Goodbye to the bioassay.

scientific article published on 6 February 2018

Goodbye to the bioassay. is …
instance of (P31):
scholarly articleQ13442814

External links are
P356DOI10.1039/C8TX00004B
P932PMC publication ID6062362
P698PubMed publication ID30090606

P2093author name stringJay I Goodman
P2860cites workIPCS framework for analyzing the relevance of a cancer mode of action for humans.Q53587174
Anticarcinogenic responses in rodent cancer bioassays are not explained by random effectsQ74658454
Are tumor incidence rates from chronic bioassays telling us what we need to know about carcinogens?Q81376834
Chemical carcinogenesisQ82836038
Evaluation of possible carcinogenic risk to humans based on liver tumors in rodent assays: the two-year bioassay is no longer necessaryQ83161176
Evaluation of carcinogenicity studies of medicinal products for human use authorised via the European centralised procedure (1995-2009)Q83935535
Carcinogens are mutagens: a simple test system combining liver homogenates for activation and bacteria for detectionQ24564216
Issues in carcinogenicity testing: dose selectionQ30406737
Prediction of carcinogenic potential of chemicals using repeated-dose (13-week) toxicity dataQ31129161
Mode of action and human relevance analysis for nuclear receptor-mediated liver toxicity: A case study with phenobarbital as a model constitutive androstane receptor (CAR) activatorQ33606444
Chemical carcinogenesis: too many rodent carcinogensQ33830472
Percivall Pott (1714-1788) and chimney sweepers' cancer of the scrotumQ33969386
Altered DNA methylation: a secondary mechanism involved in carcinogenesisQ34504084
The traditional toxicologic paradigm is correct: dose influences mechanismQ34940462
Chemicals associated with site-specific neoplasia in 1394 long-term carcinogenesis experiments in laboratory rodentsQ35034198
Long-term chemical carcinogenesis experiments for identifying potential human cancer hazards: collective database of the National Cancer Institute and National Toxicology Program (1976-1991)Q35034726
Best-estimate low-dose extrapolation of carcinogenicity dataQ35132430
Dose-dependent transitions in mechanisms of toxicityQ35975273
Dose-dependent transitions in mechanisms of toxicity: case studiesQ35975278
Cancer as a dysregulated epigenome allowing cellular growth advantage at the expense of the hostQ36257990
Genetic errors, cell proliferation, and carcinogenesisQ36788143
Analysis of National Toxicology Program rodent bioassay data for anticarcinogenic effectsQ36802200
Too many rodent carcinogens: mitogenesis increases mutagenesisQ37848515
Cell proliferation in carcinogenesisQ37951208
Muller's Nobel Prize Lecture: when ideology prevailed over scienceQ37968101
Evaluation of the utility of the lifetime mouse bioassay in the identification of cancer hazards for humansQ38129673
Human relevance framework for rodent liver tumors induced by the insecticide sulfoxaflorQ38212105
Flaws in the LNT single-hit model for cancer risk: An historical assessmentQ38653653
Critical analysis of carcinogenicity study outcomes. Relationship with pharmacological propertiesQ38818082
Influence of DNA repair on nonlinear dose-responses for mutationQ39216690
Principles underlying dose selection for, and extrapolation from, the carcinogen bioassay: dose influences mechanismQ40371097
Alterations in DNA methylation may play a variety of roles in carcinogenesisQ40410595
Historical review of the rodent bioassay and future directionsQ40546962
A rational approach to risk assessment requires the use of biological information: an analysis of the National Toxicology Program (NTP), final report of the advisory review by the NTP Board of Scientific CounselorsQ40741242
Alternatives to the 2-species bioassay for the identification of potential human carcinogensQ41137398
Definitive relationships among chemical structure, carcinogenicity and mutagenicity for 301 chemicals tested by the U.S. NTPQ43717333
Cancer risk assessment approaches at the FDA/CDER: Is the era of the 2-year bioassay drawing to a close?Q43734471
Evaluating the human relevance of chemically induced animal tumorsQ47250065
Weight and survival depression in rodent bioassays with and without tumor decreasesQ47287024
The rodent carcinogenicity bioassay produces a similar frequency of tumor increases and decreases: implications for risk assessmentQ50146519
An integrative test strategy for cancer hazard identification.Q50856445
An analysis of pharmaceutical experience with decades of rat carcinogenicity testing: support for a proposal to modify current regulatory guidelines.Q51559026
Carcinogen testing: current problems and new approaches.Q53569528
P433issue4
P304page(s)558-564
P577publication date2018-02-06
P1433published inToxicology researchQ26853990
P1476titleGoodbye to the bioassay.
P478volume7

Reverse relations

cites work (P2860)
Q100509843A comprehensive view on mechanistic approaches for cancer risk assessment of non-genotoxic agrochemicals
Q91950350Carcinogenicity assessment: Addressing the challenges of cancer and chemicals in the environment
Q99560130Quantification of Cancer Driver Mutations in Human Breast and Lung DNA Using Targeted, Error-corrected CarcSeq

Search more.