Amedeo Smart

Free Medical Literature Service


 

Amedeo

Breast Cancer

  Free Subscription

Articles published in
Radiology
    July 2021
  1. LEE SH, Ryu HS, Jang MJ, Yi A, et al
    Glandular Tissue Component and Breast Cancer Risk in Mammographically Dense Breasts at Screening Breast US.
    Radiology. 2021 Jul 20:210367. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2021210367.
    >> Share

  2. CHAN HP, Helvie MA
    Using Single-View Wide-Angle DBT with AI for Breast Cancer Screening.
    Radiology. 2021 Jul 6:211203. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2021211203.
    >> Share

  3. PINTO MC, Rodriguez-Ruiz A, Pedersen K, Hofvind S, et al
    Impact of Artificial Intelligence Decision Support Using Deep Learning on Breast Cancer Screening Interpretation with Single-View Wide-Angle Digital Breast Tomosynthesis.
    Radiology. 2021 Jul 6:204432. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2021204432.
    >> Share

    June 2021
  4. SLANETZ PJ
    MRI Screening of Women with a Personal History of Breast Cancer.
    Radiology. 2021 Jun 8:211080. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2021211080.
    >> Share

  5. KIM GR, Cho N, Kim SY, Han W, et al
    Interval Cancers after Negative Supplemental Screening Breast MRI Results in Women with a Personal History of Breast Cancer.
    Radiology. 2021 Jun 8:203074. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2021203074.
    >> Share

    May 2021
  6. CHANG JM
    MRI Screening Interval in Women with a History of Breast Cancer.
    Radiology. 2021 May 25:210836. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2021210836.
    >> Share

  7. PARK VY, Kim MJ, Kim GR, Yoon JH, et al
    Outcomes Following Negative Screening MRI Results in Korean Women with a Personal History of Breast Cancer: Implications for the Next MRI Interval.
    Radiology. 2021 May 25:204217. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2021204217.
    >> Share

  8. MOY L, Gao Y
    Digital Mammography Is Similar to Screen-Film Mammography for Women with Personal History of Breast Cancer.
    Radiology. 2021 May 18:210930. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2021210930.
    >> Share

  9. LEE JM, Ichikawa LE, Wernli KJ, Bowles E, et al
    Digital Mammography and Breast Tomosynthesis Performance in Women with a Personal History of Breast Cancer, 2007-2016.
    Radiology. 2021 May 18:204581. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2021204581.
    >> Share

  10. TAOUREL P
    Interval Breast Cancer after Digital Breast Tomosynthesis-based Screening: A Glimmer of Hope.
    Radiology. 2021 May 11:210179. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2021210179.
    >> Share

  11. HOFVIND S, Moshina N, Holen AS, Danielsen AS, et al
    Interval and Subsequent Round Breast Cancer in a Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Digital Breast Tomosynthesis and Digital Mammography Screening.
    Radiology. 2021 May 11:203936. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2021203936.
    >> Share

  12. RAYA-POVEDANO JL, Romero-Martin S, Elias-Cabot E, Gubern-Merida A, et al
    AI-based Strategies to Reduce Workload in Breast Cancer Screening with Mammography and Tomosynthesis: A Retrospective Evaluation.
    Radiology. 2021 May 4:203555. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2021203555.
    >> Share

    April 2021
  13. BYON JH, Park YV, Yoon JH, Moon HJ, et al
    Added Value of MRI for Invasive Breast Cancer including the Entire Axilla for Evaluation of High-Level or Advanced Axillary Lymph Node Metastasis in the Post-ACOSOG Z0011 Trial Era.
    Radiology. 2021 Apr 27:202683. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2021202683.
    >> Share

  14. PARK AR, Chae EY, Cha JH, Shin HJ, et al
    Preoperative Breast MRI in Women 35 Years of Age and Younger with Breast Cancer: Benefits in Surgical Outcomes by Using Propensity Score Analysis.
    Radiology. 2021 Apr 20:204124. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2021204124.
    >> Share

  15. MANN RM
    Tomosynthesis Is Taking Small Steps to Become the Standard for Breast Cancer Screening.
    Radiology. 2021 Apr 6:210153. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2021210153.
    >> Share

  16. JOHNSON K, Lang K, Ikeda DM, Akesson A, et al
    Interval Breast Cancer Rates and Tumor Characteristics in the Prospective Population-based Malmo Breast Tomosynthesis Screening Trial.
    Radiology. 2021 Apr 6:204106. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2021204106.
    >> Share

    March 2021
  17. FEIG SA
    Influence of Patient Participation on Decreased Mortality from Screening Mammography.
    Radiology. 2021 Mar 30:210226. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2021210226.
    >> Share

  18. KIM SY, Cho N, Choi Y, Lee SH, et al
    Factors Affecting Pathologic Complete Response Following Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Breast Cancer: Development and Validation of a Predictive Nomogram.
    Radiology. 2021 Mar 23:203871. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2021203871.
    >> Share

  19. MOY L, Gao Y
    Supplemental MRI in Extremely Dense Breasts: Sharp Reduction in False-Positive Rate in the Second Screening Round of the DENSE Trial.
    Radiology. 2021 Mar 16:210265. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2021210265.
    >> Share

  20. DUFFY SW, Tabar L, Yen AM, Dean PB, et al
    Beneficial Effect of Consecutive Screening Mammography Examinations on Mortality from Breast Cancer: A Prospective Study.
    Radiology. 2021 Mar 2:203935. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2021203935.
    >> Share

