168 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1632342)
1. Interval carcinomas in the Malmö Mammographic Screening Trial: radiographic appearance and prognostic considerations.
Ikeda DM; Andersson I; Wattsgård C; Janzon L; Linell F
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1992 Aug; 159(2):287-94. PubMed ID: 1632342
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Histopathology and growth rate of interval breast carcinoma. Characterization of different subgroups.
Brekelmans CT; van Gorp JM; Peeters PH; Collette HJ
Cancer; 1996 Sep; 78(6):1220-8. PubMed ID: 8826943
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Radiographic screening for breast carcinoma. II. Prognostic considerations on the basis of a short-term follow-up.
Andersson I
Acta Radiol Diagn (Stockh); 1981; 22(3A):227-33. PubMed ID: 7315500
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Do mammographic tumor features in breast cancer relate to breast density and invasiveness, tumor size, and axillary lymph node involvement?
Sartor H; Borgquist S; Hartman L; Olsson Å; Jawdat F; Zackrisson S
Acta Radiol; 2015 May; 56(5):536-44. PubMed ID: 24814360
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. [Breast carcinoma diagnosed in mammographic screening incidentally. Research on the radiologic signs in prior mammograms].
Marra V; Frigerio A; Di Virgilio MR; Menna S; Burke P
Radiol Med; 1999 Nov; 98(5):342-6. PubMed ID: 10780212
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Tubular carcinoma of the breast: mode of presentation, mammographic appearance, and frequency of nodal metastases.
Elson BC; Helvie MA; Frank TS; Wilson TE; Adler DD
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1993 Dec; 161(6):1173-6. PubMed ID: 8249721
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Interval carcinomas of the breast: a group with intermediate outcome.
Schroën AA; Wobbes T; van der Sluis RF
J Surg Oncol; 1996 Nov; 63(3):141-4. PubMed ID: 8944056
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Initial versus subsequent screening mammography: comparison of findings and their prognostic significance.
Frankel SD; Sickles EA; Curpen BN; Sollitto RA; Ominsky SH; Galvin HB
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1995 May; 164(5):1107-9. PubMed ID: 7717214
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Previous mammograms in patients with impalpable breast carcinoma: retrospective vs blinded interpretation. 1993 ARRS President's Award.
Harvey JA; Fajardo LL; Innis CA
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1993 Dec; 161(6):1167-72. PubMed ID: 8249720
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Do non-specific minimal signs in a biennial mammographic breast cancer screening programme need further diagnostic assessment?
Maes RM; Dronkers DJ; Hendriks JH; Thijssen MA; Nab HW
Br J Radiol; 1997 Jan; 70():34-38. PubMed ID: 9059292
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Using tumor phenotype, histological tumor distribution, and mammographic appearance to explain the survival differences between screen-detected and clinically detected breast cancers.
Chuang SL; Chen SL; Yu CP; Chang KJ; Yen AM; Chiu SY; Fann JC; Tabár L; Stephen DW; Smith RA; Chen HH
APMIS; 2014 Aug; 122(8):699-707. PubMed ID: 25046200
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Analysis of 172 subtle findings on prior normal mammograms in women with breast cancer detected at follow-up screening.
Ikeda DM; Birdwell RL; O'Shaughnessy KF; Brenner RJ; Sickles EA
Radiology; 2003 Feb; 226(2):494-503. PubMed ID: 12563145
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Imaging findings in mucin-containing carcinomas of the breast: correlation with pathologic features.
Conant EF; Dillon RL; Palazzo J; Ehrlich SM; Feig SA
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1994 Oct; 163(4):821-4. PubMed ID: 8092016
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Tubular carcinoma of the breast: mammographic appearance.
Leibman AJ; Lewis M; Kruse B
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1993 Feb; 160(2):263-5. PubMed ID: 8424330
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Pure and mixed mucinous carcinoma of the breast: pathologic basis for differences in mammographic appearance.
Wilson TE; Helvie MA; Oberman HA; Joynt LK
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1995 Aug; 165(2):285-9. PubMed ID: 7618541
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Significance and staging of nonpalpable carcinomas of the breast.
Schwartz GF; Feig SA; Patchefsky AS
Surg Gynecol Obstet; 1988 Jan; 166(1):6-10. PubMed ID: 2827328
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Screening interval breast cancers: mammographic features and prognosis factors.
Burrell HC; Sibbering DM; Wilson AR; Pinder SE; Evans AJ; Yeoman LJ; Elston CW; Ellis IO; Blamey RW; Robertson JF
Radiology; 1996 Jun; 199(3):811-7. PubMed ID: 8638010
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Sonographic appearance of mucinous carcinoma of the breast.
Lam WW; Chu WC; Tse GM; Ma TK
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2004 Apr; 182(4):1069-74. PubMed ID: 15039190
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Metaplastic carcinoma of the breast: mammographic appearance with pathologic correlation.
Patterson SK; Tworek JA; Roubidoux MA; Helvie MA; Oberman HA
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1997 Sep; 169(3):709-12. PubMed ID: 9275883
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Screening mammography: value in women 35-39 years old.
Liberman L; Dershaw DD; Deutch BM; Thaler HT; Lippin BS
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1993 Jul; 161(1):53-6. PubMed ID: 8517320
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
