Trial reportFrontiers in immunology2025
Exhaled breath analysis with the use of an electronic nose to predict response to immune checkpoint inhibitors in patients with metastatic melanoma: melaNose trial.
Trial report in Frontiers in immunology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have significantly improved the overall survival for patients with different solid tumors. However, there is an urgent need for predictive biomarkers to identify patients with metastatic melanoma who do not benefit from treatment with ICIs, to prevent unnecessary immune related adverse events (irAEs). Electronic noses (eNoses) showed promising results in the detection of cancer as well as the prediction of response outcome in patients with cancer. In this feasibility study, we aimed to investigate whether the breath pattern measured using eNose can be used as a simple biomarker to predict clinical benefit to first-line treatment with ICIs in patients with metastatic melanoma. Methods: In this prospective, observational single-center feasibility study, patients with metastatic melanoma performed a breath test using Aeonose™ before start of first-line treatment with ICIs. The detected exhaled breath pattern of volatile organic compounds (VOC) was used for machine learning in a training set to develop a model to identify patients who do not benefit from treatment with ICIs. Lack of clinical benefit was defined as progressive disease according to best tumor response using RECIST v1.1. Primary outcome measures were sensitivity, specificity and accuracy. Results: The eNose showed a distinct breath pattern between patients with and without clinical benefit from ICIs. To identify patients who do not benefit from first-line ICIs treatment, breath pattern analysis using the eNose resulted in a sensitivity of 88%, specificity of 79%, and accuracy of 85%. Conclusion: Exhaled breath analysis using eNose can identify patients with metastatic melanoma who will not benefit from first-line treatment with ICIs and guide treatment strategies. When validated in an external cohort, eNose could be a useful tool to select these patients for alternative treatment strategies in clinical practice.
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.