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

Fast Track

OLIENA
Language recovery after stroke
App | Video | PDF (278 pp) | Web

Free Abstracts

  Breast Cancer

  Free Subscription


Articles published in Radiology

Retrieve available abstracts of 33 articles:
HTML format
Text format



Single Articles


    February 2018
  1. GUNTHER JE, Lim EA, Kim HK, Flexman M, et al
    Dynamic Diffuse Optical Tomography for Monitoring Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Patients with Breast Cancer.
    Radiology. 2018 Feb 12:161041. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2018161041.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


    January 2018
  2. CHEON H, Kim HJ, Kim TH, Ryeom HK, et al
    Invasive Breast Cancer: Prognostic Value of Peritumoral Edema Identified at Preoperative MR Imaging.
    Radiology. 2018 Jan 9:171157. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2017171157.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


    December 2017
  3. BAHL M, Gaffney S, McCarthy AM, Lowry KP, et al
    Breast Cancer Characteristics Associated with 2D Digital Mammography versus Digital Breast Tomosynthesis for Screening-detected and Interval Cancers.
    Radiology. 2017 Dec 22:171148. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2017171148.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


  4. HOFVIND S, Sagstad S, Sebuodegard S, Chen Y, et al
    Interval Breast Cancer Rates and Histopathologic Tumor Characteristics after False-Positive Findings at Mammography in a Population-based Screening Program.
    Radiology. 2017 Dec 14:162159. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2017162159.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


  5. GORDON PB, Berg WA, Jankowitz RC
    Breast Cancer Recurrence after Initial Detection with Screening US.
    Radiology. 2017;285:1054-1055.
    PubMed     Text format    


    November 2017
  6. FOWLER AM, Mankoff DA, Joe BN
    Imaging Neoadjuvant Therapy Response in Breast Cancer.
    Radiology. 2017;285:358-375.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


    October 2017
  7. NGUYEN TL, Choi YH, Aung YK, Evans CF, et al
    Breast Cancer Risk Associations with Digital Mammographic Density by Pixel Brightness Threshold and Mammographic System.
    Radiology. 2017 Oct 16:170306. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2017170306.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


    September 2017
  8. SALEM K, Kumar M, Powers GL, Jeffery JJ, et al
    18F-16alpha-17beta-Fluoroestradiol Binding Specificity in Estrogen Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer.
    Radiology. 2017 Sep 25:162956. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2017162956.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


  9. LUO J, Johnston BS, Kitsch AE, Hippe DS, et al
    Ductal Carcinoma in Situ: Quantitative Preoperative Breast MR Imaging Features Associated with Recurrence after Treatment.
    Radiology. 2017 Sep 14:170587. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2017170587.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


  10. WOODARD GA, Ray KM, Joe BN, Price ER, et al
    Qualitative Radiogenomics: Association between Oncotype DX Test Recurrence Score and BI-RADS Mammographic and Breast MR Imaging Features.
    Radiology. 2017 Sep 8:162333. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2017162333.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


    August 2017
  11. ALTUNDAG K
    Association between Computer-aided Diagnosis-measured Peak Enhancement and Washout Component at Preoperative MR Imaging and Operable Hormone Receptor-positive Breast Cancer.
    Radiology. 2017;284:604.
    PubMed     Text format    


    July 2017
  12. FUKADA I, Araki K, Kobayashi K, Shibayama T, et al
    Pattern of Tumor Shrinkage during Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Is Associated with Prognosis in Low-Grade Luminal Early Breast Cancer.
    Radiology. 2017 Jul 24:161548. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2017161548.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


  13. WU J, Li B, Sun X, Cao G, et al
    Heterogeneous Enhancement Patterns of Tumor-adjacent Parenchyma at MR Imaging Are Associated with Dysregulated Signaling Pathways and Poor Survival in Breast Cancer.
    Radiology. 2017 Jul 14:162823. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2017162823.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


    June 2017
  14. LEE-FELKER SA, Tekchandani L, Thomas M, Gupta E, et al
    Newly Diagnosed Breast Cancer: Comparison of Contrast-enhanced Spectral Mammography and Breast MR Imaging in the Evaluation of Extent of Disease.
    Radiology. 2017 Jun 26:161592. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2017161592.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


  15. DISHAROON M, Kozlowski KF, Kaniowski JM
    Case 242: Radiation-induced Angiosarcoma.
    Radiology. 2017;283:909-916.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


  16. CONANT EF, Keller BM, Pantalone L, Gastounioti A, et al
    Agreement between Breast Percentage Density Estimations from Standard-Dose versus Synthetic Digital Mammograms: Results from a Large Screening Cohort Using Automated Measures.
    Radiology. 2017;283:673-680.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


