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 *

192 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8172652)

  • 1. Carcinogen risk assessment in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
    Albert RE
    Crit Rev Toxicol; 1994; 24(1):75-85. PubMed ID: 8172652
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. A cancer risk assessment of di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate: application of the new U.S. EPA Risk Assessment Guidelines.
    Doull J; Cattley R; Elcombe C; Lake BG; Swenberg J; Wilkinson C; Williams G; van Gemert M
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 1999 Jun; 29(3):327-57. PubMed ID: 10388618
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. A discussion of the U.S. EPA methodology for determining Water Quality Standards (WQS).
    Burmaster DE; von Stackelberg KE
    Qual Assur; 1992 Jun; 1(3):192-206. PubMed ID: 1344674
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's risk assessment guidelines.
    Jarabek AM; Farland WH
    Toxicol Ind Health; 1990 Oct; 6(5):199-216. PubMed ID: 2274984
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Default assumptions in carcinogen risk assessment used by regulatory agencies.
    Moolenaar RJ
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 1994 Dec; 20(3 Pt 2):S135-41. PubMed ID: 7724845
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Update of potency factors for asbestos-related lung cancer and mesothelioma.
    Berman DW; Crump KS
    Crit Rev Toxicol; 2008; 38 Suppl 1():1-47. PubMed ID: 18671157
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Analysis of in vivo mutation data can inform cancer risk assessment.
    Moore MM; Heflich RH; Haber LT; Allen BC; Shipp AM; Kodell RL
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2008 Jul; 51(2):151-61. PubMed ID: 18321622
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. U.S. EPA's IRIS assessment of 2-butoxyethanol: the relationship of noncancer to cancer effects.
    Gift JS
    Toxicol Lett; 2005 Mar; 156(1):163-78. PubMed ID: 15705494
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Captan: transition from 'B2' to 'not likely'. How pesticide registrants affected the EPA Cancer Classification Update.
    Gordon E
    J Appl Toxicol; 2007; 27(5):519-26. PubMed ID: 17582583
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency procedures and policies to estimate risk of injury to the male reproductive system.
    Francis EZ
    Prog Clin Biol Res; 1989; 302():3-16; discussion 17-20. PubMed ID: 2755956
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Understanding population and individual risk assessment: the case of polychlorinated biphenyls.
    Shields PG
    Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 2006 May; 15(5):830-9. PubMed ID: 16702358
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Risk assessment: the default conservatism controversy.
    Barnard RC
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 1995 Jun; 21(3):431-8. PubMed ID: 7480897
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Calculating excess risk with age-dependent adjustment factors and cumulative doses: ethylene oxide case study.
    Sielken RL; Flores CV
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2009 Oct; 55(1):76-81. PubMed ID: 19508881
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Science, policy, and trends of metals risk assessment at EPA: how understanding metals bioavailability has changed metals risk assessment at US EPA.
    Reiley MC
    Aquat Toxicol; 2007 Aug; 84(2):292-8. PubMed ID: 17662477
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Developmental toxicity risk assessment: consensus building, hypothesis formulation, and focused research.
    Kimmel CA
    Drug Metab Rev; 1996; 28(1-2):85-103. PubMed ID: 8744591
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Mechanistic data and cancer risk assessment: the need for quantitative molecular endpoints.
    Preston RJ
    Environ Mol Mutagen; 2005; 45(2-3):214-21. PubMed ID: 15645441
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Synthetic risks, risk potency, and carcinogen regulation.
    Viscusi WK; Hakes JK
    J Policy Anal Manage; 1998; 17(1):52-73. PubMed ID: 10848157
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Potential new approaches for children's inhalation risk assessment.
    Firestone M; Sonawane B; Barone S; Salmon AG; Brown JP; Hattis D; Woodruff T
    J Toxicol Environ Health A; 2008; 71(3):208-17. PubMed ID: 18097946
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.