Beyond Mammography: By: Len Saputo, MD
Beyond Mammography: By: Len Saputo, MD
Beyond Mammography: By: Len Saputo, MD
Overview
The most devastating loss of life from breast cancer occurs between the ages of 30 to 50.
Fortunately, women today have more options available to them to help in the detection of
breast cancer than in the past decades. Unfortunately, education and awareness of these
options and their effectiveness in detecting breast cancer at different stages in life are
woefully deficient.
Modern-day breast thermography boasts vastly improved technology and more extensive
scientific clinical research. In fact, the article references data from major peer review
journals and research on more than 300,000 women who have been tested using the
technology. Combined with the successes in detecting breast cancer with greater accuracy
than other methods, the technology is slowly gaining ground among more progressive
practitioners.
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART I
Introduction ............................................................................... 4
SIDE BAR:
PART II
The History of Breast Thermography ......................................... 6
How Breast Thermograms Work ............................................... 7
Clinical Research Supporting Breast Thermography ..................... 8
Important Highlights from Breast Thermography Studies ........ 9
Conclusion ...........................................................................10
References ...........................................................................11
2
Introduction
The most devastating loss of life from breast cancer impacts women between the
ages of 30 and 50. For women between the ages of 40 and 44, breast cancer is
the leading cause of death, according to the American Cancer Society. Yet the
November 10, 2003 issue of the AMA journal, American Medical News, reports
little evidence documenting that mammography saves lives from breast cancer
for premenopausal women, which are many of the women who fall into these age
ranges. (1)
A Closer Look:
The Prevalence, Fear and Risk Factors
of Breast Cancer
According to the American Cancer Society (ACS), breast cancer is
the leading cause of death in women between the ages of 40 and
44. Although breast cancer has only 10 percent the morbidity and
mortality of coronary heart disease, it is generally more feared. (3)
DCIS and LCIS are very mild cancerous lesions that only become
malignant in about 2 percent of cases. For this reason many
physicians do not consider DCIS and LCIS true cancers.
3
genes, are known to be associated with both breast and ovarian
cancers, but only account for 5 to 10 percent of all breast cancer.
4
women under the age of 50. (1, 8-10) Results from the widely accepted BCDDP
study documented that the overall ability of mammograms to detect cancer was
only 70 percent. This means that 30 percent of mammograms found to be
negative for potentially cancerous lesions are actually positive.
5
At least 10 percent of breast cancers cannot be identified by mammography,
even when they are palpable. (8)
For women under the age of 40, no accurate or cost effective technology exists in
mainstream medical practice that identifies lesions likely to be breast cancer with
reasonable sensitivity and specificity. Given that breast cancer is the leading
cause of death between the ages of 40 and 44, it is obvious that a pressing need
exists for another test to identify these cancers when they are just starting to
develop and still small enough to be cured.
Most breast cancers do not become palpable until they are greater than one
centimeter in size—by that time 25 percent have already metastasized. Because
most lethal breast cancers take approximately 15 years from their beginning to
the time of death, women need reliable testing that starts when the cancer is
initially forming—in their mid-twenties.
Even though there is reliable technology existing today that is available, there is
limited awareness and insufficient education that has resulted in its being greatly
underused in clinical practice.
6
Initially, physicians were very excited when they learned that breast cancers emit
more infrared heat than normal healthy tissues, and that they could be detected
using infrared scanners.
Unfortunately, this resulted in many women having breast surgeries that did not
have breast cancer. Eventually, the high rate of unneeded surgeries led to the
rejection of infrared breast imaging in the United States, with the entire
technology being sidelined by mainstream medical practice for several decades.
Since the 1970s, however, clinical research has continued, especially in Canada
and France where this technology is considered more mainstream. More than 800
research papers have been published on the subject of breast thermography, and
a research databank on more than 300,000 women who have been tested with
infrared breast imaging now exists.
7
constricting to conserve heat while tumor tissue remains hot.
Thus, tumors emit more heat than their surrounding tissues and are usually
easily detected by heat-sensing infrared scanners.
Over time, cancerous tissues stay hot or become even hotter—they do not cool
down. In sharp contrast, however, other possible conditions such as fibrocystic
breasts, infections, and other benign disorders cool down as they resolve.
Thermograms are graded with a system much like pap smears with grades 1-5.
Th1 and Th2 are normal, Th3 is moderately abnormal, and Th4 and Th5 are
severely abnormal and require careful follow-up because many of them are
caused by cancer. Of significance, one recent study documented that women with
Th1 and Th2 scores can be reassured with a 99 percent level of confidence that
they do not have breast cancer. (16)
• Cancer, 1980, Volume 56, 45-51. (17) Fifty eight thousand patients with
breast complaints were examined between 1965 and 1977. Twelve hundred and
forty five patients with abnormal Th3 mammotherms had normal breasts by
mammography, ultrasound, physical exam, and biopsy. Thirty-eight percent of
women with normal breasts and 44 percent of those with mastopathy developed
biopsy proven breast cancer within five years. Ninety percent of patients with Th4
or 5 had diagnosis of cancer made on their first visit.
8
years of age where breast cancer is the leading cause of death.
