BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

436 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28715278)

  • 21. Stereoscopic digital mammography: improved specificity and reduced rate of recall in a prospective clinical trial.
    D'Orsi CJ; Getty DJ; Pickett RM; Sechopoulos I; Newell MS; Gundry KR; Bates SR; Nishikawa RM; Sickles EA; Karellas A; D'Orsi EM
    Radiology; 2013 Jan; 266(1):81-8. PubMed ID: 23150865
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. 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]  

  • 23. Can digital breast tomosynthesis replace conventional diagnostic mammography views for screening recalls without calcifications? A comparison study in a simulated clinical setting.
    Brandt KR; Craig DA; Hoskins TL; Henrichsen TL; Bendel EC; Brandt SR; Mandrekar J
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2013 Feb; 200(2):291-8. PubMed ID: 23345348
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Impact of the Addition of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis (DBT) to Standard 2D Digital Screening Mammography on the Rates of Patient Recall, Cancer Detection, and Recommendations for Short-term Follow-up.
    Powell JL; Hawley JR; Lipari AM; Yildiz VO; Erdal BS; Carkaci S
    Acad Radiol; 2017 Mar; 24(3):302-307. PubMed ID: 27919540
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Screening Performance of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis vs Digital Mammography in Community Practice by Patient Age, Screening Round, and Breast Density.
    Lowry KP; Coley RY; Miglioretti DL; Kerlikowske K; Henderson LM; Onega T; Sprague BL; Lee JM; Herschorn S; Tosteson ANA; Rauscher G; Lee CI
    JAMA Netw Open; 2020 Jul; 3(7):e2011792. PubMed ID: 32721031
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Effect of Mammographic Screening Modality on Breast Density Assessment: Digital Mammography versus Digital Breast Tomosynthesis.
    Gastounioti A; McCarthy AM; Pantalone L; Synnestvedt M; Kontos D; Conant EF
    Radiology; 2019 May; 291(2):320-327. PubMed ID: 30888933
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Multicenter Evaluation of Breast Cancer Screening with Digital Breast Tomosynthesis in Combination with Synthetic versus Digital Mammography.
    Zuckerman SP; Sprague BL; Weaver DL; Herschorn SD; Conant EF
    Radiology; 2020 Dec; 297(3):545-553. PubMed ID: 33048032
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Impact on the recall rate of digital breast tomosynthesis as an adjunct to digital mammography in the screening setting. A double reading experience and review of the literature.
    Carbonaro LA; Di Leo G; Clauser P; Trimboli RM; Verardi N; Fedeli MP; Girometti R; Tafà A; Bruscoli P; Saguatti G; Bazzocchi M; Sardanelli F
    Eur J Radiol; 2016 Apr; 85(4):808-14. PubMed ID: 26971428
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Digital Breast Tomosynthesis and Synthetic 2D Mammography versus Digital Mammography: Evaluation in a Population-based Screening Program.
    Hofvind S; Hovda T; Holen ÅS; Lee CI; Albertsen J; Bjørndal H; Brandal SHB; Gullien R; Lømo J; Park D; Romundstad L; Suhrke P; Vigeland E; Skaane P
    Radiology; 2018 Jun; 287(3):787-794. PubMed ID: 29494322
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Baseline Screening Mammography: Performance of Full-Field Digital Mammography Versus Digital Breast Tomosynthesis.
    McDonald ES; McCarthy AM; Akhtar AL; Synnestvedt MB; Schnall M; Conant EF
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2015 Nov; 205(5):1143-8. PubMed ID: 26496565
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Clinical Performance of Synthesized Two-dimensional Mammography Combined with Tomosynthesis in a Large Screening Population.
    Aujero MP; Gavenonis SC; Benjamin R; Zhang Z; Holt JS
    Radiology; 2017 Apr; 283(1):70-76. PubMed ID: 28221096
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. The effect of the addition of tomosynthesis to digital mammography on reader recall rate and reader confidence in the UK prevalent screening round.
    Upadhyay N; Soneji N; Stewart V; Ralleigh G
    Clin Radiol; 2018 Aug; 73(8):744-749. PubMed ID: 29724433
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Choice of imaging method in the work-up of non-calcified breast lesions identified on tomosynthesis screening.
    Porembka JH; Baydoun S; Mootz AR; Xi Y; Dogan BE
    Eur J Radiol; 2020 Oct; 131():109203. PubMed ID: 32771916
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Implementation of Synthesized Two-dimensional Mammography in a Population-based Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Screening Program.
    Zuckerman SP; Conant EF; Keller BM; Maidment AD; Barufaldi B; Weinstein SP; Synnestvedt M; McDonald ES
    Radiology; 2016 Dec; 281(3):730-736. PubMed ID: 27467468
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Screening Mammography Performance Metrics of 2D Digital Mammography Versus Digital Breast Tomosynthesis in Women With a Personal History of Breast Cancer.
    Chikarmane SA; Cochon LR; Khorasani R; Sahu S; Giess CS
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2021 Sep; 217(3):587-594. PubMed ID: 32966113
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. The Potential Impact of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis on the Benign Biopsy Rate in Women Recalled within the UK Breast Screening Programme.
    Sharma N; McMahon M; Haigh I; Chen Y; Dall BJG
    Radiology; 2019 May; 291(2):310-317. PubMed ID: 30888932
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Comparison of digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis in the detection of architectural distortion.
    Dibble EH; Lourenco AP; Baird GL; Ward RC; Maynard AS; Mainiero MB
    Eur Radiol; 2018 Jan; 28(1):3-10. PubMed ID: 28710582
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Screening outcome for consecutive examinations with digital breast tomosynthesis versus standard digital mammography in a population-based screening program.
    Hovda T; Brandal SHB; Sebuødegård S; Holen ÅS; Bjørndal H; Skaane P; Hofvind S
    Eur Radiol; 2019 Dec; 29(12):6991-6999. PubMed ID: 31187221
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Breast cancer screening using tomosynthesis in combination with digital mammography compared to digital mammography alone: a cohort study within the PROSPR consortium.
    Conant EF; Beaber EF; Sprague BL; Herschorn SD; Weaver DL; Onega T; Tosteson AN; McCarthy AM; Poplack SP; Haas JS; Armstrong K; Schnall MD; Barlow WE
    Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2016 Feb; 156(1):109-16. PubMed ID: 26931450
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Assessment of Radiologist Performance in Breast Cancer Screening Using Digital Breast Tomosynthesis vs Digital Mammography.
    Sprague BL; Coley RY; Kerlikowske K; Rauscher GH; Henderson LM; Onega T; Lee CI; Herschorn SD; Tosteson ANA; Miglioretti DL
    JAMA Netw Open; 2020 Mar; 3(3):e201759. PubMed ID: 32227180
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 22.