В статьях по маммографии использованы следующие сокращения:

• ВВК — верхневнутренний квадрант
• ВНК — верхненаружный квадрант
• ДНК — дезоксирибонуклеиновая кислота
• ЗГТ — заместительная гормональная терапия
• ЗСА — задняя сосковая линия
• ИА — ингибиторы ароматазы
• ИМС — инфрамаммарная складка
• ИО — истинно отрицательный
• ИП — истинно положительный
• КК — контроль качества
• КЛКТ — конусно-лучевая компьютерная томография молочной железы
• КОМЖ — клиническое обследование молочной железы
• КР — компьютерная рентгенография
• КТ — компьютерная томография
• АП — ложноположительный
• МГ — маммография
• МИС — медицинская информационная система
• МР — магнитный резонанс
• МРТ — магнитно-резонансная томография
• МФ — медицинский физик
• НВК — нижневнутренний квадрант
• ННК — нижненаружный квадрант
• ОИ — область, представляющая интерес
• ОК — обеспечение качества
• ОСА — органосохраняющее лечение
• ПИ — пиковая интенсивность
• ППЗ — положительная прогностическая значимость
• ПУПИ — поддерживающее устройство для приемников изображения
• ПЭТ — позитронно-эмиссионная томография
• РИД — расстояние между источником и детектором изображения
• РИС — радиологическая информационная система
• РП — рецептор прогестерона
• РСИ — рабочий список исследований
• РЧ — радиочастота, радиочастотный
• РЭ — рецептор эстрогена
• СБМЖ — стереотаксическая биопсия молочной железы
• СЛУ — сторожевой лимфатический узел
• ТИАБ — тонкоигольная аспирационная биопсия
• ТПДЕ — терминальная протоково-дольковая единица
• ТПТ — тонкопленочный транзистор
• УЗИ — ультразвуковое исследование
• ФПМ — функция передачи модуляции
• ЯМР — ядерный магнитный резонанс
• 2D — двухмерный
• 3D — трехмерный
• ААРМ — Американская ассоциация медицинских физиков (American Association of Physicists in Medicine')
• ABUS — автоматизированное ультразвуковое исследование молочной железы (Automated Breast UltraSound)
• ACR — Американский колледж радиологии (American College of Radiology)
• ACRIN — Сеть визуализации Американского колледжа радиологии (American College of Radiology Imaging Network)
• ACS — Американское онкологическое общество {American Cancer Society)
• AEC — автоматическое управление экспозиционной дозой {Automatic Exposure Control)
• ARRT — Американский регистр рентген-лаборантов {American Registry of Radiologic Technologists)
• AT — проекция подмышечной хвостовой доли (Axillary tail)
• AWS — рабочая станция получения изображений (Acquisition Work Station)
• BCSC — Консорциум по наблюдению за раком молочной железы (Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium)
• BIRADS — система отчетов и данных по визуализации молочной железы (Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System)
• BRCA — ген рака молочной железы (BReast CAncer gene)
• C/N — соотношение контраста и шума
• CAD — компьютерная автоматизированная диагностика (Computer-Aided Detection)
• СС — краниокаудальная (проекция) (Cranio Caudal)
• CD — компакт-диск (Compact Disc)
• CDC — центры по контролю и профилактике заболеваний (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention)
• CEM — маммография с контрастированием (Contrast-Enhanced Mammography)
• CEU — Центрально-Европейский университет (Central European University)
• СМЕ Group Inc. — Американская компания глобальных рынков (Chicago Mercantile Exchange}
• CQI — непрерывное улучшение качества (Continuous Quality Improvement)
• DBT — цифровой томосинтез молочной железы (Digital Breast Tomosynthesis)
• DCIS — протоковая карцинома in situ (Ductal Carcinoma In Situ)
• DICOM — медицинский отраслевой стандарт создания, хранения, передачи и визуализации цифровых медицинских изображений и документов обследованных пациентов (Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine)
• DMIST — скрининговое исследование цифровой маммографии (Digital Mammographic Imaging Screening Trial)
• DQE — пороговая квантовая эффективность (Detective Quantum Efficiency)
• DR — прямой луч (Direct Ray)
• DVD — универсальный цифровой диск (Digital Versatile Disc)
• EQUIP — повышение качества с помощью программы проверки (инспекционной программы) (Enhancing Quality Using the Inspection Program)
• FB — обратное изображение с фильтрацией каудокраниальная (проекция) (From below)
• FBP — обратное изображение с фильтрацией (Filtered back projection)
• FDA — Управление США по санитарному надзору за качеством пищевых продуктов и медикаментов (Food and Drug Administration)
• FFDM — цифровая полноформатная маммография (Full-Field Digital Mammography)
• GE — американская компания Дженерал Электрик (General Electric)
• HIPAA — акт о мобильности и подотчетности медицинского страхования (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act)
• HL7 — «Седьмой уровень» (Health Level Seven)
• HVL — слой половинного полуослабления (Half-Value Layer)
• ID — проекция co смещением имплантата (Implant Displaced)
• IDC — инвазивная протоковая карцинома (Invasive Ductal Carcinoma)
• IHE — интеграция учреждений здравоохранения (Integrating the Healthcare Enterprise)
• LCC — прямая краниокаудальная проекция левой молочной железы
• LCIS — дольковая карцинома in situ (Lobular Carcinoma In Situ)
• LM — латеромедиальная (проекция) (Lateromedial)
• LML — медиолатеральная проекция левой молочной железы
• LMLO — косая медиолатеральная проекция левой молочной железы
• LMO — косая латеромедиальная (проекция) (Lateromedial Oblique)
• MAP — программа сертификации маммографии (Mammography Accreditation Program)
• MCC — увеличенная краниокаудальная (проекция) {Magnified CranioCaudal)
• МЕЕ — оценка оборудования для выполнения маммографии {Mammography Equipment Evaluation)
• ML — медиолатеральная (проекция) (Mediolateral)
• MLO — косая медиолатеральная (проекция) (MedioLateral Oblique)
• MMLO — увеличенная косая медиолатеральная (проекция) (Magnified MedioLateral Oblique)
• MQSA — Закон о стандартах качества маммографии (США) (Mammography Quality Standards Act)
• NCI — Национальный институт онкологии {National Cancer Institute)
• PACS — система архивирования и связи изображений {Picture Archival Communication System)
• РЕМ — позитронно-эмиссионная маммография (Positron Emission Mammography)
• PGHS — справочная система указаний по политике (Policy Guidance Help System)
• RAID — избыточный массив недорогих дисков (Redundant Array of Inexpensive Discs)
• RCC — прямая краниокаудальная проекция правой молочной железы
• RMLO — косая медиолатеральная проекция правой молочной железы
• RWS — рабочая станция радиолога (Review Workstation)
• S/N — соотношение сигнала и шума
• SCC — прицельная компрессия в краниокаудальной проекции (Spot Compression Craniocaudal)
• SIO — косая проекция с компрессией в направлении от верхнелатерального отдела молочной железы к нижнемедиальному (Superolateral to Inferomedial Oblique)
• SMLO — прицельная компрессия в косой медиолатеральной проекции (Spot Compression Mediolateral Oblique)
• SMPTE — Общество инженеров кино и телевидения (Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers)
• TG18 — рабочая группа № 18 (Task Group 18)
• TRAM — поперечный лоскут прямой мышцы живота (Transverse Rectus Abdominis Myocutaneous)
• USPSTF — Американская рабочая группа по профилактическим мероприятиям (U.S. Preventive Services Task Force)
• XCCL — расширенная латеральная краниокаудальная проекция (Exaggerated CranioCaudal Lateral projection)
• XCCM — расширенная медиальная краниокаудальная (проекция)

В ходе подготовки статей по маммографии для пользователей сайта МедУнивер использованы труды лишь признанных зарубежных авторов:

1. PDQ Screening and PreventioN Editorial Board. «PDQ Breast Cancer Screening». Bethesda, MD : National Cancer Institute. Updated March 4, 2016. URL: http://www.cancer.gov/types/breast/hp/breast-screening-pdq (date of access June 5,2016)
2. Sickles E.A. et al. ACR BI-RADS mammography // ACR BI-RADS’ Atlas, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. Reston, VA : AmericaN College of Radiology, 2013.
3. Checka C.M. et al. The relationship of mammographic density and age: implications for breast cancer screening // AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 2012. Vol. 198, N 3. P. W292-W295.
4. McCarthy A.M. et al. Racial differences iN quantitative measures of area and volumetric breast density // J. Natl Cancer Inst. 2016. Vol. 108, N 10. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djwl04
5. Hart V, Reeves K.W., SturgeoN S.R. et al. The effect of change iN body mass index oN volumetric measures of mammographic density // Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev. 2015. Vol. 24, N 11. P. 1724-1730.
6. Phipps A.I., Buist D.S., Malone K.E. et al. Breast density, body mass index, and risk of tumor marker-defined subtypes of breast cancer // Ann. Epidemiol. 2012. Vol. 22, N 5. P. 340-348.
7. MartiN L.J., MinkiN S., Boyd N.F. Hormone therapy, mammographic density, and breast cancer risk // Maturitas. 2009. Vol. 64, N 1. P. 20-26.
8. Litherland J.C. et al. The effect of hormone replacement therapy oN the sensitivity of screening mammograms // Clin. Radiol. 1999. Vol. 54, N 5. P. 285-288.
9. Laya M.B. et al. Effect of postmenopausal hormonal replacement therapy oN mammographic density and parenchymal pattern // Radiology. 1995. Vol. 196, N 2. P. 433-437.
10. Mullooly M. et al. Mammographic density as a biosensor of tamoxifeN effectiveness iN adjuvant endocrine treatment of breast cancer: opportunities and implications // J. Clin. Oncol. 2016. Vol. 34, N 18. P. 2093-2097.
11. Megglorini M.L. et al. TamoxifeN iN womeN with breast cancer and mammographic density // Eur. J. Gynaecol. Oncol. 2008. Vol. 29, N 6. P. 598-601.
12. Boyd N.F. et al. Heritability of mammographic density, a risk factor for breast cancer // N. Engl. J. Med. 2002. Vol. 347, N 12. P. 886-894.
13. vaN Gils C.H. et al. Changes iN mammographic breast density and concomitant changes iN breast cancer risk // Eur. J. Cancer Prev. 1999. Vol. 8, N 6. P. 509-515.
14. Yaffe M.J. et al. Breast cancer risk and measured mammographic density // Eur. J. Cancer Prev. 1998. Vol. 7, suppl. 1. P. S47-S55.
15. Carney P.A. et al. Individual and combined effects of age, breast density, and hormone replacement therapy use oN the accuracy of screening mammography // Ann. Intern. Med. 2003. Vol. 138. P. 168-175.
16. Kerlikowske K., Grady D., Barclay J. et al. Effect of age, breast density, and family history oN the sensitivity of first screening mammography // JAMA. 1996. Vol. 276. P. 33-38.
17. Pisano E.D. et al.; Digital Mammographic Imaging Screening Trial (DMIST) Investigators GrouP. Diagnostic performance of digital versus film mammography for breast-cancer screening // N. Engl. J. Med. 2005. Vol. 353, N 17. P. 1773-1783.
18. Pisano E.D., Yaffe M.J. Digital mammography // Radiology. 2005. Vol. 234. P. 353-361.
19. Pisano E.D. et al. Diagnostic accuracy of digital versus film mammography: exploratory analysis of selected populatioN subgroups iN DMIST // Radiology. 2008. Vol. 246, N 2. P. 376-383.
20. Kerlikowske K. et al. Identifying womeN with dense breasts at high risk for interval cancer: a cohort study // Ann. Intern. Med. 2015. Vol. 162, N 10. P. 673-681.
21. Choi WJ. et al. Analysis of prior mammography with negative result iN womeN with interval breast cancer // Breast Cancer. 2016. Vol. 23, N 4. P. 583-589.
22. Boyd N.F. et al. Mammographic features associated with interval breast cancers iN screening programs // Breast Cancer Res. 2014. Vol. 16, N 4. P. 417.
23. Wolfe J.N. Breast patterns as aN index of risk for developing breast cancer // AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 1976. Vol. 126. P. 1130-1139.
24. Boyd N.F. et al. Mammographic density and the risk and detectioN of breast cancer // N. Engl. J. Med. 2007. Vol. 356, N 3. P. 227-236.
25. Barlow W.E. et al. Prospective breast cancer risk predictioN model for womeN undergoing screening mammography // J. Natl Cancer Inst. 2006. Vol. 98, N 17. P. 1204-1214.
26. Harvey J.A., Bovbjerg V.E. Quantitative assessment of mammographic breast density: relationship with breast cancer risk // Radiology. 2004. Vol. 230, N 1. P. 29-41.
27. Vacek P.M., Geller B.M. A prospective study of breast cancer risk using routine mammographic breast density measurements // Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev. 2004. Vol. 13, N 5. P. 715-722.
28. Yaffe M.J. et al. Breast cancer risk and measured mammographic density // Eur. J. Cancer Prev. 1998. Vol. 7, suppl. 1. P. S47-S55.
29. AmericaN Cancer Society. Breast Cancer Facts & Figures 2015-2016. Atlanta, GA : AmericaN Cancer Society, 2015.
30. Boyd N.F. et al. Breast tissue compositioN and susceptibility to breast cancer // J. Natl Cancer Inst. 2010. Vol. 102. P. 1224-1237.
31. Kerlikowske K., Cook A.J., Buist D.S. et al. Breast cancer risk by breast density, menopause, and postmenopausal hormone therapy use // J. Clin. Oncol. 2010. Vol. 28, N 24. P. 3830-3837.
32. Habel L.A., Capra A.M., Achacoso N.S. et al. Mammographic density and risk of second breast cancer after ductal carcinoma iN situ // Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev. 2010. Vol. 19, N 10. P. 2488-2495.
33. Ghosh K. et al. Independent associatioN of lobular involutioN and mammographic breast density with breast cancer risk // J. Natl Cancer Inst. 2010. Vol. 102. P. 1-8.
34. Douglas J.A. et al. Mammographic breast density — evidence for genetic correlations with established breast cancer risk factors // Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev. 2008. Vol. 17, N 2. P. 3509-3516.
35. Sprague B.L. et al. VariatioN iN mammographic breast density assessments among radiologists iN clinical practice: a multicenter observational study // Ann. Intern. Med. 2016. Vol. 165, N 7. P. 457-464. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7326/M15-2934
36. Hainline S., Myers L., McLelland R., Newell J., Grufferma N S., ShingletoN W. Mammographic patterns and risk of breast cancer // AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 1978. Vol. 130. P. 1157-1158.
37. Carlile T. et al. Breast cancer predictioN and the Wolfe classificatioN of mammograms // JAMA. 1985. Vol. 254. P. 1050-1053.
38. Fajardo L.L. et al. CorrelatioN betweeN breast parenchymal patterns and mammographers’ certainty of diagnosis // Invest. Radiol. 1988. Vol. 23. P. 505-508.
39. VaN Gils C.H. et al. Effect of mammographic breast density oN breast cancer screening performance: a study iN Nijmegen, the Netherlands // J. Epidemiol. Community Health. 1998. Vol. 52. P. 267-271.
40. MandelsoN M.T. et al. Breast density as a predictor of mammographic detection: comparisoN of interval- and screendetected cancers // J. Natl Cancer Inst. 2000. Vol. 92. P. 1081-1087.
41. Burnside E.S. et al. The ACR BI-RADS’ experience: learning from history // J. Am. Coll. Radiol. 2009. Vol. 6. P. 851-860.
42. D’Orsi C.J., Bassett L.W., Berg W.A. et al. Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS): Mammography. 4th ed. Reston, VA: AmericaN College of Radiology, 2003.
43. MartiN K.E. et al. Mammographic density measured with quantitative computer-aided method: comparisoN with radiologists’ estimates and BIRADS categories // Radiology. 2006. Vol. 240, N 3. P. 656-665.
44. NicholsoN B.T. et al. Accuracy of assigned BI-RADS breast density category definitions // Acad. Radiol. 2006. Vol. 13. P. 1143-1149.
45. Byng J.W. et al. Analysis of mammographic density and breast cancer risk from digitized mammograms // Radiographics. 1998. Vol. 18. P. 1587-1598.
46. Haas J.S., KaplaN C.P. The divide betweeN breast density notificatioN laws and evidence-based guidelines for breast cancer screening laws: legislating practice // JAMA Intern. Med. 2015. Vol. 175. P. 1439-1440.
