161 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25714323)
21. 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]
22. Should breast MRI be performed with adjustment for the phase in patients' menstrual cycle? Correlation between mammographic density, age, and background enhancement on breast MRI without adjusting for the phase in patients' menstrual cycle.
Uematsu T; Kasami M; Watanabe J
Eur J Radiol; 2012 Jul; 81(7):1539-42. PubMed ID: 21592704
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Breast-specific gamma imaging for the detection of breast cancer in dense versus nondense breasts.
Rechtman LR; Lenihan MJ; Lieberman JH; Teal CB; Torrente J; Rapelyea JA; Brem RF
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2014 Feb; 202(2):293-8. PubMed ID: 24450668
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. The relationship of mammographic density and age: implications for breast cancer screening.
Checka CM; Chun JE; Schnabel FR; Lee J; Toth H
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2012 Mar; 198(3):W292-5. PubMed ID: 22358028
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Comparison of Background Parenchymal Enhancement at Contrast-enhanced Spectral Mammography and Breast MR Imaging.
Sogani J; Morris EA; Kaplan JB; D'Alessio D; Goldman D; Moskowitz CS; Jochelson MS
Radiology; 2017 Jan; 282(1):63-73. PubMed ID: 27379544
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Characteristics, Malignancy Rate, and Follow-up of BI-RADS Category 3 Lesions Identified at Breast MR Imaging: Implications for MR Image Interpretation and Management.
Chikarmane SA; Birdwell RL; Poole PS; Sippo DA; Giess CS
Radiology; 2016 Sep; 280(3):707-15. PubMed ID: 27089027
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Supplemental Screening for Breast Cancer in Women With Dense Breasts: A Systematic Review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.
Melnikow J; Fenton JJ; Whitlock EP; Miglioretti DL; Weyrich MS; Thompson JH; Shah K
Ann Intern Med; 2016 Feb; 164(4):268-78. PubMed ID: 26757021
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Background echotexture classification in breast ultrasound: inter-observer agreement study.
Kim WH; Lee SH; Chang JM; Cho N; Moon WK
Acta Radiol; 2017 Dec; 58(12):1427-1433. PubMed ID: 28273746
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Histopathologic characteristics of background parenchymal enhancement (BPE) on breast MRI.
Sung JS; Corben AD; Brooks JD; Edelweiss M; Keating DM; Lin C; Morris EA; Patel P; Robson M; Woods M; Bernstein JL; Pike MC
Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2018 Nov; 172(2):487-496. PubMed ID: 30140962
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Foci on breast magnetic resonance imaging in high-risk women: cancer or not?
Clauser P; Cassano E; De Nicolò A; Rotili A; Bonanni B; Bazzocchi M; Zuiani C
Radiol Med; 2016 Aug; 121(8):611-7. PubMed ID: 27169908
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Mammographic density and estimation of breast cancer risk in intermediate risk population.
Tesic V; Kolaric B; Znaor A; Kuna SK; Brkljacic B
Breast J; 2013; 19(1):71-8. PubMed ID: 23173778
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Pilot study of quantitative analysis of background enhancement on breast MR images: association with menstrual cycle and mammographic breast density.
Scaranelo AM; Carrillo MC; Fleming R; Jacks LM; Kulkarni SR; Crystal P
Radiology; 2013 Jun; 267(3):692-700. PubMed ID: 23418005
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. 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]
34. Risk factors and tumor characteristics of interval cancers by mammographic density.
Holm J; Humphreys K; Li J; Ploner A; Cheddad A; Eriksson M; Törnberg S; Hall P; Czene K
J Clin Oncol; 2015 Mar; 33(9):1030-7. PubMed ID: 25646195
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. 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]
36. Mammographic parenchymal pattern and breast cancer risk profile of Papua New Guinean women - A baseline study of the screening population.
Pape R; Spuur K; Umo P
Radiography (Lond); 2017 Nov; 23(4):e93-e98. PubMed ID: 28965910
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Does Mammographic Density have an Impact on the Margin Re-excision Rate After Breast-Conserving Surgery?
Edwards BL; Guidry CA; Larson KN; Novicoff WM; Harvey JA; Schroen AT
Ann Surg Oncol; 2016 Mar; 23(3):782-8. PubMed ID: 26471488
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Accuracy of assigned BI-RADS breast density category definitions.
Nicholson BT; LoRusso AP; Smolkin M; Bovbjerg VE; Petroni GR; Harvey JA
Acad Radiol; 2006 Sep; 13(9):1143-9. PubMed ID: 16935726
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Comparison of background parenchymal enhancement and fibroglandular density at breast magnetic resonance imaging between BRCA gene mutation carriers and non-carriers.
Grubstein A; Rapson Y; Benzaquen O; Rozenblatt S; Gadiel I; Atar E; Yerushalmi R; Cohen MJ
Clin Imaging; 2018; 51():347-351. PubMed ID: 29982132
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Prediction of background parenchymal enhancement on breast MRI using mammography, ultrasonography, and diffusion-weighted imaging.
Kawamura A; Satake H; Ishigaki S; Ikeda M; Kimura R; Shimamoto K; Naganawa S
Nagoya J Med Sci; 2015 Aug; 77(3):425-37. PubMed ID: 26412889
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