    May 2017
  17. NAM K, Eisenbrey JR, Stanczak M, Sridharan A, et al
    Monitoring Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Breast Cancer by Using Three-dimensional Subharmonic Aided Pressure Estimation and Imaging with US Contrast Agents: Preliminary Experience.
    Radiology. 2017 May 3:161683. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2017161683.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


    April 2017
  18. KUHL CK, Strobel K, Bieling H, Wardelmann E, et al
    Impact of Preoperative Breast MR Imaging and MR-guided Surgery on Diagnosis and Surgical Outcome of Women with Invasive Breast Cancer with and without DCIS Component.
    Radiology. 2017 Apr 26:161449. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2017161449.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


  19. KIM SY, Han BK, Kim EK, Choi WJ, et al
    Breast Cancer Detected at Screening US: Survival Rates and Clinical-Pathologic and Imaging Factors Associated with Recurrence.
    Radiology. 2017 Apr 6:162348. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2017162348.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


    March 2017
  20. TUCKER L, Gilbert FJ, Astley SM, Dibden A, et al
    Does Reader Performance with Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Vary according to Experience with Two-dimensional Mammography?
    Radiology. 2017 Mar 13:151936. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2017151936.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


  21. KIM JJ, Kim JY, Kang HJ, Shin JK, et al
    Computer-aided Diagnosis-generated Kinetic Features of Breast Cancer at Preoperative MR Imaging: Association with Disease-free Survival of Patients with Primary Operable Invasive Breast Cancer.
    Radiology. 2017 Mar 2:162079. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2017162079.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


    February 2017
  22. SPRAGUE BL, Arao RF, Miglioretti DL, Henderson LM, et al
    National Performance Benchmarks for Modern Diagnostic Digital Mammography: Update from the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium.
    Radiology. 2017 Feb 28:161519. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2017161519.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


  23. D'ORSI CJ, Sickles EA
    2017 Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium Reports on Interpretive Performance at Screening and Diagnostic Mammography: Welcome New Data, But Not as Benchmarks for Practice.
    Radiology. 2017 Feb 28. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2017170181.
    PubMed     Text format    


  24. KUHL CK, Strobel K, Bieling H, Leutner C, et al
    Supplemental Breast MR Imaging Screening of Women with Average Risk of Breast Cancer.
    Radiology. 2017 Feb 21:161444. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2016161444.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


  25. AUJERO MP, Gavenonis SC, Benjamin R, Zhang Z, et al
    Clinical Performance of Synthesized Two-dimensional Mammography Combined with Tomosynthesis in a Large Screening Population.
    Radiology. 2017 Feb 21:162674. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2017162674.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


    December 2016
  26. LEHMAN CD, Arao RF, Sprague BL, Lee JM, et al
    National Performance Benchmarks for Modern Screening Digital Mammography: Update from the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium.
    Radiology. 2016 Dec 5:161174.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


    November 2016
  27. SANTAMARIA G, Bargallo X, Fernandez PL, Farrus B, et al
    Neoadjuvant Systemic Therapy in Breast Cancer: Association of Contrast-enhanced MR Imaging Findings, Diffusion-weighted Imaging Findings, and Tumor Subtype with Tumor Response.
    Radiology. 2016 Nov 22:160176.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


    October 2016
  28. BAE MS, Lee SH, Chu AJ, Shin SU, et al
    Preoperative MR Imaging in Women with Breast Cancer Detected at Screening US.
    Radiology. 2016 Oct 6:160706.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


  29. KIM JH, Ko ES, Lim Y, Lee KS, et al
    Breast Cancer Heterogeneity: MR Imaging Texture Analysis and Survival Outcomes.
    Radiology. 2016 Oct 4:160261.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


    September 2016
  30. JEFFERS AM, Sieh W, Lipson JA, Rothstein JH, et al
    Breast Cancer Risk and Mammographic Density Assessed with Semiautomated and Fully Automated Methods and BI-RADS.
    Radiology. 2016 Sep 5:152062.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


    June 2016
  31. GOMBOS EC, Jayender J, Richman DM, Caragacianu DL, et al
    Intraoperative Supine Breast MR Imaging to Quantify Tumor Deformation and Detection of Residual Breast Cancer: Preliminary Results.
    Radiology. 2016 Jun 22:151472.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


    May 2016
  32. BAE MS, Shin SU, Ryu HS, Han W, et al
    Pretreatment MR Imaging Features of Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: Association with Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Recurrence-Free Survival.
    Radiology. 2016 May 19:152331.
    PubMed     Text format     Abstract available


    February 2016
  33. PISANO ED
    Digital Compared with Screen-Film Mammography: Measures of Diagnostic Accuracy among Women Screened in the Ontario Breast Screening Program-Evidence that Direct Radiography Is Superior to Computed Radiography for Cancer Detection.
    Radiology. 2016;278:311-2.
    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: