Format
Sort by
Items per page

Send to

Choose Destination

Search results

Items: 1 to 50 of 117

1.

Deep Learning to Distinguish Recalled but Benign Mammography Images in Breast Cancer Screening.

Aboutalib SS, Mohamed AA, Berg WA, Zuley ML, Sumkin JH, Wu S.

Clin Cancer Res. 2018 Oct 11. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-18-1115. [Epub ahead of print]

PMID:
30309858
2.

Breast density implications and supplemental screening.

Vourtsis A, Berg WA.

Eur Radiol. 2018 Sep 25. doi: 10.1007/s00330-018-5668-8. [Epub ahead of print] Review.

PMID:
30255244
3.

Palpable Breast Lump Triage by Minimally Trained Operators in Mexico Using Computer-Assisted Diagnosis and Low-Cost Ultrasound.

Love SM, Berg WA, Podilchuk C, López Aldrete AL, Gaxiola Mascareño AP, Pathicherikollamparambil K, Sankarasubramanian A, Eshraghi L, Mammone R.

J Glob Oncol. 2018 Aug;(4):1-9. doi: 10.1200/JGO.17.00222.

PMID:
30156946
4.

Dedicated Breast Gamma Camera Imaging and Breast PET: Current Status and Future Directions.

Narayanan D, Berg WA.

PET Clin. 2018 Jul;13(3):363-381. doi: 10.1016/j.cpet.2018.02.008. Review.

PMID:
30100076
5.

Grouped Amorphous Calcifications at Mammography: Frequently Atypical but Rarely Associated with Aggressive Malignancy.

Oligane HC, Berg WA, Bandos AI, Chen SS, Sohrabi S, Anello M, Zuley ML.

Radiology. 2018 Sep;288(3):671-679. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2018172406. Epub 2018 Jun 19.

PMID:
29916773
6.
7.

Can Optoacoustic Imaging Safely Reduce Benign Breast Biopsies?

Berg WA.

Radiology. 2018 May;287(2):413-415. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2018180121. No abstract available.

PMID:
29668408
8.

Use of Breast-Specific PET Scanners and Comparison with MR Imaging.

Narayanan D, Berg WA.

Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 2018 May;26(2):265-272. doi: 10.1016/j.mric.2017.12.006. Review.

PMID:
29622131
9.

A deep learning method for classifying mammographic breast density categories.

Mohamed AA, Berg WA, Peng H, Luo Y, Jankowitz RC, Wu S.

Med Phys. 2018 Jan;45(1):314-321. doi: 10.1002/mp.12683. Epub 2017 Dec 22.

PMID:
29159811
10.

Breast Cancer Recurrence after Initial Detection with Screening US.

Gordon PB, Berg WA, Jankowitz RC.

Radiology. 2017 Dec;285(3):1054-1055. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2017171849. No abstract available.

PMID:
29155627
11.

DCE-MRI Background Parenchymal Enhancement Quantified from an Early versus Delayed Post-contrast Sequence: Association with Breast Cancer Presence.

Wu S, Zuley ML, Berg WA, Kurland BF, Jankowitz RC, Sumkin JH, Gur D.

Sci Rep. 2017 May 18;7(1):2115. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-02341-8.

12.

Upgrade Rate and Imaging Features of Atypical Apocrine Lesions.

Chang Sen LQ, Berg WA, Carter GJ.

Breast J. 2017 Sep;23(5):569-578. doi: 10.1111/tbj.12789. Epub 2017 Mar 23.

PMID:
28333404
13.

Core Breast Biopsies Showing Lobular Carcinoma In Situ Should Be Excised and Surveillance Is Reasonable for Atypical Lobular Hyperplasia.

Sen LQ, Berg WA, Hooley RJ, Carter GJ, Desouki MM, Sumkin JH.

AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016 Nov;207(5):1132-1145. Epub 2016 Aug 17.

PMID:
27532153
14.

