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 *

205 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8313353)

  • 1. High dose levels are not necessary in rodent studies to detect human carcinogens.
    Monro A; Davies TS
    Cancer Lett; 1993 Dec; 75(3):183-94. PubMed ID: 8313353
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Evaluation of carcinogenicity studies of medicinal products for human use authorised via the European centralised procedure (1995-2009).
    Friedrich A; Olejniczak K
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2011 Jul; 60(2):225-48. PubMed ID: 21513764
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. International Commission for Protection Against Environmental Mutagens and Carcinogens. ICPEMC Working Paper 1/2. A multi-factor ranking scheme for comparing the carcinogenic activity of chemicals.
    Nesnow S
    Mutat Res; 1990 Sep; 239(2):83-115. PubMed ID: 2385240
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Prediction of carcinogenicity from two versus four sex-species groups in the carcinogenic potency database.
    Gold LS; Slone TH
    J Toxicol Environ Health; 1993 May; 39(1):143-57. PubMed ID: 8492327
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Neonatal mouse model: review of methods and results.
    McClain RM; Keller D; Casciano D; Fu P; MacDonald J; Popp J; Sagartz J
    Toxicol Pathol; 2001; 29 Suppl():128-37. PubMed ID: 11695548
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. How many high production chemicals are rodent carcinogens? Why should we care? What do we need to do about it?
    Johnson FM
    Mutat Res; 2003 Jun; 543(3):201-15. PubMed ID: 12787813
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. Chemical carcinogenesis: too many rodent carcinogens.
    Ames BN; Gold LS
    Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A; 1990 Oct; 87(19):7772-6. PubMed ID: 2217209
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Dose selection for carcinogenicity studies of pharmaceuticals.
    Horii I
    J Toxicol Sci; 1995 Sep; 20(4):462-4. PubMed ID: 8531242
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Summary of carcinogenic potency and positivity for 492 rodent carcinogens in the carcinogenic potency database.
    Gold LS; Slone TH; Bernstein L
    Environ Health Perspect; 1989 Feb; 79():259-72. PubMed ID: 2707207
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Mutagenic activity of carcinogens detected in transgenic rodent mutagenicity assays at dose levels used in chronic rodent cancer bioassays.
    Schmezer P; Eckert C; Liegibel UM; Zelezny O; Klein RG
    Mutat Res; 1998 Sep; 405(2):193-8. PubMed ID: 9748572
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Animal carcinogenicity studies: 2. Obstacles to extrapolation of data to humans.
    Knight A; Bailey J; Balcombe J
    Altern Lab Anim; 2006 Feb; 34(1):29-38. PubMed ID: 16522148
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Further analysis of Ames-negative rodent carcinogens that are only genotoxic in mammalian cells in vitro at concentrations exceeding 1 mM, including retesting of compounds of concern.
    Kirkland D; Fowler P
    Mutagenesis; 2010 Nov; 25(6):539-53. PubMed ID: 20720197
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The syrian hamster embryo (SHE) cell transformation assay: review of the methods and results.
    Mauthe RJ; Gibson DP; Bunch RT; Custer L
    Toxicol Pathol; 2001; 29 Suppl():138-46. PubMed ID: 11695550
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. Detecting and predicting the activity of rodent carcinogens.
    Parry JM
    Mutagenesis; 1994 Jan; 9(1):3-5. PubMed ID: 7911554
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The case for an upper dose limit of 1000 mg/kg in rodent carcinogenicity tests.
    Davies TS; Montro A
    Cancer Lett; 1995 Aug; 95(1-2):69-77. PubMed ID: 7656246
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Predicting rodent carcinogenicity using potency measures of the in vitro sister chromatid exchange and chromosome aberration assays.
    Schildcrout JS; Margolin BH; Zeiger E
    Environ Mol Mutagen; 1999; 33(1):59-64. PubMed ID: 10037324
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.