Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28879861›Full record

ArticleJournal of breath research2017

Integrating exhaled breath diagnostics by disease-sniffing dogs with instrumental laboratory analysis.

Joachim Pleil, Roger Giese

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of breath research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Joachim PleilNational Exposure Research Laboratory, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, United States of America.
Roger GieseDepartment of Pharmaceutical Sciences and Barnett Institute, Northeastern University, Boston, MA, United States of America.
Northeastern University · USResearch Triangle Park Foundation · US

Funding

Research Experiences and Training Coordination CoreP42ES017198 · NIEHS · NORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY · PI ALSHAWABKEH, AKRAM N · 2010 to 2024
$38.6M
NIEHS NIH HHS P42 ES017198
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dogs have been studied for many years as a medical diagnostic tool to detect a pre-clinical disease state by sniffing emissions directly from a human or an in vitro biological sample. Some of the studies report high sensitivity and specificity in blinded case-control studies. However, in these studies it is completely unknown as to which suites of chemicals the dogs detect and how they ultimately interpret this information amidst confounding background odors. Herein, we consider the advantages and challenges of canine olfaction for early (meaningful) detection of cancer, and propose an experimental concept to narrow the molecular signals used by the dog for sample classification to laboratory-based instrumental analysis. This serves two purposes; first, in contrast to dogs, analytical methods could be quickly up-scaled for high throughput sampling. Second, the knowledge gained from identifying probative chemicals could be helpful in learning more about biochemical pathways and disease progression. We focus on exhaled breath aerosol, arguing that the semi-volatile fraction should be given more attention. Ultimately, we conclude that the interaction between dog-based and instrument-based research will be mutually beneficial and accelerate progress towards early detection of cancer by breath analysis.

Indexed as

DiseaseExhalationOdorantsAerosolsAnimalsBreath TestsClinical Laboratory TechniquesDogsHumansSpectrometry, Mass, Matrix-Assisted Laser Desorption-IonizationAerosols

Identifiers

PMID28879861
PMCPMC5751435
OpenAlexW2626668034

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.