264 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31520277)
21. Breast cancer screening with tomosynthesis (3D mammography) with acquired or synthetic 2D mammography compared with 2D mammography alone (STORM-2): a population-based prospective study.
Bernardi D; Macaskill P; Pellegrini M; Valentini M; Fantò C; Ostillio L; Tuttobene P; Luparia A; Houssami N
Lancet Oncol; 2016 Aug; 17(8):1105-1113. PubMed ID: 27345635
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. The Gothenburg breast screening trial: first results on mortality, incidence, and mode of detection for women ages 39-49 years at randomization.
Bjurstam N; Björneld L; Duffy SW; Smith TC; Cahlin E; Eriksson O; Hafström LO; Lingaas H; Mattsson J; Persson S; Rudenstam CM; Säve-Söderbergh J
Cancer; 1997 Dec; 80(11):2091-9. PubMed ID: 9392331
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Supplemental Breast MR Imaging Screening of Women with Average Risk of Breast Cancer.
Kuhl CK; Strobel K; Bieling H; Leutner C; Schild HH; Schrading S
Radiology; 2017 May; 283(2):361-370. PubMed ID: 28221097
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Diagnostic Accuracy of Digital Screening Mammography With and Without Computer-Aided Detection.
Lehman CD; Wellman RD; Buist DS; Kerlikowske K; Tosteson AN; Miglioretti DL;
JAMA Intern Med; 2015 Nov; 175(11):1828-37. PubMed ID: 26414882
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. The added value of mammography in different age-groups of women with and without BRCA mutation screened with breast MRI.
Vreemann S; van Zelst JCM; Schlooz-Vries M; Bult P; Hoogerbrugge N; Karssemeijer N; Gubern-Mérida A; Mann RM
Breast Cancer Res; 2018 Aug; 20(1):84. PubMed ID: 30075794
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Transfer learning with different modified convolutional neural network models for classifying digital mammograms utilizing Local Dataset.
Mutar MT; Majid M; Ibrahim MJ; Obaid AH; Alsammarraie AZ; Altameemi E; Kareem TF
Gulf J Oncolog; 2023 Jan; 1(41):66-71. PubMed ID: 36804161
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Potential of using mammography screening appointments to identify high-risk women: cross sectional survey results from the national health interview survey.
Narayan AK; Mercaldo SF; Gupta YP; Warner ET; Lehman CD; Miles RC
Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2021 Feb; 186(1):229-235. PubMed ID: 33180237
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Comparison of screening mammography in the United States and the United kingdom.
Smith-Bindman R; Chu PW; Miglioretti DL; Sickles EA; Blanks R; Ballard-Barbash R; Bobo JK; Lee NC; Wallis MG; Patnick J; Kerlikowske K
JAMA; 2003 Oct; 290(16):2129-37. PubMed ID: 14570948
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Mammography screening in the county of Fyn. November 1993-December 1999.
Njor SH; Olsen AH; Bellstrøm T; Dyreborg U; Bak M; Axelsson C; Graversen HP; Schwartz W; Lynge E
APMIS Suppl; 2003; (110):1-33. PubMed ID: 12739252
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Digital versus screen-film mammography: impact of mammographic density and hormone therapy on breast cancer detection.
Chiarelli AM; Prummel MV; Muradali D; Shumak RS; Majpruz V; Brown P; Jiang H; Done SJ; Yaffe MJ
Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2015 Nov; 154(2):377-87. PubMed ID: 26518019
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Deep adversarial domain adaptation for breast cancer screening from mammograms.
Wang Y; Feng Y; Zhang L; Wang Z; Lv Q; Yi Z
Med Image Anal; 2021 Oct; 73():102147. PubMed ID: 34246849
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Joanne Knight Breast Health Cohort at Siteman Cancer Center.
Colditz GA; Bennett DL; Tappenden J; Beers C; Ackermann N; Wu N; Luo J; Humble S; Linnenbringer E; Davis K; Jiang S; Toriola AT
Cancer Causes Control; 2022 Apr; 33(4):623-629. PubMed ID: 35059919
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Using tumor phenotype, histological tumor distribution, and mammographic appearance to explain the survival differences between screen-detected and clinically detected breast cancers.
Chuang SL; Chen SL; Yu CP; Chang KJ; Yen AM; Chiu SY; Fann JC; Tabár L; Stephen DW; Smith RA; Chen HH
APMIS; 2014 Aug; 122(8):699-707. PubMed ID: 25046200
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Mammography screening: A major issue in medicine.
Autier P; Boniol M
Eur J Cancer; 2018 Feb; 90():34-62. PubMed ID: 29272783
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Comparison of digital screening mammography and screen-film mammography in the early detection of clinically relevant cancers: a multicenter study.
Bluekens AM; Holland R; Karssemeijer N; Broeders MJ; den Heeten GJ
Radiology; 2012 Dec; 265(3):707-14. PubMed ID: 23033499
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. An Ad Hoc Random Initialization Deep Neural Network Architecture for Discriminating Malignant Breast Cancer Lesions in Mammographic Images.
Duggento A; Aiello M; Cavaliere C; Cascella GL; Cascella D; Conte G; Guerrisi M; Toschi N
Contrast Media Mol Imaging; 2019; 2019():5982834. PubMed ID: 31249497
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Mammography in symptomatic and asymptomatic patients.
Stomper PC; Gelman RS
Hematol Oncol Clin North Am; 1989 Dec; 3(4):611-40. PubMed ID: 2691492
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Deep Learning Pre-training Strategy for Mammogram Image Classification: an Evaluation Study.
Clancy K; Aboutalib S; Mohamed A; Sumkin J; Wu S
J Digit Imaging; 2020 Oct; 33(5):1257-1265. PubMed ID: 32607908
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Mammography screening for breast cancer in Copenhagen April 1991-March 1997. Mammography Screening Evaluation Group.
Lynge E
APMIS Suppl; 1998; 83():1-44. PubMed ID: 9850674
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Is mammography screening history a predictor of future breast cancer risk?
Andersen SB; Törnberg S; Kilpeläinen S; Von Euler-Chelpin M; Njor SH
Eur J Epidemiol; 2015 Feb; 30(2):143-9. PubMed ID: 25421784
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