47. Kerlikowske K. Evidence-based breast cancer prevention: the importance of individual risk // Ann. Intern. Med. 2009. Vol. 151, N 10. P. 750-752.
48. Cummings S.R. et al. PreventioN of breast cancer iN postmenopausal women: approaches to estimating and reducing risk // J. Natl Cancer Inst. 2009. Vol. 101. P. 384-398.
49. Kimpe T., Tuytschaever T. Increasing the number of gray shades iN medical display systems — how much is enough? // J. Digit. Imaging. 2007. Vol. 20, N 4. P. 422-432.
50. Highnam R. et al. Robust breast compositioN measurement — Volpara’” // IWDM 2010. LNCS. Vol. 6136 / eds J. Marti et al.. Girona, SpaiN: International Workshop oN Digital Mammography, 2010. P. 342-349.
51. Volpara Density. Wellington, NZ : Volpara Solutions, 2013.
52. Salslow D. et al. AmericaN Cancer Society guidelines for breast screening with MRI as aN adjunct to mammography // CA Cancer J. Clin. 2007. Vol. 57. P. 75-89.
53. Duffy S.W. et al. Tumor size and breast cancer detection: what might be the effect of a less sensitive screening tool thaN mammography // Breast J. 2006. Vol. 12, suppl. 1. P. S91-S95.
54. Kerlikowski K. et al. Identifying womeN with dense breasts at high risk for interval cancer: a cohort study 11 Ann. Intern. Med. 2015. Vol. 162. P. 673-681.
55. Burkett B.J., HanemanN C.W. A review of supplemental screening ultrasound for breast cancer: cer-taiN populations of womeN with dense breast tissue may benefit // Acad. Radiol. 2016. Vol. 23, N 12. P. 1604-1609. pii: S1076-6332(16)30096-4. DOI: https://doi.Org/10.1016/j.acra.2016.05.017
56. Lehtimaki T., LundiN M., Linder N. et al. Long-term prognosis of breast cancer detected by mammography or other methods // Breast Cancer Res. 2011. Vol. 13, N 6. P. R134. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/bcr3080
57. Breast Cancer Treatment (PDQ®), Stage 1, II, IIIA, and Operable IIIC Breast Cancer, National Cancer Institute. URL: http://www.cancer.gov/cancertop-ics/pdq/treatment/breast/healthprofessional (date of access August 22, 2016)
58. Miao H. et al. Long-term cognitive impairment of breast cancer patients after chemotherapy: a functional MRI study // Eur. J. Radiol. 2016. Vol. 85, N 6. P. 1053-1057.
59. Matson J., Simon М. The Pioneers of NMR and Magnetic Resonance in Medicine: The Story of MRI. Ramat Gan, Israel: Bar-Ilan University Press, 1996.
60. Lauterbur P.C. Image formation by induced local interactions: examples employing nuclear magnetic resonance // Nature. 1973. Vol. 242. P. 190-191.
61. Saslow D. et al. American cancer society guidelines for breast screening with MRI as an adjunct to mammography // CA Cancer J. Clin. 2007. Vol. 57. P. 75-89.
62. Krieg M. et al. Efficacy of MRI and mammography for breast cancer screening in women with familial or genetic predisposition // N. Engl. J. Med. 2004. Vol. 351. P. 427-437.
63. Boyd N.E. et al. Quantitative classification of mammographic densities and breast cancer risk: results from the Canadian National Breast Screening Study // J. Natl Cancer Inst. 1995. Vol. 87. P. 670-675.
64. Brisson J. et al. Mammographic features of the breast and breast cancer risk // Am. J. Epidemiol. 1982. Vol. 115. P. 428-437.
65. Byrne C. et al. Mammographic features of the breast and breast cancer risk: effects with time, age, and menopause status // J. Natl Cancer Inst. 1995. Vol. 87, N 21. P. 1622-1629.
66. Dummin L.J., Cox M., Plant L. Prediction of breast tumor size by mammography and sonography. A breast screen experience // Breast. 2007. Vol. 16, N 1. P. 46.
67. Chapter news: MR & nuclear medicine // ASRT Scanner. 1996. P. 14.
68. Coons T. MRI’s role in assessing and managing breast disease // Radiol. Technol. 1997. Vol. 67, N 4. P. 311-325.
69. Deurloo E.E. et al. Additional breast lesions // Eur. J. Cancer. 2005. Vol. 41. P. 1393-1401.
70. Berg W.A. et al. Diagnostic accuracy of mammography, clinical breast examination, US, and MR imaging in pre-operation assessment of breast cancer // Radiology. 2004. Vol. 233. P. 830-849.
71. Houssami N. et al. Accuracy and surgical impact of magnetic resonance imaging in breast cancer staging: systematic review and meta-analysis in detection of multifocal and multicentric cancer // J. Clin. Oncol. 2008. Vol. 26. P. 3248-3258.
72. Sumkin J. Transitions in breast imaging: digital mammography, MRI-guided-biopsy in aid in battle against breast cancer // RT Image. 2006. Vol. 19. P. 41.
73. Lehman C.D. et al. MRI evaluation of the contralateral breast in women with recently diagnosed breast cancer // N. Engl. J. Med. 2007. Vol. 356, N13. P. 1295-1303.
74. Hussman K. et al. MR mammographic localization: work in progress // Radiology. 1993. Vol. 189. P. 915-917.
75. 17. Bluemke D.A. et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast prior to biopsy // JAMA. 2004. Vol. 292. P. 2735-2742.
76. Stout N.K. et al. Rapid increase in breast magnetic resonance imaging use: trends from 2000 to 2011 // JAMA Intern. Med. 2014. Vol. 174. P. 114-121.
77. Sardanelli F. et al. Sensitivity of MRI versus mammography for detecting foci of multifocal, multicentric breast cancer in fatty and dense breasts using the wholebreast pathologic examination as a gold standard // AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 2004. Vol. 183. P. 1149-1157.
78. Wernli K.J. et al. Patterns of breast magnetic resonance imaging use in community practice // JAMA Intern. Med. 2014. Vol. 174. P. 125-132.
79. Kuhl C.K. et al. Mammography, breast ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging for surveillance of women at high familial risk for breast cancer // J. Clin. Oncol. 2005. Vol. 23. P. 8469-8476.
80. Leach M.O. et al. Screening with magnetic resonance imaging and mammography of a UK population at high familial risk of breast cancer; a prospective multicentre cohort study (MARBIS) // Lancet. 2005.Vol. 365. P. 1769-1778.
81. Lehmman C. et al. Screening women at high risk for breast cancer with mammography and magnetic resonance imaging // Cancer. 2005. Vol. 103. P. 898-905.
82. Gabriel H. et al. Breast MRI for cancer detection in a patient with diabetic mastopathy // Am. J. Roentgenol. 2004. Vol. 182. P. 1081-1083.
83. Pfleiderer S. et al. Dedicated double breast coil for magnetic resonance mammography imaging, biopsy, and preoperative localization // Invest. Radiol. 2003. Vol. 38, N 1. P. 1-8.
84. Kopans D.B. Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast // Breast Imaging. 3rd ed. / ed. D.B. Kopans. Philadelphia, PA : Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2006.P. 691-728.
85. Winer E. Role of MRI in breast cancer detection unclear for majority of women // HemOnc Today. 2008.URL: http://www.hemoncoltoday.com (date of access September 21, 2009)
86. Warner E. et al. Surveillance of BrCAl and BrCA2 mutation carriers with magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasound mammography and clinical breast examination // JAMA. 2004. Vol. 292. P. 1317-1325.
87. CancerConsultants.com. MRI does not improve staging compared with conventional methods in early breast cancer. URL: www.p4healthcare.com/ go/pbis/news/aspx (date of access August 6, 2009)
88. Newly diagnosed early breast cancer MRI may cause more harm than good // Medical News Today. URL: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com (date of access August 13, 2009)
89. Morrow M. Magnetic resonance imaging in the breast cancer patient: curb your enthusiasm // J. Clin. Oncol. 2008. Vol. 26, N 3. P. 352.
90. Hashemi R., Braddley W.G. Jr, Lisanti C. The Basics of MRI. Philadelphia, PA : Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 1997.
91. Mallard J.R. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) — the odyssey of one contributor to its birth // Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Proceedings of the Annual International Conference of the IEEE. Aberdeen, June 1992. Vol. 7. P. 2860-2862.
92. Hardy C.J. et al. Large field-of-view real-time MRI with 32 channel system // Magn. Reson. Med. 2004. Vol. 52, N 4. P. 878-884.
93. Bradley W. Fundamentals of MRI: part IL URL: http://www.radiography.net/mri/fund%20mr2 (date of access September 7, 2009)
94. Burum D. Guide to selecting an NMR probe // MR Resources. URL: www.mrr.com/parts/measurement (date of access September 21, 2009)
95. IT policies — networks. Materials Research Institute. URL: http://www.mri.psu/internetpolicy/net-works.asp (date of access September 7, 2009)
96. Hyton N.M., Kinkle K. Technical aspects of breast magnetic resonance imaging // Magn. Reson. Imaging. 1998. Vol. 9. P. 13-16.
97. Sun L., Olsen J.O., Robitaille P.M. Design and optimization of a breast coil for magnetic resonance imaging // Magn. Reson. Imaging. 1993. Vol. 11. P. 73-80.
98. Hyton N.M., Frankel S.D. Imaging techniques for breast MR imaging // Magn. Reson. Imaging Clin. N. Am. 1994. Vol. 2. P. 511-525.
99. New Software for MR Breast Imaging Simplifies Diagnosing Biopsies. Siemens, September 10, 2009. URL: http://www.ehealthnews.eu (date of access September 21, 2009)
100. Yeh E. et al. Perspective comparison of mammography, sonography, and MRI in patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy for palpable breast cancer // AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 2005. Vol. 184. P. 868-877.
101. Bilimoria K.Y. et al. Evaluating the impact of preoperative breast magnetic resonance imaging on the surgical management of newly diagnosed breast cancers // Arch. Surg. 2007. Vol. 142. P. 441-445.
102. Berg W. et al. Detection of breast cancer with addition of annual screening ultrasound or a single screening MRI to mammography in women with elevated breast cancer risk // JAMA. 2012. Vol. 307, N 13. P. 1394-1404.
103. Turnbull L.W. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in the diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer // NMR Biomed. 2009. Vol. 22. P. 28-29.
104. Schnall M. MR imaging evaluation of cancer extent // Magn. Reson. Imaging Clin. N. Am. 2006. Vol. 14. P. 379-381.
105. Barlow W.E. et al. Prospective breast cancer risk prediction model for women undergoing screening mammography // J. Natl Cancer Inst. 2006. Vol. 98. P. 1204-1214.
106. Friedman P. et al. Breast MRI: the importance of bilateral imaging // AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 2006. Vol. 187. P. 345-349.
107. Heron D.E. et al. Bilateral breast carcinoma: risk factors and outcomes for patients with synchronous and metachronous disease // Cancer. 2000. Vol. 88. P. 2739-2750.
108. Jobsen J.J. et al. Synchronous, bi-lateral breast cancer: prognostic value and incidence // Breast. 2003. Vol. 12. P. 3-8.
109. Kuhl C.K. MRI is better for early breast cancer detection // Lancet Study. 2007. URL: http://cancerge-netics.com/2007 (date of access May 18, 2010)
110. Thibault F. et al. MRI for surgical planning in patients with breast cancer who undergo preoperative chemotherapy // AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 2004. Vol. 183. P. 1159-1168.
111. Middleton M.S., McNamara M.P. Breast Implant Imaging (Chapters 9 and 10). Philadelphia, PA : Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2003.
112. Scaranelo A.M. et al. Evaluation of rupture of silicone breast implants by mammography, ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging in asymptomatic patients: correlation with surgical findings // Sao Paula Med. J. 2004. Vol. 122. P. 41-47.
113. Huch R.A. et al. MR Imaging of the Augmented Breast. Vol. 3. Berlin, Germany: Springer, 1998. P. 371-376.
114. Gorczyca D„ Brenner RJ. The Augmented Breast: Radiologic and Clinical Perspectives. 1st ed. New York, NY : Thieme Medical Publishers, 1996.
115. Holmich L. et al. The diagnosis of breast implant rupture: MRI findings compared with findings at explantation // Eur. J. Radiol. 2005. Vol. 53, N 2. P. 213-225.
116. Al-Hallaq H.A. et al. Magnetic resonance imaging identifies multifocal and multicentric disease in breast cancer patients who are eligible for partial breast irradiation // Cancer. 2008. Vol. 113. P. 2498-2514.
117. Ojeda-Fournier H., Comstock C. MRI breast cancer: current indications // Indian J. Radiol Imaging. 2009.Vol. 19, N 2. P. 161-169.
118. Wurdinger S. et al. Differentiation of phyllodes breast tumors from fibroadenomas on MRI // AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 2005. Vol. 185. P. 1317-1321.
119. Penn A. et al. Morphologic blooming in breast MRI as a characterization of margin for discriminating benign from malignant lesions // Acad. Radiol. 2006. Vol. 13, N 11. P. 1344-1354.
120. Kozlowski K. Breast MRI: a case for wider use // Radiol. Today. 2008. Vol. 9, N 20. P. 20.
121. Yu J., Morris E„ Park A. Efficacy of breast MRI in elderly women // Am. J. Clin. Oncol. 2007. Vol. 25, N 185. P. 608.
122. Mann R.M. et al. Breast MRI: guidelines from European Society of Breast Imaging // Eur. Radiol. 2008. Vol. 18, N 7. P. 1307-1318.
123. Ko E.Y. et al. Breast MRI for evaluating patients with metastatic axillary lymph node and initially negative mammography and sonography // Korean J. Radiol. 2007. Vol. 8, N 5. P. 382-389.
124. Houssami N., Hayes D.F. Review of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in breast cancer: should MRI be performed on all women with newly diagnosed, early stage breast cancer? // CA Cancer J. Clin. 2009. Vol. 59. P. 290-302.
125. Fisher B. et al. Effect of preoperative chemotherapy on the outcome of women with operable breast cancer // J. Clin. Oncol. 1998. Vol. 16. P. 2672-2685.
126. Poggi M.M. et al. Eighteen-year results in the treatment of early breast carcinomas with mastectomy versus breast conservation therapy: the National Cancer Institute Randomized Trial // Cancer. 2003. Vol. 98. P. 697-702.
127. Orenstein B. Think small — Mayo Clinic researchers retool scintimammography to target small lesion // Radiol. Today. 2005. Vol. 6. P. 8.
128. Turmbull L. Magnetic resonance imaging in breast cancer: results of the COMICE Trial // Breast Cancer Res. 2008. Vol. 10, N 3. P. 10.
129. Orel S.G., Schnall M.D. MR imaging of the breast for the detection, diagnosis and staging of breast cancer // Radiology. 2001. Vol. 10, N 220. P. 13-30.
130. Tozaki M„ Fukuda K. High-spatial-resolution MRI of non-mass-like breast lesions: interpretation model based on Bi-RADS MRI descriptors // AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 2006. Vol. 187. P. 330-337.
131. Anderson J., Walker L.G., Leach M.O. Magnetic resonance imaging: an acceptable way of screening women with a family history of breast cancer // Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 2004. Vol. 88, suppl. P. S188.
132. Mayo Clinic Health Solutions Staff. Mayo website. Blues Cost Advice for Breast MR. URL: http://www. blue.regence.com/trgmedpol/radiology/rad5
133. Sandep G. et al. Non-enhancing breast malignancies on MRI: sonographic and pathologic correlations // AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 2005. Vol. 185. P. 481-487.
134. Radiological Society of North America. MRI-guided breast biopsy // Radiology lnfo.org. RSNA 2010, July 10, 2009.
135. Magnetic Resonance Breast Imaging (MRI, MR). URL: http://www.imaginis.com/breasthealth/mri (date of access September 28, 2009)
136. Hricak H., Amparo E. Body MRI: alleviation of claustrophobia by prone positioning // Radiology. 1984. Vol. 152. P. 819.
137. Kanal E., Barkovich A.J., Bell C. ACR guidance document on MR safe practices: 2013 // J. Magn. Reson. Imaging. 2013. Vol. 37. P. 501-530.
138. Dorfman G.S. et al. Translational research working group // Clin. Cancer Res. 2008. Vol. 14, N 18. P. 5678-5684.
139. Berrie C. New pacemaker system safe for use with MRI: presented at ESC. September 1, 2008.
140. Liberman L. et al. MRI guided 9 gauge vacuum breast biopsy: initial clinical experience // AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 2005. Vol. 185. P. 183-193.
