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)

  • 21. Breast lesion detection and classification: comparison of screen-film mammography and full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading--observer performance study.
    Skaane P; Balleyguier C; Diekmann F; Diekmann S; Piguet JC; Young K; Niklason LT
    Radiology; 2005 Oct; 237(1):37-44. PubMed ID: 16100086
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. 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]  

  • 23. Differences in measured mammographic density in the menstrual cycle.
    Hovhannisyan G; Chow L; Schlosser A; Yaffe MJ; Boyd NF; Martin LJ
    Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 2009 Jul; 18(7):1993-9. PubMed ID: 19567508
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Using Whole Breast Ultrasound Tomography to Improve Breast Cancer Risk Assessment: A Novel Risk Factor Based on the Quantitative Tissue Property of Sound Speed.
    Duric N; Sak M; Fan S; Pfeiffer RM; Littrup PJ; Simon MS; Gorski DH; Ali H; Purrington KS; Brem RF; Sherman ME; Gierach GL
    J Clin Med; 2020 Jan; 9(2):. PubMed ID: 32013177
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Reported mammographic density: film-screen versus digital acquisition.
    Harvey JA; Gard CC; Miglioretti DL; Yankaskas BC; Kerlikowske K; Buist DS; Geller BA; Onega TL;
    Radiology; 2013 Mar; 266(3):752-8. PubMed ID: 23249570
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Volumetric quantification of the effect of aging and hormone replacement therapy on breast composition from digital mammograms.
    Hammann-Kloss JS; Bick U; Fallenberg E; Engelken F
    Eur J Radiol; 2014 Jul; 83(7):1092-1097. PubMed ID: 24788077
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. 2D mammography, digital breast tomosynthesis, and ultrasound: which should be used for the different breast densities in breast cancer screening?
    Starikov A; Drotman M; Hentel K; Katzen J; Min RJ; Arleo EK
    Clin Imaging; 2016; 40(1):68-71. PubMed ID: 26549432
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. 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]  

  • 29. 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]  

  • 30. Digital breast tomosynthesis and breast ultrasound: Additional roles in dense breasts with category 0 at conventional digital mammography.
    Lee WK; Chung J; Cha ES; Lee JE; Kim JH
    Eur J Radiol; 2016 Jan; 85(1):291-296. PubMed ID: 26499000
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Reproductive factors related to childbearing and mammographic breast density.
    Yaghjyan L; Colditz GA; Rosner B; Bertrand KA; Tamimi RM
    Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2016 Jul; 158(2):351-9. PubMed ID: 27351801
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Reduction in false-positive results after introduction of digital mammography: analysis from four population-based breast cancer screening programs in Spain.
    Sala M; Salas D; Belvis F; Sánchez M; Ferrer J; Ibañez J; Román R; Ferrer F; Vega A; Laso MS; Castells X
    Radiology; 2011 Feb; 258(2):388-95. PubMed ID: 21273520
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Analysis of parenchymal texture with digital breast tomosynthesis: comparison with digital mammography and implications for cancer risk assessment.
    Kontos D; Ikejimba LC; Bakic PR; Troxel AB; Conant EF; Maidment AD
    Radiology; 2011 Oct; 261(1):80-91. PubMed ID: 21771961
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Novel approach to evaluating breast density utilizing ultrasound tomography.
    Glide C; Duric N; Littrup P
    Med Phys; 2007 Feb; 34(2):744-53. PubMed ID: 17388192
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. 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]  

  • 36. Combination of digital mammography with semi-automated 3D breast ultrasound.
    Kapur A; Carson PL; Eberhard J; Goodsitt MM; Thomenius K; Lokhandwalla M; Buckley D; Roubidoux MA; Helvie MA; Booi RC; LeCarpentier GL; Erkamp RQ; Chan HP; Fowlkes JB; Thomas J; Landberg C
    Technol Cancer Res Treat; 2004 Aug; 3(4):325-34. PubMed ID: 15270583
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Comparison of direct digital mammography, computed radiography, and film-screen in the French national breast cancer screening program.
    Séradour B; Heid P; Estève J
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2014 Jan; 202(1):229-36. PubMed ID: 24370149
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. 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]  

  • 39. The use of ultrasonography and digital mammography in women under 40 years with symptomatic breast cancer: a 7-year Irish experience.
    Redmond CE; Healy GM; Murphy CF; O'Doherty A; Foster A
    Ir J Med Sci; 2017 Feb; 186(1):63-67. PubMed ID: 27271165
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.