Efficacy of MRI and mammography for breast-cancer screening in women with a familial or genetic predisposition.
By M. Kriege, C. Brekelmans, C. Boetes, Peter E. Besnard, H. Zonderland, I. Obdeijn, R. Manoliu, T. Kok, H. Peterse, M. Tilanus-Linthorst and 8 more. New England Journal of Medicine, 2004
1,701 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Cancer Research, Genetics, Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f751b9dcdd929d905abdc2c6708e411e56388540
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging
Citations in the corpus
- Breast cancer screening with imaging: recommendations from the Society of Breast Imaging and the ACR on the use of mammography, breast MRI, breast ultrasound, and other technologies for the detection of clinically occult breast cancer. (2010, neutral): “[60-65].”
- Screening for breast cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. (2009, positive): “Studies of MRI in high-risk women without cancer (19) showed that MRI has a sensitivity of 71% to 100% and a specificity of 81% to 97%; MRI is therefore recommended by the American Cancer Society for women at high risk for breast cancer.”
- Mammography, breast ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging for surveillance of women at high familial risk for breast cancer. (2005, background): “Given the limited efficacy of mammographic and clinical surveillance of women at high genetic risk, other nonmammographic imaging technologies have been suggested, the most important candidates being high-frequency breast ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).(22-26) In particular, ultraso”
- Meeting highlights: international expert consensus on the primary therapy of early breast cancer 2005. (2005, background): “MRI appears more sensitive than mammography in detecting tumors in women at familial increased risk [9].”