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 *

110 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 6821864)

  • 1. The predictive value of certain mammographic signs in screening for breast cancer.
    Moskowitz M
    Cancer; 1983 Mar; 51(6):1007-11. PubMed ID: 6821864
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The significance of mammographic calcifications in early breast cancer detection.
    Rosselli Del Turco M; Ciatto S; Bravetti P; Pacini P
    Radiol Med; 1986; 72(1-2):7-12. PubMed ID: 3008222
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The predictive value of needle localization mammographically assisted biopsy of the breast.
    Senofsky GM; Davies RJ; Olson L; Skully P; Olshen R
    Surg Gynecol Obstet; 1990 Nov; 171(5):361-5. PubMed ID: 2237718
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Microcalcifications of non-palpable breast lesions detected by ultrasonography: correlation with mammography and histopathology.
    Huang CS; Wu CY; Chu JS; Lin JH; Hsu SM; Chang KJ
    Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 1999 Jun; 13(6):431-6. PubMed ID: 10423808
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Limitations of mammography in the identification of noninfiltrating carcinoma of the breast.
    Sener SF; Candela FC; Paige ML; Bernstein JR; Winchester DP
    Surg Gynecol Obstet; 1988 Aug; 167(2):135-40. PubMed ID: 2840746
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Usefulness and limitations of the Japan Mammography Guidelines for the categorization of microcalcifications.
    Uematsu T; Kasami M; Yuen S
    Breast Cancer; 2008; 15(4):291-7. PubMed ID: 18288569
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Contribution of 99mTc-MIBI scintimammography to the diagnosis of non-palpable breast lesions in relation to mammographic probability of malignancy.
    Carril JM; Gómez-Barquín R; Quirce R; Tabuenca O; Uriarte I; Montero A
    Anticancer Res; 1997; 17(3B):1677-81. PubMed ID: 9179217
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The use of fine-needle aspiration cytology and core biopsy in the assessment of highly suspicious mammographic microcalcifications: analysis of outcome for 182 lesions detected in the setting of a population-based breast cancer screening program.
    Farshid G; Rush G
    Cancer; 2003 Dec; 99(6):357-64. PubMed ID: 14681944
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Impact of full field digital mammography on the classification and mammographic characteristics of interval breast cancers.
    Knox M; O'Brien A; Szabó E; Smith CS; Fenlon HM; McNicholas MM; Flanagan FL
    Eur J Radiol; 2015 Jun; 84(6):1056-61. PubMed ID: 25816990
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Mammographic screening for breast cancer by lateral view only: is it practical?
    Moskowitz M; Libshitz HI
    J Can Assoc Radiol; 1977 Dec; 28(4):259-61. PubMed ID: 925066
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Bayesian network to predict breast cancer risk of mammographic microcalcifications and reduce number of benign biopsy results: initial experience.
    Burnside ES; Rubin DL; Fine JP; Shachter RD; Sisney GA; Leung WK
    Radiology; 2006 Sep; 240(3):666-73. PubMed ID: 16926323
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. An analysis of referral patterns from a breast screening unit.
    Whitehouse GH; Leinster SJ; Al-Sumidaie AM; McDicken IW
    Clin Radiol; 1986 Nov; 37(6):555-9. PubMed ID: 3791852
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Is breast MRI a helpful additional diagnostic test in suspicious mammographic microcalcifications?
    Baltzer PAT; Bennani-Baiti B; Stöttinger A; Bumberger A; Kapetas P; Clauser P
    Magn Reson Imaging; 2018 Feb; 46():70-74. PubMed ID: 29122667
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging in screening detected microcalcification lesions of the breast: is there any value?
    Uematsu T; Yuen S; Kasami M; Uchida Y
    Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2007 Jul; 103(3):269-81. PubMed ID: 17063274
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A prospective comparison of stereotaxic fine-needle aspiration versus stereotaxic core needle biopsy for the diagnosis of mammographic abnormalities.
    Symmans WF; Weg N; Gross J; Cangiarella JF; Tata M; Mazzo JA; Waisman J
    Cancer; 1999 Mar; 85(5):1119-32. PubMed ID: 10091797
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Contrast-enhanced MR imaging in patients with BI-RADS 3-5 microcalcifications.
    Cilotti A; Iacconi C; Marini C; Moretti M; Mazzotta D; Traino C; Naccarato AG; Piagneri V; Giaconi C; Bevilacqua G; Bartolozzi C
    Radiol Med; 2007 Mar; 112(2):272-86. PubMed ID: 17361370
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Assessment of BI-RADS category 4 lesions detected with screening mammography and screening US: utility of MR imaging.
    Strobel K; Schrading S; Hansen NL; Barabasch A; Kuhl CK
    Radiology; 2015 Feb; 274(2):343-51. PubMed ID: 25271857
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Nonpalpable breast lesions: accuracy of prebiopsy mammographic diagnosis.
    Hermann G; Janus C; Schwartz IS; Krivisky B; Bier S; Rabinowitz JG
    Radiology; 1987 Nov; 165(2):323-6. PubMed ID: 3659350
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Specificity of screening in United Kingdom trial of early detection of breast cancer.
    BMJ; 1992 Feb; 304(6823):346-9. PubMed ID: 1540731
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Dual-Energy Contrast-Enhanced Spectral Mammography: Enhancement Analysis on BI-RADS 4 Non-Mass Microcalcifications in Screened Women.
    Cheung YC; Juan YH; Lin YC; Lo YF; Tsai HP; Ueng SH; Chen SC
    PLoS One; 2016; 11(9):e0162740. PubMed ID: 27611215
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.