National Academy of Sciences | 150 Year Anniversary

Questions? Call 800-624-6242

| Items in cart [0]

The National Academies Press

HARDBACK
price:$47.95
add to cart

Rights & Permissions

topleft topright

Saving Women's Lives: Strategies for Improving Breast Cancer Detection and Diagnosis (2005)
National Cancer Policy Board (NCPB)
Board on Science, Technology, and Economic Policy (STEP)

Citation Manager

. "2 Benefits and Limitations of Mammography." Saving Women's Lives: Strategies for Improving Breast Cancer Detection and Diagnosis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2005.

Please select a format:

BibTeX EndNote RefMan


Page
62
bottomleft bottomright

The following HTML text is provided to enhance online readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML. Please use the page image as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy.


Saving Women’s Lives: Strategies for Improving Breast Cancer Detection and Diagnosis

101. Tunon-de-Lara C, de-Mascarel I, Mac-Grogan G, Stockle E, Jourdain O, Acharian V, Guegan C, Faucher A, Bussieres E, Trojani M, Bonichon F, Barreau B, Dilhuydy MH, Dilhuydy JM, Mauriac L, Durand M, Avril A. 2001. Analysis of 676 cases of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast from 1971 to 1995: diagnosis and treatment—the experience of one institute. Am J Clin Oncol 24(6):531-536.

102. Ursin G, Astrahan MA, Salane M, Parisky YR, Pearce JG, Daniels JR, Pike MC, Spicer DV. 1998. The detection of changes in mammographic densities. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 7(1):43-47.

103. Ursin G, Parisky YR, Pike MC, Spicer DV. 2001. Mammographic density changes during the menstrual cycle. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 10(2):141-142.

104. Van Zee KJ, Liberman L, Samli B, Tran KN, McCormick B, Petrek JA, Rosen PP, Borgen PI. 1999. Long term follow-up of women with ductal carcinoma in situ treated with breast-conserving surgery: the effect of age. Cancer 86(9):1757-1767.

105. Vicini FA, Recht A. 2002. Age at diagnosis and outcome for women with ductal carcinoma-in-situ of the breast: a critical review of the literature. J Clin Oncol 20(11):2736-2744.

106. Viehweg P, Lampe D, Buchmann J, Heywang-Kobrunner SH. 2000. In situ and minimally invasive breast cancer: morphologic and kinetic features on contrast-enhanced MR imaging. MAGMA 11(3):129-137.

107. Walker RA, Dearing SJ, Lane DP, Varley JM. 1991. Expression of p53 protein in infiltrating and in-situ breast carcinomas. J Pathol 165(3):203-211.

108. Warnberg F, Bergh J, Holmberg L. 1999. Prognosis in women with a carcinoma in situ of the breast: a population-based study in Sweden. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 8(9):769-774.

109. Wazer DE, Gage I, Homer MJ, Krosnick SH, Schmid C. 1996. Age-related differences in patients with nonpalpable breast carcinomas. Cancer 78(7):1432-1437.

110. Welch HG, Black WC. 1997. Using autopsy series to estimate the disease “reservoir” for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: how much more breast cancer can we find? Ann Intern Med 127(11):1023-1028.

111. White E, Velentgas P, Mandelson MT, Lehman CD, Elmore JG, Porter P, Yasui Y, Taplin SH. 1998. Variation in mammographic breast density by time in menstrual cycle among women aged 40-49 years. J Natl Cancer Inst 90(12):906-910.

112. White SC. 1992. 1992 assessment of radiation risk from dental radiography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 21(3):118-126.

113. Yen MF, Tabar L, Vitak B, Smith RA, Chen HH, Duffy SW. 2003. Quantifying the potential problem of overdiagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ in breast cancer screening. Eur J Cancer 39(12):1746-1754.

114. Zellars R, Wolff AC. 2003. Local failure and prognostic factors in ductal carcinoma in situ: concentration on recent publications. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 15(1):9-12.

Page
62