138 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17032896)
1. The University of Rochester model of breast cancer detection and survival.
Hanin LG; Miller A; Zorin AV; Yakovlev AY
J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr; 2006; (36):66-78. PubMed ID: 17032896
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. A stochastic simulation model of U.S. breast cancer mortality trends from 1975 to 2000.
Plevritis SK; Sigal BM; Salzman P; Rosenberg J; Glynn P
J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr; 2006; (36):86-95. PubMed ID: 17032898
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. The MISCAN-Fadia continuous tumor growth model for breast cancer.
Tan SY; van Oortmarssen GJ; de Koning HJ; Boer R; Habbema JD
J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr; 2006; (36):56-65. PubMed ID: 17032895
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Comparison of cancer registry and clinical data as predictors for breast cancer survival.
Seppänen J; Heinävaara S; Holli K; Hakulinen T
Cancer Causes Control; 2008 Dec; 19(10):1299-304. PubMed ID: 18752035
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The SPECTRUM population model of the impact of screening and treatment on U.S. breast cancer trends from 1975 to 2000: principles and practice of the model methods.
Mandelblatt J; Schechter CB; Lawrence W; Yi B; Cullen J
J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr; 2006; (36):47-55. PubMed ID: 17032894
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. A stochastic model for predicting the mortality of breast cancer.
Lee S; Zelen M
J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr; 2006; (36):79-86. PubMed ID: 17032897
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Impact of mammography on U.S. breast cancer mortality, 1975-2000: are intermediate outcome measures informative?
Habbema JD; Tan SY; Cronin KA
J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr; 2006; (36):105-11. PubMed ID: 17032900
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Modeling the impact of treatment and screening on U.S. breast cancer mortality: a Bayesian approach.
Berry DA; Inoue L; Shen Y; Venier J; Cohen D; Bondy M; Theriault R; Munsell MF
J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr; 2006; (36):30-6. PubMed ID: 17032892
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Breast cancer screening policies in developing countries: a cost-effectiveness analysis for India.
Okonkwo QL; Draisma G; der Kinderen A; Brown ML; de Koning HJ
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2008 Sep; 100(18):1290-300. PubMed ID: 18780864
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Mammography surveillance and mortality in older breast cancer survivors.
Lash TL; Fox MP; Buist DS; Wei F; Field TS; Frost FJ; Geiger AM; Quinn VP; Yood MU; Silliman RA
J Clin Oncol; 2007 Jul; 25(21):3001-6. PubMed ID: 17548838
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Impact of adjuvant therapy and mammography on U.S. mortality from 1975 to 2000: comparison of mortality results from the cisnet breast cancer base case analysis.
Cronin KA; Feuer EJ; Clarke LD; Plevritis SK
J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr; 2006; (36):112-21. PubMed ID: 17032901
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Scheduling mammography screening for the early detection of breast cancer in Korean women.
Lee SY; Jeong SH; Kim J; Jung SH; Song KB; Nam CM
J Med Screen; 2007; 14(4):205-9. PubMed ID: 18078566
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Trends in area-socioeconomic and race-ethnic disparities in breast cancer incidence, stage at diagnosis, screening, mortality, and survival among women ages 50 years and over (1987-2005).
Harper S; Lynch J; Meersman SC; Breen N; Davis WW; Reichman MC
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 2009 Jan; 18(1):121-31. PubMed ID: 19124489
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. The effect of service screening on breast cancer mortality rates.
Cox B
Eur J Cancer Prev; 2008 Aug; 17(4):306-11. PubMed ID: 18562953
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. A comparison of trends in incidence and mortality rates of breast cancer, incidence to mortality ratio and stage at diagnosis between Arab and Jewish women in Israel, 1979-2002.
Tarabeia J; Baron-Epel O; Barchana M; Liphshitz I; Ifrah A; Fishler Y; Green MS
Eur J Cancer Prev; 2007 Feb; 16(1):36-42. PubMed ID: 17220702
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Recent trends in breast cancer incidence rates by age and tumor characteristics among U.S. women.
Jemal A; Ward E; Thun MJ
Breast Cancer Res; 2007; 9(3):R28. PubMed ID: 17477859
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Breast cancer survivors in the United States: geographic variability and time trends, 2005-2015.
De Angelis R; Tavilla A; Verdecchia A; Scoppa S; Hachey M; Feuer EJ; Mariotto AB
Cancer; 2009 May; 115(9):1954-66. PubMed ID: 19248047
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Breast cancer incidence and mortality in the Nordic capitals, 1970-1998. Trends related to mammography screening programmes.
Törnberg S; Kemetli L; Lynge E; Helene Olsen A; Hofvind S; Wang H; Anttila A; Hakama M; Nyström L
Acta Oncol; 2006; 45(5):528-35. PubMed ID: 16864165
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Reducing the effects of lead-time bias, length bias and over-detection in evaluating screening mammography: a censored bivariate data approach.
Mahnken JD; Chan W; Freeman DH; Freeman JL
Stat Methods Med Res; 2008 Dec; 17(6):643-63. PubMed ID: 18445697
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Estimation of age-specific sensitivity and sojourn time in breast cancer screening studies.
Cong XJ; Shen Y; Miller AB
Stat Med; 2005 Oct; 24(20):3123-38. PubMed ID: 15977269
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