141. Lehman C. et al. Clinical experience with MRI-guided vacuum-assisted breast biopsy // AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 2005. Vol. 184. P. 1782-1787.
142. Schelfout K. et al. Contrast-enhanced MR imaging and the staging of breast lesions // Eur. J. Surg. Oncol. 2004. Vol. 30. P. 501-507.
143. El Khouli Riham H. et al. MRI-guided vacuum-assisted breast biopsy: a phantom and patient evaluation of targeting accuracy // J. Magn. Reson. Imaging. 2009. Vol. 30, N 2. P. 424-429.
144. Tozaki M. Diagnosis of breast cancer: MDCT versus MRI // Breast Cancer. 2008. Vol. 15, N 3. P. 205-213.
145. MRI Technology Breaks New Ground in Molecular Imaging. URL: http://www.azonaro.com/news (date of access September 18, 2009)
146. Hardy K. Functional breast imaging modalities — breast surgeons explore their routes in improving cancer diagnosis // Radiol. Today. 2009. Vol. 10, N 14. P. 22.
147. Evans J.C., Smith E.T., Nixon T.E. A national survey of attitudes towards the use of MRI in patients known to have intracranial aneurysm clips // Br. J. Radiol. 2001. Vol. 74. P. 1118-1120.
148. American College of Radiology. ACR Develops Modular MRI Accreditation Program. URL: http:// www.acr.org.accreditation/featured_categories (date of access September 21, 2009)
149. Hardy K. Breast MRI’s evolving role // Radiol. Today. 2008.Vol. 9. N 19. P. 6.
150. Gradishar W.J. et al. Invasive breast cancer version 1.2016, NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology // J. Natl Compr. Cane. Netw. 2016. Vol. 14. P. 324-354.
151. Morrow M., Freedmann G. A clinical oncology perspective on the use of breast MR // Magn. Reson. Imaging Clin. N. Am. 2006. Vol. 14. P. 363-378.
152. Godinez J. et al. Breast MRI in the evaluation of eligibility for accelerated partial breast irradiation // AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 2008. Vol. 191. P. 272-277.
153. Pengel K.E. et al. The impact of preoperative MRI on breast-conserving surgery of invasive cancer: a comparative cohort study // Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 2009.Vol. 116, N 1. P. 161-169.
154. Veronesi U. et al. Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized study comparing breast-conserving surgery with radical mastectomy for early breast cancer // N. Engl. J. Med. 2002. Vol. 347. P. 1227-1232.
155. Ma J. et al. SU-F-I-16: short breast MRI with high-resolution T2-weighted and dynamic contrast enhanced Tl-weighted images // Med. Phys. 2016. Vol. 43. P. 3390.
156. Yutzy S., Deurk J. Pulse sequences and system interfaces for interventional and real-time MRI // J. Magn. Reson. Imaging. 2009. Vol. 27, N 2. P. 267-275.
157. Plevritis S.K. et al. Cost effective for selected women with BrCA 1 and BrCA 2 mutations // JAMA. 2006. Vol. 295. P. 2374-2384.
158. Howlader N. et al. (eds). SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975-2013. Bethesda, MD : National Cancer Institute. URL: http://seer.cancer.gov/archive/ csr/1975_2013/, based oN November 2015 SEER data submission, posted to the SEER web site, April 2016.
159. Berry D.A. et al. Effect of screening and adjuvant therapy oN mortality from breast cancer // N. Engl. J. Med. 2005. Vol. 353. P. 1784-1792.
160. Siegel R.L. et al. Cancer statistics 2017 // CA Cancer J. Clin. 2017. Vol. 67, N 1. P. 7-30.
161. Miller K.D. et al. Cancer treatment and survivorship statistics 2016 // CA Cancer J. Clin. 2016. Vol. 66, N 4. P. 271-289.
162. Mastectomy vs. Lumpectomy. URL: www.breast-cancer.org/treatment/surgery/mast_vs_lump.jsp (date of access July 29, 2008)
163. AmericaN College of Surgeons, Commis-sioN oN Cancer. National Cancer Database, 2013 Data Submission. Chicago, IL : AmericaN College of Surgeons, 2015.
164. McGuire K.P. et al. Are mastectomies oN the rise? A 13-year trend analysis of the selectioN of mastectomy versus breast conservatioN therapy iN 5865 patients // Ann. Surg. Oncol. 2009. Vol. 16. P. 2682-2690.
165. Brett S. More long-term follow-up from breast cancer trials // N. Engl. J. Med. 2002. Vol. 347. P. 1227-1232.
166. Litiere S. et al. Breast conserving therapy versus mastectomy for stage I-II breast cancer: 20 year follow-up of the EORTC 10801 phase 3 randomised trial // Lancet Oncol. 2012. Vol. 13. P. 412-419.
167. FreedmaN R.A. et al. Receipt of locoregional therapy among young womeN with breast cancer // Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 2012. Vol. 135. P. 893-906.
168. Kummerow K.L. et al. Nationwide trends iN mastectomy for early-stage breast cancer // JAMA Surg. 2015. Vol. 150. P. 9-16.
169. Murthy V., ChamberlaiN R.S. Nipple sparing mastectomy iN moderN breast care // Clin. Anat. 2013. Vol. 26, N 1. P. 56-65.
170. DiSipio T. et al. Incidence of unilateral arm lymphedema after breast cancer: a systematic review and metaanalysis // Lancet Oncol. 2013. Vol. 14. P. 500-515.
171. ACS. Breast Cancer Facts & Figures 2005-2006. Atlanta, GA : AmericaN Cancer Society, 2006.
172. Cabanas R.M. AN approach for the treatment of penile carcinoma // Cancer. 1977. Vol. 39, N 2. P. 456-466.
173. Gould E.A. et al. Observations oN a «sentinel node» iN cancer of the parotid // Cancer. 1960. Vol. 13. P. 77-78.
174. MortoN D.L. et al. Technical details of intraoperative lymphatic mapping for early stage melanoma // Arch. Surg. 1992. Vol. 127, N 4. P. 392-399.
175. Veronesi U. et al. Sentinel node biopsy to avoid axillary dissectioN iN breast cancer with clinically negative lymph nodes // Lancet. 1997. Vol. 349, N 9069. P. 1864-1867.
176. Giuliano A.E. et al. Lymphatic mapping and sentinel lymphadenectomy for breast cancer // Ann. Surg. 1994. Vol. 220, N 3. P. 391-398.
177. Brachytherapy. URL: http://www.radiologyinfo.org/ en/info.cfm?pg=brachy (date of access March 23,2009)
178. Silverstone R. Robert abbe: founder of radium therapy iN America // Bull. N. Y. Acad. Med. 1956. Vol. 32, N 2. P. 157-167.
179. RT Answers. Answers to Your RadiatioN Therapy Questions. Fairfax, VA : Society for RadiatioN Oncology. URL: www.rtanswers.org/treatmentinfor-mation/index.aspx (date of access March 23, 2009)
180. Arnold N.D. et al. Age, breast cancer subtype approximation, and local recurrence after breast conserving therapy // J. Clin. Oncol. 2011. Vol. 29, N 29. P. 3885-3891.
181. CarlsoN R.W. Chapter 67: Surveillance of patients following primary therapy // Diseases of the Breast. 5th ed. / eds J.R. Harris et al. Philadelphia, PA : Lippincott Williams &Wilkins, 2014.
182. AmericaN Cancer Society 2008. Study quantifies risk of breast cancer recurrence // CA Cancer J. Clin. 2008. Vol. 58, N 6. P. 322.
183. Why Reconstruction. URL: http://www.breastcan-cer.org/treatment/surgery/reconstruction/why/ (date of access June 24, 2008)
184. Rivera E., Cianfrocca ?. Overview of neuropathy associated with taxanes for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer // Cancer Chemother. Pharmacol. 2015. Vol. 75. P. 659-670.
185. Conte P., Frassoldati A. Aromatase inhibitors iN the adjuvant treatment of postmenopausal womeN with early breast cancer: putting safety issues into perspective // Breast J. 2007. Vol. 13. P. 28-35.
186. Howard-AndersoN J. et al. Quality of life, fertility concerns, and behavioral health outcomes iN younger breast cancer survivors: a systematic review // J. Natl Cancer Inst. 2012. Vol. 104. P. 386-405.
187. Curigliano G. et al. Cardiovascular toxicity induced by chemotherapy, targeted agents and radiotherapy: ESMO clinical practice guidelines // Ann. Oncol. 2012. Vol. 23, suppl. 7. P. viil55-viil66.
188. NCI, US N1H SEER Program. SEER 17 Incidence and Mortality 2000-2003, NCI, DCCPS, Surveillance Research Program, Cancer Statistics Branch. Bethesda, MD : National Cancer Institute.
189. Cianfrocca M., Grandishar W. New molecular classifications of breast cancer // CA Cancer J. Clin. 2009. Vol. 59. P. 303-313.
190. Davies C. et al. Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group (EBCTCG), Relevance of breast cancer hormone receptors and other factors to the efficacy of adjuvant tamoxifen: patient-level meta-analysis of randomised trials // Lancet. 2011. Vol. 378. P. 771-784.
191. Schover L.R. et al. Sexual dysfunctioN and infertility as late effects of cancer treatment // EJC Suppl. 2014. Vol. 12. P. 41-53.
192. Fisher B. et al. TamoxifeN for preventioN of breast cancer: report of the national surgical adjuvant breast and bowel project P-1 study // J. Natl Cancer Inst. 1998. Vol. 90. P. 1371-1388.
193. SusaN G. KomeN for the Cure. Types of Treatment.
194. Angarita F.A. et al. Perioperative measures to optimize margin clearance in breast conserving surgery // Surg. Oncol. 2014. Vol. 23, N 2. P. 81-91.
195. Crowe J.P. et al. A prospective review of the decline of excisional breast biopsy // Am. J. Surg. 2002. Vol. 184, N 4. P. 353-355.
196. Stolier A.J., Rupley D.G. The impact of image-directed core biopsy on the practice of breast surgery: a new algorithm for a changing technology // Am. J. Surg. 1997. Vol. 63, N 9. P. 827-830.
197. Eberth J.M. et al. Surgeon influence on use of needle biopsy in patients with breast cancer: a national medicare study // J. Clin. Oncol. 2014. Vol. 32, N 21. P. 2206-2216.
198. Gent H.J. Stereotaxic needle localization and cytological diagnosis of occult breast lesions // Ann. Surg. 1986. Vol. 204. P. 580-585.
199. Elvecrog E.L. et al. Non-palpable breast lesions: correlation of stereotaxic large-core needle biopsy and surgical results // Radiology. 1993. Vol. 188. P. 453-455.
200. Lofgren M. et al. X-ray guided fine needle aspiration for the cytologic diagnosis of non-palpable breast lesions // Cancer. 1988. Vol. 61. P. 1032-1037.
201. Azavedo E. et al. Stereotactic fine needle biopsy in 2594 mammographically detected non-palpable lesions // Lancet. 1989. Vol. 1. P. 1033-1036.
202. Ciatto S. et al. Non-palpable breast lesions: stereotaxic fine needle aspiration cytology // Radiology. 1989. Vol. 173. P. 57-59.
203. Parker S.H. et al. Nonpalpable breast lesions: stereotactic automated large core biopsies // Radiology. 1991. Vol. 180, N 2. P. 403-407.
204. Parker S.H. et al. Stereotactic breast biopsy with a biopsy gun // Radiology. 1990. Vol. 176, N 3. P. 741-747.
205. Logan-Young W. et al. The cost effectiveness of fine needle aspiration cytology and 14-gauge core needle biopsy compared with open surgical biopsy in the diagnosis of breast carcinoma // Cancer. 1998. Vol. 82. P. 1867-1873.
206. Singhal H., Davis L. Breast stereotactic core biopsy/ fine needle aspiration. URL: http://eMedicine.Med-scape.com/article/1845123-overview (date of access January 29, 2017)
207. Hooley R.J. et al. Breast ultrasonography: state of the art // Radiology. 2013. Vol. 268, N 3. P. 642-659.
208. Nordenstrom B. Stereotaxic screw needle biopsy of non-palpable breast lesion // Breast Carcinoma: the Radiologists Expanded Role / ed. WW Young. New York : Wiley, 1977.
209. Bolmgren J. et al. Stereotaxic instrument for the needle biopsy of the mamina // AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 1977. Vol. 129, N 1. P. 121-125.
210. Schrading S., Distelmaier M., Dirricks T. et al. Digital breast tomosynthesis guided vacuum-assisted breast biopsy: initial experiences and comparison with prone stereotactic vacuum-assisted biopsy // Radiology. 2015. Vol. 274, N 3. P. 654-662.
211. Liberman L. et al. Clip placement after stereotactic vacuum-assisted breast biopsy // Radiology. 1997. Vol. 205. P. 417-422.
212. Burbank E, Forcier N. Tissue marking clip for stereotactic breast biopsy — initial placement accuracy, long-term stability, and usefulness as a guide for wire localization // Radiology. 1997. Vol. 205. P. 407-415.
213. Fajardo L.L. et al. Placement of endovascular embolization microcoils to localize the site of breast lesions removed at stereotactic core biopsy // Radiology. 1998. Vol. 206. P. 275-278.
214. Liberman L. et al. Calcification retrieval at stereotactic, 11-gauge, directional, vacuum-assisted breast biopsy // Radiology. 1998. Vol. 208. P. 251-260.
215. Dowlatashahi D. et al. Non-palpable breast lesions: findings of stereotaxic needle core biopsy and fine needle aspiration cytology // Radiology. 1991. Vol. 81. P. 745-750.
216. Parker S.H., Jobe W.E. Percutaneous Breast Biopsy. New York : Raven Press, 1993.
217. Hendrick R.E., Parker S.H. Stereotaxic imaging // Syllabus: A Categorical Course in Physics, Technical Aspects of Breast Imaging. Oak Brook, IL : Radiologic Society of North America, 1994.
218. Venta L.A. Image-guided biopsy of non-palpable breast lesions // Diseases of the Breast. 2nd ed. / ed. J.R. Harris. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2000. P. 149-164.
219. Eklund G.W., Cardenosa G. The art of mammographic positioning // Radiol. Clin. North Am. 1992. Vol. 30, N 1. P. 21-53.
220. Porter G.J.R. et al. Influence of mammographie parenchymal pattern in screening detected and interval invasive be cancers on pathologic features, mammographic features and patient survival // AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 2007. Vol. 188. P. 676-683.
221. Logan-Young W., Hoffman N.Y. Breast Cancer: a Practical Guide to Diagnosis. Vol. 1: Procedures. Rochester, NY : Mt Hope, 1994.
222. Homer M.J., Pile-Spellman E.R. Needle localization of non-palpable breast lesions: the importance of communication // Appl. Radiol. 1987. Nov. P. 88-98.
223. Homer M.J. Breast imaging: pitfalls, controversies and some practical thoughts // Radiol. Clin. North Am. 1985. Vol. 23. P. 466-467.
224. Helvie M.A. et al. Localization and needle aspiration of breast lesions: complications in 370 cases // AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 1991. Vol. 157. P. 711-714.
225. Kopans D.B., DeLuca S. A modified needle-hookwire technique to simplify preoperative localization of occult breast lesions // Radiology. 1980. Vol. 134. P. 781.
226. Kopans D.B., Meyer J.E. Computed tomography guided localization of clinically occult breast carcinoma — the «N» skin guide // Radiology. 1982. Vol. 145. P. 211-212.
227. Urrutia E.J. et al. Retractable-barb needle for breast lesion localization: use in 60 cases II Radiology. 1988. Vol. 169. P. 845-847.
228. Hawkins I.F. Jr et al. Wide Range of Applications of a New 22-Gauge Needle which Permits Placement of Larger Catheters of Needles (Including Spring Barb Needle for Breast Lesion Localization). Las Vegas, NV : American Roentgen Ray Society, 1980.
229. Frank H.A. et al. Preoperative localization of non-palpable breast lesions demonstrated by mammography // N. Engl. J. Med. 1975. Vol. 295. P. 259-260.
230. Homer M.J. Nonpalpable breast lesion localization using a curved-end retractable wire // Radiology. 1985. Vol. 157. P. 259-260.
231. Davis P.S. et al. Migration of breast biopsy localization wire // AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 1988. Vol. 150. P. 787-788.
232. Roux S., Logan-Young W. Private practice interdisciplinary breast centers-their rationale and impact on patients, physicians, and the health care industry: a bicoastal perspective // Surg. Oncol. Clin. N. Am. 2000. Vol. 9, N 2. P. 177-198.
