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.
Pubmed for Handhelds
PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS
Journal Abstract Search
360 related items for PubMed ID: 17567850
1. Application of toxicogenomics to genetic toxicology risk assessment. Thybaud V, Le Fevre AC, Boitier E. Environ Mol Mutagen; 2007 Jun; 48(5):369-79. PubMed ID: 17567850 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Application of toxicogenomics to study mechanisms of genotoxicity and carcinogenicity. Ellinger-Ziegelbauer H, Aubrecht J, Kleinjans JC, Ahr HJ. Toxicol Lett; 2009 Apr 10; 186(1):36-44. PubMed ID: 18822359 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Strategy for genotoxicity testing: hazard identification and risk assessment in relation to in vitro testing. Thybaud V, Aardema M, Clements J, Dearfield K, Galloway S, Hayashi M, Jacobson-Kram D, Kirkland D, MacGregor JT, Marzin D, Ohyama W, Schuler M, Suzuki H, Zeiger E, Expert Working Group on Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment in Relation to In Vitro Testing. Mutat Res; 2007 Feb 03; 627(1):41-58. PubMed ID: 17126066 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Safety and nutritional assessment of GM plants and derived food and feed: the role of animal feeding trials. EFSA GMO Panel Working Group on Animal Feeding Trials. Food Chem Toxicol; 2008 Mar 03; 46 Suppl 1():S2-70. PubMed ID: 18328408 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Genetic toxicity assessment: employing the best science for human safety evaluation Part VII: Why not start with a single test: a transformational alternative to genotoxicity hazard and risk assessment. Ku WW, Aubrecht J, Mauthe RJ, Schiestl RH, Fornace AJ. Toxicol Sci; 2007 Sep 03; 99(1):20-5. PubMed ID: 17548889 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. 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 19; 608(1):29-42. PubMed ID: 16769241 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Comparative analysis of predictive models for nongenotoxic hepatocarcinogenicity using both toxicogenomics and quantitative structure-activity relationships. Liu Z, Kelly R, Fang H, Ding D, Tong W. Chem Res Toxicol; 2011 Jul 18; 24(7):1062-70. PubMed ID: 21627106 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. 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 15; 151(1):29-41. PubMed ID: 15177638 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. How to assess the mutagenic potential of cosmetic products without animal tests? Speit G. Mutat Res; 2009 Aug 15; 678(2):108-12. PubMed ID: 19379833 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Identification of a gene expression profile that discriminates indirect-acting genotoxins from direct-acting genotoxins. Hu T, Gibson DP, Carr GJ, Torontali SM, Tiesman JP, Chaney JG, Aardema MJ. Mutat Res; 2004 May 18; 549(1-2):5-27. PubMed ID: 15120960 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Sensitive DsRed fluorescence-based reporter cell systems for genotoxicity and oxidative stress assessment. Hendriks G, Atallah M, Raamsman M, Morolli B, van der Putten H, Jaadar H, Tijdens I, Esveldt-van Lange R, Mullenders L, van de Water B, Vrieling H. Mutat Res; 2011 May 10; 709-710():49-59. PubMed ID: 21382384 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Follow-up testing of rodent carcinogens not positive in the standard genotoxicity testing battery: IWGT workgroup report. Kasper P, Uno Y, Mauthe R, Asano N, Douglas G, Matthews E, Moore M, Mueller L, Nakajima M, Singer T, Speit G, IWGT Workgroup. Mutat Res; 2007 Feb 03; 627(1):106-16. PubMed ID: 17123861 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Toxicogenomics in the assessment of immunotoxicity. Baken KA, Vandebriel RJ, Pennings JL, Kleinjans JC, van Loveren H. Methods; 2007 Jan 03; 41(1):132-41. PubMed ID: 17161310 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Comparison of phenotypic and transcriptomic effects of false-positive genotoxins, true genotoxins and non-genotoxins using HepG2 cells. Magkoufopoulou C, Claessen SM, Jennen DG, Kleinjans JC, van Delft JH. Mutagenesis; 2011 Sep 03; 26(5):593-604. PubMed ID: 21632981 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. In vitro approaches to develop weight of evidence (WoE) and mode of action (MoA) discussions with positive in vitro genotoxicity results. Kirkland DJ, Aardema M, Banduhn N, Carmichael P, Fautz R, Meunier JR, Pfuhler S. Mutagenesis; 2007 May 03; 22(3):161-75. PubMed ID: 17369606 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Evaluation of the Vitotox and RadarScreen assays for the rapid assessment of genotoxicity in the early research phase of drug development. Westerink WM, Stevenson JC, Lauwers A, Griffioen G, Horbach GJ, Schoonen WG. Mutat Res; 2009 May 31; 676(1-2):113-30. PubMed ID: 19393335 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. A case for a new paradigm in genetic toxicology testing. Pottenger LH, Gollapudi BB. Mutat Res; 2009 Aug 31; 678(2):148-51. PubMed ID: 19616117 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Comparison of supervised clustering methods to discriminate genotoxic from non-genotoxic carcinogens by gene expression profiling. van Delft JH, van Agen E, van Breda SG, Herwijnen MH, Staal YC, Kleinjans JC. Mutat Res; 2005 Aug 04; 575(1-2):17-33. PubMed ID: 15924884 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Predictive toxicogenomics approaches reveal underlying molecular mechanisms of nongenotoxic carcinogenicity. Nie AY, McMillian M, Parker JB, Leone A, Bryant S, Yieh L, Bittner A, Nelson J, Carmen A, Wan J, Lord PG. Mol Carcinog; 2006 Dec 04; 45(12):914-33. PubMed ID: 16921489 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] Page: [Next] [New Search]