SynthesisJournal of nanobiotechnology2025
Advanced strategy for cancer detection based on volatile organic compounds in breath.
Synthesis in Journal of nanobiotechnology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Electronic nose versus gas chromatography - mass spectrometry for diagnostic discrimination of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma by volatolomic analysis.BMC gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Rapid and noninvasive artificial intelligence-assisted diagnostic method for oral squamous cell carcinoma.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Toward Timely Diagnosis of Pancreatic Cancer: Revolutionizing Early Detection Through Genomics, Artificial Intelligence, and Noninvasive Biomarkers.Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2026Review
- A Review of Exhaled Volatile Organic Compounds as Emerging Diagnostic Tools for Gastrointestinal Malignancies.Archives of Iranian medicine · 2026Review
- Early Detection of Lung Cancer: A Review of Innovative Milestones and Techniques.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Prognostic Significance of the Comprehensive Biomarker Analysis in Colorectal Cancer.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The analysis of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in exhaled breath has emerged as a promising non-invasive approach for cancer diagnosis, offering advantages in speed, safety, cost-effectiveness, and real-time monitoring. Two primary methodologies are employed for VOCs detection: mass spectrometry (MS)-based techniques, which provide high-precision identification and quantification of individual compounds, and sensor-based pattern recognition methods, which detect disease-specific VOC signatures. Despite their diagnostic potential, inconsistencies in accuracy highlight the need for a comprehensive evaluation of these techniques. This review synthesizes evidence from clinical studies through meta-analysis to assess the diagnostic performance of MS and sensor-based approaches. Furthermore, we examine variations in VOC profiles across cancer types, which may influence diagnostic precision, and discuss key biomarkers, analytical methodologies, current challenges, and future directions in VOCs-based diagnostics. Meta-analysis revealed a high diagnostic accuracy, with a mean area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.94 (95% CI 0.91-0.96), sensitivity of 89% (95% CI 87%-90%), and specificity of 87% (95% CI 84%-88%). Notably, no significant difference was observed between MS and sensor-based methods (AUC: 0.91 vs. 0.93, p = 0.286), supporting the potential of sensor technologies for clinical application. Subgroup analysis further indicated no statistical difference in AUCs between heterogeneous and homogeneous sensor groups, suggesting that simplified detection systems may be feasible. Despite these promising results, standardization of protocols and methodological consistency remain critical challenges. Future efforts should focus on large-scale, well-designed clinical trials to validate and optimize VOCs-based breath tests, enhancing their diagnostic reliability and translational potential in oncology.
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.