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 *

123 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8259405)

  • 1. Breast cancer in the elderly patient: early detection with mammography.
    Wilson TE; Helvie MA; August DA
    Radiology; 1994 Jan; 190(1):203-7. PubMed ID: 8259405
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Breast cancer in women 65-74 years old: earlier detection by mammographic screening.
    Gabriel H; Wilson TE; Helvie MA
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1997 Jan; 168(1):23-7. PubMed ID: 8976913
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Ability of mammography to reveal nonpalpable breast cancer in women with palpable breast masses.
    Rosen EL; Sickles E; Keating D
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1999 Feb; 172(2):309-12. PubMed ID: 9930773
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Pure and mixed mucinous carcinoma of the breast: pathologic basis for differences in mammographic appearance.
    Wilson TE; Helvie MA; Oberman HA; Joynt LK
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1995 Aug; 165(2):285-9. PubMed ID: 7618541
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Invasive cancers detected after breast cancer screening yielded a negative result: relationship of mammographic density to tumor prognostic factors.
    Roubidoux MA; Bailey JE; Wray LA; Helvie MA
    Radiology; 2004 Jan; 230(1):42-8. PubMed ID: 14695385
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Mammographic screening in women more than 64 years old: a comparison of 1- and 2-year intervals.
    Field LR; Wilson TE; Strawderman M; Gabriel H; Helvie MA
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1998 Apr; 170(4):961-5. PubMed ID: 9530044
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Tubular carcinoma of the breast: mode of presentation, mammographic appearance, and frequency of nodal metastases.
    Elson BC; Helvie MA; Frank TS; Wilson TE; Adler DD
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1993 Dec; 161(6):1173-6. PubMed ID: 8249721
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Screening mammography: value in women 35-39 years old.
    Liberman L; Dershaw DD; Deutch BM; Thaler HT; Lippin BS
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1993 Jul; 161(1):53-6. PubMed ID: 8517320
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Bilateral breast cancer: early detection with mammography.
    Roubidoux MA; Helvie MA; Lai NE; Paramagul C
    Radiology; 1995 Aug; 196(2):427-31. PubMed ID: 7617856
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Stratification of palpable and nonpalpable breast cancer by method of detection and age.
    Perdue PW; Galbo C; Ghosh BC
    Ann Surg Oncol; 1995 Nov; 2(6):512-5. PubMed ID: 8591081
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The comparative value of mammographic screening for women 40-49 years old versus women 50-64 years old.
    Curpen BN; Sickles EA; Sollitto RA; Ominsky SH; Galvin HB; Frankel SD
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1995 May; 164(5):1099-103. PubMed ID: 7717212
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Tubular carcinoma of the breast: mammographic appearance.
    Leibman AJ; Lewis M; Kruse B
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1993 Feb; 160(2):263-5. PubMed ID: 8424330
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Palpable presentation of breast cancer persists in the era of screening mammography.
    Mathis KL; Hoskin TL; Boughey JC; Crownhart BS; Brandt KR; Vachon CM; Grant CS; Degnim AC
    J Am Coll Surg; 2010 Mar; 210(3):314-8. PubMed ID: 20193894
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Mammographic appearance of cancer in the opposite breast: comparison with the first cancer.
    Roubidoux MA; Lai NE; Paramagul C; Joynt LK; Helvie MA
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1996 Jan; 166(1):29-31. PubMed ID: 8571898
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Mammography and subsequent whole-breast sonography of nonpalpable breast cancers: the importance of radiologic breast density.
    Leconte I; Feger C; Galant C; Berlière M; Berg BV; D'Hoore W; Maldague B
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2003 Jun; 180(6):1675-9. PubMed ID: 12760942
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The anatomy of missed breast cancers.
    Reintgen D; Berman C; Cox C; Baekey P; Nicosia S; Greenberg H; Bush C; Lyman GH; Clark RA
    Surg Oncol; 1993; 2(1):65-75. PubMed ID: 8252194
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Prognostic significance of mammographic detection in a cohort of conservatively treated breast cancer patients.
    Haffty BG; Lee C; Philpotts L; Horvath L; Ward B; McKhann C; Tocino I
    Cancer J Sci Am; 1998; 4(1):35-40. PubMed ID: 9467044
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. The prevalence of carcinoma in palpable vs impalpable, mammographically detected lesions.
    Bassett LW; Liu TH; Giuliano AE; Gold RH
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1991 Jul; 157(1):21-4. PubMed ID: 1646562
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Nonpalpable, circumscribed, noncalcified solid breast masses: likelihood of malignancy based on lesion size and age of patient.
    Sickles EA
    Radiology; 1994 Aug; 192(2):439-42. PubMed ID: 8029411
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.