Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40598195›Full record

SynthesisJournal of nanobiotechnology2025

Advanced strategy for cancer detection based on volatile organic compounds in breath.

Ziqi Jia, Yiwen Jiang, Tongxuan Shang, Heng Cao, Jiayi Li, Lin Cong, Pengming Pu, Hengyi Xu, Yuchen Liu, Yansong Huang and 6 more

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
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

16 authors.

Ziqi Jia *Department of Breast Surgical Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100021, China.
Yiwen Jiang *Department of Breast Surgical Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100021, China.
Tongxuan Shang *Department of Breast Surgical Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100021, China.
Heng CaoDepartment of Breast Surgical Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100021, China.
Jiayi LiPeking Union Medical College and Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, 100005, China.
Lin CongDepartment of Breast Surgical Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100021, China.
Pengming PuPeking Union Medical College and Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, 100005, China.
Hengyi XuPeking Union Medical College and Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, 100005, China.
Yuchen LiuDepartment of Breast Surgical Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100021, China.
Yansong HuangDepartment of Breast Surgical Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100021, China.
Dongxu MaDepartment of Breast Surgical Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100021, China.
Jiang WuDepartment of Breast Surgical Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100021, China.
Ruijie ZhouDepartment of Breast Surgical Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100021, China.
Xiang WangDepartment of Breast Surgical Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100021, China. xiangw@vip.sina.com.
Chang Bao HanKey Laboratory of Advanced Functional Materials, Ministry of Education, College of Materials Science and Engineering, Beijing University of Technology, Beijing, 100124, China. cbhan@bjut.edu.cn.
Jiaqi LiuDepartment of Breast Surgical Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100021, China. j.liu@cicams.ac.cn.

Funding

Beijing Hope Run Special Fund LC2020B05Beijing Nova Program 20240484638Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences 2021-I2M-1-014National Natural Science Foundation of China 81802669
6 · The paper itself

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

NeoplasmsVolatile Organic CompoundsBiomarkers, TumorBreath TestsHumansMass SpectrometrySensitivity and SpecificityBiomarkers, TumorVolatile Organic CompoundsBreath analysisCancer diagnosticsMass spectrometryNon-invasive biomarkerSensorVolatile organic compound

Identifiers

PMID40598195
PMCPMC12210820

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.