91 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17032900)
1. 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]
2. 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]
3. 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]
4. Estimation of natural history parameters of breast cancer based on non-randomized organized screening data: subsidiary analysis of effects of inter-screening interval, sensitivity, and attendance rate on reduction of advanced cancer.
Wu JC; Hakama M; Anttila A; Yen AM; Malila N; Sarkeala T; Auvinen A; Chiu SY; Chen HH
Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2010 Jul; 122(2):553-66. PubMed ID: 20054645
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
6. 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]
7. 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]
8. 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]
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. 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]
11. [Breast cancer].
Fukuda M; Miyamoto K; Hashizume R; Okamoto J; Kawamoto H; Yabuki Y; Ogata H; Ohta T
Gan To Kagaku Ryoho; 2002 Nov; 29(11):1900-6. PubMed ID: 12465388
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Tumor size and breast cancer detection: what might be the effect of a less sensitive screening tool than mammography?
Duffy SW; Tabar L; Vitak B; Warwick J
Breast J; 2006; 12 Suppl 1():S91-5. PubMed ID: 16430402
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. A comparative review of CISNET breast models used to analyze U.S. breast cancer incidence and mortality trends.
Clarke LD; Plevritis SK; Boer R; Cronin KA; Feuer EJ
J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr; 2006; (36):96-105. PubMed ID: 17032899
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. Estimating personal costs incurred by a woman participating in mammography screening in the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program.
Ekwueme DU; Hall IJ; Richardson LC; Gardner JG; Royalty J; Thompson TD
Cancer; 2008 Aug; 113(3):592-601. PubMed ID: 18536027
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Reducing ovarian cancer mortality through screening: Is it possible, and can we afford it?
Havrilesky LJ; Sanders GD; Kulasingam S; Myers ER
Gynecol Oncol; 2008 Nov; 111(2):179-87. PubMed ID: 18722004
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. 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]
19. Survival rates for breast cancers detected in a community service screening mammogram program.
Sener SF; Winchester DJ; Winchester DP; Barrera E; Bilimoria M; Brinkmann E; Alwawi E; Rabbitt S; Schermerhorn M; Du H
Am J Surg; 2006 Mar; 191(3):406-9. PubMed ID: 16490556
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Significance tests for cancer screening trials.
Tarone RE; Gart JJ
Biometrics; 1989 Sep; 45(3):883-90. PubMed ID: 2790126
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
