175 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32311194)
61. Evaluating wait times from screening to breast cancer diagnosis among women undergoing organised assessment vs usual care.
Chiarelli AM; Muradali D; Blackmore KM; Smith CR; Mirea L; Majpruz V; O'Malley FP; Quan ML; Holloway CM
Br J Cancer; 2017 May; 116(10):1254-1263. PubMed ID: 28359079
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
62. Are prognostic factors more favorable for breast cancer detected by organized screening than by opportunistic screening or clinical diagnosis? A study in Loire-Atlantique (France).
Vanier A; Leux C; Allioux C; Billon-Delacour S; Lombrail P; Molinié F
Cancer Epidemiol; 2013 Oct; 37(5):683-7. PubMed ID: 23880147
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
63. Impact of a prior diagnosis of DCIS on survival from invasive breast cancer.
Sopik V; Iqbal J; Sun P; Narod SA
Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2016 Jul; 158(2):385-93. PubMed ID: 27383477
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
64. Mammography screening and breast cancer mortality in Australia: an aggregate cohort study.
Morrell S; Taylor R; Roder D; Dobson A
J Med Screen; 2012 Mar; 19(1):26-34. PubMed ID: 22345322
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
65. Evolution of the National Breast Screening Programme in Ireland: Two-year interval analysis (2004-2013) of BreastCheck.
Fitzpatrick PE; Greehy G; Mooney MT; Flanagan F; Larke A; Connors A; O'Doherty A
J Med Screen; 2018 Dec; 25(4):191-196. PubMed ID: 29153014
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
66. History of screening by BreastScreen New South Wales of women with invasive breast cancer.
Li M; Warner-Smith M; McGill S; Roder D; Currow D
Cancer Epidemiol; 2020 Feb; 64():101659. PubMed ID: 31855779
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
67. Breast magnetic resonance image screening and ductal lavage in women at high genetic risk for breast carcinoma.
Hartman AR; Daniel BL; Kurian AW; Mills MA; Nowels KW; Dirbas FM; Kingham KE; Chun NM; Herfkens RJ; Ford JM; Plevritis SK
Cancer; 2004 Feb; 100(3):479-89. PubMed ID: 14745863
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
68. Cost-effectiveness of mammography screening for breast cancer in a low socioeconomic group of Iranian women.
Barfar E; Rashidian A; Hosseini H; Nosratnejad S; Barooti E; Zendehdel K
Arch Iran Med; 2014 Apr; 17(4):241-5. PubMed ID: 24724599
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
69. Natural history of breast cancers detected in the Swedish mammography screening programme: a cohort study.
Zahl PH; Gøtzsche PC; Mæhlen J
Lancet Oncol; 2011 Nov; 12(12):1118-24. PubMed ID: 21996169
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
70. The clinical significance of minimal breast cancer: a pathologist's viewpoint.
Wirman JA
Crit Rev Oncol Hematol; 1985; 3(1):35-74. PubMed ID: 2990747
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
71. Screening outcome and surgical treatment during and after the transition from screen-film to digital screening mammography in the south of The Netherlands.
Weber RJ; Nederend J; Voogd AC; Strobbe LJ; Duijm LE
Int J Cancer; 2015 Jul; 137(1):135-43. PubMed ID: 25418512
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
72. Overdiagnosis and overtreatment of breast cancer: microsimulation modelling estimates based on observed screen and clinical data.
de Koning HJ; Draisma G; Fracheboud J; de Bruijn A
Breast Cancer Res; 2006; 8(1):202. PubMed ID: 16524452
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
73. Surveillance for cancer recurrence in long-term young breast cancer survivors randomly selected from a statewide cancer registry.
Jones T; Duquette D; Underhill M; Ming C; Mendelsohn-Victor KE; Anderson B; Milliron KJ; Copeland G; Janz NK; Northouse LL; Duffy SM; Merajver SD; Katapodi MC
Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2018 May; 169(1):141-152. PubMed ID: 29353367
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
74. Prospective validation of the NCI Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool (Gail Model) on 40,000 Australian women.
Nickson C; Procopio P; Velentzis LS; Carr S; Devereux L; Mann GB; James P; Lee G; Wellard C; Campbell I
Breast Cancer Res; 2018 Dec; 20(1):155. PubMed ID: 30572910
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
75. Factors Affecting Breast Cancer Detectability on Digital Breast Tomosynthesis and Two-Dimensional Digital Mammography in Patients with Dense Breasts.
Lee SH; Jang MJ; Kim SM; Yun B; Rim J; Chang JM; Kim B; Choi HY
Korean J Radiol; 2019 Jan; 20(1):58-68. PubMed ID: 30627022
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
76. The detection and diagnosis of early, occult and minimal breast cancer.
Hickey RC; Gallager HS; Dodd GD; Samuels BI; Paulus DD; Moore DL
Adv Surg; 1976; 10():287-312. PubMed ID: 185891
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
77. Effect of organised mammography screening on stage-specific incidence in Norway: population study.
Lousdal ML; Kristiansen IS; Møller B; Støvring H
Br J Cancer; 2016 Mar; 114(5):590-6. PubMed ID: 26835975
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
78. Diagnosis of small sized invasive breast cancer by an Australian mammography screening service: surrogate end-points for mortality reduction.
Rickard M; Donnellan M
Aust N Z J Surg; 1998 Jun; 68(6):415-8. PubMed ID: 9623460
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
79. Obligate Overdiagnosis Due to Mammographic Screening: A Direct Estimate for U.S. Women.
Hendrick RE
Radiology; 2018 May; 287(2):391-397. PubMed ID: 29267146
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
80. Digital mammography screening: association between detection rate and nuclear grade of ductal carcinoma in situ.
Weigel S; Heindel W; Heidinger O; Berkemeyer S; Hense HW
Radiology; 2014 Apr; 271(1):38-44. PubMed ID: 24475843
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
