Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33596212›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

Feasibility of integrating canine olfaction with chemical and microbial profiling of urine to detect lethal prostate cancer.

Claire Guest, Rob Harris, Karen S Sfanos, Eva Shrestha, Alan W Partin, Bruce Trock, Leslie Mangold, Rebecca Bader, Adam Kozak, Scott Mclean and 10 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 45 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Prostate cancer detection: a systematic review of urinary biosensors.Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases · 2022
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Accuracy of a new electronic nose for prostate cancer diagnosis in urine samples.International journal of urology : official journal of the Japanese Urological Association · 2022
    Trial
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

20 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.

Claire GuestMedical Detection Dogs, Milton Keynes, United Kingdom.
Rob HarrisMedical Detection Dogs, Milton Keynes, United Kingdom.
Karen S SfanosDepartment of Pathology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-7015-3059
Eva ShresthaDepartment of Pathology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America.
Alan W PartinDepartment of Urology, James Buchanan Brady Urological Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America.
Bruce TrockDepartment of Urology, James Buchanan Brady Urological Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America.
Leslie MangoldDepartment of Urology, James Buchanan Brady Urological Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America.
Rebecca BaderCambridge Polymer Group, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Adam KozakCambridge Polymer Group, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Scott McleanCambridge Polymer Group, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Jonathan SimonsProstate Cancer Foundation, Santa Monica, California, United States of America.
Howard SouleProstate Cancer Foundation, Santa Monica, California, United States of America.
Thomas JohnsonProstate Cancer Foundation, Santa Monica, California, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-0835-6418
Wen-Yee LeeDepartment of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of Texas at El Paso, El Paso, Texas, United States of America.
Qin GaoDepartment of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of Texas at El Paso, El Paso, Texas, United States of America.
Sophie AzizMedical Detection Dogs, Milton Keynes, United Kingdom.
Patritsia Maria StathatouThe Center for Bits and Atoms, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Stephen ThalerImagination Engines, St. Charles, Missouri, United States of America.
Simmie FosterDepartment of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School and Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Andreas MershinThe Center for Bits and Atoms, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Johns Hopkins University · USCambridge Polymer Group (United States) · USProstate Cancer Foundation · USMIT-Harvard Center for Ultracold Atoms · USThe University of Texas at El Paso · USHarvard University · USImagination Engines (United States) · US

Funding

Urinary biomarkers for prostate cancer diagnosis and risk assessmentSC1CA245675 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS EL PASO · PI LEE, WEN-YEE · 2019 to 2023
$1.5M
NCI NIH HHS SC1 CA245675
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Prostate cancer is the second leading cause of cancer death in men in the developed world. A more sensitive and specific detection strategy for lethal prostate cancer beyond serum prostate specific antigen (PSA) population screening is urgently needed. Diagnosis by canine olfaction, using dogs trained to detect cancer by smell, has been shown to be both specific and sensitive. While dogs themselves are impractical as scalable diagnostic sensors, machine olfaction for cancer detection is testable. However, studies bridging the divide between clinical diagnostic techniques, artificial intelligence, and molecular analysis remains difficult due to the significant divide between these disciplines. We tested the clinical feasibility of a cross-disciplinary, integrative approach to early prostate cancer biosensing in urine using trained canine olfaction, volatile organic compound (VOC) analysis by gas chromatography-mass spectroscopy (GC-MS) artificial neural network (ANN)-assisted examination, and microbial profiling in a double-blinded pilot study. Two dogs were trained to detect Gleason 9 prostate cancer in urine collected from biopsy-confirmed patients. Biopsy-negative controls were used to assess canine specificity as prostate cancer biodetectors. Urine samples were simultaneously analyzed for their VOC content in headspace via GC-MS and urinary microbiota content via 16S rDNA Illumina sequencing. In addition, the dogs' diagnoses were used to train an ANN to detect significant peaks in the GC-MS data. The canine olfaction system was 71% sensitive and between 70-76% specific at detecting Gleason 9 prostate cancer. We have also confirmed VOC differences by GC-MS and microbiota differences by 16S rDNA sequencing between cancer positive and biopsy-negative controls. Furthermore, the trained ANN identified regions of interest in the GC-MS data, informed by the canine diagnoses. Methodology and feasibility are established to inform larger-scale studies using canine olfaction, urinary VOCs, and urinary microbiota profiling to develop machine olfaction diagnostic tools. Scalable multi-disciplinary tools may then be compared to PSA screening for earlier, non-invasive, more specific and sensitive detection of clinically aggressive prostate cancers in urine samples.

Indexed as

SmellAnimalsBiomarkers, TumorDogsFeasibility StudiesMalePilot ProjectsProstatic NeoplasmsUrinary TractVolatile Organic CompoundsBiomarkers, TumorVolatile Organic Compounds

Identifiers

PMID33596212
PMCPMC7888653
OpenAlexW3132612376

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.