Breast MRI contrast enhancement kinetics of normal parenchyma correlate with presence of breast cancer.

Wu S, Berg WA, Zuley ML, Kurland BF, Jankowitz RC, Nishikawa R, Gur D, Sumkin JH.

Breast Cancer Res. 2016 Jul 22;18(1):76. doi: 10.1186/s13058-016-0734-0.

15.

Current Status of Supplemental Screening in Dense Breasts.

Berg WA.

J Clin Oncol. 2016 Mar 9. pii: JCO658674. [Epub ahead of print] No abstract available.

16.

Nuclear Breast Imaging: Clinical Results and Future Directions.

Berg WA.

J Nucl Med. 2016 Feb;57 Suppl 1:46S-52S. doi: 10.2967/jnumed.115.157891. Review.

17.

No myth: Benefits of breast screening.

Berg JM, Berg WA.

Nature. 2016 Jan 21;529(7586):283. doi: 10.1038/529283b. No abstract available. Erratum in: Nature. 2016 Feb 25;530(7591):419.

PMID:
26791708
18.

Supplemental Breast Cancer Screening in Women With Dense Breasts Should Be Offered With Simultaneous Collection of Outcomes Data.

Berg WA.

Ann Intern Med. 2016 Feb 16;164(4):299-300. doi: 10.7326/M15-2977. Epub 2016 Jan 12. No abstract available.

19.

Ultrasound as the Primary Screening Test for Breast Cancer: Analysis From ACRIN 6666.

Berg WA, Bandos AI, Mendelson EB, Lehrer D, Jong RA, Pisano ED.

J Natl Cancer Inst. 2015 Dec 28;108(4). pii: djv367. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djv367. Print 2016 Apr.

20.

Quantitative Maximum Shear-Wave Stiffness of Breast Masses as a Predictor of Histopathologic Severity.

Berg WA, Mendelson EB, Cosgrove DO, Doré CJ, Gay J, Henry JP, Cohen-Bacrie C.

AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015 Aug;205(2):448-55. doi: 10.2214/AJR.14.13448.

PMID:
26204299
21.

Supplemental ultrasonography screening for women with dense breasts.

Berg WA, Gur D.

Ann Intern Med. 2015 Jun 2;162(11):801. doi: 10.7326/L15-5061. No abstract available.

PMID:
26030640
22.

Response.

Berg WA, Mendelson EB.

Radiology. 2015 Feb;274(2):624. No abstract available.

PMID:
25785290
23.

Ligation-independent cloning for plant research.

Wendrich JR, Liao CY, van den Berg WA, De Rybel B, Weijers D.

Methods Mol Biol. 2015;1284:421-31. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4939-2444-8_21.

PMID:
25757785
24.

Training and standards for performance, interpretation, and structured reporting for supplemental breast cancer screening.

Mendelson EB, Berg WA.

AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015 Feb;204(2):265-8. doi: 10.2214/AJR.14.13794.

PMID:
25615748
25.

How should screening breast US be audited? The patient perspective.

Berg WA, Mendelson EB.

Radiology. 2014 Aug;272(2):309-15. doi: 10.1148/radiol.14140653. No abstract available.

PMID:
25058130
26.

Technologist-performed handheld screening breast US imaging: how is it performed and what are the outcomes to date?

Berg WA, Mendelson EB.

Radiology. 2014 Jul;272(1):12-27. doi: 10.1148/radiol.14132628. Review.

PMID:
24956046
27.

How well does supplemental screening magnetic resonance imaging work in high-risk women?

Berg WA.

J Clin Oncol. 2014 Jul 20;32(21):2193-6. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2014.56.2975. Epub 2014 Jun 16. No abstract available.

PMID:
24934782
28.

Structural basis for DNA binding specificity by the auxin-dependent ARF transcription factors.

Boer DR, Freire-Rios A, van den Berg WA, Saaki T, Manfield IW, Kepinski S, López-Vidrieo I, Franco-Zorrilla JM, de Vries SC, Solano R, Weijers D, Coll M.