    February 2021
  21. OZUTEMIZ C, Krystosek LA, Church AL, Chauhan A, et al
    Lymphadenopathy in COVID-19 Vaccine Recipients: Diagnostic Dilemma in Oncology Patients.
    Radiology. 2021 Feb 24:210275. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2021210275.
    >> Share

  22. KWON MR, Choi JS, Won H, Ko EY, et al
    Breast Cancer Screening with Abbreviated Breast MRI: 3-year Outcome Analysis.
    Radiology. 2021 Feb 23:202927. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2021202927.
    >> Share

  23. ZARIC O, Farr A, Minarikova L, Lachner S, et al
    Tissue Sodium Concentration Quantification at 7.0-T MRI as an Early Marker for Chemotherapy Response in Breast Cancer: A Feasibility Study.
    Radiology. 2021 Feb 16:201600. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2021201600.
    >> Share

  24. HARADA TL, Uematsu T, Nakashima K, Kawabata T, et al
    Evaluation of Breast Edema Findings at T2-weighted Breast MRI Is Useful for Diagnosing Occult Inflammatory Breast Cancer and Can Predict Prognosis after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy.
    Radiology. 2021 Feb 9:202604. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2021202604.
    >> Share

  25. HENDRICK RE, Helvie MA, Monticciolo DL
    Breast Cancer Mortality Rates Have Stopped Declining in U.S. Women Younger than 40 Years.
    Radiology. 2021 Feb 9:203476. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2021203476.
    >> Share

    January 2021
  26. RAHBAR H
    Closing the Chapter on Supplemental Breast Cancer Screening with US.
    Radiology. 2021 Jan 12:204334. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2021204334.
    >> Share

  27. YI A, Jang MJ, Yim D, Kwon BR, et al
    Addition of Screening Breast US to Digital Mammography and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis for Breast Cancer Screening in Women at Average Risk.
    Radiology. 2021 Jan 12:203134. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2021203134.
    >> Share

  28. BAE MS
    Sustainable Benefits of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Screening.
    Radiology. 2021;298:58-59.
    >> Share

  29. EL KHOURY M, Maietta A, Tran A, Trop I, et al
    Case 285: Primary Breast Lymphoma.
    Radiology. 2021;298:231-236.
    >> Share

    December 2020
  30. BAHL M, Mercaldo S, McCarthy AM, Lehman CD, et al
    Imaging Surveillance of Breast Cancer Survivors with Digital Mammography versus Digital Breast Tomosynthesis.
    Radiology. 2020 Dec 22:201854. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2020201854.
    >> Share

  31. HOOLEY R, Butler R
    Digital Breast Tomosynthesis May Not Provide Optimal Surveillance of Breast Cancer Survivors.
    Radiology. 2020 Dec 22:204219. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2020204219.
    >> Share

  32. DURAND MA, Friedewald SM, Plecha DM, Copit DS, et al
    False-Negative Rates of Breast Cancer Screening with and without Digital Breast Tomosynthesis.
    Radiology. 2020 Dec 1:202858. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2020202858.
    >> Share

  33. PUJARA AC, Joe AI, Patterson SK, Neal CH, et al
    Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Slab Thickness: Impact on Reader Performance and Interpretation Time.
    Radiology. 2020;297:534-542.
    >> Share

  34. SCHATTNER E
    High-Quality Mammography: A Step Forward for Women's Health.
    Radiology. 2020 Dec 1:204087. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2020204087.
    >> Share

    November 2020
  35. MCDONALD ES, Romanoff J, Rahbar H, Kitsch AE, et al
    Mean Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Is a Sufficient Conventional Diffusion-weighted MRI Metric to Improve Breast MRI Diagnostic Performance: Results from the ECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research Group A6702 Diffusion Imaging Trial.
    Radiology. 2020 Nov 17:202465. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2020202465.
    >> Share

  36. CAUMO F, Montemezzi S, Romanucci G, Brunelli S, et al
    Repeat Screening Outcomes with Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Plus Synthetic Mammography for Breast Cancer Detection: Results from the Prospective Verona Pilot Study.
    Radiology. 2020 Nov 10:201246. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2020201246.
    >> Share

    October 2020
  37. KOSMIN M, Padhani AR, Gogbashian A, Woolf D, et al
    Comparison of Whole-Body MRI, CT, and Bone Scintigraphy for Response Evaluation of Cancer Therapeutics in Metastatic Breast Cancer to Bone.
    Radiology. 2020 Oct 20:192683. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2020192683.
    >> Share

  38. JIANG Y, Edwards AV, Newstead GM
    Artificial Intelligence Applied to Breast MRI for Improved Diagnosis.
    Radiology. 2020 Oct 20:200292. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2020200292.
    >> Share

  39. ZUCKERMAN SP, Sprague BL, Weaver DL, Herschorn SD, et al
    Multicenter Evaluation of Breast Cancer Screening with Digital Breast Tomosynthesis in Combination with Synthetic versus Digital Mammography.
    Radiology. 2020 Oct 13:200240. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2020200240.
    >> Share

  40. LANG K
    Mounting Evidence for Synthetic Mammography in Breast Cancer Screening.
    Radiology. 2020 Oct 13:203716. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2020203716.
    >> Share

    September 2020
  41. MOSHINA N, Aase HS, Danielsen AS, Haldorsen IS, et al
    Comparing Screening Outcomes for Digital Breast Tomosynthesis and Digital Mammography by Automated Breast Density in a Randomized Controlled Trial: Results from the To-Be Trial.
    Radiology. 2020 Sep 15:201150. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2020201150.
    >> Share

