SynthesisMedicine2020
Volatile organic compounds analysis as a potential novel screening tool for colorectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Medicine, 2020. 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 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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.
Hybrid-sensor Breath Analysis for Colorectal Cancer Screening (HYCOR)
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Volatile organic compounds as a potential screening tool for neoplasm of the digestive system: a meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2021Pooled it
- Remote Medical Scent Detection of Cancer and Infectious Diseases With Dogs and Rats: A Systematic Review.Integrative cancer therapiesPooled it
- Development of Electronic Nose as a Complementary Screening Tool for Breath Testing in Colorectal Cancer.Biosensors · 2025Article
- Volatile Organic Metabolites as Potential Biomarkers for Genitourinary Cancers: Review of the Applications and Detection Methods.Metabolites · 2025Review
- Prospect and Challenges of Volatile Organic Compound Breath Testing in Non-Cancer Gastrointestinal Disorders.Biomedicines · 2024Review
- Sample Collection and Processing in Volatile Organic Compound Analysis for Gastrointestinal Cancers.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Breath Fingerprint of Colorectal Cancer Patients Based on the Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry Analysis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- Advancing Colorectal Cancer Diagnosis with AI-Powered Breathomics: Navigating Challenges and Future Directions.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Identification of Volatile Markers of Colorectal Cancer from Tumor Tissues Using Volatilomic Approach.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Fecal Microbiota and Associated Volatile Organic Compounds Distinguishing No-Adenoma from High-Risk Colon Adenoma Adults.Metabolites · 2023Article
- Article
- Article
- Systematic Review: Contribution of the Gut Microbiome to the Volatile Metabolic Fingerprint of Colorectal Neoplasia.Metabolites · 2022Review
- The Present and Future of Colorectal Cancer Screening.Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2022Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The purpose of this meta-analysis was to assess the usefulness of volatile organic compounds (VOC) as a potential novel biomarker for colorectal cancer (CRC).We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases for observational studies (published before November 25th, 2019; no language restrictions) comparing the VOC analysis between patients with CRC and healthy controls. We evaluated the pooled sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio, positive and negative likelihood ratio, as well as summary receiver operating characteristic curve and area under the curve.We identified a total of 10 observational studies that included 381 patients with CRC and 436 healthy controls. Bivariate analysis yielded a pooled sensitivity of 0.82 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.77-0.86), specificity of 0.79 (95% CI = 0.71-0.85), positive likelihood ratio of 3.8 (95% CI = 2.8-5.3), and negative likelihood ratio of 0.23 (95% CI = 0.17-0.30). The area under the curve was 0.87 (95% CI = 0.84-0.90). The pooled diagnostic odds ratio was 17 (95% CI = 10-28). Sensitivity analysis indicated that the pooled results were stabilized. The Deeks' funnel plot asymmetry test (P = .41) suggested no potential publication bias.Our pooled data confirmed the associations between VOC analysis and CRC, highlighting the usefulness of VOC analysis as a potential novel screening tool for CRC. However, standardization of VOC collection and analysis methods for CRC screening is required in future research.
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.