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 *

597 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25567532)

  • 1. The use of the Gail model, body mass index and SNPs to predict breast cancer among women with abnormal (BI-RADS 4) mammograms.
    McCarthy AM; Keller B; Kontos D; Boghossian L; McGuire E; Bristol M; Chen J; Domchek S; Armstrong K
    Breast Cancer Res; 2015 Jan; 17(1):1. PubMed ID: 25567532
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Longitudinal measurement of clinical mammographic breast density to improve estimation of breast cancer risk.
    Kerlikowske K; Ichikawa L; Miglioretti DL; Buist DS; Vacek PM; Smith-Bindman R; Yankaskas B; Carney PA; Ballard-Barbash R;
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 2007 Mar; 99(5):386-95. PubMed ID: 17341730
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. Breast cancer risk prediction and mammography biopsy decisions: a model-based study.
    Armstrong K; Handorf EA; Chen J; Bristol Demeter MN
    Am J Prev Med; 2013 Jan; 44(1):15-22. PubMed ID: 23253645
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. Assessment of clinical validity of a breast cancer risk model combining genetic and clinical information.
    Mealiffe ME; Stokowski RP; Rhees BK; Prentice RL; Pettinger M; Hinds DA
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 2010 Nov; 102(21):1618-27. PubMed ID: 20956782
    [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. Patient navigation to improve follow-up of abnormal mammograms among disadvantaged women.
    Percac-Lima S; Ashburner JM; McCarthy AM; Piawah S; Atlas SJ
    J Womens Health (Larchmt); 2015 Feb; 24(2):138-43. PubMed ID: 25522246
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Predicting risk of breast cancer in postmenopausal women by hormone receptor status.
    Chlebowski RT; Anderson GL; Lane DS; Aragaki AK; Rohan T; Yasmeen S; Sarto G; Rosenberg CA; Hubbell FA;
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 2007 Nov; 99(22):1695-705. PubMed ID: 18000216
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Assessment of BI-RADS category 4 lesions detected with screening mammography and screening US: utility of MR imaging.
    Strobel K; Schrading S; Hansen NL; Barabasch A; Kuhl CK
    Radiology; 2015 Feb; 274(2):343-51. PubMed ID: 25271857
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Factors Impacting False Positive Recall in Screening Mammography.
    Honig EL; Mullen LA; Amir T; Alvin MD; Jones MK; Ambinder EB; Falomo ET; Harvey SC
    Acad Radiol; 2019 Nov; 26(11):1505-1512. PubMed ID: 30772138
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Comparison of Clinical and Automated Breast Density Measurements: Implications for Risk Prediction and Supplemental Screening.
    Brandt KR; Scott CG; Ma L; Mahmoudzadeh AP; Jensen MR; Whaley DH; Wu FF; Malkov S; Hruska CB; Norman AD; Heine J; Shepherd J; Pankratz VS; Kerlikowske K; Vachon CM
    Radiology; 2016 Jun; 279(3):710-9. PubMed ID: 26694052
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Role of Clinical and Imaging Risk Factors in Predicting Breast Cancer Diagnosis Among BI-RADS 4 Cases.
    Hsu W; Zhou X; Petruse A; Chau N; Lee-Felker S; Hoyt A; Wenger N; Elashoff D; Naeim A
    Clin Breast Cancer; 2019 Feb; 19(1):e142-e151. PubMed ID: 30366654
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Mammography screening and the risk of breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: a prospective study.
    Giannakeas V; Lubinski J; Gronwald J; Moller P; Armel S; Lynch HT; Foulkes WD; Kim-Sing C; Singer C; Neuhausen SL; Friedman E; Tung N; Senter L; Sun P; Narod SA
    Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2014 Aug; 147(1):113-8. PubMed ID: 25082516
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Risk stratification of women with false-positive test results in mammography screening based on mammographic morphology and density: A case control study.
    Winkel RR; Euler-Chelpin MV; Lynge E; Diao P; Lillholm M; Kallenberg M; Forman JL; Nielsen MB; Uldall WY; Nielsen M; Vejborg I
    Cancer Epidemiol; 2017 Aug; 49():53-60. PubMed ID: 28558329
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Breast carcinoma screening and risk perception among women at increased risk for breast carcinoma: results from a national survey.
    Sabatino SA; Burns RB; Davis RB; Phillips RS; Chen YH; McCarthy EP
    Cancer; 2004 Jun; 100(11):2338-46. PubMed ID: 15160336
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Mammographic screening in women at increased risk of breast cancer after treatment of Hodgkin's disease.
    Kwong A; Hancock SL; Bloom JR; Pal S; Birdwell RL; Mariscal C; Ikeda DM
    Breast J; 2008; 14(1):39-48. PubMed ID: 18186864
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The Gail model predicts breast cancer in women with suspicious radiographic lesions.
    Weik JL; Lum SS; Esquivel PA; Tully RJ; Bae WC; Petersen FF; Jaque JM; Reeves ME; Garberoglio CA
    Am J Surg; 2005 Oct; 190(4):526-9. PubMed ID: 16164914
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Mammography in asymptomatic women aged 40-49 years.
    Silva FX; Katz L; Souza AS; Amorim MM
    Rev Saude Publica; 2014 Dec; 48(6):931-9. PubMed ID: 26039396
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. False-negative rate of combined mammography and ultrasound for women with palpable breast masses.
    Chan CH; Coopey SB; Freer PE; Hughes KS
    Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2015 Oct; 153(3):699-702. PubMed ID: 26341750
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 30.