  42. MANN RM, Hooley R, Barr RG, Moy L, et al
    Novel Approaches to Screening for Breast Cancer.
    Radiology. 2020 Sep 8:200172. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2020200172.
    >> Share

  43. ERIKSSON M, Czene K, Strand F, Zackrisson S, et al
    Identification of Women at High Risk of Breast Cancer Who Need Supplemental Screening.
    Radiology. 2020 Sep 8:201620. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2020201620.
    >> Share

  44. CHUNG M, Hayward JH, Woodard GA, Knobel A, et al
    US as the Primary Imaging Modality in the Evaluation of Palpable Breast Masses in Breastfeeding Women, Including Those of Advanced Maternal Age.
    Radiology. 2020 Sep 1:201036. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2020201036.
    >> Share

    August 2020
  45. MCKAY JA, Church AL, Rubin N, Emory TH, et al
    A Comparison of Methods for High-Spatial-Resolution Diffusion-weighted Imaging in Breast MRI.
    Radiology. 2020 Aug 25:200221. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2020200221.
    >> Share

  46. SANKATSING VDV, Juraniec K, Grimm SE, Joore MA, et al
    Cost-effectiveness of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis in Population-based Breast Cancer Screening: A Probabilistic Sensitivity Analysis.
    Radiology. 2020 Aug 4:192505. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2020192505.
    >> Share

  47. SLANETZ PJ
    Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Screening for Breast Cancer: It Is Cost-Effective!
    Radiology. 2020 Aug 4:202779. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2020202779.
    >> Share

    July 2020
  48. BROWN AL, Wahab RA
    MRI of Primary Angiosarcoma of the Breast.
    Radiology. 2020 Jul 28:201377. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2020201377.
    >> Share

  49. SALIM M, Dembrower K, Eklund M, Lindholm P, et al
    Range of Radiologist Performance in a Population-based Screening Cohort of 1 Million Digital Mammography Examinations.
    Radiology. 2020 Jul 28:192212. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2020192212.
    >> Share

  50. MOY L
    BI-RADS Category 3 Is a Safe and Effective Alternative to Biopsy or Surgical Excision.
    Radiology. 2020;296:42-43.
    >> Share

    June 2020
  51. ULANER GA, Carrasquillo JA, Riedl CC, Yeh R, et al
    Identification of HER2-Positive Metastases in Patients with HER2-Negative Primary Breast Cancer by Using HER2-targeted (89)Zr-Pertuzumab PET/CT.
    Radiology. 2020 Jun 9:192828. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2020192828.
    >> Share

    May 2020
  52. BISMEIJER T, van der Velden BHM, Canisius S, Lips EH, et al
    Radiogenomic Analysis of Breast Cancer by Linking MRI Phenotypes with Tumor Gene Expression.
    Radiology. 2020 May 26:191453. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2020191453.
    >> Share

  53. CHO N
    Breast Cancer Radiogenomics: Association of Enhancement Pattern at DCE MRI with Deregulation of mTOR Pathway.
    Radiology. 2020 May 26:201607. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2020201607.
    >> Share

  54. BERG WA, Berg JM, Sickles EA, Burnside ES, et al
    Cancer Yield and Patterns of Follow-up for BI-RADS Category 3 after Screening Mammography Recall in the National Mammography Database.
    Radiology. 2020 May 19:192641. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2020192641.
    >> Share

  55. GASTOUNIOTI A, Kasi CD, Scott CG, Brandt KR, et al
    Evaluation of LIBRA Software for Fully Automated Mammographic Density Assessment in Breast Cancer Risk Prediction.
    Radiology. 2020 May 12:192509. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2020192509.
    >> Share

  56. CONANT EF, Zuckerman SP, McDonald ES, Weinstein SP, et al
    Five Consecutive Years of Screening with Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: Outcomes by Screening Year and Round.
    Radiology. 2020;295:285-293.
    >> Share

    April 2020
  57. CHANG JM, Leung JWT, Moy L, Ha SM, et al
    Axillary Nodal Evaluation in Breast Cancer: State of the Art.
    Radiology. 2020 Apr 21:192534. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2020192534.
    >> Share

  58. TAOUREL P
    Breast Cancer Screening with Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: The Initial Benefits Continue Over Time.
    Radiology. 2020 Apr 7:200622. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2020200622.
    >> Share

  59. BAHL M, Mercaldo S, Dang PA, McCarthy AM, et al
    Breast Cancer Screening with Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: Are Initial Benefits Sustained?
    Radiology. 2020 Apr 7:191030. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2020191030.
    >> Share

    March 2020
  60. KIM JY, Kim JJ, Hwangbo L, Suh HB, et al
    Kinetic Heterogeneity of Breast Cancer Determined Using Computer-aided Diagnosis of Preoperative MRI Scans: Relationship to Distant Metastasis-Free Survival.
    Radiology. 2020 Mar 31:192039. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2020192039.
    >> Share

  61. PINKER K
    Preoperative MRI Improves Surgical Planning and Outcomes for Ductal Carcinoma in Situ.
    Radiology. 2020 Mar 17:200076. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2020200076.
    >> Share

  62. YOON GY, Choi WJ, Kim HH, Cha JH, et al
    Surgical Outcomes for Ductal Carcinoma in Situ: Impact of Preoperative MRI.
    Radiology. 2020 Mar 17:191535. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2020191535.
    >> Share

  63. KIM WH, Kim HJ, Park CS, Lee J, et al
    Axillary Nodal Burden Assessed with Pretreatment Breast MRI Is Associated with Failed Sentinel Lymph Node Identification after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Breast Cancer.
    Radiology. 2020 Mar 3:191639. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2020191639.
    >> Share

