https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30625040
Journal of Clinical Oncology : Official Journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology;Arasu VA, Miglioretti DL et. al.
Jan 10th, 2019 - To evaluate comparative associations of breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) background parenchymal enhancement (BPE) and mammographic breast density with subsequent breast cancer risk. We examined women undergoing breast MRI in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium from 2005 to 2015 (with one exam in 2000) using qualitative BPE ...
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30630872
Journal of Clinical Pathology; Kraby MR, Opdahl S et. al.
Jan 10th, 2019 - Tumour microvessel density (MVD) is assessed by counting vessels in the most vascularised tumour region, the vascular hot spot. Current uncertainty regarding the prognostic role of MVD in breast cancer could, in part, be explained by variations in field area size for MVD assessment. We aimed to identify the field area size that provides the most accurate prognostic i...
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30624682
Journal of the National Cancer Institute; Sprague BL, Kerlikowske K et. al.
Jan 8th, 2019 - Changes to mammography practice, including revised Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) density classification guidelines and implementation of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT), may impact clinical breastdensity assessment. We investigated temporal trends in clinical breast densityassessment among 2 9...
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30557052
AJR. American Journal of Roentgenology; Lee CS, Sickles EA et. al.
Dec 18th, 2018 - The purpose of this article is to compare commonly used breastcancer risk assessment models, describe the machine learning approach and big data in risk prediction, and summarize the potential benefits and harms of restrictive risk-based screening. The commonly used risk assessment models for breast cancercan be complex and cumbersome to use. Each mod...
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30366654
Clinical Breast Cancer; Hsu W, Zhou X et. al.
Oct 28th, 2018 - To analyze women with suspicious findings (assessed as BreastImaging Reporting and Data System [BI-RADS] 4), examining the value of clinical and imaging predictors in predicting cancer diagnosis. A set of 2138 examinations (1978 women) given a BI-RADS 4 with matching pathology results were analyzed. Predictors such as patient demographics, clinical risk factors, and...
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.