167 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 7570659)
1. Development of structure-activity relationship rules for predicting carcinogenic potential of chemicals.
Woo YT; Lai DY; Argus MF; Arcos JC
Toxicol Lett; 1995 Sep; 79(1-3):219-28. PubMed ID: 7570659
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Mode of action and the assessment of chemical hazards in the presence of limited data: use of structure-activity relationships (SAR) under TSCA, Section 5.
Auer CM; Nabholz JV; Baetcke KP
Environ Health Perspect; 1990 Jul; 87():183-97. PubMed ID: 2269224
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. The new chemicals process at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): structure-activity relationships for hazard identification and risk assessment.
Wagner PM; Nabholz JV; Kent RJ
Toxicol Lett; 1995 Sep; 79(1-3):67-73. PubMed ID: 7570675
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Assessment and validation of US EPA's OncoLogic® expert system and analysis of its modulating factors for structural alerts.
Benigni R; Bossa C; Alivernini S; Colafranceschi M
J Environ Sci Health C Environ Carcinog Ecotoxicol Rev; 2012; 30(2):152-73. PubMed ID: 22690713
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. International Commission for Protection Against Environmental Mutagens and Carcinogens. Application of SAR methods to non-congeneric data bases associated with carcinogenicity and mutagenicity: issues and approaches.
Richard AM
Mutat Res; 1994 Feb; 305(1):73-97. PubMed ID: 7508549
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Development of quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) models to predict the carcinogenic potency of chemicals. II. Using oral slope factor as a measure of carcinogenic potency.
Wang NC; Venkatapathy R; Bruce RM; Moudgal C
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2011 Mar; 59(2):215-26. PubMed ID: 20951756
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Chloroform: An EPA test case.
Schmidt CW
Environ Health Perspect; 1999 Jul; 107(7):A358-60. PubMed ID: 10379014
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's revised guidelines for carcinogen risk assessment: evaluating a postulated mode of carcinogenic action in guiding dose-response extrapolation.
Wiltse JA; Dellarco VL
Mutat Res; 2000 Jan; 464(1):105-15. PubMed ID: 10633182
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. Computational toxicology as implemented by the U.S. EPA: providing high throughput decision support tools for screening and assessing chemical exposure, hazard and risk.
Kavlock R; Dix D
J Toxicol Environ Health B Crit Rev; 2010 Feb; 13(2-4):197-217. PubMed ID: 20574897
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. 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]
13. Comparison of criteria used to access carcinogenicity in CPANN QSAR models versus the knowledge-based expert system Toxtree.
Fjodorova N; Novič M
SAR QSAR Environ Res; 2014; 25(6):423-41. PubMed ID: 24716754
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. Environmental hazard and risk assessment under the United States Toxic Substances Control Act.
Nabholz JV
Sci Total Environ; 1991 Dec; 109-110():649-65. PubMed ID: 1815379
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Testing computational toxicology models with phytochemicals.
Valerio LG; Arvidson KB; Busta E; Minnier BL; Kruhlak NL; Benz RD
Mol Nutr Food Res; 2010 Feb; 54(2):186-94. PubMed ID: 20024931
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. International Commission for Protection Against Environmental Mutagens and Carcinogens. Use of SAR in computer-assisted prediction of carcinogenicity and mutagenicity of chemicals by the TOPKAT program.
Enslein K; Gombar VK; Blake BW
Mutat Res; 1994 Feb; 305(1):47-61. PubMed ID: 7508547
[No 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. The application of structure-activity relationships (SARs) in the aquatic toxicity evaluation of discrete organic chemicals.
Clements RG; Nabholz JV; Zeeman MG; Auer CM
SAR QSAR Environ Res; 1995; 3(3):203-15. PubMed ID: 8564855
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Animal carcinogenicity studies: 1. Poor human predictivity.
Knight A; Bailey J; Balcombe J
Altern Lab Anim; 2006 Feb; 34(1):19-27. PubMed ID: 16522147
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
