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 *

476 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26303303)

  • 1. 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]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. Breast Cancer Risk and Mammographic Density Assessed with Semiautomated and Fully Automated Methods and BI-RADS.
    Jeffers AM; Sieh W; Lipson JA; Rothstein JH; McGuire V; Whittemore AS; Rubin DL
    Radiology; 2017 Feb; 282(2):348-355. PubMed ID: 27598536
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. Breast Cancer Risk Associations with Digital Mammographic Density by Pixel Brightness Threshold and Mammographic System.
    Nguyen TL; Choi YH; Aung YK; Evans CF; Trinh NH; Li S; Dite GS; Kim MS; Brennan PC; Jenkins MA; Sung J; Song YM; Hopper JL
    Radiology; 2018 Feb; 286(2):433-442. PubMed ID: 29040039
    [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. 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]  

  • 9. Fully Automated Volumetric Breast Density Estimation from Digital Breast Tomosynthesis.
    Gastounioti A; Pantalone L; Scott CG; Cohen EA; Wu FF; Winham SJ; Jensen MR; Maidment ADA; Vachon CM; Conant EF; Kontos D
    Radiology; 2021 Dec; 301(3):561-568. PubMed ID: 34519572
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. Impact of type of full-field digital image on mammographic density assessment and breast cancer risk estimation: a case-control study.
    Busana MC; Eng A; Denholm R; Dowsett M; Vinnicombe S; Allen S; Dos-Santos-Silva I
    Breast Cancer Res; 2016 Sep; 18(1):96. PubMed ID: 27670914
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Mammographic non-dense area and breast cancer risk in postmenopausal women: a causal inference approach in a case-control study.
    Velásquez García HA; Sobolev BG; Gotay CC; Wilson CM; Lohrisch CA; Lai AS; Aronson KJ; Spinelli JJ
    Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2018 Jul; 170(1):159-168. PubMed ID: 29516373
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. Mammographic density defined by higher than conventional brightness thresholds better predicts breast cancer risk.
    Nguyen TL; Aung YK; Evans CF; Dite GS; Stone J; MacInnis RJ; Dowty JG; Bickerstaffe A; Aujard K; Rommens JM; Song YM; Sung J; Jenkins MA; Southey MC; Giles GG; Apicella C; Hopper JL
    Int J Epidemiol; 2017 Apr; 46(2):652-661. PubMed ID: 28338721
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Predicting interval and screen-detected breast cancers from mammographic density defined by different brightness thresholds.
    Nguyen TL; Aung YK; Li S; Trinh NH; Evans CF; Baglietto L; Krishnan K; Dite GS; Stone J; English DR; Song YM; Sung J; Jenkins MA; Southey MC; Giles GG; Hopper JL
    Breast Cancer Res; 2018 Dec; 20(1):152. PubMed ID: 30545395
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Utility of relative and absolute measures of mammographic density vs clinical risk factors in evaluating breast cancer risk at time of screening mammography.
    Abdolell M; Tsuruda KM; Lightfoot CB; Payne JI; Caines JS; Iles SE
    Br J Radiol; 2016; 89(1059):20150522. PubMed ID: 26689094
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. Parenchymal texture analysis in digital mammography: A fully automated pipeline for breast cancer risk assessment.
    Zheng Y; Keller BM; Ray S; Wang Y; Conant EF; Gee JC; Kontos D
    Med Phys; 2015 Jul; 42(7):4149-60. PubMed ID: 26133615
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The effect of change in body mass index on volumetric measures of mammographic density.
    Hart V; Reeves KW; Sturgeon SR; Reich NG; Sievert LL; Kerlikowske K; Ma L; Shepherd J; Tice JA; Mahmoudzadeh AP; Malkov S; Sprague BL
    Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 2015 Nov; 24(11):1724-30. PubMed ID: 26315554
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 24.