BarrattM.D., CastellJ.V., ChamberlainM., CombesR.D., DeardenJ.C., FentemJ.H., GernerI., GiulianiA., GrayT.J.B., LivingstoneD.J., ProvanW.M., RuttenF.A.J.J.L., VerhaarH.J.M., and ZbindenP. (1995). The integrated use of alternative approaches for predicting toxic hazard. The report and recommendations of ECVAM workshop 8.ATLA23, 410–429.
3.
BallsML, GoldbergA.M., FentemJ.H., Broad-headC.L., BurchR.L., FestingM.F.W., FrazierJ.M., HendriksenC.F.M., JenningsM., van der KampM.D.O., MortonD.B., RowanA.N., RussellC., RussellW.M.S., SpielmannH., StephensM.L., StokesW.S., StraughanD.W., YagerJ.D., ZurloJ., & van ZutphenB.F.M. (1995). The Three Rs: the way forward. The report and recommendations of ECVAM workshop 11.ATLA23, 838–866.
4.
SvendsenO., GarthoffB., SpielmannH., Hensten-PettersenA., JensenJ.C., KuypersM.R., LeimgruberR., LiebschM., Müller-LierheimW.G.K., RydhögG., SauerU.G., SchmalzG., SimB., and SteaS. (1996). Alternatives to the animal testing of medical devices. The report and recommendations of ECVAM workshop 17.ATLA24, 659–669.
5.
BachP.H., VickersA.E.M., FisherR., BaumannA., BritteboE., CarlileD.J., KosterH.J., LakeB.G., SalmonF., SawyerT.W., and SkibinskiG. (1996). The use of tissue slices for pharmacotoxicology studies. The report and recommendations of ECVAM workshop 20.ATLA24, 893–923.
6.
LeahyD.E., DuncanR., AhrH.J., BaylissM.K., de BoerA.G., DarvasF., FentemJ.H., FryJ.R., HopkinsR., HoustonJ.B., KarlssonJ., KedderisG.L., PrattenM.K., PrietoP., SmithD.A., and StraughanD.W. (1997). Pharmacokinetics in early drug research. The report and recommendations of ECVAM workshop 22.ATLA25, 17–31.
7.
JanuschA., van der KampM.D.O., BottrillK., GruneB., AndersonD.C., EkwallB., HowaldM., KolarR., KuiperH.J.D., LarsonJ., LoprienoG., SauerU.G., SmithA.J., & van der ValkJ.B.F. (1997). Current status and future developments of databases on alternative methods. The report and recommendations of ECVAM workshop 25.ATLA25, 411–122.
8.
LumleyC.E., ParkinsonC., and WalkerS.R. (1992). An international appraisal of the minimum duration of chronic animal toxicity studies.Human and Experimental Toxicology11, 155–162.
9.
LumleyC.E., and WalkerS.R. (1985). The value of chronic animal toxicology studies of pharmaceutical compounds — a retrospective analysis.Fundamental and Applied Toxicology5, 1007–1024.
10.
LumleyC.E., ParkinsonC., and WalkerS.R. (1993). The value of the dog in long-term toxicity studies. The CMR International Toxicology Database.Adverse Drug Reactions and Toxicological Reviews12, 53–61.
11.
SpielmannH. (1996). A German study on “The use of dogs as the second species in regulatory testing of pesticides”. ATLA24, 609–610.
12.
van OosterhoutJ.P.T., van der LaanJ.W., de WaalE.J., OlejniczakK., HilgenfeldM., SchmidtV., and BassR. (1997). The utility of two rodent species in carcinogenic risk assessment of pharmaceuticals in Europe.Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology25, 6–17.
13.
KramerH.J., van den HamW.A., SlobW., and PietersM.N. (1996). Conversion factors estimating indicative chronic no-observed effect levels from short-term toxicity data.Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology23, 249–255.
14.
PietersM.N., KramerH.J., and SlobW. (1998). A no-observed effect level of 1000mg/kg-1 in a 28-day repeated-study as a limit value for acute toxicity testing.International Journal of Toxicology, in press.
