BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

174 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30196816)

  • 1. Effect of Arrival of Prior Mammograms on Recall Negation for Screening Mammograms Performed With Digital Breast Tomosynthesis in a Clinical Setting.
    Hardesty LA; Lind KE; Gutierrez EJ
    J Am Coll Radiol; 2018 Sep; 15(9):1293-1299. PubMed ID: 30196816
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. Impact of prior mammograms on combined reading of digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis.
    Kim WH; Chang JM; Koo HR; Seo M; Bae MS; Lee J; Moon WK
    Acta Radiol; 2017 Feb; 58(2):148-155. PubMed ID: 27178032
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. BI-RADS 3 on dense breast screening ultrasound after digital mammography versus digital breast tomosynthesis.
    Dibble EH; Singer TM; Baird GL; Lourenco AP
    Clin Imaging; 2021 Dec; 80():315-321. PubMed ID: 34482242
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Comparing Diagnostic Performance of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis and Full-Field Digital Mammography in a Hybrid Screening Environment.
    Giess CS; Pourjabbar S; Ip IK; Lacson R; Alper E; Khorasani R
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2017 Oct; 209(4):929-934. PubMed ID: 28639832
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Factors Impacting False Positive Recall in Screening Mammography.
    Honig EL; Mullen LA; Amir T; Alvin MD; Jones MK; Ambinder EB; Falomo ET; Harvey SC
    Acad Radiol; 2019 Nov; 26(11):1505-1512. PubMed ID: 30772138
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. BI-RADS Category 3 Comparison: Probably Benign Category after Recall from Screening before and after Implementation of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis.
    McDonald ES; McCarthy AM; Weinstein SP; Schnall MD; Conant EF
    Radiology; 2017 Dec; 285(3):778-787. PubMed ID: 28715278
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Effect of the Availability of Prior Full-Field Digital Mammography and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Images on the Interpretation of Mammograms.
    Hakim CM; Catullo VJ; Chough DM; Ganott MA; Kelly AE; Shinde DD; Sumkin JH; Wallace LP; Bandos AI; Gur D
    Radiology; 2015 Jul; 276(1):65-72. PubMed ID: 25768673
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Effectiveness of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Compared With Digital Mammography: Outcomes Analysis From 3 Years of Breast Cancer Screening.
    McDonald ES; Oustimov A; Weinstein SP; Synnestvedt MB; Schnall M; Conant EF
    JAMA Oncol; 2016 Jun; 2(6):737-43. PubMed ID: 26893205
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Dense Breast Ultrasound Screening After Digital Mammography Versus After Digital Breast Tomosynthesis.
    Dibble EH; Singer TM; Jimoh N; Baird GL; Lourenco AP
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2019 Dec; 213(6):1397-1402. PubMed ID: 31553658
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Increased Cancer Detection Rate and Variations in the Recall Rate Resulting from Implementation of 3D Digital Breast Tomosynthesis into a Population-based Screening Program.
    Sharpe RE; Venkataraman S; Phillips J; Dialani V; Fein-Zachary VJ; Prakash S; Slanetz PJ; Mehta TS
    Radiology; 2016 Mar; 278(3):698-706. PubMed ID: 26458206
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Clinical implementation of synthesized mammography with digital breast tomosynthesis in a routine clinical practice.
    Freer PE; Riegert J; Eisenmenger L; Ose D; Winkler N; Stein MA; Stoddard GJ; Hess R
    Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2017 Nov; 166(2):501-509. PubMed ID: 28780702
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Comparing Diagnostic Performance of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis and Full-Field Digital Mammography.
    Cochon LR; Giess CS; Khorasani R
    J Am Coll Radiol; 2020 Aug; 17(8):999-1003. PubMed ID: 32068009
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. Comparison of Resource Utilization and Clinical Outcomes Following Screening with Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Versus Digital Mammography: Findings From a Learning Health System.
    Alsheik NH; Dabbous F; Pohlman SK; Troeger KM; Gliklich RE; Donadio GM; Su Z; Menon V; Conant EF
    Acad Radiol; 2019 May; 26(5):597-605. PubMed ID: 30057195
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Characterization of Breast Masses in Digital Breast Tomosynthesis and Digital Mammograms: An Observer Performance Study.
    Chan HP; Helvie MA; Hadjiiski L; Jeffries DO; Klein KA; Neal CH; Noroozian M; Paramagul C; Roubidoux MA
    Acad Radiol; 2017 Nov; 24(11):1372-1379. PubMed ID: 28647388
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Screening Digital Mammography Recall Rate: Does It Change with Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Experience?
    DiPrete O; Lourenco AP; Baird GL; Mainiero MB
    Radiology; 2018 Mar; 286(3):838-844. PubMed ID: 29173123
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.