Cell. 2014 Jan 30;156(3):577-89. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2013.12.027.

29.

Breast cancer detection using high-resolution breast PET compared to whole-body PET or PET/CT.

Kalinyak JE, Berg WA, Schilling K, Madsen KS, Narayanan D, Tartar M.

Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2014 Feb;41(2):260-75. doi: 10.1007/s00259-013-2553-1. Epub 2013 Oct 2.

PMID:
24085500
30.

Probably benign lesions at screening breast US in a population with elevated risk: prevalence and rate of malignancy in the ACRIN 6666 trial.

Barr RG, Zhang Z, Cormack JB, Mendelson EB, Berg WA.

Radiology. 2013 Dec;269(3):701-12. doi: 10.1148/radiol.13122829. Epub 2013 Oct 28.

31.

Multiple bilateral circumscribed masses at screening breast US: consider annual follow-up.

Berg WA, Zhang Z, Cormack JB, Mendelson EB.

Radiology. 2013 Sep;268(3):673-83. doi: 10.1148/radiol.13122251. Epub 2013 Apr 24.

32.

Large rodlike calcifications at mammography: analysis of morphologic features.

Graf O, Berg WA, Sickles EA.

AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2013 Feb;200(2):299-303. doi: 10.2214/AJR.12.9104.

PMID:
23345349
33.

Gamma camera breast imaging lexicon.

Conners AL, Maxwell RW, Tortorelli CL, Hruska CB, Rhodes DJ, Boughey JC, Berg WA.

AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2012 Dec;199(6):W767-74. doi: 10.2214/AJR.11.8298.

PMID:
23169751
34.

Cofactor binding protects flavodoxin against oxidative stress.

Lindhoud S, van den Berg WA, van den Heuvel RH, Heck AJ, van Mierlo CP, van Berkel WJ.

PLoS One. 2012;7(7):e41363. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0041363. Epub 2012 Jul 19.

35.

Training the ACRIN 6666 Investigators and effects of feedback on breast ultrasound interpretive performance and agreement in BI-RADS ultrasound feature analysis.

Berg WA, Blume JD, Cormack JB, Mendelson EB.

AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2012 Jul;199(1):224-35. doi: 10.2214/AJR.11.7324.

36.

Effectiveness of breast cancer screening: what are the metrics.

Berg WA.

Oncology (Williston Park). 2012 May 15;26(5). pii: 168238. No abstract available.

37.

Detection of breast cancer with addition of annual screening ultrasound or a single screening MRI to mammography in women with elevated breast cancer risk.

Berg WA, Zhang Z, Lehrer D, Jong RA, Pisano ED, Barr RG, Böhm-Vélez M, Mahoney MC, Evans WP 3rd, Larsen LH, Morton MJ, Mendelson EB, Farria DM, Cormack JB, Marques HS, Adams A, Yeh NM, Gabrielli G; ACRIN 6666 Investigators.

JAMA. 2012 Apr 4;307(13):1394-404. doi: 10.1001/jama.2012.388.

38.

Lexicon for standardized interpretation of gamma camera molecular breast imaging: observer agreement and diagnostic accuracy.

Conners AL, Hruska CB, Tortorelli CL, Maxwell RW, Rhodes DJ, Boughey JC, Berg WA.

Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2012 Jun;39(6):971-82. doi: 10.1007/s00259-011-2054-z.

PMID:
22289959
39.

Shear-wave elastography improves the specificity of breast US: the BE1 multinational study of 939 masses.

Berg WA, Cosgrove DO, Doré CJ, Schäfer FK, Svensson WE, Hooley RJ, Ohlinger R, Mendelson EB, Balu-Maestro C, Locatelli M, Tourasse C, Cavanaugh BC, Juhan V, Stavros AT, Tardivon A, Gay J, Henry JP, Cohen-Bacrie C; BE1 Investigators.

