ArticleRespiratory research2023
Differentiating interstitial lung diseases from other respiratory diseases using electronic nose technology.
Article in Respiratory research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- eNose technologies in the detection of cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.The oncologist · 2026Pooled it
- Exhaled breath volatile organic compounds (VOCs) detection methods: GC-MS versus eNose in COPD diagnosis-a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Electronic nose technology in bronchial asthma diagnosis and management.Multidisciplinary respiratory medicine · 2026Article
- Electronic Nose-Based Exhaled Volatile Organic Compound Pattern Recognition and Multivariate Signal Analysis for Discriminating Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis from Autoimmune Usual Interstitial Pneumonia.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- The Role of Exhaled Breath Analyses in Interstitial Lung Disease.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Moving past multidisciplinary discussions and Gender-Age-Physiology model: precision medicine through biological phenotyping in interstitial lung disease.Current opinion in pulmonary medicine · 2025Review
- Proteomic Biomarkers of Survival in Non-Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis Interstitial Lung Disease.American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2025Article
- The Role of Inflammation and Fibrosis in Interstitial Lung Disease Treatment Decisions.American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2024Article
- Overcoming the Limits of Cross-Sensitivity: Pattern Recognition Methods for Chemiresistive Gas Sensor Array.Nano-micro letters · 2024Review
- ERS International Congress 2023: highlights from the Interstitial Lung Diseases Assembly.ERJ open research · 2024Article
- Prostate cancer risk stratification via eNose urine odor analysis: a preliminary report.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
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 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionInterstitial lung disease (ILD) may be difficult to distinguish from other respiratory diseases due to overlapping clinical presentation. Recognition of ILD is often late, causing delay which has been associated with worse clinical outcome. Electronic nose (eNose) sensor technology profiles volatile organic compounds in exhaled breath and has potential to detect ILD non-invasively. We assessed the accuracy of differentiating breath profiles of patients with ILD from patients with asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and lung cancer using eNose technology.
methodsPatients with ILD, asthma, COPD, and lung cancer, regardless of stage or treatment, were included in a cross-sectional study in two hospitals. Exhaled breath was analysed using an eNose (SpiroNose) and clinical data were collected. Datasets were split in training and test sets for independent validation of the model. Data were analyzed with partial least squares discriminant and receiver operating characteristic analyses.
results161 patients with ILD and 161 patients with asthma (n = 65), COPD (n = 50) or lung cancer (n = 46) were included. Breath profiles of patients with ILD differed from all other diseases with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.99 (95% CI 0.97-1.00) in the test set. Moreover, breath profiles of patients with ILD could be accurately distinguished from the individual diseases with an AUC of 1.00 (95% CI 1.00-1.00) for asthma, AUC of 0.96 (95% CI 0.90-1.00) for COPD, and AUC of 0.98 (95% CI 0.94-1.00) for lung cancer in test sets. Results were similar after excluding patients who never smoked.
conclusionsExhaled breath of patients with ILD can be distinguished accurately from patients with other respiratory diseases using eNose technology. eNose has high potential as an easily accessible point-of-care medical test for identification of ILD amongst patients with respiratory symptoms, and could possibly facilitate earlier referral and diagnosis of patients suspected of ILD.
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.