What is the most common mammographic appearance of T1a and T1b invasive breast cancer?

Primic Zakelj M. Cancer incidence in Slovenia 2005. Ljubljana: Institute of Oncology Ljubljana. Cancer Registry of Slovenia; 2008.Search in Google Scholar

Fletcher SW, Elmore JG. Clinical practice. Mammographic screening for breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2003; 348: 1672-80.10.1056/NEJMcp021804Search in Google Scholar

Leitch AM, Dodd GD, Costanza M, Linver M, Pressman P, McGinnis L, et al. American Cancer Society guidelines for the early detection of breast cancer: update 1997. CA Cancer J Clin 1997; 47: 150-3.10.3322/canjclin.47.3.150Search in Google Scholar

Tabar L, Vitak B, Chen HH, Prevost TC, Duffy SW. Update of the Swedish Two-County Trial of breast cancer screening: histologic grade-specific and age-specific results. Swiss Surg 1999; 5: 199-204.10.1024/1023-9332.5.5.199Search in Google Scholar

Barth RJ, Jr., Gibson GR, Carney PA, Mott LA, Becher RD, Poplack SP. Detection of breast cancer on screening mammography allows patients to be treated with less-toxic therapy. Am J Roentgenol 2005; 184: 324-9.10.2214/ajr.184.1.01840324Search in Google Scholar

Tabar L, Tony Chen HH, Amy Yen MF, Tot T, Tung TH, Chen LS, et al. Mammographic tumor features can predict long-term outcomes reliably in women with 1-14-mm invasive breast carcinoma. Cancer 2004; 101: 1745-59.10.1002/cncr.20582Search in Google Scholar

Rissanen TJ, Makarainen HP, Mattila SI, Karttunen AI, Kiviniemi HO, Kallioinen MJ, et al. Wire localized biopsy of breast lesions: a review of 425 cases found in screening or clinical mammography. Clin Radiol 1993; 47: 14-22.10.1016/S0009-9260(05)81207-3Search in Google Scholar

Obenauer S, Hermann KP, Grabbe E. Applications and literature review of the BI-RADS classification. Eur Radiol 2005; 15: 1027-36.10.1007/s00330-004-2593-9Search in Google Scholar

Kocijancic I, Rener M, Vidmar K. Simultaneous occurence of fat necrosis and carcinoma after breast injury in a traffic accident. Eur J Ultrasound 2000; 11: 213-6.10.1016/S0929-8266(00)00090-2Search in Google Scholar

Burrell HC, Pinder SE, Wilson AR, Evans AJ, Yeoman LJ, Elston CW, et al. The positive predictive value of mammographic signs: a review of 425 non-palpable breast lesions. Clin Radiol 1996; 51: 277-81.10.1016/S0009-9260(96)80346-1Search in Google Scholar

Franceschi D, Crowe JP, Lie S, Duchesneau R, Zollinger R, Shenk R, et al. Not all nonpalpable breast cancers are alike. Arch Surg 1991; 126: 967-70.10.1001/archsurg.1991.014103200490051650548Search in Google Scholar

Sickles EA. Mammographic features of 300 consecutive nonpalpable breast cancers. Am J Roentgenol 1986; 146: 661-3.10.2214/ajr.146.4.6613485337Search in Google Scholar

Thurfjell MG, Lindgren A, Thurfjell E. Nonpalpable breast cancer: mammographic appearance as predictor of histologic type. Radiology 2002; 222: 165-70.10.1148/radiol.222100147111756721Search in Google Scholar

Tinnemans JG, Wobbes T, Holland R, Hendriks JH, Van der Sluis RF, Lubbers EJ, et al. Mammographic and histopathologic correlation of nonpalpable lesions of the breast and the reliability of frozen section diagnosis. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1987; 165: 523-9.Search in Google Scholar

Samardar P, de Paredes ES, Grimes MM, Wilson JD. Focal asymmetric densities seen at mammography: US and pathologic correlation. Radiographics 2002; 22: 19-33.10.1148/radiographics.22.1.g02ja221911796895Search in Google Scholar