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 *

104 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15186000)

  • 1. Breast imaging in a military setting: a comparison with civilian breast imaging.
    Gan FY; Wettlaufer JR; Lundell AL
    Mil Med; 2004 May; 169(5):361-7. PubMed ID: 15186000
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. What Happens after a Diagnosis of High-Risk Breast Lesion at Stereotactic Vacuum-assisted Biopsy? An Observational Study of Postdiagnosis Management and Imaging Adherence.
    Gao Y; Albert M; Young Lin LL; Lewin AA; Babb JS; Heller SL; Moy L
    Radiology; 2018 May; 287(2):423-431. PubMed ID: 29378151
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The impact of mammography on breast biopsy.
    Goedde TA; Frykberg ER; Crump JM; Lay SF; Turetsky DB; Linden SS
    Am Surg; 1992 Nov; 58(11):661-6. PubMed ID: 1485695
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Stereotactic Breast Biopsy With Benign Results Does Not Negatively Affect Future Screening Adherence.
    Lewin AA; Gao Y; Lin Young LL; Albert ML; Babb JS; Toth HK; Moy L; Heller SL
    J Am Coll Radiol; 2018 Apr; 15(4):622-629. PubMed ID: 29433804
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Trends in recall, biopsy, and positive biopsy rates for screening mammography in an academic practice.
    Gur D; Wallace LP; Klym AH; Hardesty LA; Abrams GS; Shah R; Sumkin JH
    Radiology; 2005 May; 235(2):396-401. PubMed ID: 15770039
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. [Stereotaxic breast biopsy techniques have become the standard of care for mammographically suspicious lesions].
    Fehr MK; Hornung R; Von Orelli S; Haller U
    Gynakol Geburtshilfliche Rundsch; 2002; 42(4):201-11. PubMed ID: 12373024
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Comparison of screening mammography in the United States and the United kingdom.
    Smith-Bindman R; Chu PW; Miglioretti DL; Sickles EA; Blanks R; Ballard-Barbash R; Bobo JK; Lee NC; Wallis MG; Patnick J; Kerlikowske K
    JAMA; 2003 Oct; 290(16):2129-37. PubMed ID: 14570948
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Abnormal mammography and sonography associated with foreign-body giant-cell reaction after stereotactic vacuum-assisted breast biopsy with carbon marking.
    Ruiz-Delgado ML; López-Ruiz JA; Sáiz-López A
    Acta Radiol; 2008 Dec; 49(10):1112-8. PubMed ID: 18932053
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Needle-localized breast biopsy for mammographic abnormalities: a community hospital experience.
    Tran DQ; Wilkerson DK; Namm J; Zeis MA; Cottone FJ
    Am Surg; 1999 Mar; 65(3):283-8. PubMed ID: 10075310
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Sonographically guided core biopsy of the breast: comparison of 14-gauge automated gun and 11-gauge directional vacuum-assisted biopsy methods.
    Cho N; Moon WK; Cha JH; Kim SM; Kim SJ; Lee SH; Chung HK; Cho KS; Park IA; Noh DY
    Korean J Radiol; 2005; 6(2):102-9. PubMed ID: 15968149
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Breast cancer: the military's experience at Wilford Hall USAF Medical Center.
    Bowers GJ; Roettger RH; McAuley CE; Beck DE
    South Med J; 1990 Dec; 83(12):1413-7. PubMed ID: 2174576
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Influence of Risk Category and Screening Round on the Performance of an MR Imaging and Mammography Screening Program in Carriers of the BRCA Mutation and Other Women at Increased Risk.
    Vreemann S; Gubern-Mérida A; Schlooz-Vries MS; Bult P; van Gils CH; Hoogerbrugge N; Karssemeijer N; Mann RM
    Radiology; 2018 Feb; 286(2):443-451. PubMed ID: 29040037
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Evaluation of Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System Category 3 mammograms and the use of stereotactic vacuum-assisted breast biopsy in a nonacademic community practice.
    Mendez A; Cabanillas F; Echenique M; Malekshamran K; Perez I; Ramos E
    Cancer; 2004 Feb; 100(4):710-4. PubMed ID: 14770425
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Performance benchmarks for screening mammography.
    Rosenberg RD; Yankaskas BC; Abraham LA; Sickles EA; Lehman CD; Geller BM; Carney PA; Kerlikowske K; Buist DS; Weaver DL; Barlow WE; Ballard-Barbash R
    Radiology; 2006 Oct; 241(1):55-66. PubMed ID: 16990671
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Pathologic findings from the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium: population-based outcomes in women undergoing biopsy after screening mammography.
    Weaver DL; Rosenberg RD; Barlow WE; Ichikawa L; Carney PA; Kerlikowske K; Buist DS; Geller BM; Key CR; Maygarden SJ; Ballard-Barbash R
    Cancer; 2006 Feb; 106(4):732-42. PubMed ID: 16411214
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Performance parameters for screening and diagnostic mammography in a community practice: are there differences between specialists and general radiologists?
    Leung JW; Margolin FR; Dee KE; Jacobs RP; Denny SR; Schrumpf JD
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2007 Jan; 188(1):236-41. PubMed ID: 17179372
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Screening mammography in community practice: positive predictive value of abnormal findings and yield of follow-up diagnostic procedures.
    Brown ML; Houn F; Sickles EA; Kessler LG
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1995 Dec; 165(6):1373-7. PubMed ID: 7484568
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Enhancement of true-positive rates for nonpalpable carcinoma of the breast through mammographic selection.
    McManus V; Desautels JE; Benediktsson H; Pasieka J; Lafreniere R
    Surg Gynecol Obstet; 1992 Sep; 175(3):212-8. PubMed ID: 1514155
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Benign breast lesions: minimally invasive vacuum-assisted biopsy with 11-gauge needles patient acceptance and effect on follow-up imaging findings.
    Huber S; Wagner M; Medl M; Czembirek H
    Radiology; 2003 Mar; 226(3):783-90. PubMed ID: 12616021
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Effectiveness of a Mobile Mammography Program.
    Stanley E; Lewis MC; Irshad A; Ackerman S; Collins H; Pavic D; Leddy RJ
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2017 Dec; 209(6):1426-1429. PubMed ID: 28871806
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.