    February 2020
  64. LEE CI, Lee JM
    Identifying Effective Supplemental Screening Strategies for Women with a Personal History of Breast Cancer.
    Radiology. 2020 Feb 25:200015. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2020200015.
    >> Share

  65. KIM SY, Cho N, Kim SY, Choi Y, et al
    Supplemental Breast US Screening in Women with a Personal History of Breast Cancer: A Matched Cohort Study.
    Radiology. 2020 Feb 25:191691. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2020191691.
    >> Share

  66. HEALY NA, O'Brien A, Knox M, Hargaden G, et al
    Consensus Review of Discordant Imaging Findings after the Introduction of Digital Screening Mammography: Irish National Breast Cancer Screening Program Experience.
    Radiology. 2020 Feb 11:181454. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2020181454.
    >> Share

  67. PARK AY, Han MR, Park KH, Kim JS, et al
    Radiogenomic Analysis of Breast Cancer by Using B-Mode and Vascular US and RNA Sequencing.
    Radiology. 2020 Feb 4:191368. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2020191368.
    >> Share

    January 2020
  68. LUITEN JD, Voogd AC, Luiten EJT, Broeders MJM, et al
    Recall and Outcome of Screen-detected Microcalcifications during 2 Decades of Mammography Screening in the Netherlands National Breast Screening Program.
    Radiology. 2020 Jan 28:191266. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2020191266.
    >> Share

  69. ROCHAT CJ, Baird GL, Lourenco AP
    Digital Mammography Stereotactic Biopsy versus Digital Breast Tomosynthesis-guided Biopsy: Differences in Biopsy Targets, Pathologic Results, and Discordance Rates.
    Radiology. 2020 Jan 21:191525. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019191525.
    >> Share

  70. COOLEN AMP, Korte B, Tjan-Heijnen VCG, Bodewes HW, et al
    Additional Breast Cancer Detection at Digital Screening Mammography through Quality Assurance Sessions between Technologists and Radiologists.
    Radiology. 2020 Jan 7:191388. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019191388.
    >> Share

    December 2019
  71. BAHL M
    Harnessing the Power of Deep Learning to Assess Breast Cancer Risk.
    Radiology. 2019 Dec 17:192471. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019192471.
    >> Share

  72. DEMBROWER K, Liu Y, Azizpour H, Eklund M, et al
    Comparison of a Deep Learning Risk Score and Standard Mammographic Density Score for Breast Cancer Risk Prediction.
    Radiology. 2019 Dec 17:190872. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019190872.
    >> Share

  73. HOVDA T, Holen AS, Lang K, Albertsen JL, et al
    Interval and Consecutive Round Breast Cancer after Digital Breast Tomosynthesis and Synthetic 2D Mammography versus Standard 2D Digital Mammography in BreastScreen Norway.
    Radiology. 2019 Dec 10:191337. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019191337.
    >> Share

  74. HONG S, Song SY, Park B, Suh M, et al
    Effect of Digital Mammography for Breast Cancer Screening: A Comparative Study of More than 8 Million Korean Women.
    Radiology. 2019 Dec 3:190951. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019190951.
    >> Share

    November 2019
  75. EUN NL, Kang D, Son EJ, Park JS, et al
    Texture Analysis with 3.0-T MRI for Association of Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Breast Cancer.
    Radiology. 2019 Nov 26:182718. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019182718.
    >> Share

  76. BAE MS
    Using Deep Learning to Predict Axillary Lymph Node Metastasis from US Images of Breast Cancer.
    Radiology. 2019 Nov 19:192339. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019192339.
    >> Share

  77. ZHOU LQ, Wu XL, Huang SY, Wu GG, et al
    Lymph Node Metastasis Prediction from Primary Breast Cancer US Images Using Deep Learning.
    Radiology. 2019 Nov 19:190372. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019190372.
    >> Share

    October 2019
  78. SUMKIN JH, Berg WA, Carter GJ, Bandos AI, et al
    Diagnostic Performance of MRI, Molecular Breast Imaging, and Contrast-enhanced Mammography in Women with Newly Diagnosed Breast Cancer.
    Radiology. 2019 Oct 29:190887. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019190887.
    >> Share

  79. BENNANI-BAITI B, Krug B, Giese D, Hellmich M, et al
    Evaluation of 3.0-T MRI Brain Signal after Exposure to Gadoterate Meglumine in Women with High Breast Cancer Risk and Screening Breast MRI.
    Radiology. 2019 Oct 22:190847. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019190847.
    >> Share

  80. AMORNSIRIPANITCH N, Bickelhaupt S, Shin HJ, Dang M, et al
    Diffusion-weighted MRI for Unenhanced Breast Cancer Screening.
    Radiology. 2019 Oct 8:182789. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019182789.
    >> Share

    September 2019
  81. GAO Y, Goldberg JE, Young TK, Babb JS, et al
    Breast Cancer Screening in High-Risk Men: A 12-Year Longitudinal Observational Study of Male Breast Imaging Utilization and Outcomes.
    Radiology. 2019 Sep 17:190971. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019190971.
    >> Share

  82. COLIN C, Doutriaux-Dumoulin I
    Breast Cancer Screening in BRCA Mutation Carriers: Necessity of a Relevant Update of Mammographic Modalities.
    Radiology. 2019 Sep 3:191306. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019191306.
    >> Share

  83. JOHNSON K, Zackrisson S, Rosso A, Sartor H, et al
    Tumor Characteristics and Molecular Subtypes in Breast Cancer Screening with Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: The Malmo Breast Tomosynthesis Screening Trial.
    Radiology. 2019 Sep 3:190132. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019190132.
    >> Share

