Background Nipple discharge is the third most frequent complaint of women attending rapid diagnostic breast clinics. Nipple smear cytology remains the single most used diagnostic method for investigating fluid content. This study aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of nipple discharge fluid assessment. Methods The study incorporated searches for studies interrogating the diagnostic data of nipple discharge fluid cytology compared with the histopathology gold standard. Data from studies published from 1956 to 2019 were analyzed. The analysis included 8648 cytology samples of women with a presenting complaint of nipple discharge. Both hierarchical and bivariate models for diagnostic meta-analysis were used to attain overall pooled sensitivity and specificity. Results Of 837 studies retrieved, 45 fulfilled the criteria for inclusion. The diagnostic accuracy of the meta-analysis examining nipple discharge fluid had a sensitivity of 75 % (95 % confidence interval [CI], 0.74–0.77) and a specificity of 87 % (95 % CI, 0.86–0.87) for benign breast disease. For breast cancer, it had a sensitivity of 62 % (95 % CI, 0.53–0.71) and a specificity 71 % (95 % CI, 0.57–0.81). Furthermore, patients presenting with blood-stained discharge yielded an overall malignancy rate of 58 % (95 % CI, 0.54–0.60) with a positive predictive value (PPV) of 27 % (95 % CI, 0.17–0.36). Conclusions Pooled data from studies encompassing nipple discharge fluid assessment suggest that nipple smear cytology is of limited diagnostic accuracy. The authors recommend that a tailored approach to diagnosis be required given the variable sensitivities of currently available tests.

Atypical insufficiency fractures of the femur in patients on long-term bisphosphonate therapy have been well described in recent literature. The majority of cases are associated with minimal or no trauma and occur in the subtrochanteric or diaphyseal region.

Nipple aspirate fluid is the physiological biofluid lining ductal epithelial cells. Historically, cytology of nipple fluid has been the gold standard diagnostic method for assessment of ductal fluid in patients with symptomatic nipple discharge. The role of biomarker discovery in nipple aspirate fluid for assessment of asymptomatic and high-risk patients is highly attractive but evaluation to date is limited by poor diagnostic accuracy. However, the emergence of new technologies capable of identifying metabolites that have been previously thought unidentifiable within such small volumes of fluid, has enabled testing of nipple biofluid to be re-examined. This review evaluates the use of new technologies to evaluate the components of nipple fluid and their potential to serve as biomarkers in screening.

Purpose: To calculate the diagnostic accuracy of nipple aspirate fluid (NAF) cytology. Background: Evaluation of NAF cytology in asymptomatic patients conceptually offers a non-invasive method for either screening for breast cancer or else predicting or stratifying future cancer risk. Methods: Studies were identified by performing electronic searches up to August 2019. A meta-analysis was conducted to attain an overall pooled sensitivity and specificity of NAF for breast cancer detection. Results: A search through 938 studies yielded a total of 19 studies. Overall, 9308 patients were examined, with cytology results from 10,147 breasts [age (years), mean ± SD = 49.73 ± 4.09 years]. Diagnostic accuracy meta-analysis of NAF revealed a pooled specificity of 0.97 (95% CI 0.97–0.98), and sensitivity of 0.64 (95% CI 0.62–0.66). Conclusions: The diagnostic accuracy of nipple smear cytology is limited by poor sensitivity. If nipple fluid assessment is to be used for diagnosis, then emerging technologies for fluid biomarker analysis must supersede the current diagnostic accuracy of NAF cytology.

Ambient Ionisation Mass Spectrometry techniques: Desorption Electrospray Ionisation (DESI) and Laser Desorption – Rapid Evaporative Ionisation Mass Spectrometry (LD-REIMS) were used to detect the SARS-CoV-2 in dry nasal swabs. 45 patients were studied from samples collected between April – June 2020 in a clinical feasibility study. Diagnostic accuracy was calculated as 86.7% and 84% for DESI and LD-REIMS respectively. Results can be acquired in seconds providing robust and quick analysis of COVID-19 status which could be carried out without the need for a centralised laboratory. This technology has the potential to provide an alternative to population testing and enable the track and trace objectives set by governments and curtail the effects of a second surge in COVID-19 positive cases. In contrast to current PCR testing, using this technique there is no requirement of specific reagents which can cause devastating delays upon breakdowns of supply chains, thus providing a promising alternative testing method.

Background Currently, there is an unmet clinical need in identifying and screening women at high risk of breast cancer, where tumours are often aggressive and treatment intervention is too late to prevent metastasis, recurrence and mortality. This has been brought into sharp focus by the SARS-CoV-2 global pandemic, constantly changing hospital policies and surgical guidelines in reducing access to established screening and treatment regimens. Nipple aspirate fluid (NAF), is thought to provide a unique window into the biological processes occurring within the breast, particularly in the context of a developing neoplasm. Evaluation of NAF in asymptomatic women, for novel chemical biomarkers of either early disease and/or cancer risk offers tremendous promise as a tool to facilitate early detection and to supplement screening. However, it is acceptability as a method of collection and screening by women is critical and yet unknown. A breast health questionnaire was disseminated to women through breast cancer charities, patient support groups and social media platforms, with the aim of collecting opinions on the acceptability of use of NAF as a potential screening tool. Method Following ethical approval a questionnaire was prepared using online surveys consisting of four parts: (a) introduction on breast health screening in the UK, (b) core demographic data, (c) questions regarding screening and the acceptability of using NAF and (d) opinions about the process of collecting and using nipple fluid for screening. The voluntary and anonymous questionnaire was disseminated through social media, professional networks, charity websites and by individuals between October 2019 and December 2020. Survey responses were collected electronically, and the data analysed using online surveys statistical tools. Results A total of 3178 women completed the questionnaire (65.9% Caucasian, 27.7% Asian/British Asian, 0.6% black and 5.0% other). Of these, 2650 women (83.4%) had no prior knowledge of NAF and 89.4% were unaware that NAF can be expressed in up to 90% of all women. Concerning their risk of breast cancer, 89.8% of women were keen to know their future risk of breast cancer, 8.5% were unsure whether they wanted to know their risk and a further, 1.6% did not want to know. Regarding screening, 944 women (29.8%) were unaware of the lack of routine National Health Service Breast Screening for those under the age of 47 years. Furthermore, 53.0% of women were unaware that mammographic screening is affected by breast density. In terms of the acceptability of home testing for breast health, 92.0% were keen to undergo a home test. Both 79.7% and 70.9% stated they would consider hand massage and a breast pump to acquire nipple fluid samples, respectively. A further 48.6% of women would consider the use of a hormonal nasal spray for the same purpose. However, with regards to acquiring results from NAF testing, 42.6% of women would prefer to receive results at home and 34.2% in a medical facility. Finally, 91.6% of women believed that breast health should be incorporated as part of school education curriculum. Conclusion Public awareness regarding breast screening protocols and limitations of mammography could be improved. Many women were unaware that NAF might be a useful biofluid for future risk prediction, and yet the concept of self-testing of nipple fluid, with either hand massage or a breast pump was well received. Efforts should be made to increase awareness of the benefits of alternative and supplementary tests, especially in the context of high-risk individuals and younger patients.