233. Evans W.P., Cade S.H. Needle localization and fine-needle aspirations of non-palpable breast lesions with use of standard stereotactic equipment // Radiology. 1989. Vol. 173. P. 53-56.
234. Rebner M. et al. Two-view specimen radiography in surgical biopsy of non-palpable breast masses // AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 1987. Vol. 149. P. 283-285.
235. Mature V.G. et al. Ultrasonic appearance of mammary carcinoma with a dedicated whole-breast scanner // Radiology. 1982. Vol. 142. P. 713-718.
236. Logan W. The radiologist’s increasing role in breast cancer diagnosis // Diagnostic Radiology / eds A.R. Margulis, C.A. Gooding. San Francisco, CA : University of California Printing Department, 1982.
237. Logan W.W. Ultrasonography: its role in the diagnosis of breast carcinoma // Diagnostic Radiology / eds A.R. Margulis, C.A. Gooding. San Francisco, CA: University of California Printing Department; 1982.
238. Sickles E.A. et al. Breast cancer detection with sonography and mammography: comparison using state-of-the-art equipment // AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 1983. Vol. 140. P. 843-845.
239. Wilkinson E.J. et al. Cytological needle sampling for the breast: techniques and end results // The Breast: Comprehensive Management of Benign and Malignant Diseases / eds K.I. Bland, E.M. Copeland III. Philadelphia, PA : W.B. Saunders, 1991.
240. Fornage B.D. et al. Breast masses: US-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy // Radiology. 1987. Vol. 162. P. 409-414.
241. Hall F.M. US-guided aspiration biopsy of the breast // Radiology. 1987. Vol. 164. P. 285-286.
242. Novak R. Method for control of the target at aspiration biopsy of non-palpable breast lesions // Acta Radiol. Diagn. (Stockh.). 1986. Vol. 27. P. 65-70.
243. Donegan W.L. Tumor-related prognostic factors for breast cancer // CA Cancer J. Clin. 1997. Vol. 47. P. 28-51.
244. Greve B. et al. Flow cytometry in cancer stem cell analysis and separation // Cytometry A. 2012. Vol. 81. P. 284-293. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ cryo.a.22022 (date of access December 30, 2016)
245. Van Diest P.J. et al. Pathological investigation of sentinel lymph nodes // Eur. J. Nucl. Med. 1999. Vol. 26. P. S43-S49.
246. ACR Practice Parameter for the Performance of Screening and Diagnostic Mammography. American College of Radiology. Revised 2013 (Resolution 11).
247. Duffy S.W. et al. The impact of organized mammography service screening on breast carcinoma mortality in seven Swedish counties // Cancer. 2002. Vol. 95. P. 458-469.
248. Hellquist B.N. et al. Effectiveness of populationbased service screening with mammography for women ages 40 to 49 years: evaluation of the Swedish Mammography Screening in Young Women (SCRY) cohort // Cancer. 2011. Vol. 117. P. 714-722.
249. Smart C.R. et al. Benefit of mammography screening in women ages 40 to 49 years. Current evidence from randomized controlled trials // Cancer. 1995. Vol. 75. P. 1619-1626.
250. Tabar L. et al. Recent results from the Swedish Two-County Trial: the effects of age, histologic type, and mode of detection on the efficacy of breast cancer screening // J. Natl Cancer Inst. Monogr. 1997. Vol. 22. P. 43-47.
251. Tabar L. et al. Update of the Swedish two-county program of mammographic screening for breast cancer // Radiol. Clin. North Am. 1992. Vol. 30. P. 187-210.
252. Tabar L. et al. Swedish two-county trial: impact of mammographic screening on breast cancer mortality during 3 decades // Radiology. 2011. Vol. 260. P. 658-663.
253. Policy Guidance Help System (PGHS). URL: www. fda.gov/Equipment/General_Equipment_Require-ment (date of access December 9, 2016)
254. American College of Radiology Website: Quality and Safety/Accreditation/Mammography/Medical Physicist Evaluation Forms/MQSA Requirements for Mammography Equipment Checklist (date of access December 9, 2016)
255. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Inspector General. Lessons from Inspections of Mammography Facilities, June Gibbs Brown, Inspector General, MAY MM OEI-05-92-00300.
256. Policy Guidance Help System (PGHS). URL: www. fda.gov/Mammography Quality Standards Act and Program/PGHS/Quality Assurance/Equipment/ Quality Control Tests Other Than Annual (date of access December 9, 2016)
257. Policy Guidance Help System (PGHS). URL: www. fda.gov/Mammography Quality Standards Act and Program/PGHS/Quality Assurance/Equipment/ Other Modalities Quality Control Tests (date of access December 9, 2016)
258. ACR 2016 Digital Quality Control Manual Mammography Manual. URL: www.acr.org
259. ACR website. URL: www.acr.org/Quality and Safe-ty/Accreditation/Mammography/Mammography Accreditation Program Requirements
260. Policy Guidance Help System (PGHS). URL: www. fda.gov/Mammography Quality Standards Act and Program/PGHS/Quality Assurance/General/Re-sponsible Individuals for Quality Assurance Program
261. Policy Guidance Help System (PGHS). URL: www. fda.gov/Mammography Quality Standards Act and Program/PGHS/Quality Assurance/General/Medi-cal Physicist Responsibilities
262. The American Registry of Radiologic Technologists 2017 Post-Primary Discipline Handbook/Mammog-raphy (date of access December 9, 2016)
263. Papp J. Quality Management in the Imaging Sciences. 4th ed. St Louis, Missouri: Mosby/Elsevier, 2010.
264. Assessment of Display Performance for Medical Imaging Systems © 2005 by American Association of Physicists in Medicine One Physics Ellipse College Park, MD 20740-3846 /ААРМ On-Line Report No. 03/American Association of Physicists in Medicine Task Group 18 Imaging Informatics Subcommittee.
265. Policy Guidance Help System (PGHS). URL: www.fda.org
266. Gray J.E. Use of the SMPTE test pattern in picture archiving and communications systems // J· Digit. Imaging. 1992. Vol. 5, N 1. P. 54-58.
267. Policy Guidance Help System (PGHS). URL: www.fda. gov/Mammography Quality Standards Act and Pro-gram/PGHS/Mammography Equipment Evaluation
268. Parikh J., Fanus D. Implementing digital quality control in a breast center // J. Am. Coll. Radiol. 2004. Vol. 1, N 11. P. 854-860. DOI: https://doi. org/10.1016/j.jacr.2004.05.006
269. American College of Radiology (ACR). Mammography Quality Control Manual. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology Committee on Quality Assurance in Mammography, 1999.
270. Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration. 21 CFR Parts 16 and 900 Quality Mammography Standards, Final Rule (Tuesday, October 28,1997).
271. Minigh J. Quality assurance in digital mammography 11 Radiol. Technol. 2008. Vol. 79, N 5.
272. Jacobson D.R. Mammography, Physics, Instrumentation, and Quality Control. Blackwell Science, 2001.
273. Pisano E.D., Yaffee M.J., Kuzmiak CM. Digital Mammography, 2004.
274. Koran N. Digital Imaging: Understanding Image Sharpness. Part 1: Introduction to Resolution and MTF Curves. URL: http://www.normankoren.com/ Tutorials/MTF.html (date of access June 26, 2010)
275. Andolina V.F., Lille S.L. Mammographic Image. A Practical Guide. 3rd ed. Philadelphia, PA : Wolters Kluwer, 2010.
276. Yaffe M.J. et al. Quality Control for Digital Mammography: Part II. Recommendations from the ACRIN DMIST Trial // Med. Phys. 2006. Vol. 33. P. 3).
277. ACR-AAPM-SIIM Practice Parameter for Determinants of Image Quality in Digital Mammography. American College of Radiology. Amended 2014 (Resolution 39).
278. Burgess A.E., Kang H. Incomplete skin representation in digital mammograms // Med. Phys. 2004. Vol. 31. P. 2834-2838.
279. Goo J.M. et al. Effect of monitor luminance and ambient light on observer performance in soft-copy reading of digital chest radiographs // Radiology. 2004. Vol. 232. P. 762-766.
280. National Electrical Manufacturers Association. Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) Part 14: Grayscale Standard Display Function.
281. Krupinski E.A., Flynn M„ Hirschorn D.S. IT Reference Guide for the Practicing Radiologist. Reston, VA : American College of Radiology, 2013.
282. Norweck J.T. et al. ACR-AAPM-SIIM technical standard for electronic practice of medical imaging // J. Digit. Imaging. 2013. Vol. 26. P. 38-52.
283. Silverstein L.D. et al. Paradigm for achieving colorreproduction accuracy in LCDs for medical imaging // J. Soc. Info. Display. 2012. Vol. 20. P. 53-62.
284. Andriole K.P. et al. ACR-AAPM-SIIM practice guidelines for digital radiography // J. Digit. Imaging. 2013. Vol. 26. P. 26-37.
285. Kanal K.M. et al. ACR-SIIM practice guidelines for digital radiography 11 J. Digit. Imaging. 2013. Vol. 26. P. 26-37.
286. Practice Guideline for Determinants of Image Quality in Digital Mammography. American College of Radiology. 2007 (Resolution 35).
287. Mammography Quality Standards Act and Program: fda.org, MQSA Insights/Printers and the Evolution of Mammography. Accessed November 18, 2015.
288. Mammography Quality Standards Act and Program. MQSA Insights/EQUIP: Enhancing Quality Using the Inspection Program, October 21, 2016. A Message from the Director, Division of Mammography Quality Standards (DMQS): EQUIP, December 2, 2016. URL: www.fda.org
289. Routine Quality Control Tests for Full-Field Digital Mammography Systems Equipment Report 1303: Fourth Edition, October 2013/NHS Cancer Screening Programmes (The National Office of the NHS Cancer Screening Programmes is operated by Public Health England).
290. FDA American College of Radiology. ACR Practice Guideline for the Performance of Screening and Diagnostic Mammography; 2008 (Resolution 24). URL: http//www.org/SecondaryMainMenuCatego-ries/quality_safety/guidelines/breast/Screening/Di-agnostic.aspx (date of access September 6, 2010.)
291. Policy Guidance Help System (PGHS). URL: www. fda.gov/Mammography Quality Standards Act and Program/PGHS/Quality Assurance/Equipment/Re-peat Reject Analysis and Fixer Retention-Quarterly Quality Control Tests
292. Papp J. Quality Management in the Imaging Sciences. 4th ed. Missouri, MO : Mosby/Elsevier, 2011.
293. Destouet J.M. et al. The ACR’s mammography accreditation program: ten years of experiences since MQSA // J. Am. Coll. Radiol. 2005. Vol. 2, N 7. P. 585-594.
294. McLelland R. et al. The American College of Radiology Mammography Accreditation Program 11 AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 1991. Vol. 157. P. 473-479.
295. Mammography Accreditation Program/Frequently Asked Questions K:/MammoMaster/l MAP Policy Proc Manual/l-General/Frequently Asked Questions.docx. URL: www.acr.org (date of access October 10, 2016)
296. Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, 21 CFR Parts 16 and 900, Quality Mammography Standards. Final Rule, Title 21, Volume 8. Revised April 1, 2016.
297. ACR Mammography Accreditation Program Requirements Mammography. URL: www.acr.org (date of access October 10, 2016)
298. Sickles E.A. et al. ACR Bl-RADSR mammography 11 ACR BI-RADS® Atlas, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. Reston, VA : American College of Radiology, 2013.
299. Mammography, Clinical Image Quality Guide (from 1999 Mammography QC Manual). URL: www. acraccreditation.org
300. Home/Radiation-Emitting Products/Mammogra-phy Quality Standards Act and Program/Guidance (MQSA)ZPolicy Guidance Help System. URL: www. fda.gov
301. Home/Radiation-Emitting Products/Mammogra-phy Quality Standard Act and Program/Mammog-raphy Quality Standards Act (MQSA) Enhancing Quality Using the Inspection Program (EQUIP) Frequently Asked Questions — Facilities. URL: www.fda.gov
302. Mammography/Medical Physicist Evaluation Forms. URL: www.acraccreditation.org (date of access October 10, 2016)
303. Burnside E.S. et al. The ACR BI-RADS experience: learning from history // J. Am. Coll. Radiol. 2009. Vol. 6, N 12. P. 851-860.
304. Sickles E.A. Successful methods to reduce false positive mammography interpretations // Radiol. CliN. North Am. 2000. Vol. 38, N 4. P. 693-700; Radiol. CliN. North Am. 2010. Vol. 48. P. 859-878.
305. Yankaskas B.C. et al. Effect of observing change from comparison mammograms on performance of screening mammography in a large community-based population // Radiology. 2011. Vol. 261, N 3. P. 762-770.
306. Roelofs A.A. et al. Importance of comparison of current and prior mammograms in breast cancer screening // Radiology. 2007. Vol. 242, N 1. P. 70-77.
307. Thurfjell M.G. et al. Effects on sensitivity and specificity of mammography screening with or without comparison of old mammograms // Acta Radiol. 2000. Vol. 41. P. 52-56.
308. Kleit A.N., Ruiz J.F. False positive mammograms and detection controlled estimation // Health Serv. Res. 2003. Vol. 38, N 4. P. 1207-1228.
309. National Cancer Institute: Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. Performance Measures for 1,960,150 Screening Mammography Examinations from 2002 to 2006 by Time (Months) Since Previous Mammography — based on BCSC data as of 2009. URL: www.breastscreening.cancer.gov (date of access December 14, 2009)
310. Ryerson A.B., Venard VB., Major A.C. National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program: 1991-2002 National Report. Centers for Disease Control and PreventioN. URL: http://www.cdc.gov/cancer/ nbccedp/Reports/NationalReport/index.htm
311. NHS Breast Screening Programme: Annual Review 2012.U.K. National Health Service Breast Screening Web site. URL: www.cancerscreening.nhs.uk/ breastscreen
312. Hubbard R.A. et al. Cumulative probability of falsepositive recall or biopsy recommendation after 10 years of screening mammography: a cohort study // AnN. InterN. Med. 2011. Vol. 155, N 8. P. 481-492.
313. Burnside E. et al. The differential value of comparison with previous examinations in diagnostic versus screening mammography // AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 2002. Vol. 179. P. 1173-1177.
314. Sickles E.A., D’Orsi C.J. ACR BI-RADSR follow-up and outcome monitoring // ACR BI-RADS" Atlas, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. Reston, VA : American College of Radiology, 2013.
315. Bassett L.W. et al. Quality Determinants of Mammography, Clinical Practice Guideline No. 13. AHCPR Publication No. 95-0632. Rockville, MD : Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, Public Health Service, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 1994.
316. Linver M.N. et al. The mammography audit: a primer for the Mammography Quality Standards Act (MQSA) // AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 1995. Vol. 165. P. 19-25.
317. Linver M.N. Audits measure practice quality of mammography // DiagN. Imaging. 2000. Vol. 22, N 7. P. 57-61, 79.
318. Jacobson D.R. Rad Tech’s Guide to Mammography: Physics, Instrumentation, and Quality Control. Malden, MA : Blackwell Science, 2001.
319. Kopans D.B. Breast Imaging. 3rd ed. Philadelphia, PA : Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2007.
320. Berns E.A. et al. Digital Mammography Quality Control Manual. Reston, VA : American College of Radiology, 2016.
321. Home/Advisory Committees/Recently Updated Advisory Committee Materials. URL: www.fda.gov (date of access October 10, 2016)
322. Skaane Р. et al. Comparison of digital mammography alone and digital mammography plus tomosynthesis in a population-based screening program // Radiology. 2013. Vol. 267, N 1. P. 47-56.
323. Genusaro G. et al. Digital breast tomosynthesis versus digital mammography: a clinical performance study // Eur. Radiol. 2009. Vol. 20. P. 1545-1553.
324. Bick U. et al. Tomosynthesis and the impact on patient management // EUSOBI March 2014. Vienna, 2014.
325. Butler R.S. et al. How tomosynthesis optimizes patient workup, throughput, and resource utilization // RSNA Annual Meeting. Chicago, IL, 2013.
326. Zuley M.L. et al. Digital breast tomosynthesis versus supplemental diagnostic mammographic images for evaluation of non-calcified breast lesions // Radiology. 2013. Vol. 266, N 1. P. 89-95.
327. Bonafede M. et al. Value analysis of digital breast tomosynthesis for breast cancer screening in a commercially insured US population // Clinicoecon. Outcomes Res. 2015. Vol. 7. P. 53-63.
