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 *

185 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29687544)

  • 1. Palpable breast abnormalities in women under age 40.
    Lee MV; Shaw HL; Chi T; Brazeal HA; Holley SO; Appleton CM
    Breast J; 2018 Sep; 24(5):798-805. PubMed ID: 29687544
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Risk of malignancy in palpable solid breast masses considered probably benign or low suspicion: implications for management.
    Giess CS; Smeglin LZ; Meyer JE; Ritner JA; Birdwell RL
    J Ultrasound Med; 2012 Dec; 31(12):1943-9. PubMed ID: 23197547
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. False-negative rate of combined mammography and ultrasound for women with palpable breast masses.
    Chan CH; Coopey SB; Freer PE; Hughes KS
    Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2015 Oct; 153(3):699-702. PubMed ID: 26341750
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Evaluation of abnormal mammography results and palpable breast abnormalities.
    Kerlikowske K; Smith-Bindman R; Ljung BM; Grady D
    Ann Intern Med; 2003 Aug; 139(4):274-84. PubMed ID: 12965983
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Outcomes of solid palpable masses assessed as BI-RADS 3 or 4A: a retrospective review.
    Patterson SK; Neal CH; Jeffries DO; Joe A; Klein K; Bailey J; Pinsky R; Paramagul C; Watcharotone K
    Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2014 Sep; 147(2):311-6. PubMed ID: 25151294
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. BI-RADS 3, 4, and 5 lesions: value of US in management--follow-up and outcome.
    Raza S; Chikarmane SA; Neilsen SS; Zorn LM; Birdwell RL
    Radiology; 2008 Sep; 248(3):773-81. PubMed ID: 18647850
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Targeted ultrasound in women younger than 30 years with focal breast signs or symptoms: outcomes analyses and management implications.
    Loving VA; DeMartini WB; Eby PR; Gutierrez RL; Peacock S; Lehman CD
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2010 Dec; 195(6):1472-7. PubMed ID: 21098212
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Palpable breast masses with probably benign morphology at sonography: can biopsy be deferred?
    Park YM; Kim EK; Lee JH; Ryu JH; Han SS; Choi SJ; Lee SJ; Yoon HK
    Acta Radiol; 2008 Dec; 49(10):1104-11. PubMed ID: 18855166
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Breast Imaging Outcomes following Abnormal Thermography.
    Neal CH; Flynt KA; Jeffries DO; Helvie MA
    Acad Radiol; 2018 Mar; 25(3):273-278. PubMed ID: 29275941
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Shear-wave elastography and greyscale assessment of palpable probably benign masses: is biopsy always required?
    Giannotti E; Vinnicombe S; Thomson K; McLean D; Purdie C; Jordan L; Evans A
    Br J Radiol; 2016 Jun; 89(1062):20150865. PubMed ID: 27007593
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Breast Imaging-Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) classification in 51 excised palpable pediatric breast masses.
    Koning JL; Davenport KP; Poole PS; Kruk PG; Grabowski JE
    J Pediatr Surg; 2015 Oct; 50(10):1746-50. PubMed ID: 25783351
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. [Neddle-guided biopsy in the diagnosis of non-palpable breast cancer].
    Becerra-Alcántara GI; Círigo-Villagómez LL; Ramos-Medina F; Robledo-Martínez H; Mar-Merinos CG; Panzi-Altamirano RM
    Ginecol Obstet Mex; 2015 Jul; 83(7):400-7. PubMed ID: 26422910
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. A Pivotal Study of Optoacoustic Imaging to Diagnose Benign and Malignant Breast Masses: A New Evaluation Tool for Radiologists.
    Neuschler EI; Butler R; Young CA; Barke LD; Bertrand ML; Böhm-Vélez M; Destounis S; Donlan P; Grobmyer SR; Katzen J; Kist KA; Lavin PT; Makariou EV; Parris TM; Schilling KJ; Tucker FL; Dogan BE
    Radiology; 2018 May; 287(2):398-412. PubMed ID: 29178816
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. In the Setting of Negative Mammogram, Is Additional Breast Ultrasound Necessary for Evaluation of Breast Pain?
    Mema E; Cho E; Ryu YK; Jadeja P; Wynn R; Taback B; Ha R
    Curr Probl Diagn Radiol; 2019; 48(2):117-120. PubMed ID: 29402490
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast as a problem-solving method: to be or not to be?
    Oztekin PS; Kosar PN
    Breast J; 2014; 20(6):622-31. PubMed ID: 25200378
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Value of the US BI-RADS final assessment following mastectomy: BI-RADS 4 and 5 lesions.
    Gweon HM; Son EJ; Youk JH; Kim JA; Chung J
    Acta Radiol; 2012 Apr; 53(3):255-60. PubMed ID: 22302210
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. Follow-up of palpable circumscribed noncalcified solid breast masses at mammography and US: can biopsy be averted?
    Graf O; Helbich TH; Fuchsjaeger MH; Hopf G; Morgun M; Graf C; Mallek R; Sickles EA
    Radiology; 2004 Dec; 233(3):850-6. PubMed ID: 15486217
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. [Ultrasound follow-up of palpable solid, probably benign breast lesions (BI-RADS category III)].
    Graf O; Helbich TH; Fuchsjäger MH; Hopf G; Morgun M; Graf C; Mallek R
    Rofo; 2004 Sep; 176(9):1251-6. PubMed ID: 15346259
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Predictive value of BI-RADS classification for breast imaging in women under age 50.
    Kennedy G; Markert M; Alexander JR; Avisar E
    Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2011 Dec; 130(3):819-23. PubMed ID: 21748292
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.