An electronic nose distinguishes exhaled breath of patients with Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma from controls
An electronic nose distinguishes exhaled breath of patients with Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma from controls
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.lungcan.2011.08.009
复制
发表时间：
2012-03-01
期刊：
影响因子：
5.3
通讯作者：
Sterk, Peter J.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Dragonieri, Silvano;van der Schee, Marc P.;Sterk, Peter J.
背景：恶性胸膜间皮瘤（MPM）是胸膜表面细胞的肿瘤，具有高度侵袭性，主要由石棉暴露引起。电子鼻捕获呼出的挥发性有机化合物 (VOC) 谱，提供复合生物标志物谱（呼吸纹）。目的：我们测试了这样的假设：电子鼻可以将患有 MPM 的患者的呼出气体与长期接触石棉但未患 MPM 的受试者和健康对照者区分开来。方法：13 名组织学确诊为 MPM 的患者（年龄 60.9 +/- 12.2 岁）、13 名经过认证、长期专业石棉暴露的受试者（年龄 67.2 +/- 9.8）和 13 名没有石棉暴露的健康受试者（年龄 52.2 +/- 16.2）参加了一项横断面研究。通过先前描述的方法收集呼出气并通过电子鼻（Cyranose 320）采样。通过主成分减少的典型判别分析来分析呼吸纹。计算交叉验证准确性 (CVA)。 结果：将 MPM 患者的呼吸纹与石棉暴露受试者的呼吸纹分开（CVA：80.8%，敏感性 92.3%，特异性 85.7%）。 MPM 也与健康对照区分开来（CVA：84.6%）。重复测量证实了这些结果。结论：呼出气的分子模式识别可以正确地区分 MPM 患者、具有类似职业石棉暴露但未患 MPM 的受试者以及健康对照者。这表明电子鼻获得的呼吸纹具有 MPM 的诊断潜力。 (C) 2011 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. 保留所有权利。
Background: Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma (MPM) is a tumour of the surface cells of the pleura that is highly aggressive and mainly caused by asbestos exposure. Electronic noses capture the spectrum of exhaled volatile organic compounds (VOCs) providing a composite biomarker profile (breathprint).Objective: We tested the hypothesis that an electronic nose can discriminate exhaled air of patients with,MPM from subjects with a similar long-term professional exposure to asbestos without MPM and from healthy controls.Methods: 13 patients with a histology confirmed diagnosis of MPM (age 60.9 +/- 12.2 year), 13 subjects with certified, long-term professional asbestos exposure (age 67.2 +/- 9.8), and 13 healthy subjects without asbestos exposure (age 52.2 +/- 16.2) participated in a cross-sectional study. Exhaled breath was collected by a previously described method and sampled by an electronic nose (Cyranose 320). Breathprints were analyzed by canonical discriminant analysis on principal component reduction. Cross-validated accuracy (CVA) was calculated.Results: Breathprints from patients with MPM were separated from subjects with asbestos exposure (CVA: 80.8%, sensitivity 92.3%, specificity 85.7%). MPM was also distinguished from healthy controls (CVA: 84.6%). Repeated measurements confirmed these results.Conclusions: Molecular pattern recognition of exhaled breath can correctly distinguish patients with MPM from subjects with similar occupational asbestos exposure without MPM and from healthy controls. This suggests that breathprints obtained by electronic nose have diagnostic potential for MPM. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.