2023
Editorial Comment: Artificial Intelligence May Help Define Screening Strategies in Patients With Dense Breasts.
Butler R. Editorial Comment: Artificial Intelligence May Help Define Screening Strategies in Patients With Dense Breasts. American Journal Of Roentgenology 2023, 222: e2330042. PMID: 37556603, DOI: 10.2214/ajr.23.30042.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchPACS-integrated machine learning breast density classifier: clinical validation
Lewin J, Schoenherr S, Seebass M, Lin M, Philpotts L, Etesami M, Butler R, Durand M, Heller S, Heacock L, Moy L, Tocino I, Westerhoff M. PACS-integrated machine learning breast density classifier: clinical validation. Clinical Imaging 2023, 101: 200-205. PMID: 37421715, DOI: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2023.06.023.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchModern Challenges in Assessing Breast Cancer Screening Strategies: A Call for Added Resources.
Hooley R, Butler R. Modern Challenges in Assessing Breast Cancer Screening Strategies: A Call for Added Resources. Radiology 2023, 306: e230145. PMID: 36749216, DOI: 10.1148/radiol.230145.Peer-Reviewed Original Research
2020
Digital Breast Tomosynthesis May Not Provide Optimal Surveillance of Breast Cancer Survivors.
Hooley R, Butler R. Digital Breast Tomosynthesis May Not Provide Optimal Surveillance of Breast Cancer Survivors. Radiology 2020, 298: 317-318. PMID: 33355509, DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2020204219.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchEditorial Comment on "Synthetic 2D Mammography Versus Standard 2D Digital Mammography: A Diagnostic Test Accuracy Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis".
Butler RS. Editorial Comment on "Synthetic 2D Mammography Versus Standard 2D Digital Mammography: A Diagnostic Test Accuracy Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis". American Journal Of Roentgenology 2020, 217: 325. PMID: 32966116, DOI: 10.2214/ajr.20.24762.Peer-Reviewed Original Research
2016
Tomosynthesis in the Diagnostic Setting: Changing Rates of BI-RADS Final Assessment over Time.
Raghu M, Durand MA, Andrejeva L, Goehler A, Michalski MH, Geisel JL, Hooley RJ, Horvath LJ, Butler R, Forman HP, Philpotts LE. Tomosynthesis in the Diagnostic Setting: Changing Rates of BI-RADS Final Assessment over Time. Radiology 2016, 281: 54-61. PMID: 27139264, DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2016151999.Peer-Reviewed Original Research
2015
Invited Commentary: The Breast Density Dilemma—Challenges, Lessons, and Future Directions
Butler RS. Invited Commentary: The Breast Density Dilemma—Challenges, Lessons, and Future Directions. Radio Graphics 2015, 35: 324-6. PMID: 25763720, DOI: 10.1148/rg.352140276.Peer-Reviewed Original Research
2013
Response.
Hooley RJ, Greenberg K, Stackhouse RM, Geisel J, Butler R, Philpotts LE. Response. Radiology 2013, 266: 998-9. PMID: 23550287.Peer-Reviewed Original Research
2012
Screening US in Patients with Mammographically Dense Breasts: Initial Experience with Connecticut Public Act 09-41
Hooley RJ, Greenberg KL, Stackhouse RM, Geisel JL, Butler RS, Philpotts LE. Screening US in Patients with Mammographically Dense Breasts: Initial Experience with Connecticut Public Act 09-41. Radiology 2012, 265: 59-69. PMID: 22723501, DOI: 10.1148/radiol.12120621.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchConceptsPositive predictive valueOverall positive predictive valueBI-RADS category 4BI-RADS category 3Breast ultrasonographyDense breastsBreast cancerOverall cancer detection rateHIPAA-compliant retrospective reviewData System (BI-RADS) category 1Occult breast cancerCancer detection rateWhole-breast ultrasonographyCategory 4Category 3Dense breast tissueBreast Imaging ReportingPostmenopausal patientsIntermediate riskRetrospective reviewRisk groupsUS examinationHigh riskGeneral populationLower risk