    August 2019
  84. SUNG JS, Lebron L, Keating D, D'Alessio D, et al
    Performance of Dual-Energy Contrast-enhanced Digital Mammography for Screening Women at Increased Risk of Breast Cancer.
    Radiology. 2019 Aug 27:182660. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019182660.
    >> Share

  85. WHITMAN GJ
    Can We Use MRI and US to Predict Axillary Node Response in Breast Cancer?
    Radiology. 2019 Aug 13:191642. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019191642.
    >> Share

  86. KIM R, Chang JM, Lee HB, Lee SH, et al
    Predicting Axillary Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: Breast MRI and US in Patients with Node-Positive Breast Cancer.
    Radiology. 2019 Aug 13:190014. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019190014.
    >> Share

  87. KONTOS D, Conant EF
    Can AI Help Make Screening Mammography "Lean"?
    Radiology. 2019 Aug 6:191542. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019191542.
    >> Share

    July 2019
  88. MANN RM
    Do We Need Optoacoustic Assessment of Hypoxia to Differentiate Molecular Subtypes of Breast Cancer?
    Radiology. 2019 Jul 9:191263. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019191263.
    >> Share

  89. SITEK A, Wolfe JM
    Assessing Cancer Risk from Mammograms: Deep Learning Is Superior to Conventional Risk Models.
    Radiology. 2019;292:67-68.
    >> Share

  90. FOWLER AM
    Survival Outcomes for Women with Ductal Carcinoma in Situ in the Era of Supplemental Screening.
    Radiology. 2019;292:49-50.
    >> Share

    June 2019
  91. MANN RM, Pinker K
    Is Background Parenchymal Enhancement an Important Risk Factor for Breast Cancer Development in Women with Increased Risk?
    Radiology. 2019 Jun 25:191164. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019191164.
    >> Share

  92. THOMPSON CM, Mallawaarachchi I, Dwivedi DK, Ayyappan AP, et al
    The Association of Background Parenchymal Enhancement at Breast MRI with Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
    Radiology. 2019 Jun 25:182441. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019182441.
    >> Share

  93. AKSELROD-BALLIN A, Chorev M, Shoshan Y, Spiro A, et al
    Predicting Breast Cancer by Applying Deep Learning to Linked Health Records and Mammograms.
    Radiology. 2019 Jun 18:182622. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019182622.
    >> Share

  94. JOE BN, Hayward JH
    More Lives Risked with Risk-based versus Age-based Breast Cancer Screening.
    Radiology. 2019 Jun 11:191040. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019191040.
    >> Share

  95. WERNLI KJ, Ichikawa L, Kerlikowske K, Buist DSM, et al
    Surveillance Breast MRI and Mammography: Comparison in Women with a Personal History of Breast Cancer.
    Radiology. 2019 Jun 4:182475. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019182475.
    >> Share

  96. NEWELL MS
    Risk versus Benefit of Surveillance Breast MRI: A Sticky Wicket.
    Radiology. 2019 Jun 4:190991. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019190991.
    >> Share

    May 2019
  97. EBY PR
    Breast Cancer: Let Imaging Be Our Guide and Improving Patient Outcomes Be Our Goal.
    Radiology. 2019 May 28:190949. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019190949.
    >> Share

  98. ROSENBERG RD, Seidenwurm D
    Optimizing Breast Cancer Screening Programs: Experience and Structures.
    Radiology. 2019 May 28:190924. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019190924.
    >> Share

  99. HA SM, Cha JH, Shin HJ, Chae EY, et al
    Mammography, US, and MRI to Assess Outcomes of Invasive Breast Cancer with Extensive Intraductal Component: A Matched Cohort Study.
    Radiology. 2019 May 28:182762. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019182762.
    >> Share

  100. KORHONEN KE, Conant EF, Cohen EA, Synnestvedt M, et al
    Breast Cancer Conspicuity on Simultaneously Acquired Digital Mammographic Images versus Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Images.
    Radiology. 2019 May 14:182027. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019182027.
    >> Share

  101. YALA A, Lehman C, Schuster T, Portnoi T, et al
    A Deep Learning Mammography-based Model for Improved Breast Cancer Risk Prediction.
    Radiology. 2019 May 7:182716. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019182716.
    >> Share

  102. SIPPO DA, Burk KS, Mercaldo SF, Rutledge GM, et al
    Performance of Screening Breast MRI across Women with Different Elevated Breast Cancer Risk Indications.
    Radiology. 2019 May 7:181136. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019181136.
    >> Share

    April 2019
  103. CHOI SH, Choi JS, Han BK, Ko EY, et al
    Long-term Surveillance of Ductal Carcinoma in Situ Detected with Screening Mammography versus US: Factors Associated with Second Breast Cancer.
    Radiology. 2019 Apr 30:181844. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019181844.
    >> Share

  104. MOY L
    Is Digital Breast Tomosynthesis the Better Mammogram for Local Breast Cancer Staging?
    Radiology. 2019 Apr 9:190590. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019190590.
    >> Share

  105. FONTAINE M, Tourasse C, Pages E, Laurent N, et al
    Local Tumor Staging of Breast Cancer: Digital Mammography versus Digital Mammography Plus Tomosynthesis.
    Radiology. 2019 Apr 9:182457. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019182457.
    >> Share

  106. PARTRIDGE SC, Newitt DC, Chenevert TL, Rosen MA, et al
    Diffusion-weighted MRI in Multicenter Trials of Breast Cancer.
    Radiology. 2019 Apr 2:190446. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019190446.
    >> Share

