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 *

115 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19132752)

  • 21. Increased risk of breast cancer in women with false-positive test: the role of misclassification.
    von Euler-Chelpin M; Kuchiki M; Vejborg I
    Cancer Epidemiol; 2014 Oct; 38(5):619-22. PubMed ID: 25035157
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Accuracy of screening mammography in older women.
    Sinclair N; Littenberg B; Geller B; Muss H
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2011 Nov; 197(5):1268-73. PubMed ID: 22021524
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Impact of menstrual phase on false-negative mammograms in the Canadian National Breast Screening Study.
    Baines CJ; Vidmar M; McKeown-Eyssen G; Tibshirani R
    Cancer; 1997 Aug; 80(4):720-4. PubMed ID: 9264355
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Image features of true positive and false negative cancers in screening mammograms.
    Meeson S; Young KC; Wallis MG; Cooke J; Cummin A; Ramsdale ML
    Br J Radiol; 2003 Jan; 76(901):13-21. PubMed ID: 12595320
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Impact of intermediate mammography assessment on the likelihood of false-positive results in breast cancer screening programmes.
    Ascunce N; Ederra M; Delfrade J; Baroja A; Erdozain N; Zubizarreta R; Salas D; Castells X;
    Eur Radiol; 2012 Feb; 22(2):331-40. PubMed ID: 21901564
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Incidence of malignancy in hormone therapy users with indeterminate calcifications on mammogram.
    Lochner DM; Brubaker KL
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2006 Jan; 194(1):82-5. PubMed ID: 16389013
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Effect of recall rate on earlier screen detection of breast cancers based on the Dutch performance indicators.
    Otten JD; Karssemeijer N; Hendriks JH; Groenewoud JH; Fracheboud J; Verbeek AL; de Koning HJ; Holland R
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 2005 May; 97(10):748-54. PubMed ID: 15900044
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Previous mammograms in patients with impalpable breast carcinoma: retrospective vs blinded interpretation. 1993 ARRS President's Award.
    Harvey JA; Fajardo LL; Innis CA
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1993 Dec; 161(6):1167-72. PubMed ID: 8249720
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. [Breast carcinoma diagnosed in mammographic screening incidentally. Research on the radiologic signs in prior mammograms].
    Marra V; Frigerio A; Di Virgilio MR; Menna S; Burke P
    Radiol Med; 1999 Nov; 98(5):342-6. PubMed ID: 10780212
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Additional double reading of screening mammograms by radiologic technologists: impact on screening performance parameters.
    Duijm LE; Groenewoud JH; Fracheboud J; de Koning HJ
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 2007 Aug; 99(15):1162-70. PubMed ID: 17652282
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Cumulative false positive recall rate and association with participant related factors in a population based breast cancer screening programme.
    Castells X; Molins E; Macià F
    J Epidemiol Community Health; 2006 Apr; 60(4):316-21. PubMed ID: 16537348
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Effect of computer-aided detection on independent double reading of paired screen-film and full-field digital screening mammograms.
    Skaane P; Kshirsagar A; Stapleton S; Young K; Castellino RA
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2007 Feb; 188(2):377-84. PubMed ID: 17242245
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Consequences of a false-positive mammography result: drug consumption before and after screening.
    von Euler-Chelpin M; Bæksted C; Vejborg I; Lynge E
    Acta Oncol; 2016 May; 55(5):572-6. PubMed ID: 26799406
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Impact of hormone therapy on false-positive recall and costs among women undergoing screening mammography.
    Boudreau DM; Buist DS; Rutter CM; Fishman PA; Beverly KR; Taplin S
    Med Care; 2006 Jan; 44(1):62-9. PubMed ID: 16365614
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Different types of postmenopausal hormone therapy and mammographic density in Norwegian women.
    Bremnes Y; Ursin G; Bjurstam N; Lund E; Gram IT
    Int J Cancer; 2007 Feb; 120(4):880-4. PubMed ID: 17131324
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Hormone replacement therapy and accuracy of mammographic screening.
    Kavanagh AM; Mitchell H; Giles GG
    Lancet; 2000 Jan; 355(9200):270-4. PubMed ID: 10675074
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. 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]  

  • 38. [Mammography screening in the county of Copenhagen. Results of the first three screening rounds].
    Tange UB; Hirsch FR; Jensen MB; Olsen AH; Blichert-Toft M; Rank FE; Vejborg IM; Mouridsen H; Lynge E
    Ugeskr Laeger; 2002 Feb; 164(8):1048-52. PubMed ID: 11894707
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. The visibility of cancer on earlier mammograms in a population-based screening programme.
    Saarenmaa I; Salminen T; Geiger U; Holli K; Isola J; Kärkkäinen A; Pakkanen J; Piironen A; Salo A; Hakama M
    Eur J Cancer; 1999 Jul; 35(7):1118-22. PubMed ID: 10533457
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. The incremental contribution of clinical breast examination to invasive cancer detection in a mammography screening program.
    Oestreicher N; Lehman CD; Seger DJ; Buist DS; White E
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2005 Feb; 184(2):428-32. PubMed ID: 15671358
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.