328. Skaane P. et al. Prospective trial comparing full field digital mammography (FFDM) versus combined FFDM and tomosynthesis in a population based screening programme using independent double reading with arbitration // Eur. Radiol. 2013. Vol. 23, N 8. P. 2061-2071.
329. Ciatto S. et al. Integration of 3D digital mammography with tomosynthesis for population breast cancer screening (STORM): a prospective comparison study // Lancet Oncol. 2013. Vol. 14, N 7. P. 583-589.
330. Rose S.L. et al. Implementation of breast tomosynthesis in a routine screening practice: an observational study // AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 2013. Vol. 200, N 6. P. 1401-1408.
331. Gandini G. et al. Comparative study with digital mammography (DM) combined with digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) for detection of invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) // RSNA Annual Meeting. Chicago, IL, 2013.
332. Uchiyama N. et al. Diagnostic impact of adjunction of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) to full field digital mammography (FFDM) and in comparison with full field digital mammography (FFDM) breast imaging // 11th International Workshop on Digital Mamography (IWDM 2012). Philadelphia, PA, July 2012.
333. Skaane P. et al. Comparison of digital mammography (FFDM) and FFDM plus DBT in mammography screening for cancer detection according to breast parenchyma density // RSNA Annual Meeting. Chicago, IL, 2014.
334. Philpotts L.E. et al. Tomosynthesis in breast cancer visualization as a function of mammographic density // RSNA Annual Meeting. Chicago, IL, 2013.
335. Haas B.M. et al. Comparison of tomosynthesis plus digital mammography and digital mammography alone for breast cancer screening // Radiology. 2013. Vol. 269, N 3. P. 694-700.
336. Destounis S.V., Morgan R., Arieno A. Screening for dense breasts: digital breast tomosynthesis // AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 2015. Vol. 204, N 2. P. 261-264.
337. Sickles Е.А. SBI Forum Post. Orlando, FL, January 2012.
338. Kolb T.M., Lichy J., Newhouse J.H. Comparison of the performance of screening mammography, physical examination, and breast ultrasound, and evaluation of factors that influence them: analysis of 27,825 patients // Radiology. 2002. Vol. 225. P. 165-175.
339. Rafferty E.A., Niklason L., Smith A. Comparison of FFDM with breast tomosynthesis to FFDM alone: performance in fatty and dense breasts // Tomosynthesis Imaging Symposium. Duke University, 2009.
340. Geisel J., Raghu M., Durand M., Haas B., Lapia K., Hooley R. et al. Cancer Detection rates on screening 2D versus combined 2D + Tomosynthesis Imaging // American Roentgen Ray Society (ARRS) Annual Meeting. Washington, DC, April 2013.
341. Rafferty E.A., Niklason L.T., Jameson-Meehan L.A. Breast tomosynthesis: 1 view or 2? // Radiological Society of North America Annual Meeting. Chicago, 2006. P. SS601-SS604.
342. Baker J.A., Lo J.Y. Breast tomosynthesis: state-of-the-art and review of the literature // Radiology. 2011. Vol. 18, N 10. P. 1298-1310.
343. American Roentgen Ray Society (ARRS) Annual Meeting. Washington, DC, April 2013.
344. Zackrisson S. et al. Performance of one-view breast tomosynthesis versus two-view mammography in breast cancer screening — first results from the Malmo breast tomosynthesis screening trial 11 ECR 2014. Vienna, Austria, March 2014.
345. Wallis M.G. et al. 2 view and single view tomosynthesis versus full field digital mammography: high resolution X-ray imaging observer study // Radiology. 2012. Vol. 262, N 3. P. 788-796.
346. Beck N. et al. One-view vs 2-view tomosynthesis: a comparison of breast cancer visibility in the MLO and CC views // ARRS Annual Meeting. Washington, DC, April 2013.
347. Rafferty E., Niklason L., Jameson-Meehan L. Breast tomosynthesis: one view or two? // RSNA Annual Meeting. Chicago, IL, 2006.
348. Tabar L. et al. Swedish two county trial: impact of mammographic screening on breast cancer mortality during 3 decades // Radiology. 2011. Vol. 260, N 3. P. 658-663.
349. GE Senoclaire Summary of Safety and Effectiveness.
350. Zuley M.L. et al. Analysis of cancers missed on digital breast tomosynthesis // RSNA Annual Meeting. Chicago, IL, 2014.
351. Haygood T.M. et al. Timed efficiency of interpretation of digital and film-screen screening mammograms // AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 2009. Vol. 192. P. 216-220.
352. Zuley M.L. et al. Time to diagnosis and performance levels during repeat interpretations of digital breast tomosynthesis: preliminary observations // Acad. Radiol. 2010. Vol. 17, N 4. P. 450-455.
353. Sonnenschein M. The use of breast tomosynthesis with C-view images and tomosynthesis guided biopsy in daily practice: our experience in Switzerland // Symposium S423. European College of Radiology Annual Meeting. Vienna, Austria, 2014.
354. Dang P.A. et al. Addition of tomosynthesis to conventional digital mammography: effect on image interpretation time of screening examinations // Radiology. 2014. Vol. 270, N 1. P. 49-56.
355. Dustier M. et al. Image quality of thick average intensity pixel slabs using statistical artifact reduction in breast tomosynthesis // 12th International Workshop on Digital Mammography (IWDM 2014). Gifu City, Japan, June-July 2014.
356. Dustier M. et al. A study of the feasibility of using slabbing to reduce tomosynthesis review time. Medical Imaging 2013: Image Perception, Observer Performance, and Technology Assessment // Proc. SPIE. 2013. Vol. 8673. P. 83761L.
357. Zuley M. et al. Comparison of 2 dimensional synthesized mammograms versus original digital mammogram alone and in combination with tomosynthesis images // Radiology. 2014. Vol. 271, N 3. P. 664-671.
358. Wallis M.G. et al. Two view and single view tomosynthesis versus full field digital mammography: high resolution x-ray imaging observer study // Radiology. 2012. Vol. 262, N 3. P. 788-796.
359. Skaane P. et al. 2 view digital breast tomosynthesis screening with synthetically reconstructed projection images: comparison with digital breast tomosynthesis with full field digital mammographic images // Radiology. 2014. Vol. 271, N 3. P. 655-663.
360. Saunders R.S. et al. Can compression be reduced for breast tomosynthesis? Monte Carlo study on mass and microcalcification cancer conspicuity in tomosynthesis // Radiology. 2009. Vol. 251. P. 673-682.
361. Fornvik D. et al. The effect of reduced breast compression in breast tomosynthesis: human observer study using clinical cases // Radiat. Prot. Dosimetry. 2010. Vol. 139. P. 118-123.
362. Geiser W.R. et al. Challenges in mammography: part 1. Artifacts in digital mammography // AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 2011. Vol. 197, N 6. P. 1023-1030.
363. Kempston M„ Mainprize J., Yaffe M. Evaluating the effect of dose on reconstructed image quality in digital tomosynthesis // Proceedings of the 8th International Workshop on Digital Mammography. Berlin, Heidelberg, Manchester: Springer, 2006. P. 490-497.
364. Timberg P. et al. Impact of dose on observer performance in breast tomosynthesis using breast specimens // Proc. SPIE. 2008. Vol. 6913. P. 69134J.
365. Nishikawa R.M. et al. A new approach to digital breast tomosynthesis for breast cancer screening // Proc. SPIE. 2007. Vol. 6510. P. 65103-C-65108-C.
366. Das M. et al. Evaluation of a variable dose acquisition technique for microcalcification and mass detection in digital breast tomosynthesis // Med. Phys. 2009. Vol. 36. P. 1976-1984.
367. Rush В. The Impact of New Technologies, Imaging Economics. URL: http://www.imagingeconomics. com/issues/articles/2003-10_17.asp (date of access October 17, 2003)
368. Ishiyama M. et al. Comparison of reading time between screen-film mammography and soft-copied, full-field digital mammography // Breast Cancer. 2009. Vol. 16. N 1. P. 58-61.
369. D’Orsi CJ. 1-26 follow-up and final results of the Oslo I study comparing screen-film mammography and full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading // Breast Dis. 2007. Vol. 18, N 1. P. 56-57.
370. Oosterwijk H. PACS Fundamentals. Dallas, Texas : OTech, 2004.
371. Andolina V, Wade T. Digital Mammography — a How-To Manual for Seamless Implementation. Marblehead, MA : HCPro, 2006. 49 p.
372. Imai M. Kaizen: The Key to Japan’s Competitive Success. New York : Random House, 1986.
373. Europe Japan Centre. Kaizen Strategies for Improving Team Performance / ed. M. Colenso M. London, UK : Pearson Education Limited, 2000.
374. Radiology PACS Administrators Website. URL: http://www.pacsadminforum.com/Job%20Descrip-tion/Pacs_Admin_Job_Desc.html (date of access November 29, 2016)
375. Dreyer K. et al. PACS: A Guide to the Digital Revolution. 2nd ed. New York : Springer, 2006.
376. FDA. MQSA Final Regulations, Policy Guidance Help System. Silver Spring, MD : FDA, 2014.
377. Oosterwijk H. PACS Fundamentals. Dallas, TX : OTech, 2004.
378. Orenstein B.W. Eight keys to digital mammography success // Radiol. Today. 2007. Vol. 7, N 19. P. 30.
379. Page D. Teleradiologists Tap Neglected Long-Distance Breast Imaging. December 2007.
380. Trambert M. Digital mammography integrated with PACS: real world issues, considerations, workflow solutions, and reading paradigms // Semin. Breast Dis. 2006. Vol. 9. P. 75-81.
381. Zimmermann J. BMDO Technology Applications in Biomedicine. Washington, DC : National Technology Transfer Center, Washington Operations for the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization, 1997.
382. Lewin J.M. et al. Clinical comparison of full field digital mammography and screen-film mammography for detection of breast cancer // AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 2002. Vol. 179. P. 671-677.
383. Frost & Sullivan. North American X-ray Mammography Market [Electronic resource]. February 6, 2006.
384. Pisano E.D. et al. Diagnostic performance of digital versus film mammography for breast cancer screening // N. Engl. J. Med. 2005. Vol. 353, N 17. P. 1773-1783.
385. Yee K.M. Managing the Transition to Digital Mammography. 2007.
386. Mullaney R., Burbage D., Evantash A. et al. Making the transition to digital mammography // Commun. Oncol. 2007. Vol. 4, N 11. P. 678-680.
387. Berns E.A., Hendrick R.E., Solari M. et al. Digital and screen-film mammography: comparison of image acquisition and interpretation times // AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 2006. Vol. 187. P. 38-41.
388. Digital mammo takes longer to interpret than screen-film // Advance Magazine. 2004. June 14. P. 18.
389. Massat M.B. A Clinical Perspective of Digital Mammography: Evaluating Choices in Mammography Displays. Crystal Lake, IL : Massat Media.
390. Miner H.T., Wang J., Neely A.E. et al. Timed efficiency of interpretation of digital and film-screen screening mammograms // AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 2009. Vol. 192. P. 216-220.
391. Undrill P.E., O’Kane A.D., Gilbert F.J. A comparison of digital with screen-film mammography for cancer detection: results of 4,945 paired examinations // Radiology. 2001. Vol. 218, N 93. P. 873-880.
392. Pisano E., Yaffe M., Kuzniak C. Digital Mammography. Baltimore, MD : Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2004.
393. Indrajit I.K., Verma B.S. Digital imaging in radiology practice: an introduction to few fundamental concepts // Indian J. Radiol. Imaging. 2007. Vol. 17, N 4. P. 230-236.
394. Goldstraw E.J., Castellano L, Ashley S. et al. The effect of premium view post-processing software on digital mammographic reporting // Br. J. Radiol. 2009. Vol. 10. P. 1259.
395. Mahesh M. AAPM/RSNA physics tutorial for residents. Digital mammography: an overview // Radiographics. 2004. Vol. 24. P. 1747-1760.
396. Reiner B., Siegel E., Carrino J. Workflow optimization: current trends and future directions // J. Digit. Imaging. 2002. Vol. 15. P. 141-152.
397. Pisaro W., Zuley M., Baum J. et al. Issues to consider in converting to digital mammography // Radiol. Clin. North Am. 2007. Vol. 45, N 5. P. 813-830.
398. Smith A.P. Fundamentals of Digital Mammography: Physics, Technology, and Practical Considerations. Bedford, MA : Hologic, 2005.
399. Sudharsanan R. Thin Film CdZnTe Detector Arrays for Digital Mammography. Bedford, MA : Spire Corporation, 1999.
400. Cole E.B., Pisano E.D., Kistner E.O. et al. Diagnostic accuracy of digital mammography in patients with dense breasts who underwent problem-solving mammography: effects of image processing and lesion type // Radiology. 2002. Vol. 223. P. 845-852.
401. Pisano E.D., Cole E.B., Hemminger B.M. et al. Image processing algorithms for digital mammography: a pictorial essay // Radiographics. 2000. Vol. 20. P. 1479-1491.
402. Pisasno E.D., Gatsonis C.J., Hendrick E. et al. Diagnostic performance of digital versus film mammography for breast cancer screening // N. Engl. J. Med. 2005. Vol. 353, N 17. P. 1773-1783.
403. Trambert M. Digital Mammography Integrated with PACS: Real World Issues, Considerations, Workflow Solutions, and Reading Paradigms. Santa Barbara, CA : Department of Radiology, Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital, 2006.
404. Provost V., Pauwels H„ Marchai G. et al. Evaluation of clinical image processing algorithms used in digital mammography // Med. Phys. 2009. Vol. 36, N 3. P. 765-775.
405. Weiser J. LCD monitors beyond radiology // Imaging Economics. July, 2004.
406. Monnin P., Gutierrez D., Bulling S. et al. A comparison of the performance of digital mammography systems // Med. Phys. 2007. Vol. 34, N 3. P. 906-914.
407. McKinney W. Sensitometry. The professional’s test tool 11 Radiol. Technol. 1996. Vol. 67, N 6. P. 477-478.
408. Hendrick R.E. Quality assurance in mammography // Radiol. Clin. North Am. 1992. Vol. 30, N 1. P. 243-255.
409. Barnes D. Mammographers face crisis in QC П Di-agn. Imaging. 1991. Vol. 13, N 12. P. 73-78.
410. Mammography — a User’s Guide. NCRP Report No. 85. Bethesda, MD : National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, 1986.
411. Recommended Specifications for New Mammography Equipment. Screen-Film Systems, Image Receptors, and Film Processors. ACR, 1995.
412. Weigl W. A new high-frequency controlled x-ray generator system with multi-pulse wave shape // I. Radiol. Eng. 1983. Vol. 1, N 1. P. 7.
413. Gingold E., Wu X., Barnes G. Contrast and dose with Mo/Mo, Mo/Rh, Rh/Rh target-filter combinations in mammography // Radiology. 1995. Vol. 195. P. 639-644.
414. Tobin M„ Bednarek D., Rudin S. Dependence of Contrast and Dose on Variations in Mammographic Parameters. AAPM, 1995.
415. Kimme-Smith C., Wang J., DeBruhl N. et al. Mammograms obtained with rhodium vs. molybdenum anodes: contrast and dose differences // AJR Am. J Roentgenol. 1994. Vol. 162. P. 1313-1317.
416. Heidsieck R. Dual target (Molybdenum/Rhodium) X-ray tubes for mammographic applications: dose reduction with image quality equivalents to standard mammographic tubes // Radiology. 1991. Vol. 181. P. 311.
417. Kimme-Smith C.M., Sayre J.W., McCombs M.M. et al. Breast calcification and mass detection with mammographic anode-filter combinations of molybdenum, tungsten, and rhodium // Radiology. 1997. Vol. 203. P. 679-683.
418. Jacobson D. Mammographic dose and contrast as a function of anode and filter material // Presented at AAPM. July, 1994.
419. Stears J.G., Gray J.E., Frank E.D. (eds). Radiologic exchange // Radiol. Technol. 1990. Vol. 61, N 3. P. 221.
420. Feig S. Fundamental considerations in xeromammography and screen/film mammography // Syllabus for the Categorical Course on Mammography. Chevy Chase: American College of Radiology, 1984.
421. Tabar L., Dean P. Optimum mammography technique // Adm. Radiol. 1989. May. P. 54-56.
422. Diagnostic X-ray Imaging Task Group No. 7: Equipment Requirements and Quality Control for Mammography. AAPM Report No. 29. American Institute of Physics, 1990.
