Document Type: Original Research


1 PhD, Department of Medical Physics, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran

2 MSc, Graduate, Department of Medical Physics, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran

3 MD, Cancer Research Center, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciencs, Tehran, Iran

4 MD, Department of Otolarygology, Imam-Khomeini Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

5 PhD, Department of Radiology Technology, School of Allied Medical Sciences, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran


Background: Breast cancer is the most common type of cancer in women demanding accurate diagnosis to take remedial measures to treat.
Objective: Comparing the diagnostic capability of the computer regulation thermography (CRT), as a novel and safe diagnostic procedure, with common methods including sonography, mammography and clinical examinations for diagnosing breast cancer in suspicious patients against pathology as the gold standard.
Material and Methods: In this prospective clinical trial study, out of 97 referred patients, 44 meeting the inclusion criteria were selected. The selected patients were subjected to mammography, sonography, CRT and clinical examinations. Then, the patients showing suspicious symptoms of breast cancer underwent pathological examinations.
Results: CRT indicated a higher specificity compared to mammography and sonography (78.9% vs. 71.4% and 47.0%, respectively). However, CRT sensitivity was lower than those of mammography, sonography and clinical examination (52% vs. 70.6%, 82.4% and 84.0%). Furthermore, CRT accuracy was lower than mammography, sonography and clinical examination (63.6% vs. 70.9%, 64.7% and 88.6%). While CRT positive prediction value (PPV) was higher than those of mammography and sonography, it was lower than that of clinical examination (76.5% vs. 75%, 60.9% and 95.5%). The negative prediction value (NPV) of CRT was less than all other modalities (55.5% vs. 66.7%, 72.7% and 81.8% for the clinical examination, mammography and sonography, respectively).
Conclusion: Although CRT with a lower sensitivity and higher specificity, cannot be recommended to be used as a definitive diagnostic tool for breast cancer patients, it can be used as a complementary method with other methods to increase the diagnostic accuracy of suspicious patients.


  1. Gautherie M. Temperature and blood flow patterns in breast cancer during natural evolution and following radiotherapy. Prog Clin Biol Res. 1982;107:21-64. PubMed PMID: 7167480.
  2. Ferlay J, Shin H-R, Bray F, Forman D, Mathers C, Parkin DM. GLOBOCAN 2008, cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: IARC CancerBase No. 10. Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer. 2010;2010:29.
  3. Akbari ME. Iranian Female Cancer Report. Tehran: Entesharat Mohsen. 2014.
  4. Ng EY, Fok SC, Peh YC, Ng FC, Sim LS. Computerized detection of breast cancer with artificial intelligence and thermograms. J Med Eng Technol. 2002;26:152-7. PubMed PMID: 12396330.
  5. Lee CH. Screening mammography: proven benefit, continued controversy. Radiol Clin North Am. 2002;40:395-407. PubMed PMID: 12117183.
  6. Usuki H, Onoda Y, Kawasaki S, Misumi T, Murakami M, Komatsubara S, et al. Relationship between thermographic observations of breast tumors and the DNA indices obtained by flow cytometry. Biomedical Thermololgy. 1990;10:282-5.
  7. Gautherie M, Gros CM. Breast thermography and cancer risk prediction. Cancer. 1980;45(1):51-6. PubMed PMID: 7351006.
  8. Thomas DB, Gao DL, Self SG, Allison CJ, Tao Y, Mahloch J, et al. Randomized trial of breast self-examination in Shanghai: methodology and preliminary results. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1997;89:355-65. PubMed PMID: 9060957.
  9. Carter CL, Allen C, Henson DE. Relation of tumor size, lymph node status, and survival in 24,740 breast cancer cases. Cancer. 1989;63:181-7.;2-H. PubMed PMID: 2910416.
  10. Kopans D. Breast cancer screening: women 40 to 49 years of age. Principles and Practice of Oncology. 1994;8:1-11.
  11. Feig SA. Decreased breast cancer mortality through mammographic screening: results of clinical trials. Radiology. 1988;167:659-65. PubMed PMID: 3283836.
  12. Smart CR, Byrne C, Smith RA, Garfinkel L, Letton AH, Dodd GD, et al. Twenty-year follow-up of the breast cancers diagnosed during the Breast Cancer Detection Demonstration Project. CA Cancer J Clin. 1997;47:134-49. PubMed PMID: 9152171.
  13. Tabar L, Dean PB. The control of breast cancer through mammography screening. What is the evidence? Radiol Clin North Am. 1987;25:993-1005. PubMed PMID: 3306777.
  14. Kapoor P, Prasad S, Bhayana E. Real time intelligent thermal analysis approach for early diagnosis of breast cancer. International Journal of computer applications. 2010;1:22-4.
  15. James Odell O. Introduction to contact regulation thermography. Richmond, BC, Canada: Eidam Diagnostics Corporation; 2010.
  16. Lawson R. Implications of surface temperatures in the diagnosis of breast cancer. Can Med Assoc J. 1956;75:309-11. PubMed PMID: 13343098. PubMed PMCID: 1824571.
  17. Lawson RN. A new infrared imaging device. Can Med Assoc J. 1958;79(5):402-3. PubMed PMID: 13573292. PubMed PMCID: 1830404.
  18. Rost A, Rost J. Introduction to Regulation Thermography. Stuttgart. Hippokrates. 1987.
  19. Umadevi V, Raghavan SV, Jaipurkar S. Framework for estimating tumour parameters using thermal imaging. Indian J Med Res. 2011;134:725-31. PubMed PMID: 22199114. PubMed PMCID: 3249973.
  20. Usuki H, Ikeda T, Igarashi Y, Takahashi I, Fukami A, Yokoe T, et al. What kinds of non-palpable breast cancer can be detected by thermography? Biomedical Thermology: the journal of the Japanese Society of Thermorogy. 1998;18:8-12.
  21. In: Natural Doctor. Eccles N. Thermography: Its role in early breast cancer detection. [August 7, 2013]. Available from: