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 *

191 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34036224)

  • 1. Integrating Clinical and Polygenic Factors to Predict Breast Cancer Risk in Women Undergoing Genetic Testing.
    Hughes E; Tshiaba P; Wagner S; Judkins T; Rosenthal E; Roa B; Gallagher S; Meek S; Dalton K; Hedegard W; Adami CA; Grear DF; Domchek SM; Garber J; Lancaster JM; Weitzel JN; Kurian AW; Lanchbury JS; Gutin A; Robson ME
    JCO Precis Oncol; 2021; 5():. PubMed ID: 34036224
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Comprehensive Breast Cancer Risk Assessment for
    Gallagher S; Hughes E; Kurian AW; Domchek SM; Garber J; Probst B; Morris B; Tshiaba P; Meek S; Rosenthal E; Roa B; Slavin TP; Wagner S; Weitzel J; Gutin A; Lanchbury JS; Robson M
    JCO Precis Oncol; 2021 Jun; 5():. PubMed ID: 34322652
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Comparative validation of the BOADICEA and Tyrer-Cuzick breast cancer risk models incorporating classical risk factors and polygenic risk in a population-based prospective cohort of women of European ancestry.
    Pal Choudhury P; Brook MN; Hurson AN; Lee A; Mulder CV; Coulson P; Schoemaker MJ; Jones ME; Swerdlow AJ; Chatterjee N; Antoniou AC; Garcia-Closas M
    Breast Cancer Res; 2021 Feb; 23(1):22. PubMed ID: 33588869
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Validation of a clinical breast cancer risk assessment tool combining a polygenic score for all ancestries with traditional risk factors.
    Mabey B; Hughes E; Kucera M; Simmons T; Hullinger B; Pederson HJ; Yehia L; Eng C; Garber J; Gary M; Gordon O; Klemp JR; Mukherjee S; Vijai J; Offit K; Olopade OI; Pruthi S; Kurian A; Robson ME; Whitworth PW; Pal T; Ratzel S; Wagner S; Lanchbury JS; Taber KJ; Slavin TP; Gutin A
    Genet Med; 2024 Jul; 26(7):101128. PubMed ID: 38829299
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Performance of the IBIS/Tyrer-Cuzick model of breast cancer risk by race and ethnicity in the Women's Health Initiative.
    Kurian AW; Hughes E; Simmons T; Bernhisel R; Probst B; Meek S; Caswell-Jin JL; John EM; Lanchbury JS; Slavin TP; Wagner S; Gutin A; Rohan TE; Shadyab AH; Manson JE; Lane D; Chlebowski RT; Stefanick ML
    Cancer; 2021 Oct; 127(20):3742-3750. PubMed ID: 34228814
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Breast cancer risk prediction using Tyrer-Cuzick algorithm with an 18-SNPs polygenic risk score in a European population with below-average breast cancer incidence.
    Oblak T; Škerl P; Narang BJ; Blagus R; Krajc M; Novaković S; Žgajnar J
    Breast; 2023 Dec; 72():103590. PubMed ID: 37857130
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Long-term Accuracy of Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Combining Classic Risk Factors and Breast Density.
    Brentnall AR; Cuzick J; Buist DSM; Bowles EJA
    JAMA Oncol; 2018 Sep; 4(9):e180174. PubMed ID: 29621362
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The Tyrer-Cuzick Model Inaccurately Predicts Invasive Breast Cancer Risk in Women With LCIS.
    Valero MG; Zabor EC; Park A; Gilbert E; Newman A; King TA; Pilewskie ML
    Ann Surg Oncol; 2020 Mar; 27(3):736-740. PubMed ID: 31559544
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Evaluation of breast cancer risk assessment packages in the family history evaluation and screening programme.
    Amir E; Evans DG; Shenton A; Lalloo F; Moran A; Boggis C; Wilson M; Howell A
    J Med Genet; 2003 Nov; 40(11):807-14. PubMed ID: 14627668
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Evaluation of the Tyrer-Cuzick (International Breast Cancer Intervention Study) model for breast cancer risk prediction in women with atypical hyperplasia.