  107. LANG K
    The Coming of Age of Breast Tomosynthesis in Screening.
    Radiology. 2019;291:31-33.
    >> Share

    March 2019
  108. TAOUREL P
    Diffusion-weighted MRI for Breast Cancer: Why and with What Impact?
    Radiology. 2019 Mar 12:190331. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019190331.
    >> Share

  109. KIM JY, Kim JJ, Hwangbo L, Kang T, et al
    Diffusion-weighted Imaging of Invasive Breast Cancer: Relationship to Distant Metastasis-free Survival.
    Radiology. 2019 Mar 12:181706. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019181706.
    >> Share

    February 2019
  110. SKAANE P, Bandos AI, Niklason LT, Sebuodegard S, et al
    Digital Mammography versus Digital Mammography Plus Tomosynthesis in Breast Cancer Screening: The Oslo Tomosynthesis Screening Trial.
    Radiology. 2019 Feb 19:182394. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019182394.
    >> Share

  111. LI H, Mendel KR, Lan L, Sheth D, et al
    Digital Mammography in Breast Cancer: Additive Value of Radiomics of Breast Parenchyma.
    Radiology. 2019 Feb 12:181113. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019181113.
    >> Share

  112. SHAFFER K
    Mammographic Parenchymal Analysis: Can We Do Better with Digital Assistance?
    Radiology. 2019 Feb 12:190085. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019190085.
    >> Share

  113. MAURI G, Sconfienza LM, Sardanelli F
    Imaging-guided Percutaneous Ablation: A Step Forward to Minimize the Invasiveness of Breast Cancer Treatment.
    Radiology. 2019 Feb 5:182448. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019182448.
    >> Share

    December 2018
  114. BLANKS RG, Wallis MG, Alison R, Kearins O, et al
    Impact of Digital Mammography on Cancer Detection and Recall Rates: 11.3 Million Screening Episodes in the English National Health Service Breast Cancer Screening Program.
    Radiology. 2018 Dec 11:181426. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2018181426.
    >> Share

  115. LEE CI, Lee JM
    Impact of New Technology Adoption on Breast Cancer Screening.
    Radiology. 2018 Dec 11:182476. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2018182476.
    >> Share

    November 2018
  116. RODRIGUEZ-RUIZ A, Krupinski E, Mordang JJ, Schilling K, et al
    Detection of Breast Cancer with Mammography: Effect of an Artificial Intelligence Support System.
    Radiology. 2018 Nov 20:181371. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2018181371.
    >> Share

    October 2018
  117. PINKER K
    Beyond Breast Density: Radiomic Phenotypes Enhance Assessment of Breast Cancer Risk.
    Radiology. 2018 Oct 30:182296. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2018182296.
    >> Share

  118. KONTOS D, Winham SJ, Oustimov A, Pantalone L, et al
    Radiomic Phenotypes of Mammographic Parenchymal Complexity: Toward Augmenting Breast Density in Breast Cancer Risk Assessment.
    Radiology. 2018 Oct 30:180179. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2018180179.
    >> Share

  119. CHEN Y, Panda A, Pahwa S, Hamilton JI, et al
    Three-dimensional MR Fingerprinting for Quantitative Breast Imaging.
    Radiology. 2018 Oct 30:180836. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2018180836.
    >> Share

    September 2018
  120. PARTRIDGE SC, Zhang Z, Newitt DC, Gibbs JE, et al
    Diffusion-weighted MRI Findings Predict Pathologic Response in Neoadjuvant Treatment of Breast Cancer: The ACRIN 6698 Multicenter Trial.
    Radiology. 2018 Sep 4:180273. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2018180273.
    >> Share

  121. DESOUZA NM
    Diffusion-weighted MRI in Multicenter Trials of Breast Cancer: A Useful Measure of Tumor Response?
    Radiology. 2018 Sep 4:181717. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2018181717.
    >> Share

  122. MOY L
    Should We Continue to Biopsy All Amorphous Calcifications?
    Radiology. 2018;288:680-681.
    >> Share

    August 2018
  123. ZHANG X, Zheng C, Yang Z, Cheng Z, et al
    Axillary Sentinel Lymph Nodes in Breast Cancer: Quantitative Evaluation at Dual-Energy CT.
    Radiology. 2018 Aug 28:180544. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2018180544.
    >> Share

  124. HYLTON NM
    Residual Disease after Neoadjuvant Therapy for Breast Cancer: Can MRI Help?
    Radiology. 2018 Aug 28:181846. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2018181846.
    >> Share

  125. GARCIA-TEJEDOR A, Guma A, Soler T, Valdivieso A, et al
    Radiofrequency Ablation Followed by Surgical Excision versus Lumpectomy for Early Stage Breast Cancer: A Randomized Phase II Clinical Trial.
    Radiology. 2018 Aug 21:180235. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2018180235.
    >> Share

  126. BREM RF
    Radiofrequency Ablation of Breast Cancer: A Step Forward.
    Radiology. 2018 Aug 21:181784. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2018181784.
    >> Share

  127. PHILPOTTS LE
    Machine Detection of High Breast Density: Worse Outcomes for Our Patients.
    Radiology. 2018;288:353-354.
    >> Share

  128. EISENBERG AM, Eppelheimer CN, Fulop TA, Abramson LL, et al
    Case 256: Breast Implant-associated Anaplastic Large-Cell Lymphoma.
    Radiology. 2018;288:624-629.
    >> Share

