334 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26026112)
1. Non-menopausal Status, High Nuclear Grade, Tumor Size >30 mm and Positive Resection Margins Are Predictors of Residual Tumor After Lumpectomy for Ductal Carcinoma In Situ of the Breast.
Joste M; Mendes V; Tixier S; Palpacuer C; Laviolle B; Leveque J; Ouldamer L
Anticancer Res; 2015 Jun; 35(6):3471-7. PubMed ID: 26026112
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The safety of multiple re-excisions after lumpectomy for breast cancer.
Coopey S; Smith BL; Hanson S; Buckley J; Hughes KS; Gadd M; Specht MC
Ann Surg Oncol; 2011 Dec; 18(13):3797-801. PubMed ID: 21630123
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Factors associated with residual disease after initial breast-conserving surgery for ductal carcinoma in situ.
Wei S; Kragel CP; Zhang K; Hameed O
Hum Pathol; 2012 Jul; 43(7):986-93. PubMed ID: 22221704
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Patient age and positive margins are predictive factors of residual tumor on mastectomy specimen after conservative treatment for breast cancer.
Voguet L; Hébert T; Levêque J; Acker O; Mesbah H; Marret H; Porée P; Body G
Breast; 2009 Aug; 18(4):233-7. PubMed ID: 19628389
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Optimal use of re-excision in patients diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer by excisional biopsy treated with breast-conserving therapy.
Caughran JL; Vicini FA; Kestin LL; Dekhne NS; Benitez PR; Goldstein NS
Ann Surg Oncol; 2009 Nov; 16(11):3020-7. PubMed ID: 19636632
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Predictors of surgical margin status in breast-conserving surgery within a breast screening program.
Kurniawan ED; Wong MH; Windle I; Rose A; Mou A; Buchanan M; Collins JP; Miller JA; Gruen RL; Mann GB
Ann Surg Oncol; 2008 Sep; 15(9):2542-9. PubMed ID: 18618180
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Ductal carcinoma in situ: size and resection volume predict margin status.
Melstrom LG; Melstrom KA; Wang EC; Pilewskie M; Winchester DJ
Am J Clin Oncol; 2010 Oct; 33(5):438-42. PubMed ID: 20023569
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Factors affecting successful breast conservation for ductal carcinoma in situ.
Dillon MF; Mc Dermott EW; O'Doherty A; Quinn CM; Hill AD; O'Higgins N
Ann Surg Oncol; 2007 May; 14(5):1618-28. PubMed ID: 17443388
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Sampling of secondary margins decreases the need for re-excision after partial mastectomy.
Guidroz JA; Larrieux G; Liao J; Sugg SL; Scott-Conner CE; Weigel RJ
Surgery; 2011 Oct; 150(4):802-9. PubMed ID: 22000194
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Predictive factors for residual disease in re-excision specimens after breast-conserving surgery.
Atalay C; Irkkan C
Breast J; 2012; 18(4):339-44. PubMed ID: 22616572
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The value of breast lumpectomy margin assessment as a predictor of residual tumor burden in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast.
Neuschatz AC; DiPetrillo T; Steinhoff M; Safaii H; Yunes M; Landa M; Chung M; Cady B; Wazer DE
Cancer; 2002 Apr; 94(7):1917-24. PubMed ID: 11932892
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Ductal carcinoma in situ in core biopsies containing invasive breast cancer: correlation with extensive intraductal component and lumpectomy margins.
Dzierzanowski M; Melville KA; Barnes PJ; MacIntosh RF; Caines JS; Porter GA
J Surg Oncol; 2005 May; 90(2):71-6. PubMed ID: 15844190
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Indication for relumpectomy--a useful scoring system in cases of invasive breast cancer.
Halevy A; Lavy R; Pappo I; Davidson T; Gold-Deutch R; Jeroukhimov I; Shapira Z; Wassermann I; Sandbank J; Chikman B
J Surg Oncol; 2012 Mar; 105(4):376-80. PubMed ID: 21780127
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Implications of New Lumpectomy Margin Guidelines for Breast-Conserving Surgery: Changes in Reexcision Rates and Predicted Rates of Residual Tumor.
Merrill AL; Coopey SB; Tang R; McEvoy MP; Specht MC; Hughes KS; Gadd MA; Smith BL
Ann Surg Oncol; 2016 Mar; 23(3):729-34. PubMed ID: 26467458
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Predictors of residual disease in repeat excisions for lumpectomies with margins less than 0.1 cm.
Rodriguez N; Diaz LK; Wiley EL
Clin Breast Cancer; 2005 Jun; 6(2):169-72. PubMed ID: 16001996
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Margin width is not predictive of residual disease on re-excision in breast conserving therapy.
Hadzikadic Gusic L; McGuire KP; Ozmen T; Soran A; Thomas CR; McAuliffe PF; Diego EJ; Bonaventura M; Johnson RR; Ahrendt GM
J Surg Oncol; 2014 Apr; 109(5):426-30. PubMed ID: 24338603
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Margin index is not a reliable tool for predicting residual disease after breast-conserving surgery for DCIS.
Fisher CS; Klimberg VS; Khan S; Gao F; Margenthaler JA
Ann Surg Oncol; 2011 Oct; 18(11):3155-9. PubMed ID: 21947593
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. The role of reexcision for positive margins in optimizing local disease control after breast-conserving surgery for cancer.
Aziz D; Rawlinson E; Narod SA; Sun P; Lickley HL; McCready DR; Holloway CM
Breast J; 2006; 12(4):331-7. PubMed ID: 16848842
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Review of re-excision for narrow or positive margins of invasive and intraductal carcinoma.
Gupta A; Subhas G; Dubay L; Silapaswan S; Kolachalam R; Kestenberg W; Ferguson L; Jacobs MJ; Gorieil Y; Mittal VK
Am Surg; 2010 Jul; 76(7):731-4. PubMed ID: 20698380
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. [Reexcision for positive margins in the surgery of ductal carcinoma in situ: are there any risk factors?].
Devouge P; Phalippou J; Martin de Beauce S; Kerdraon O; Prolongeau JF; Collinet P; Vinatier D; Boulanger L
Gynecol Obstet Fertil; 2013 Apr; 41(4):228-34. PubMed ID: 23562544
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
