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 *

125 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8893641)

  • 21. Simulation of mammographic lesions.
    Saunders R; Samei E; Baker J; Delong D
    Acad Radiol; 2006 Jul; 13(7):860-70. PubMed ID: 16777560
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. [Impact of menopause hormone replacement therapy on screening mammography reading].
    Meye NE; Schaffer P; Hédelin G; Guldenfels C; Gairard B
    J Radiol; 2001 Jun; 82(6 Pt 1):653-9. PubMed ID: 11449167
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Can breast surgeons read mammograms of symptomatic patients in the one-stop breast clinic?
    Rao MC; Griffith CD; Griffiths AB
    Ann R Coll Surg Engl; 2001 Mar; 83(2):108-9. PubMed ID: 11320917
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. The accuracy of mammographic interpretation.
    Kopans DB
    N Engl J Med; 1994 Dec; 331(22):1521-2. PubMed ID: 7969306
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Mammographically indeterminate microcalcifications--can we do any better?
    Albertyn LE
    Australas Radiol; 1991 Nov; 35(4):350-7. PubMed ID: 1812828
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. CADMIUM II: acquisition and representation of radiological knowledge for computerized decision support in mammography.
    Alberdi E; Taylor P; Lee R; Fox J; Sordo M; Todd-Pokropek A
    Proc AMIA Symp; 2000; ():7-11. PubMed ID: 11079834
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Inter-reader Variability in the Use of BI-RADS Descriptors for Suspicious Findings on Diagnostic Mammography: A Multi-institution Study of 10 Academic Radiologists.
    Lee AY; Wisner DJ; Aminololama-Shakeri S; Arasu VA; Feig SA; Hargreaves J; Ojeda-Fournier H; Bassett LW; Wells CJ; De Guzman J; Flowers CI; Campbell JE; Elson SL; Retallack H; Joe BN
    Acad Radiol; 2017 Jan; 24(1):60-66. PubMed ID: 27793579
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Mammographic signs of potential relevance to breast cancer risk: the agreement of radiologists' classification.
    Jong R; Fishell E; Little L; Lockwood G; Boyd NF
    Eur J Cancer Prev; 1996 Aug; 5(4):281-6. PubMed ID: 8894565
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Biopsy of occult breast lesions. Analysis of 1261 abnormalities.
    Meyer JE; Eberlein TJ; Stomper PC; Sonnenfeld MR
    JAMA; 1990 May; 263(17):2341-3. PubMed ID: 2157903
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. [Test for the assessment of the diagnostic accuracy of mammography. Results of 103 tests carried out by Italian radiologists].
    Ciatto S; Rosselli Del Turco M; Ambrogetti D; Catarzi S; Morrone D
    Radiol Med; 1996 Oct; 92(4):367-71. PubMed ID: 9045233
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Changing patterns of microcalcification on screening mammography for prediction of breast cancer.
    Kim KI; Lee KH; Kim TR; Chun YS; Lee TH; Choi HY; Park HK
    Breast Cancer; 2016 May; 23(3):471-8. PubMed ID: 25651818
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Frequency and predictive value of a mammographic recommendation for short-interval follow-up.
    Yasmeen S; Romano PS; Pettinger M; Chlebowski RT; Robbins JA; Lane DS; Hendrix SL
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 2003 Mar; 95(6):429-36. PubMed ID: 12644536
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. The efficacy of double reading mammograms in breast screening.
    Husien AM
    Clin Radiol; 1995 Jan; 50(1):67. PubMed ID: 7834982
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. The efficacy of double reading mammograms in breast screening.
    McLean L; Simpson W
    Clin Radiol; 1995 Jan; 50(1):67. PubMed ID: 7834983
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Atypical hyperplasia of the breast: mammographic appearance and histologic correlation.
    Helvie MA; Hessler C; Frank TS; Ikeda DM
    Radiology; 1991 Jun; 179(3):759-64. PubMed ID: 2027988
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Cancellation of preoperative breast localization procedures: analysis of 53 cases.
    Meyer JE; Sonnenfeld MR; Greenes RA; Stomper PC
    Radiology; 1988 Dec; 169(3):629-30. PubMed ID: 3186984
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Characteristics of breast carcinomas missed by screening radiologists.
    Goergen SK; Evans J; Cohen GP; MacMillan JH
    Radiology; 1997 Jul; 204(1):131-5. PubMed ID: 9205234
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Computer vision and artificial intelligence in mammography.
    Vyborny CJ; Giger ML
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1994 Mar; 162(3):699-708. PubMed ID: 8109525
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Mammographic and pathological correlations in a breast screening programme.
    Stamp GW; Whitehouse GH; McDicken IW; Leinster SJ; George WD
    Clin Radiol; 1983 Sep; 34(5):529-42. PubMed ID: 6617084
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. BIRADS mammography: exercises.
    Balleyguier C; Bidault F; Mathieu MC; Ayadi S; Couanet D; Sigal R
    Eur J Radiol; 2007 Feb; 61(2):195-201. PubMed ID: 17161933
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.