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 *

388 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27139264)

  • 21. Use of BI-RADS 3-probably benign category in the American College of Radiology Imaging Network Digital Mammographic Imaging Screening Trial.
    Baum JK; Hanna LG; Acharyya S; Mahoney MC; Conant EF; Bassett LW; Pisano ED
    Radiology; 2011 Jul; 260(1):61-7. PubMed ID: 21502382
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Screening US in patients with mammographically dense breasts: initial experience with Connecticut Public Act 09-41.
    Hooley RJ; Greenberg KL; Stackhouse RM; Geisel JL; Butler RS; Philpotts LE
    Radiology; 2012 Oct; 265(1):59-69. PubMed ID: 22723501
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Revisiting the mammographic follow-up of BI-RADS category 3 lesions.
    Varas X; Leborgne JH; Leborgne F; Mezzera J; Jaumandreu S; Leborgne F
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2002 Sep; 179(3):691-5. PubMed ID: 12185047
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Diagnostic accuracy and recall rates for digital mammography and digital mammography combined with one-view and two-view tomosynthesis: results of an enriched reader study.
    Rafferty EA; Park JM; Philpotts LE; Poplack SP; Sumkin JH; Halpern EF; Niklason LT
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2014 Feb; 202(2):273-81. PubMed ID: 24450665
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. [Evaluation of the results after using of the BI-RADS categories in 1,777 clinical mammograms].
    Hauth EA; Khan K; Wolfgarten B; Betzler A; Kimmig R; Forsting M
    Radiologe; 2008 Mar; 48(3):281-8. PubMed ID: 17265008
    [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. Value of one-view breast tomosynthesis versus two-view mammography in diagnostic workup of women with clinical signs and symptoms and in women recalled from screening.
    Waldherr C; Cerny P; Altermatt HJ; Berclaz G; Ciriolo M; Buser K; Sonnenschein MJ
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2013 Jan; 200(1):226-31. PubMed ID: 23255766
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Imaging and Histopathologic Features of BI-RADS 3 Lesions Upgraded during Imaging Surveillance.
    Michaels A; Chung CS; Birdwell RL; Frost EP; Giess CS
    Breast J; 2017 Jan; 23(1):10-16. PubMed ID: 27612001
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. BI-RADS Category 5 Assessments at Diagnostic Breast Imaging:Outcomes Analysis Based on Lesion Descriptors.
    Yao MM; Joe BN; Sickles EA; Lee CS
    Acad Radiol; 2019 Aug; 26(8):1048-1052. PubMed ID: 30195413
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Cancer Yield and Patterns of Follow-up for BI-RADS Category 3 after Screening Mammography Recall in the National Mammography Database.
    Berg WA; Berg JM; Sickles EA; Burnside ES; Zuley ML; Rosenberg RD; Lee CS
    Radiology; 2020 Jul; 296(1):32-41. PubMed ID: 32427557
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Characterization of Breast Masses in Digital Breast Tomosynthesis and Digital Mammograms: An Observer Performance Study.
    Chan HP; Helvie MA; Hadjiiski L; Jeffries DO; Klein KA; Neal CH; Noroozian M; Paramagul C; Roubidoux MA
    Acad Radiol; 2017 Nov; 24(11):1372-1379. PubMed ID: 28647388
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Mammographic density measured with quantitative computer-aided method: comparison with radiologists' estimates and BI-RADS categories.
    Martin KE; Helvie MA; Zhou C; Roubidoux MA; Bailey JE; Paramagul C; Blane CE; Klein KA; Sonnad SS; Chan HP
    Radiology; 2006 Sep; 240(3):656-65. PubMed ID: 16857974
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Changes in recall type and patient treatment following implementation of screening digital breast tomosynthesis.
    Lourenco AP; Barry-Brooks M; Baird GL; Tuttle A; Mainiero MB
    Radiology; 2015 Feb; 274(2):337-42. PubMed ID: 25247407
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Outcomes of unconventional utilization of BI-RADS category 3 assessment at opportunistic screening.
    Altas H; Tureli D; Cengic I; Kucukkaya F; Aribal E; Kaya H
    Acta Radiol; 2016 Nov; 57(11):1304-1309. PubMed ID: 26019241
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Comparison Between Digital and Synthetic 2D Mammograms in Breast Density Interpretation.
    Alshafeiy TI; Wadih A; Nicholson BT; Rochman CM; Peppard HR; Patrie JT; Harvey JA
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2017 Jul; 209(1):W36-W41. PubMed ID: 28504593
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Detection of mammographically occult architectural distortion on digital breast tomosynthesis screening: initial clinical experience.
    Partyka L; Lourenco AP; Mainiero MB
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2014 Jul; 203(1):216-22. PubMed ID: 24951218
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Outcome of Architectural Distortion Detected Only at Breast Tomosynthesis versus 2D Mammography.
    Alshafeiy TI; Nguyen JV; Rochman CM; Nicholson BT; Patrie JT; Harvey JA
    Radiology; 2018 Jul; 288(1):38-46. PubMed ID: 29584593
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Two-view and single-view tomosynthesis versus full-field digital mammography: high-resolution X-ray imaging observer study.
    Wallis MG; Moa E; Zanca F; Leifland K; Danielsson M
    Radiology; 2012 Mar; 262(3):788-96. PubMed ID: 22274840
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Changes in the Utilization of the BI-RADS Category 3 Assessment in Recalled Patients Before and After the Implementation of Screening Digital Breast Tomosynthesis.
    Stepanek T; Constantinou N; Marshall H; Pham R; Thompson C; Dubchuk C; Plecha D
    Acad Radiol; 2019 Nov; 26(11):1515-1525. PubMed ID: 30665715
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. A comparison of full-field digital mammograms versus 2D synthesized mammograms for detection of microcalcifications on screening.
    Wahab RA; Lee SJ; Zhang B; Sobel L; Mahoney MC
    Eur J Radiol; 2018 Oct; 107():14-19. PubMed ID: 30292258
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 20.