Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21282130›Full record

Trial reportGut2011

Colorectal cancer screening with odour material by canine scent detection.

Hideto Sonoda, Shunji Kohnoe, Tetsuro Yamazato, Yuji Satoh, Gouki Morizono, Kentaro Shikata, Makoto Morita, Akihiro Watanabe, Masaru Morita, Yoshihiro Kakeji and 2 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Gut, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05173077 (Hybrid-sensor Breath Analysis for Colorectal Cancer Screening), which is not on this map. Cited by 89 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
89citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
15.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT05173077 unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

Hybrid-sensor Breath Analysis for Colorectal Cancer Screening (HYCOR)

TypeobservationalSponsorUniversity of LatviaRan2022 to 2023Enrolled3,000ConditionsColorectal Cancer, Polyp of ColonArmsIdentification of specific VOCs in CRC tissue surgery material, Secondary validation study in general CRC screening settings, Breath sampling for VOC detection, Blood sample collection, Microbiota testing
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

89 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 295 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. A non-invasive screening method usingBiochemistry and biophysics reports · 2024
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

29 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Hideto SonodaDepartment of Surgery and Science, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan. hsonoda@surg2.med.kyushu-u.ac.jp
Shunji Kohnoe
Tetsuro Yamazato
Yuji Satoh
Gouki Morizono
Kentaro Shikata
Makoto Morita
Akihiro Watanabe
Masaru Morita
Yoshihiro Kakeji
Fumio Inoue
Yoshihiko Maehara
Kyushu University · JPFukuoka Dental College · JPImari Arita Kyoritsu Hospital · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveEarly detection and early treatment are of vital importance to the successful treatment of various cancers. The development of a novel screening method that is as economical and non-invasive as the faecal occult blood test (FOBT) for early detection of colorectal cancer (CRC) is needed. A study was undertaken using canine scent detection to determine whether odour material can become an effective tool in CRC screening.

designExhaled breath and watery stool samples were obtained from patients with CRC and from healthy controls prior to colonoscopy. Each test group consisted of one sample from a patient with CRC and four control samples from volunteers without cancer. These five samples were randomly and separately placed into five boxes. A Labrador retriever specially trained in scent detection of cancer and a handler cooperated in the tests. The dog first smelled a standard breath sample from a patient with CRC, then smelled each sample station and sat down in front of the station in which a cancer scent was detected.

results33 and 37 groups of breath and watery stool samples, respectively, were tested. Among patients with CRC and controls, the sensitivity of canine scent detection of breath samples compared with conventional diagnosis by colonoscopy was 0.91 and the specificity was 0.99. The sensitivity of canine scent detection of stool samples was 0.97 and the specificity was 0.99. The accuracy of canine scent detection was high even for early cancer. Canine scent detection was not confounded by current smoking, benign colorectal disease or inflammatory disease.

conclusionsThis study shows that a specific cancer scent does indeed exist and that cancer-specific chemical compounds may be circulating throughout the body. These odour materials may become effective tools in CRC screening. In the future, studies designed to identify cancer-specific volatile organic compounds will be important for the development of new methods for early detection of CRC.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overAnimalsBehavior, AnimalBreath TestsCase-Control StudiesColorectal NeoplasmsDogsEarly Detection of CancerFecesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm Staging

Identifiers

PMID21282130
PMCPMC3095480
OpenAlexW2156161107

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.