200 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24722754)
1. 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]
2. 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]
3. 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]
4. 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]
5. 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]
6. 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]
7. 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]
8. 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]
9. 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]
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. Volumetric mammographic density: heritability and association with breast cancer susceptibility loci.
Brand JS; Humphreys K; Thompson DJ; Li J; Eriksson M; Hall P; Czene K
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2014 Dec; 106(12):. PubMed ID: 25376863
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. Automatic pectoral muscle segmentation on mediolateral oblique view mammograms.
Kwok SM; Chandrasekhar R; Attikiouzel Y; Rickard MT
IEEE Trans Med Imaging; 2004 Sep; 23(9):1129-40. PubMed ID: 15377122
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Detection and Segmentation of Pectoral Muscle on MLO-View Mammogram Using Enhancement Filter.
Vikhe PS; Thool VR
J Med Syst; 2017 Oct; 41(12):190. PubMed ID: 29071592
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. AutoDensity: an automated method to measure mammographic breast density that predicts breast cancer risk and screening outcomes.
Nickson C; Arzhaeva Y; Aitken Z; Elgindy T; Buckley M; Li M; English DR; Kavanagh AM
Breast Cancer Res; 2013; 15(5):R80. PubMed ID: 24020331
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. High-throughput mammographic-density measurement: a tool for risk prediction of breast cancer.
Li J; Szekely L; Eriksson L; Heddson B; Sundbom A; Czene K; Hall P; Humphreys K
Breast Cancer Res; 2012 Jul; 14(4):R114. PubMed ID: 22846386
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. 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]
19. 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]
20. Pectoral muscle segmentation: a review.
Ganesan K; Acharya UR; Chua KC; Min LC; Abraham KT
Comput Methods Programs Biomed; 2013 Apr; 110(1):48-57. PubMed ID: 23270962
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
