Molecular breast imaging

References

• Berry DA, Cronin KA, Plevritis SK et al. Effect of screening and adjuvant therapy on mortality from breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med.353, 1784–1792 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mushlin AI, Kouides RW, Shapiro DE. Estimating the accuracy of screening mammography: a meta-analysis. Am. J. Prev. Med.14(2), 143–153 (1998).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Humphrey LL, Helfand M, Chan BKS, Woolf SH. Breast cancer screening: a summary of the evidence for the USA Preventive Services Task Force. Ann. Intern. Med.137, 347–360 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sardanelli F, Podo F, D’Agnolo G et al. Multicenter comparative multimodality surveillance of women at genetic-familial high risk for breast cancer (HIBCRIT study): interim results. Radiology242, 698–715 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lehman CD. Role of MRI in screening women at high risk for breast cancer. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging.24, 964–970 (2006).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Leconte I, Feger C, Galant C et al. Mammography and subsequent whole-breast sonography of nonpalpable breast cancers: the importance of radiologic breast density. Am. J. Roentgenol.180, 1675–1679 (2003).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kolb TM, Lichy J, Newhouse JH. Comparison of the performance of screening mammography, physical examination, and breast ultrasound and evaluation of factors that influence them: an analysis of 27,825 patient evaluations. Radiology225, 165–175 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pisano ED, Gatsonis C, Hendrick E et al. Diagnostic performance of digital versus film mammography for breast-cancer screening. N. Engl. J. Med.353(17), 1773–1783 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berg WA, Blume JD, Cormack JB et al. For the ACRIN 6666 investigators combined screening with ultrasound and mammography versus mammography alone in women at elevated risk of breast cancer. JAMA299(18), 2151–2163 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saslow D, Boetes C, Burke W, et al American cancer society guidelines for breast screening with MRI as an adjunct to mammography. CA. Cancer J. Clin.57, 75–89 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rafferty EA. Digital mammography: novel applications. Radiol. Clin. North Am.45(5), 831–843 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weismann CF, Datz L. Diagnostic algorithm: how to make use of new 2D, 3D and 4D ultrasound technologies in breast imaging. Eur. J. Radiol.64(2), 250–257 (2007).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Karellas A, Vedantham S. Breast cancer imaging: a perspective for the next decade. Med. Phys.35(11), 4878–4897 (2008).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Alizad A, Whaley DH, Greenleaf JF, Fatemi M. Critical issues in breast imaging by vibro-acoustography. Ultrasonics44(Suppl. 1), e217–e220 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raylman RR, Majewski S, Smith MF et al. The positron emission mammography/tomography breast imaging and biopsy system (PEM/PET): design, construction and phantom-based measurements. Phys. Med. Biol.53(3), 637–653 (2008).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Taillefer R. The role of 99mTc sestamibi and other conventional radiopharmaceuticals in breast cancer diagnosis. Semin. Nucl. Med.29, 16–40 (1999).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Waxman AD. The role of (99m)Tc methoxyisobutylisonitrile in imaging breast cancer. Semin. Nucl. Med.27, 40–54 (1997).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Brem RF, Schoonjans JM, Kieper DA, Majewski S, Goodman S, Civelek C. High resolution scintimammography: a pilot study. J. Nucl. Med.43, 909–915 (2002).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Coover LR, Caravaglia G, Kuhn P. Scintimammography with dedicated breast camera detects and localizes occult carcinoma. J. Nucl. Med.45, 553–558 (2004).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Brem RF, Floerke AC, Rapelyea JA, Teal C, Kelly T, Mathur V. Breast-specific γ imaging as an adjunct imaging modality for the diagnosis of breast cancer. Radiology247, 651–657 (2008).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Brem RF, Fishman M, Rapelyea JA. Detection of ductal carcinoma in situ with mammography, breast specific γ imaging, and magnetic resonance imaging: a comparative study. Acad. Radiol.14, 945–950 (2007).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Avril N, Rosé CA, Schelling M et al. Breast imaging with positron emission tomography and fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose: use and limitations. J. Clin. Oncol.18, 3495–3502 (2000).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raylman RR, Majewski S, Smith MF et al The positron emission mammography/tomography breast imaging and biopsy system (PEM/PET): design, construction and phantom-based measurements. Phys. Med. Biol.53, 637–653 (2008).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Schilling K, Conti P, Adler L, Tafra L. The role of positron emission mammography in breast cancer imaging and management. Applied Radiol.37, 26–36 (2008).
   Google Scholar
• Berg WA, Weinberg IN, Narayanan D, et al. High-resolution fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography with compression (“positron emission mammography”) is highly accurate in depicting primary breast cancer. Breast J.12, 309–323 (2006).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hruska CB, O’Connor MK, Collins DA. Comparison of small field of view g camera systems for scintimammography. Nucl. Med. Commun.26, 441–445 (2005).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hruska CB, O’Connor MK. Development of a lesion quantification method for dual-head molecular breast imaging. Med. Phys.35, 1365–1376 (2008).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hruska CB, Phillips SW, Whaley DH, Rhodes DJ, O’Connor MK. Molecular breast imaging: use of a dual-head dedicated γ camera for detection of small breast tumors. AJR Am J Roentgenol.191, 1805–1815 (2008).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• O’Connor MK, Phillips SW, Hruska CB, Rhodes DJ, Collins DA. Molecular breast imaging: advantages and limitations of a scintimammographic technique in patients with small breast tumors. Breast J.13, 3–11 (2007).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hruska CB, Boughey JC, Phillips SW et al. Molecular breast imaging: a review of the Mayo clinic experience. Am. J. Surg.196, 470–476 (2008).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hruska CB, Phillips SW, Rhodes DJ, O’Connor MK. Concordance of molecular breast imaging and breast MRI findings: a retrospective review. Eur. J. Nucl. Med. Mol. Imag.35(Suppl. 2), S200 (2008).
   Google Scholar
• Hruska CB, Rhodes DJ, Phillips SW, Whaley DH, Alabin TT, O’Connor MK, Molecular breast imaging for breast cancer screening in women with mammographically dense breasts and increased risk. [abstract]. Eur. J. Nucl. Med. Mol. Imag.35(Suppl. 2), S200 (2008).
   Google Scholar
• Hesse B, Tägil K, Cuocolo A. et al. EANM/ESC Procedural guidelines for myocardial perfusion imaging in nuclear cardiology. Eur J. Nucl. Med.32, 855–897 (2005).
   Google Scholar
• Bach-Gansmo T, Danielsson R, Saracco A, et al. Integrin receptor imaging of breast cancer: a proof-of-concept study to evaluate 99mTc-NC100692. J. Nucl. Med.47(9), 1434–1439 (2006)
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bryant J, Yang D, Schechter N et al. Evaluation of Tc-99m-EC-DG in lung cancer patients. J. Nucl. Med.48(Suppl. 2), 354P (2007).
   Google Scholar
• Papantoniou V, Tsiouris S, Koutsikos J et al. Scintimammographic detection of usual ductal hyperplasia with increased proliferation rate at risk for malignancy. Nucl. Med. Commun.27, 911–917 (2006).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mansi L, Rambaldi PF, Procaccini E et al Scintimammography with technetium-99m tetrofosmin in the diagnosis of breast cancer and lymph node metastases. Eur. J. Nucl. Med.23, 932–939 (1996).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar