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 *

113 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2315379)

  • 1. Characterisation of mammographic parenchymal pattern by fractal dimension.
    Caldwell CB; Stapleton SJ; Holdsworth DW; Jong RA; Weiser WJ; Cooke G; Yaffe MJ
    Phys Med Biol; 1990 Feb; 35(2):235-47. PubMed ID: 2315379
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Parenchymal texture analysis in digital mammography: A fully automated pipeline for breast cancer risk assessment.
    Zheng Y; Keller BM; Ray S; Wang Y; Conant EF; Gee JC; Kontos D
    Med Phys; 2015 Jul; 42(7):4149-60. PubMed ID: 26133615
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Inter-observer agreement according to three methods of evaluating mammographic density and parenchymal pattern in a case control study: impact on relative risk of breast cancer.
    Winkel RR; von Euler-Chelpin M; Nielsen M; Diao P; Nielsen MB; Uldall WY; Vejborg I
    BMC Cancer; 2015 Apr; 15():274. PubMed ID: 25884160
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Computer-assisted diagnosis: the classification of mammographic breast parenchymal patterns.
    Tahoces PG; Correa J; Souto M; Gómez L; Vidal JJ
    Phys Med Biol; 1995 Jan; 40(1):103-17. PubMed ID: 7708834
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Fractal analysis of mammographic parenchymal patterns in breast cancer risk assessment.
    Li H; Giger ML; Olopade OI; Lan L
    Acad Radiol; 2007 May; 14(5):513-21. PubMed ID: 17434064
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Observer variation in the classification of mammographic parenchymal patterns.
    Boyd NF; Wolfson C; Moskowitz M; Carlile T; Petitclerc C; Ferri HA; Fishell E; Gregoire A; Kiernan M; Longley JD
    J Chronic Dis; 1986; 39(6):465-72. PubMed ID: 3711253
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Automated analysis of mammographic densities.
    Byng JW; Boyd NF; Fishell E; Jong RA; Yaffe MJ
    Phys Med Biol; 1996 May; 41(5):909-23. PubMed ID: 8735257
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Mammographic features and subsequent risk of breast cancer: a comparison of qualitative and quantitative evaluations in the Guernsey prospective studies.
    Torres-Mejía G; De Stavola B; Allen DS; Pérez-Gavilán JJ; Ferreira JM; Fentiman IS; Dos Santos Silva I
    Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 2005 May; 14(5):1052-9. PubMed ID: 15894652
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Fractal analysis of visual search activity for mass detection during mammographic screening.
    Alamudun F; Yoon HJ; Hudson KB; Morin-Ducote G; Hammond T; Tourassi GD
    Med Phys; 2017 Mar; 44(3):832-846. PubMed ID: 28079249
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Computerized texture analysis of mammographic parenchymal patterns of digitized mammograms.
    Li H; Giger ML; Olopade OI; Margolis A; Lan L; Chinander MR
    Acad Radiol; 2005 Jul; 12(7):863-73. PubMed ID: 16039540
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Fractal analysis of mammographic lesions: a feasibility study quantifying the difference between benign and malignant masses.
    Velanovich V
    Am J Med Sci; 1996 May; 311(5):211-4. PubMed ID: 8615395
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Reproducibility of visual assessment on mammographic density.
    Gao J; Warren R; Warren-Forward H; Forbes JF
    Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2008 Mar; 108(1):121-7. PubMed ID: 17616811
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The Tabár classification of mammographic parenchymal patterns.
    Gram IT; Funkhouser E; Tabár L
    Eur J Radiol; 1997 Feb; 24(2):131-6. PubMed ID: 9097055
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Mammographic density and structural features can individually and jointly contribute to breast cancer risk assessment in mammography screening: a case-control study.
    Winkel RR; von Euler-Chelpin M; Nielsen M; Petersen K; Lillholm M; Nielsen MB; Lynge E; Uldall WY; Vejborg I
    BMC Cancer; 2016 Jul; 16():414. PubMed ID: 27387546
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Association between mammographic parenchymal pattern classification and incidence of breast cancer.
    Threatt B; Norbeck JM; Ullman NS; Kummer R; Roselle P
    Cancer; 1980 May; 45(10):2550-6. PubMed ID: 7378990
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Reproducibility and consistency in classification of breast parenchymal patterns.
    Carlile T; Thompson DJ; Kopecky KJ; Gilbert FI; Krook PM; Present AJ; Russell HW; Threatt BA
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1983 Jan; 140(1):1-7. PubMed ID: 6600294
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Automated analysis of mammographic densities and breast carcinoma risk.
    Byng JW; Yaffe MJ; Lockwood GA; Little LE; Tritchler DL; Boyd NF
    Cancer; 1997 Jul; 80(1):66-74. PubMed ID: 9210710
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Automated classification of parenchymal patterns in mammograms.
    Karssemeijer N
    Phys Med Biol; 1998 Feb; 43(2):365-78. PubMed ID: 9509532
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Mammographic signs of potential relevance to breast cancer risk: the agreement of radiologists' classification.
    Jong R; Fishell E; Little L; Lockwood G; Boyd NF
    Eur J Cancer Prev; 1996 Aug; 5(4):281-6. PubMed ID: 8894565
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Quantitative classification of mammographic densities and breast cancer risk: results from the Canadian National Breast Screening Study.
    Boyd NF; Byng JW; Jong RA; Fishell EK; Little LE; Miller AB; Lockwood GA; Tritchler DL; Yaffe MJ
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 1995 May; 87(9):670-5. PubMed ID: 7752271
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.