423. Ranallo F.N. Physics of screen-film mammography // Handbook of Breast Imaging / eds M.E. Peters, D.R. Voegeli, K.A. Scanlan. New York: Churchill Livingstone, 1989.
424. The National Strategic Plan for the Early Detection and Control of Breast and Cervical Cancers. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 1990.
425. Yaffe M. Recommended specifications for new mammography equipment: report of the ACR-CDC focus group on mammography equipment // Radiology. 1995. Vol. 197. P. 19-26.
426. Sterling S. Automatic exposure control: a primer // Radiol. Technol. 1988. Vol. 59, N 5. P. 421.
427. Sickles E.A. Dedicated equipment // Syllabus for the Categorical Course on Mammography. Chevy Chase : American College of Radiology, 1984.
428. Logan W.W., Norlund A.W. Screen-film mammography technique: compression and other factors // Reduced Dose Mammography I eds W.W. Logan, E.P. Muntz. New York : Masson, 1979.
429. ECR1: mammography machines // Health Devices. 1989. Vol. 18, N 1. P. 41.
430. Sickles E.A. Quality Assurance: how to audit your own mammography practice // Radiol. Clin. North Am. 1992. Vol. 30. P. 265-275.
431. Ellis R.L., Meade A.A., Mathiason M.A. et al. Evaluation of computer-aided detection systems in the detection of small invasive breast carcinoma // Radiology. 2007. Vol. 245, N 1. P. 88-94.
432. Bird R.E., Wallace T.W., Yankaskas B.C. Analysis of cancers missed at screening mammography // Radiology. 1992. Vol. 184. P. 613-617.
433. Harvey J.A., Fajardo L.L., Innis C.A. Previous mammograms in patients with impalpable breast carcinoma: retrospective vs blinded interpretation // AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 1993. Vol. 161. P. 1167—1172.
434. Beam C., Layde P., Sullivan D. Variability in the interpretation of screening mammograms by US radiologists — findings from a national sample // Arch. Intern. Med. 1996. Vol. 156. P. 209-213.
435. Elmore J., Wells C., Lee C. et al. Variability in radiologists’ interpretations of mammograms // N. Engl. J. Med. 1994. Vol. 331. P. 1493-1499.
436. Warren-Burhenne L.J., Wood S.A., D’Orsi C.J. et al. Potential contribution of computer aided detection (CAD) to the sensitivity of screening mammography // Radiology. 2000. Vol. 215. P. 554-562.
437. Antinnen L, Pamilo M., Soiva M. et al. Double reading of mammography screening films — one radiologist or two? // Clin. Radiol. 1993. Vol. 48. P. 414-421.
438. Thurfjell E„ Lernevall K., Raube A. Benefit of independent double reading in a population-based mammography screening program // Radiology. 1994. Vol. 191. P. 241-244.
439. Taplin S.H., Rutter C.M., Elmore J.G. et al. Accuracy of screening mammography using single versus independent double interpretation // AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 2000. Vol. 174. P. 1257-1262.
440. Ko J.M., Nicholas M.J., Mendel J.B. et al. Prospective assessment of computer-aided detection in interpretation of screening mammography // AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 2006. Vol. 187, N 6. P. 1483-1491.
441. Jiang Y., Nishikawa R.M., Schmidt R.A. et al. Potential of computer-aided diagnosis to reduce variability in radiologist’s interpretations of mammograms depicting micro calcifications // Radiology. 2001. Vol. 220. P. 787-794.
442. Skaane P., Kshirsagar A., Stapleton S. et al. Effects of computer-aided detection on independent doublereading of paired screen-film and full-field digital screening mammograms // AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 2007. Vol. 188. P. 377-384.
443. Kegelmeyer W.P., Pruneda J.M., Bourland P.D. et al. Computeraided mammographic screening for spiculated lesions // Radiology. 1994. Vol. 191. P. 331-337.
444. Chan H.P., Doi K., Vyborny C.J. et al. Improvement in radiologists’ detection of clustered microcalcifications on mammograms: the potential of computer-aided diagnosis // Invest. Radiol. 1990. Vol. 25. P. 1102-1110.
445. Taplin S.H., Rutter C.M., Lehman C.D. Testing the effect of computer-assisted detection on interpretive performance in screening mammography // AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 2006. Vol. 187, N 6. P. 1475-1482.
446. Freer T.W., Ulissey M.J. Screening mammography with computer-aided detection: prospective study of 12,860 patients in a community breast center // Radiology. 2004. Vol. 220. P. 781-786.
447. Birdwell R.L., Bandodkar P., Ikeda D.M. Computer-aided detection with screening mammography in a university hospital setting // Radiology. 2005. Vol. 236. P. 451-457.
448. Morton M.J., Whaley D.H., Brandt K.R. et al. Screening mammograms: interpretation with computer-aided detection — a prospective evaluation // Radiology. 2006. Vol. 239. P. 375-383.
449. Cuppies T.E., Cunningham J.E., Reynolds J.C. Impact of computer-aided detection in a regional screening mammography program // AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 2005. Vol. 185. P. 944-950.
450. Gilbert F.J., Astley S.M., McGee M.A. et al. Single reading with computer-aided detection and double reading of screening mammograms in the United Kingdom National Breast Screening Program // Radiology. 2006. Vol. 241. P. 47-53.
451. Dean J.C., Ilvento C.C. Improved cancer detection using computer-aided detection with diagnostic and screening mammography: prospective study of 104 cancers // AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 2006. Vol. 187. P. 20-28.
452. Nishikawa R.M., Giger M.L., Wolverton D.E. et al. Prospective Testing of a Clinical Mammography Workstation for CAD: Analysis of the First 10,000 Cases. Digital Mammography. Dordrecht, Netherlands : Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1998.
453. Ikeda D.M., Birdwell R.L., OShaughnessy K.F. et al. Computer-aided detection output on 172 subtle findings on normal mammograms previously obtained in women with breast cancer detected at follow-up screening mammography // Radiology. 2004. Vol. 230. P. 811-819.
454. Kerlikowske К., Grady D., Rubin S.M. et al. Efficacy of screening mammography. A meta-analysis // JAMA. 1995. Vol. 273, N 2. P. 149-154.
455. Bird R.E., Wallace T.W., Yankaskas B.C. Analysis of cancers missed at screening mammography 11 Radiology. 1992. Vol. 184, N 3. P. 613-617.
456. Logan-Young W., Dawson A.E., Wilbur D.C. et al. The cost-effectiveness of fine-needle aspiration cytology and 14-gauge core needle biopsy compared with open surgical biopsy in the diagnosis of breast carcinoma // Cancer. 1998. Vol. 82, N 10. P. 1867-1873.
457. Haas B.M., Kalra V, Geisel J. et al. Comparison of tomosynthesis plus digital mammography and digital mammography alone for breast cancer screening // Radiology. 2013. Vol. 269, N 3. P. 694-700.
458. Burnside E., Park J., Fine J. et al. The use of batch reading to improve the performance of screening mammography // AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 2005. Vol. 185, N 3. P. 790-796.
459. Freeman R., McKee S., Lee-Lehner B. et al. Reducing interruptions to improve medication safety // J. Nurs. Care Qual. 2013. Vol. 28, N 2. P. 176-185. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/NCQ.0b013e318275ac3e
460. D’Esmond L. Distracted practice and patient safety: the healthcare team experience // Nurs. Forum. 2017. Vol. 52, N 3. P. 149-164. DOI: https://doi. org/10.1111/nuf.l2173
461. Fiske S., Krupinski E. Improving patient care through medical image perception research // Policy Insights Behav. Brain Sci. 2015. Vol. 2, N 1. P. 74-80.
462. Amaratunga T., Dobranowski J. Systematic review of the application of Lean and Six Sigma Quality Improvement methodologies in radiology // J. Am. Coll. Radiol. 2016. Vol. 13, N 9. P. 1088.e7-1095.e7. DOI: https://doi.Org/10.1016/j.jacr.2016.02.033
463. URL: http://www.thebreastsite.com/breast-surgery/ breast-reduction-statistics.aspx (date of access October, 2009)
464. Newman J. Mammographic evaluation of the augmented breast // Radiol. TechnoL 1998. Vol. 69, N 4. P. 319-338.
465. Caskey C.I., Berg W.A., Hamper U.M. et al. Imaging spectrum of extracapsular silicone: correlation of US, MR imaging, mammographic, and histopathologic findings // Radiographics. 1999. Vol. 19. P. S39-S51.
466. Silverstein M.J., Handel N., Gamagami P. et al. Breast cancer in women after augmentation mammoplasty // Arch. Surg. 1988. Vol. 123, N 6. P. 681-685.
467. Dershaw D.D., Chaglassian T.A. Mammography after prosthesis placement for augmentation or reconstructive mammoplasty // Radiology. 1989. Vol. 170. P. 69-74.
468. Baker J.L. Classification of spherical contractures // Presented at the Aesthetic Breast Symposium, Scottsdale, AZ, 1975.
469. Cohen B.E., Biggs T.M., Cronin E.D. et al. Assessment and longevity of the silicone gel breast implant // Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 1997. Vol. 99, N 6. P. 1597-1601.
470. Hogge J.P., Zuurbier R.A., de Paredes E.S. Mammography of autologous myocutaneous flaps // Radiographics. 1999. Vol. 19. P. S63-S72.
471. Overgaard M., Hansen P.S., Overgaard J. et al. Postoperative radiotherapy in high-risk premenopausal women with breast cancer who receive adjuvant chemotherapy. Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group 82b Trial // N. Engl. J. Med. 1997. Vol. 337, N 14. P. 949-955.
472. ACR BI-RADS Atlas Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. 5th ed. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology, 2013.
473. Harvey J„ March D.E. Making the Diagnosis: A Practical Guide to Breast Imaging Expert Consult — Online and Print. Philadelphia, PA : Elsevier/ Saunders, 2013.
474. Monsees B.S., Destouet J.M. Mammography in aesthetic and reconstructive breast surgery // Perspect. Plast. Surg. 1991. Vol. 5, N 1. P. 103-119.
475. Leibman A.J., Styblo T.M., Bostwick J. III. Mammography of the post construction breast // Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 1997. Vol. 99, N 3. P. 698-704.
476. ACR Practice Parameter for the Performance of Screening and Diagnostic Mammography, Res. 11-2013. The American College of Radiology. d4684779d492d.pdf (date of access February 12,2017)
477. Eklund G.W., Cardenosa G. The art of mammographic positioning 11 Radiol. Clin. North Am. 1992. Vol. 30, N 1. P. 21-53.
478. American College of Radiology. Mammography Quality Control Manual. Reston, VA : American College of Radiology Committee on Quality Assurance in Mammography, 1999.
479. Majid A. et al. Missed breast carcinoma: pitfalls and pearls // Radiographics. 2003. Vol. 23. P. 881,803-806.
480. The American Registry of Radiologic Technologists (ARRT) Standard of Ethics.
481. American Society of Radiologic Technologists (ASRT) Mammography Curriculum. URL: https://www.asrt. org/docs/default-source/educators/curriculum/mam-mography/ed_curr_mammoadptd2013_20160606. pdf?sfvrsn=2 (date of access March 12, 2017)
482. United Spinal Association. Free Publications, Disability Etiquette.
483. Hartmann L.C. et al. Mayo Clinic Guide to Women’s Cancers. Rochester, Minn.: Mayo Clinic, 2007.
484. Federal Register Department of Health and Human services/Food and Drug Administration. 21CFR Parts 16 and 900. Quality Mammography Standards, Final Rule.
485. Wentz G. Mammography for Radiologic Technologists. 2nd ed. St Louis, MO : McGraw-Hill, 1997.
486. Cardenosa G. Breast Imaging Companion. 3rd ed. Philadelphia, PA : Wolters Kluwer, 2008.
487. FDA/MQSA/Guidance/Policy Guidance Help Sys-tem/Mammography Equipment Evaluation. URL: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/presen-tations/pghs/Polic_Guidance_Help_System.htm (date of access February 23, 2017)
488. Logan W.W., Norland Q.W. Screen-film mammography technique: compression and other factors // Reduced Dose Mammography / eds W.W. Logan, E.P. Muntz. New York, NY : Masson, 1979.
489. Andolina V.F., Lille S. Mammographic Imaging: A Practical Guide. 3rd ed. Philadelphia, PA : Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2011.
490. Kopans D. Breast Imaging. 3rd ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2007.
491. American College of Radiology Committee on Quality Assurance in Mammography. Mammography Quality Control Manual. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology, 1999.
492. Andolina V. Chapter 23. Mammography // Vol. 2. Merrill’s Atlas of Radiographic Positioning and Procedures. 11th ed. I eds E.D. Frank, B.W Long, B.J. Smith. St Louis, MO : Mosby/Elsevier, 2007.
493. ACR Practice Parameter for the Performance of Screening and Diagnostic Mammography, Res. 11-2013. The American College of Radiology. URL: https://www.acr.Org/~/media/3484ca308453483 59bad4684779d492d.pdf (date of access February 23, 2017)
494. Lundgren B. The oblique view mammography // Br. J. Radiol. 1977. Vol. 50. P. 626-628.
495. Andersson I. Mammography in clinical practice // Med. Radiogr. Photogr. 1986. Vol. 62, N 2.
496. Clinical Practice Guideline/Quality Determinants of Mammography/U.S. Department of Health and Human Services/Public Health Service/Agency for Health Care Policy and Research/Number 13/AH-CPR Publication No. 95-0632, October 1994.
497. Majid A., de Paredes E., Doherty R. et al. Missed breast carcinoma pitfalls and pearls // Radiographics. 2003. Vol. 23. P. 881-895.
498. Sickles E.A., D’Orsi C.J., Bassett L.W. et al. ACR BI-RADS® mammography // ACR BI-RADS® Atlas, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. Reston, VA : American College of Radiology, 2013.
499. Eklund G.W., Cardinosa G. The art of mammographic positioning // Radiol. Clin. North Am. 1992. Vol. 30, N 1. P. 21-53.
500. Eklund G.W., Cardenosa G., Parsons W. Assessing adequacy of mammographic image quality // Radiology. 1994. Vol. 190. P. 297-307.
501. Bradley F.M., Hoover H.C. Jr, Hulka C.A. et al. The sternalis muscle: an unusual normal finding seen on mammography // AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 1996. Vol. 166, N 1. P. 33-36.
502. Taplin S.H., Rutter C.M., Finder C. et al. Screening mammography: clinical image quality and the risk of interval breast cancer // AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 2002. Vol. 178. P. 797-803.
503. MQSA Insights Articles. Poor Positioning Responsible for Most clinical Image Deficiencies, Failures. URL: http://fda.gov/MQSA/MQSA_Insights_Ar-ticles (date of access February 23, 2017)
504. Keller B.A., Evans K.D. Fighting anxiety in order to improve the quality of breast imaging for women. URL: https://eradimaging.com/site/article. cfm?ID=758#.WdvXAltSzIU Epub Dec 15, 2010. (date of access February, 2017)
505. Deibel D., Heinlein R. Avoiding clinical image failure: a worksheet for clinical analysis // Adv. Admin. Radiol. Radiat. Oncol. 1998. Vol. 8, N 4.
506. NCI-Funded Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (HHSN261201199931C). Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. URL: http://breastscreening. cancer.gov/statistics/benchmarks/screening/2009/ table6.html (date of access February 23, 2017)
507. Skaane P., Bandos A., Gullien R. et al. Comparison of digital mammography alone and digital mammography plus tomosynthesis in a population-based screening program // Radiology. 2013. Vol. 267, N 1. P. 47-56.
508. Genusaro G., Toledano A., DiMaggio C. et al. Digital breast tomosynthesis versus digital mammography: a clinical performance study // Eur. Radiol. 2009. Vol. 20. P. 1545-1553.
509. Bick U. et al. Tomosynthesis and the impact on patient management // EUSOBI 2014. Vienna, March 4-5, 2014.
510. Butler R.S., Crenshaw J„ Kaira V. et al. How tomosynthesis optimizes patient workup, throughput, and resource utilization // RSNA Annual Meeting. Chicago, IL, 2013.
511. Ecklund G.W. Breast Imaging: Focus on Excellence (syllabus). Sponsors: Medical College of Wisconsin, Medical Technology Management Institute, 1999.