    Boughey JC; Hartmann LC; Anderson SS; Degnim AC; Vierkant RA; Reynolds CA; Frost MH; Pankratz VS
    J Clin Oncol; 2010 Aug; 28(22):3591-6. PubMed ID: 20606088
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Assessing the Value of Incorporating a Polygenic Risk Score with Nongenetic Factors for Predicting Breast Cancer Diagnosis in the UK Biobank.
    Collister JA; Liu X; Littlejohns TJ; Cuzick J; Clifton L; Hunter DJ
    Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 2024 Jun; 33(6):812-820. PubMed ID: 38630597
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Use of Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) Curve Analysis for Tyrer-Cuzick and Gail in Breast Cancer Screening in Jiangxi Province, China.
    Zhang L; Jie Z; Xu S; Zhang L; Guo X
    Med Sci Monit; 2018 Aug; 24():5528-5532. PubMed ID: 30089770
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Mammographic density adds accuracy to both the Tyrer-Cuzick and Gail breast cancer risk models in a prospective UK screening cohort.
    Brentnall AR; Harkness EF; Astley SM; Donnelly LS; Stavrinos P; Sampson S; Fox L; Sergeant JC; Harvie MN; Wilson M; Beetles U; Gadde S; Lim Y; Jain A; Bundred S; Barr N; Reece V; Howell A; Cuzick J; Evans DG
    Breast Cancer Res; 2015 Dec; 17(1):147. PubMed ID: 26627479
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The impact of a panel of 18 SNPs on breast cancer risk in women attending a UK familial screening clinic: a case-control study.
    Evans DG; Brentnall A; Byers H; Harkness E; Stavrinos P; Howell A; ; Newman WG; Cuzick J
    J Med Genet; 2017 Feb; 54(2):111-113. PubMed ID: 27794048
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Breast cancer pathology and stage are better predicted by risk stratification models that include mammographic density and common genetic variants.
    Evans DGR; Harkness EF; Brentnall AR; van Veen EM; Astley SM; Byers H; Sampson S; Southworth J; Stavrinos P; Howell SJ; Maxwell AJ; Howell A; Newman WG; Cuzick J
    Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2019 Jul; 176(1):141-148. PubMed ID: 30941651
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A case-control evaluation of 143 single nucleotide polymorphisms for breast cancer risk stratification with classical factors and mammographic density.
    Brentnall AR; van Veen EM; Harkness EF; Rafiq S; Byers H; Astley SM; Sampson S; Howell A; Newman WG; Cuzick J; Evans DGR
    Int J Cancer; 2020 Apr; 146(8):2122-2129. PubMed ID: 31251818
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Estimating the Cost of 3 Risk Prediction Strategies for Potential Use in the United Kingdom National Breast Screening Program.
    Wright SJ; Eden M; Ruane H; Byers H; Evans DG; Harvie M; Howell SJ; Howell A; French D; Payne K
    MDM Policy Pract; 2023; 8(1):23814683231171363. PubMed ID: 37152662
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Integration of a Cross-Ancestry Polygenic Model With Clinical Risk Factors Improves Breast Cancer Risk Stratification.
    Tshiaba PT; Ratman DK; Sun JM; Tunstall TS; Levy B; Shah PS; Weitzel JN; Rabinowitz M; Kumar A; Im KM
    JCO Precis Oncol; 2023 Feb; 7():e2200447. PubMed ID: 36809055
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Distribution of Estimated Lifetime Breast Cancer Risk Among Women Undergoing Screening Mammography.
    Niell BL; Augusto B; McIntyre M; Conley CC; Gerke T; Roetzheim R; Garcia J; Vadaparampil ST
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2021 Jul; 217(1):48-55. PubMed ID: 33978450
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Variation in Breast Cancer Risk Model Estimates Among Women in Their 40s Seen in Primary Care.
    Schonberg MA; Karamourtopoulos M; Pinheiro A; Davis RB; Sternberg SB; Mehta TS; Gilliam EA; Tung NM
    J Womens Health (Larchmt); 2022 Apr; 31(4):495-502. PubMed ID: 35073183
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.