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 *

437 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28728854)

  • 1. Potential Use of American College of Radiology BI-RADS Mammography Atlas for Reporting and Assessing Lesions Detected on Dedicated Breast CT Imaging: Preliminary Study.
    Jung HK; Kuzmiak CM; Kim KW; Choi NM; Kim HJ; Langman EL; Yoon S; Steen D; Zeng D; Gao F
    Acad Radiol; 2017 Nov; 24(11):1395-1401. PubMed ID: 28728854
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Inter-reader Variability in the Use of BI-RADS Descriptors for Suspicious Findings on Diagnostic Mammography: A Multi-institution Study of 10 Academic Radiologists.
    Lee AY; Wisner DJ; Aminololama-Shakeri S; Arasu VA; Feig SA; Hargreaves J; Ojeda-Fournier H; Bassett LW; Wells CJ; De Guzman J; Flowers CI; Campbell JE; Elson SL; Retallack H; Joe BN
    Acad Radiol; 2017 Jan; 24(1):60-66. PubMed ID: 27793579
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Breast imaging reporting and data system standardized mammography lexicon: observer variability in lesion description.
    Baker JA; Kornguth PJ; Floyd CE
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1996 Apr; 166(4):773-8. PubMed ID: 8610547
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. BI-RADS lexicon for US and mammography: interobserver variability and positive predictive value.
    Lazarus E; Mainiero MB; Schepps B; Koelliker SL; Livingston LS
    Radiology; 2006 May; 239(2):385-91. PubMed ID: 16569780
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Inter- and intraradiologist variability in the BI-RADS assessment and breast density categories for screening mammograms.
    Redondo A; Comas M; Macià F; Ferrer F; Murta-Nascimento C; Maristany MT; Molins E; Sala M; Castells X
    Br J Radiol; 2012 Nov; 85(1019):1465-70. PubMed ID: 22993385
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Assessment of Interradiologist Agreement Regarding Mammographic Breast Density Classification Using the Fifth Edition of the BI-RADS Atlas.
    Ekpo EU; Ujong UP; Mello-Thoms C; McEntee MF
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2016 May; 206(5):1119-23. PubMed ID: 26999655
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Variability and accuracy in mammographic interpretation using the American College of Radiology Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System.
    Kerlikowske K; Grady D; Barclay J; Frankel SD; Ominsky SH; Sickles EA; Ernster V
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 1998 Dec; 90(23):1801-9. PubMed ID: 9839520
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Breast lesion shape and margin evaluation: BI-RADS based metrics understate radiologists' actual levels of agreement.
    Rawashdeh M; Lewis S; Zaitoun M; Brennan P
    Comput Biol Med; 2018 May; 96():294-298. PubMed ID: 29673997
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Dedicated Three-dimensional Breast Computed Tomography: Lesion Characteristic Perception by Radiologists.
    Kuzmiak CM; Cole EB; Zeng D; Tuttle LA; Steed D; Pisano ED
    J Clin Imaging Sci; 2016; 6():14. PubMed ID: 27195180
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Breast density (BD) assessment with digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT): Agreement between Quantra™ and 5th edition BI-RADS
    Ekpo EU; Mello-Thoms C; Rickard M; Brennan PC; McEntee MF
    Breast; 2016 Dec; 30():185-190. PubMed ID: 27769015
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Measuring mammographic density: comparing a fully automated volumetric assessment versus European radiologists' qualitative classification.
    Sartor H; Lång K; Rosso A; Borgquist S; Zackrisson S; Timberg P
    Eur Radiol; 2016 Dec; 26(12):4354-4360. PubMed ID: 27011371
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Breast imaging reporting and data system lexicon for US: interobserver agreement for assessment of breast masses.
    Abdullah N; Mesurolle B; El-Khoury M; Kao E
    Radiology; 2009 Sep; 252(3):665-72. PubMed ID: 19567644
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Comparison of synthetic mammography, reconstructed from digital breast tomosynthesis, and digital mammography: evaluation of lesion conspicuity and BI-RADS assessment categories.
    Mariscotti G; Durando M; Houssami N; Fasciano M; Tagliafico A; Bosco D; Casella C; Bogetti C; Bergamasco L; Fonio P; Gandini G
    Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2017 Dec; 166(3):765-773. PubMed ID: 28819781
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Comparison of Visual Assessment of Breast Density in BI-RADS 4th and 5th Editions With Automated Volumetric Measurement.
    Youk JH; Kim SJ; Son EJ; Gweon HM; Kim JA
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2017 Sep; 209(3):703-708. PubMed ID: 28657850
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. Nonpalpable breast lesions: impact of a second-opinion review at a breast unit on BI-RADS classification.
    de Margerie-Mellon C; Debry JB; Dupont A; Cuvier C; Giacchetti S; Teixeira L; Espié M; de Bazelaire C
    Eur Radiol; 2021 Aug; 31(8):5913-5923. PubMed ID: 33462625
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Effects of Changes in BI-RADS Density Assessment Guidelines (Fourth Versus Fifth Edition) on Breast Density Assessment: Intra- and Interreader Agreements and Density Distribution.
    Irshad A; Leddy R; Ackerman S; Cluver A; Pavic D; Abid A; Lewis MC
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2016 Dec; 207(6):1366-1371. PubMed ID: 27656766
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Does training in the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) improve biopsy recommendations or feature analysis agreement with experienced breast imagers at mammography?
    Berg WA; D'Orsi CJ; Jackson VP; Bassett LW; Beam CA; Lewis RS; Crewson PE
    Radiology; 2002 Sep; 224(3):871-80. PubMed ID: 12202727
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. A Reliability Comparison of Cone-Beam Breast Computed Tomography and Mammography: Breast Density Assessment Referring to the Fifth Edition of the BI-RADS Atlas.
    Ma Y; Cao Y; Liu A; Yin L; Han P; Li H; Zhang X; Ye Z
    Acad Radiol; 2019 Jun; 26(6):752-759. PubMed ID: 30220584
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Reader variability in reporting breast imaging according to BI-RADS assessment categories (the Florence experience).
    Ciatto S; Houssami N; Apruzzese A; Bassetti E; Brancato B; Carozzi F; Catarzi S; Lamberini MP; Marcelli G; Pellizzoni R; Pesce B; Risso G; Russo F; Scorsolini A
    Breast; 2006 Feb; 15(1):44-51. PubMed ID: 16076556
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 22.