The significance of new densities and microcalcification in the second round of breast screening

Clinical Radiology

Volumn 54, Issue 4, 1999, Pages 243-247

  Hussain, Hero K ^a,b   Ng, Yin Yuen ^a   Wells, Clive A ^a   Courts, Miriam ^a   Nockler, Inge B ^a   Curling, O Marigold ^a   Carpenter, Robert ^a   Perry, Nicholas M ^a  

^a ST BARTHOLOMEW S HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^b Department of Radiology   (United States)

Author keywords

Breast; Mammography; Neoplasms; Screening

Indexed keywords

SEX HORMONE;

ARTICLE; ASPIRATION BIOPSY; BREAST BIOPSY; BREAST CALCIFICATION; BREAST CANCER; BREAST CYST; BREAST LESION; CYTODIAGNOSIS; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; FEMALE; HORMONE SUBSTITUTION; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MAMMOGRAPHY; MASS SCREENING; MORPHOLOGY; NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE; OPTICAL DENSITY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; TISSUE DISTRIBUTION; UNITED KINGDOM;

EID: 0032897718     PISSN: 00099260     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0009-9260(99)91159-5     Document Type: Article

References (12)

1. Wilhelm MC, de Paredes ES, Pope T, Wanebo HJ. The changing mammogram: a primary indication for needle localization biopsy. Arch Surg 1986;121:1311-1314.
2. Sickles EA. Periodic mammographic follow-up of probably benign lesions: results in 3,184 consecutive cases. Radiology 1991;179:463-468.
3. Breast Cancer Screening: Report to Health Ministers of England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland by a Working Group chaired by Professor Sir Patrick Forrest. Department of Health and Social Security, HMSO, 1986/7.
4. Jones RD, McLean L, Young JR, Simpson W, Neilson F. Proportion of cancers detected at the first incident screen which were false negative at the prevalent screen. Breast 1996;5:339-343.
5. Opie H, Estes NC, Jewell WR, Chang CHJ, Thomas JA, Estes MA. Breast biopsy for nonpalpable lesions: a worthwhile endeavor? Am Surg 1993;59:490-494.
6. Tabar L, Dean PB. Teaching Atlas of Mammography, 2nd ed. New York: Springer-Thieme, 1985:18.
7. Jackson VP, Dines KA, Bassett LW, Gold RH, Reynolds HE. Diagnostic importance of the radiographic density of noncalcified breast masses: analysis of 91 lesions. Am J Roentgenol 1991;157:25-28.
8. de Lafontan B, Daures JP, Salicru B, et al. Isolated clustered microcalcifications: diagnostic value of mammography - series of 400 cases with surgical verification. Radiology 1994;190:479-483.
9. Sickles EA. Mammographic features of 300 consecutive nonpalpable breast cancers. Am J Roentgenol 1986:146:661-663.
10. Harvey JA, Fajardo LL, Innis CA. Previous mammograms in patients with impalpable breast carcinoma: retrospective vs blinded interpretation. Am J Roentgenol 1993;161:1167-1172.
11. Ikeda DM, Andersson I, Wattsgard C, Janzon L, Linell F. Interval carcinomas in the Malmö mammographie screening trial: radiographic appearance and prognostic considerations. Am J Roentgenol 1992;159:287-294.
12. Kopans DB, Swann CA, White G, et al. Asymmetric breast tissue. Radiology 1989;171:639-643.