Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36050339›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2022

Breast cancer detection by analyzing the volatile organic compound (VOC) signature in human urine.

Judit Giró Benet, Minjun Seo, Michelle Khine, Josep Gumà Padró, Antonio Pardo Martnez, Fadi Kurdahi

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

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

Judit Giró BenetCenter for Embedded Cyber-Physical Systems (CEPS), University of California Irvine (UCI), Irvine, 92697, USA. jgirbene@uci.edu.
Minjun SeoCenter for Embedded Cyber-Physical Systems (CEPS), University of California Irvine (UCI), Irvine, 92697, USA.
Michelle KhineDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, University of California Irvine (UCI), Irvine, 92697, USA.
Josep Gumà PadróSouth Catalonia Oncology Institute (IOCS), Sant Joan de Reus University Hospital, IISPV, Rovira i Virgili University, 43204, Reus, Spain.
Antonio Pardo MartnezDepartment of Electronic and Biomedical Engineering, Universitat de Barcelona (UB), 08028, Barcelona, Spain.
Fadi KurdahiCenter for Embedded Cyber-Physical Systems (CEPS), University of California Irvine (UCI), Irvine, 92697, USA.
University of California, Irvine · USUniversidad Rovira i Virgili · ESUniversitat de Barcelona · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A rising number of authors are drawing evidence on the diagnostic capacity of specific volatile organic compounds (VOCs) resulting from some body fluids. While cancer incidence in society is on the rise, it becomes clear that the analysis of these VOCs can yield new strategies to mitigate advanced cancer incidence rates. This paper presents the methodology implemented to test whether a device consisting of an electronic nose inspired by a dog's olfactory system and olfactory neurons is significantly informative to detect breast cancer (BC). To test this device, 90 human urine samples were collected from control subjects and BC patients at a hospital. To test this system, an artificial intelligence-based classification algorithm was developed. The algorithm was firstly trained and tested with data resulting from gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) urine readings, leading to a classification rate of 92.31%, sensitivity of 100.00%, and specificity of 85.71% (N = 90). Secondly, the same algorithm was trained and tested with data obtained with our eNose prototype hardware, and class prediction was achieved with a classification rate of 75%, sensitivity of 100%, and specificity of 50%.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsVolatile Organic CompoundsAnimalsArtificial IntelligenceDogsElectronic NoseFemaleGas Chromatography-Mass SpectrometryHumansVolatile Organic Compounds

Identifiers

PMID36050339
PMCPMC9435419
OpenAlexW4294018543

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.