ArticleMedical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research2017
A Prediction Model with a Combination of Variables for Diagnosis of Lung Cancer.
Article in Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- The electronic nose in lung cancer diagnostics: a systematic review and meta-analysis.ERJ open research · 2025Article
- Collection methods of exhaled volatile organic compounds for lung cancer screening and diagnosis: a systematic review.Journal of thoracic disease · 2024Review
- A combined screening study for evaluating the potential of exhaled acetone, isoprene, and nitric oxide as biomarkers of lung cancer.RSC advances · 2023Article
- Review
- Development and validation of a nomogram model for lung cancer based on radiomics artificial intelligence score and clinical blood test data.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Urinary Volatiles and Chemical Characterisation for the Non-Invasive Detection of Prostate and Bladder Cancers.Biosensors · 2021Article
- Volatile Organic Compounds in Exhaled Breath as Fingerprints of Lung Cancer, Asthma and COPD.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Review
- Rapid breath analysis for acute respiratory distress syndrome diagnostics using a portable two-dimensional gas chromatography device.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2019Article
- Interaction Between Environmental Risk Factors and Catechol-O-Methyltransferase (COMT) and X-Ray Repair Cross-Complementing Protein 1 (XRCC1) Gene Polymorphisms in Risk of Lung Cancer Among Non-Smoking Chinese Women: A Case-Control Study.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Multivariate models with a combination of variables can predict disease more accurately than a single variable employed alone. We developed a logistic regression model with a combination of variables and evaluated its ability to predict lung cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODS The exhaled breath from 57 patients with lung cancer and 72 healthy controls without cancer was collected. The VOCs of exhaled breath were examined qualitatively and quantitatively by a novel electronic nose (Z-nose4200 equipment). The VOCs in the 2 groups were compared using the Mann-Whitney U test, and the baseline data were compared between the 2 groups using the chi-square test or ANOVA. Variables from VOCs and baseline data were selected by stepwise logistic regression and subjected to a prediction model for the diagnosis of lung cancer as combined factors. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to evaluate the predictive ability of this prediction model. RESULTS Nine VOCs in exhaled breath of lung cancer patients differed significantly from those of healthy controls. Four variables - age, hexane, 2,2,4,6,6-pentamethylheptane, and 1,2,6-trimethylnaphthalene - were entered into the prediction model, which could effectively separate the lung cancer samples from the control samples with an accuracy of 82.8%, a sensitivity of 76.0%, and a specificity of 94.0%. CONCLUSIONS The profile of VOCs in exhaled breath contained distinguishable biomarkers in the patients with lung cancers. The prediction model with 4 variables appears to provide a new technique for lung cancer detection.
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.