461 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 7523897)
1. The parallelogram approach in studies of genotoxic effects.
Anderson D; Sorsa M; Waters MD
Mutat Res; 1994; 313(2-3):101-15. PubMed ID: 7523897
[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. Short-term tests for defining mutagenic carcinogens.
Waters MD; Stack HF; Jackson MA
IARC Sci Publ; 1999; (146):499-536. PubMed ID: 10353401
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. Epigenetic alterations induced by genotoxic occupational and environmental human chemical carcinogens: A systematic literature review.
Chappell G; Pogribny IP; Guyton KZ; Rusyn I
Mutat Res Rev Mutat Res; 2016; 768():27-45. PubMed ID: 27234561
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Mode of action-based risk assessment of genotoxic carcinogens.
Hartwig A; Arand M; Epe B; Guth S; Jahnke G; Lampen A; Martus HJ; Monien B; Rietjens IMCM; Schmitz-Spanke S; Schriever-Schwemmer G; Steinberg P; Eisenbrand G
Arch Toxicol; 2020 Jun; 94(6):1787-1877. PubMed ID: 32542409
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Hazard identification: efficiency of short-term tests in identifying germ cell mutagens and putative nongenotoxic carcinogens.
Waters MD; Stack HF; Jackson MA; Bridges BA
Environ Health Perspect; 1993 Oct; 101 Suppl 3(Suppl 3):61-72. PubMed ID: 8143649
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Genetic toxicology data in the evaluation of potential human environmental carcinogens.
Waters MD; Stack HF; Jackson MA
Mutat Res; 1999 Jul; 437(1):21-49. PubMed ID: 10425388
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. QSAR screening of 70,983 REACH substances for genotoxic carcinogenicity, mutagenicity and developmental toxicity in the ChemScreen project.
Wedebye EB; Dybdahl M; Nikolov NG; Jónsdóttir SÓ; Niemelä JR
Reprod Toxicol; 2015 Aug; 55():64-72. PubMed ID: 25797653
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. [The mutagenic and carcinogenic activity of chemical compounds].
Rakitskiĭ VN; Turusov VS
Vestn Ross Akad Med Nauk; 2005; (3):7-9. PubMed ID: 15852703
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. An integrative test strategy for cancer hazard identification.
Luijten M; Olthof ED; Hakkert BC; Rorije E; van der Laan JW; Woutersen RA; van Benthem J
Crit Rev Toxicol; 2016 Aug; 46(7):615-39. PubMed ID: 27142259
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The influence of chemical structure on the extent and sites of carcinogenesis for 522 rodent carcinogens and 55 different human carcinogen exposures.
Ashby J; Paton D
Mutat Res; 1993 Mar; 286(1):3-74. PubMed ID: 7678908
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. Detection of genotoxic and non-genotoxic carcinogens in Xpc(-/-)p53(+/-) mice.
Melis JP; Speksnijder EN; Kuiper RV; Salvatori DC; Schaap MM; Maas S; Robinson J; Verhoef A; van Benthem J; Luijten M; van Steeg H
Toxicol Appl Pharmacol; 2013 Jan; 266(2):289-97. PubMed ID: 23153559
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. The OSIRIS Weight of Evidence approach: ITS mutagenicity and ITS carcinogenicity.
Buist H; Aldenberg T; Batke M; Escher S; Klein Entink R; Kühne R; Marquart H; Pauné E; Rorije E; Schüürmann G; Kroese D
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2013 Nov; 67(2):170-81. PubMed ID: 23357514
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. Studies on the potential for genotoxic carcinogenicity of fragrances and other chemicals.
Rosenkranz HS; Zhang YP; Klopman G
Food Chem Toxicol; 1998 Aug; 36(8):687-96. PubMed ID: 9734719
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The unique role of rodents in the detection of possible human carcinogens and mutagens.
Ashby J
Mutat Res; 1983 Jun; 115(2):177-213. PubMed ID: 6343849
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Special issue on food borne botanical genotoxic carcinogens.
Rietjens IMCM
Food Chem Toxicol; 2018 Oct; 120():708. PubMed ID: 30171971
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
