Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32176623›Full record

ArticleCancer biomarkers : section A of Disease markers2020

Electronic nose to distinguish bladder cancer by urinary odour feature: A pilot study.

Kazumasa Matsumoto, Yasukiyo Murakami, Yuriko Shimizu, Takahiro Hirayama, Wataru Ishikawa, Masatsugu Iwamura

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer biomarkers : section A of Disease markers, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 34% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
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

6 authors.

Kazumasa Matsumoto
Yasukiyo Murakami
Yuriko Shimizu
Takahiro Hirayama
Wataru Ishikawa
Masatsugu Iwamura

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNo study has yet investigated the use of electronic nose (eNose) technology to reveal pattern recognition of urological diseases, including bladder cancer.

objectiveWe sought to determine the diagnostic performance of the eNose in recognizing urinary odour in patients with bladder cancer.

methodsThe eNose is a commercially available model equipped with two sensors. The angle of the two sensors (θ) depends on the kinds of chemical substances, thus defining θ as the feature of odour. Quantity of odour is the number of θ detected during a measurement. Urine samples were from 36 untreated patients with bladder cancer, 29 with urolithiasis, 10 with urinary tract infection (UTI), and 27 healthy volunteers.

resultsBased on ROC analysis of the quantity in patients with bladder cancer, an optimal cut-off value for θ of 49, 48, and 55 was applied to compare with samples from the healthy volunteer, urolithiasis and UTI groups, respectively. There were significantly differences between bladder cancer and the other conditions using these specific points (p< 0.0001, respectively). The resulting diagnostic sensitivity was 61.4%, 45.6%, and 60.8%, and specificity was 52.8%, 68.4%, and 90.2%, respectively. The AUC for bladder cancer was 0.565, 0.548, and 0.909, respectively.

conclusionThe eNose is a small, portable, rapid, low cost, and noninvasive instrument for distinguishing bladder cancer from other benign conditions.

Indexed as

Electronic NoseAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingOdorantsPilot ProjectsUrinary Bladder NeoplasmsBladder cancerelectronic noseodoururine

Identifiers

PMID32176623
PMCPMC12662336
OpenAlexW3012233942

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.