Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30889835›Full record

ReviewMetabolites2019

Critical Review of Volatile Organic Compound Analysis in Breath and In Vitro Cell Culture for Detection of Lung Cancer.

Zhunan Jia, Abhijeet Patra, Viknish Krishnan Kutty, Thirumalai Venkatesan

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Metabolites, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 71 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
71citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

71 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article

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

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

4 authors.

Zhunan JiaNUSNNI-Nanocore, National University of Singapore, Singapore 117411, Singapore. nnijz@nus.edu.sg.
Abhijeet PatraNUSNNI-Nanocore, National University of Singapore, Singapore 117411, Singapore. abhijeet@nus.edu.sg.
Viknish Krishnan KuttyNUSNNI-Nanocore, National University of Singapore, Singapore 117411, Singapore. viknish@nus.edu.sg.
Thirumalai VenkatesanNUSNNI-Nanocore, National University of Singapore, Singapore 117411, Singapore. venky@nus.edu.sg.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Breath analysis is a promising technique for lung cancer screening. Despite the rapid development of breathomics in the last four decades, no consistent, robust, and validated volatile organic compound (VOC) signature for lung cancer has been identified. This review summarizes the identified VOC biomarkers from both exhaled breath analysis and in vitro cultured lung cell lines. Both clinical and in vitro studies have produced inconsistent, and even contradictory, results. Methodological issues that lead to these inconsistencies are reviewed and discussed in detail. Recommendations on addressing specific issues for more accurate biomarker studies have also been made.

Indexed as

biomarkerbreath analysisin vitro studylung cancervolatile organic compound

Identifiers

PMID30889835
PMCPMC6468373

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.