Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34756945›Full record

ArticleChest2022

Diagnostic Performance of Electronic Nose Technology in Sarcoidosis.

Iris G van der Sar, Catharina C Moor, Judith C Oppenheimer, Megan L Luijendijk, Paul L A van Daele, Anke H Maitland-van der Zee, Paul Brinkman, Marlies S Wijsenbeek

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Chest, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Establishing a Diagnosis of Pulmonary Sarcoidosis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
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

8 authors.

Iris G van der SarDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Catharina C MoorDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Judith C OppenheimerDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Megan L LuijendijkDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Paul L A van DaeleDepartment of Immunology, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Anke H Maitland-van der ZeeDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Paul BrinkmanDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Marlies S WijsenbeekDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. Electronic address: m.wijsenbeek-lourens@erasmusmc.nl.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDiagnosing sarcoidosis can be challenging, and a noninvasive diagnostic method is lacking. The electronic nose (eNose) technology profiles volatile organic compounds in exhaled breath and has potential as a point-of-care diagnostic tool. RESEARCH QUESTION: Can eNose technology be used to distinguish accurately between sarcoidosis, interstitial lung disease (ILD), and healthy control subjects, and between sarcoidosis subgroups? STUDY DESIGN AND

methodsIn this cross-sectional study, exhaled breath of patients with sarcoidosis and ILD and healthy control subjects was analyzed by using an eNose (SpiroNose). Clinical characteristics were collected from medical files. Partial least squares discriminant and receiver-operating characteristic analyses were applied to a training and independent validation cohort.

resultsThe study included 252 patients with sarcoidosis, 317 with ILD, and 48 healthy control subjects. In the validation cohorts, eNose distinguished sarcoidosis from control subjects with an area under the curve (AUC) of 1.00 and pulmonary sarcoidosis from other ILD (AUC, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.82-0.93) and hypersensitivity pneumonitis (AUC, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.75-1.00). Exhaled breath of sarcoidosis patients with and without pulmonary involvement, pulmonary fibrosis, multiple organ involvement, pathology-supported diagnosis, and immunosuppressive treatment revealed no distinctive differences. Breath profiles differed between patients with a slightly and highly elevated soluble IL-2 receptor level (median cutoff, 772.0 U/mL; AUC, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.64-0.92).

interpretationPatients with sarcoidosis can be distinguished from ILD and healthy control subjects by using eNose technology, indicating that this method may facilitate accurate diagnosis in the future. Further research is warranted to understand the value of eNose in monitoring sarcoidosis activity.

Indexed as

Sarcoidosis, PulmonaryVolatile Organic CompoundsBreath TestsCross-Sectional StudiesElectronic NoseExhalationHumansTechnologyVolatile Organic Compoundsbreath testdiagnostic toolelectronic noseinterstitial lung diseasesarcoidosis

Identifiers

PMID34756945
PMCPMC8941620

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.