512. FDA/MQSA/Guidance/Policy Guidance Help System/ Breast Implants. URL: https://www.accessdata.fda. gov/cdrh_docs/presentations/pghs/Polic_Guidance_ Help_System.htm (date of access February 23, 2017)
513. Eklund G.W., Busby R.C., Miller S.H. et al. Improving imaging of the augmented breast // AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 1988. Vol. 151. P. 469-473.
514. FDA/MQSA/Guidance/Policy Guidance Help Sys-tem/Mammographic Image Identification. URL: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/presen-tations/pghs/Polic_Guidance_Help_System.htm (date of access February 23, 2017)
515. FDA/MQSA/Guidance/Policy Guidance Help Sys-tem/Quality Assurance-Equipment/Infection Control. URL: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_ docs/presentations/pghs/Polic_Guidance_Help_ System.htm (date of access February 23, 2017)
516. Your Pathology Reports. Ardmore, PA. URL: www. breastcancer.org (date of access June 26, 2008)
517. Page D.L., Anderson T.J. Diagnostic Histopathology of the Breast. Edinburgh : Churchill Livingstone, 1987.
518. Azzopardi J.G. Problems in Breast Pathology. London, UK : W.B. Saunders, 1979.
519. Haagensen C.C. Diseases of the Breast. Philadelphia, PA : W.B. Saunders, 1986.
520. Hoeffken W„ Lanyi ?. Mammography. Philadelphia, PA : W.B. Saunders, 1977.
521. Cavelli L.R. et al. Loss of heterozygosity in normal breast epithelial tissue and benign lesions in BRCA1/2 carriers with breast cancer H Cancer Genet. Cytogenet. 2004. Vol. 149, N 1. P. 38-43.
522. Kamm В. The genetics of sporadic and inherited breast cancer // Radiol. Technol. 1998. Vol. 69, N 4. P. 299-311.
523. Logan-Young W., Hoffman N. Breast Cancer: A Practical Guide to Diagnosis. Rochester, NY : Hope Publishing, 1994.
524. Kopans D.B. Breast Imaging. 2nd ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott/Raven, 1998.
525. Tabar L., Dean P.B. Teaching Atlas of Mammography. 2nd ed. New York, NY : Thieme, 1985.
526. Fleming I.D. et al. Manual for Staging of Cancer: American Joint Committee on Cancer. Philadelphia, PA : Lippincott/Raven, 1997. P. 171-180.
527. Sickles E.A. et al. Performance benchmarks for diagnostic mammography // Radiology. 2005. Vol. 235. P. 775-790.
528. News release from PIAA Nov 22, 2013. New PIAA Study Analyzes Diagnosis and Treatment of Breast Cancer.
529. Kopans D.B. Breast Imaging. Philadelphia, PA : J.B. Lippincott, 1989.
530. Salkowski L. Rad cases: Breast Imaging. New York, NY: Thieme, 2014.
531. Shaw-de Parades E. Atlas of Film-Screen Mammography. Baltimore, MD : Urban & Schwarzenberg, 1989.
532. Wellings S.R. et al. An atlas of subgross pathology of the human breast with special reference to possible precancerous lesions // J. Natl Cancer Inst. 1975. Vol. 55. P. 231.
533. Lanyi M. Breast Calcifications. New York, NY : Springer-Verlag, 1986.
534. Hoeffken W, Lanyi M. Mammography. Philadelphia, PA : W.B. Saunders, 1977.
535. Shaw-de Parades E. Atlas of Film-Screen Mammography. Baltimore, MD : Urban & Schwarzenberg, 1989.
536. Logan-Young W., Hoffman N.Y. Breast Cancer: A Practical Guide to Diagnosis. Vol. I. Rochester, NY : Mt Hope Publishing Company, 1996.
537. Azzopardi J.G. Problems in Breast Pathology. London, UK : W.B. Saunders, 1979.
538. Haagensen CC. Disease of the Breast. Philadelphia, PA : W.B. Saunders, 1986.
539. Laya M.B. et al. Effect of postmenopausal hormonal replacement therapy on mammographic density and parenchymal pattern // Radiology. 1995. Vol. 196. P. 433-437.
540. Egan R.L., McSweeney M.B. The normal breast // Ultrasound, Mammography / ed. P. Harper. Baltimore, MD : University Park Press, 1985.
541. Cooper S.A. Anatomy and Diseases of the Breast. Philadelphia, PA : Lea & Blanchard, 1845.
542. Page D.L., Anderson T.J. Diagnostic Histopathology of the Breast. Edinburgh : Churchill Livingstone, 1987.
543. Gallager H.S. Pathology of benign breast disease// Ultrasound, Mammography / ed. P. Harper. Baltimore, MD : University Park Press, 1985.
544. Kopans D,B. Breast Imaging. 2nd ed. Philadelphia, PA : Lippincott/Raven, 1998.
545. Colditz G.A. et al. The use of estrogens and progestins and the risk of breast cancer in postmenopausal women // N. Engl. J. Med. 1995. Vol. 332. P. 1589-1593.
546. Harvey S.C. et al. Marked regression of non-palpable breast cancer after cessation of hormone replacement therapy // Am. J. Roentgenol. 1996. Vol. 167. P. 394-395.
547. D’Orsi C. et al. ACR Breast Imaging Reporting & Data System. 4th ed. Reston, VA : American College of Radiology, 2003.
548. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements. Mammography — a Users’ Guide. NCRP report No. 85. Bethesda, MD : National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, 1986.
549. Thurfjell E.L. et al. Screening mammography: sensitivity and specificity in relation to hormone replacement therapy // Radiology. 1997. Vol. 203. P. 339-341.
550. Egan R.L. Breast Imaging Diagnosis and Morphology of Breast Diseases. Philadelphia, PA : W.B. Saunders, 1988.
551. Logan-Young W.W., Hanes-Hoffman N.Y. Breast Cancer: A Practical Guide to Diagnosis. Vol. 1. Rochester, NY : Mt Hope Publishing, 1996.
552. Stomper P.C. et al. Mammographic changes associated with postmenopausal hormone replacement therapy: a longitudinal study // Radiology. 1990. Vol. 174. P. 487-490.
553. Tabar L., Dean P.B. Teaching Atlas of Mammography. 2nd ed. New York : Thieme, 1985.
554. Wolfe J.N. Xeroradiography of the Breast. Springfield, IL : Charles C. Thomas, 1972.
555. Mammography Quality Standards Act/MQSA Insights/MQSA National Statistics. URL: www.fda. gov (date of access February 12, 2017)
556. American Registry of Radiologic Technologist’s. ARRT Website/consensus/ (date of access February 12, 2017)
557. Papp J. Quality Management in the Imaging Sciences. 4th ed. St Louis, MO : Mosby Elsevier, 2010.
558. American Society of Radiologic Technologist’s. ASRT Website/ (date of accessed February 12, 2017)
559. American Registry of Radiologic Technologist’s. ARRT Website/Code of Ethics/ (date of access February 12, 2017)
560. ACR Practice Parameter for the Performance of Screening and Diagnostic Mammography. Revised 2013 (Resolution 11).
561. Hendricks M.M. Documentation for mammogra-phers // Radiol. Technol. 2007. Vol. 78, N 5. P. 396M-412M.
562. Homer J.F., Berlin L. Malpractice issues in radiology: mammography and the patient information form // AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 2002. Vol. 178. P. 307-310.
563. Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations. Hospital Accreditation Standards 2006. Oakbrook Terrace, IL : Joint Commission Resources, 2006. P. 113-123, 163-166, 338-344.
564. Arnold L. Patient care, communication, and safety in the mammography suite // Radiol. Technol. 2016. Vol. 88, N 1. P. 33M-47M.
565. Adler A., Carlton R. Patient interactions. History taking. Safe patient movement and handling techniques // Radiologic Imaging and Sciences and Patient Care. 6th ed. St Louis, MO : Elsevier, 2016. P. 13-159.
566. Bland K.I., Copeland E.M. The Breast: Comprehensive Management of Benign and Malignant Diseases. 2nd ed. Philadelphia, PA : W.B. Saunders, 1998. P. 1-3, 370.
567. Saslow D„ Hannan J., Ossuch J. et al. Clinical breast examination: practical recommendations for optimizing performance and reporting // CA Cancer J. Clin. 2004. Vol. 54. P. 327-344.
568. Hartmann L.C., Loprinzi C.L. Mayo Clinic Guide to Women’s Cancers (Breast and Gynecologic Cancers Prevention, Treatment, Coping). Mayo Clinic Cancer Center, 2008.
569. American Cancer Society (ACS), (date of access February 12, 2017)
570. Keller B.R., Evans K.D. Fighting Anxiety in Order to Improve the Quality of Breast Imaging for Women. URL: http://eradimaging.com/site/printerfriendly. cfm?ID=758
571. Department of Health and Human Services/Food and Drug Administration/Code of Federal Register 21/Quality Mammography Standards, Final Rule.
572. Mears P., Voehl F. The Executive Guide to Implementing Quality Systems. 1st ed. CRC Press, 1995.
573. Insured Retirement Institute. Boomer expectations for retirement 2016 // Sixth Annual Update on the Retirement Preparedness of the Boomer Generation. Washington, DC : IRI, 2016.
574. ACR Quality Control Manual. 1999.
575. Newstead G.M. Digital mammography: cost and workflow issues // Appl. Radiol. Suppl. 2006. September.
576. FDA/MQSA Insight Article. 4-11-2016. Poor Positioning Responsible For Most Clinical Image Deficiencies, Failures, (date of access February 12, 2017)
577. The ACR 2016 Digital Mammography Quality Control Manual.
578. Taplin S.H., Rutter C.M., Finder C. et al. Screening mammography: clinical image quality and the risk of interval breast cancer // AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 2002. Vol. 178. P. 797-803.
579. The Economist. The Hawthorne effect. Nov. 2008. Online Extra, (date of access February 12, 2017)
580. Balancing Hard and Soft Skills in Healthcare/ Healthcare JobSite.com. Posted by Staff Editor, November 22, 2012.
581. Jacquelyn S. The 20 people skills you need to succeed at work. November 15, 2013. (date of access February 12, 2017)
582. Performance benchmarks for screening mammography // Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC). National Cancer Institute.
583. Carroll D. 4 Reassuring Statistics About Abnormal Screening Mammograms. Mammo Press, 2016. (date of access February 12, 2017).
584. Barton M.B., Morley D.S., Morre S. et al. Decreasing women’s anxieties after abnormal mammograms: a controlled study П J. Natl Cancer Inst. 2004. Vol. 96. P. 529-538.
585. American Association of Physicists in Medicine. Public and Media/Public Position Statements/ AAPM Response to Use of Lead Aprons in Mammography. April 14, 2011.
586. HCAHPS Fact Sheet, June 2015. Baltimore, MD : Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). URL:http://www.Hcahpsonline.org/Facts/aspx (date of access January 18, 2017)
587. HCAHPS: Patient’s Perspective of Care Survey. URL: www.CMS.gov (date of access January 18, 2017)
588. Itri J.N. Patient-centered radiology // Radiographics. 2015. Vol. 35, N 6. P. 1835-1846.
589. Beach M.C. et al. The role and relationship of cultural competence and patient-centeredness in health care quality // The Commonwealth Fund. October, 2006.
590. Gamble M. Developing a Workforce Strategy for Patient-Centered Care: 6 Key Steps. Beckers Hospital Review. 2013.
591. Minimizing Pain and Discomfort During Mammography (Dateline July 26, 2000). Imaginis — The Women’s Health and Wellness Resource Network, 2000.
592. Keller B.R., Evans K.D. Fighting anxiety in order to improve the quality of breast imaging for women // eRADIMAGING.com.
593. Arnold L. Patient care, communication, and safety in the mammography suite // Radiol. Technol. 2016. Vol. 88, N 1. P. 33M-47M.
594. Randel S. Mammograms: reducing patient anxiety // Radiol. Technol. 2016. Vol. 87, N 6. P. 707-709.
595. Johnson S., Johnson J. Managing a mammography center: a model to thrive // Radiol. Technol. 2010. Vol. 82, N 1. P. 22-32.
596. Loeken K. et al. A new measure of patient satisfaction with mammography. Validation by factor analytic technique // Fam. Pract. 1996. Vol. 13. P. 67-74.
597. Tang T.S. et al. Women’s mammography experience and its impact on screening adherence // Psychooncology. 2009. Vol. 18, N 7. P. 727-734.
598. United States Department of Health and Human Services. URL: www.HHS.gov (date of access January 18, 2017)
599. Manual vs Automated Appointment Scheduling. Appointment-Plus, 2012.
600. Sharrock R. A well-appointed establishment // Ind. Eng. 2007. Vol. 39, N 4. P. 44-48.
601. Rimer B.K. et al. Why women resist screening mammography: patient-related barriers // Radiology. 1989. Vol. 172, N 1. P. 243-246.
602. Through the patient’s eyes; understanding and promoting patient-centered care // Picker/Common-wealth Program for Patient-Centered Care I eds M. Gerteis et al. San Francisco, CA : Jossey-Bass, 1993.
603. Hamilton E.L., Barlow J. Women’s views of a breast screening service // Health Care Women Int. 2003. Vol. 24, N 1. P. 40-48.
604. Morris N. When health means suffering: mammograms, pain and compassionate care // Eur. J. Cancer Care. 2015. Vol. 24. P. 483-492.
605. Louw A. et al. Mammographer personality traits-elements of the optimal mammogram experience // Health SA Gesondheid. 2014. Vol. 19, N 1. P. 1-7. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/hsag.vl9il.803
606. Rubin R. AIDET’ in the Medical Practice: More Important than Ever. The Studer Group, 2014. URL: http://www.studergroup.com (date of access January 18, 2017)
607. Institute of Medicine. Chapter 3. Patient-centered communication and shared decision making // Delivering High-Quality Cancer Care: Charting a New Course for a System in Crisis. Washington, DC : The National Academies Press, 2013.
608. The Common Wealth Fund. Helping patients make better treatment choices with decision aids. Quality Matters Archive, 2012.
609. Information Eases Anxiety About Screening Mammograms. URL: www.BreastCancer.org Epub Nov 16, 2015.
610. American Cancer Society Website. URL: www.cancer.org (date of access January 17, 2017).
611. Mammography Quality Standards Act/Guidance/ Policy Guidance Help System (PGHS). URL: www. fda.gov (date of access January 18, 2017).
612. Andolina V.F., Lille S.L. Mammographic Imaging: A Practical Guide. 3rd ed. Philadelphia, PA : Wolters Kluwer/Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2011.
613. Vashi R. Breast imaging of the pregnant and lactating patient: imaging modalities and pregnancy-associated breast cancer // AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 2013. Vol. 200, N 2. P. 321-328. URL: http://www. ajronline.org/doi/full/10.2214/AJR.12.9814
614. Patient Safety: Radiation Exposure in X-Ray and CT Exams, 2012. URL: www.radiologyinfo.org/en/ safety/index.cfm?pg=sfty_xray (date of access January 18, 2017).
615. Hardy K. Dr. Oz, Thyroid Shields & Mammography — the popular TV host sparks a debate with radiology // Radiol. Today. 2011. Vol. 12, N 6. P. 18.
616. Lee N.C. et al. Implementation of the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program: the beginning // Cancer. 2014. Vol. 120, suppl. 16. P. 2540-2548.
617. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Health, United States, 2009: With Special Feature on Medical Technology. Hyattsville, MD : Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, US Department of Health and Human Services, 2010.
618. Breast and Cervical Cancer Mortality Prevention Act of 1990. Publ. No. 301-354. URL: http://www. cdc.gov/cancer/nbccedp/legislation/law.htm (date of access May 31, 2012).
619. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Cancer screening — United States, 2010 // MMWR Morb. Mortal. Wkly ReP. 2012. Vol. 61, N 3. P. 41-45.
620. Wisconsin Department of Health Services. Wisconsin Well Women’s Program. URL: www.dhs.wisconsin.gov (date of access January 21, 2017).
621. Chen A.H. et al. The legal framework for language access in healthcare settings: title VI and beyond // J. Gen. Intern. Med. 2007. Vol. 22, suppl. 2. P. 362-367. Epub Oct 24,2007. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/ s11606-007-0366-2
622. Breasted J.H. The Edwin Smith Papyrus. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1930. P. 403-406.
623. Baum M. Breast cancer 2000 BC to 2000 AD — time for a paradigm shift? // Acta Oncol. 1993. Vol. 32, N 1. P. 3-8.
624. Statement of the American Society of Human Genetics on genetic testing for breast and ovarian cancer predisposition // Am. J. Hum. Genet. 1994. Vol. 55. P. i-iv.
