Could open wide and exhale replace hold your breath and don't breath(4mammogram)

Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2006 Feb 24; [Epub ahead of print] Related Articles, Links

Prediction of breast cancer using volatile biomarkers in the breath.

Phillips M, Cataneo RN, Ditkoff BA, Fisher P, Greenberg J, Gunawardena R, Kwon CS, Tietje O, Wong C.

Menssana Research Inc., 1 Horizon Road, Suite 1415, Fort Lee, NJ, 07024, USA.

We evaluated a breath test for volatile organic compounds (VOCs) as a predictor of breast cancer. Breath VOCs were assayed in 51 asymptomatic women with abnormal mammograms and biopsy-proven breast cancer, and 42 age-matched healthy women. A fuzzy logic model predicted breast cancer with accuracy superior to previously reported findings. Following random assignment to a training set (64) or a prediction set (29), a model was constructed in the training set employing five breath VOCs that predicted breast cancer in the prediction set with 93.8% sensitivity and 84.6% specificity. The same model predicted no breast cancer in 16/50 (32.0%) women with abnormal mammograms and no cancer on biopsy. A two-minute breath test could potentially provide a safe, accurate and painless screening test for breast cancer, but prospective validation studies are required.

PMID: 16502014 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]

Why not as a starting point for regular quick easy check up, in an scheme that accouts for lack of absolute accuracy, benifits of self examination etc.

Were these figures not similar to the best dogs tested.

Very interesting.


RB

[tousled1]

Wouldn't it be wonderful if a simple breath test could aid in diagnosing breast cancer!!! I am doubtful that the medical profession would ever agree to such a test. Everyone knows that an MRI is a much better tool than the mammogram but yet the MRI is not routinely used. Medical insurance wants the mamo because it's cheaper than the MRI. If the insurance companies didn't worry so much about cost of tests, I'm sure that breast cancer would be diagnosed much earlier than it currently is. Guess I'm a bit cynical here today

I am sure a breathalyzer test would be much less expensive than a mammogram (no leaded walls required, no certification of technician, inspection by the radiologic safey people, takes less time (thus more patients per hour), no malpractice coverage required as no radiologist required to read it, also no "professional service" fee for the reading...

There is a lot of competition from firms tryiing to develop machines to look for small quantities of organic materials ( goded on by the hope of large
profits in the Home land security field)--my neighbor has one such company, trying to decide how to market his machine.

The only losers would be the radiologists and makers of mammogram machines and they are already moving into more lucrative alternatives --"interventional radiology" and cyberknife.

But why not use dogs in those places which can't afford a machine and save a poor stray from the usual fate of euthanasia?

I wonder what the dog would charge you--a pet on the snod or a dog treat?