1) Deb RA, Matthews P, Elston CW, Ellis IO, Pinder SE. An audit of "equivocal" (C3) and "suspicious" (C4) categories in fine needle aspiration cytology of the breast. Cytopathol 2001;12:219-226.
2) Mulford DK, Dawson AE. Atypia in fine needle aspiration cytology of nonpalpable and palpable mammographically detected breast lesions. Acta Cytol 1994;38:9-17.
3) al-Kaisi N. The spectrum of the "gray zone" in breast cytology. A review of 186 cases of atypical and suspicious cytology. Acta Cytol 1994;38:898-908.
4) Kanhoush R, Jorda M, Gomez-Fernandez C, Wang H, Mirzabeigi M, Ghorab Z, Ganjei-Azar P. 'Atypical' and 'suspicious' diagnoses in breast aspiration cytology. Cancer 2004;102:164-167.
5) Umudum H, Rezanko T, Dag F, Dogan M. Diagnostic help of HER-2/neu expression in suspicious cases of breast fine needle aspiration. Acta Cytol 2006;50:596- 598.
6) Midulla C, Pisani T, De Iorio P, Cenci M, Divizia E, Nofroni I, Vecchione A. Cytological analysis and immunocytochemical expression of Ki67 and Bcl-2 in breast proliferative lesions. Anticancer Res 2002;22(2B):1341-1345.
7) Keeling J, McKee GT. Heat shock protein (HSP)27: a further refinement in the diagnosis of suspicious fine needle aspirates of breast. Cytopathology 1999;10:40- 49.
8) Nijhawan R, Rajwanshi A. Cytomorphologic and morphometric limitations of the assessment of atypia in fibroadenoma of the breast. Anal Quant Cytol Histol 2005;27:273-276.
9) Rajesh L, Dey P, Joshi K. Automated image morphometry of lobular breast carcinoma. Anal Quant Cytol Histol 2002;24:81-84.
10) Teague MW, Wolberg WH, Street WN, Mangasarian OL, Lambremont S, Page DL. Indeterminate fine-needle aspiration of the breast. Image analysis-assisted diagnosis. Cancer 1997;81:129-135.
11) Seigneurin D, Louis J, Villoud MC. The value of DNA image cytometry for the cytological diagnosis of welldifferentiated breast carcinomas and benign lesions. Anal Cell Pathol 1994;7:115-125.
12) Ruiz A, Almenar S, Callaghan RC, Llombart-Bosch A. Benign, preinvasive and invasive ductal breast lesions. A comparative study with quantitative techniques: morphometry, image- and flow cytometry. Pathol Res Pract 1999;195:741-746.
13) Beerman H, Veldhuizen RW, Hermans J, Bonsing BA, Ooms EC. Flow cytometric and histomorphometric analysis of limitations of clinical breast cytomorphometry. Anal Cell Pathol 1991;3:287-297.
14) Barrows GH, Anderson TJ, Lamb JL, Dixon JM. Fineneedle aspiration of breast cancer. Relationship of clinical factors to cytology results in 689 primary malignancies. Cancer 1986;58:1493-1498.
15) Casey TT, Rodgers WH, Baxter JW, Sawyers JL, Reynolds VH, Page DL. Stratified diagnostic approach to fine needle aspiration of the breast. Am J Surg 1992;163:305-311.
16) Castrén JP, Kuopio T, Nurmi MJ, Collan YU. Nuclear morphometry in differential diagnosis of renal oncocytoma and renal cell carcinoma. J Urol 1995;154:1302- 1306.
17) Buhmeida A, Kuopio T, Collan Y. Nuclear size and shape in fine needle aspiration biopsy samples of the prostate. Anal Quant Cytol Histol 2000;22:291-298.
18) Dey P, Ghoshal S, Pattari SK. Nuclear image morphometry and cytologic grade of breast carcinoma. Anal Quant Cytol Histol 2000;22:483-485.
19) Boon ME, Trott PA, van Kaam H, Kurver PJ, Leach A, Baak JP. Morphometry and cytodiagnosis of breast lesions. Virchows Arch A Pathol Anat Histol 1982;396:9-18.
20) Tahlan A, Nijhawan R, Joshi K. Grading of ductal breast carcinoma by cytomorphology and image morphometry with histologic correlation. Anal Quant Cytol Histol 2000;22:193-198.
21) Wolberg WH, Street WN, Heisey DM, Mangasarian OL. Computer-derived nuclear "grade" and breast cancer prognosis. Anal Quant Cytol Histol 1995;17:257- 264.
22) Tuczek HV, Fritz P, Schwarzmann P, Wu X, Mähner G. Breast carcinoma. Correlations between visual diagnostic criteria for histologic grading and features of image analysis. Anal Quant Cytol Histol 1996;18:481- 493.
23) Mommers EC, Page DL, Dupont WD, Schuyler P, Leonhart AM, Baak JP, et al. Prognostic value of morphometry in patients with normal breast tissue or usual ductal hyperplasia of the breast. Int J Cancer 2001;95:282-285.
24) Baak JP, Van Dop H, Kurver PH, Hermans J. The value of morphometry to classic prognosticators in breast cancer. Cancer 1985;56:374-382.
25) Kronqvist P, Kuopio T, Collan Y. Morphometric grading of invasive ductal breast cancer. I. Thresholds for nuclear grade. Br J Cancer 1998;78:800-805.
26) King EB, Chew KL, Duarte L, Hom JD, Mayall BH, Miller TR, Petrakis NL. Image cytometric classification of premalignant breast disease in fine needle aspirates. Cancer 1988;62:114-124.
27) Wittekind C, Schulte E. Computerized morphometric image analysis of cytologic nuclear parameters in breast cancer. Anal Quant Cytol Histol 1987;9:480-484.
28) Norris HJ, Bahr GF, Mikel UV. A comparative morphometric and cytophotometric study of intraductal hyperplasia and intraductal carcinoma of the breast. Anal Quant Cytol Histol 1988;10:1-9.
29) Cross SS, Bury JP, Stephenson TJ, Harrison RF. Image analysis of low magnification images of fine needle aspirates of the breast produces useful discrimination between benign and malignant cases. Cytopathol 1997;8:265-273.
30) Beerman H, Veldhuizen RW, Blok RA, Hermans J, Ooms EC. Cytomorphometry as quality control for fine needle aspiration. A study in 321 breast lesions. Anal Quant Cytol Histol 1991;13:143-148.
31) Kaushik N, Sardana S, Das DK, Luthra UK. Quantitative analysis of nuclear area variation in benign and malignant breast fine needle aspirates. Indian J Cancer 1991;28:202-207.
32) Mapstone NP, Zakhour HD. Morphometric analysis of fine needle aspirates from breast lesions. Cytopathol 1990;1:349-355.
33) Elzagheid A, Collan Y. Fine needle aspiration biopsy of the breast. Value of nuclear morphometry after different sampling methods. Anal Quant Cytol Histol 2003;25:73-80.