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 *

190 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8050633)

  • 1. The relationship between use of the maximum tolerated dose and study sensitivity for detecting rodent carcinogenicity.
    Haseman JK; Lockhart A
    Fundam Appl Toxicol; 1994 Apr; 22(3):382-91. PubMed ID: 8050633
    [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. 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]  

  • 4. Supplement to the Carcinogenic Potency Database (CPDB): results of animal bioassays published in the general literature in 1993 to 1994 and by the National Toxicology Program in 1995 to 1996.
    Gold LS; Manley NB; Slone TH; Rohrbach L
    Environ Health Perspect; 1999 Aug; 107 Suppl 4(Suppl 4):527-600. PubMed ID: 10421768
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Data quality in predictive toxicology: reproducibility of rodent carcinogenicity experiments.
    Gottmann E; Kramer S; Pfahringer B; Helma C
    Environ Health Perspect; 2001 May; 109(5):509-14. PubMed ID: 11401763
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. An examination of the association between maximum-tolerated dose and carcinogenicity in 326 long-term studies in rats and mice.
    Haseman JK; Seilkop SK
    Fundam Appl Toxicol; 1992 Aug; 19(2):207-13. PubMed ID: 1516777
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Carcinogenesis bioassays: study duration and biological relevance.
    Haseman J; Melnick R; Tomatis L; Huff J
    Food Chem Toxicol; 2001 Jul; 39(7):739-44. PubMed ID: 11397520
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Issues in carcinogenicity testing: dose selection.
    Haseman JK
    Fundam Appl Toxicol; 1985 Feb; 5(1):66-78. PubMed ID: 3886467
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Comparison of site-specific and overall tumor incidence analyses for 81 recent National Toxicology Program carcinogenicity studies.
    Haseman JK; Tharrington EC; Huff JE; McConnell EE
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 1986 Jun; 6(2):155-70. PubMed ID: 3726178
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Comparison of target organs of carcinogenicity for mutagenic and non-mutagenic chemicals.
    Gold LS; Slone TH; Stern BR; Bernstein L
    Mutat Res; 1993 Mar; 286(1):75-100. PubMed ID: 7678909
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Carcinogenicity results for 114 laboratory animal studies used to assess the predictivity of four in vitro genetic toxicity assays for rodent carcinogenicity.
    Haseman JK; Clark AM
    Environ Mol Mutagen; 1990; 16 Suppl 18():15-31. PubMed ID: 2091922
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Experimental design constraints on carcinogenic potency estimates.
    Rieth JP; Starr TB
    J Toxicol Environ Health; 1989; 27(3):287-96. PubMed ID: 2754755
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Preliminary estimates of the virtually safe dose for tumors obtained from the maximum tolerated dose.
    Gaylor DW
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 1989 Apr; 9(2):101-8. PubMed ID: 2717786
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Prediction of the carcinogenicity of a second group of organic chemicals undergoing carcinogenicity testing.
    Zhang YP; Sussman N; Macina OT; Rosenkranz HS; Klopman G
    Environ Health Perspect; 1996 Oct; 104 Suppl 5(Suppl 5):1045-50. PubMed ID: 8933053
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Monte Carlo simulation of rodent carcinogenicity bioassays.
    Shlyakhter A; Goodman G; Wilson R
    Risk Anal; 1992 Mar; 12(1):73-82. PubMed ID: 1574618
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The carcinogenesis bioassay in perspective: application in identifying human cancer hazards.
    Fung VA; Barrett JC; Huff J
    Environ Health Perspect; 1995; 103(7-8):680-3. PubMed ID: 7588478
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Structural relationships between mutagenicity, maximum tolerated dose, and carcinogenicity in rodents.
    Rosenkranz HS; Klopman G
    Environ Mol Mutagen; 1993; 21(2):193-206. PubMed ID: 8444146
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Comparison of human exposures to selected chemicals with thresholds from NTP carcinogenicity studies in rodents.
    Waddell WJ
    Hum Exp Toxicol; 2003 Sep; 22(9):501-6. PubMed ID: 14580010
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Using the NTP database to assess the value of rodent carcinogenicity studies for determining human cancer risk.
    Haseman JK
    Drug Metab Rev; 2000 May; 32(2):169-86. PubMed ID: 10774773
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Evaluation of the ability of a battery of three in vitro genotoxicity tests to discriminate rodent carcinogens and non-carcinogens II. Further analysis of mammalian cell results, relative predictivity and tumour profiles.
    Kirkland D; Aardema M; Müller L; Makoto H
    Mutat Res; 2006 Sep; 608(1):29-42. PubMed ID: 16769241
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.