Table 2 A synopsis of the established approaches for the detection of breast cancer
From: Evaluation of nipple aspirate fluid as a diagnostic tool for early detection of breast cancer
Modality | Indication | Sensitivity (%) | Specificity (%) | Advantages | Disadvantages | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Self-examination | Tumour detection | 53.90 | 54–59 | A free and easy way to look for cancer and reduce mortality | Some breast lumps can be missed, cause unnecessary distress | [21] |
Mammography | Tumour detection | 73–86 | 88–93 | Inexpensive, highly portable and does not necessarily require a contrast agent | Discomfort, limited depth penetration, challenging spatial localization, and radiation exposure, False positive and false negative results | [29] |
Ultrasound, especially with contrast enhancement | Detection tumour characterization | 61.40 | 82 | Highly portable, inexpensive molecular microbubble agents possible | Operator dependence contrast agents confined to vascular system | [41] |
Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) | Tumour characterization | 77–99 | 81–99 | Quantification of tumour perfusion and tumour capillary permeability | Confined space, contrast design limited by need for magnetic atom | [42] |
Positron emission tomography | Detection response evaluation characterization | 64–96 | 73–99 | Wide range of molecular imaging probes Tracer imaging without perturbing biologic system | Limited spatial resolution (improved with use of non-contrast computed tomography), some radiation exposure | [43] |
Histopathology | Detection, tumour characterization | 90 | 88 | Differentiating benign and malignant | Discomfort and painful because a surgical procedures required, risk of complications such as infection and bleeding. Can result in over-diagnosis and overtreatment | [35] |