In women under the age of 50, where there is the most devastating loss of life
from breast cancer, mammography, MRIs and PET scans cannot come close to
matching the combined sensitivity and specificity (accuracy) of breast
The FDA thermography.
approved breast
9 Breast thermography involves no radiation exposure or breast compression, is
thermography easy to do, is done in a private setting, and is affordable.
for breast
cancer risk 9 The FDA approved breast thermography for breast cancer risk assessment in
1982.
assessment in
1982. 9 It is important to begin breast cancer screening long before age 40. It should
begin at age 25 in order to identify young women who are already developing
breast cancer since it takes approximately 15 years for a breast cancer to form
and lead to death.
Further, young women with dense breast tissue are the most difficult to evaluate
using breast palpation, mammography, and ultrasound examinations, yet their
significantly higher risk of developing breast cancer can be accurately detected
with breast thermography.
9 Mainstream procedures are not approved for breast cancer screening in women
under age 40—it is widely known and accepted that they miss too many cancers
and lead to too many false positive findings that result in far too many needless
breast biopsies.
9
Conclusion
There is an abundance of scientific evidence supporting that breast thermography
is the most sensitive and accurate way to identify women with breast cancer,
especially in women under the age of 55, where it causes the most devastating
loss of life. For women over 55, breast thermography is an important adjunct to
clinical breast examination and mammography, as this combination has been
documented to increase identification of breast cancers to 98 percent.
Many new technologies are on the horizon that may become mainstream in the
near future. With the advent of highly sophisticated genetic technology, new
proteins are constantly being discovered that offer promise as markers of early
breast cancer. (20) Recently published reports also suggest that MRI technology
may be blended with spectrophotometric measurements that could diagnose
breast cancer without even doing a biopsy. (21)
10
REFERENCES
1. Elliott, V S. Mammography debate: Who should get screened and when?
American Medical News, an AMA publication. Volume 10, number 42, pages 35-37,
November 10, 2003. www.amednews.com.
2. Kerlikowske, K. Use of mammograms in older women questionable. JAMA.
December 10, 2003.
3. Time Magazine, April 28, 2003. Cover story: The No. 1 Killer of Women.
4. SEER, National Cancer Institute: Chances of developing breast cancer at a
given age.
5. de Sanjose S, et al. Prevalence of BRCA1 and BRCA2 germline mutations in
young breast cancer patients: a population-based study. Int J Cancer 2003; 106 (4):
588-93.
6. Furstenberger et al. Insulin like growth factors mediate breast cancer growth
and proliferation. Onkologie, 2003. Volume 26, number 3, pages 290-94.
7. Baker L. Breast cancer detection demonstration project: Five year summary
report. Cancer, 1982, volume 32, pages 194-225.
8. Sickles EA. Breast masses: mammographic evaluation. Radiology 1989. Pages
173-303.
9. Fletcher, S W, and Elmore, J G. Mammographic Screening for Breast Cancer.
New England Journal of Medicine. Volume 348, no. 17, pages 1672-80. April 24, 2003.
10. Ostbye, T. Elderly women over-screened for cancers with little measurable
benefit. Annals of Family Practice. November/December issue, 2003.
11. Pisano, E. Digital Mammography Offers Better Breast Cancer Diagnoses.
Presented at the Radiologic Society of North America annual meeting, December 2003.
Research conducted at University of North Carolina School of Medicine.
[email protected].
12. Freidrich M. MRI of the breast: State of the art. European Radiology, 1998.
Volume 8, pages 707-725.
13. Avril N, Rose CA, Schelling M, et al. Breast imaging with positron emission
tomography and fluorine-18 flourodeoxyglucose: use and limitations. Journal of
Clinical Oncology, 2000. Volume 18, pages 3495-3502.
14. Avril N. Discussions in PET Imaging 2003. CMP Healthcare Media, DPI no.
621, PET and Breast Cancer.
15. Gautherie, M, Haehnel, P, Walter, J p, Keith, L. Long-Term Assessment of
Breast Cancer Risk by Liquid-Crystal Thermal Imaging. Biomedical Thermology, pages
279-301. 1982 Alan R. Liss, Incl, 150 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10011.
16. Parisky, Y R, et al. Efficacy of Computerized Infrared Imaging Analysis to
Evaluate Mammographically Suspicious Lesions. American Journal of Roentgenology,
January 2003, 263-69.
17. Gautherie, M, and Gros, C M. Breast Thermography and Cancer Risk
Prediction. Cancer, 1980, volume 56, 45-51.
18. Nyirjesy, M D, et al. Clinical Evaluation, Mammography and Thermography in
the Diagnosis of Breast Carcinoma. Thermology, 1986, volume 1, 170-73.
19. Keyserlingk, M D, et al. Infrared Imaging of the Breast: Initial Reappraisal
Using High-Resolution Digital Technology in 100 successive cases of Stage I and II
Breast Cancer. The Breast Journal, volume 4, 1998, 245-51.
20. Zangar, R. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment. July 3, 2003.
21. Bolan, P. In vivo quantification of choline compounds in the breast with 1H MR
spectroscopy. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine. Volume 50, Issue 6, Date: December
2003, Pages: 1134-1143.
11