These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

79 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17137063)

  • 1. The trade-off between population and individual benefit of screening.
    Hense HW
    Z Arztl Fortbild Qualitatssich; 2006; 100(7):505-13. PubMed ID: 17137063
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Ascertainment and evaluation of interval cancers in population-based mammography screening programmes: a collaborative study in four European centres.
    Törnberg S; Codd M; Rodrigues V; Segnan N; Ponti A
    J Med Screen; 2005; 12(1):43-9. PubMed ID: 15814019
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. [Mammography screening: presentation of scientific evidence as a basis for communication with women].
    Mühlhauser I; Höldke B
    Z Arztl Fortbild Qualitatssich; 2000 Oct; 94(9):721-31. PubMed ID: 11127779
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Evaluation of effectiveness of quality-assured mammography screening in Germany: sample size considerations and design options.
    Becker N; Hakama M; Nyström L
    Eur J Cancer Prev; 2007 Jun; 16(3):225-31. PubMed ID: 17415093
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Performance of systematic and non-systematic ('opportunistic') screening mammography: a comparative study from Denmark.
    Bihrmann K; Jensen A; Olsen AH; Njor S; Schwartz W; Vejborg I; Lynge E
    J Med Screen; 2008; 15(1):23-6. PubMed ID: 18416951
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. MRI and mammography surveillance of women at increased risk for breast cancer: recommendations using an evidence-based approach.
    Granader EJ; Dwamena B; Carlos RC
    Acad Radiol; 2008 Dec; 15(12):1590-5. PubMed ID: 19000876
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Age-specific interval breast cancers in Japan: estimation of the proper sensitivity of screening using a population-based cancer registry.
    Suzuki A; Kuriyama S; Kawai M; Amari M; Takeda M; Ishida T; Ohnuki K; Nishino Y; Tsuji I; Shibuya D; Ohuchi N
    Cancer Sci; 2008 Nov; 99(11):2264-7. PubMed ID: 18795941
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. [Mammography screening in Germany: how, when and why?].
    Bick U
    Rofo; 2006 Oct; 178(10):957-69. PubMed ID: 17021975
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Some issues in screening for breast and other cancers.
    Duffy SW; McCann J; Godward S; Gabe R; Warwick J
    J Med Screen; 2006; 13 Suppl 1():S28-34. PubMed ID: 17227639
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Results of the Two-County trial of mammography screening are not compatible with contemporaneous official Swedish breast cancer statistics.
    Zahl PH; Gøtzsche PC; Andersen JM; Maehlen J
    Dan Med Bull; 2006 Nov; 53(4):438-40. PubMed ID: 17150148
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Adjusting mammography--audit recommendations in a lower-incidence Taiwanese population.
    Chen CY; Tzeng WS; Tsai CC; Mak CW; Chen CH; Chou MC
    J Am Coll Radiol; 2008 Sep; 5(9):978-85. PubMed ID: 18755438
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Screening and prevention of breast cancer in primary care.
    Tice JA; Kerlikowske K
    Prim Care; 2009 Sep; 36(3):533-58. PubMed ID: 19616154
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Predictors of breast cancer-related distress following mammography screening in younger women on a family history breast screening programme.
    Brain K; Henderson BJ; Tyndel S; Bankhead C; Watson E; Clements A; Austoker J;
    Psychooncology; 2008 Dec; 17(12):1180-8. PubMed ID: 18506670
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast improves detection of invasive cancer, preinvasive cancer, and premalignant lesions during surveillance of women at high risk for breast cancer.
    Riedl CC; Ponhold L; Flöry D; Weber M; Kroiss R; Wagner T; Fuchsjäger M; Helbich TH
    Clin Cancer Res; 2007 Oct; 13(20):6144-52. PubMed ID: 17947480
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Reliability and validity of needle biopsy evaluation of breast-abnormalities using the B-categorization--design and objectives of the Diagnosis Optimisation Study (DIOS).
    Kluttig A; Trocchi P; Heinig A; Holzhausen HJ; Taege C; Hauptmann S; Boecker W; Decker T; Loening T; Schmidt-Pokrzywniak A; Thomssen C; Lantzsch T; Buchmann J; Stang A
    BMC Cancer; 2007 Jun; 7():100. PubMed ID: 17570833
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. The role of magnetic resonance imaging in screening women at high risk of breast cancer.
    Warner E
    Top Magn Reson Imaging; 2008 Jun; 19(3):163-9. PubMed ID: 18941396
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Is there a role for sonography in breast cancer screening?
    Villeirs GM
    JBR-BTR; 2007; 90(3):155-8. PubMed ID: 17696079
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Effectiveness of decentralized community-based screening, detection, and treatment of breast cancer in low-income, uninsured women.
    Bhaskara A; Altamirano M; Trisal V; Paz IB; Lai LL
    Am Surg; 2008 Oct; 74(10):1017-21. PubMed ID: 18942635
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 4.