Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40315287›Full record

ArticlePloS one2025

Exploring canine's olfactive threshold in artificial urine for medical detection.

Michelle Leemans, Sara Hoummady, Emmanuelle Boutin, Adeline Giganti, Laetitia Maidodou, Vincent Cuzuel, Sabrine Ajili, Damien Steyer, Caroline Gilbert, Isabelle Fromantin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. 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

10 authors.

Michelle LeemansClinical Epidemiology and Ageing Unit, Institut Mondor de Recherche Biomédicale, INSERM, Paris-Est University, Créteil, France, AP-HP, Hopital Henri-Mondor, Clinical Research Unit (URC Mondor), Créteil, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2028-2610
Sara HoummadyInstitut Polytechnique UniLaSalle, IDEALISS ULR 7519, Université d'Artois, Mont Saint Aignan, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2875-4870
Emmanuelle BoutinClinical Epidemiology and Ageing Unit, Institut Mondor de Recherche Biomédicale, INSERM, Paris-Est University, Créteil, France, AP-HP, Hopital Henri-Mondor, Clinical Research Unit (URC Mondor), Créteil, France.
Adeline GigantiWound Care and Research Unit 26, Curie Institute, Rue d'Ulm, Paris, France.
Laetitia MaidodouTwistaroma, Illkirch Graffenstaden, France.
Vincent CuzuelForensic Institute of the French Gendarmerie, Caserne Lange, 5 Boulevard de l'Hautil, Cedex, Cergy-Pontoise, France.
Sabrine AjiliWound Care and Research Unit 26, Curie Institute, Rue d'Ulm, Paris, France.
Damien SteyerTwistaroma, Illkirch Graffenstaden, France.
Caroline GilbertEcole Nationale Vétérinaire d'Alfort, 7 avenue du Général de Gaulle, Maisons-Alfort, France.
Isabelle FromantinWound Care and Research Unit 26, Curie Institute, Rue d'Ulm, Paris, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Canine olfaction is increasingly studied as a tool for detecting cancer and other diseases. Previous pilot studies have demonstrated that dogs can effectively distinguish positive samples from negative samples in humans with breast cancer, achieving sensitivity rates as high as 100%. However, questions remain about dogs' ability to detect low concentrations of volatile organic compounds in complex medium. While dogs' detection thresholds for isoamyl acetate using a mineral oil substrate have been studied, there are no current studies on their detection limits using more complex substrates like urine, relevant in clinical settings. This pilot study aimed to evaluate the olfactory threshold of dogs using artificial urine with various concentrations of isoamyl acetate. Two dogs were trained to detect isoamyl acetate, initially using water as the substrate during the training phase, and subsequently using artificial urine during the testing phase, under single and double-blinded conditions. The dogs were trained to indicate the presence of isoamyl acetate solutions by sitting in front of the positive sample and ignoring controls. Training and testing occurred in a controlled environment, maintaining consistency with the same two handlers, a standardized methodology, and positive reinforcement with toy rewards. Based on double-blind performances, results showed a minimum detection threshold of 6.7 x 10-9 Molar (M) for Nougaro (Springer Spaniel) one dog and 2.1 x 10-7M for Prince (Labrador Retriever). The sample age did not affect performance. However, the position of the cone did, with higher failure rates for the first cone compared to the other three. These findings underscore the potential of trained dogs to detect volatile organic compounds at very low concentrations in complex substrates, supporting their use in clinical diagnostics.

Indexed as

Sensory ThresholdsSmellUrineAnimalsDogsFemaleHumansMaleOdorantsPentanolsPilot ProjectsVolatile Organic CompoundsPentanolsVolatile Organic Compounds

Identifiers

PMID40315287
PMCPMC12047819

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.