Literature DB >> 1820280

Examples of uses of databases for quantitative and qualitative correlation studies between genotoxicity and carcinogenicity.

S Parodi1, D Malacarne, M Taningher.   

Abstract

In this paper we give some examples of using databases of genotoxicity and carcinogenicity for quantitative and qualitative correlation studies between short-term tests and carcinogenicity. The quality of the databases is obviously important, but one of the major deficiencies of present databases is that they are too small. Using relatively small, different databases, different results can be obtained. With small databases it is difficult to disaggregate data for homogeneous chemical classes or other types of subsets. Using the databases of Gold (carcinogenicity) and Würgler (genotoxicity), we have investigated the carcinogenic potency of genotoxic and nongenotoxic carcinogens for different chemical classes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1991        PMID: 1820280      PMCID: PMC1568232          DOI: 10.1289/ehp.919661

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Health Perspect        ISSN: 0091-6765            Impact factor:   9.031


  17 in total

1.  Quantitative evaluation of DNA binding data for risk estimation and for classification of direct and indirect carcinogens.

Authors:  W K Lutz
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  1986       Impact factor: 4.553

2.  Validation and characterization of the L5178Y/TK+/- mouse lymphoma mutagen assay system.

Authors:  D Clive; K O Johnson; J F Spector; A G Batson; M M Brown
Journal:  Mutat Res       Date:  1979-01       Impact factor: 2.433

3.  Quantitative predictivity of the transformation in vitro assay compared with the Ames test.

Authors:  S Parodi; M Taningher; P Russo; M Pala; D Vecchio; G Fassina; L Santi
Journal:  J Toxicol Environ Health       Date:  1983 Oct-Dec

4.  Induction of preneoplastic nodules: quantitative predictivity of carcinogenicity.

Authors:  S Parodi; M Taningher; L Santi
Journal:  Anticancer Res       Date:  1983 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 2.480

5.  Predictive ability of the autoradiographic repair assay in rat liver cells compared with the Ames test.

Authors:  S Parodi; M Taningher; C Balbi; L Santi
Journal:  J Toxicol Environ Health       Date:  1982 Oct-Nov

6.  Exploring relationships between mutagenic and carcinogenic potencies.

Authors:  W W Piegorsch; D G Hoel
Journal:  Mutat Res       Date:  1988-09       Impact factor: 2.433

7.  Statistical analysis of Salmonella test data and comparison to results of animal cancer tests.

Authors:  J McCann; L S Gold; L Horn; R McGill; T E Graedel; J Kaldor
Journal:  Mutat Res       Date:  1988 May-Aug       Impact factor: 2.433

8.  Predicting mammalian mutagenesis by submammalian assays: an application of database GEN.

Authors:  F E Würgler
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  1991-12       Impact factor: 9.031

9.  Quantitative predictability of carcinogenicity of the covalent binding index of chemicals to DNA: comparison of the in vivo and in vitro assays.

Authors:  M Taningher; G Saccomanno; L Santi; S Grilli; S Parodi
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  1990-03       Impact factor: 9.031

10.  Quantitative predictivity of carcinogenicity of the autoradiographic repair test (primary hepatocyte cultures) for a group of 80 chemicals belonging to different chemical classes.

Authors:  C Bolognesi; M Taningher; S Parodi; L Santi
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  1986-12       Impact factor: 9.031

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.