BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

250 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16860625)

  • 1. The value of magnetic resonance imaging in diagnosis and size assessment of in situ and small invasive breast carcinoma.
    Schouten van der Velden AP; Boetes C; Bult P; Wobbes T
    Am J Surg; 2006 Aug; 192(2):172-8. PubMed ID: 16860625
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Rates of reexcision for breast cancer after magnetic resonance imaging-guided bracket wire localization.
    Wallace AM; Daniel BL; Jeffrey SS; Birdwell RL; Nowels KW; Dirbas FM; Schraedley-Desmond P; Ikeda DM
    J Am Coll Surg; 2005 Apr; 200(4):527-37. PubMed ID: 15804466
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. BI-RADS MRI enhancement characteristics of ductal carcinoma in situ.
    Rosen EL; Smith-Foley SA; DeMartini WB; Eby PR; Peacock S; Lehman CD
    Breast J; 2007; 13(6):545-50. PubMed ID: 17983393
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. MRI of the breast for the detection and assessment of the size of ductal carcinoma in situ.
    Kim DY; Moon WK; Cho N; Ko ES; Yang SK; Park JS; Kim SM; Park IA; Cha JH; Lee EH
    Korean J Radiol; 2007; 8(1):32-9. PubMed ID: 17277561
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Ductal carcinoma in situ: is there a role for MRI?
    Zuiani C; Francescutti GE; Londero V; Zunnui I; Bazzocchi M
    J Exp Clin Cancer Res; 2002 Sep; 21(3 Suppl):89-95. PubMed ID: 12585661
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Potential role of magnetic resonance imaging and other modalities in ductal carcinoma in situ detection.
    Ikeda DM; Birdwell RL; Daniel BL
    Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am; 2001 May; 9(2):345-56, vii. PubMed ID: 11493424
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Can breast MRI computer-aided detection (CAD) improve radiologist accuracy for lesions detected at MRI screening and recommended for biopsy in a high-risk population?
    Arazi-Kleinman T; Causer PA; Jong RA; Hill K; Warner E
    Clin Radiol; 2009 Dec; 64(12):1166-74. PubMed ID: 19913125
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Breast magnetic resonance image screening and ductal lavage in women at high genetic risk for breast carcinoma.
    Hartman AR; Daniel BL; Kurian AW; Mills MA; Nowels KW; Dirbas FM; Kingham KE; Chun NM; Herfkens RJ; Ford JM; Plevritis SK
    Cancer; 2004 Feb; 100(3):479-89. PubMed ID: 14745863
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Outcome of patients with ductal carcinoma in situ untreated after diagnostic biopsy: results from the Nurses' Health Study.
    Collins LC; Tamimi RM; Baer HJ; Connolly JL; Colditz GA; Schnitt SJ
    Cancer; 2005 May; 103(9):1778-84. PubMed ID: 15770688
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Breast MRI wire-guided excisional biopsy: specimen size as compared to mammogram wire-guided excisional biopsy and implications for use.
    Javid SH; Carlson JW; Garber JE; Birdwell RL; Lester S; Lipsitz S; Golshan M
    Ann Surg Oncol; 2007 Dec; 14(12):3352-8. PubMed ID: 17849165
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. [Morphology and contrast enhancement of ductal carcinoma in situ in dynamic 1.0 T MR mammography].
    Sittek H; Kessler M; Heuck AF; Bredl T; Perlet C; Künzer I; Lebeau A; Untch M; Reiser M
    Rofo; 1997 Sep; 167(3):247-51. PubMed ID: 9376552
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Extension of breast cancer: comparison of CT and MRI.
    Nakahara H; Namba K; Wakamatsu H; Watanabe R; Furusawa H; Shirouzu M; Matsu T; Tanaka C; Akiyama F; Ifuku H; Nakahara M; Tamura S
    Radiat Med; 2002; 20(1):17-23. PubMed ID: 12002599
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. [Ductal carcinoma in situ in dynamic MR-mammography at 1.5 T].
    Fischer U; Westerhof JP; Brinck U; Korabiowska M; Schauer A; Grabbe E
    Rofo; 1996 Apr; 164(4):290-4. PubMed ID: 8645861
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Characteristics of ductal carcinoma in situ in magnetic resonance imaging.
    Facius M; Renz DM; Neubauer H; Böttcher J; Gajda M; Camara O; Kaiser WA
    Clin Imaging; 2007; 31(6):394-400. PubMed ID: 17996602
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Breast cancer tumor size: correlation between magnetic resonance imaging and pathology measurements.
    Onesti JK; Mangus BE; Helmer SD; Osland JS
    Am J Surg; 2008 Dec; 196(6):844-48; discussion 849-50. PubMed ID: 19095098
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Effect of MRI on the management of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast.
    Pilewskie M; Kennedy C; Shappell C; Helenowski I; Scholtens D; Hansen N; Bethke K; Jeruss J; Karstaedt P; Khan SA
    Ann Surg Oncol; 2013 May; 20(5):1522-9. PubMed ID: 23224903
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Relationship of breast magnetic resonance imaging to outcome after breast-conservation treatment with radiation for women with early-stage invasive breast carcinoma or ductal carcinoma in situ.
    Solin LJ; Orel SG; Hwang WT; Harris EE; Schnall MD
    J Clin Oncol; 2008 Jan; 26(3):386-91. PubMed ID: 18202414
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. [MRI of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: patterns of findings and evaluation of disease extent].
    Hiramatsu H; Ikeda T; Mukai M; Masamura S; Kikuchi K; Hiramatsu K
    Nihon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi; 2000 Mar; 60(4):205-9. PubMed ID: 10774182
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Predictors of surgical margin status in breast-conserving surgery within a breast screening program.
    Kurniawan ED; Wong MH; Windle I; Rose A; Mou A; Buchanan M; Collins JP; Miller JA; Gruen RL; Mann GB
    Ann Surg Oncol; 2008 Sep; 15(9):2542-9. PubMed ID: 18618180
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Histopathologic analysis of atypical lesions in image-guided core breast biopsies.
    Bonnett M; Wallis T; Rossmann M; Pernick NL; Bouwman D; Carolin KA; Visscher D
    Mod Pathol; 2003 Feb; 16(2):154-60. PubMed ID: 12591968
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 13.