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.
2. Strategy of long-term animal testing for quantitative evaluation of chemical carcinogenicity. Hayashi Y; Kurokawa Y; Maekawa A; Takahashi M Dev Toxicol Environ Sci; 1986; 12():383-91. PubMed ID: 3549239 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. The assessment of low-dose carcinogenicity. Armitage P Biometrics; 1982 Mar; 38 Suppl():119-39. PubMed ID: 7046818 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Approaches to the genetic safety evaluation of agricultural chemicals. Ray VA Basic Life Sci; 1982; 21():45-56. PubMed ID: 7150204 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Testing for carcinogens: shift from animals to automation gathers steam--slowly. Schmidt C J Natl Cancer Inst; 2009 Jul; 101(13):910-2. PubMed ID: 19549960 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. NTP technical report on the toxicology and carcinogenesis studies of Elmiron (Cas No. 37319-17-8) in F344/N rats and B6C3F1 mice (Gavage Studies). National Toxicology Program, Public Health Services, National Institutes of Health, US Department of Health and Human Services, Natl Toxicol Program Tech Rep Ser; 2004 May; (512):7-289. PubMed ID: 15213766 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. The ED01 study: introduction, objectives, and experimental design. Cairns T J Environ Pathol Toxicol; 1980; 3(3 Spec No):1-7. PubMed ID: 7365374 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Aspects of database construction and interrogation of relevance to the accurate prediction of rodent carcinogenicity and mutagenicity. Ashby J Environ Health Perspect; 1991 Dec; 96():97-100. PubMed ID: 1820286 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. A survey of the Predictive Toxicology Challenge 2000-2001. Helma C; Kramer S Bioinformatics; 2003 Jul; 19(10):1179-82. PubMed ID: 12835259 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Chemical structure of mutagens and carcinogens and the relationship with biological activity. Benigni R J Exp Clin Cancer Res; 2004 Mar; 23(1):5-8. PubMed ID: 15149144 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Use of transgenic mice in carcinogenicity hazard assessment. Jacobson-Kram D; Sistare FD; Jacobs AC Toxicol Pathol; 2004; 32 Suppl 1():49-52. PubMed ID: 15209403 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Estimation of "safe doses" in carcinogenic experiments. Hartley HO; Sielken RL J Environ Pathol Toxicol; 1977; 1(2):241-78. PubMed ID: 553133 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. Prediction of carcinogenic potency from toxicological data. Travis CC; Pack SA; Saulsbury AW; Yambert MW Mutat Res; 1990 May; 241(1):21-36. PubMed ID: 2333083 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Interpreting the Delaney Clause in the 21st century. Picut CA; Parker GA Toxicol Pathol; 1992; 20(4):617-27, discussion 628-9. PubMed ID: 1308627 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Validation of a novel molecular orbital approach (COMPACT) for the prospective safety evaluation of chemicals, by comparison with rodent carcinogenicity and Salmonella mutagenicity data evaluated by the U.S. NCI/NTP. Lewis DF; Ioannides C; Parke DV Mutat Res; 1993 Feb; 291(1):61-77. PubMed ID: 7678916 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]