    July 2018
  129. SHIN SU, Cho N, Lee HB, Kim SY, et al
    Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Surgery for Breast Cancer: Preoperative MRI Features Associated with Local Recurrence.
    Radiology. 2018 Jul 24:172888. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2018172888.
    >> Share

  130. JAMSHIDI N, Yamamoto S, Gornbein J, Kuo MD, et al
    Receptor-based Surrogate Subtypes and Discrepancies with Breast Cancer Intrinsic Subtypes: Implications for Image Biomarker Development.
    Radiology. 2018 Jul 24:171118. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2018171118.
    >> Share

    June 2018
  131. MOSHINA N, Sebuodegard S, Lee CI, Akslen LA, et al
    Automated Volumetric Analysis of Mammographic Density in a Screening Setting: Worse Outcomes for Women with Dense Breasts.
    Radiology. 2018 Jun 26:172972. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2018172972.
    >> Share

  132. OLIGANE HC, Berg WA, Bandos AI, Chen SS, et al
    Grouped Amorphous Calcifications at Mammography: Frequently Atypical but Rarely Associated with Aggressive Malignancy.
    Radiology. 2018 Jun 19:172406. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2018172406.
    >> Share

  133. PATTACINI P, Nitrosi A, Rossi PG, Iotti V, et al
    Digital Mammography versus Digital Mammography Plus Tomosynthesis for Breast Cancer Screening: The Reggio Emilia Tomosynthesis Randomized Trial.
    Radiology. 2018 Jun 5:172119. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2018172119.
    >> Share

  134. KANG SK, Jiang M, Duszak R Jr, Heller SL, et al
    Use of Breast Cancer Screening and Its Association with Later Use of Preventive Services among Medicare Beneficiaries.
    Radiology. 2018 Jun 5:172326. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2018172326.
    >> Share

  135. WHITMAN GJ, Cantor SB
    Effect of Screening Mammography on Other Preventive Services in Older Women.
    Radiology. 2018 Jun 5:180937. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2018180937.
    >> Share

  136. PINKER K, Chin J, Melsaether AN, Morris EA, et al
    Precision Medicine and Radiogenomics in Breast Cancer: New Approaches toward Diagnosis and Treatment.
    Radiology. 2018;287:732-747.
    >> Share

    May 2018
  137. MAZARI FAK, Sharma N, Dodwell D, Horgan K, et al
    Human Epidermal Growth Factor 2-positive Breast Cancer with Mammographic Microcalcification: Relationship to Pathologic Complete Response after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy.
    Radiology. 2018 May 16:170960. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2018170960.
    >> Share

    April 2018
  138. WU J, Cao G, Sun X, Lee J, et al
    Intratumoral Spatial Heterogeneity at Perfusion MR Imaging Predicts Recurrence-free Survival in Locally Advanced Breast Cancer Treated with Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy.
    Radiology. 2018 Apr 27:172462. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2018172462.
    >> Share

  139. GILLIES RJ, Balagurunathan Y
    Perfusion MR Imaging of Breast Cancer: Insights Using "Habitat Imaging".
    Radiology. 2018 Apr 27:180271. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2018180271.
    >> Share

  140. MENEZES GLG, Pijnappel RM, Meeuwis C, Bisschops R, et al
    Downgrading of Breast Masses Suspicious for Cancer by Using Optoacoustic Breast Imaging.
    Radiology. 2018 Apr 17:170500. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2018170500.
    >> Share

  141. ROSENBERG RD, Seidenwurm D
    Breast Cancer Screening: Two (or Three) Heads Are Better than One?
    Radiology. 2018 Apr 10:180207. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2018180207.
    >> Share

  142. TAYLOR-PHILLIPS S, Jenkinson D, Stinton C, Wallis MG, et al
    Double Reading in Breast Cancer Screening: Cohort Evaluation in the CO-OPS Trial.
    Radiology. 2018 Apr 10:171010. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2018171010.
    >> Share

  143. BURNSIDE ES, Vulkan D, Blanks RG, Duffy SW, et al
    Association between Screening Mammography Recall Rate and Interval Cancers in the UK Breast Cancer Service Screening Program: A Cohort Study.
    Radiology. 2018 Apr 3:171539. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2018171539.
    >> Share

  144. PISANO ED
    Is Tomosynthesis the Future of Breast Cancer Screening?
    Radiology. 2018;287:47-48.
    >> Share

    March 2018
  145. KIM GR, Choi JS, Han BK, Lee JE, et al
    Preoperative Axillary US in Early-Stage Breast Cancer: Potential to Prevent Unnecessary Axillary Lymph Node Dissection.
    Radiology. 2018 Mar 20:171987. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2018171987.
    >> Share

  146. BAHL M, Barzilay R, Yedidia AB, Locascio NJ, et al
    High-Risk Breast Lesions: A Machine Learning Model to Predict Pathologic Upgrade and Reduce Unnecessary Surgical Excision.
    Radiology. 2018;286:810-818.
    >> Share

    February 2018
  147. 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.
    >> Share

  148. SEIDENWURM D, Breslau J
    Recall Rate Benchmark for Screening Breast MR Imaging in Community Practice.
    Radiology. 2018;286:728-729.
    >> Share

  149. IMBRIACO M, Cuocolo R
    Does Texture Analysis of MR Images of Breast Tumors Help Predict Response to Treatment?
    Radiology. 2018;286:421-423.
    >> Share

  150. CONANT EF, Sprague BL, Kontos D
    Beyond BI-RADS Density: A Call for Quantification in the Breast Imaging Clinic.
    Radiology. 2018;286:401-404.
    >> Share

