kwic
data
data
right
off
ON
220
1
100
500
strict
ELIZA cgi-bash version rev. 1.90
- Medical English LInking keywords finder for the PubMed Zipped Archive (ELIZA) -
return
kwic search for data out of >500 occurrences
617251 occurrences (No.12 in the rank) during 5 years in the PubMed. [cache]
--- ABSTRACT ---
--- ABSTRACT END ---
[frequency of next (right) word to data]
617251 occurrences (No.12 in the rank) during 5 years in the PubMed. [cache]
| 220) To accumulate enough reliable and robust data for the validation of QIVIVE, there are some partially opposing needs: Detailed delineation of the in vitro test system to produce a reliable toxicokinetic measure for a studied chemical, and a throughput capacity of the in vitro set-up and the analytical tool as high as possible. |
| PMID:23994130 DOI:10.1016/j.tox.2013.08.010 |
| 2015 Toxicology |
| * Analytical challenges for conducting rapid metabolism characterization for QIVIVE. |
| - For quantitative in vitro-in vivo extrapolation (QIVIVE) of metabolism for the purposes of toxicokinetics prediction, a precise and robust analytical technique for identifying and measuring a chemical and its metabolites is an absolute prerequisite. Currently, high-resolution mass spectrometry (HR-MS) is a tool of choice for a majority of organic relatively lipophilic molecules, linked with a LC separation tool and simultaneous UV-detection. However, additional techniques such as gas chromatography, radiometric measurements and NMR, are required to cover the whole spectrum of chemical structures. To accumulate enough reliable and robust data for the validation of QIVIVE, there are some partially opposing needs: Detailed delineation of the in vitro test system to produce a reliable toxicokinetic measure for a studied chemical, and a throughput capacity of the in vitro set-up and the analytical tool as high as possible. We discuss current analytical challenges for the identification and quantification of chemicals and their metabolites, both stable and reactive, focusing especially on LC-MS techniques, but simultaneously attempting to pinpoint factors associated with sample preparation, testing conditions and strengths and weaknesses of a particular technique available for a particular task. |
[
right
kwic]
(1)70  from |
(14)7 revealed |
(27)3 analyses |
(40)2 at |
| (2)55 were |
(15)7 support |
(28)3 can |
(41)2 by |
| (3)32 *null* | (16)7 was |
(29)3 concerning |
(42)2 clearly |
| (4)26 on |
(17)6 analysis |
(30)3 in |
(43)2 clustering |
| (5)19 and |
(18)6 obtained |
(31)3 indicated |
(44)2 have |
| (6)18 for |
(19)5 collection |
(32)3 may |
(45)2 here |
| (7)17 suggest |
(20)5 sets |
(33)3 the |
(46)2 highlight |
| (8)13 are |
(21)5 showed |
(34)3 which |
(47)2 mining |
| (9)11 set |
(22)5 we |
(35)3 with |
(48)2 show |
| (10)11 to |
(23)4 demonstrate |
(36)3 would |
(49)2 shows |
| (11)9 of |
(24)4 is |
(37)2 about |
|
| (12)7 collected |
(25)4 provide |
(38)2 also |
|
| (13)7 indicate |
(26)4 regarding |
(39)2 as |
add keyword
--- WordNet output for data ---