The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Carcinogenicity Assessment of Selected Nickel Compounds
Open accessAbstract
The early epidemiological data indicated different carcinogenic risks from inhalation of different nickel compounds, but it was not clear what characteristics governed the intrinsic carcinogenic hazard of the various nickel compounds. Based on the earlier results, all soluble and insoluble nickel compounds were assumed to have the same carcinogenic mechanism albeit different potencies. Recent in vivo and in vitro studies challenged this assumption. In this paper an attempt is made to integrate the most relevant human, animal, and in vitro data into a general model that can help understand the different carcinogenic potentials of the various nickel compounds. In this perspective, it is recognized that there are two main components that could contribute to the development of lung cancer via exposure to certain nickel compounds. The first component corresponds to the heritable changes (genetic or epigenetic) derived from the direct or indirect actions of nickel compounds. The second component may be the promotion of cell proliferation elicited by certain nickel compounds. The different contributions of three nickel compounds to these two components are presented. This paper emphasizes the importance of recognizing the individuality of the different nickel species in reaching regulatory decisions and the fact that different risk assessment considerations may apply for compounds that appear to produce immortality and cancer by genetic/epigenetic mechanisms (like nickel subsulfide), compounds that may present a threshold for the induction of tumors in rats (like high-temperature nickel oxide), or compounds that may only have an enhancing effect on carcinogenicity (like nickel sulfate).
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Oxidative Nucleobase Modifications Leading to Strand Scission
Burrows, C. J., & Muller, J. G. (1998) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/cr960421s · Cited by 1,736
Chemical looping beyond combustion – a perspective
Zhu, X., Imtiaz, Q., Donat, F., Müller, C. R., & Li, F. (2020) · Energy & Environmental Science · doi:10.1039/c9ee03793d · Cited by 538
Bioavailability of Nickel in Single‐Wall Carbon Nanotubes
Liu, X., Gurel, V., Morris, D., Murray, D. W., Zhitkovich, A., Kane, A. B., & Hurt, R. H. (2007) · Advanced Materials · doi:10.1002/adma.200602696 · Cited by 169
Groundwater status in Pakistan: A review of contamination, health risks, and potential needs
Raza, M., Hussain, F., Lee, J.-Y., Shakoor, M. B., & Kwon, K. D. (2017) · Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology · doi:10.1080/10643389.2017.1400852 · Cited by 132
Bloise, A., Ricchiuti, C., Punturo, R., & Pereira, D. (2020) · Chemical Geology · doi:10.1016/j.chemgeo.2020.119896 · Cited by 46
Metadata
- Authors
- Oller, A. R., Costa, M., & Oberdörster, G.
- Venue
- Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1997-03
- Volume
- 143
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 152-166
- ISSN
- 0041-008X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2021712303
- Cited by
- 284
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 4.28
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Carcinogenicity Assessment of Selected Nickel Compounds. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1006/taap.1996.8075
- The paper
- Oller, A. R., Costa, M., & Oberdörster, G. (1997). Carcinogenicity Assessment of Selected Nickel Compounds. Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology. https://doi.org/10.1006/taap.1996.8075
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.