ArticlePloS one2015
Repeated nipple fluid aspiration: compliance and feasibility results from a prospective multicenter study.
Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Nipple aspirate fluid-A liquid biopsy for diagnosing breast health.Proteomics. Clinical applications · 2017Trial
- Nipple aspirate fluid as a proximal breast liquid biopsy platform: advancing precision risk management in breast cancer.Clinical proteomics · 2026Review
- Microbial Signatures in Breast Cancer: Exploring New Potentials Across Body Niches.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Patient-centered research: how do women tolerate nipple fluid aspiration as a potential screening tool for breast cancer?BMC cancer · 2022Article
- Nipple aspirate fluid and its use for the early detection of breast cancer.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2022Review
- Nipple Aspirate Fluid at a Glance.Cancers · 2021Review
- The changing microRNA landscape by color and cloudiness: a cautionary tale for nipple aspirate fluid biomarker analysis.Cellular oncology (Dordrecht, Netherlands) · 2021Article
- Breast health screening: a UK-wide questionnaire.BMJ nutrition, prevention & health · 2021Article
- The Physiological MicroRNA Landscape in Nipple Aspirate Fluid: Differences and Similarities with Breast Tissue, Breast Milk, Plasma and Serum.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020Article
- Application of Nipple Aspirate Fluid miRNA Profiles for Early Breast Cancer Detection and Management.International journal of molecular sciences · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite intensive surveillance, a high rate of interval malignancies is still seen in women at increased breast cancer risk. Therefore, novel screening modalities aiming at early detection remain needed. The intraductal approach offers the possibility to directly sample fluid containing cells, DNA and proteins from the mammary ductal system where, in the majority of cases, breast cancer originates. Fluid from the breast can non-invasively be obtained by oxytocin-assisted vacuum aspiration, called nipple fluid aspiration (NFA). The goal of this feasibility study was to evaluate the potential of repeated NFA, which is a critical and essential step to evaluate its possible value as a breast cancer screening method.
methodsIn this multicenter, prospective study, we annually collected nipple fluid for up to 5 consecutive years from women at increased breast cancer risk, and performed a questionnaire-based survey regarding discomfort of the aspiration. Endpoints of the current interim analyses were the feasibility and results of 994 NFA procedures in 451 women with total follow-up of 560 person years of observation.
resultsIn this large group of women at increased risk of breast cancer, repetitive NFA appeared to be feasible and safe. In 66.4% of aspirated breasts, nipple fluid was successfully obtained. Independent predictive factors for successful NFA were premenopausal status, spontaneous nipple discharge, smaller breast size, bilateral oophorectomy and previous use of hormone replacement therapy or anti-hormonal treatment. The procedure was well tolerated with low discomfort. Drop-out rate was 20%, which was mainly due to repeated unsuccessful aspiration attempts. Only 1.6% of women prematurely declined further participation because of side effects.
conclusionsRepeated NFA in women at increased breast cancer risk is feasible and safe. Therefore, NFA is a promising method to non-invasively obtain a valuable source of potential breast cancer specific biomarkers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.