ArticleMolecules (Basel, Switzerland)2021
The Influence of Smoking Status on Exhaled Breath Profiles in Asthma and COPD Patients.
Article in Molecules (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Electronic nose technology in bronchial asthma diagnosis and management.Multidisciplinary respiratory medicine · 2026Article
- Article
- Breath Prints for Diagnosing Asthma in Children.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Short-Term Effect of Cigarette Smoke on Exhaled Volatile Organic Compounds Profile Analyzed by an Electronic Nose.Biosensors · 2022Article
- Exhaled Metabolite Patterns to Identify Recent Asthma Exacerbations.Metabolites · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Breath analysis using eNose technology can be used to discriminate between asthma and COPD patients, but it remains unclear whether results are influenced by smoking status. We aim to study whether eNose can discriminate between ever- vs. never-smokers and smoking <24 vs. >24 h before the exhaled breath, and if smoking can be considered a confounder that influences eNose results. We performed a cross-sectional analysis in adults with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and healthy controls. Ever-smokers were defined as patients with current or past smoking habits. eNose measurements were performed by using the SpiroNose. The principal component (PC) described the eNose signals, and linear discriminant analysis determined if PCs classified ever-smokers vs. never-smokers and smoking <24 vs. >24 h. The area under the receiver-operator characteristic curve (AUC) assessed the accuracy of the models. We selected 593 ever-smokers (167 smoked <24 h before measurement) and 303 never-smokers and measured the exhaled breath profiles of discriminated ever- and never-smokers (AUC: 0.74; 95% CI: 0.66-0.81), and no cigarette consumption <24h (AUC 0.54, 95% CI: 0.43-0.65). In healthy controls, the eNose did not discriminate between ever or never-smokers (AUC 0.54; 95% CI: 0.49-0.60) and recent cigarette consumption (AUC 0.60; 95% CI: 0.50-0.69). The eNose could distinguish between ever and never-smokers in asthma and COPD patients, but not recent smokers. Recent smoking is not a confounding factor of eNose breath profiles.
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.