Home The Word Brain Fast Track My Amedeo FAQ About Flying Publisher   

Fast Track

Ear2MemoryFree App | Free PDF | Web
Learning languages on your smartphone
By BSK

Free Abstracts

  Breast Cancer

  Free Subscription


Articles published in AJR Am J Roentgenol

Retrieve available abstracts of 51 articles:
HTML format
Text format



Single Articles


    March 2017
  1. EOM HJ, Cha JH, Choi WJ, Chae EY, et al
    Predictive Clinicopathologic and Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced MRI Findings for Tumor Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2017 Mar 28:1-6. doi: 10.2214/AJR.16.17125.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


    February 2017
  2. AMORNSIRIPANITCH N, Mangano M, Niell BL
    Screening Mammography: Patient Perceptions and Preferences Regarding Communication of Estimated Breast Cancer Risk.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2017 Feb 22:1-8. doi: 10.2214/AJR.16.16779.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


  3. AMINOLOLAMA-SHAKERI S, Flowers CI, McLaren CE, Wisner DJ, et al
    Can Radiologists Predict the Presence of Ductal Carcinoma In Situ and Invasive Breast Cancer?
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2017 Feb 15:1-7. doi: 10.2214/AJR.16.16073.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


  4. JAVITT MC
    Section Editor's Notebook: The Future of Breast Imaging-Find It and Fix It.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2017;208:245-247.
    PubMed     Text format    


  5. HOOLEY RJ, Durand MA, Philpotts LE
    Advances in Digital Breast Tomosynthesis.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2017;208:256-266.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


    January 2017
  6. PLAZA MJ, Handa P, Esserman LE
    Preoperative MRI Evaluation of Axillary Lymph Nodes in Invasive Ductal Carcinoma: Comparison of Luminal A Versus Luminal B Subtypes in a Paradigm Using Ki-67 and Receptor Status.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2017 Jan 31:1-5. doi: 10.2214/AJR.15.15788.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


  7. HUANG ML, Speer M, Dogan BE, Rauch GM, et al
    Imaging-Concordant Benign MRI-Guided Vacuum-Assisted Breast Biopsy May Not Warrant MRI Follow-Up.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2017 Jan 31:1-7. doi: 10.2214/AJR.16.16576.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


  8. LAM DL, Houssami N, Lee JM
    Imaging Surveillance After Primary Breast Cancer Treatment.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2017 Jan 11:1-11. doi: 10.2214/AJR.16.16300.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


  9. FERRE R, Omeroglu A, Mesurolle B
    Sonographic Appearance of Lesions Diagnosed as Lobular Neoplasia at Sonographically Guided Biopsies.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2017 Jan 11:1-7. doi: 10.2214/AJR.15.15056.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


    December 2016
  10. LEE J, Tanaka E, Eby PR, Zhou S, et al
    Preoperative Breast MRI: Surgeons' Patient Selection Patterns and Potential Bias in Outcomes Analyses.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016 Dec 27:1-10. doi: 10.2214/AJR.16.17038.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


  11. PARK VY, Kim EK, Kim MJ, Yoon JH, et al
    Perfusion Parameters on Breast Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced MRI Are Associated With Disease-Specific Survival in Patients With Triple-Negative Breast Cancer.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016 Dec 22:1-8. doi: 10.2214/AJR.16.16476.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


  12. KRISHNAMURTHY S, Bevers T, Kuerer HM, Smith B, et al
    Paradigm Shifts in Breast Care Delivery: Impact of Imaging in a Multidisciplinary Environment.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


    November 2016
  13. DESTOUNIS S, Johnston L, Highnam R, Arieno A, et al
    Using Volumetric Breast Density to Quantify the Potential Masking Risk of Mammographic Density.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


  14. RAUCH GM, Adrada BE, Kuerer HM, van la Parra RF, et al
    Multimodality Imaging for Evaluating Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Breast Cancer.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


  15. CHHOR CM, Mercado CL
    Abbreviated MRI Protocols: Wave of the Future for Breast Cancer Screening.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


