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 *

126 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17696079)

  • 21. [Population screening for breast cancer: between euphoria and scepticism].
    Bossuyt PM
    Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2002 Jun; 146(22):1020-3. PubMed ID: 12073501
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. [Mammographically distinguishable parenchymal patterns and their significance in estimating breast cancer risk].
    Franken T; Boldt I
    Rofo; 1982 Dec; 137(6):707-10. PubMed ID: 6218051
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Reliability and validity of Champion's Health Belief Model Scale for breast cancer screening among Malaysian women.
    Parsa P; Kandiah M; Mohd Nasir MT; Hejar AR; Nor Afiah MZ
    Singapore Med J; 2008 Nov; 49(11):897-903. PubMed ID: 19037556
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. 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]  

  • 25. [Automated mammary sonography and mammography: the differentiation of benign and malignant breast lesions].
    Richter K; Hamm B; Heywang-Köbrunner SH; Fobbe F; Prihoda H; Schmitt KJ; Frohberg HD; Winzer KJ; Aldinger HU; Guski H; Döinghaus K; Löhr G
    Rofo; 1998 Sep; 169(3):245-52. PubMed ID: 9779063
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. [Economic evaluation of the new national breast cancer screening programme in France: application to the Bouche-du-Rhone district].
    Giorgi R; Reynaud J; Wait S; Seradour B
    Bull Cancer; 2005 Nov; 92(11):995-1001. PubMed ID: 16316834
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. 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]  

  • 28. 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]  

  • 29. Predicting the risk of a false-positive test for women following a mammography screening programme.
    Njor SH; Olsen AH; Schwartz W; Vejborg I; Lynge E
    J Med Screen; 2007; 14(2):94-7. PubMed ID: 17626709
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. 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]  

  • 31. Ultrasound for breast cancer screening and staging.
    Gordon PB
    Radiol Clin North Am; 2002 May; 40(3):431-41. PubMed ID: 12117185
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. 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]  

  • 33. The connecticut experiment: the role of ultrasound in the screening of women with dense breasts.
    Weigert J; Steenbergen S
    Breast J; 2012; 18(6):517-22. PubMed ID: 23009208
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. The challenge of imaging dense breast parenchyma: is magnetic resonance mammography the technique of choice? A comparative study with x-ray mammography and whole-breast ultrasound.
    Pediconi F; Catalano C; Roselli A; Dominelli V; Cagioli S; Karatasiou A; Pronio A; Kirchin MA; Passariello R
    Invest Radiol; 2009 Jul; 44(7):412-21. PubMed ID: 19448554
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. [Ultrasound for Breast Cancer Screening: an Effective Tool in a Personalized Screening].
    Meuwly JY
    Praxis (Bern 1994); 2015 Dec; 104(25):1399-404. PubMed ID: 26649958
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Mammographic screening: does it work?
    Handler S
    Minn Med; 2003 Dec; 86(12):6-7. PubMed ID: 14719608
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Supplementary screening sonography in mammographically dense breast: pros and cons.
    Youk JH; Kim EK
    Korean J Radiol; 2010; 11(6):589-93. PubMed ID: 21076583
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. [Establishment of imaging-based breast cancer screening system].
    Suzuki A; Ishida T; Ohuchi N
    Nihon Rinsho; 2007 Jun; 65 Suppl 6():221-5. PubMed ID: 17679201
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Breast screening in north India: a cost-effective cancer prevention strategy.
    Pandey S; Chandravati
    Asian Pac J Cancer Prev; 2013; 14(2):853-7. PubMed ID: 23621251
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Validity of short-term consequences of cancer prevention and screening activities?
    Brodersen J; Thorsen H; Cockburn J
    J Clin Oncol; 2005 Jan; 23(1):244; author reply 244-5. PubMed ID: 15625383
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

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