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 *

342 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31453765)

  • 1. Performance of Dual-Energy Contrast-enhanced Digital Mammography for Screening Women at Increased Risk of Breast Cancer.
    Sung JS; Lebron L; Keating D; D'Alessio D; Comstock CE; Lee CH; Pike MC; Ayhan M; Moskowitz CS; Morris EA; Jochelson MS
    Radiology; 2019 Oct; 293(1):81-88. PubMed ID: 31453765
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Contrast-Enhanced Digital Mammography Screening for Intermediate-Risk Women With a History of Lobular Neoplasia.
    Hogan MP; Amir T; Sevilimedu V; Sung J; Morris EA; Jochelson MS
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2021 Jun; 216(6):1486-1491. PubMed ID: 33787291
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Low energy mammogram obtained in contrast-enhanced digital mammography (CEDM) is comparable to routine full-field digital mammography (FFDM).
    Francescone MA; Jochelson MS; Dershaw DD; Sung JS; Hughes MC; Zheng J; Moskowitz C; Morris EA
    Eur J Radiol; 2014 Aug; 83(8):1350-5. PubMed ID: 24932846
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced digital mammography in breast cancer detection in comparison to tomosynthesis, synthetic 2D mammography and tomosynthesis combined with ultrasound in women with dense breast.
    Sudhir R; Sannapareddy K; Potlapalli A; Krishnamurthy PB; Buddha S; Koppula V
    Br J Radiol; 2021 Feb; 94(1118):20201046. PubMed ID: 33242249
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital mammography: initial clinical results.
    Dromain C; Thibault F; Muller S; Rimareix F; Delaloge S; Tardivon A; Balleyguier C
    Eur Radiol; 2011 Mar; 21(3):565-74. PubMed ID: 20839001
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Diagnostic Accuracy of Screening Contrast-enhanced Mammography for Women with Extremely Dense Breasts at Increased Risk of Breast Cancer.
    Nissan N; Comstock CE; Sevilimedu V; Gluskin J; Mango VL; Hughes M; Ochoa-Albiztegui RE; Sung JS; Jochelson MS
    Radiology; 2024 Oct; 313(1):e232580. PubMed ID: 39352285
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Contrast-Enhanced Spectral Mammography in Women With Intermediate Breast Cancer Risk and Dense Breasts.
    Sorin V; Yagil Y; Yosepovich A; Shalmon A; Gotlieb M; Neiman OH; Sklair-Levy M
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2018 Nov; 211(5):W267-W274. PubMed ID: 30240292
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Which clinical, radiological, histological, and molecular parameters are associated with the absence of enhancement of known breast cancers with Contrast Enhanced Digital Mammography (CEDM)?
    Bicchierai G; Amato F; Vanzi B; De Benedetto D; Boeri C; Vanzi E; Di Naro F; Bianchi S; Cirone D; Cozzi D; Miele V; Nori J
    Breast; 2020 Dec; 54():15-24. PubMed ID: 32889303
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Contrast-enhanced dual-energy mammography: a promising new imaging tool in breast cancer detection.
    Lalji U; Lobbes M
    Womens Health (Lond); 2014 May; 10(3):289-98. PubMed ID: 24956295
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Digital breast tomosynthesis and contrast-enhanced dual-energy digital mammography alone and in combination compared to 2D digital synthetized mammography and MR imaging in breast cancer detection and classification.
    Petrillo A; Fusco R; Vallone P; Filice S; Granata V; Petrosino T; Rosaria Rubulotta M; Setola SV; Mattace Raso M; Maio F; Raiano C; Siani C; Di Bonito M; Botti G
    Breast J; 2020 May; 26(5):860-872. PubMed ID: 31886607
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Assessing tumor extent on contrast-enhanced spectral mammography versus full-field digital mammography and ultrasound.
    Patel BK; Garza SA; Eversman S; Lopez-Alvarez Y; Kosiorek H; Pockaj BA
    Clin Imaging; 2017; 46():78-84. PubMed ID: 28750354
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Comparison of screening CEDM and MRI for women at increased risk for breast cancer: A pilot study.
    Jochelson MS; Pinker K; Dershaw DD; Hughes M; Gibbons GF; Rahbar K; Robson ME; Mangino DA; Goldman D; Moskowitz CS; Morris EA; Sung JS
    Eur J Radiol; 2017 Dec; 97():37-43. PubMed ID: 29153365
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Comparison of False-Positive Versus True-Positive Findings on Contrast-Enhanced Digital Mammography.
    Amir T; Hogan MP; Jacobs S; Sevilimedu V; Sung J; Jochelson MS
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2022 May; 218(5):797-808. PubMed ID: 34817195
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. Contrast-enhanced digital mammography.
    Dromain C; Balleyguier C; Adler G; Garbay JR; Delaloge S
    Eur J Radiol; 2009 Jan; 69(1):34-42. PubMed ID: 18790584
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Preoperative loco-regional staging of invasive lobular carcinoma with contrast-enhanced digital mammography (CEDM).
    Amato F; Bicchierai G; Cirone D; Depretto C; Di Naro F; Vanzi E; Scaperrotta G; Bartolotta TV; Miele V; Nori J
    Radiol Med; 2019 Dec; 124(12):1229-1237. PubMed ID: 31773458
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Anatomical noise in contrast-enhanced digital mammography. Part I. Single-energy imaging.
    Hill ML; Mainprize JG; Carton AK; Muller S; Ebrahimi M; Jong RA; Dromain C; Yaffe MJ
    Med Phys; 2013 May; 40(5):051910. PubMed ID: 23635280
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Contrast Enhanced Digital Mammography (CEDM) Helps to Safely Reduce Benign Breast Biopsies for Low to Moderately Suspicious Soft Tissue Lesions.
    Zuley ML; Bandos AI; Abrams GS; Ganott MA; Gizienski TA; Hakim CM; Kelly AE; Nair BE; Sumkin JH; Waheed U; Gur D
    Acad Radiol; 2020 Jul; 27(7):969-976. PubMed ID: 31495761
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Contrast enhanced dual energy spectral mammogram, an emerging addendum in breast imaging.
    Kariyappa KD; Gnanaprakasam F; Anand S; Krishnaswami M; Ramachandran M
    Br J Radiol; 2016 Nov; 89(1067):20150609. PubMed ID: 27610475
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

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

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 18.