Michael Bousamra1, Erin Schumer2, Mingxiao Li3, Ralph J Knipp4, Michael H Nantz4, Victor van Berkel2, Xiao-An Fu3. 1. Department of Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery, University of Louisville, Louisville, Ky. Electronic address: mbousamra@louisvilleheartsurgery.com. 2. Department of Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery, University of Louisville, Louisville, Ky. 3. Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Louisville, Louisville, Ky. 4. Department of Chemistry, University of Louisville, Louisville, Ky.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The analysis of exhaled breath is a promising noninvasive tool for the diagnosis of lung cancer, but its clinical relevance has yet to be established. We report the analysis of exhaled volatile carbonyl compounds for the identification of specific carbonyl cancer markers to differentiate benign pulmonary disease from early-stage lung cancer and to compare its diagnostic accuracy with positron emission tomography (PET) scans. METHODS: Aminooxy-coated silicon microchips were used for the selective capture of exhaled carbonyls by an oximation reaction. Breath samples were collected then directed through the silicon chips by applying a vacuum. Carbonyl adducts were analyzed by Fourier transform mass spectrometry. Eighty-eight control subjects, 107 patients with lung cancer (64 stage 0, I, or II), 40 patients with benign pulmonary disease, and 7 patients with a solitary pulmonary metastasis participated. Analysis of cancer markers was performed blinded to the pathologic results. RESULTS: Four carbonyls were defined as cancer markers with significantly higher concentrations in patients with lung cancer. The number of increased cancer markers distinguished benign disease from both early and stage III and IV lung cancer. For early-stage disease, defining greater than 2 increased markers as diagnostic of lung cancer resulted in 83% sensitivity and 74% specificity. PET scans for this same cohort resulted in 90% sensitivity but only 39% specificity. Markers normalized for 3 of the 4 markers after resection of the lung cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Analysis of specific exhaled carbonyls can differentiate early lung cancer from benign pulmonary disease. Breath analysis was more specific than PET for a lung cancer diagnosis. Judicious use of these data may expedite the care of patients with lung cancer.
OBJECTIVES: The analysis of exhaled breath is a promising noninvasive tool for the diagnosis of lung cancer, but its clinical relevance has yet to be established. We report the analysis of exhaled volatile carbonyl compounds for the identification of specific carbonyl cancer markers to differentiate benign pulmonary disease from early-stage lung cancer and to compare its diagnostic accuracy with positron emission tomography (PET) scans. METHODS: Aminooxy-coated silicon microchips were used for the selective capture of exhaled carbonyls by an oximation reaction. Breath samples were collected then directed through the silicon chips by applying a vacuum. Carbonyl adducts were analyzed by Fourier transform mass spectrometry. Eighty-eight control subjects, 107 patients with lung cancer (64 stage 0, I, or II), 40 patients with benign pulmonary disease, and 7 patients with a solitary pulmonary metastasis participated. Analysis of cancer markers was performed blinded to the pathologic results. RESULTS: Four carbonyls were defined as cancer markers with significantly higher concentrations in patients with lung cancer. The number of increased cancer markers distinguished benign disease from both early and stage III and IV lung cancer. For early-stage disease, defining greater than 2 increased markers as diagnostic of lung cancer resulted in 83% sensitivity and 74% specificity. PET scans for this same cohort resulted in 90% sensitivity but only 39% specificity. Markers normalized for 3 of the 4 markers after resection of the lung cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Analysis of specific exhaled carbonyls can differentiate early lung cancer from benign pulmonary disease. Breath analysis was more specific than PET for a lung cancer diagnosis. Judicious use of these data may expedite the care of patients with lung cancer.
Authors: Mumiye A Ogunwale; Ralph J Knipp; Clint N Evrard; Lee M Thompson; Michael H Nantz; Xiao-An Fu Journal: Chemphyschem Date: 2019-03-05 Impact factor: 3.102
Authors: Amalia Z Berna; James S McCarthy; Rosalind X Wang; Kevin J Saliba; Florence G Bravo; Julie Cassells; Benjamin Padovan; Stephen C Trowell Journal: J Infect Dis Date: 2015-03-25 Impact factor: 5.226
Authors: Michael Phillips; Thomas L Bauer; Renee N Cataneo; Cassie Lebauer; Mayur Mundada; Harvey I Pass; Naren Ramakrishna; William N Rom; Eric Vallières Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-12-23 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Ahmed Shaffie; Ahmed Soliman; Xiao-An Fu; Michael Nantz; Guruprasad Giridharan; Victor van Berkel; Hadil Abu Khalifeh; Mohammed Ghazal; Adel Elmaghraby; Ayman El-Baz Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2021-02-25 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Agne Krilaviciute; Jonathan Alexander Heiss; Marcis Leja; Juozas Kupcinskas; Hossam Haick; Hermann Brenner Journal: Oncotarget Date: 2015-11-17
Authors: Erin M Schumer; Matthew C Black; Michael Bousamra; Jaimin R Trivedi; Mingxiao Li; Xiao-An Fu; Victor van Berkel Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2016-06-09 Impact factor: 4.330