Mammography or Thermography

Breast Thermography is still an unknown quantity or at best, regarded as controversial by the majority of the medical profession. However, whilst breast cancer rates are climbing steadily, there is little doubt that early detection saves lives. It is also obvious that before mammography can detect a tumour, the tumour has to be there, and this is where other more sensitive screening methods would be invaluable. Notably, the thermal imaging camera detects the early blood vessel changes that generally precede the actual development of a malignant tumour mass and the U.S. FDA has approved its use for breast cancer screening. Unfortunately, earlier less efficient cameras, combined with a lack of awareness of proper essential protocols and standardisation, resulted in numerous false positive reports (even though subsequent research revealed that some of these patients developed cancer at the site several years later). In contrast, modern digital thermal imaging (DTI) with its sophisticated software, has greatly improved this procedure, especially in younger women and in those with dense breast tissue who are much harder to accurately screen with mammography.

The Cochrane Review (an acknowledged independent scientific body) reviewed: "Screening for breast cancer with mammography" by Olsen and Getzsche (Update Issue 4:2002). The Review determined that mammography was also controversial and concluded that "The currently available reliable evidence does not show a survival benefit of mass screening for breast cancer. Women, clinicians and policy makers should consider these findings carefully when they decide whether or not to support screening programs." Anne McTierman MD,PhD (Medscape Women's Health eJournal 7 (2),2002) also acknowledged. "Mammography, even at its best, is an imperfect cancer screening tool. Mammography is imperfect because it does not reliably detect lesions before they are cancerous." Dr McTierman highlighted the need for urgent investigations of other screening modalities including thermal imaging. Notably, the BreastScreen Aotearoa Newsletter to GPs (2005/6) admits that mammography can miss 25% of cancer in women under 50 and 15% in the elderly. It should also be noted that thermography has revealed the presence of breast cancer despite normal reports from mammography. In January 2003, Parisky published their findings in 875 biopsied lesions where thermography had an over 95% predictive value and concluded that infrared imaging was a safe non-invasive procedure that would be a valuable adjunct to mammography in determining whether a lesion was benign or malignant. (Parisky YR et al. Efficacy of computerised infrared imaging analysis to evaluate mammographyically suspicious lesions. American J Roentgenology 180(2003):263-269

Neither thermography nor mammography identify cancer as the latter can only be proven by histology. Both methods are different screening procedures that identify possible pathology. Thermal imaging appears to be a superior early detection and monitoring method. However, when indicated, it is then followed by the essential x-ray and ultra-sound structural investigations to locate and confirm a mass. Both methods therefore have their place. Sitting in front of a camera in an air-conditioned room is certainly "user friendly" and radiation free.
Further information is available at: www.breastthermography.org

Dr Mike Godfrey