  16. PRABHU V, Chhor CM, Ego-Osuala IO, Xiao JM, et al
    Frequency and Outcomes of Incidental Breast Lesions Detected on Abdominal MRI Over a 7-Year Period.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


    October 2016
  17. LEWIN AA, Heller SL, Jaglan S, Elias K, et al
    Radiologic-Pathologic Discordance and Outcome After MRI-Guided Vacuum-Assisted Biopsy.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


  18. FLEMING MM, Holbrook AI, Newell MS
    Update on Image-Guided Percutaneous Ablation of Breast Cancer.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


  19. HRUSKA CB
    Molecular Breast Imaging for Screening in Dense Breasts: State of the Art and Future Directions.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


  20. SHIN K, Caudle AS, Kuerer HM, Santiago L, et al
    Radiologic Mapping for Targeted Axillary Dissection: Needle Biopsy to Excision.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


    September 2016
  21. GRABLER P, Sighoko D, Wang L, Allgood K, et al
    Recall and Cancer Detection Rates for Screening Mammography: Finding the Sweet Spot.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


    August 2016
  22. KU YJ, Kim HH, Cha JH, Shin HJ, et al
    Correlation Between MRI and the Level of Tumor-Infiltrating Lymphocytes in Patients With Triple-Negative Breast Cancer.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


    May 2016
  23. SHERMIS RB, Wilson KD, Doyle MT, Martin TS, et al
    Supplemental Breast Cancer Screening With Molecular Breast Imaging for Women With Dense Breast Tissue.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


  24. YOUK JH, Gweon HM, Son EJ, Kim JA, et al
    Automated Volumetric Breast Density Measurements in the Era of the BI-RADS Fifth Edition: A Comparison With Visual Assessment.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016;206:1056-62.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


    April 2016
  25. MCDONALD ES, Hammersley JA, Chou SS, Rahbar H, et al
    Performance of DWI as a Rapid Unenhanced Technique for Detecting Mammographically Occult Breast Cancer in Elevated-Risk Women With Dense Breasts.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


  26. TEIXEIRA SC, Rebolleda JF, Koolen BB, Wesseling J, et al
    Evaluation of a Hanging-Breast PET System for Primary Tumor Visualization in Patients With Stage I-III Breast Cancer: Comparison With Standard PET/CT.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


  27. GIGER ML, Inciardi MF, Edwards A, Papaioannou J, et al
    Automated Breast Ultrasound in Breast Cancer Screening of Women With Dense Breasts: Reader Study of Mammography-Negative and Mammography-Positive Cancers.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


  28. TAGHIPOUR M, Wray R, Sheikhbahaei S, Wright JL, et al
    FDG Avidity and Tumor Burden: Survival Outcomes for Patients With Recurrent Breast Cancer.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016;206:846-55.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


  29. JALAGUIER-COUDRAY A, Delarbre B, Brenot-Rossi I, Houvenaeghel G, et al
    Contribution of FDG PET/CT for the Optimization of the Management of Additional Lesions Detected on Local Staging Breast MRI.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016;206:891-900.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


    March 2016
  30. PIATO JR, Jales Alves de Andrade RD, Chala LF, de Barros N, et al
    MRI to Predict Nipple Involvement in Breast Cancer Patients.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


  31. DRYDEN MJ, Dogan BE, Fox P, Wang C, et al
    Imaging Factors That Influence Surgical Margins After Preoperative I Radioactive Seed Localization of Breast Lesions: Comparison With Wire Localization.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


  32. EKPO EU, Ujong UP, Mello-Thoms C, McEntee MF, et al
    Assessment of Interradiologist Agreement Regarding Mammographic Breast Density Classification Using the Fifth Edition of the BI-RADS Atlas.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


  33. CHAE EY, Cha JH, Shin HJ, Choi WJ, et al
    Reassessment and Follow-Up Results of BI-RADS Category 3 Lesions Detected on Screening Breast Ultrasound.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016;206:666-72.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