625. Strax P. Control of breast cancer // Adm. Radiol. 1989. Vol. 8, N 9. P. 30-36.
626. Dakins D. Diagnostic problem-solving takes a back seat in breast screening // Diagn. Imaging. 1987. Vol. 9, N 11. P. 372.
627. Vinocur B. The breast cancer battle: screening with mammography // Diagn. Imaging. 1986. Vol. 8, N 7. P. 84.
628. Self-exams, mammograms recommended // USA Today. October 19, 1987.
629. Gladwell M. How safe are your breasts? // New Republic. October 24, 1994.
630. Subtle mammographic signs disclose presence of early breast cancer // Radiol. Today. 1987. Vol. 4, N 4. P. 4.
631. Egan R. The new age of breast care // Adm. Radiol. 1989. Vol. 9.
632. Tabar L., Vitak B., Chem J.J. et al. The Swedish 2 county trial 20 years later // Radiol. Clin. North Am. 2000. Vol. 38. P. 625-652.
633. National Center for Health Statistics. Health, United States, 2014: With Special Feature on Adults Aged 55-64. Hyattsville, MD : National Center for Health Statistics, 2015.
634. Narod S.A., Javaid I., Miller A.B. Why have mortality rates declined? // J. Cancer Policy. 2015. Vol. 5. P. 8-17.
635. CDC. The National Strategic Plan for the early detection and control of breast and cervical cancers. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, CDC, 1993.
636. National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. URL: https://www.cdc.gov/cancer/nbc-cedp/about.htm (date of access October 18, 2017)
637. Bassett L.W Screening strategies aim to increase compliance // Diagn. Imaging. 1991. Vol. 13. P. 75-79.
638. Rebner M. Can government legislation improve screening mammography use? // Radiology. 1996. Vol. 198. P. 636-637.
639. King A. Not everyone agrees with the new mammographic screening guidelines designed to end the confusion // JAMA. 1989. Vol. 262, N 9. P. 1154-1155.
640. Rubin R. Study finds mammograms not as frequent as thought // USA Today. September 12, 2005.
641. Song J. Women start mammography on time, but fail to follow-up // Advance. October 4, 2004. P. 17.
642. Many women skipping breast exams. URL: www. healthatoz.com (date of access November 1, 2007)
643. What are the key statistics for breast cancer? URL: www.cancer.org (date of access June 1, 2016)
644. National Center for Health Statistics. Health, U.S., 2014: with Chartbook on Trends in the Health of Americans. Hyattsville, MD : National Center for Health Statistics, 2015.
645. Siegel R.L., Miller K., Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2017 // CA Cancer J. Clin. 2017. Vol. 67, N 1. P. 7-30.
646. DeSantis C.E., Fedewa S.A., Sauer A.G. et al. Breast cancer statistics, 2015: convergence of incidence rates between black and white women // CA Cancer J. Clin. 2016. Vol. 66, N 1. P. 31-42.
647. Nystrom L., Rutqvist L.E., Wall S. et al. Breast cancer screening with mammography: overview of Swedish randomized trials // Lancet. 1993. Vol. 341. P. 973-978.
648. Tabar L ., Fagerberg G., Day N.E. et al. Breast cancer treatment and natural history: new insights from results of screening // Lancet. 1992. Vol. 339. P. 412-414.
649. Barbara Ferreira, BS, RT(R)(M), Breast Imaging Clinical Instructor and Educator, Medical Imaging, Regis College, Weston, Massachusetts
650. Alicia Giaimo, MBA-HCM, MHS, RT(R)(M)(BD)(ARRT), Clinical Associate Professor, Radiologic Sciences Diagnostic Imaging Department, Quinnipiac University, Hamden, Connecticut
651. Katie Gray, BS, RT(R)(M)(BD), Mammography Education Coordinator/Mammography, Instructor, Department of Radiology, Saint Joseph Mercy Health System/Washtenaw Community, College, Ann Arbor, Michigan
652. Ann Hagenau, MS, RT(R)(M), Associate Professor, Radiologic Technology and Medical Imaging, Clarkson College, Omaha, Nebraska
653. Julie Hall, MPH, RT(R)(CT), Program Director, Radiologic Technology, Roane State Community College, Oak Ridge, Tennessee
654. Phyllis Hooi, MSRS, RT(R)(M), Medical Radiography Professor, Medical Imaging Technology Program, San Jacinto College Central, Pasadena, Texas
655. Veronica Manning, EdS, RT(R)(M), Assistant Professor/Clinical Coordinator, Department of Medical Imaging & Radiation Sciences, Arkansas State University, Jonesboro, Arizona
656. Tabar L., Dufy S.W., Burhenne L. New Swedish breast cancer detection results for women aged 40-49 // Cancer. 1993. Vol. 72, N 4. P. 1437-1448.
657. Tabar L., Vitak B. et al. Swedish two county trial: impact of mammographic screening on breast cancer mortality during 3 decades // Radiology. 2012. Vol. 260, N 3. P. 653-663.
658. Shapiro S. Determining the efficacy of breast cancer screening // Cancer. 1989. Vol. 63. P. 1873-1880.
659. Howlader N., Noone A.M., Krapcho M. et al. (eds). SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975-2013. Bethesda, MD : National Cancer Institute. URL: http:// seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2013/, based on November 2015 SEER data submission, posted to the SEER web site, April 2016.
660. Horner M.J., Reis L.A.G., Krapcho M. et al. (eds). SEER Cancer Statistics Review 1975-2006. Bethesda, MD : National Cancer Institute, 2009.
661. Feig S. Determination of mammographic screening intervals with surrogate measures for women aged 40-49 years // Radiology. 1994. Vol. 193. P. 311-314.
662. Cancer Study Cites Rapid Growth // Sarasota Herald Tribune. July 3, 1996.
663. Mettein C., Smart C. Breast cancer detection guidelines for women aged 40-49 years: rationale for the American Cancer Society reaffirmation of recommendations // CA Cancer J. Clin. 1994. Vol. 44. P. 248-255.
664. Cancer Agency Changes Mammogram Advice // Sarasota Herald Tribune. December 5, 1993.
665. Slantez P„ Moore R.H., Hulka C.A. et al. Screening mammography: effect of national guidelines on current physician practice // Radiology. 1997. Vol. 203. P. 335-338.
666. D’Orsi C. NIH consensus development conference statement: breast cancer screening for women ages 40-49 // SBI News. February 1997.
667. Linver M. Summary: mammography outcomes in a practice setting by age: prognostic factors, sensitivity and positive biopsy rate // SBI News. February 1997.
668. Leitch A. ACS guidelines for the early detection of breast cancer: update 1997 // CA Cancer J. Clin. 1997. Vol. 47, N 3. P. 150-153.
669. Siu A.L.; U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for breast cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement // Ann. Intern. Med. 2016. Vol. 164, N 4. P. 279-296.
670. Moskowitz M. Breast cancer: age-specific growth rates and screening strategies // Radiology. 1986. Vol. 16, N 1. P. 37-41.
671. Tabar L„ Fagerberg G., Chen H.H. et al. Efficacy of breast cancer screening by age. New results from the Swedish two county trial // Cancer. 1995. Vol. 75, N 10. P. 2507-2517.
672. Buist D.S., Porter P.L., Lehman C. et al. Factors contributing to mammography failure in women aged 40-49 years // J. Natl Cancer Inst. 2004. Vol. 96, N 19. P. 1432-1440.
673. Johns L.E., Moss S.M. False positive results in the randomized controlled trial of mammographic screening from age 40 // Cancer EpidermioL Biomarkers Prev. 2010. Vol. 19, N 11. P. 2758-2764.
674. Monsees B., Monticciolo D., Murray R. Electronic Response on Behalf of ACR and SBI to USPSTF Re: Draft USPSTF Recommendations on Breast Cancer Screening.
675. Graham R., Mancher M., Miller Wolman D. et al. (eds); Institute of Medicine of the National Academies. Clinical Practice Guidelines We Can Trust. Washington, DC : National Academies Press, 2011.
676. Crystal Bromeling, MBA, RT(R)(M) (ARRT), Program Director Radiologic Technology, Rasmussen College, Lake Elmo, Minnesota
677. Mary Carrillo, MBA/HCM, RT(R)(M)CDT, Program Director, Medical Radiography, GateWay Community College, Phoenix, Arizona
678. Mary F. Daniel, MAEd, RT-(R)(M)(BS), Program Director Radiography/Breast Imaging, Pitt Community College
679. Winterville, North Carolina, Deborah Espen, Assistant Professor, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
680. Rebecca Farmer, RT(R)(M)(MSRS), Associate Professor, Allied Health, Northwestern State University, Shreveport, Louisiana
681. Debbie McCollam, RT(R)(M), MBA, Department Chair of Medical Imaging Technology, Professor in Radiologic Science, Oregon Tech
682. Klamath Falls, Oregon, Cynthia Meyers, BS, Professor, Radiologic Technology; Program Coordinator, Niagara County Community College, Sanborn, New York
683. Mary Potanovic, BS, RT(R)(M), Assistant Professor, Medical Imaging, Hudson Valley Community College, Troy, New York
684. Mindy Smith-Amburgey, MA, BSRT(R)(M)RDMS, MBA, Department Chair, Medical Imaging, Program Director, Radiologic Science, University of Charleston, Charleston, West Virginia
685. Jennifer Wagner, MS, RT(R)(M)(QM), RDMS, RVT, Associate Professor, Allied Health, Fort Hays State University, Hays, Kansas
686. Richelle Weber, RT(M)(QM), Adjunct Faculty, Department of Radiography, Cuyahoga Community College, Parma, Ohio
687. Breeders M., Moss S., Nystrqm L. et al. The impact of mammographic screening on breast cancer mortality in Europe: a review of observational studies 11 J. Med. Screen. 2012. Vol. 19, suppl. 1. P. 14-25.
688. Coldman A., Phillips N., Wilson C. et al. Pan-Cana-dian study of mammography screening and mortality from breast cancer // J. Natl Cancer Inst. 2014. Vol. 106, NIL P. 261-263.
689. Hellquist B.N., Duffy S.W., Abdsaleh S. et al. Effectiveness of population-based service screening with mammography for women ages 40 to 49 years: evaluation of the Swedish Mammography Screening in Young Women (SCRY) cohort // Cancer. 2011. Vol. 117, N4. P. 714-722.
690. Wald N.J., Murphy P„ Major P. et al. UKCCCR multicenter randomized controlled trial of one and two view mammography in breast cancer screening // BMJ. 1995. Vol. 311. P. 1189-1193.
691. Webb M.L., Cady B., Michaelson J.S. et al. A failure analysis of invasive breast cancer: most deaths from disease occur in women not regularly screened // Cancer. 2014. Vol. 120, N 18. P. 2839-2846.
692. American College of Radiology. News Releases. USPSTF Breast Cancer Screening Recommendations Could Endanger Women // News Release. January 11, 2016. URL: www.acr.org/MediaCenter (date of access June 27, 2016)
693. Siedman H., Mushinski M. Breast cancer incidence, mortality, survival, prognosis // Breast Carcinoma: Current Diagnosis and Treatment / eds S. Feig, R. McLelland. New York : Mason, 1983.
694. Benning T. Komen for the cure founder Nancy Brinker blasts proposed new mammography guidelines // The Dallas Morning News. November 23, 2009.
695. Ferrini R., Mannino E., Ramsdell E. et al. Screening mammography for breast cancer, American College of Preventive Medicine Practice Policy Statement // Am. J. Prev. Med. 1996. Vol. 12, N 5. P. 340-341.
696. Mammography Screening Guidelines. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. URL: www.acog.org (date of access April 21, 2010)
697. Newman J. Early detection techniques in breast cancer management // Radiol. Technol. 1997. Vol. 68, N 4. P. 309-324.
698. Burkenne L., Burkenne H., Kan L. Quality oriented mass mammography screening // Radiology. 1995. Vol. 194. P. 185-188.
699. Baker L. BCDDP: 5 year summary report // CA Cancer J. Clin. 1992. Vol. 32. P. 194-225.
700. Sickles E. Summary of presentation screening outcomes: clinical experience with service screening using modern mammography // SBI News. February, 1997.
701. Sampson D.; American Cancer Society. American Cancer Society report finds breast cancer death rate continues to drop // Breast Cancer Facts & Figures, September 25, 2007.
702. Pelikan S., Moskowitz M. Effects of lead-time, length bias, and false negative reassurance on screening for breast cancer // Cancer. 1993. Vol. 71. P. 1998-2005.
703. Tabar L., Fagerberg G., Day N.E. et al. What is the optimum interval between screening examination? An analysis based on the latest results of the Swedish two county breast cancer screening trial // Br. J. Cancer. 1987. Vol. 55. P. 47-51.
704. Sinclair N., Littenberg B., Geller B. et al. Accuracy of screening mammography in older women // AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 2011. Vol. 197, N 5. P. 1268-1273.
705. Michaelson J.S., Halpern E., Kopans D.B. Breast cancer computer simulation method for estimation of optimal intervals for screening // Radiology. 1999. Vol. 212. P. 551-560.
706. Kummerow K.L., Du L„ Penson D.F. et al. Nationwide trends in mastectomy for early stage breast cancer // JAMA Surg. 2015. Vol. 150, N 1. P. 9-16.
707. Allen J.D., Blumethmann S.M., Sheets M. et al. Women’s responses to changes in US Preventive Services Task Force’s mammography screening guidelines: results of focus groups with ethnically diverse women // BMC Public Health. 2013. Vol. 13. P. 1169.
708. Forbes L.J., Ramirez A.J.; Expert Group on Information about Breast Screening. Offering informed choice about breast cancer screening // J. Med. Screen. 2014. Vol. 21, N 4. P. 194-200.
709. Javitt M.C. Section editors notebook: breast cancer screening and over diagnosis unmasked // AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 2014. Vol. 202, N 2. P. 259-261.
710. Nelson H.D., Tyne K., Naika A. et al. Screening for Breast Cancer: Systemic Evidence Review Updated for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Evidence synthesis No. 74. AHRQ Publication No. 10-05142-EF-l. Rockville, MD : Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, 2009.
711. Feig S.A. Screening mammography benefit controversies: sorting out the evidence // Radiol. Clin. North Am. 2014. Vol. 52, N 3. P. 455-480.
712. Humphrey L.L., Helfand M„ Chan B.K. et al. Breast cancer screening: a summary of the evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force // Ann. Intern. Med. 2002. Vol. 137. P. 347-360.
713. Biesheuvel C„ Barratt A., Howard K. et al. Effects of study methods and biases on estimates of invasive breast cancer overdetection with mammography screening: a systematic review // Lancet Oncol. 2007. Vol. 8, N 12. P. 1129-1138.
714. Puliti D., Duffy S.W., Miccinesi G. et al. Overdiagnosis in mammographic screening for breast cancer in Europe: a literature review // J. Med. Screen. 2012. Vol. 19, suppl. 1. P. 42-56.
715. Barton M.B., Elmore J.G., Fletcher S.W. Breast symptoms among women enrolled in a health maintenance organization: frequency, evaluation, and outcome // Ann. Intern. Med. 1999. Vol. 130, N 8. P. 651-657.
716. Silbner J. How to beat breast cancer // US News & World Report. July 1, 1988. P. 52.
717. Warren S.L. Roentgenologic study of the breast // AJR Am.). Roentgenol. 1930. Vol. 24. P. 113.
718. Strax P. Evolution in techniques in breast screening // Control of Breast Cancer Through Mass Screening / ed. P. Strax. St Louis, MO : Mosby-Year Book, 1978. P. 167.
719. Alcorn F.S., O’Donnell E.O., Ackerman L.V. Training non-radiologists to scan mammograms // Radiology. 1971. Vol. 99. P. 523-529.
720. Andersson I. Mammography in clinical practice // Med. Radiogr. Photogr. 1986. Vol. 62. P. 2.
721. Lundgren B. The oblique view at mammography // Br. J. Radiol. 1977. Vol. 50. P. 626-628.
722. Helvie M., Rebner M., Sickles E. et al. Calcifications in metastatic breast cancer in axillary lymph nodes // AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 1988. Vol. 151. P. 921-922.
723. Barclay L. USPSTF issues new breast cancer screening guidelines // Medscape Medical News. November 16, 2009.
724. Simon S. American Cancer Society Releases New Breast Cancer Society Guidelines. October 20, 2015.

- Также рекомендуем "Рентгенограмма при дивертикуле пищевода"

Редактор: Искандер Милевски. Дата обновления публикации: 20.4.2026