BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

564 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22358016)

  • 1. Mammography screening: a new estimate of number needed to screen to prevent one breast cancer death.
    Hendrick RE; Helvie MA
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2012 Mar; 198(3):723-8. PubMed ID: 22358016
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. United States Preventive Services Task Force screening mammography recommendations: science ignored.
    Hendrick RE; Helvie MA
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2011 Feb; 196(2):W112-6. PubMed ID: 21257850
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Implications of CISNET modeling on number needed to screen and mortality reduction with digital mammography in women 40-49 years old.
    Hendrick RE; Helvie MA; Hardesty LA
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2014 Dec; 203(6):1379-81. PubMed ID: 25415718
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Screening for breast cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement.
    US Preventive Services Task Force
    Ann Intern Med; 2009 Nov; 151(10):716-26, W-236. PubMed ID: 19920272
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Outcomes of Breast Cancer Screening Strategies Based on Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network Estimates.
    Monticciolo DL; Hendrick RE; Helvie MA
    Radiology; 2024 Feb; 310(2):e232658. PubMed ID: 38376405
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Collaborative Modeling to Compare Different Breast Cancer Screening Strategies: A Decision Analysis for the US Preventive Services Task Force.
    Trentham-Dietz A; Chapman CH; Jayasekera J; Lowry KP; Heckman-Stoddard BM; Hampton JM; Caswell-Jin JL; Gangnon RE; Lu Y; Huang H; Stein S; Sun L; Gil Quessep EJ; Yang Y; Lu Y; Song J; Muñoz DF; Li Y; Kurian AW; Kerlikowske K; O'Meara ES; Sprague BL; Tosteson ANA; Feuer EJ; Berry D; Plevritis SK; Huang X; de Koning HJ; van Ravesteyn NT; Lee SJ; Alagoz O; Schechter CB; Stout NK; Miglioretti DL; Mandelblatt JS
    JAMA; 2024 Jun; 331(22):1947-1960. PubMed ID: 38687505
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Comparison of recommendations for screening mammography using CISNET models.
    Arleo EK; Hendrick RE; Helvie MA; Sickles EA
    Cancer; 2017 Oct; 123(19):3673-3680. PubMed ID: 28832983
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Clinical outcomes of modelling mammography screening strategies.
    Yaffe MJ; Mittmann N; Lee P; Tosteson AN; Trentham-Dietz A; Alagoz O; Stout NK
    Health Rep; 2015 Dec; 26(12):9-15. PubMed ID: 26676234
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Benefits and Harms of Breast Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review.
    Myers ER; Moorman P; Gierisch JM; Havrilesky LJ; Grimm LJ; Ghate S; Davidson B; Mongtomery RC; Crowley MJ; McCrory DC; Kendrick A; Sanders GD
    JAMA; 2015 Oct; 314(15):1615-34. PubMed ID: 26501537
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Screening for Breast Cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.
    Siu AL;
    Ann Intern Med; 2016 Feb; 164(4):279-96. PubMed ID: 26757170
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Screening Mammography for Women in Their 40s: The Potential Impact of the American Cancer Society and U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Breast Cancer Screening Recommendations.
    Pitman JA; McGinty GB; Soman RR; Drotman MB; Reichman MB; Arleo EK
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2017 Sep; 209(3):697-702. PubMed ID: 28504572
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Mammography in 40-year-old women: what difference does it make? The potential impact of the U.S. Preventative Services Task Force (USPSTF) mammography guidelines.
    Shen N; Hammonds LS; Madsen D; Dale P
    Ann Surg Oncol; 2011 Oct; 18(11):3066-71. PubMed ID: 21863364
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Re-examining current breast cancer screening: An analysis of the 2009 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force guidelines for breast cancer screening.
    Beard C; Beard V
    Women Health; 2016; 56(3):281-95. PubMed ID: 26362522
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Change in Breast Cancer Screening Intervals Since the 2009 USPSTF Guideline.
    Wernli KJ; Arao RF; Hubbard RA; Sprague BL; Alford-Teaster J; Haas JS; Henderson L; Hill D; Lee CI; Tosteson ANA; Onega T
    J Womens Health (Larchmt); 2017 Aug; 26(8):820-827. PubMed ID: 28177856
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Preventive health care, 2001 update: screening mammography among women aged 40-49 years at average risk of breast cancer.
    Ringash J;
    CMAJ; 2001 Feb; 164(4):469-76. PubMed ID: 11233866
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. To screen or not to screen: the issue of breast cancer screening in older women.
    Caplan LS
    Public Health Rev; 2001; 29(2-4):231-40. PubMed ID: 12418709
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Development and Validation of Risk Models to Select Ever-Smokers for CT Lung Cancer Screening.
    Katki HA; Kovalchik SA; Berg CD; Cheung LC; Chaturvedi AK
    JAMA; 2016 Jun; 315(21):2300-11. PubMed ID: 27179989
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Potential impact of USPSTF recommendations on early diagnosis of breast cancer.
    Aragon R; Morgan J; Wong JH; Lum S
    Ann Surg Oncol; 2011 Oct; 18(11):3137-42. PubMed ID: 21947591
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Cost-effectiveness of digital mammography screening before the age of 50 in The Netherlands.
    Sankatsing VD; Heijnsdijk EA; van Luijt PA; van Ravesteyn NT; Fracheboud J; de Koning HJ
    Int J Cancer; 2015 Oct; 137(8):1990-9. PubMed ID: 25895135
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 29.