Michael Phillips1,2, Renee N Cataneo3, Jose Alfonso Cruz-Ramos4, Jan Huston5, Omar Ornelas6, Nadine Pappas7, Sonali Pathak3. 1. Breath Research Laboratory, Menssana Research Inc, 211 Warren St, Newark, NJ, 07103, USA. mphillips@menssanaresearch.com. 2. Department of Medicine, New York Medical College, Valhalla, NY, USA. mphillips@menssanaresearch.com. 3. Breath Research Laboratory, Menssana Research Inc, 211 Warren St, Newark, NJ, 07103, USA. 4. Universidad de Guadalajara & Instituto Jalisciense de Cancerologia, 44280, Guadalajara, Mexico. 5. Formerly Hackensack UMC Mountainside, Montclair, NJ, USA. 6. Grupo Mexlab, Paseos Del Sol, 45070, Zapopan, Jalisco, Mexico. 7. Saint Michael's Medical Center, Newark, NJ, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Human breath contains volatile organic compounds (VOCs) that are biomarkers of breast cancer. We investigated the positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV) of breath VOC biomarkers as indicators of breast cancer risk. METHODS: We employed ultra-clean breath collection balloons to collect breath samples from 54 women with biopsy-proven breast cancer and 124 cancer-free controls. Breath VOCs were analyzed with gas chromatography (GC) combined with either mass spectrometry (GC MS) or surface acoustic wave detection (GC SAW). Chromatograms were randomly assigned to a training set or a validation set. Monte Carlo analysis identified significant breath VOC biomarkers of breast cancer in the training set, and these biomarkers were incorporated into a multivariate algorithm to predict disease in the validation set. In the unsplit dataset, the predictive algorithms generated discriminant function (DF) values that varied with sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV. RESULTS: Using GC MS, test accuracy = 90% (area under curve of receiver operating characteristic in unsplit dataset) and cross-validated accuracy = 77%. Using GC SAW, test accuracy = 86% and cross-validated accuracy = 74%. With both assays, a low DF value was associated with a low risk of breast cancer (NPV > 99.9%). A high DF value was associated with a high risk of breast cancer and PPV rising to 100%. CONCLUSION: Analysis of breath VOC samples collected with ultra-clean balloons detected biomarkers that accurately predicted risk of breast cancer.
BACKGROUND:Human breath contains volatile organic compounds (VOCs) that are biomarkers of breast cancer. We investigated the positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV) of breath VOC biomarkers as indicators of breast cancer risk. METHODS: We employed ultra-clean breath collection balloons to collect breath samples from 54 women with biopsy-proven breast cancer and 124 cancer-free controls. Breath VOCs were analyzed with gas chromatography (GC) combined with either mass spectrometry (GC MS) or surface acoustic wave detection (GC SAW). Chromatograms were randomly assigned to a training set or a validation set. Monte Carlo analysis identified significant breath VOC biomarkers of breast cancer in the training set, and these biomarkers were incorporated into a multivariate algorithm to predict disease in the validation set. In the unsplit dataset, the predictive algorithms generated discriminant function (DF) values that varied with sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV. RESULTS: Using GC MS, test accuracy = 90% (area under curve of receiver operating characteristic in unsplit dataset) and cross-validated accuracy = 77%. Using GC SAW, test accuracy = 86% and cross-validated accuracy = 74%. With both assays, a low DF value was associated with a low risk of breast cancer (NPV > 99.9%). A high DF value was associated with a high risk of breast cancer and PPV rising to 100%. CONCLUSION: Analysis of breath VOC samples collected with ultra-clean balloons detected biomarkers that accurately predicted risk of breast cancer.
Entities:
Keywords:
Biomarker; Breast cancer; Breath; Volatile organic compound
Authors: Michael J Wilde; Rebecca L Cordell; Dahlia Salman; Bo Zhao; Wadah Ibrahim; Luke Bryant; Dorota Ruszkiewicz; Amisha Singapuri; Robert C Free; Erol A Gaillard; Caroline Beardsmore; C L Paul Thomas; Chris E Brightling; Salman Siddiqui; Paul S Monks Journal: J Chromatogr A Date: 2019-02-05 Impact factor: 4.759
Authors: Patrick J Danaher; Michael Phillips; Peter Schmitt; Stephanie A Richard; Eugene V Millar; Brian K White; Jason F Okulicz; Christian L Coles; Timothy H Burgess Journal: Open Forum Infect Dis Date: 2022-09-21 Impact factor: 4.423
Authors: Kelly E van Keulen; Maud E Jansen; Ruud W M Schrauwen; Jeroen J Kolkman; Peter D Siersema Journal: Aliment Pharmacol Ther Date: 2019-12-20 Impact factor: 8.171