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 *

185 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23298122)

  • 1. Breast density measurements with ultrasound tomography: a comparison with film and digital mammography.
    Duric N; Boyd N; Littrup P; Sak M; Myc L; Li C; West E; Minkin S; Martin L; Yaffe M; Schmidt S; Faiz M; Shen J; Melnichouk O; Li Q; Albrecht T
    Med Phys; 2013 Jan; 40(1):013501. PubMed ID: 23298122
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Volumetric breast density evaluation from ultrasound tomography images.
    Glide-Hurst CK; Duric N; Littrup P
    Med Phys; 2008 Sep; 35(9):3988-97. PubMed ID: 18841850
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Ultrasound Tomography Evaluation of Breast Density: A Comparison With Noncontrast Magnetic Resonance Imaging.
    OʼFlynn EAM; Fromageau J; Ledger AE; Messa A; DʼAquino A; Schoemaker MJ; Schmidt M; Duric N; Swerdlow AJ; Bamber JC
    Invest Radiol; 2017 Jun; 52(6):343-348. PubMed ID: 28121639
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Whole Breast Sound Speed Measurement from US Tomography Correlates Strongly with Volumetric Breast Density from Mammography.
    Sak M; Littrup P; Brem R; Duric N
    J Breast Imaging; 2020; 2(5):443-451. PubMed ID: 33015618
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Using Speed of Sound Imaging to Characterize Breast Density.
    Sak M; Duric N; Littrup P; Bey-Knight L; Ali H; Vallieres P; Sherman ME; Gierach GL
    Ultrasound Med Biol; 2017 Jan; 43(1):91-103. PubMed ID: 27692872
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. Cancer cases from ACRIN digital mammographic imaging screening trial: radiologist analysis with use of a logistic regression model.
    Pisano ED; Acharyya S; Cole EB; Marques HS; Yaffe MJ; Blevins M; Conant EF; Hendrick RE; Baum JK; Fajardo LL; Jong RA; Koomen MA; Kuzmiak CM; Lee Y; Pavic D; Yoon SC; Padungchaichote W; Gatsonis C
    Radiology; 2009 Aug; 252(2):348-57. PubMed ID: 19703878
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. Diagnostic accuracy of digital versus film mammography: exploratory analysis of selected population subgroups in DMIST.
    Pisano ED; Hendrick RE; Yaffe MJ; Baum JK; Acharyya S; Cormack JB; Hanna LA; Conant EF; Fajardo LL; Bassett LW; D'Orsi CJ; Jong RA; Rebner M; Tosteson AN; Gatsonis CA;
    Radiology; 2008 Feb; 246(2):376-83. PubMed ID: 18227537
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Reader variability in breast density estimation from full-field digital mammograms: the effect of image postprocessing on relative and absolute measures.
    Keller BM; Nathan DL; Gavenonis SC; Chen J; Conant EF; Kontos D
    Acad Radiol; 2013 May; 20(5):560-8. PubMed ID: 23465381
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Diagnostic performance of digital versus film mammography for breast-cancer screening.
    Pisano ED; Gatsonis C; Hendrick E; Yaffe M; Baum JK; Acharyya S; Conant EF; Fajardo LL; Bassett L; D'Orsi C; Jong R; Rebner M;
    N Engl J Med; 2005 Oct; 353(17):1773-83. PubMed ID: 16169887
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. A new method for quantitative analysis of mammographic density.
    Glide-Hurst CK; Duric N; Littrup P
    Med Phys; 2007 Nov; 34(11):4491-8. PubMed ID: 18072514
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Breast percent density: estimation on digital mammograms and central tomosynthesis projections.
    Bakic PR; Carton AK; Kontos D; Zhang C; Troxel AB; Maidment AD
    Radiology; 2009 Jul; 252(1):40-9. PubMed ID: 19420321
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Comparison Between Digital and Synthetic 2D Mammograms in Breast Density Interpretation.
    Alshafeiy TI; Wadih A; Nicholson BT; Rochman CM; Peppard HR; Patrie JT; Harvey JA
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2017 Jul; 209(1):W36-W41. PubMed ID: 28504593
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Mammographic density and cancer detection: does digital imaging challenge our current understanding?
    Al Mousa DS; Mello-Thoms C; Ryan EA; Lee WB; Pietrzyk MW; Reed WM; Heard R; Poulos A; Tan J; Li Y; Brennan PC
    Acad Radiol; 2014 Nov; 21(11):1377-85. PubMed ID: 25097013
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of breast masses using digitized images versus screen-film mammography.
    Liang Z; Du X; Liu J; Yao X; Yang Y; Li K
    Acta Radiol; 2008 Jul; 49(6):618-22. PubMed ID: 18568552
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.