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 *

353 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29943180)

  • 1. Comparison between software volumetric breast density estimates in breast tomosynthesis and digital mammography images in a large public screening cohort.
    Förnvik D; Förnvik H; Fieselmann A; Lång K; Sartor H
    Eur Radiol; 2019 Jan; 29(1):330-336. PubMed ID: 29943180
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. Breast Density Estimation with Fully Automated Volumetric Method: Comparison to Radiologists' Assessment by BI-RADS Categories.
    Singh T; Sharma M; Singla V; Khandelwal N
    Acad Radiol; 2016 Jan; 23(1):78-83. PubMed ID: 26521687
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. False positives in breast cancer screening with one-view breast tomosynthesis: An analysis of findings leading to recall, work-up and biopsy rates in the Malmö Breast Tomosynthesis Screening Trial.
    Lång K; Nergården M; Andersson I; Rosso A; Zackrisson S
    Eur Radiol; 2016 Nov; 26(11):3899-3907. PubMed ID: 26943342
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. One-view breast tomosynthesis versus two-view mammography in the Malmö Breast Tomosynthesis Screening Trial (MBTST): a prospective, population-based, diagnostic accuracy study.
    Zackrisson S; Lång K; Rosso A; Johnson K; Dustler M; Förnvik D; Förnvik H; Sartor H; Timberg P; Tingberg A; Andersson I
    Lancet Oncol; 2018 Nov; 19(11):1493-1503. PubMed ID: 30322817
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Understanding Clinical Mammographic Breast Density Assessment: a Deep Learning Perspective.
    Mohamed AA; Luo Y; Peng H; Jankowitz RC; Wu S
    J Digit Imaging; 2018 Aug; 31(4):387-392. PubMed ID: 28932980
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Classification of fatty and dense breast parenchyma: comparison of automatic volumetric density measurement and radiologists' classification and their inter-observer variation.
    Østerås BH; Martinsen AC; Brandal SH; Chaudhry KN; Eben E; Haakenaasen U; Falk RS; Skaane P
    Acta Radiol; 2016 Oct; 57(10):1178-85. PubMed ID: 26792823
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. One-view digital breast tomosynthesis as a stand-alone modality for breast cancer detection: do we need more?
    Rodriguez-Ruiz A; Gubern-Merida A; Imhof-Tas M; Lardenoije S; Wanders AJT; Andersson I; Zackrisson S; Lång K; Dustler M; Karssemeijer N; Mann RM; Sechopoulos I
    Eur Radiol; 2018 May; 28(5):1938-1948. PubMed ID: 29230524
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Digital Mammography versus Breast Tomosynthesis: Impact of Breast Density on Diagnostic Performance in Population-based Screening.
    Østerås BH; Martinsen ACT; Gullien R; Skaane P
    Radiology; 2019 Oct; 293(1):60-68. PubMed ID: 31407968
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. A new automated method to evaluate 2D mammographic breast density according to BI-RADS® Atlas Fifth Edition recommendations.
    Balleyguier C; Arfi-Rouche J; Boyer B; Gauthier E; Helin V; Loshkajian A; Ragusa S; Delaloge S
    Eur Radiol; 2019 Jul; 29(7):3830-3838. PubMed ID: 30770972
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Radiologist assessment of breast density by BI-RADS categories versus fully automated volumetric assessment.
    Gweon HM; Youk JH; Kim JA; Son EJ
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2013 Sep; 201(3):692-7. PubMed ID: 23971465
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Radiation dose with digital breast tomosynthesis compared to digital mammography: per-view analysis.
    Gennaro G; Bernardi D; Houssami N
    Eur Radiol; 2018 Feb; 28(2):573-581. PubMed ID: 28819862
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. Estimation of percentage breast tissue density: comparison between digital mammography (2D full field digital mammography) and digital breast tomosynthesis according to different BI-RADS categories.
    Tagliafico AS; Tagliafico G; Cavagnetto F; Calabrese M; Houssami N
    Br J Radiol; 2013 Nov; 86(1031):20130255. PubMed ID: 24029631
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Automated and Clinical Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System Density Measures Predict Risk for Screen-Detected and Interval Cancers: A Case-Control Study.
    Kerlikowske K; Scott CG; Mahmoudzadeh AP; Ma L; Winham S; Jensen MR; Wu FF; Malkov S; Pankratz VS; Cummings SR; Shepherd JA; Brandt KR; Miglioretti DL; Vachon CM
    Ann Intern Med; 2018 Jun; 168(11):757-765. PubMed ID: 29710124
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. Evaluation of automated volumetric breast density software in comparison with visual assessments in an Asian population: A retrospective observational study.
    Rahmat K; Ab Mumin N; Ramli Hamid MT; Fadzli F; Ng WL; Muhammad Gowdh NF
    Medicine (Baltimore); 2020 Sep; 99(39):e22405. PubMed ID: 32991467
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Average glandular dose in paired digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis acquisitions in a population based screening program: effects of measuring breast density, air kerma and beam quality.
    Østerås BH; Skaane P; Gullien R; Martinsen ACT
    Phys Med Biol; 2018 Jan; 63(3):035006. PubMed ID: 29311416
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 18.