These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

151 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10701619)

  • 41. Symmetry of projection in the quantitative analysis of mammographic images.
    Byng JW; Boyd NF; Little L; Lockwood G; Fishell E; Jong RA; Yaffe MJ
    Eur J Cancer Prev; 1996 Oct; 5(5):319-27. PubMed ID: 8972250
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Histologic work-up of non-palpable breast lesions classified as probably benign at initial mammography and/or ultrasound (BI-RADS category 3).
    Gruber R; Jaromi S; Rudas M; Pfarl G; Riedl CC; Flöry D; Graf O; Sickles EA; Helbich TH
    Eur J Radiol; 2013 Mar; 82(3):398-403. PubMed ID: 22429299
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. Incident screening cancers detected with a second mammographic view: pathological and radiological features.
    Given-Wilson RM; Blanks RG
    Clin Radiol; 1999 Nov; 54(11):724-35. PubMed ID: 10580762
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Number of projections in mammography: influence on detection of breast disease.
    Andersson I; Hildell J; Mühlow A; Pettersson H
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1978 Feb; 130(2):349-51. PubMed ID: 414592
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. [Diagnostic imaging of lobular carcinoma of the breast: mammographic, ultrasonographic and MR findings].
    Bazzocchi M; Facecchia I; Zuiani C; Puglisi F; Di Loreto C; Smania S
    Radiol Med; 2000 Dec; 100(6):436-43. PubMed ID: 11307504
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. Average glandular dose in digital mammography and breast tomosynthesis.
    Olgar T; Kahn T; Gosch D
    Rofo; 2012 Oct; 184(10):911-8. PubMed ID: 22711250
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. Longitudinal measurement of clinical mammographic breast density to improve estimation of breast cancer risk.
    Kerlikowske K; Ichikawa L; Miglioretti DL; Buist DS; Vacek PM; Smith-Bindman R; Yankaskas B; Carney PA; Ballard-Barbash R;
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 2007 Mar; 99(5):386-95. PubMed ID: 17341730
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Investigation of lesions detected by mammography. The Steering Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Care and Treatment of Breast Cancer. Canadian Association of Radiation Oncologists.
    CMAJ; 1998 Feb; 158 Suppl 3():S9-14. PubMed ID: 9484273
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Efficacy of mammographic evaluation of breast cancer in women less than 40 years of age: experience from a single medical center in Taiwan.
    Wang J; Chang KJ; Kuo WH; Lee HT; Shih TT
    J Formos Med Assoc; 2007 Sep; 106(9):736-47. PubMed ID: 17908663
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Mammographic breast density status in women aged more than 40 years in Sulaimaniyah, Iraq: a cross-sectional study.
    Ali KAS; Fateh SM
    J Int Med Res; 2022 Dec; 50(12):3000605221139712. PubMed ID: 36453636
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. Invasive lobular carcinoma: mammographic findings in a 10-year experience.
    Hilleren DJ; Andersson IT; Lindholm K; Linnell FS
    Radiology; 1991 Jan; 178(1):149-54. PubMed ID: 1984294
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. The relationship between breast density, age, and mammographic lesion type among Chinese breast cancer patients from a large clinical dataset.
    Ji Y; Li B; Zhao R; Zhang Y; Liu J; Lu H
    BMC Med Imaging; 2021 Mar; 21(1):43. PubMed ID: 33685388
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. Interpreting one-view mammographic findings: minimizing callbacks while maximizing cancer detection.
    Giess CS; Frost EP; Birdwell RL
    Radiographics; 2014; 34(4):928-40. PubMed ID: 25019432
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Breast compression and radiation dose in two different mammographic oblique projections: 45 and 60 degrees.
    Brnić Z; Hebrang A
    Eur J Radiol; 2001 Oct; 40(1):10-5. PubMed ID: 11673002
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. Mammography practice in Serbia: evaluation and optimisation of image quality and the technical aspects of the mammographic imaging chain.
    Kosutic D; Ciraj-Bjelac O; Arandjic D
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2010; 139(1-3):293-7. PubMed ID: 20207752
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Outcome of mammography examination in asymptomatic women.
    Kolade-Yunusa HO; Itanyi UD
    Ann Afr Med; 2021; 20(1):52-58. PubMed ID: 33727513
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. Developing Asymmetries at Mammography: A Multimodality Approach to Assessment and Management.
    Chesebro AL; Winkler NS; Birdwell RL; Giess CS
    Radiographics; 2016; 36(2):322-34. PubMed ID: 26963449
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Digital mammographic artifacts on full-field systems: what are they and how do I fix them?
    Ayyala RS; Chorlton M; Behrman RH; Kornguth PJ; Slanetz PJ
    Radiographics; 2008; 28(7):1999-2008. PubMed ID: 19001654
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. Clinically challenging mammographic artifacts: a pictorial guide.
    Coscia J; Jaskulski S; Wang J
    Curr Probl Diagn Radiol; 2001; 30(1):6-18. PubMed ID: 11211883
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Evaluation of the mammographic lesion.
    Osborne JM; Robert D
    Australas Radiol; 1989 Nov; 33(4):320-7. PubMed ID: 2633731
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.