219 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34052010)
1. Breast ductal carcinoma in situ with micro-invasion versus ductal carcinoma in situ: a comparative analysis of clinicopathological and mammographic findings.
Zhang M; Lin Q; Su XH; Cui CX; Bian TT; Wang CQ; Zhao J; Li LL; Ma JZ; Huang JL
Clin Radiol; 2021 Oct; 76(10):787.e1-787.e7. PubMed ID: 34052010
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Mammographic morphology and distribution of calcifications in ductal carcinoma in situ diagnosed in organized screening.
Hofvind S; Iversen BF; Eriksen L; Styr BM; Kjellevold K; Kurz KD
Acta Radiol; 2011 Jun; 52(5):481-7. PubMed ID: 21498306
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Screening mammography-detected ductal carcinoma in situ: mammographic features based on breast cancer subtypes.
Kim MY; Kim HS; Choi N; Yang JH; Yoo YB; Park KS
Clin Imaging; 2015; 39(6):983-6. PubMed ID: 26259866
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Predictors of Invasive Breast Cancer in Patients With Ductal Carcinoma In Situ in Ultrasound-Guided Core Needle Biopsy.
Shin YJ; Kim SM; Yun B; Jang M; Kim B; Lee SH
J Ultrasound Med; 2019 Feb; 38(2):481-488. PubMed ID: 30069893
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Clinic-Pathological Features of Breast Ductal Carcinoma
Zheng J; Zhou T; Li F; Shi J; Zhang L
Cancer Invest; 2020 Feb; 38(2):113-121. PubMed ID: 31939679
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Can Occult Invasive Disease in Ductal Carcinoma In Situ Be Predicted Using Computer-extracted Mammographic Features?
Shi B; Grimm LJ; Mazurowski MA; Baker JA; Marks JR; King LM; Maley CC; Hwang ES; Lo JY
Acad Radiol; 2017 Sep; 24(9):1139-1147. PubMed ID: 28506510
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Computer-aided heterogeneity analysis in breast MR imaging assessment of ductal carcinoma in situ: Correlating histologic grade and receptor status.
Chou SS; Gombos EC; Chikarmane SA; Giess CS; Jayender J
J Magn Reson Imaging; 2017 Dec; 46(6):1748-1759. PubMed ID: 28371110
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Qualitative Radiogenomics: Association Between BI-RADS Calcification Descriptors and Recurrence Risk as Assessed by the Oncotype DX Ductal Carcinoma In Situ Score.
Woodard GA; Price ER
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2019 Apr; 212(4):919-924. PubMed ID: 30714832
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Determination of the presence and extent of pure ductal carcinoma in situ by mammography and magnetic resonance imaging.
Menell JH; Morris EA; Dershaw DD; Abramson AF; Brogi E; Liberman L
Breast J; 2005; 11(6):382-90. PubMed ID: 16297080
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Differentiation of ductal carcinoma in-situ from benign micro-calcifications by dedicated breast computed tomography.
Aminololama-Shakeri S; Abbey CK; Gazi P; Prionas ND; Nosratieh A; Li CS; Boone JM; Lindfors KK
Eur J Radiol; 2016 Jan; 85(1):297-303. PubMed ID: 26520874
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Clinicopathologic, mammographic, and sonographic features in 1,187 patients with pure ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast by estrogen receptor status.
Rauch GM; Kuerer HM; Scoggins ME; Fox PS; Benveniste AP; Park YM; Lari SA; Hobbs BP; Adrada BE; Krishnamurthy S; Yang WT
Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2013 Jun; 139(3):639-47. PubMed ID: 23774990
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Lesion size is a major determinant of the mammographic features of ductal carcinoma in situ: findings from the Sloane project.
Evans A; Clements K; Maxwell A; Bishop H; Hanby A; Lawrence G; Pinder SE;
Clin Radiol; 2010 Mar; 65(3):181-4. PubMed ID: 20152272
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Mammographic size of ductal carcinoma in situ does not predict the presence of an invasive focus.
Wahedna Y; Evans AJ; Pinder SE; Ellis IO; Blamey RW; Geraghty JG
Eur J Cancer; 2001 Mar; 37(4):459-62. PubMed ID: 11267854
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Growth Dynamics of Mammographic Calcifications: Differentiating Ductal Carcinoma in Situ from Benign Breast Disease.
Grimm LJ; Miller MM; Thomas SM; Liu Y; Lo JY; Hwang ES; Hyslop T; Ryser MD
Radiology; 2019 Jul; 292(1):77-83. PubMed ID: 31112087
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Casting-type calcifications with invasion and high-grade ductal carcinoma in situ: a more aggressive disease?
Zunzunegui RG; Chung MA; Oruwari J; Golding D; Marchant DJ; Cady B
Arch Surg; 2003 May; 138(5):537-40. PubMed ID: 12742959
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Screening-detected calcified and non-calcified ductal carcinoma in situ: differences in the imaging and histopathological features.
Mun HS; Shin HJ; Kim HH; Cha JH; Kim H
Clin Radiol; 2013 Jan; 68(1):e27-35. PubMed ID: 23177096
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Is breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) useful for diagnosis of additional sites of disease in patients recently diagnosed with pure ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS)?
Benveniste AP; Ortiz-Perez T; Ebuoma LO; Sepulveda KA; Severs FJ; Roark A; Wang T; Sedgwick EL
Eur J Radiol; 2017 Nov; 96():74-79. PubMed ID: 29103479
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Non-calcified ductal carcinoma in situ: ultrasound and mammographic findings correlated with histological findings.
Cho KR; Seo BK; Kim CH; Whang KW; Kim YH; Kim BH; Woo OH; Lee YH; Chung KB
Yonsei Med J; 2008 Feb; 49(1):103-10. PubMed ID: 18306476
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Predictive significance of breast-specific gamma imaging for upstaging core-needle biopsy-detected ductal carcinoma in situ to invasive cancer.
Yoo J; Kim BS; Yoon HJ
Ann Nucl Med; 2018 Jun; 32(5):328-336. PubMed ID: 29556944
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Mammographic extent of microcalcifications and oestrogen receptor expression affect preoperative breast carcinoma in situ size estimation.
Vernet-Tomas M; Mojal S; Gamero R; Nicolau P; RodrÃguez-Arana A; Plancarte F; Corominas JM; Serrano-Munne L; Carreras R; Sabadell D
Breast Cancer; 2017 May; 24(3):466-472. PubMed ID: 27639877
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
