SynthesisBJS open2021
Breath analysis for the detection of digestive tract malignancies: systematic review.
Synthesis in BJS open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 3 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Diagnostic Performance of Electronic Noses in Cancer Diagnoses Using Exhaled Breath: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.JAMA network open · 2022Pooled it
- Systematic review: non-endoscopic surveillance for colorectal neoplasia in individuals with Lynch syndrome.Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics · 2022Pooled it
- SLC2A3 Expression is Differentially Associated with Postoperative Recurrence, Complications, and Liver Metastasis in Colorectal Cancer.Cancer management and research · 2026Article
- Innovative Approaches to Early Detection of Cancer-Transforming Screening for Breast, Lung, and Hard-to-Screen Cancers.Cancers · 2025Review
- Faecal Volatile Organic Compounds to Detect Colorectal Neoplasia in Lynch Syndrome-A Prospective Longitudinal Multicentre Study.Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics · 2025Article
- Diagnostic potential of CDK1 and STAT1 in acute kidney injury associated with gastrointestinal cancers: a bioinformatics-based study.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2025Article
- Machine learning assisted breathomic approach for early-stage thoracic cancer detection.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- VOCs from Exhaled Breath for the Diagnosis of Hepatocellular Carcinoma.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Diagnosis by Volatile Organic Compounds in Exhaled Breath in Exhaled Breath from Patients with Gastric and Colorectal Cancers.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- Detecting Colorectal Adenomas and Cancer Using Volatile Organic Compounds in Exhaled Breath: A Proof-of-Principle Study to Improve Screening.Clinical and translational gastroenterology · 2022Article
- Polyurethane-Based Porous Carbons Suitable for Medical Application.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- A Panel of Bile Volatile Organic Compounds Servers as a Potential Diagnostic Biomarker for Gallbladder Cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn recent decades there has been growing interest in the use of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in exhaled breath as biomarkers for the diagnosis of multiple variants of cancer. This review aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy and current status of VOC analysis in exhaled breath for the detection of cancer in the digestive tract.
methodsPubMed and the Cochrane Library database were searched for VOC analysis studies, in which exhaled air was used to detect gastro-oesophageal, liver, pancreatic, and intestinal cancer in humans, Quality assessment was performed using the QUADAS-2 criteria. Data on diagnostic performance, VOCs with discriminative power, and methodological information were extracted from the included articles.
resultsTwenty-three articles were included (gastro-oesophageal cancer n = 14, liver cancer n = 1, pancreatic cancer n = 2, colorectal cancer n = 6). Methodological issues included different modalities of patient preparation and sampling and platform used. The sensitivity and specificity of VOC analysis ranged from 66.7 to 100 per cent and from 48.1 to 97.9 per cent respectively. Owing to heterogeneity of the studies, no pooling of the results could be performed. Of the VOCs found, 32 were identified in more than one study. Nineteen were reported as cancer type-specific, whereas 13 were found in different cancer types. Overall, decanal, nonanal, and acetone were the most frequently identified.
conclusionThe literature on VOC analysis has documented a lack of standardization in study designs. Heterogeneity between the studies and insufficient validation of the results make interpretation of the outcomes challenging. To reach clinical applicability, future studies on breath analysis should provide an accurate description of the methodology and validate their findings.
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.