ReviewEXCLI journal2024
Exhaled volatile organic compounds in the detection of colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in EXCLI journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Volatilomic Signatures of Parental and Oxaliplatin-Resistant HCT116 Colon Cancer Cell Lines.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Prognostic Significance of the Comprehensive Biomarker Analysis in Colorectal Cancer.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- A Novel Sample Preparation Method for GC-MS Analysis of Volatile Organic Compounds in Whole Blood for Veterinary Use.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Halitosis: the unique scent of colorectal cancer.EXCLI journal · 2025Article
- Unveiling Colorectal Cancer Biomarkers: Harnessing Biosensor Technology for Volatile Organic Compound Detection.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There is an apparent need for novel non-invasive colorectal cancer (CRC) screening tests that are more acceptable to patients and can reliably detect CRC or reduce the number of unnecessary colonoscopies performed in cancer-free patients. An emerging number of studies demonstrate the potential value of exhaled volatile organic compounds (VOCs) as a diagnostic and triaging test for CRC. A systematic appraisal and meta-analysis of the published evidence was done to determine whether exhaled VOCs can be used in the detection and screening of CRC. Nine electronic databases were searched from inception of the databases until August 2020. Quantitative and descriptive data of CRC patients and healthy control (HC) participants who underwent VOCs breath analysis was extracted. In addition, where possible, sampling methods, analytical platforms, processors, and specific breath biomarkers found in each study were recorded. Fourteen articles were included in the systematic review with 491 colorectal patients and 754 HC participants (n=1245). Sub-group meta-analysis was conducted on nine of those articles and the pooled sensitivity was estimated to be 0.89 (95 % CI = 0.80-0.99) whereas specificity was 0.83 (95 % CI = 0.74-0.92). Heterogeneity of pooled sensitivity and specificity was estimated as I
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.