244 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23289950)
21. Examination of fully automated mammographic density measures using LIBRA and breast cancer risk in a cohort of 21,000 non-Hispanic white women.
Habel LA; Alexeeff SE; Achacoso N; Arasu VA; Gastounioti A; Gerstley L; Klein RJ; Liang RY; Lipson JA; Mankowski W; Margolies LR; Rothstein JH; Rubin DL; Shen L; Sistig A; Song X; Villaseñor MA; Westley M; Whittemore AS; Yaffe MJ; Wang P; Kontos D; Sieh W
Breast Cancer Res; 2023 Aug; 25(1):92. PubMed ID: 37544983
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Calibrated Breast Density Measurements.
Fowler EE; Smallwood A; Khan N; Miltich C; Drukteinis J; Sellers TA; Heine J
Acad Radiol; 2019 Sep; 26(9):1181-1190. PubMed ID: 30545682
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Generalized breast density metrics.
Fowler EEE; Smallwood A; Miltich C; Drukteinis J; Sellers TA; Heine J
Phys Med Biol; 2018 Dec; 64(1):015006. PubMed ID: 30523909
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Breast parenchymal patterns in processed versus raw digital mammograms: A large population study toward assessing differences in quantitative measures across image representations.
Gastounioti A; Oustimov A; Keller BM; Pantalone L; Hsieh MK; Conant EF; Kontos D
Med Phys; 2016 Nov; 43(11):5862. PubMed ID: 27806604
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Assessment of a fully automated, high-throughput mammographic density measurement tool for use with processed digital mammograms.
Couwenberg AM; Verkooijen HM; Li J; Pijnappel RM; Charaghvandi KR; Hartman M; van Gils CH
Cancer Causes Control; 2014 Aug; 25(8):1037-43. PubMed ID: 24962023
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Enhancement of mammographic density measures in breast cancer risk prediction.
Cheddad A; Czene K; Shepherd JA; Li J; Hall P; Humphreys K
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 2014 Jul; 23(7):1314-23. PubMed ID: 24722754
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. A novel and fully automated mammographic texture analysis for risk prediction: results from two case-control studies.
Wang C; Brentnall AR; Cuzick J; Harkness EF; Evans DG; Astley S
Breast Cancer Res; 2017 Oct; 19(1):114. PubMed ID: 29047382
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Effects of exposure equalization on image signal-to-noise ratios in digital mammography: a simulation study with an anthropomorphic breast phantom.
Liu X; Lai CJ; Whitman GJ; Geiser WR; Shen Y; Yi Y; Shaw CC
Med Phys; 2011 Dec; 38(12):6489-501. PubMed ID: 22149832
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Association between computed tissue density asymmetry in bilateral mammograms and near-term breast cancer risk.
Zheng B; Tan M; Ramalingam P; Gur D
Breast J; 2014; 20(3):249-57. PubMed ID: 24673749
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Automated measurement of volumetric mammographic density: a tool for widespread breast cancer risk assessment.
Brand JS; Czene K; Shepherd JA; Leifland K; Heddson B; Sundbom A; Eriksson M; Li J; Humphreys K; Hall P
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 2014 Sep; 23(9):1764-72. PubMed ID: 25012995
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Area and volumetric density estimation in processed full-field digital mammograms for risk assessment of breast cancer.
Cheddad A; Czene K; Eriksson M; Li J; Easton D; Hall P; Humphreys K
PLoS One; 2014; 9(10):e110690. PubMed ID: 25329322
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. 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]
33. Comparison of fully and semi-automated area-based methods for measuring mammographic density and predicting breast cancer risk.
Sovio U; Li J; Aitken Z; Humphreys K; Czene K; Moss S; Hall P; McCormack V; dos-Santos-Silva I
Br J Cancer; 2014 Apr; 110(7):1908-16. PubMed ID: 24556624
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Texture features from mammographic images and risk of breast cancer.
Manduca A; Carston MJ; Heine JJ; Scott CG; Pankratz VS; Brandt KR; Sellers TA; Vachon CM; Cerhan JR
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 2009 Mar; 18(3):837-45. PubMed ID: 19258482
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. A quantitative description of the percentage of breast density measurement using full-field digital mammography.
Heine JJ; Cao K; Rollison DE; Tiffenberg G; Thomas JA
Acad Radiol; 2011 May; 18(5):556-64. PubMed ID: 21474058
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. 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]
37. Predicting interval and screen-detected breast cancers from mammographic density defined by different brightness thresholds.
Nguyen TL; Aung YK; Li S; Trinh NH; Evans CF; Baglietto L; Krishnan K; Dite GS; Stone J; English DR; Song YM; Sung J; Jenkins MA; Southey MC; Giles GG; Hopper JL
Breast Cancer Res; 2018 Dec; 20(1):152. PubMed ID: 30545395
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. 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]
39. A novel automated mammographic density measure and breast cancer risk.
Heine JJ; Scott CG; Sellers TA; Brandt KR; Serie DJ; Wu FF; Morton MJ; Schueler BA; Couch FJ; Olson JE; Pankratz VS; Vachon CM
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2012 Jul; 104(13):1028-37. PubMed ID: 22761274
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Fully Automated Quantitative Estimation of Volumetric Breast Density from Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Images: Preliminary Results and Comparison with Digital Mammography and MR Imaging.
Pertuz S; McDonald ES; Weinstein SP; Conant EF; Kontos D
Radiology; 2016 Apr; 279(1):65-74. PubMed ID: 26491909
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
