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

409 related items for PubMed ID: 2228144

  • 1. Screening assays for carcinogenic agents and mixtures: an appraisal based on data in the IARC Monograph series.
    Bartsch H, Malaveille C.
    IARC Sci Publ; 1990; (104):65-74. PubMed ID: 2228144
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. [The relation between carcinogenesis and mutagenesis: a re-evaluation].
    Bartsch H, Malaveille C.
    Bull Acad Natl Med; 1989 Nov; 173(8):1005-12; discussion 1013-5. PubMed ID: 2633853
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. [Genotoxicity of carcinogenic substances in humans and animals].
    Malaveille C, Bartsch H.
    J Toxicol Clin Exp; 1989 Nov; 9(2 Pt 2):15-25. PubMed ID: 2677321
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. Prevalence of genotoxic chemicals among animal and human carcinogens evaluated in the IARC Monograph Series.
    Bartsch H, Malaveille C.
    Cell Biol Toxicol; 1989 Jun; 5(2):115-27. PubMed ID: 2766027
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. Evaluation of the ability of a battery of three in vitro genotoxicity tests to discriminate rodent carcinogens and non-carcinogens I. Sensitivity, specificity and relative predictivity.
    Kirkland D, Aardema M, Henderson L, Müller L.
    Mutat Res; 2005 Jul 04; 584(1-2):1-256. PubMed ID: 15979392
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. Testing strategies in mutagenicity and genetic toxicology: an appraisal of the guidelines of the European Scientific Committee for Cosmetics and Non-Food Products for the evaluation of hair dyes.
    Kirkland DJ, Henderson L, Marzin D, Müller L, Parry JM, Speit G, Tweats DJ, Williams GM.
    Mutat Res; 2005 Dec 30; 588(2):88-105. PubMed ID: 16326131
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. The results of assays in Drosophila as indicators of exposure to carcinogens.
    Vogel EW, Graf U, Frei HJ, Nivard MM.
    IARC Sci Publ; 1999 Dec 30; (146):427-70. PubMed ID: 10353398
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. Chemicals classified by IARC: their potency in tests for carcinogenicity in rodents and their genotoxicity and acute toxicity.
    McGregor DB.
    IARC Sci Publ; 1992 Dec 30; (116):323-52. PubMed ID: 1428089
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. Are tumor incidence rates from chronic bioassays telling us what we need to know about carcinogens?
    Gaylor DW.
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2005 Mar 30; 41(2):128-33. PubMed ID: 15698536
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. 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]

  • 13. Guidelines for the evaluation of chemicals for carcinogenicity. Committee on Carcinogenicity of Chemicals in Food, Consumer Products and the Environment.
    Rep Health Soc Subj (Lond); 1991 Sep 19; 42():1-80. PubMed ID: 1763238
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. Genotoxicity and carcinogenicity studies of antihypertensive agents.
    Brambilla G, Martelli A.
    Mutat Res; 2006 Mar 19; 612(2):115-49. PubMed ID: 16458045
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. The comet assay with multiple mouse organs: comparison of comet assay results and carcinogenicity with 208 chemicals selected from the IARC monographs and U.S. NTP Carcinogenicity Database.
    Sasaki YF, Sekihashi K, Izumiyama F, Nishidate E, Saga A, Ishida K, Tsuda S.
    Crit Rev Toxicol; 2000 Nov 19; 30(6):629-799. PubMed ID: 11145306
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. 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]

  • 17. 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]

  • 18. Epidemiological and experimental applications to occupational cancer prevention.
    Vainio H, Hemminki K.
    J UOEH; 1989 Mar 20; 11 Suppl():323-45. PubMed ID: 2664947
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. Toxicology and Carcinogenesis Studies of 5,5-Diphenylhydantoin (CAS No. 57-41-0) (Phenytoin) in F344/N Rats and B6C3F1 Mice (Feed Studies).
    National Toxicology Program .
    Natl Toxicol Program Tech Rep Ser; 1993 Nov 20; 404():1-303. PubMed ID: 12621514
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. From hazard identification to weighing the benefits and drawbacks of prevention.
    Vainio H, Weiderpass E.
    Toxicol Appl Pharmacol; 2005 Sep 01; 207(2 Suppl):28-33. PubMed ID: 16005922
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 21.