HG; Thielmann HW; Filser JG; Gelbke HP; Greim H; Kappus H; Norpoth KH; Reuter U; Vamvakas S; Wardenbach P; Wichmann HE
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 1997 Dec; 26(3):288-95. PubMed ID: 9441919
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Banding carcinogenic risks in developed countries: A procedural basis for qualitative assessment.
    Stewart BW
    Mutat Res; 2008; 658(1-2):124-151. PubMed ID: 18357634
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. Approaches to the risk assessment of genotoxic carcinogens in food: a critical appraisal.
    O'Brien J; Renwick AG; Constable A; Dybing E; Müller DJ; Schlatter J; Slob W; Tueting W; van Benthem J; Williams GM; Wolfreys A
    Food Chem Toxicol; 2006 Oct; 44(10):1613-35. PubMed ID: 16887251
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Hydroquinone: an evaluation of the human risks from its carcinogenic and mutagenic properties.
    McGregor D
    Crit Rev Toxicol; 2007; 37(10):887-914. PubMed ID: 18027166
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Evaluation of the utility of the lifetime mouse bioassay in the identification of cancer hazards for humans.
    Osimitz TG; Droege W; Boobis AR; Lake BG
    Food Chem Toxicol; 2013 Oct; 60():550-62. PubMed ID: 23954551
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. Approaches to cancer assessment in EPA's Integrated Risk Information System.
    Gehlhaus MW; Gift JS; Hogan KA; Kopylev L; Schlosser PM; Kadry AR
    Toxicol Appl Pharmacol; 2011 Jul; 254(2):170-80. PubMed ID: 21034767
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. Comparison of carcinogenic and in vivo genotoxic potency estimates.
    Sanner T; Dybing E
    Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol; 2005 Feb; 96(2):131-9. PubMed ID: 15679476
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.