Literature DB >> 6821864

The predictive value of certain mammographic signs in screening for breast cancer.

M Moskowitz.   

Abstract

Prospective evaluation of aggressive screening for breast cancers which are either 5 mm in size or, alternatively, wholly intraductal or in situ lobular, was performed. Twenty-one percent of all cancers were identified by the presence of microcalcifications; 71% of these were minimal and the predictive value of microcalcifications was 11.5% (+/- 1.7). The probability of cancer given a radiographically benign, dominant mass over 1 cm in size, palpable or not, was 2% (+/- 0.8) and two-thirds of these cancers were minimal. If diagnosis had not been established by biopsy for these benign appearing lesions six percent of all cancers would not have been detected. Had clinical examination been omitted from screening, 32 cancers (16%) would have been eliminated, 13 of which were minimal. However, the false-positive rate would have been halved. The range of predictive values, true-positive rates, and percent of minimal cancers detected are presented for each of several mammographic signs when clinical examination was either positive or negative.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1983        PMID: 6821864     DOI: 10.1002/1097-0142(19830315)51:6<1007::aid-cncr2820510607>3.0.co;2-p

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  8 in total

1.  Presentation of similar images as a reference for distinction between benign and malignant masses on mammograms: analysis of initial observer study.

Authors:  Chisako Muramatsu; Robert A Schmidt; Junji Shiraishi; Qiang Li; Kunio Doi
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2010-01-07       Impact factor: 4.056

2.  An incidentally detected breast cancer on tc-99m MIBI cardiac scintigraphy.

Authors:  Duray Seker; Gaye Seker; Emine Ozturk; Bahattin Bayar; Hakan Kulacoglu
Journal:  J Breast Cancer       Date:  2012-06-28       Impact factor: 3.588

3.  Randomized mammographic screening for breast cancer in Stockholm. Design, first round results and comparisons.

Authors:  J Frisell; U Glas; L Hellström; A Somell
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  1986       Impact factor: 4.872

4.  The role of off-focus radiation in scatter correction for dedicated cone beam breast CT.

Authors:  Linxi Shi; Srinivasan Vedantham; Andrew Karellas; Lei Zhu
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2017-12-16       Impact factor: 4.071

5.  Using Machine Learning to Identify Benign Cases with Non-Definitive Biopsy.

Authors:  Finn Kuusisto; Inês Dutra; Houssam Nassif; Yirong Wu; Molly E Klein; Heather B Neuman; Jude Shavlik; Elizabeth S Burnside
Journal:  Healthcom       Date:  2013-10-09

6.  Positive predictive value of specific mammographic findings according to reader and patient variables.

Authors:  Aruna Venkatesan; Philip Chu; Karla Kerlikowske; Edward A Sickles; Rebecca Smith-Bindman
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2009-01-21       Impact factor: 11.105

7.  Breast cancer and atypia among young and middle-aged women: a study of 110 medicolegal autopsies.

Authors:  M Nielsen; J L Thomsen; S Primdahl; U Dyreborg; J A Andersen
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1987-12       Impact factor: 7.640

8.  The detectability of breast cancer by screening mammography.

Authors:  S Ciatto; M Rosselli Del Turco; M Zappa
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1995-02       Impact factor: 7.640

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.