A Comparison of Mammography, MRI, Ultrasound, and Thermography

Breast Cancer Screening

IMPORTANT: If you have Ashkenazi Jewish heritage, and you have BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes, you should be particularly cautions about getting a mammogram. BRCA1 and BRCA2 trigger breast cancer when radiated.

EQUALLY IMPORTANT:

If a core biopsy or needle biopsy is scheduled to determine if you have breast cancer, it is VERY important that you do the following to minimize the risk of cancer cells metastasizing to other parts of your body: Start taking Cimetidine (Tagamet) Tablets (an over-the-counter heartburn medication) and Modified Citrus Pectin two weeks before your core biopsy or needle aspiration, and continue taking them for at least one month afterwards.

Details:
Cimetidine (Tagamet)
Take 800mg tablets of Cimetidine tablets per day to help the body protect against surgically induced cancer metastasis by blocking the adhesion of tumor cells to healthy tissue. To read details:
http://www.lef.org/magazine/mag2009/dec2009_Preventing-Surgery-Induced-Cancer-Metastasis_01.htm

Modified Citrus Pectin
Take three heaping teaspoons dissolved in a cup of warm water per day to reduce the risk of metastasis by reducing both the attraction and adhesion of cancer cells to healthy cells. Best taken between meals - time of day is not important - OK to take it with the Cimetidine (which is best taken at night).

Mammography

I must say up front, I have a very strong opinion against the use of mammography as a screening or breast cancer diagnostic tool. I believe women are being short-changed by the mammography industry that continues to conceal the inadequacies and dangers of mammography. Now that the American Cancer Society has gone public with “ ... American medicine has overpromised when it comes to screening”, it is time for women to unite as a group and demand a better option.
For more on this subject, read:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/21/health/21cancer.html?_r=2&partner=rss&emc=rss
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/324/7334/432

My Own Experience: I've had a history of fibroid cysts in both breasts that began in my late twenties. I was in my early thirties when I had my first mammogram, and when I look back on that today I think, "What the heck was that doctor thinking?" I was told during the follow-up visit my breasts were too dense for mammography to pick up anything. Being the demur patient I was then, I thought, "OK - Oh well".

Knowing what I know today, I'd like to drop-kick that doctor. Was he out to just make a buck by prescribing the procedure, or did he really not have enough common sense to know that mammography is a totally inadequate screening device for young dense breasts? And thank you very much for all the radiation exposure. (The four images captured during a mammography procedure expose your body to approximately 1 rad (radiation absorbed dose), which is about 1,000 times greater than the exposure from a chest x-ray.)

The other detail you will not be told is how painful it is. Every single time I had a mammogram, it was so painful I almost passed out. EVERY time, the technician looked at me and said, "You're white as a ghost". And EVERY time I replied, "I'm about to pass out - make this quick please."

I was in my forties when I had my second mammogram. Roughly every three to four years, I would find a lump that would be removed via needle aspiration; and routinely, my doctor at the time would prescribe a mammogram. Each and every time, including the last mammogram I had taken in 2006 (the image in the header of a 50-year-old breast), I was told my breasts were too dense to see anything in a mammogram. You would think doctors could apply some simple logic: very dense breasts means you're not going to see anything using mammography.

Another Lady's Experience: The lady sitting next to me during my second round of chemotherapy still had her hair. So, I asked, "Is this your first chemo treatment?" She smiled and replied, "No, I've been undergoing chemotherapy for many years." I'm sure she could read the puzzled look in my face, which is why she told me her story.

She was diagnosed with breast cancer seven years ago; had a lumpectomy; and was monitored very closely via mammography. For the first couple years she had a mammogram every three months, followed by a mammogram every six months. Three years after her breast cancer diagnosis and surgery, she started having severe lower back pain. An MRI of her lower back determined her breast cancer had spread to her spine, and an MRI of her breasts determined a cancer reoccurrence in her breast behind the scar tissue created from the lumpectomy. The reason mammography didn't catch it: mammography cannot see behind scar tissue. Wouldn't you think a doctor could foresee this problem? Now, in order to live, this lady is undergoing chemotherapy for the rest of her life. Fortunately, the chemo agents she is receiving are not attacking her fast growing cells to the degree that causes hair loss.

Look at the Numbers:
Mammography has 70 to 80 percent false positives and 40 percent false negatives, while MRI and Thermography have 95 percent accuracy. I don't know the numbers on Ultrasound.

Back to My Experience:
In late December 2009 I noticed that my right nipple had inverted. I also had a lump just below the nipple, along with an annoying itch. My doctor at that time wanted me to have a mammogram, I refused. In all the years I've had a mammogram, every single time they came back and said my breasts were too dense for mammography to see anything; and every time I objected to another mammogram because I was always told my breasts were too dense, I was told I was older, therefore my breasts would be less dense, so mammography should be able to see something this go-round.

DON'T BUY INTO IT!
If you have dense breasts, or a history of fibroid cysts, or you are an Ashkenazi Jew, or if cancer runs in your family, or if you want to avoid having your implants ruptured from the intense pressure (yes, that does happen - even though they tell you it doesn't) - INSIST on an MRI. If you are told that insurance will not cover it, request an ultrasound. If the ultrasound identifies a suspect mass, insurance should cover the MRI. It is worth your time and life to work out the details with your doctor and insurance company. If your doctor will not work with you, go find yourself a doctor who cares about the well-being of his or her patients.

Also, regardless of what technology is used to identify a suspect mass/tumor, you will not be given a diagnosis until either a needle aspiration or a core biopsy is performed. So, if you have a palatable mass, have a needle aspiration preformed with ultrasound. This is the quickest way to a diagnosis.

MRI

My immediate reaction upon seeing the MRI image of my breast cancer: “I should be the poster child for MRI.”  I had never seen an MRI before, so I had no idea how much detail this technology captures. The one thing I did know at that time, I was not about to risk my life to another mammogram, given that mammography had never been able to identify anything in my breasts prior.

Ultrasound

Given what I know today - in all the years I've dealt with fibroid cysts, I would have refused to ever having a mammogram. Instead, I would have had insisted on an ultrasound and if the ultrasound presented something suspicious, I would have demanded an MRI.

The ultrasound image in the header (taken in December 2009) is of the 6:00 tumor in my right breast. Ultrasound also identified the two other tumors: 8:00 and 10:00 (in different images) that I had at that time.

Thermography

For a better understanding of breast thermography, go to:
www.breastthermography.info