Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33996531›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in oncology2021

Advanced Diagnostic Technology of Volatile Organic Compounds Real Time analysis Analysis From Exhaled Breath of Gastric Cancer Patients Using Proton-Transfer-Reaction Time-of-Flight Mass Spectrometry.

Yoon Ju Jung, Ho Seok Seo, Ji Hyun Kim, Kyo Young Song, Cho Hyun Park, Han Hong Lee

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 49 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Yoon Ju JungDivision of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Catholic Cancer Research Institute, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, South Korea.
Ho Seok SeoDivision of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Catholic Cancer Research Institute, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, South Korea.
Ji Hyun KimDivision of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Catholic Cancer Research Institute, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, South Korea.
Kyo Young SongDivision of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Catholic Cancer Research Institute, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, South Korea.
Cho Hyun ParkDivision of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Catholic Cancer Research Institute, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, South Korea.
Han Hong LeeDivision of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Catholic Cancer Research Institute, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, South Korea.
Catholic University of Korea · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundScreening endoscopy is considered to be the most accurate tool for early detection of gastric cancer, but it is both invasive and costly. It is therefore essential to develop cost-effective and non-invasive diagnostic tools for gastric cancer. The aim of this study is to investigate the presence of certain volatile organic compounds (VOCs) associated with gastric cancer and to survey the usefulness of VOCs as screening tools of gastric cancer.

methodsThe present study was conducted prospectively to identify the relationship between gastric cancer and specific VOCs quantified by mass spectrometry. Exhaled breath samples from a total of 43 participants were analysed. This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the College of Medicine, Catholic University of Korea (KC16TISI0598), and registered to clinical research information service (KCT0004356).

resultsNine VOCs differed significantly between the control and cancer patient groups. When participants were divided into control, early gastric cancer (EGC), and advanced gastric cancer (AGC) groups, seven VOCs remained significantly different. Of these, four (propanal, aceticamide, isoprene and 1,3 propanediol) showed gradual increases as cancer advanced, from normal control to EGC to AGC. In receiver operating characteristic curves for these four VOCs, the area under the curve for gastric cancer prediction was highest (0.842) when more than two VOCs were present.

conclusionsThe present study offers potential directions for non-invasive gastric cancer screening, and may inspire advanced diagnostic technologies in the era of smart home healthcare. However, despite the high accuracy, cancer-specific VOCs from several studies on different populations, and analytic methods show inconsistency, it is necessary to establish standards for each analytical method, and to validate on each population.

Indexed as

breath analysisdiagnosisscreeningstomach neoplasmvolatile organic compound

Identifiers

PMID33996531
PMCPMC8116791
OpenAlexW3158727602

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.