Literature DB >> 12752626

Volatile markers of breast cancer in the breath.

Michael Phillips1, Renee N Cataneo, Beth Ann Ditkoff, Peter Fisher, Joel Greenberg, Ratnasiri Gunawardena, C Stephan Kwon, Farid Rahbari-Oskoui, Cynthia Wong.   

Abstract

Breast cancer is accompanied by increased oxidative stress and induction of polymorphic cytochrome P-450 mixed oxidase enzymes (CYP). Both processes affect the abundance of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in the breath because oxidative stress causes lipid peroxidation of polyunsaturated fatty acids in membranes, producing alkanes and methylalkanes which are catabolized by CYP. We performed a pilot study of breath VOCs, a potential new marker of disease in women with breast cancer. This was a combined case-control and cross-sectional study of women with abnormal mammograms scheduled for a breast biopsy. Breath samples were analyzed by gas chromatography and mass spectroscopy in order to determine the breath methylated alkane contour (BMAC), a three-dimensional display of the alveolar gradients (abundance in breath minus abundance in room air) of C4-C20 alkanes and monomethylated alkanes. BMACs in women with and without breast cancer were compared using forward stepwise discriminant analysis. Two hundred one breath samples were obtained from women with abnormal mammograms and biopsies read by two pathologists. There were 51 cases of breast cancer in 198 concordant biopsies. The breath test distinguished between women with breast cancer and healthy volunteers with a sensitivity of 94.1% (48/51) and a specificity of 73.8% (31/42) (cross-validated sensitivity 88.2% (45/51), specificity 73.8% (31/42)). Compared to women with abnormal mammograms and no cancer on biopsy, the breath test identified breast cancer with a sensitivity of 62.7% (32/51) and a specificity of 84.0% (42/50) (cross-validated sensitivity of 60.8% (31/51), specificity of 82.0% (41/50)). The negative predictive value (NPV) of a screening breath test for breast cancer was superior to a screening mammogram (99.93% versus 99.89%); the positive predictive value (PPV) of a screening mammogram was superior to a screening breath test (4.63% versus 1.29%). A breath test for markers of oxidative stress accurately identified women with breast cancer, with an NPV superior to a screening mammogram. This breath test could potentially be employed as a primary screen for breast cancer. Confirmatory studies in larger groups are required.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12752626     DOI: 10.1046/j.1524-4741.2003.09309.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Breast J        ISSN: 1075-122X            Impact factor:   2.431


  55 in total

Review 1.  Advances in electronic-nose technologies developed for biomedical applications.

Authors:  Alphus D Wilson; Manuela Baietto
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2011-01-19       Impact factor: 3.576

2.  Headspace measurements of irradiated in vitro cultured cells using PTR-MS.

Authors:  C Brunner; W Szymczak; W Li; C Hoeschen; S Mörtl; F Eckardt-Schupp; U Oeh
Journal:  Radiat Environ Biophys       Date:  2010-09-04       Impact factor: 1.925

3.  Olfactory detection of human bladder cancer by dogs: proof of principle study.

Authors:  Carolyn M Willis; Susannah M Church; Claire M Guest; W Andrew Cook; Noel McCarthy; Anthea J Bransbury; Martin R T Church; John C T Church
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2004-09-25

4.  Increased H2O2 level in exhaled breath condensate in primary breast cancer patients.

Authors:  Robert A Stolarek; Elzbieta Potargowicz; Ewa Seklewska; Jarosław Jakubik; Marek Lewandowski; Arkadiusz Jeziorski; Dariusz Nowak
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  2009-12-05       Impact factor: 4.553

5.  Noninvasive detection of lung cancer by analysis of exhaled breath.

Authors:  Amel Bajtarevic; Clemens Ager; Martin Pienz; Martin Klieber; Konrad Schwarz; Magdalena Ligor; Tomasz Ligor; Wojciech Filipiak; Hubert Denz; Michael Fiegl; Wolfgang Hilbe; Wolfgang Weiss; Peter Lukas; Herbert Jamnig; Martin Hackl; Alfred Haidenberger; Bogusław Buszewski; Wolfram Miekisch; Jochen Schubert; Anton Amann
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2009-09-29       Impact factor: 4.430

6.  Differential volatile signatures from skin, naevi and melanoma: a novel approach to detect a pathological process.

Authors:  Tatjana Abaffy; Robert Duncan; Daniel D Riemer; Olaf Tietje; George Elgart; Clara Milikowski; R Anthony DeFazio
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-11-04       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Detection of lung, breast, colorectal, and prostate cancers from exhaled breath using a single array of nanosensors.

Authors:  G Peng; M Hakim; Y Y Broza; S Billan; R Abdah-Bortnyak; A Kuten; U Tisch; H Haick
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2010-07-20       Impact factor: 7.640

Review 8.  Metabolomics-based methods for early disease diagnostics.

Authors:  G A Nagana Gowda; Shucha Zhang; Haiwei Gu; Vincent Asiago; Narasimhamurthy Shanaiah; Daniel Raftery
Journal:  Expert Rev Mol Diagn       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 5.225

9.  Release of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from the lung cancer cell line CALU-1 in vitro.

Authors:  Wojciech Filipiak; Andreas Sponring; Tomas Mikoviny; Clemens Ager; Jochen Schubert; Wolfram Miekisch; Anton Amann; Jakob Troppmair
Journal:  Cancer Cell Int       Date:  2008-11-24       Impact factor: 5.722

10.  Modern breast cancer detection: a technological review.

Authors:  Adam B Nover; Shami Jagtap; Waqas Anjum; Hakki Yegingil; Wan Y Shih; Wei-Heng Shih; Ari D Brooks
Journal:  Int J Biomed Imaging       Date:  2009-12-28
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.