366 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20664027)
1. A simulation model investigating the impact of tumor volume doubling time and mammographic tumor detectability on screening outcomes in women aged 40-49 years.
Bailey SL; Sigal BM; Plevritis SK
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2010 Aug; 102(16):1263-71. PubMed ID: 20664027
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Factors contributing to mammography failure in women aged 40-49 years.
Buist DS; Porter PL; Lehman C; Taplin SH; White E
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2004 Oct; 96(19):1432-40. PubMed ID: 15467032
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Breast cancer screening in BRCA1 mutation carriers: effectiveness of MR imaging--Markov Monte Carlo decision analysis.
Lee JM; Kopans DB; McMahon PM; Halpern EF; Ryan PD; Weinstein MC; Gazelle GS
Radiology; 2008 Mar; 246(3):763-71. PubMed ID: 18309013
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Breast cancer screening by mammography in women aged under 50 years in Japan.
Morimoto T; Sasa M; Yamaguchi T; Kondo H; Akaiwa H; Sagara Y
Anticancer Res; 2000; 20(5C):3689-94. PubMed ID: 11268440
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Nationwide mammographic screening and breast cancer mortality in Taiwan: an interrupted time-series analysis.
Su SY
Breast Cancer; 2022 Mar; 29(2):336-342. PubMed ID: 34837139
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Breast MRI screening for average-risk women: A monte carlo simulation cost-benefit analysis.
Mango VL; Goel A; Mema E; Kwak E; Ha R
J Magn Reson Imaging; 2019 Jun; 49(7):e216-e221. PubMed ID: 30632645
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Breast Tumor Prognostic Characteristics and Biennial vs Annual Mammography, Age, and Menopausal Status.
Miglioretti DL; Zhu W; Kerlikowske K; Sprague BL; Onega T; Buist DS; Henderson LM; Smith RA;
JAMA Oncol; 2015 Nov; 1(8):1069-77. PubMed ID: 26501844
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Screening outcomes in older US women undergoing multiple mammograms in community practice: does interval, age, or comorbidity score affect tumor characteristics or false positive rates?
Braithwaite D; Zhu W; Hubbard RA; O'Meara ES; Miglioretti DL; Geller B; Dittus K; Moore D; Wernli KJ; Mandelblatt J; Kerlikowske K;
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2013 Mar; 105(5):334-41. PubMed ID: 23385442
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Obligate Overdiagnosis Due to Mammographic Screening: A Direct Estimate for U.S. Women.
Hendrick RE
Radiology; 2018 May; 287(2):391-397. PubMed ID: 29267146
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Breast density as a predictor of mammographic detection: comparison of interval- and screen-detected cancers.
Mandelson MT; Oestreicher N; Porter PL; White D; Finder CA; Taplin SH; White E
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2000 Jul; 92(13):1081-7. PubMed ID: 10880551
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Performance of first mammography examination in women younger than 40 years.
Yankaskas BC; Haneuse S; Kapp JM; Kerlikowske K; Geller B; Buist DS;
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2010 May; 102(10):692-701. PubMed ID: 20439838
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Estimating Breast Cancer Survival by Molecular Subtype in the Absence of Screening and Adjuvant Treatment.
Munoz DF; Plevritis SK
Med Decis Making; 2018 Apr; 38(1_suppl):32S-43S. PubMed ID: 29554464
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Annual Screening Mammography Associated With Lower Stage Breast Cancer Compared With Biennial Screening.
Moorman SEH; Pujara AC; Sakala MD; Neal CH; Maturen KE; Swartz L; Egloff H; Helvie MA
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2021 Jul; 217(1):40-47. PubMed ID: 33955776
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. The National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program: report on the first 4 years of mammography provided to medically underserved women.
May DS; Lee NC; Nadel MR; Henson RM; Miller DS
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1998 Jan; 170(1):97-104. PubMed ID: 9423608
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Effects of age, breast density, ethnicity, and estrogen replacement therapy on screening mammographic sensitivity and cancer stage at diagnosis: review of 183,134 screening mammograms in Albuquerque, New Mexico.
Rosenberg RD; Hunt WC; Williamson MR; Gilliland FD; Wiest PW; Kelsey CA; Key CR; Linver MN
Radiology; 1998 Nov; 209(2):511-8. PubMed ID: 9807581
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Tipping the balance of benefits and harms to favor screening mammography starting at age 40 years: a comparative modeling study of risk.
van Ravesteyn NT; Miglioretti DL; Stout NK; Lee SJ; Schechter CB; Buist DS; Huang H; Heijnsdijk EA; Trentham-Dietz A; Alagoz O; Near AM; Kerlikowske K; Nelson HD; Mandelblatt JS; de Koning HJ
Ann Intern Med; 2012 May; 156(9):609-17. PubMed ID: 22547470
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Comparing sensitivity and specificity of screening mammography in the United States and Denmark.
Kemp Jacobsen K; O'Meara ES; Key D; S M Buist D; Kerlikowske K; Vejborg I; Sprague BL; Lynge E; von Euler-Chelpin M
Int J Cancer; 2015 Nov; 137(9):2198-207. PubMed ID: 25944711
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Novel mammographic image features differentiate between interval and screen-detected breast cancer: a case-case study.
Strand F; Humphreys K; Cheddad A; Törnberg S; Azavedo E; Shepherd J; Hall P; Czene K
Breast Cancer Res; 2016 Oct; 18(1):100. PubMed ID: 27716311
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Mammographic screening interval in relation to tumor characteristics and false-positive risk by race/ethnicity and age.
O'Meara ES; Zhu W; Hubbard RA; Braithwaite D; Kerlikowske K; Dittus KL; Geller B; Wernli KJ; Miglioretti DL
Cancer; 2013 Nov; 119(22):3959-67. PubMed ID: 24037812
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20.
; ; . PubMed ID:
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
