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 *

367 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28391808)

  • 1. Fully automated nipple detection in digital breast tomosynthesis.
    Chae SH; Jeong JW; Choi JH; Chae EY; Kim HH; Choi YW; Lee S
    Comput Methods Programs Biomed; 2017 May; 143():113-120. PubMed ID: 28391808
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Computerized nipple identification for multiple image analysis in computer-aided diagnosis.
    Zhou C; Chan HP; Paramagul C; Roubidoux MA; Sahiner B; Hadjiiski LM; Petrick N
    Med Phys; 2004 Oct; 31(10):2871-82. PubMed ID: 15543797
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Mass detection in reconstructed digital breast tomosynthesis volumes with a computer-aided detection system trained on 2D mammograms.
    van Schie G; Wallis MG; Leifland K; Danielsson M; Karssemeijer N
    Med Phys; 2013 Apr; 40(4):041902. PubMed ID: 23556896
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Automatic detection of breast border and nipple in digital mammograms.
    Méndez AJ; Tahoces PG; Lado MJ; Souto M; Correa JL; Vidal JJ
    Comput Methods Programs Biomed; 1996 May; 49(3):253-62. PubMed ID: 8800610
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. A heuristic approach to automated nipple detection in digital mammograms.
    Jas M; Mukhopadhyay S; Chakraborty J; Sadhu A; Khandelwal N
    J Digit Imaging; 2013 Oct; 26(5):932-40. PubMed ID: 23423610
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Comparison of visibility of circumscribed masses on Digital Breast Tomosynthesis (DBT) and 2D mammography: are circumscribed masses better visualized and assured of being benign on DBT?
    Nakashima K; Uematsu T; Itoh T; Takahashi K; Nishimura S; Hayashi T; Sugino T
    Eur Radiol; 2017 Feb; 27(2):570-577. PubMed ID: 27236817
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Fully Automated Quantitative Estimation of Volumetric Breast Density from Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Images: Preliminary Results and Comparison with Digital Mammography and MR Imaging.
    Pertuz S; McDonald ES; Weinstein SP; Conant EF; Kontos D
    Radiology; 2016 Apr; 279(1):65-74. PubMed ID: 26491909
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Generative compressed breast shape model for digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis.
    Pinto MC; Michielsen K; Biniazan R; Kappler S; Sechopoulos I
    Med Phys; 2023 May; 50(5):2928-2938. PubMed ID: 36433824
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Digital breast tomosynthesis versus full-field digital mammography: comparison of the accuracy of lesion measurement and characterization using specimens.
    Seo N; Kim HH; Shin HJ; Cha JH; Kim H; Moon JH; Gong G; Ahn SH; Son BH
    Acta Radiol; 2014 Jul; 55(6):661-7. PubMed ID: 24005560
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Automatic detection of the nipple in screen-film and full-field digital mammograms using a novel Hessian-based method.
    Casti P; Mencattini A; Salmeri M; Ancona A; Mangieri FF; Pepe ML; Rangayyan RM
    J Digit Imaging; 2013 Oct; 26(5):948-57. PubMed ID: 23508373
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Automated Breast Density Computation in Digital Mammography and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: Influence on Mean Glandular Dose and BIRADS Density Categorization.
    Castillo-García M; Chevalier M; Garayoa J; Rodriguez-Ruiz A; García-Pinto D; Valverde J
    Acad Radiol; 2017 Jul; 24(7):802-810. PubMed ID: 28214227
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A Radiomic feature-based Nipple Detection Algorithm on Digital Mammography.
    Jiang J; Zhang Y; Lu Y; Guo Y; Chen H
    Med Phys; 2019 Oct; 46(10):4381-4391. PubMed ID: 31242321
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Computer-aided detection of clustered microcalcifications in digital breast tomosynthesis: a 3D approach.
    Sahiner B; Chan HP; Hadjiiski LM; Helvie MA; Wei J; Zhou C; Lu Y
    Med Phys; 2012 Jan; 39(1):28-39. PubMed ID: 22225272
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Digital breast tomosynthesis: Image acquisition principles and artifacts.
    Sujlana PS; Mahesh M; Vedantham S; Harvey SC; Mullen LA; Woods RW
    Clin Imaging; 2019; 55():188-195. PubMed ID: 30236642
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Correlating locations in ipsilateral breast tomosynthesis views using an analytical hemispherical compression model.
    van Schie G; Tanner C; Snoeren P; Samulski M; Leifland K; Wallis MG; Karssemeijer N
    Phys Med Biol; 2011 Aug; 56(15):4715-30. PubMed ID: 21737868
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Screening for dense breasts: digital breast tomosynthesis.
    Destounis SV; Morgan R; Arieno A
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2015 Feb; 204(2):261-4. PubMed ID: 25615747
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Impact of prior mammograms on combined reading of digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis.
    Kim WH; Chang JM; Koo HR; Seo M; Bae MS; Lee J; Moon WK
    Acta Radiol; 2017 Feb; 58(2):148-155. PubMed ID: 27178032
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. A computer simulation study comparing lesion detection accuracy with digital mammography, breast tomosynthesis, and cone-beam CT breast imaging.
    Gong X; Glick SJ; Liu B; Vedula AA; Thacker S
    Med Phys; 2006 Apr; 33(4):1041-52. PubMed ID: 16696481
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Clinical performance metrics of 3D digital breast tomosynthesis compared with 2D digital mammography for breast cancer screening in community practice.
    Greenberg JS; Javitt MC; Katzen J; Michael S; Holland AE
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2014 Sep; 203(3):687-93. PubMed ID: 24918774
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Computerized mass detection for digital breast tomosynthesis directly from the projection images.
    Reiser I; Nishikawa RM; Giger ML; Wu T; Rafferty EA; Moore R; Kopans DB
    Med Phys; 2006 Feb; 33(2):482-91. PubMed ID: 16532956
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 19.