Defining EMS and ENU dose–response relationships using the Pig-a mutation assay in rats
Krista L. Dobo(Pfizer (United States)), Maik Schuler(Pfizer (United States)), Thomas J. Shutsky(Pfizer (United States)), William C. Gunther(Pfizer (United States)), Stephanie L. Coffing(Pfizer (United States)), Zoryana Cammerer(Pfizer (United States)), Catherine J. Thiffeault(Pfizer (United States)), Ronald D. Fiedler(Pfizer (United States))
Mutation Research/Genetic Toxicology and Environmental Mutagenesis
June 28, 2011
Cited by 48
Related Papers
Strategy for genotoxicity testing: Hazard identification and risk assessment in relation to in vitro testing
|Mutation Research/Genetic Toxicology and Environmental Mutagenesis|2006|131
Advantages and limitations of using fluorescence in situ hybridization for the detection of aneuploidy in interphase human cells
|Mutation Research Letters|1995|119
Improvement of in vivo genotoxicity assessment: Combination of acute tests and integration into standard toxicity testing
|Mutation Research/Genetic Toxicology and Environmental Mutagenesis|2010|106
Synthesis, Molecular Editing, and Biological Assessment of the Potent Cytotoxin Leiodermatolide
|Journal of the American Chemical Society|2014|93
A critical evaluation of centromeric labeling to distinguish micronuclei induced by chromosomal loss and breakage in vitro
|Mutation Research/Genetic Toxicology and Environmental Mutagenesis|1997|89