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 *

220 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32853342)

  • 1. Personalizing Breast Cancer Screening Based on Polygenic Risk and Family History.
    van den Broek JJ; Schechter CB; van Ravesteyn NT; Janssens ACJW; Wolfson MC; Trentham-Dietz A; Simard J; Easton DF; Mandelblatt JS; Kraft P; de Koning HJ
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 2021 Apr; 113(4):434-442. PubMed ID: 32853342
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Tailoring Breast Cancer Screening Intervals by Breast Density and Risk for Women Aged 50 Years or Older: Collaborative Modeling of Screening Outcomes.
    Trentham-Dietz A; Kerlikowske K; Stout NK; Miglioretti DL; Schechter CB; Ergun MA; van den Broek JJ; Alagoz O; Sprague BL; van Ravesteyn NT; Near AM; Gangnon RE; Hampton JM; Chandler Y; de Koning HJ; Mandelblatt JS; Tosteson AN;
    Ann Intern Med; 2016 Nov; 165(10):700-712. PubMed ID: 27548583
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Collaborative Modeling of the Benefits and Harms Associated With Different U.S. Breast Cancer Screening Strategies.
    Mandelblatt JS; Stout NK; Schechter CB; van den Broek JJ; Miglioretti DL; Krapcho M; Trentham-Dietz A; Munoz D; Lee SJ; Berry DA; van Ravesteyn NT; Alagoz O; Kerlikowske K; Tosteson AN; Near AM; Hoeffken A; Chang Y; Heijnsdijk EA; Chisholm G; Huang X; Huang H; Ergun MA; Gangnon R; Sprague BL; Plevritis S; Feuer E; de Koning HJ; Cronin KA
    Ann Intern Med; 2016 Feb; 164(4):215-25. PubMed ID: 26756606
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Collaborative Modeling to Compare Different Breast Cancer Screening Strategies: A Decision Analysis for the US Preventive Services Task Force.
    Trentham-Dietz A; Chapman CH; Jayasekera J; Lowry KP; Heckman-Stoddard BM; Hampton JM; Caswell-Jin JL; Gangnon RE; Lu Y; Huang H; Stein S; Sun L; Gil Quessep EJ; Yang Y; Lu Y; Song J; Muñoz DF; Li Y; Kurian AW; Kerlikowske K; O'Meara ES; Sprague BL; Tosteson ANA; Feuer EJ; Berry D; Plevritis SK; Huang X; de Koning HJ; van Ravesteyn NT; Lee SJ; Alagoz O; Schechter CB; Stout NK; Miglioretti DL; Mandelblatt JS
    JAMA; 2024 Jun; 331(22):1947-1960. PubMed ID: 38687505
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Benefits and Harms of Mammography Screening in 75 + Women to Inform Shared Decision-making: a Simulation Modeling Study.
    Jayasekera J; Stein S; Wilson OWA; Wojcik KM; Kamil D; Røssell EL; Abraham LA; O'Meara ES; Schoenborn NL; Schechter CB; Mandelblatt JS; Schonberg MA; Stout NK
    J Gen Intern Med; 2024 Feb; 39(3):428-439. PubMed ID: 38010458
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Benefits and harms of annual, biennial, or triennial breast cancer mammography screening for women at average risk of breast cancer: a systematic review for the European Commission Initiative on Breast Cancer (ECIBC).
    Canelo-Aybar C; Posso M; Montero N; Solà I; Saz-Parkinson Z; Duffy SW; Follmann M; Gräwingholt A; Giorgi Rossi P; Alonso-Coello P
    Br J Cancer; 2022 Mar; 126(4):673-688. PubMed ID: 34837076
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Tipping the balance of benefits and harms to favor screening mammography starting at age 40 years: a comparative modeling study of risk.
    van Ravesteyn NT; Miglioretti DL; Stout NK; Lee SJ; Schechter CB; Buist DS; Huang H; Heijnsdijk EA; Trentham-Dietz A; Alagoz O; Near AM; Kerlikowske K; Nelson HD; Mandelblatt JS; de Koning HJ
    Ann Intern Med; 2012 May; 156(9):609-17. PubMed ID: 22547470
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Personalizing mammography by breast density and other risk factors for breast cancer: analysis of health benefits and cost-effectiveness.
    Schousboe JT; Kerlikowske K; Loh A; Cummings SR
    Ann Intern Med; 2011 Jul; 155(1):10-20. PubMed ID: 21727289
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Benefits and Harms of Mammography Screening for Women With Down Syndrome: a Collaborative Modeling Study.
