SynthesisScientific reports2021
Volatile organic compounds as a potential screening tool for neoplasm of the digestive system: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Observational
- Efficient detection of gastric cancer biomarkers on functionalized carbon nanoribbons using DFT analysis.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Serum-volatile organic compounds in the diagnostics of esophageal cancer.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Advancing Colorectal Cancer Diagnosis with AI-Powered Breathomics: Navigating Challenges and Future Directions.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Methanethiol: A Scent Mark of Dysregulated Sulfur Metabolism in Cancer.Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Identification of Volatile Markers of Colorectal Cancer from Tumor Tissues Using Volatilomic Approach.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Breath Volatile Organic Compounds in Surveillance of Gastric Cancer Patients following Radical Surgical Management.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Novel breath biomarkers identification for early detection of hepatocellular carcinoma and cirrhosis using ML tools and GCMS.PloS one · 2023Article
- Considerations of biomarker application for cancer continuum in the era of precision medicine.Current epidemiology reports · 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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This meta-analysis was aimed to estimate the diagnostic performance of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) as a potential novel tool to screen for the neoplasm of the digestive system. An integrated literature search was performed by two independent investigators to identify all relevant studies investigating VOCs in diagnosing neoplasm of the digestive system from inception to 7th December 2020. STATA and Revman software were used for data analysis. The methodological quality of each study was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool. A bivariate mixed model was used and meta-regression and subgroup analysis were performed to identify possible sources of heterogeneity. A total of 36 studies comprised of 1712 cases of neoplasm and 3215 controls were included in our meta-analysis. Bivariate analysis showed a pooled sensitivity of 0.87 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.83-0.90), specificity of 0.86 (95% CI 0.82-0.89), a positive likelihood ratio of 6.18 (95% CI 4.68-8.17), and a negative likelihood ratio of 0.15 (95% CI 0.12-0.20). The diagnostic odds ratio and the area under the summary ROC curve for diagnosing neoplasm of the digestive system were 40.61 (95% CI 24.77-66.57) and 0.93 (95% CI 0.90-0.95), respectively. Our analyses revealed that VOCs analysis could be considered as a potential novel tool to screen for malignant diseases of the digestive system.
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.