    January 2018
  151. GAO Y, Albert M, Young Lin LL, Lewin AA, et al
    What Happens after a Diagnosis of High-Risk Breast Lesion at Stereotactic Vacuum-assisted Biopsy? An Observational Study of Postdiagnosis Management and Imaging Adherence.
    Radiology. 2018 Jan 29:171665. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2017171665.
    >> Share

  152. 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.
    >> Share

  153. ELEZABY M, Li G, Bhargavan-Chatfield M, Burnside ES, et al
    ACR BI-RADS Assessment Category 4 Subdivisions in Diagnostic Mammography: Utilization and Outcomes in the National Mammography Database.
    Radiology. 2018 Jan 9:170770. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2017170770.
    >> Share

  154. MOY L
    Do Tumor Shrinkage Patterns at Breast MR Imaging Predict Survival?
    Radiology. 2018;286:58-59.
    >> Share

    December 2017
  155. 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.
    >> Share

  156. HENDRICK RE
    Obligate Overdiagnosis Due to Mammographic Screening: A Direct Estimate for U.S. Women.
    Radiology. 2017 Dec 21:171622. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2017171622.
    >> Share

  157. 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.
    >> Share

  158. CAUMO F, Zorzi M, Brunelli S, Romanucci G, et al
    Digital Breast Tomosynthesis with Synthesized Two-Dimensional Images versus Full-Field Digital Mammography for Population Screening: Outcomes from the Verona Screening Program.
    Radiology. 2017 Dec 13:170745. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2017170745.
    >> Share

  159. GORDON PB, Berg WA, Jankowitz RC
    Breast Cancer Recurrence after Initial Detection with Screening US.
    Radiology. 2017;285:1054-1055.
    >> Share

    November 2017
  160. DIPRETE O, Lourenco AP, Baird GL, Mainiero MB, et al
    Screening Digital Mammography Recall Rate: Does It Change with Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Experience?
    Radiology. 2017 Nov 28:170517. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2017170517.
    >> Share

  161. NEUSCHLER EI, Butler R, Young CA, Barke LD, et al
    A Pivotal Study of Optoacoustic Imaging to Diagnose Benign and Malignant Breast Masses: A New Evaluation Tool for Radiologists.
    Radiology. 2017 Nov 27:172228. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2017172228.
    >> Share

  162. WEIGEL S, Khil L, Hense HW, Decker T, et al
    Detection Rates of Ductal Carcinoma in Situ with Biannual Digital Mammography Screening: Radiologic Findings Support Pathologic Model of Tumor Progression.
    Radiology. 2017 Nov 6:170673. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2017170673.
    >> Share

  163. IIMA M, Kataoka M, Kanao S, Onishi N, et al
    Intravoxel Incoherent Motion and Quantitative Non-Gaussian Diffusion MR Imaging: Evaluation of the Diagnostic and Prognostic Value of Several Markers of Malignant and Benign Breast Lesions.
    Radiology. 2017 Nov 2:162853. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2017162853.
    >> Share

  164. FOWLER AM, Mankoff DA, Joe BN
    Imaging Neoadjuvant Therapy Response in Breast Cancer.
    Radiology. 2017;285:358-375.
    >> Share

    October 2017
  165. LEE SH, Yi A, Jang MJ, Chang JM, et al
    Supplemental Screening Breast US in Women with Negative Mammographic Findings: Effect of Routine Axillary Scanning.
    Radiology. 2017 Oct 30:171218. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2017171218.
    >> Share

  166. RAY KM, Kerlikowske K, Lobach IV, Hofmann MB, et al
    Effect of Background Parenchymal Enhancement on Breast MR Imaging Interpretive Performance in Community-based Practices.
    Radiology. 2017 Oct 25:170811. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2017170811.
    >> Share

  167. 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.
    >> Share

  168. VREEMANN S, Gubern-Merida A, Schlooz-Vries MS, Bult P, et al
    Influence of Risk Category and Screening Round on the Performance of an MR Imaging and Mammography Screening Program in Carriers of the BRCA Mutation and Other Women at Increased Risk.
    Radiology. 2017 Oct 16:170458. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2017170458.
    >> Share

  169. CHAMMING'S F, Ueno Y, Ferre R, Kao E, et al
    Features from Computerized Texture Analysis of Breast Cancers at Pretreatment MR Imaging Are Associated with Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy.
    Radiology. 2017 Oct 4:170143. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2017170143.
    >> Share

    September 2017
  170. 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.
    >> Share

  171. 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.
    >> Share

  172. 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.
    >> Share

  173. COLIN C
    Mammographic Density: Is There a Public Health Significance Linked to Published Relative Risk Data?
    Radiology. 2017;284:918-919.
    >> Share

    August 2017
  174. LEE JM, Miglioretti DL, Burnside ES, Morris EA, et al
    Mammography Performance Benchmarks in an Era of Value-based Care.
    Radiology. 2017;284:605-607.
    >> Share

  175. SEIDENWURM D, Breslau J
    Diagnostic Outcomes of Screening and Diagnostic Mammography.
    Radiology. 2017;284:610-611.
    >> Share

    January 2017
  176. BOEHM-STURM P, Haeckel A, Hauptmann R, Mueller S, et al
    Low-Molecular-Weight Iron Chelates May Be an Alternative to Gadolinium-based Contrast Agents for T1-weighted Contrast-enhanced MR Imaging.
    Radiology. 2017 Jan 7:170116. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2017170116.
    >> Share


Free Medical Abstracts
Privacy Policy
Sponsors
Share

© Amedeo 1997-2016