  34. ALSHARIF S, Ferre R, Omeroglu A, Khoury ME, et al
    Imaging Features Associated With Posttraumatic Breast Neuromas.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016;206:660-5.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


    February 2016
  35. LEE CS, Bhargavan-Chatfield M, Burnside ES, Nagy P, et al
    The National Mammography Database: Preliminary Data.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


  36. CHHOR CM, Mercado CL
    Integrating Customer Intimacy Into Radiology to Improve the Patient Perspective: The Case of Breast Cancer Screening.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016;206:265-9.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


  37. CARBILLON L, Bricou A, Sellier N
    Challenges, Benefits, and Harms of Risk-Based Screening Mammography in Women 40-49 Years Old.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016;206:W50.
    PubMed     Text format    


  38. BAHL M, Baker JA, Ghate SV
    Reply to "Conventional Ductography Combined With Digital Breast Tomosynthesis for Imaging of Pathologic Nipple Discharge".
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016;206:W45.
    PubMed     Text format    


  39. COHEN Y
    Conventional Ductography Combined With Digital Breast Tomosynthesis for Imaging of Pathologic Nipple Discharge.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016;206:W44.
    PubMed     Text format    


  40. GUPTA D, Karst I, Mendelson EB
    Value-Based Reimbursement: Impact of Curtailing Physician Autonomy in Medical Decision Making.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016;206:276-9.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


  41. FERRE R, Aldis A, AlSharif S, Omeroglu A, et al
    Differentiation of Fibroadenomas and Pure Mucinous Carcinomas on Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced MRI of the Breast Using Volume Segmentation for Kinetic Analysis: A Feasibility Study.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016;206:253-8.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


  42. BITENCOURT AG, Graziano L, Osorio CA, Guatelli CS, et al
    MRI Features of Mucinous Cancer of the Breast: Correlation With Pathologic Findings and Other Imaging Methods.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016;206:238-46.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


    January 2016
  43. KUCUKKAYA F, Aribal E, Tureli D, Altas H, et al
    Use of a Volume Navigation Technique for Combining Real-Time Ultrasound and Contrast-Enhanced MRI: Accuracy and Feasibility of a Novel Technique for Locating Breast Lesions.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016;206:217-25.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


  44. LEE AY, Ichikawa L, Lee JM, Lee CI, et al
    Concordance of BI-RADS Assessments and Management Recommendations for Breast MRI in Community Practice.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016;206:211-6.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


    December 2015
  45. KIM JY, Shin JK, Lee SH
    The Breast Tumor Strain Ratio Is a Predictive Parameter for Axillary Lymph Node Metastasis in Patients With Invasive Breast Cancer.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015;205:W630-8.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


  46. KOVACS M
    Reply to "The Use of Lossy Compression of Digital Mammograms for Primary Interpretation and Image Retention".
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015;205:W642.
    PubMed     Text format    


  47. LERNER DL, Pezeshk A
    The Use of Lossy Compression of Digital Mammograms for Primary Interpretation and Image Retention.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015;205:W640-1.
    PubMed     Text format    


  48. BAHL M, Baker JA, Kinsey EN, Ghate SV, et al
    Architectural Distortion on Mammography: Correlation With Pathologic Outcomes and Predictors of Malignancy.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015;205:1339-45.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


    November 2015
  49. KOPANS DB
    "Off Label" Use of FDA-Approved Devices and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015;205:1149-51.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


  50. MCDONALD ES, McCarthy AM, Akhtar AL, Synnestvedt MB, et al
    Baseline Screening Mammography: Performance of Full-Field Digital Mammography Versus Digital Breast Tomosynthesis.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015;205:1143-8.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


    October 2015
  51. DIGHE MK, Kanal KM
    Please Explain the Basic Concept of Ultrasound Elastography, and How Can It Help Differentiate Benign From Malignant Breast Lesions?
    AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015;205:W389.
    PubMed     Text format    


Thank you for your interest in scientific medicine.


AMEDEO Breast Cancer is free of charge.
This policy is made possible thanks to a media sponsorship by Boehringer Ingelheim.

Design: