96 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8431859)
21. Incidence of invasive breast cancer and ductal carcinoma in situ in a screening program by age: should older women continue screening?
Erbas B; Amos A; Fletcher A; Kavanagh AM; Gertig DM
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 2004 Oct; 13(10):1569-73. PubMed ID: 15466971
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Comparison of the relative incidence of impalpable invasive breast carcinoma and ductal carcinoma in situ in cancers detected in patients older and younger than 50 years of age.
Evans WP; Starr AL; Bennos ES
Radiology; 1997 Aug; 204(2):489-91. PubMed ID: 9240541
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. [Breast cancer incidence related with a population-based screening program].
Natal C; Caicoya M; Prieto M; Tardón A
Med Clin (Barc); 2015 Feb; 144(4):156-60. PubMed ID: 25194975
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. The severity of breast cancer at diagnosis: a comparison of age and extent of disease in black and white women.
Satariano WA; Belle SH; Swanson GM
Am J Public Health; 1986 Jul; 76(7):779-82. PubMed ID: 3717463
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Does the volume of ductal carcinoma in situ impact the positive margin rate in patients undergoing breast conservation for invasive breast cancer?
Martin-Dunlap TM; Cyr AE; Al Mushawah F; Gao F; Margenthaler JA
J Surg Res; 2013 Sep; 184(1):228-33. PubMed ID: 23688789
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Risk of recurrence after ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast.
Habel LA; Daling JR; Newcomb PA; Self SG; Porter PL; Stanford JL; Seidel K; Weiss NS
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 1998 Aug; 7(8):689-96. PubMed ID: 9718221
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. The method of detection of ductal carcinoma in situ has no therapeutic implications: results of a population-based cohort study.
Elshof LE; Schaapveld M; Rutgers EJ; Schmidt MK; de Munck L; van Leeuwen FE; Wesseling J
Breast Cancer Res; 2017 Mar; 19(1):26. PubMed ID: 28274272
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Breast-Cancer Tumor Size, Overdiagnosis, and Mammography Screening Effectiveness.
Welch HG; Prorok PC; O'Malley AJ; Kramer BS
N Engl J Med; 2016 Oct; 375(15):1438-1447. PubMed ID: 27732805
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Obligate Overdiagnosis Due to Mammographic Screening: A Direct Estimate for U.S. Women.
Hendrick RE
Radiology; 2018 May; 287(2):391-397. PubMed ID: 29267146
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Digital Mammography Screening: Does Age Influence the Detection Rates of Low-, Intermediate-, and High-Grade Ductal Carcinoma in Situ?
Weigel S; Hense HW; Heidrich J; Berkemeyer S; Heindel W; Heidinger O
Radiology; 2016 Mar; 278(3):707-13. PubMed ID: 26505802
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Trends in the treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast.
Baxter NN; Virnig BA; Durham SB; Tuttle TM
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2004 Mar; 96(6):443-8. PubMed ID: 15026469
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Comparison of risk factors for ductal carcinoma in situ and invasive breast cancer.
Kerlikowske K; Barclay J; Grady D; Sickles EA; Ernster V
J Natl Cancer Inst; 1997 Jan; 89(1):76-82. PubMed ID: 8978410
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Shifting breast cancer trends in the United States.
Anderson WF; Reiner AS; Matsuno RK; Pfeiffer RM
J Clin Oncol; 2007 Sep; 25(25):3923-9. PubMed ID: 17679726
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Trends in breast cancer in younger women in contrast to older women.
Hankey BF; Miller B; Curtis R; Kosary C
J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr; 1994; (16):7-14. PubMed ID: 7999473
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Breast cancer in the southeastern Netherlands, 1960-1989: trends in incidence and mortality.
Nab HW; Voogd AC; Crommelin MA; Kluck HM; vd Heijden LH; Coebergh JW
Eur J Cancer; 1993; 29A(11):1557-9. PubMed ID: 8217362
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Recent incidence trends for breast cancer in women and the relevance of early detection: an update.
Miller BA; Feuer EJ; Hankey BF
CA Cancer J Clin; 1993; 43(1):27-41. PubMed ID: 8422603
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Descriptive epidemiology of prostate cancer in metropolitan Detroit.
Taylor JD; Holmes TM; Swanson GM
Cancer; 1994 Mar; 73(6):1704-7. PubMed ID: 8156498
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast, a population-based study of epidemiology and pathology.
Kricker A; Goumas C; Armstrong B
Br J Cancer; 2004 Apr; 90(7):1382-5. PubMed ID: 15054459
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Increases in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast in relation to mammography: a dilemma.
Ernster VL; Barclay J
J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr; 1997; (22):151-6. PubMed ID: 9709292
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. The contribution of mammography screening to breast cancer incidence trends in the United States: an updated age-period-cohort model.
Gangnon RE; Sprague BL; Stout NK; Alagoz O; Weedon-Fekjær H; Holford TR; Trentham-Dietz A
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 2015 Jun; 24(6):905-12. PubMed ID: 25787716
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
