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 *

110 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30375362)

  • 41. X-ray properties of an anthropomorphic breast phantom for MRI and x-ray imaging.
    Freed M; Badal A; Jennings RJ; de las Heras H; Myers KJ; Badano A
    Phys Med Biol; 2011 Jun; 56(12):3513-33. PubMed ID: 21606556
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Investigating energy deposition in glandular tissues for mammography using multiscale Monte Carlo simulations.
    Oliver PAK; Thomson RM
    Med Phys; 2019 Mar; 46(3):1426-1436. PubMed ID: 30657190
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. Method for determination of the mean fraction of glandular tissue in individual female breasts using mammography.
    Jansen JT; Veldkamp WJ; Thijssen MA; van Woudenberg S; Zoetelief J
    Phys Med Biol; 2005 Dec; 50(24):5953-67. PubMed ID: 16333166
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Mean glandular dose coefficients (D(g)N) for x-ray spectra used in contemporary breast imaging systems.
    Nosratieh A; Hernandez A; Shen SZ; Yaffe MJ; Seibert JA; Boone JM
    Phys Med Biol; 2015 Sep; 60(18):7179-90. PubMed ID: 26348995
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Average glandular dose conversion coefficients for segmented breast voxel models.
    Zankl M; Fill U; Hoeschen C; Panzer W; Regulla D
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 114(1-3):410-4. PubMed ID: 15933148
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. Generation and analysis of clinically relevant breast imaging x-ray spectra.
    Hernandez AM; Seibert JA; Nosratieh A; Boone JM
    Med Phys; 2017 Jun; 44(6):2148-2160. PubMed ID: 28303582
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. Algorithmic scatter correction in dual-energy digital mammography.
    Chen X; Nishikawa RM; Chan ST; Lau BA; Zhang L; Mou X
    Med Phys; 2013 Nov; 40(11):111919. PubMed ID: 24320452
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Two-dimensional breast dosimetry improved using three-dimensional breast image data.
    Boone JM; Hernandez AM; Seibert JA
    Radiol Phys Technol; 2017 Jun; 10(2):129-141. PubMed ID: 28573551
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Composition of mammographic phantom materials.
    Geise RA; Palchevsky A
    Radiology; 1996 Feb; 198(2):347-50. PubMed ID: 8596830
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Dosimetric characterization and organ dose assessment in digital breast tomosynthesis: Measurements and Monte Carlo simulations using voxel phantoms.
    Baptista M; Di Maria S; Barros S; Figueira C; Sarmento M; Orvalho L; Vaz P
    Med Phys; 2015 Jul; 42(7):3788-800. PubMed ID: 26133581
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. A model for optimization of spectral shape in digital mammography.
    Fahrig R; Yaffe MJ
    Med Phys; 1994 Sep; 21(9):1463-71. PubMed ID: 7838058
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Niobium/molybdenum K-edge filtration in mammography: contrast and dose evaluation.
    Calicchia A; Gambaccini M; Indovina PL; Mazzei F; Pugliani L
    Phys Med Biol; 1996 Sep; 41(9):1717-26. PubMed ID: 8884908
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. Population of 224 realistic human subject-based computational breast phantoms.
    Erickson DW; Wells JR; Sturgeon GM; Samei E; Dobbins JT; Segars WP; Lo JY
    Med Phys; 2016 Jan; 43(1):23. PubMed ID: 26745896
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Technical challenges in generalizing calibration techniques for breast density measurements.
    Fowler EEE; Smallwood AM; Khan NZ; Kilpatrick K; Sellers TA; Heine J
    Med Phys; 2019 Feb; 46(2):679-688. PubMed ID: 30525207
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. Mean glandular dose estimation using MCNPX for a digital breast tomosynthesis system with tungsten/aluminum and tungsten/aluminum+silver x-ray anode-filter combinations.
    Ma AK; Darambara DG; Stewart A; Gunn S; Bullard E
    Med Phys; 2008 Dec; 35(12):5278-89. PubMed ID: 19175087
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Measurement of breast density with dual X-ray absorptiometry: feasibility.
    Shepherd JA; Kerlikowske KM; Smith-Bindman R; Genant HK; Cummings SR
    Radiology; 2002 May; 223(2):554-7. PubMed ID: 11997567
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. Breast Radiation Dose With CESM Compared With 2D FFDM and 3D Tomosynthesis Mammography.
    James JR; Pavlicek W; Hanson JA; Boltz TF; Patel BK
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2017 Feb; 208(2):362-372. PubMed ID: 28112559
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Skin models and their impact on mean glandular dose in mammography.
    Massera RT; Tomal A
    Phys Med; 2018 Jul; 51():38-47. PubMed ID: 29673742
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. Breast skin thickness: normal range and causes of thickening shown on film-screen mammography.
    Pope TL; Read ME; Medsker T; Buschi AJ; Brenbridge AN
    J Can Assoc Radiol; 1984 Dec; 35(4):365-8. PubMed ID: 6526847
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Towards the prediction of flow-induced shear stress distributions experienced by breast cancer cells in the lymphatics.
    Morley ST; Newport DT; Walsh MT
    Biomech Model Mechanobiol; 2017 Dec; 16(6):2051-2062. PubMed ID: 28741084
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.