BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

131 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17044402)

  • 21. A New Breast Border Extraction and Contrast Enhancement Technique with Digital Mammogram Images for Improved Detection of Breast Cancer.
    Hazarika M; Mahanta LB
    Asian Pac J Cancer Prev; 2018 Aug; 19(8):2141-2148. PubMed ID: 30139217
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. A wavelet-based spatially adaptive method for mammographic contrast enhancement.
    Sakellaropoulos P; Costaridou L; Panayiotakis G
    Phys Med Biol; 2003 Mar; 48(6):787-803. PubMed ID: 12699195
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. A computer simulation study comparing lesion detection accuracy with digital mammography, breast tomosynthesis, and cone-beam CT breast imaging.
    Gong X; Glick SJ; Liu B; Vedula AA; Thacker S
    Med Phys; 2006 Apr; 33(4):1041-52. PubMed ID: 16696481
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Globally supported radial basis function based collocation method for evolution of level set in mass segmentation using mammograms.
    Kashyap KL; Bajpai MK; Khanna P
    Comput Biol Med; 2017 Aug; 87():22-37. PubMed ID: 28549292
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. An anatomically oriented breast coordinate system for mammogram analysis.
    Brandt SS; Karemore G; Karssemeijer N; Nielsen M
    IEEE Trans Med Imaging; 2011 Oct; 30(10):1841-51. PubMed ID: 21609879
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Breast image pre-processing for mammographic tissue segmentation.
    He W; Hogg P; Juette A; Denton ER; Zwiggelaar R
    Comput Biol Med; 2015 Dec; 67():61-73. PubMed ID: 26498046
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Breast peripheral area correction in digital mammograms.
    Tortajada M; Oliver A; Martí R; Ganau S; Tortajada L; Sentís M; Freixenet J; Zwiggelaar R
    Comput Biol Med; 2014 Jul; 50():32-40. PubMed ID: 24845018
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Steepest changes of a probability-based cost function for delineation of mammographic masses: a validation study.
    Kinnard L; Lo SC; Makariou E; Osicka T; Wang P; Chouikha MF; Freedman MT
    Med Phys; 2004 Oct; 31(10):2796-810. PubMed ID: 15543787
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. How mammographic breast density affects radiologists' visual search patterns.
    Al Mousa DS; Brennan PC; Ryan EA; Lee WB; Tan J; Mello-Thoms C
    Acad Radiol; 2014 Nov; 21(11):1386-93. PubMed ID: 25172414
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Automatic pectoral muscle segmentation on mediolateral oblique view mammograms.
    Kwok SM; Chandrasekhar R; Attikiouzel Y; Rickard MT
    IEEE Trans Med Imaging; 2004 Sep; 23(9):1129-40. PubMed ID: 15377122
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. A calibration approach to glandular tissue composition estimation in digital mammography.
    Kaufhold J; Thomas JA; Eberhard JW; Galbo CE; Trotter DE
    Med Phys; 2002 Aug; 29(8):1867-80. PubMed ID: 12201434
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. A concentric morphology model for the detection of masses in mammography.
    Eltonsy NH; Tourassi GD; Elmaghraby AS
    IEEE Trans Med Imaging; 2007 Jun; 26(6):880-9. PubMed ID: 17679338
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. An approach to the detection of lesions in mammograms using fuzzy image processing.
    Bayram B; Acar U
    J Int Med Res; 2007; 35(6):790-5. PubMed ID: 18034992
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. A comparison of breast tissue classification techniques.
    Oliver A; Freixenet J; Martí R; Zwiggelaar R
    Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv; 2006; 9(Pt 2):872-9. PubMed ID: 17354855
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Mammogram segmentation using maximal cell strength updation in cellular automata.
    Anitha J; Peter JD
    Med Biol Eng Comput; 2015 Aug; 53(8):737-49. PubMed ID: 25841356
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Incomplete skin representation in digital mammograms.
    Burgess AE; Kang H
    Med Phys; 2004 Oct; 31(10):2834-8. PubMed ID: 15543791
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Mammogram registration: a phantom-based evaluation of compressed breast thickness variation effects.
    Richard FJ; Bakić PR; Maidment AD
    IEEE Trans Med Imaging; 2006 Feb; 25(2):188-97. PubMed ID: 16468453
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Computer aided detection of clusters of microcalcifications on full field digital mammograms.
    Ge J; Sahiner B; Hadjiiski LM; Chan HP; Wei J; Helvie MA; Zhou C
    Med Phys; 2006 Aug; 33(8):2975-88. PubMed ID: 16964876
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. A new stochastic framework for accurate lung segmentation.
    El-Ba A; Gimel'farb G; Falk R; Holland T; Shaffer T
    Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv; 2008; 11(Pt 1):322-30. PubMed ID: 18979763
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Radiomics based detection and characterization of suspicious lesions on full field digital mammograms.
    Sapate SG; Mahajan A; Talbar SN; Sable N; Desai S; Thakur M
    Comput Methods Programs Biomed; 2018 Sep; 163():1-20. PubMed ID: 30119844
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.