ArticleAsian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP2026
Breath Aldehyde Profiling using PFBHA-GC/MS as a Prostate Cancer Biomarker.
Article in Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP, 2026. 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
backgroundWhile PSA screening reduces prostate cancer (PCa) mortality, it is associated with overdiagnosis and unnecessary biopsies. Breathomics presents a painless, repeatable adjunct method, provided that robust volatile biomarkers can be reliably identified.
objectiveTo evaluate whether targeted quantification of 12 biologically plausible aldehydes in end-tidal breath can differentiate histologically confirmed PCa from biopsy-negative or low-PSA control subjects.
methodsIn a prospective exploratory study at Toho University Omori Medical Center (Tokyo, Japan), we enrolled men aged ≥50 years between 1 September 2020 and 31 August 2023. Breath samples, obtained after an overnight fast, were derivatised with O-(2,3,4,5,6-pentafluorobenzyl)-hydroxylamine and analysed using conventional quadrupole GC/MS. Limits of detection ranged from 0.3 to 1.1 ng. Non-detects were addressed using LOD/2 substitution and Tobit left-censored regression. Group differences were assessed using two-tailed Wilcoxon or Fisher's exact tests (α = 0.05). Ethics approval: M16243 / M20229; informed consent was obtained.
resultsThirty-three men were analysed (PCa = 22; controls = 11). Only formaldehyde and acetaldehyde were quantifiable in ≥85% of samples. Median concentrations did not differ (formaldehyde: 3.09 [2.15-5.35] vs. 5.85 [2.72-7.36] ng , p = 0.181; acetaldehyde: 7.47 [5.36-11.73] vs. 7.80 [6.70-14.32] ng, p = 0.456). The exploratory formaldehyde-to-acetaldehyde ratio was likewise non-discriminatory (p = 0.87). The remaining ten aldehydes showed detection rates ≤45.5% and no significant group differences in Tobit modelling.
conclusionsSingle-compound aldehyde profiling with PFBHA-GC/MS failed to differentiate PCa from controls, primarily due to low analyte detection rates and minimal between-group contrasts. Enhanced-sensitivity platforms (e.g., GC×GC-HRMS or MEMS-based pre-concentrators) and multi-component VOC signatures coupled with rigorous control of smoking and ambient confounders are needed before breath testing can contribute meaningfully to prostate cancer screening.
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.