    Alagoz O; Hajjar A; Chootipongchaivat S; van Ravesteyn NT; Yeh JM; Ergun MA; de Koning HJ; Chicoine B; Martin B
    J Gen Intern Med; 2019 Nov; 34(11):2374-2381. PubMed ID: 31385214
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Trade-Offs Between Harms and Benefits of Different Breast Cancer Screening Intervals Among Low-Risk Women.
    van Ravesteyn NT; Schechter CB; Hampton JM; Alagoz O; van den Broek JJ; Kerlikowske K; Mandelblatt JS; Miglioretti DL; Sprague BL; Stout NK; de Koning HJ; Trentham-Dietz A; Tosteson ANA;
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 2021 Aug; 113(8):1017-1026. PubMed ID: 33515225
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Benefits, harms, and costs for breast cancer screening after US implementation of digital mammography.
    Stout NK; Lee SJ; Schechter CB; Kerlikowske K; Alagoz O; Berry D; Buist DS; Cevik M; Chisholm G; de Koning HJ; Huang H; Hubbard RA; Miglioretti DL; Munsell MF; Trentham-Dietz A; van Ravesteyn NT; Tosteson AN; Mandelblatt JS
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 2014 Jun; 106(6):dju092. PubMed ID: 24872543
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Cost-effectiveness of using artificial intelligence versus polygenic risk score to guide breast cancer screening.
    Mital S; Nguyen HV
    BMC Cancer; 2022 May; 22(1):501. PubMed ID: 35524200
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The impact of risk stratification by polygenic risk and age on breast cancer screening in women aged 40-49 years: a modelling study.
    Huntley C; Torr B; Sud A; Houlston RS; Hingorani AD; Jones ME; Turnbull C
    Lancet; 2023 Nov; 402 Suppl 1():S54. PubMed ID: 37997097
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Risk stratification in breast cancer screening: Cost-effectiveness and harm-benefit ratios for low-risk and high-risk women.
    Sankatsing VDV; van Ravesteyn NT; Heijnsdijk EAM; Broeders MJM; de Koning HJ
    Int J Cancer; 2020 Dec; 147(11):3059-3067. PubMed ID: 32484237
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Identifying Equitable Screening Mammography Strategies for Black Women in the United States Using Simulation Modeling.
    Chapman CH; Schechter CB; Cadham CJ; Trentham-Dietz A; Gangnon RE; Jagsi R; Mandelblatt JS
    Ann Intern Med; 2021 Dec; 174(12):1637-1646. PubMed ID: 34662151
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Mammographic screening interval in relation to tumor characteristics and false-positive risk by race/ethnicity and age.
    O'Meara ES; Zhu W; Hubbard RA; Braithwaite D; Kerlikowske K; Dittus KL; Geller B; Wernli KJ; Miglioretti DL
    Cancer; 2013 Nov; 119(22):3959-67. PubMed ID: 24037812
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Insights Into Breast Cancer Screening: A Computer Simulation of Two Contemporary Screening Strategies.
    Carter KJ; Castro F; Morcos RN
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2018 Mar; 210(3):564-571. PubMed ID: 29323554
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Effects of mammography screening under different screening schedules: model estimates of potential benefits and harms.
    Mandelblatt JS; Cronin KA; Bailey S; Berry DA; de Koning HJ; Draisma G; Huang H; Lee SJ; Munsell M; Plevritis SK; Ravdin P; Schechter CB; Sigal B; Stoto MA; Stout NK; van Ravesteyn NT; Venier J; Zelen M; Feuer EJ;
    Ann Intern Med; 2009 Nov; 151(10):738-47. PubMed ID: 19920274
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Factors Associated with False Positive Results on Screening Mammography in a Population of Predominantly Hispanic Women.
    McGuinness JE; Ueng W; Trivedi MS; Yi HS; David R; Vanegas A; Vargas J; Sandoval R; Kukafka R; Crew KD
    Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 2018 Apr; 27(4):446-453. PubMed ID: 29382701
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

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

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.