Comparison of accuracy of diagnostic modalities for evaluation of breast cancer with review of literature

Abstract

This study was conducted to confirm which of these modalities [mammography (MG), fine-needle aspiration cytology (FNAC), core-needle biopsy (CNB), or intraoperative touch imprint cytology (IOTIC)] is useful to detect breast cancer and to compare the accuracy of these modalities for the diagnostic setting. One hundred seventy-five, 85, 78, and 25 patients were selected who underwent FNAC, MG, IOTIC, and CNB, respectively. Histopathology was used as a gold standard for comparison of the results of all diagnostic modalities. Twenty-five patients with combinations of three preoperative tests (MG, FNAC, CNB) showed 100% accurate results when compared with histopathology, while the overall accuracy for MG, FNAC, and CNB was 91.7%, 91.5%, and 96%, respectively. Both touch and scrape imprints' sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy were 100% for class V and class II smears, while sensitivity, accuracy, and NPV were 87, 95, and 83% for IOTIC and 94%, 96%, and 89% for IOSC for class III and IV smears. On comparison of the results of all these procedures, the difference was nonspecific (P = 0.2, 0.3, 0.5, 0.55, and 0.6 for MG, FNAC, IOTI, IOSC, and CNB, respectively). Combinations of preoperative tests (MG, FNAC, CNB) were more accurate, reliable, and acceptable when compared with individual diagnostic procedure, but these have their own technical limitations. The accuracy of CNB was much higher than that of MG and FNAC. IOTP and IOSC are simple and cost effective diagnostic tests with better accuracy that can be used as an alternate to frozen section in diagnostic settings and margin assessments.