ArticleFrontiers in oncology2023
Diagnosis of primary lung cancer and benign pulmonary nodules: a comparison of the breath test and 18F-FDG PET-CT.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Advanced strategy for cancer detection based on volatile organic compounds in breath.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2025Pooled it
- Inconsistencies in predictive models based on exhaled volatile organic compounds for distinguishing between benign pulmonary nodules and lung cancer: a systematic review.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Article
- Volatile Organic Compounds in Biological Matrices as a Sensitive Weapon in Cancer Diagnosis.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Letter to the Editor: Current role of [18 F] FDG-PET/CT in pulmonary sarcoidosis: a meta-analysis.European radiology · 2025Article
- Collection methods of exhaled volatile organic compounds for lung cancer screening and diagnosis: a systematic review.Journal of thoracic disease · 2024Review
- Luminescence Probes in Bio-Applications: From Principle to Practice.Biosensors · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
With the application of low-dose computed tomography in lung cancer screening, pulmonary nodules have become increasingly detected. Accurate discrimination between primary lung cancer and benign nodules poses a significant clinical challenge. This study aimed to investigate the viability of exhaled breath as a diagnostic tool for pulmonary nodules and compare the breath test with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) positron emission tomography (PET)-computed tomography (CT). Exhaled breath was collected by Tedlar bags and analyzed by high-pressure photon ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry (HPPI-TOFMS). A retrospective cohort (n = 100) and a prospective cohort (n = 63) of patients with pulmonary nodules were established. In the validation cohort, the breath test achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.872 (95% CI 0.760-0.983) and a combination of 16 volatile organic compounds achieved an AUC of 0.744 (95% CI 0.7586-0.901). For PET-CT, the SUVmax alone had an AUC of 0.608 (95% CI 0.433-0.784) while after combining with CT image features, 18F-FDG PET-CT had an AUC of 0.821 (95% CI 0.662-0.979). Overall, the study demonstrated the efficacy of a breath test utilizing HPPI-TOFMS for discriminating lung cancer from benign pulmonary nodules. Furthermore, the accuracy achieved by the exhaled breath test was comparable with 18F-FDG PET-CT.
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.