152 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24551380)
1. Genetic variants improve breast cancer risk prediction on mammograms.
Liu J; Page D; Nassif H; Shavlik J; Peissig P; McCarty C; Onitilo AA; Burnside E
AMIA Annu Symp Proc; 2013; 2013():876-85. PubMed ID: 24551380
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Comparing the value of mammographic features and genetic variants in breast cancer risk prediction.
Wu Y; Liu J; Page D; Peissig P; McCarty C; Onitilo AA; Burnside ES
AMIA Annu Symp Proc; 2014; 2014():1228-37. PubMed ID: 25954434
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Computerized analysis of mammographic parenchymal patterns on a large clinical dataset of full-field digital mammograms: robustness study with two high-risk datasets.
Li H; Giger ML; Lan L; Bancroft Brown J; MacMahon A; Mussman M; Olopade OI; Sennett C
J Digit Imaging; 2012 Oct; 25(5):591-8. PubMed ID: 22246204
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Improving breast cancer risk prediction by using demographic risk factors, abnormality features on mammograms and genetic variants.
Feld SI; Woo KM; Alexandridis R; Wu Y; Liu J; Peissig P; Onitilo AA; Cox J; Page CD; Burnside ES
AMIA Annu Symp Proc; 2018; 2018():1253-1262. PubMed ID: 30815167
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Mammographic Breast Density and Common Genetic Variants in Breast Cancer Risk Prediction.
Lee CP; Choi H; Soo KC; Tan MH; Chay WY; Chia KS; Liu J; Li J; Hartman M
PLoS One; 2015; 10(9):e0136650. PubMed ID: 26401662
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Probabilistic computer model developed from clinical data in national mammography database format to classify mammographic findings.
Burnside ES; Davis J; Chhatwal J; Alagoz O; Lindstrom MJ; Geller BM; Littenberg B; Shaffer KA; Kahn CE; Page CD
Radiology; 2009 Jun; 251(3):663-72. PubMed ID: 19366902
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. Using multidimensional mutual information to prioritize mammographic features for breast cancer diagnosis.
Wu Y; Vanness DJ; Burnside ES
AMIA Annu Symp Proc; 2013; 2013():1534-43. PubMed ID: 24551425
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Preliminary investigation of a Bayesian network for mammographic diagnosis of breast cancer.
Kahn CE; Roberts LM; Wang K; Jenks D; Haddawy P
Proc Annu Symp Comput Appl Med Care; 1995; ():208-12. PubMed ID: 8563269
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Comparing Mammography Abnormality Features to Genetic Variants in the Prediction of Breast Cancer in Women Recommended for Breast Biopsy.
Burnside ES; Liu J; Wu Y; Onitilo AA; McCarty CA; Page CD; Peissig PL; Trentham-Dietz A; Kitchner T; Fan J; Yuan M
Acad Radiol; 2016 Jan; 23(1):62-9. PubMed ID: 26514439
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Bayesian network to predict breast cancer risk of mammographic microcalcifications and reduce number of benign biopsy results: initial experience.
Burnside ES; Rubin DL; Fine JP; Shachter RD; Sisney GA; Leung WK
Radiology; 2006 Sep; 240(3):666-73. PubMed ID: 16926323
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Convolutional Neural Network Based Breast Cancer Risk Stratification Using a Mammographic Dataset.
Ha R; Chang P; Karcich J; Mutasa S; Pascual Van Sant E; Liu MZ; Jambawalikar S
Acad Radiol; 2019 Apr; 26(4):544-549. PubMed ID: 30072292
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Power spectral analysis of mammographic parenchymal patterns for breast cancer risk assessment.
Li H; Giger ML; Olopade OI; Chinander MR
J Digit Imaging; 2008 Jun; 21(2):145-52. PubMed ID: 18175183
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Breast cancer risk prediction and individualised screening based on common genetic variation and breast density measurement.
Darabi H; Czene K; Zhao W; Liu J; Hall P; Humphreys K
Breast Cancer Res; 2012 Feb; 14(1):R25. PubMed ID: 22314178
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. 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]
17. Discriminatory power of common genetic variants in personalized breast cancer diagnosis.
Wu Y; Abbey CK; Liu J; Ong I; Peissig P; Onitilo AA; Fan J; Yuan M; Burnside ES
Proc SPIE Int Soc Opt Eng; 2016 Feb; 9787():. PubMed ID: 27279675
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Assessing breast cancer risk within the general screening population: developing a breast cancer risk model to identify higher risk women at mammographic screening.
Abdolell M; Payne JI; Caines J; Tsuruda K; Barnes PJ; Talbot PJ; Tong O; Brown P; Rivers-Bowerman M; Iles S
Eur Radiol; 2020 Oct; 30(10):5417-5426. PubMed ID: 32358648
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. 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]
20. Performance of common genetic variants in breast-cancer risk models.
Wacholder S; Hartge P; Prentice R; Garcia-Closas M; Feigelson HS; Diver WR; Thun MJ; Cox DG; Hankinson SE; Kraft P; Rosner B; Berg CD; Brinton LA; Lissowska J; Sherman ME; Chlebowski R; Kooperberg C; Jackson RD; Buckman DW; Hui P; Pfeiffer R; Jacobs KB; Thomas GD; Hoover RN; Gail MH; Chanock SJ; Hunter DJ
N Engl J Med; 2010 Mar; 362(11):986-93. PubMed ID: 20237344
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
