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 *

92 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2057424)

  • 1. A new breast screening programme--an audit of the first year.
    Kirby RM; Williams M; Hopper G; Skinner MD; French C; Suarez V; Summerly ME; Gray JG
    Postgrad Med J; 1991 Jan; 67(783):36-8. PubMed ID: 2057424
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Will the spectrum of lesions prompting a "B3" breast core biopsy increase the benign biopsy rate?
    Carder PJ; Liston JC
    J Clin Pathol; 2003 Feb; 56(2):133-8. PubMed ID: 12560393
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. An analysis of referral patterns from a breast screening unit.
    Whitehouse GH; Leinster SJ; Al-Sumidaie AM; McDicken IW
    Clin Radiol; 1986 Nov; 37(6):555-9. PubMed ID: 3791852
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Hospital work load produced by breast-cancer screening programme run by trained non-medical staff.
    George WD; Sellwood RA; Asbury DA; Hartley G
    Br Med J; 1980 Sep; 281(6241):653-5. PubMed ID: 7437755
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Selective nonoperative management of patients referred with abnormal mammograms.
    Erickson EJ; McGreevy JM; Muskett A
    Am J Surg; 1990 Dec; 160(6):659-62: discussion 662-4. PubMed ID: 2252132
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Surgical biopsy of non-palpable mammary lesions. Technique and results.
    Arnesson LG; Fagerberg G; Gröntoft O; Lundström B
    Acta Chir Scand; 1986 Feb; 152():97-101. PubMed ID: 3513472
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Mammography screening--reasons for recall and the influence of experience on recall in the Finnish system.
    Pamilo M; Anttinen I; Soiva M; Roiha M; Suramo I
    Clin Radiol; 1990 Jun; 41(6):384-7. PubMed ID: 2383951
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Specificity of screening in United Kingdom trial of early detection of breast cancer.
    BMJ; 1992 Feb; 304(6823):346-9. PubMed ID: 1540731
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Compliance with referrals from a cancer-screening project.
    Lane DS
    J Fam Pract; 1983 Nov; 17(5):811-7. PubMed ID: 6631345
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Medical audit of a rapid-throughput mammography screening practice: methodology and results of 27,114 examinations.
    Sickles EA; Ominsky SH; Sollitto RA; Galvin HB; Monticciolo DL
    Radiology; 1990 May; 175(2):323-7. PubMed ID: 2326455
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Crude open biopsy rates for benign screen detected lesions no longer reflect breast screening quality--time to change the standard.
    Maxwell AJ; Pearson JM; Bishop HM
    J Med Screen; 2002; 9(2):83-5. PubMed ID: 12133928
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Mammography screening in the Netherlands: delay in the diagnosis of breast cancer after breast cancer screening.
    Duijm LE; Groenewoud JH; Jansen FH; Fracheboud J; van Beek M; de Koning HJ
    Br J Cancer; 2004 Nov; 91(10):1795-9. PubMed ID: 15505630
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. What Happens after a Diagnosis of High-Risk Breast Lesion at Stereotactic Vacuum-assisted Biopsy? An Observational Study of Postdiagnosis Management and Imaging Adherence.
    Gao Y; Albert M; Young Lin LL; Lewin AA; Babb JS; Heller SL; Moy L
    Radiology; 2018 May; 287(2):423-431. PubMed ID: 29378151
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Assessment of lesions detected at mammographic screening: performance at first or repeat screening in the Florence programme.
    Ciatto S; Del Turco MR; Giorgi D; Morrone D; Catarzi S; Ambrogetti D; Paci E; Zappa M
    J Med Screen; 1994 Jul; 1(3):188-92. PubMed ID: 8790515
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Screening US in patients with mammographically dense breasts: initial experience with Connecticut Public Act 09-41.
    Hooley RJ; Greenberg KL; Stackhouse RM; Geisel JL; Butler RS; Philpotts LE
    Radiology; 2012 Oct; 265(1):59-69. PubMed ID: 22723501
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Assessment of non-palpable mammographic abnormalities: comparison between screening and symptomatic clinics.
    Aitken RJ; Forrest AP; Chetty U; Roberts MM; Huggins A; MacDonald HL; Muir BB; Kirkpatrick AE; Anderson TJ
    Br J Surg; 1992 Sep; 79(9):925-7. PubMed ID: 1422758
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Canadian National Breast Screening Study: 2. Breast cancer detection and death rates among women aged 50 to 59 years.
    Miller AB; Baines CJ; To T; Wall C
    CMAJ; 1992 Nov; 147(10):1477-88. PubMed ID: 1423088
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Family physicians' initiative to increase compliance with screening mammography--an innovative community project.
    Eilat-Tsanani S; Sorek M; Gay N; Chaimovitch O; Kulton L; Tabenkin H
    Isr Med Assoc J; 2001 Dec; 3(12):920-4. PubMed ID: 11794915
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. [The effectiveness of population-based breast cancer screening programme].
    Szynglarewicz B; Matkowski R; Kasprzak P; Kotowska J; Forgacz J; Pudełko M; Kornafel J
    Pol Merkur Lekarski; 2009 Feb; 26(152):117-20. PubMed ID: 19388515
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.