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.
2. Comparison of the performance of screening mammography, physical examination, and breast US and evaluation of factors that influence them: an analysis of 27,825 patient evaluations. Kolb TM; Lichy J; Newhouse JH Radiology; 2002 Oct; 225(1):165-75. PubMed ID: 12355001 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Short-term follow-up of palpable breast lesions with benign imaging features: evaluation of 375 lesions in 320 women. Harvey JA; Nicholson BT; Lorusso AP; Cohen MA; Bovbjerg VE AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2009 Dec; 193(6):1723-30. PubMed ID: 19933671 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Follow-up of palpable circumscribed noncalcified solid breast masses at mammography and US: can biopsy be averted? Graf O; Helbich TH; Fuchsjaeger MH; Hopf G; Morgun M; Graf C; Mallek R; Sickles EA Radiology; 2004 Dec; 233(3):850-6. PubMed ID: 15486217 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Light scanning versus mammography in breast cancer detection. Monsees B; Destouet JM; Totty WG Radiology; 1987 May; 163(2):463-5. PubMed ID: 3562828 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The abnormal mammogram in women with clinically normal breasts. Sterns EE Can J Surg; 1995 Apr; 38(2):168-72. PubMed ID: 7728672 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Negative predictive value of sonography with mammography in patients with palpable breast lesions. Soo MS; Rosen EL; Baker JA; Vo TT; Boyd BA AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2001 Nov; 177(5):1167-70. PubMed ID: 11641195 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Mammography and ultrasound in the diagnosis of contralateral breast cancer. Rissanen TJ; Mäkäräinen HP; Apaja-Sarkkinen MA; Lindholm EL Acta Radiol; 1995 Jul; 36(4):358-66. PubMed ID: 7619612 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Prospective multicenter cohort study to refine management recommendations for women at elevated familial risk of breast cancer: the EVA trial. Kuhl C; Weigel S; Schrading S; Arand B; Bieling H; König R; Tombach B; Leutner C; Rieber-Brambs A; Nordhoff D; Heindel W; Reiser M; Schild HH J Clin Oncol; 2010 Mar; 28(9):1450-7. PubMed ID: 20177029 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Small (< 2.0-cm) breast cancers: mammographic and US findings at US-guided cryoablation--initial experience. Roubidoux MA; Sabel MS; Bailey JE; Kleer CG; Klein KA; Helvie MA Radiology; 2004 Dec; 233(3):857-67. PubMed ID: 15567802 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. [The use of echography and US-guided percutaneous puncture in addition to mammography for the detection of malignant breast tumors]. Matricardi L; Lovati R; Nazzaro V; Guarneri A; Calzoni G; Gagliano E; Donato F Radiol Med; 1992 Apr; 83(4):395-401. PubMed ID: 1318561 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Mammography screening for breast cancer in Copenhagen April 1991-March 1997. Mammography Screening Evaluation Group. Lynge E APMIS Suppl; 1998; 83():1-44. PubMed ID: 9850674 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Detection of breast carcinoma: comparison of automated water-path whole-breast sonography, mammography, and physical examination. Egan RL; Egan KL AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1984 Sep; 143(3):493-7. PubMed ID: 6331727 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Breast MR imaging screening in 192 women proved or suspected to be carriers of a breast cancer susceptibility gene: preliminary results. Kuhl CK; Schmutzler RK; Leutner CC; Kempe A; Wardelmann E; Hocke A; Maringa M; Pfeifer U; Krebs D; Schild HH Radiology; 2000 Apr; 215(1):267-79. PubMed ID: 10751498 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Twenty-year follow-up breast screening project. Letton AH; Mason EM; Ramshaw B J Med Assoc Ga; 1996 Jan; 85(1):31-2. PubMed ID: 8583185 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast improves detection of invasive cancer, preinvasive cancer, and premalignant lesions during surveillance of women at high risk for breast cancer. Riedl CC; Ponhold L; Flöry D; Weber M; Kroiss R; Wagner T; Fuchsjäger M; Helbich TH Clin Cancer Res; 2007 Oct; 13(20):6144-52. PubMed ID: 17947480 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. [The "EVA" Trial: Evaluation of the Efficacy of Diagnostic Methods (Mammography, Ultrasound, MRI) in the secondary and tertiary prevention of familial breast cancer. Preliminary results after the first half of the study period]. Kuhl CK; Schrading S; Weigel S; Nüssle-Kügele K; Sittek H; Arand B; Morakkabati N; Leutner C; Tombach B; Nordhoff D; Perlet C; Rieber A; Heindel W; Brambs HJ; Schild H Rofo; 2005 Jun; 177(6):818-27. PubMed ID: 15902631 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Breast biopsy avoidance: the value of normal mammograms and normal sonograms in the setting of a palpable lump. Dennis MA; Parker SH; Klaus AJ; Stavros AT; Kaske TI; Clark SB Radiology; 2001 Apr; 219(1):186-91. PubMed ID: 11274555 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Breast cancers detected by breast MRI screening and ultrasound in asymptomatic Asian women: 8 years of experience in Taiwan. Cheng YC; Wu NY; Ko JS; Lin PW; Lin WC; Juang SJ; Tsai TT; Chang CY; Chen JH; Cheng HC Oncology; 2012; 82(2):98-107. PubMed ID: 22328009 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A decade of breast cancer screening in The Netherlands: trends in the preoperative diagnosis of breast cancer. Duijm LE; Groenewoud JH; Roumen RM; de Koning HJ; Plaisier ML; Fracheboud J Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2007 Nov; 106(1):113-9. PubMed ID: 17219049 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]