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 *

128 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9748625)

  • 1. US Environmental Protection Agency's revised guidelines for Carcinogen Risk Assessment: incorporating mode of action data.
    Dellarco VL; Wiltse JA
    Mutat Res; 1998 Sep; 405(2):273-7. PubMed ID: 9748625
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's revised cancer guidelines for carcinogen risk assessment.
    Andersen M; Brusick D; Cohen S; Dragan Y; Frederick C; Goodman JI; Hard G; Meek B; O'Flaherty EJ
    Toxicol Appl Pharmacol; 1998 Nov; 153(1):133-6. PubMed ID: 9875307
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Lessons learned in applying the U.S. EPA proposed cancer guidelines to specific compounds.
    Andersen ME; Meek ME; Boorman GA; Brusick DJ; Cohen SM; Dragan YP; Frederick CB; Goodman JI; Hard GC; O'Flaherty EJ; Robinson DE
    Toxicol Sci; 2000 Feb; 53(2):159-72. PubMed ID: 10696764
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. Significant shortcomings of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's latest draft risk characterization for dioxin-like compounds.
    Starr TB
    Toxicol Sci; 2001 Nov; 64(1):7-13. PubMed ID: 11606796
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Topics in cancer risk assessment.
    Olin SS; Neumann DA; Foran JA; Scarano GJ
    Environ Health Perspect; 1997 Feb; 105 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):117-26. PubMed ID: 9114281
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Rationale developed by the Environmental Protection Agency for the assessment of carcinogenic risks.
    Albert RE; Train RE; Anderson E
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 1977 May; 58(5):1537-41. PubMed ID: 853532
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. EPA assesses cancer risk due to childhood carcinogen exposure.
    Lindsey H
    Lancet Oncol; 2003 Apr; 4(4):201. PubMed ID: 12681256
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Ecological risk assessment in the United States environmental protection agency: a historical overview.
    Suter GW
    Integr Environ Assess Manag; 2008 Jul; 4(3):285-9. PubMed ID: 18321143
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency guidelines for carcinogen risk assessment: past and future.
    Wiltse J; Dellarco VL
    Mutat Res; 1996 Sep; 365(1-3):3-15. PubMed ID: 8898986
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Chloroform: An EPA test case.
    Schmidt CW
    Environ Health Perspect; 1999 Jul; 107(7):A358-60. PubMed ID: 10379014
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Is ingested inorganic arsenic a "threshold" carcinogen?
    Abernathy CO; Chappell WR; Meek ME; Gibb H; Guo HR
    Fundam Appl Toxicol; 1996 Feb; 29(2):168-75. PubMed ID: 8742312
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. EPA's new guidance for assessing cancer risks from early life exposures: genotoxic mode of action and implications for human health-based standards.
    Borgert CJ
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2005 Jul; 42(2):245-8. PubMed ID: 15950346
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's examination of its risk assessment principles and practices: a brief perspective from the regulated community.
    Stahl RG; Guiseppi-Elie A; Bingman TS
    Integr Environ Assess Manag; 2005 Jan; 1(1):86-92. PubMed ID: 16637153
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The future direction of ecological risk assessment in the United States: reflecting on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's "Examination of risk assessment practices and principles".
    DeMott RP; Balaraman A; Sorensen MT
    Integr Environ Assess Manag; 2005 Jan; 1(1):77-82. PubMed ID: 16637151
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Risk Assessment Guidelines: current status and future directions.
    Farland WH
    Toxicol Ind Health; 1992; 8(3):205-12. PubMed ID: 1502698
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. What to do at low doses: a bounding approach for economic analysis.
    Griffiths CW; Dockins C; Owens N; Simon NB; Axelrad DA
    Risk Anal; 2002 Aug; 22(4):679-88. PubMed ID: 12224742
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Prioritization of Louisiana Parishes based on Industrial Releases of Known or Suspected Carcinogens.
    Katner A
    J La State Med Soc; 2015; 167(3):122-8. PubMed ID: 27159456
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The role of mode of action studies in extrapolating to human risks in toxicology.
    Lock EA; Smith LL
    Toxicol Lett; 2003 Apr; 140-141():317-22. PubMed ID: 12676480
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.