BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

916 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21257882)

  • 1. Detection and classification of calcifications on digital breast tomosynthesis and 2D digital mammography: a comparison.
    Spangler ML; Zuley ML; Sumkin JH; Abrams G; Ganott MA; Hakim C; Perrin R; Chough DM; Shah R; Gur D
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2011 Feb; 196(2):320-4. PubMed ID: 21257882
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Digital breast tomosynthesis: observer performance study.
    Gur D; Abrams GS; Chough DM; Ganott MA; Hakim CM; Perrin RL; Rathfon GY; Sumkin JH; Zuley ML; Bandos AI
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2009 Aug; 193(2):586-91. PubMed ID: 19620460
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. A comparison of full-field digital mammograms versus 2D synthesized mammograms for detection of microcalcifications on screening.
    Wahab RA; Lee SJ; Zhang B; Sobel L; Mahoney MC
    Eur J Radiol; 2018 Oct; 107():14-19. PubMed ID: 30292258
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. [Comparison of full-field digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis on assessment of the lesions in dense breast: a preliminary study].
    Li Y; Ye ZX; Wu T; An YH; Liu PF; Bao RX
    Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi; 2013 Jan; 35(1):33-7. PubMed ID: 23648297
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Performance of 2D Synthetic Mammography Versus Digital Mammography in the Detection of Microcalcifications at Screening.
    Dodelzon K; Simon K; Dou E; Levy AD; Michaels AY; Askin G; Katzen JT
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2020 Jun; 214(6):1436-1444. PubMed ID: 32255687
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Comparison of synthetic mammography, reconstructed from digital breast tomosynthesis, and digital mammography: evaluation of lesion conspicuity and BI-RADS assessment categories.
    Mariscotti G; Durando M; Houssami N; Fasciano M; Tagliafico A; Bosco D; Casella C; Bogetti C; Bergamasco L; Fonio P; Gandini G
    Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2017 Dec; 166(3):765-773. PubMed ID: 28819781
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Comparison of two-dimensional synthesized mammograms versus original digital mammograms alone and in combination with tomosynthesis images.
    Zuley ML; Guo B; Catullo VJ; Chough DM; Kelly AE; Lu AH; Rathfon GY; Lee Spangler M; Sumkin JH; Wallace LP; Bandos AI
    Radiology; 2014 Jun; 271(3):664-71. PubMed ID: 24475859
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Digital breast tomosynthesis versus full-field digital mammography: comparison of the accuracy of lesion measurement and characterization using specimens.
    Seo N; Kim HH; Shin HJ; Cha JH; Kim H; Moon JH; Gong G; Ahn SH; Son BH
    Acta Radiol; 2014 Jul; 55(6):661-7. PubMed ID: 24005560
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Diagnostic accuracy and recall rates for digital mammography and digital mammography combined with one-view and two-view tomosynthesis: results of an enriched reader study.
    Rafferty EA; Park JM; Philpotts LE; Poplack SP; Sumkin JH; Halpern EF; Niklason LT
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2014 Feb; 202(2):273-81. PubMed ID: 24450665
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Detection and characterization of breast lesions in a selective diagnostic population: diagnostic accuracy study for comparison between one-view digital breast tomosynthesis and two-view full-field digital mammography.
    Chae EY; Kim HH; Cha JH; Shin HJ; Choi WJ
    Br J Radiol; 2016 Jun; 89(1062):20150743. PubMed ID: 27072391
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Breast lesion detection and classification: comparison of screen-film mammography and full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading--observer performance study.
    Skaane P; Balleyguier C; Diekmann F; Diekmann S; Piguet JC; Young K; Niklason LT
    Radiology; 2005 Oct; 237(1):37-44. PubMed ID: 16100086
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Automated Breast Ultrasound in Breast Cancer Screening of Women With Dense Breasts: Reader Study of Mammography-Negative and Mammography-Positive Cancers.
    Giger ML; Inciardi MF; Edwards A; Papaioannou J; Drukker K; Jiang Y; Brem R; Brown JB
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2016 Jun; 206(6):1341-50. PubMed ID: 27043979
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Image quality, lesion detection, and diagnostic efficacy in digital mammography: full-field digital mammography versus computed radiography-based mammography using digital storage phosphor plates.
    Schueller G; Riedl CC; Mallek R; Eibenberger K; Langenberger H; Kaindl E; Kulinna-Cosentini C; Rudas M; Helbich TH
    Eur J Radiol; 2008 Sep; 67(3):487-96. PubMed ID: 17890036
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Is There a Difference in the Diagnostic Outcomes of Calcifications Initially Identified on Synthetic Tomosynthesis Versus Full-Field Digital Mammography Screening?
    Zhu H; Polat D; Evans P; Mootz A; Blackburn T; Xi Y; Dogan BE
    Eur J Radiol; 2020 Dec; 133():109365. PubMed ID: 33142193
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Comparison between two-dimensional synthetic mammography reconstructed from digital breast tomosynthesis and full-field digital mammography for the detection of T1 breast cancer.
    Choi JS; Han BK; Ko EY; Ko ES; Hahn SY; Shin JH; Kim MJ
    Eur Radiol; 2016 Aug; 26(8):2538-46. PubMed ID: 26628063
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Estimation of percentage breast tissue density: comparison between digital mammography (2D full field digital mammography) and digital breast tomosynthesis according to different BI-RADS categories.
    Tagliafico AS; Tagliafico G; Cavagnetto F; Calabrese M; Houssami N
    Br J Radiol; 2013 Nov; 86(1031):20130255. PubMed ID: 24029631
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Diagnostic performance of digital breast tomosynthesis with a wide scan angle compared to full-field digital mammography for the detection and characterization of microcalcifications.
    Clauser P; Nagl G; Helbich TH; Pinker-Domenig K; Weber M; Kapetas P; Bernathova M; Baltzer PAT
    Eur J Radiol; 2016 Dec; 85(12):2161-2168. PubMed ID: 27842661
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Significance and Application of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis for the BI-RADS Classification of Breast Cancer.
    Cai SQ; Yan JX; Chen QS; Huang ML; Cai DL
    Asian Pac J Cancer Prev; 2015; 16(9):4109-14. PubMed ID: 25987095
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Comparison of radiologist performance with photon-counting full-field digital mammography to conventional full-field digital mammography.
    Cole EB; Toledano AY; Lundqvist M; Pisano ED
    Acad Radiol; 2012 Aug; 19(8):916-22. PubMed ID: 22537503
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Diagnostic performance of digital breast tomosynthesis and full-field digital mammography with new reconstruction and new processing for dose reduction.
    Endo T; Morita T; Oiwa M; Suda N; Sato Y; Ichihara S; Shiraiwa M; Yoshikawa K; Horiba T; Ogawa H; Hayashi Y; Sendai T; Arai T
    Breast Cancer; 2018 Mar; 25(2):159-166. PubMed ID: 28956298
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 46.