Format
Sort by
Items per page

Send to

Choose Destination

Links from PubMed

Items: 1 to 20 of 49

1.

Paradigm Shift toward Reducing Overtreatment of Ductal Carcinoma In Situ of Breast.

Sagara Y, Julia W, Golshan M, Toi M.

Front Oncol. 2017 Aug 28;7:192. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2017.00192. eCollection 2017. Review.

2.

A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing the efficacy and safety of anastrozole versus tamoxifen for breast cancer.

Yang Y, Pan W, Tang X, Wu S, Sun X.

Oncotarget. 2017 Jul 18;8(29):48362-48374. doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.16466.

3.

Force-dependent breaching of the basement membrane.

Chang TT, Thakar D, Weaver VM.

Matrix Biol. 2017 Jan;57-58:178-189. doi: 10.1016/j.matbio.2016.12.005. Epub 2016 Dec 23. Review.

PMID:
28025167
4.

Decision-Making Regarding Mammography Screening for Older Women.

Schonberg MA.

J Am Geriatr Soc. 2016 Dec;64(12):2413-2418. doi: 10.1111/jgs.14503. Epub 2016 Dec 5.

PMID:
27917463
5.

Genome evolution in ductal carcinoma in situ: invasion of the clones.

Casasent AK, Edgerton M, Navin NE.

J Pathol. 2017 Jan;241(2):208-218. doi: 10.1002/path.4840. Epub 2016 Nov 27. Review.

PMID:
27861897
6.

Evaluation of BRCAPRO Risk Assessment Model in Patients with Ductal Carcinoma In situ Who Underwent Clinical BRCA Genetic Testing.

Elsayegh N, Barrera AM, Muse KI, Lin H, Kuerer HM, Helm M, Litton JK, Arun BK.

Front Genet. 2016 Apr 27;7:71. doi: 10.3389/fgene.2016.00071. eCollection 2016.

7.

Anastrozole versus tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with ductal carcinoma in situ undergoing lumpectomy plus radiotherapy (NSABP B-35): a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 clinical trial.

Margolese RG, Cecchini RS, Julian TB, Ganz PA, Costantino JP, Vallow LA, Albain KS, Whitworth PW, Cianfrocca ME, Brufsky AM, Gross HM, Soori GS, Hopkins JO, Fehrenbacher L, Sturtz K, Wozniak TF, Seay TE, Mamounas EP, Wolmark N.

Lancet. 2016 Feb 27;387(10021):849-56. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)01168-X. Epub 2015 Dec 11.

8.
9.

Il-6 signaling between ductal carcinoma in situ cells and carcinoma-associated fibroblasts mediates tumor cell growth and migration.

Osuala KO, Sameni M, Shah S, Aggarwal N, Simonait ML, Franco OE, Hong Y, Hayward SW, Behbod F, Mattingly RR, Sloane BF.

BMC Cancer. 2015 Aug 13;15:584. doi: 10.1186/s12885-015-1576-3.

10.

A Molecular Portrait of High-Grade Ductal Carcinoma In Situ.

Abba MC, Gong T, Lu Y, Lee J, Zhong Y, Lacunza E, Butti M, Takata Y, Gaddis S, Shen J, Estecio MR, Sahin AA, Aldaz CM.

Cancer Res. 2015 Sep 15;75(18):3980-90. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-15-0506. Epub 2015 Aug 6.

11.

Continued observation of the natural history of low-grade ductal carcinoma in situ reaffirms proclivity for local recurrence even after more than 30 years of follow-up.

Sanders ME, Schuyler PA, Simpson JF, Page DL, Dupont WD.

Mod Pathol. 2015 May;28(5):662-9. doi: 10.1038/modpathol.2014.141. Epub 2014 Dec 12.

12.

Lattice-based model of ductal carcinoma in situ suggests rules for breast cancer progression to an invasive state.

Boghaert E, Radisky DC, Nelson CM.

PLoS Comput Biol. 2014 Dec 4;10(12):e1003997. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003997. eCollection 2014 Dec.

13.

Inhibition of the transition of ductal carcinoma in situ to invasive ductal carcinoma by a Gemini vitamin D analog.

Wahler J, So JY, Kim YC, Liu F, Maehr H, Uskokovic M, Suh N.

Cancer Prev Res (Phila). 2014 Jun;7(6):617-26. doi: 10.1158/1940-6207.CAPR-13-0362. Epub 2014 Apr 1.

14.

Age at diagnosis predicts local recurrence in women treated with breast-conserving surgery and postoperative radiation therapy for ductal carcinoma in situ: a population-based outcomes analysis.

Kong I, Narod SA, Taylor C, Paszat L, Saskin R, Nofech-Moses S, Thiruchelvam D, Hanna W, Pignol JP, Sengupta S, Elavathil L, Jani PA, Done SJ, Metcalfe S, Rakovitch E.

Curr Oncol. 2014 Feb;21(1):e96-e104. doi: 10.3747/co.21.1604.

15.

Progression from ductal carcinoma in situ to invasive breast cancer: revisited.

Cowell CF, Weigelt B, Sakr RA, Ng CK, Hicks J, King TA, Reis-Filho JS.

Mol Oncol. 2013 Oct;7(5):859-69. doi: 10.1016/j.molonc.2013.07.005. Epub 2013 Jul 12. Review.

16.

Reducing false-positive biopsies: a pilot study to reduce benign biopsy rates for BI-RADS 4A/B assessments through testing risk stratification and new thresholds for intervention.

Flowers CI, O'Donoghue C, Moore D, Goss A, Kim D, Kim JH, Elias SG, Fridland J, Esserman LJ.

Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2013 Jun;139(3):769-77. doi: 10.1007/s10549-013-2576-0. Epub 2013 Jun 14.

17.

Impact of mammography screening interval on breast cancer diagnosis by menopausal status and BMI.

Dittus K, Geller B, Weaver DL, Kerlikowske K, Zhu W, Hubbard R, Braithwaite D, O'Meara ES, Miglioretti DL; Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium.

J Gen Intern Med. 2013 Nov;28(11):1454-62. doi: 10.1007/s11606-013-2507-0. Epub 2013 Jun 13.

18.

Assessment of DNA methylation status in early stages of breast cancer development.

van Hoesel AQ, Sato Y, Elashoff DA, Turner RR, Giuliano AE, Shamonki JM, Kuppen PJ, van de Velde CJ, Hoon DS.

Br J Cancer. 2013 May 28;108(10):2033-8. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2013.136. Epub 2013 May 7.

19.

Regression of ductal carcinoma in situ after treatment with acupuncture.

Dehen R.

J Altern Complement Med. 2013 Nov;19(11):911-5. doi: 10.1089/acm.2012.0696. Epub 2013 Mar 28.

20.

Combined inhibition of ErbB1/2 and Notch receptors effectively targets breast ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) stem/progenitor cell activity regardless of ErbB2 status.

Farnie G, Willan PM, Clarke RB, Bundred NJ.

PLoS One. 2013;8(2):e56840. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0056840. Epub 2013 Feb 14.

Supplemental Content

Support Center