259 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 7973358)
1. Rodent carcinogenicity bioassay: past, present, and future.
Boorman GA; Maronpot RR; Eustis SL
Toxicol Pathol; 1994; 22(2):105-11. PubMed ID: 7973358
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. Evolution of the uses of rats and mice for assessing carcinogenic risk from chemicals in humans.
Ward JM
Asian Pac J Cancer Prev; 2010; 11(1):18. PubMed ID: 20593921
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Expectations for transgenic rodent cancer bioassay models.
Ashby J
Toxicol Pathol; 2001; 29 Suppl():177-82. PubMed ID: 11695555
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. How useful are chronic (life-span) toxicology studies in rodents in identifying pharmaceuticals that pose a carcinogenic risk to humans?
Monro A
Adverse Drug React Toxicol Rev; 1993; 12(1):5-34. PubMed ID: 8513076
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. A perspective on current and future uses of alternative models for carcinogenicity testing.
Goodman JI
Toxicol Pathol; 2001; 29 Suppl():173-6. PubMed ID: 11695554
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. Human relevance of animal carcinogenicity studies.
Cohen SM
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 1995 Feb; 21(1):75-80; discussion 81-6. PubMed ID: 7784639
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The Tg rasH2 mouse in cancer hazard identification.
Morton D; Alden CL; Roth AJ; Usui T
Toxicol Pathol; 2002; 30(1):139-46. PubMed ID: 11890467
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Predicting the carcinogenicity of chemicals in humans from rodent bioassay data.
Goodman G; Wilson R
Environ Health Perspect; 1991 Aug; 94():195-218. PubMed ID: 1954931
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. Issues in the design and interpretation of chronic toxicity and carcinogenicity studies in rodents: approaches to dose selection.
Rhomberg LR; Baetcke K; Blancato J; Bus J; Cohen S; Conolly R; Dixit R; Doe J; Ekelman K; Fenner-Crisp P; Harvey P; Hattis D; Jacobs A; Jacobson-Kram D; Lewandowski T; Liteplo R; Pelkonen O; Rice J; Somers D; Turturro A; West W; Olin S
Crit Rev Toxicol; 2007; 37(9):729-837. PubMed ID: 17957539
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. 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]
14. An enhanced 13-week bioassay: an alternative to the 2-year bioassay to screen for human carcinogenesis.
Cohen SM
Exp Toxicol Pathol; 2010 Sep; 62(5):497-502. PubMed ID: 19616417
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Alternatives to the 2-species bioassay for the identification of potential human carcinogens.
Ashby J
Hum Exp Toxicol; 1996 Mar; 15(3):183-202. PubMed ID: 8839204
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Principles underlying dose selection for, and extrapolation from, the carcinogen bioassay: dose influences mechanism.
Counts JL; Goodman JI
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 1995 Jun; 21(3):418-21. PubMed ID: 7480895
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Is current risk assessment of non-genotoxic carcinogens protective?
Braakhuis HM; Slob W; Olthof ED; Wolterink G; Zwart EP; Gremmer ER; Rorije E; van Benthem J; Woutersen R; van der Laan JW; Luijten M
Crit Rev Toxicol; 2018 Jul; 48(6):500-511. PubMed ID: 29745287
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. Characterizing and predicting carcinogenicity and mode of action using conventional and toxicogenomics methods.
Waters MD; Jackson M; Lea I
Mutat Res; 2010 Dec; 705(3):184-200. PubMed ID: 20399889
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Alternative models for carcinogenicity testing: weight of evidence evaluations across models.
Cohen SM
Toxicol Pathol; 2001; 29 Suppl():183-90. PubMed ID: 11695556
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
