168 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10659732)
21. Computing mammographic density from a multiple regression model constructed with image-acquisition parameters from a full-field digital mammographic unit.
Lu LJ; Nishino TK; Khamapirad T; Grady JJ; Leonard MH; Brunder DG
Phys Med Biol; 2007 Aug; 52(16):4905-21. PubMed ID: 17671343
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. How mammographic breast density affects radiologists' visual search patterns.
Al Mousa DS; Brennan PC; Ryan EA; Lee WB; Tan J; Mello-Thoms C
Acad Radiol; 2014 Nov; 21(11):1386-93. PubMed ID: 25172414
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Pathology of familial breast cancer: differences between breast cancers in carriers of BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations and sporadic cases. Breast Cancer Linkage Consortium.
Lancet; 1997 May; 349(9064):1505-10. PubMed ID: 9167459
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Computerized image analysis: estimation of breast density on mammograms.
Zhou C; Chan HP; Petrick N; Helvie MA; Goodsitt MM; Sahiner B; Hadjiiski LM
Med Phys; 2001 Jun; 28(6):1056-69. PubMed ID: 11439475
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Relation between Mammographic Parenchymal Patterns and Breast Cancer Risk: Considering BMI, Compressed Breast Thickness and Age of Women in Tabriz, Iran.
Mehnati P; Alizadeh H; Hoda H
Asian Pac J Cancer Prev; 2016; 17(4):2259-63. PubMed ID: 27221927
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Population-based estimate of the average age-specific cumulative risk of breast cancer for a defined set of protein-truncating mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2. Australian Breast Cancer Family Study.
Hopper JL; Southey MC; Dite GS; Jolley DJ; Giles GG; McCredie MR; Easton DF; Venter DJ
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 1999 Sep; 8(9):741-7. PubMed ID: 10498392
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Computer-aided classification of mammographic masses and normal tissue: linear discriminant analysis in texture feature space.
Chan HP; Wei D; Helvie MA; Sahiner B; Adler DD; Goodsitt MM; Petrick N
Phys Med Biol; 1995 May; 40(5):857-76. PubMed ID: 7652012
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Mammographic density and cancer detection: does digital imaging challenge our current understanding?
Al Mousa DS; Mello-Thoms C; Ryan EA; Lee WB; Pietrzyk MW; Reed WM; Heard R; Poulos A; Tan J; Li Y; Brennan PC
Acad Radiol; 2014 Nov; 21(11):1377-85. PubMed ID: 25097013
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. False-positive reduction technique for detection of masses on digital mammograms: global and local multiresolution texture analysis.
Wei D; Chan HP; Petrick N; Sahiner B; Helvie MA; Adler DD; Goodsitt MM
Med Phys; 1997 Jun; 24(6):903-14. PubMed ID: 9198026
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Breast imaging findings in women with BRCA1- and BRCA2-associated breast carcinoma.
Hamilton LJ; Evans AJ; Wilson AR; Scott N; Cornford EJ; Pinder SE; Khan HN; Macmillan RD
Clin Radiol; 2004 Oct; 59(10):895-902. PubMed ID: 15451348
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Mammographic, US, and MR imaging phenotypes of familial breast cancer.
Schrading S; Kuhl CK
Radiology; 2008 Jan; 246(1):58-70. PubMed ID: 18096529
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Significance analysis of qualitative mammographic features, using linear classifiers, neural networks and support vector machines.
Mavroforakis M; Georgiou H; Dimitropoulos N; Cavouras D; Theodoridis S
Eur J Radiol; 2005 Apr; 54(1):80-9. PubMed ID: 15797296
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Mammographic density does not differ between unaffected BRCA1/2 mutation carriers and women at low-to-average risk of breast cancer.
Gierach GL; Loud JT; Chow CK; Prindiville SA; Eng-Wong J; Soballe PW; Giambartolomei C; Mai PL; Galbo CE; Nichols K; Calzone KA; Vachon C; Gail MH; Greene MH
Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2010 Aug; 123(1):245-55. PubMed ID: 20130984
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Effectiveness of breast cancer surveillance in BRCA1/2 gene mutation carriers and women with high familial risk.
Brekelmans CT; Seynaeve C; Bartels CC; Tilanus-Linthorst MM; Meijers-Heijboer EJ; Crepin CM; van Geel AA; Menke M; Verhoog LC; van den Ouweland A; Obdeijn IM; Klijn JG;
J Clin Oncol; 2001 Feb; 19(4):924-30. PubMed ID: 11181654
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. An anatomically oriented breast coordinate system for mammogram analysis.
Brandt SS; Karemore G; Karssemeijer N; Nielsen M
IEEE Trans Med Imaging; 2011 Oct; 30(10):1841-51. PubMed ID: 21609879
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Mammographic pattern analysis: an emerging risk assessment tool.
Karellas A
Acad Radiol; 2007 May; 14(5):511-2. PubMed ID: 17434063
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
37. Combined adaptive enhancement and region-growing segmentation of breast masses on digitized mammograms.
Petrick N; Chan HP; Sahiner B; Helvie MA
Med Phys; 1999 Aug; 26(8):1642-54. PubMed ID: 10501064
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Cost-effectiveness of screening BRCA1/2 mutation carriers with breast magnetic resonance imaging.
Plevritis SK; Kurian AW; Sigal BM; Daniel BL; Ikeda DM; Stockdale FE; Garber AM
JAMA; 2006 May; 295(20):2374-84. PubMed ID: 16720823
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Estimated risk of radiation-induced breast cancer from mammographic screening for young BRCA mutation carriers.
Berrington de Gonzalez A; Berg CD; Visvanathan K; Robson M
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2009 Feb; 101(3):205-9. PubMed ID: 19176458
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Using computer-extracted image features for modeling of error-making patterns in detection of mammographic masses among radiology residents.
Zhang J; Lo JY; Kuzmiak CM; Ghate SV; Yoon SC; Mazurowski MA
Med Phys; 2014 Sep; 41(9):091907. PubMed ID: 25186394
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
