243 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23289950)
1. Comparison of percent density from raw and processed full-field digital mammography data.
Vachon CM; Fowler EE; Tiffenberg G; Scott CG; Pankratz VS; Sellers TA; Heine JJ
Breast Cancer Res; 2013 Jan; 15(1):R1. PubMed ID: 23289950
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Case-control study of mammographic density and breast cancer risk using processed digital mammograms.
Habel LA; Lipson JA; Achacoso N; Rothstein JH; Yaffe MJ; Liang RY; Acton L; McGuire V; Whittemore AS; Rubin DL; Sieh W
Breast Cancer Res; 2016 May; 18(1):53. PubMed ID: 27209070
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Automated Percentage of Breast Density Measurements for Full-field Digital Mammography Applications.
Fowler EE; Vachon CM; Scott CG; Sellers TA; Heine JJ
Acad Radiol; 2014 Aug; 21(8):958-70. PubMed ID: 25018067
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Evaluation of LIBRA Software for Fully Automated Mammographic Density Assessment in Breast Cancer Risk Prediction.
Gastounioti A; Kasi CD; Scott CG; Brandt KR; Jensen MR; Hruska CB; Wu FF; Norman AD; Conant EF; Winham SJ; Kerlikowske K; Kontos D; Vachon CM
Radiology; 2020 Jul; 296(1):24-31. PubMed ID: 32396041
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Estimation of breast percent density in raw and processed full field digital mammography images via adaptive fuzzy c-means clustering and support vector machine segmentation.
Keller BM; Nathan DL; Wang Y; Zheng Y; Gee JC; Conant EF; Kontos D
Med Phys; 2012 Aug; 39(8):4903-17. PubMed ID: 22894417
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Impact of type of full-field digital image on mammographic density assessment and breast cancer risk estimation: a case-control study.
Busana MC; Eng A; Denholm R; Dowsett M; Vinnicombe S; Allen S; Dos-Santos-Silva I
Breast Cancer Res; 2016 Sep; 18(1):96. PubMed ID: 27670914
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Preliminary evaluation of the publicly available Laboratory for Breast Radiodensity Assessment (LIBRA) software tool: comparison of fully automated area and volumetric density measures in a case-control study with digital mammography.
Keller BM; Chen J; Daye D; Conant EF; Kontos D
Breast Cancer Res; 2015 Aug; 17():117. PubMed ID: 26303303
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Full field digital mammography and breast density: comparison of calibrated and noncalibrated measurements.
Heine JJ; Fowler EE; Flowers CI
Acad Radiol; 2011 Nov; 18(11):1430-6. PubMed ID: 21971260
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Mammographic density assessed on paired raw and processed digital images and on paired screen-film and digital images across three mammography systems.
Burton A; Byrnes G; Stone J; Tamimi RM; Heine J; Vachon C; Ozmen V; Pereira A; Garmendia ML; Scott C; Hipwell JH; Dickens C; Schüz J; Aribal ME; Bertrand K; Kwong A; Giles GG; Hopper J; Pérez Gómez B; Pollán M; Teo SH; Mariapun S; Taib NA; Lajous M; Lopez-Riduara R; Rice M; Romieu I; Flugelman AA; Ursin G; Qureshi S; Ma H; Lee E; Sirous R; Sirous M; Lee JW; Kim J; Salem D; Kamal R; Hartman M; Miao H; Chia KS; Nagata C; Vinayak S; Ndumia R; van Gils CH; Wanders JO; Peplonska B; Bukowska A; Allen S; Vinnicombe S; Moss S; Chiarelli AM; Linton L; Maskarinec G; Yaffe MJ; Boyd NF; Dos-Santos-Silva I; McCormack VA
Breast Cancer Res; 2016 Dec; 18(1):130. PubMed ID: 27993168
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Digital mammographic density and breast cancer risk: a case-control study of six alternative density assessment methods.
Eng A; Gallant Z; Shepherd J; McCormack V; Li J; Dowsett M; Vinnicombe S; Allen S; dos-Santos-Silva I
Breast Cancer Res; 2014 Sep; 16(5):439. PubMed ID: 25239205
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) breast composition descriptors: automated measurement development for full field digital mammography.
Fowler EE; Sellers TA; Lu B; Heine JJ
Med Phys; 2013 Nov; 40(11):113502. PubMed ID: 24320473
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. The influence of mammogram acquisition on the mammographic density and breast cancer association in the Mayo Mammography Health Study cohort.
Olson JE; Sellers TA; Scott CG; Schueler BA; Brandt KR; Serie DJ; Jensen MR; Wu FF; Morton MJ; Heine JJ; Couch FJ; Pankratz VS; Vachon CM
Breast Cancer Res; 2012 Nov; 14(6):R147. PubMed ID: 23152984
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. An automated approach for estimation of breast density.
Heine JJ; Carston MJ; Scott CG; Brandt KR; Wu FF; Pankratz VS; Sellers TA; Vachon CM
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 2008 Nov; 17(11):3090-7. PubMed ID: 18990749
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Mammographic density defined by higher than conventional brightness threshold better predicts breast cancer risk for full-field digital mammograms.
Nguyen TL; Aung YK; Evans CF; Yoon-Ho C; Jenkins MA; Sung J; Hopper JL; Song YM
Breast Cancer Res; 2015 Nov; 17():142. PubMed ID: 26581435
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Pectoral muscle attenuation as a marker for breast cancer risk in full-field digital mammography.
Cheddad A; Czene K; Hall P; Humphreys K
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 2015 Jun; 24(6):985-91. PubMed ID: 25870223
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Mammographic texture resemblance generalizes as an independent risk factor for breast cancer.
Nielsen M; Vachon CM; Scott CG; Chernoff K; Karemore G; Karssemeijer N; Lillholm M; Karsdal MA
Breast Cancer Res; 2014 Apr; 16(2):R37. PubMed ID: 24713478
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. Breast Cancer Risk and Mammographic Density Assessed with Semiautomated and Fully Automated Methods and BI-RADS.
Jeffers AM; Sieh W; Lipson JA; Rothstein JH; McGuire V; Whittemore AS; Rubin DL
Radiology; 2017 Feb; 282(2):348-355. PubMed ID: 27598536
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Reproductive Factors and Mammographic Density: Associations Among 24,840 Women and Comparison of Studies Using Digitized Film-Screen Mammography and Full-Field Digital Mammography.
Alexeeff SE; Odo NU; McBride R; McGuire V; Achacoso N; Rothstein JH; Lipson JA; Liang RY; Acton L; Yaffe MJ; Whittemore AS; Rubin DL; Sieh W; Habel LA
Am J Epidemiol; 2019 Jun; 188(6):1144-1154. PubMed ID: 30865217
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Digital versus screen-film mammography: impact of mammographic density and hormone therapy on breast cancer detection.
Chiarelli AM; Prummel MV; Muradali D; Shumak RS; Majpruz V; Brown P; Jiang H; Done SJ; Yaffe MJ
Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2015 Nov; 154(2):377-87. PubMed ID: 26518019
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