Radiology. 2012 Feb;262(2):435-49. doi: 10.1148/radiol.11110640.

PMID:
22282182
40.

Shear wave elastography for breast masses is highly reproducible.

Cosgrove DO, Berg WA, Doré CJ, Skyba DM, Henry JP, Gay J, Cohen-Bacrie C; BE1 Study Group.

Eur Radiol. 2012 May;22(5):1023-32. doi: 10.1007/s00330-011-2340-y. Epub 2011 Dec 31.

41.

Comparative effectiveness of positron emission mammography and MRI in the contralateral breast of women with newly diagnosed breast cancer.

Berg WA, Madsen KS, Schilling K, Tartar M, Pisano ED, Larsen LH, Narayanan D, Kalinyak JE.

AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2012 Jan;198(1):219-32. doi: 10.2214/AJR.10.6342.

PMID:
22194501
42.

Interpretation of positron emission mammography and MRI by experienced breast imaging radiologists: performance and observer reproducibility.

Narayanan D, Madsen KS, Kalinyak JE, Berg WA.

AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011 Apr;196(4):971-81. doi: 10.2214/AJR.10.5081.

43.

Interpretation of positron emission mammography: feature analysis and rates of malignancy.

Narayanan D, Madsen KS, Kalinyak JE, Berg WA.

AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011 Apr;196(4):956-70. doi: 10.2214/AJR.10.4748.

PMID:
21427350
44.

PET-guided breast biopsy.

Kalinyak JE, Schilling K, Berg WA, Narayanan D, Mayberry JP, Rai R, Dupree EB, Shusterman DK, Gittleman MA, Luo W, Matthews CG.

Breast J. 2011 Mar-Apr;17(2):143-51. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4741.2010.01044.x. Epub 2011 Jan 31.

PMID:
21276128
45.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® on nonpalpable mammographic findings (excluding calcifications).

Newell MS, Birdwell RL, D'Orsi CJ, Bassett LW, Mahoney MC, Bailey L, Berg WA, Harvey JA, Herman CR, Kaplan SS, Liberman L, Mendelson EB, Parikh JR, Rabinovitch R, Rosen EL, Sutherland ML.

J Am Coll Radiol. 2010 Dec;7(12):920-30. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2010.07.006.

PMID:
21129682
46.

Breast cancer: comparative effectiveness of positron emission mammography and MR imaging in presurgical planning for the ipsilateral breast.

Berg WA, Madsen KS, Schilling K, Tartar M, Pisano ED, Larsen LH, Narayanan D, Ozonoff A, Miller JP, Kalinyak JE.

Radiology. 2011 Jan;258(1):59-72. doi: 10.1148/radiol.10100454. Epub 2010 Nov 12.

47.

Cystic breast masses and the ACRIN 6666 experience.

Berg WA, Sechtin AG, Marques H, Zhang Z.

Radiol Clin North Am. 2010 Sep;48(5):931-87. doi: 10.1016/j.rcl.2010.06.007. Review.

48.

Benefits of screening mammography.

Berg WA.

JAMA. 2010 Jan 13;303(2):168-9. doi: 10.1001/jama.2009.1993. No abstract available.

49.

Reasons women at elevated risk of breast cancer refuse breast MR imaging screening: ACRIN 6666.

Berg WA, Blume JD, Adams AM, Jong RA, Barr RG, Lehrer DE, Pisano ED, Evans WP 3rd, Mahoney MC, Hovanessian Larsen L, Gabrielli GJ, Mendelson EB.

Radiology. 2010 Jan;254(1):79-87. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2541090953.

50.

Functional assignment of Glu386 and Arg388 in the active site of L-galactono-gamma-lactone dehydrogenase.

Leferink NG, Jose MD, van den Berg WA, van Berkel WJ.

FEBS Lett. 2009 Oct 6;583(19):3199-203. doi: 10.1016/j.febslet.2009.09.004. Epub 2009 Sep 6.

Supplemental Content

Support Center