233 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12049952)
1. Comparison of breast mammography, sonography and physical examination for screening women at high risk of breast cancer in taiwan.
Hou MF; Chuang HY; Ou-Yang F; Wang CY; Huang CL; Fan HM; Chuang CH; Wang JY; Hsieh JS; Liu GC; Huang TJ
Ultrasound Med Biol; 2002 Apr; 28(4):415-20. PubMed ID: 12049952
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Comparison of breast magnetic resonance imaging, mammography, and ultrasound for surveillance of women at high risk for hereditary breast cancer.
Warner E; Plewes DB; Shumak RS; Catzavelos GC; Di Prospero LS; Yaffe MJ; Goel V; Ramsay E; Chart PL; Cole DE; Taylor GA; Cutrara M; Samuels TH; Murphy JP; Murphy JM; Narod SA
J Clin Oncol; 2001 Aug; 19(15):3524-31. PubMed ID: 11481359
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Evaluation of screening whole-breast sonography as a supplemental tool in conjunction with mammography in women with dense breasts.
Chae EY; Kim HH; Cha JH; Shin HJ; Kim H
J Ultrasound Med; 2013 Sep; 32(9):1573-8. PubMed ID: 23980217
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Using sonography to screen women with mammographically dense breasts.
Crystal P; Strano SD; Shcharynski S; Koretz MJ
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2003 Jul; 181(1):177-82. PubMed ID: 12818853
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Clinically and mammographically occult breast lesions: detection and classification with high-resolution sonography.
Buchberger W; Niehoff A; Obrist P; DeKoekkoek-Doll P; Dünser M
Semin Ultrasound CT MR; 2000 Aug; 21(4):325-36. PubMed ID: 11014255
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Comparison of the performance of screening mammography, physical examination, and breast US and evaluation of factors that influence them: an analysis of 27,825 patient evaluations.
Kolb TM; Lichy J; Newhouse JH
Radiology; 2002 Oct; 225(1):165-75. PubMed ID: 12355001
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. [Analysis of the results of 137 subclinical breast lesions excisions. Value of ultrasonography in the early diagnosis of breast cancer].
Jacob D; Brombart JC; Muller C; Lefèbvre C; Massa F; Depoerck A
J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris); 1997; 26(1):27-31. PubMed ID: 9091540
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Surveillance of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers with magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasound, mammography, and clinical breast examination.
Warner E; Plewes DB; Hill KA; Causer PA; Zubovits JT; Jong RA; Cutrara MR; DeBoer G; Yaffe MJ; Messner SJ; Meschino WS; Piron CA; Narod SA
JAMA; 2004 Sep; 292(11):1317-25. PubMed ID: 15367553
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Factors associated with imaging and procedural events used to detect breast cancer after screening mammography.
Carney PA; Abraham LA; Miglioretti DL; Yabroff KR; Sickles EA; Buist DS; Kasales CJ; Geller BM; Rosenberg RD; Dignan MB; Weaver DL; Kerlikowske K;
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2007 Feb; 188(2):385-92. PubMed ID: 17242246
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Evolution of breast cancer screening in countries with intermediate and increasing incidence of breast cancer.
Wu GH; Chen LS; Chang KJ; Hou MF; Chen SC; Liu TJ; Huang CS; Hsu GC; Yu CC; Jeng LL; Chen ST; Chou YH; Wu CY; Shin-Lan K; Chen TH;
J Med Screen; 2006; 13 Suppl 1():S23-7. PubMed ID: 17227638
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Breast cancer screening by mammography in women aged under 50 years in Japan.
Morimoto T; Sasa M; Yamaguchi T; Kondo H; Akaiwa H; Sagara Y
Anticancer Res; 2000; 20(5C):3689-94. PubMed ID: 11268440
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. [Early results of breast cancer screening research].
Nowicki A; Stogowska I
Ginekol Pol; 2007 Jun; 78(6):464-70. PubMed ID: 17899703
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Incidental findings on sonography of the breast: clinical significance and diagnostic workup.
Buchberger W; DeKoekkoek-Doll P; Springer P; Obrist P; Dünser M
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1999 Oct; 173(4):921-7. PubMed ID: 10511149
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Earlier detection of breast cancer by surveillance of women at familial risk.
Tilanus-Linthorst MM; Bartels CC; Obdeijn AI; Oudkerk M
Eur J Cancer; 2000 Mar; 36(4):514-9. PubMed ID: 10717529
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Evidence of the effect of adjunct ultrasound screening in women with mammography-negative dense breasts: interval breast cancers at 1 year follow-up.
Corsetti V; Houssami N; Ghirardi M; Ferrari A; Speziani M; Bellarosa S; Remida G; Gasparotti C; Galligioni E; Ciatto S
Eur J Cancer; 2011 May; 47(7):1021-6. PubMed ID: 21211962
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Canadian National Breast Screening Study-2: 13-year results of a randomized trial in women aged 50-59 years.
Miller AB; To T; Baines CJ; Wall C
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2000 Sep; 92(18):1490-9. PubMed ID: 10995804
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. [Accuracy and direct medical cost of different screening modalities for breast cancer among Chinese women].
Kang M; Zhao Y; Huang Y; Li J; Liu L; Li H
Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi; 2014 Mar; 36(3):236-40. PubMed ID: 24785288
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Ultrasound as an Adjunct to Mammography for Breast Cancer Screening: A Health Technology Assessment.
Health Quality Ontario
Ont Health Technol Assess Ser; 2016; 16(15):1-71. PubMed ID: 27468326
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Sensitivity of mammography and physical examination of the breast for detecting breast cancer.
Hicks MJ; Davis JR; Layton JM; Present AJ
JAMA; 1979 Nov; 242(19):2080-3. PubMed ID: 490787
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20.
; ; . PubMed ID:
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
