BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

465 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21692270)

  • 1. [Analysis of the results of mammography screening in Dubrovnik-Neretva County in the 2006-2009 period].
    Dzono-Boban A; Mratović MC; Masanović M
    Acta Med Croatica; 2010 Dec; 64(5):453-9. PubMed ID: 21692270
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. [Tailored Breast Screening Trial (TBST)].
    Paci E; Mantellini P; Giorgi Rossi P; Falini P; Puliti D;
    Epidemiol Prev; 2013; 37(4-5):317-27. PubMed ID: 24293498
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. National program of breast cancer early detection in Brod-Posavina County (East Croatia).
    Jurišić I; Kolovrat A; Mitrečić D; Cvitković A
    Coll Antropol; 2014 Sep; 38(3):961-7. PubMed ID: 25420380
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. Cancer Yield and Patterns of Follow-up for BI-RADS Category 3 after Screening Mammography Recall in the National Mammography Database.
    Berg WA; Berg JM; Sickles EA; Burnside ES; Zuley ML; Rosenberg RD; Lee CS
    Radiology; 2020 Jul; 296(1):32-41. PubMed ID: 32427557
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Outcomes of unconventional utilization of BI-RADS category 3 assessment at opportunistic screening.
    Altas H; Tureli D; Cengic I; Kucukkaya F; Aribal E; Kaya H
    Acta Radiol; 2016 Nov; 57(11):1304-1309. PubMed ID: 26019241
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Longitudinal measurement of clinical mammographic breast density to improve estimation of breast cancer risk.
    Kerlikowske K; Ichikawa L; Miglioretti DL; Buist DS; Vacek PM; Smith-Bindman R; Yankaskas B; Carney PA; Ballard-Barbash R;
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 2007 Mar; 99(5):386-95. PubMed ID: 17341730
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. [Analysis for the breast cancer screening among urban populations in China, 2012-2013].
    Mi ZH; Ren JS; Zhang HZ; Li J; Wang Y; Fang Y; Shi JF; Zhang K; Zhao JB; Dai M
    Zhonghua Yu Fang Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2016 Oct; 50(10):887-892. PubMed ID: 27686767
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Arbitration of discrepant BI-RADS 0 recalls by a third reader at screening mammography lowers recall rate but not the cancer detection rate and sensitivity at blinded and non-blinded double reading.
    Klompenhouwer EG; Weber RJ; Voogd AC; den Heeten GJ; Strobbe LJ; Broeders MJ; Tjan-Heijnen VC; Duijm LE
    Breast; 2015 Oct; 24(5):601-7. PubMed ID: 26117723
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. [Breast cancer screening in urban Beijing, 2014-2019].
    Yang L; Zhang X; Liu S; Li HC; Zhang Q; Wang N; Ji JF
    Zhonghua Yu Fang Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2020 Sep; 54(9):974-980. PubMed ID: 32907288
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Patient compliance and diagnostic yield of 18-month unilateral follow-up in surveillance of probably benign mammographic lesions.
    Chung CS; Giess CS; Gombos EC; Frost EP; Yeh ED; Raza S; Birdwell RL
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2014 Apr; 202(4):922-7. PubMed ID: 24660725
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Reassessment and Follow-Up Results of BI-RADS Category 3 Lesions Detected on Screening Breast Ultrasound.
    Chae EY; Cha JH; Shin HJ; Choi WJ; Kim HH
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2016 Mar; 206(3):666-72. PubMed ID: 26901026
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. [Performance of users in tropical areas with the BI-RADS classification of breast lesions for predicting malignancy].
    Gonsu Kamga JE; Moifo B; Sando Z; Guegang Goudjou E; Nko'o Amvene S; Gonsu Fotsin J
    Med Sante Trop; 2013; 23(4):439-44. PubMed ID: 24334372
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging in screening detected microcalcification lesions of the breast: is there any value?
    Uematsu T; Yuen S; Kasami M; Uchida Y
    Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2007 Jul; 103(3):269-81. PubMed ID: 17063274
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. BI-RADS Category 3 Comparison: Probably Benign Category after Recall from Screening before and after Implementation of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis.
    McDonald ES; McCarthy AM; Weinstein SP; Schnall MD; Conant EF
    Radiology; 2017 Dec; 285(3):778-787. PubMed ID: 28715278
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Assessment of BI-RADS category 4 lesions detected with screening mammography and screening US: utility of MR imaging.
    Strobel K; Schrading S; Hansen NL; Barabasch A; Kuhl CK
    Radiology; 2015 Feb; 274(2):343-51. PubMed ID: 25271857
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. A comparison between short-interval and regular-interval follow-up for BI-RADS category 3 lesions.
    Ruamsup S; Wiratkapun C; Wibulpolprasert B; Lertsithichai P
    Singapore Med J; 2010 Feb; 51(2):120-5. PubMed ID: 20358150
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Mammography in asymptomatic women aged 40-49 years.
    Silva FX; Katz L; Souza AS; Amorim MM
    Rev Saude Publica; 2014 Dec; 48(6):931-9. PubMed ID: 26039396
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Focal Breast Lesions in Clinical CT Examinations of the Chest: A Retrospective Analysis.
    Krug KB; Houbois C; Grinstein O; Borggrefe J; Puesken M; Hanstein B; Malter W; Maintz D; Hellmich M
    Rofo; 2017 Oct; 189(10):977-989. PubMed ID: 28683503
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Using the BI-RADS lexicon in a restrictive form of double reading as a strategy for minimizing screening mammography recall rates.
    Ghate SV; Baker JA; Kim CE; Johnson KS; Walsh R; Soo MS
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2012 Apr; 198(4):962-70. PubMed ID: 22451567
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 24.