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 *

151 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30100155)

  • 1. Prediction of Cancer Masking in Screening Mammography Using Density and Textural Features.
    Mainprize JG; Alonzo-Proulx O; Alshafeiy TI; Patrie JT; Harvey JA; Yaffe MJ
    Acad Radiol; 2019 May; 26(5):608-619. PubMed ID: 30100155
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Derived mammographic masking measures based on simulated lesions predict the risk of interval cancer after controlling for known risk factors: a case-case analysis.
    Hinton B; Ma L; Mahmoudzadeh AP; Malkov S; Fan B; Greenwood H; Joe B; Lee V; Strand F; Kerlikowske K; Shepherd J
    Med Phys; 2019 Mar; 46(3):1309-1316. PubMed ID: 30697755
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Quantification of masking risk in screening mammography with volumetric breast density maps.
    Holland K; van Gils CH; Mann RM; Karssemeijer N
    Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2017 Apr; 162(3):541-548. PubMed ID: 28161786
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Breast Cancer Risk and Mammographic Density Assessed with Semiautomated and Fully Automated Methods and BI-RADS.
    Jeffers AM; Sieh W; Lipson JA; Rothstein JH; McGuire V; Whittemore AS; Rubin DL
    Radiology; 2017 Feb; 282(2):348-355. PubMed ID: 27598536
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Mammographic density and structural features can individually and jointly contribute to breast cancer risk assessment in mammography screening: a case-control study.
    Winkel RR; von Euler-Chelpin M; Nielsen M; Petersen K; Lillholm M; Nielsen MB; Lynge E; Uldall WY; Vejborg I
    BMC Cancer; 2016 Jul; 16():414. PubMed ID: 27387546
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Predicting interval and screen-detected breast cancers from mammographic density defined by different brightness thresholds.
    Nguyen TL; Aung YK; Li S; Trinh NH; Evans CF; Baglietto L; Krishnan K; Dite GS; Stone J; English DR; Song YM; Sung J; Jenkins MA; Southey MC; Giles GG; Hopper JL
    Breast Cancer Res; 2018 Dec; 20(1):152. PubMed ID: 30545395
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. Can quantitative evaluation of mammographic breast density, "volumetric measurement", predict the masking risk with dense breast tissue? Investigation by comparison with subjective visual estimation by Japanese radiologists.
    Oiwa M; Endo T; Suda N; Morita T; Sato Y; Kawasaki T; Ichihara S
    Breast Cancer; 2019 May; 26(3):349-358. PubMed ID: 30387023
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Sensitivity of screening mammography by density and texture: a cohort study from a population-based screening program in Denmark.
    von Euler-Chelpin M; Lillholm M; Vejborg I; Nielsen M; Lynge E
    Breast Cancer Res; 2019 Oct; 21(1):111. PubMed ID: 31623646
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Risk stratification of women with false-positive test results in mammography screening based on mammographic morphology and density: A case control study.
    Winkel RR; Euler-Chelpin MV; Lynge E; Diao P; Lillholm M; Kallenberg M; Forman JL; Nielsen MB; Uldall WY; Nielsen M; Vejborg I
    Cancer Epidemiol; 2017 Aug; 49():53-60. PubMed ID: 28558329
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The influence of mammogram acquisition on the mammographic density and breast cancer association in the Mayo Mammography Health Study cohort.
    Olson JE; Sellers TA; Scott CG; Schueler BA; Brandt KR; Serie DJ; Jensen MR; Wu FF; Morton MJ; Heine JJ; Couch FJ; Pankratz VS; Vachon CM
    Breast Cancer Res; 2012 Nov; 14(6):R147. PubMed ID: 23152984
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Deep learning networks find unique mammographic differences in previous negative mammograms between interval and screen-detected cancers: a case-case study.
    Hinton B; Ma L; Mahmoudzadeh AP; Malkov S; Fan B; Greenwood H; Joe B; Lee V; Kerlikowske K; Shepherd J
    Cancer Imaging; 2019 Jun; 19(1):41. PubMed ID: 31228956
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Using automated texture features to determine the probability for masking of a tumor on mammography, but not ultrasound.
    Häberle L; Hack CC; Heusinger K; Wagner F; Jud SM; Uder M; Beckmann MW; Schulz-Wendtland R; Wittenberg T; Fasching PA
    Eur J Med Res; 2017 Aug; 22(1):30. PubMed ID: 28854966
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. [Tailored Breast Screening Trial (TBST)].
    Paci E; Mantellini P; Giorgi Rossi P; Falini P; Puliti D;
    Epidemiol Prev; 2013; 37(4-5):317-27. PubMed ID: 24293498
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Mammographic density and risk of breast cancer by mode of detection and tumor size: a case-control study.
    Krishnan K; Baglietto L; Apicella C; Stone J; Southey MC; English DR; Giles GG; Hopper JL
    Breast Cancer Res; 2016 Jun; 18(1):63. PubMed ID: 27316945
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. A novel method of determining breast cancer risk using parenchymal textural analysis of mammography images on an Asian cohort.
    Tan M; Mariapun S; Yip CH; Ng KH; Teo SH
    Phys Med Biol; 2019 Jan; 64(3):035016. PubMed ID: 30577031
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Mammographic breast density: How it affects performance indicators in screening programmes?
    Posso M; Louro J; Sánchez M; Román M; Vidal C; Sala M; Baré M; Castells X;
    Eur J Radiol; 2019 Jan; 110():81-87. PubMed ID: 30599878
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. Novel mammographic image features differentiate between interval and screen-detected breast cancer: a case-case study.
    Strand F; Humphreys K; Cheddad A; Törnberg S; Azavedo E; Shepherd J; Hall P; Czene K
    Breast Cancer Res; 2016 Oct; 18(1):100. PubMed ID: 27716311
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.