200 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12888370)
1. Quantifying the potential problem of overdiagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ in breast cancer screening.
Yen MF; Tabár L; Vitak B; Smith RA; Chen HH; Duffy SW
Eur J Cancer; 2003 Aug; 39(12):1746-54. PubMed ID: 12888370
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The relative contributions of screen-detected in situ and invasive breast carcinomas in reducing mortality from the disease.
Duffy SW; Tabar L; Vitak B; Day NE; Smith RA; Chen HH; Yen MF
Eur J Cancer; 2003 Aug; 39(12):1755-60. PubMed ID: 12888371
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Overdiagnosis and overtreatment of breast cancer: estimates of overdiagnosis from two trials of mammographic screening for breast cancer.
Duffy SW; Agbaje O; Tabar L; Vitak B; Bjurstam N; Björneld L; Myles JP; Warwick J
Breast Cancer Res; 2005; 7(6):258-65. PubMed ID: 16457701
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Modeling the natural history of ductal carcinoma in situ based on population data.
Chootipongchaivat S; van Ravesteyn NT; Li X; Huang H; Weedon-Fekjær H; Ryser MD; Weaver DL; Burnside ES; Heckman-Stoddard BM; de Koning HJ; Lee SJ
Breast Cancer Res; 2020 May; 22(1):53. PubMed ID: 32460821
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Estimating the natural progression of non-invasive ductal carcinoma in situ breast cancer lesions using screening data.
Weedon-Fekjær H; Li X; Lee S
J Med Screen; 2021 Sep; 28(3):302-310. PubMed ID: 32854582
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Screen detection of ductal carcinoma in situ and subsequent incidence of invasive interval breast cancers: a retrospective population-based study.
Duffy SW; Dibden A; Michalopoulos D; Offman J; Parmar D; Jenkins J; Collins B; Robson T; Scorfield S; Green K; Hall C; Liao XH; Ryan M; Johnson F; Stevens G; Kearins O; Sellars S; Patnick J
Lancet Oncol; 2016 Jan; 17(1):109-14. PubMed ID: 26655422
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Incidence of and treatment for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast.
Ernster VL; Barclay J; Kerlikowske K; Grady D; Henderson C
JAMA; 1996 Mar; 275(12):913-8. PubMed ID: 8598618
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Screening caused rising incidence rates of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast.
van Steenbergen LN; Voogd AC; Roukema JA; Louwman WJ; Duijm LE; Coebergh JW; van de Poll-Franse LV
Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2009 May; 115(1):181-3. PubMed ID: 18516674
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The distribution of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) grade in 4232 women and its impact on overdiagnosis in breast cancer screening.
van Luijt PA; Heijnsdijk EA; Fracheboud J; Overbeek LI; Broeders MJ; Wesseling J; den Heeten GJ; de Koning HJ
Breast Cancer Res; 2016 May; 18(1):47. PubMed ID: 27160733
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Breast carcinoma in situ in 167 women--incidence, mode of presentation, therapy and follow-up.
Ringberg A; Andersson I; Aspegren K; Linell F
Eur J Surg Oncol; 1991 Oct; 17(5):466-76. PubMed ID: 1657650
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Overdiagnosis in organised mammography screening in Denmark. A comparative study.
Jørgensen KJ; Zahl PH; Gøtzsche PC
BMC Womens Health; 2009 Dec; 9():36. PubMed ID: 20028513
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Comparison of the relative incidence of impalpable invasive breast carcinoma and ductal carcinoma in situ in cancers detected in patients older and younger than 50 years of age.
Evans WP; Starr AL; Bennos ES
Radiology; 1997 Aug; 204(2):489-91. PubMed ID: 9240541
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Obligate Overdiagnosis Due to Mammographic Screening: A Direct Estimate for U.S. Women.
Hendrick RE
Radiology; 2018 May; 287(2):391-397. PubMed ID: 29267146
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. The method of detection of ductal carcinoma in situ has no therapeutic implications: results of a population-based cohort study.
Elshof LE; Schaapveld M; Rutgers EJ; Schmidt MK; de Munck L; van Leeuwen FE; Wesseling J
Breast Cancer Res; 2017 Mar; 19(1):26. PubMed ID: 28274272
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Modelling the overdiagnosis of breast cancer due to mammography screening in women aged 40 to 49 in the United Kingdom.
Gunsoy NB; Garcia-Closas M; Moss SM
Breast Cancer Res; 2012 Nov; 14(6):R152. PubMed ID: 23194032
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Benefit-to-harm ratio of the Danish breast cancer screening programme.
Beau AB; Lynge E; Njor SH; Vejborg I; Lophaven SN
Int J Cancer; 2017 Aug; 141(3):512-518. PubMed ID: 28470685
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Trends in incidence and tumour grade in screen-detected ductal carcinoma in situ and invasive breast cancer.
Luiten JD; Voogd AC; Luiten EJT; Duijm LEM
Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2017 Nov; 166(1):307-314. PubMed ID: 28748346
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Digital mammography screening: weighing reduced mortality against increased overdiagnosis.
de Gelder R; Fracheboud J; Heijnsdijk EA; den Heeten G; Verbeek AL; Broeders MJ; Draisma G; de Koning HJ
Prev Med; 2011 Sep; 53(3):134-40. PubMed ID: 21718717
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Increases in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast in relation to mammography: a dilemma.
Ernster VL; Barclay J
J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr; 1997; (22):151-6. PubMed ID: 9709292
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Incidence of invasive breast cancer and ductal carcinoma in situ in a screening program by age: should older women continue screening?
Erbas B; Amos A; Fletcher A; Kavanagh AM; Gertig DM
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 2004 Oct; 13(10):1569-73. PubMed ID: 15466971
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
