190 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34981975)
21. Imaging Features of Patients Undergoing Active Surveillance for Ductal Carcinoma in Situ.
Grimm LJ; Ghate SV; Hwang ES; Soo MS
Acad Radiol; 2017 Nov; 24(11):1364-1371. PubMed ID: 28705686
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Necessity of sentinel lymph node biopsy in ductal carcinoma in situ patients: a retrospective analysis.
Shin YD; Lee HM; Choi YJ
BMC Surg; 2021 Mar; 21(1):159. PubMed ID: 33752671
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Histopathologic correlation of residual mammographic microcalcifications after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced breast cancer.
Adrada BE; Huo L; Lane DL; Arribas EM; Resetkova E; Yang W
Ann Surg Oncol; 2015 Apr; 22(4):1111-7. PubMed ID: 25287438
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. 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]
25. Ductal carcinoma in situ diagnosed by breast needle biopsy: Predictors of invasion in the excision specimen.
Doebar SC; de Monyé C; Stoop H; Rothbarth J; Willemsen SP; van Deurzen CH
Breast; 2016 Jun; 27():15-21. PubMed ID: 27212695
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Mammographic predictors of the presence and size of invasive carcinomas associated with malignant microcalcification lesions without a mass.
Stomper PC; Geradts J; Edge SB; Levine EG
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2003 Dec; 181(6):1679-84. PubMed ID: 14627596
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Is there a role of sentinel lymph node biopsy in ductal carcinoma in situ?: analysis of 587 cases.
Goyal A; Douglas-Jones A; Monypenny I; Sweetland H; Stevens G; Mansel RE
Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2006 Aug; 98(3):311-4. PubMed ID: 16552627
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. 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]
29. Noncalcified Ductal Carcinoma In Situ (DCIS): Rate and Predictors of Upgrade to Invasive Carcinoma.
Lamb LR; Kim G; Oseni TO; Bahl M
Acad Radiol; 2021 Mar; 28(3):e71-e76. PubMed ID: 32222328
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Atypical ductal hyperplasia on core biopsy: an automatic trigger for excisional biopsy?
McGhan LJ; Pockaj BA; Wasif N; Giurescu ME; McCullough AE; Gray RJ
Ann Surg Oncol; 2012 Oct; 19(10):3264-9. PubMed ID: 22878619
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. 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]
32. 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]
33. Can algorithmically assessed MRI features predict which patients with a preoperative diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ are upstaged to invasive breast cancer?
Harowicz MR; Saha A; Grimm LJ; Marcom PK; Marks JR; Hwang ES; Mazurowski MA
J Magn Reson Imaging; 2017 Nov; 46(5):1332-1340. PubMed ID: 28181348
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Factors associated with upstaging from ductal carcinoma in situ following core needle biopsy to invasive cancer in subsequent surgical excision.
Kim J; Han W; Lee JW; You JM; Shin HC; Ahn SK; Moon HG; Cho N; Moon WK; Park IA; Noh DY
Breast; 2012 Oct; 21(5):641-5. PubMed ID: 22749854
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Correlation between sonographic findings and clinicopathologic and biologic features of pure ductal carcinoma in situ in 691 patients.
Scoggins ME; Fox PS; Kuerer HM; Rauch GM; Benveniste AP; Park YM; Lari SA; Krishnamurthy S; Yang WT
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2015 Apr; 204(4):878-88. PubMed ID: 25794082
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Mammographic features of calcifications in DCIS: correlation with oestrogen receptor and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status.
Bae MS; Moon WK; Chang JM; Cho N; Park SY; Won JK; Jeon YK; Moon HG; Han W; Park IA
Eur Radiol; 2013 Aug; 23(8):2072-8. PubMed ID: 23512196
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Prediction of Upstaged Ductal Carcinoma In Situ Using Forced Labeling and Domain Adaptation.
Hou R; Mazurowski MA; Grimm LJ; Marks JR; King LM; Maley CC; Hwang ES; Lo JY
IEEE Trans Biomed Eng; 2020 Jun; 67(6):1565-1572. PubMed ID: 31502960
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. 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]
39. Comparison of the association of mammographic density and clinical factors with ductal carcinoma in situ versus invasive ductal breast cancer in Korean women.
Ko H; Shin J; Lee JE; Nam SJ; Nguyen TL; Hopper JL; Song YM
BMC Cancer; 2017 Dec; 17(1):821. PubMed ID: 29207971
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. 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]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
