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 *

140 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 35368407)

  • 1. Do the variations in ROI placement technique have influence for prostate ADC measurements?
    Ueno Y; Tamada T; Sofue K; Urase Y; Hinata N; Fujisawa M; Murakami T
    Acta Radiol Open; 2022 Mar; 11(3):20584601221086500. PubMed ID: 35368407
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Values of Prostate Cancer: Comparison of 2D and 3D ROIs.
    Tamada T; Huang C; Ream JM; Taffel M; Taneja SS; Rosenkrantz AB
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2018 Jan; 210(1):113-117. PubMed ID: 29045185
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) measurement in ovarian tumor: Effect of region-of-interest methods on ADC values and diagnostic ability.
    Mukuda N; Fujii S; Inoue C; Fukunaga T; Tanabe Y; Itamochi H; Ogawa T
    J Magn Reson Imaging; 2016 Mar; 43(3):720-5. PubMed ID: 26201495
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Impact of measurement method on interobserver variability of apparent diffusion coefficient of lesions in prostate MRI.
    Takahashi H; Yoshida K; Kawashima A; Lee NJ; Froemming AT; Adamo DA; Khandelwal A; Bolan CW; Heller MT; Hartman RP; Kim B; Philbrick KA; Carter RE; Mynderse LA; Humphreys MR; Cai JC; Takahashi N
    PLoS One; 2022; 17(5):e0268829. PubMed ID: 35604891
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) measurement in endometrial carcinoma: effect of region of interest methods on ADC values.
    Inoue C; Fujii S; Kaneda S; Fukunaga T; Kaminou T; Kigawa J; Harada T; Ogawa T
    J Magn Reson Imaging; 2014 Jul; 40(1):157-61. PubMed ID: 24677497
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Diffusion-weighted imaging of breast lesions: Region-of-interest placement and different ADC parameters influence apparent diffusion coefficient values.
    Bickel H; Pinker K; Polanec S; Magometschnigg H; Wengert G; Spick C; Bogner W; Bago-Horvath Z; Helbich TH; Baltzer P
    Eur Radiol; 2017 May; 27(5):1883-1892. PubMed ID: 27578047
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Effect of Inter-Reader Variability on Diffusion-Weighted MRI Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Measurements and Prediction of Pathologic Complete Response for Breast Cancer.
    Le NN; Li W; Onishi N; Newitt DC; Gibbs JE; Wilmes LJ; Kornak J; Partridge SC; LeStage B; Price ER; Joe BN; Esserman LJ; Hylton NM
    Tomography; 2022 Apr; 8(3):1208-1220. PubMed ID: 35645385
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Evaluation of Diffusion Kurtosis Imaging Versus Standard Diffusion Imaging for Detection and Grading of Peripheral Zone Prostate Cancer.
    Roethke MC; Kuder TA; Kuru TH; Fenchel M; Hadaschik BA; Laun FB; Schlemmer HP; Stieltjes B
    Invest Radiol; 2015 Aug; 50(8):483-9. PubMed ID: 25867657
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in the characterization of testicular germ cell neoplasms: Effect of ROI methods on apparent diffusion coefficient values and interobserver variability.
    Tsili AC; Ntorkou A; Astrakas L; Xydis V; Tsampalas S; Sofikitis N; Argyropoulou MI
    Eur J Radiol; 2017 Apr; 89():1-6. PubMed ID: 28267523
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. MRI-Derived Restriction Spectrum Imaging Cellularity Index is Associated with High Grade Prostate Cancer on Radical Prostatectomy Specimens.
    Liss MA; White NS; Parsons JK; Schenker-Ahmed NM; Rakow-Penner R; Kuperman JM; Bartsch H; Choi HW; Mattrey RF; Bradley WG; Shabaik A; Huang J; Margolis DJ; Raman SS; Marks LS; Kane CJ; Reiter RE; Dale AM; Karow DS
    Front Oncol; 2015; 5():30. PubMed ID: 25741473
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Multiparametric MRI in detection and staging of prostate cancer.
    Boesen L
    Dan Med J; 2017 Feb; 64(2):. PubMed ID: 28157066
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Diffusion Weighted Imaging for Differentiating Benign from Malignant Orbital Tumors: Diagnostic Performance of the Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Based on Region of Interest Selection Method.
    Xu XQ; Hu H; Su GY; Liu H; Shi HB; Wu FY
    Korean J Radiol; 2016; 17(5):650-6. PubMed ID: 27587953
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Diffusion-weighted quantitative MRI of pleural abnormalities: Intra- and interobserver variability in the apparent diffusion coefficient measurements.
    Priola AM; Priola SM; Gned D; Giraudo MT; Brundu M; Righi L; Veltri A
    J Magn Reson Imaging; 2017 Sep; 46(3):769-782. PubMed ID: 28117923
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Assessment and quantification of sources of variability in breast apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) measurements at diffusion weighted imaging.
    Giannotti E; Waugh S; Priba L; Davis Z; Crowe E; Vinnicombe S
    Eur J Radiol; 2015 Sep; 84(9):1729-36. PubMed ID: 26078100
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Apparent diffusion coefficient measurements in diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging of the anterior mediastinum: inter-observer reproducibility of five different methods of region-of-interest positioning.
    Priola AM; Priola SM; Parlatano D; Gned D; Giraudo MT; Giardino R; Ferrero B; Ardissone F; Veltri A
    Eur Radiol; 2017 Apr; 27(4):1386-1394. PubMed ID: 27516357
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Does normalisation improve the diagnostic performance of apparent diffusion coefficient values for prostate cancer assessment? A blinded independent-observer evaluation.
    Rosenkrantz AB; Khalef V; Xu W; Babb JS; Taneja SS; Doshi AM
    Clin Radiol; 2015 Sep; 70(9):1032-7. PubMed ID: 26126712
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Performance of apparent diffusion coefficient values and ratios for the prediction of prostate cancer aggressiveness across different MRI acquisition settings.
    Karaarslan E; Altan Kus A; Alis D; Karaarslan UC; Saglican Y; Argun OB; Kural AR
    Diagn Interv Radiol; 2022 Jan; 28(1):12-20. PubMed ID: 35142611
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Quantitative Assessment of Bladder Cancer Reflects Grade and Recurrence: Comparing of Three Methods of Positioning Region of Interest for ADC Measurements at Diffusion-weighted MR Imaging.
    Li H; Liu L; Ding L; Zhang Z; Zhang M
    Acad Radiol; 2019 Sep; 26(9):1148-1153. PubMed ID: 30503834
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Comparison of the Diagnostic Performances of Three Techniques of ROI Placement for ADC Measurements in Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma.
    Liu L; Ma C; Li J; Wang L; Chen LG; Zhang Y; Chen SY; Lu JP
    Acad Radiol; 2015 Nov; 22(11):1385-92. PubMed ID: 26292914
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Tumour ADC measurements in rectal cancer: effect of ROI methods on ADC values and interobserver variability.
    Lambregts DM; Beets GL; Maas M; Curvo-Semedo L; Kessels AG; Thywissen T; Beets-Tan RG
    Eur Radiol; 2011 Dec; 21(12):2567-74. PubMed ID: 21822946
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.