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 *

72 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25150100)

  • 1. Breast cancer screening, body mass index and prognosis benefit.
    Montella M; Grimaldi M; Rinaldo M; Capasso I; D' Aiuto M; D'Aiuto G; Ciliberto G; Crispo A
    J Med Screen; 2014 Sep; 21(3):165-6. PubMed ID: 25150100
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Body mass and breast cancer. Relationship between method of detection and stage of disease.
    Reeves MJ; Newcomb PA; Remington PL; Marcus PM; MacKenzie WR
    Cancer; 1996 Jan; 77(2):301-7. PubMed ID: 8625238
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Late-stage breast cancer among women with recent negative screening mammography: do clinical encounters offer opportunity for earlier detection?
    Mouchawar J; Taplin S; Ichikawa L; Barlow WE; Geiger AM; Weinmann S; Gilbert J; Manos MM; Ulcickas Yood M
    J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr; 2005; (35):39-46. PubMed ID: 16287884
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Breast cancer screening: the evolving evidence.
    Smith RA; Duffy SW; Tabár L
    Oncology (Williston Park); 2012 May; 26(5):471-5, 479-81, 485-6. PubMed ID: 22730603
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The role of mammography screening attendance and detection mode in predicting breast cancer survival-is there added prognostic value?
    Biesheuvel C; Czene K; Orgeás CC; Hall P
    Cancer Epidemiol; 2011 Dec; 35(6):545-50. PubMed ID: 21470933
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Overweight in relation to tumour size and axillary lymph node involvement in postmenopausal breast cancer patients-differences between women invited to vs. not invited to mammography in a randomized screening trial.
    Olsson A; Garne JP; Tengrup I; Zackrisson S; Manjer J
    Cancer Epidemiol; 2009 Jul; 33(1):9-15. PubMed ID: 19679041
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Effectiveness of screening with annual magnetic resonance imaging and mammography: results of the initial screen from the ontario high risk breast screening program.
    Chiarelli AM; Prummel MV; Muradali D; Majpruz V; Horgan M; Carroll JC; Eisen A; Meschino WS; Shumak RS; Warner E; Rabeneck L
    J Clin Oncol; 2014 Jul; 32(21):2224-30. PubMed ID: 24934793
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Breast cancer screening--when do we start and how often should it be done?
    Fenton A; Panay N
    Climacteric; 2011 Oct; 14(5):513-4. PubMed ID: 21910669
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Screening for breast cancer.
    Kumiko S; Hiroshi S; Noriaki O; Tomotaka S
    Ann Intern Med; 2010 Nov; 153(9):618-9; author reply 619. PubMed ID: 21041585
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. [Update on current care guidelines: breast cancer diagnostics and screening].
    Duodecim; 2010; 126(10):1183-5. PubMed ID: 20597348
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Breast and cervical cancer screening in Spain and predictors of adherence.
    Martín-López R; Hernández-Barrera V; De Andres AL; Garrido PC; De Miguel AG; García RJ
    Eur J Cancer Prev; 2010 May; 19(3):239-45. PubMed ID: 20110817
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Dutch digital breast cancer screening: implications for breast cancer care.
    Timmers JM; den Heeten GJ; Adang EM; Otten JD; Verbeek AL; Broeders MJ
    Eur J Public Health; 2012 Dec; 22(6):925-9. PubMed ID: 22158996
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Balancing sensitivity and specificity: sixteen year's of experience from the mammography screening programme in Copenhagen, Denmark.
    Utzon-Frank N; Vejborg I; von Euler-Chelpin M; Lynge E
    Cancer Epidemiol; 2011 Oct; 35(5):393-8. PubMed ID: 21239242
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Cost-effectiveness of screening women with familial risk for breast cancer with magnetic resonance imaging.
    Saadatmand S; Tilanus-Linthorst MM; Rutgers EJ; Hoogerbrugge N; Oosterwijk JC; Tollenaar RA; Hooning M; Loo CE; Obdeijn IM; Heijnsdijk EA; de Koning HJ
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 2013 Sep; 105(17):1314-21. PubMed ID: 23940285
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Breast cancer screening: clinical, radiologic, and biochemical.
    Feldman ED; Oppong BA; Willey SC
    Clin Obstet Gynecol; 2012 Sep; 55(3):662-70. PubMed ID: 22828098
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Controversies regarding mammography, breast self-examination, and clinical breast examination.
    Nelson AL
    Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am; 2013 Sep; 40(3):413-27. PubMed ID: 24021250
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The impact of advances in treatment on the efficacy of mammography screening.
    Jatoi I
    Prev Med; 2011 Sep; 53(3):103-4. PubMed ID: 21722664
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Mammographic screening for breast cancer: 2010.
    Margolies L
    Mt Sinai J Med; 2010; 77(4):398-404. PubMed ID: 20687187
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Breast cancer screening: options beyond the mammogram. The mammogram remains the foundation of breast cancer screening, but variations on this test can improve detection for some women.
    Harv Womens Health Watch; 2014 Jul; 21(11):3. PubMed ID: 25219012
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Screening women at intermediate risk: harm or charm?
    Panizza P; Viganò S; Bonelli L; Bazzocchi M; Belli P; Calabrese M; Caramella D; Corcione S; Del Maschio A; Martincich L; Montemezzi S; Pediconi F; Petrillo A; Sardanelli F; Bruzzi P
    Eur J Radiol; 2012 Sep; 81 Suppl 1():S116-7. PubMed ID: 23083554
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 4.