Literature DB >> 30853355

Application of Urinary Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) for the Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer.

Qin Gao1, Xiaogang Su2, Michael H Annabi3, Brielle R Schreiter4, Thomas Prince4, Andrew Ackerman4, Sara Morgas3, Valerie Mata3, Heinric Williams5, Wen-Yee Lee6.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer (PCa) screening using serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing has caused unnecessary biopsies and overdiagnosis owing to its low accuracy and reliability. Therefore, there is an increased interest in identifying better PCa biomarkers. Studies showed that trained dogs can discriminate patients with PCa from unaffected men by sniffing urine. We hypothesized that urinary volatile organic compounds (VOCs) may be the source of that odor and could be used to develop urinary VOC PCa diagnosis models. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Urine samples from 55 and 53 biopsy proven PCa-positive and -negative patients respectively were initially obtained for diagnostic model development. Urinary metabolites were analyzed by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. A PCa diagnosis model was developed and validated using innovative statistical machine-learning techniques. A second set of samples (53 PCa-positive and 22 PCa-negative patients) were used to evaluate the previously developed PCa diagnosis model.
RESULTS: The analysis resulted in 254 and 282 VOCs for their significant association (P < .05) with either PCa-positive or -negative samples respectively. Regularized logistic regression analysis and the Firth method were then applied to predict PCa prevalence, resulting in a final model that contains 11 VOCs. Under cross-validation, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for the final model was 0.92 (sensitivity, 0.96; specificity, 0.80). Further evaluation of the developed model using a testing cohort yielded an AUC of 0.86. As a comparison, the PSA-based diagnosis model only rendered an AUC of 0.54.
CONCLUSION: The study describes the development of a urinary VOC-based model for PCa detection.
Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Gas chromatography-mass spectrometry; Metabolomics; Nonparametric statistics; Prostatic neoplasms; Stir bar sorptive extraction

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30853355     DOI: 10.1016/j.clgc.2019.02.003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Genitourin Cancer        ISSN: 1558-7673            Impact factor:   2.872


  11 in total

Review 1.  Circulating metabolite biomarkers: a game changer in the human prostate cancer diagnosis.

Authors:  Sabareeswaran Krishnan; Shruthi Kanthaje; Devasya Rekha Punchappady; M Mujeeburahiman; Chandrahas Koumar Ratnacaram
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  2022-06-28       Impact factor: 4.553

2.  Investigation of urinary volatile organic compounds as novel diagnostic and surveillance biomarkers of bladder cancer.

Authors:  Lauren Lett; Michael George; Rachael Slater; Ben De Lacy Costello; Norman Ratcliffe; Marta García-Fiñana; Henry Lazarowicz; Chris Probert
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2022-03-29       Impact factor: 9.075

3.  Volatile organic compounds in breath can serve as a non-invasive diagnostic biomarker for the detection of advanced adenomas and colorectal cancer.

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

4.  Feasibility of integrating canine olfaction with chemical and microbial profiling of urine to detect lethal prostate cancer.

Authors:  Claire Guest; Rob Harris; Karen S Sfanos; Eva Shrestha; Alan W Partin; Bruce Trock; Leslie Mangold; Rebecca Bader; Adam Kozak; Scott Mclean; Jonathan Simons; Howard Soule; Thomas Johnson; Wen-Yee Lee; Qin Gao; Sophie Aziz; Patritsia Maria Stathatou; Stephen Thaler; Simmie Foster; Andreas Mershin
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-02-17       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 5.  Urinary Volatile Organic Compound Analysis for the Diagnosis of Cancer: A Systematic Literature Review and Quality Assessment.

Authors:  Qing Wen; Piers Boshier; Antonis Myridakis; Ilaria Belluomo; George B Hanna
Journal:  Metabolites       Date:  2020-12-29

Review 6.  Radiomic and Genomic Machine Learning Method Performance for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis: Systematic Literature Review.

Authors:  Leandro Pecchia; Monica Franzese; Rossana Castaldo; Carlo Cavaliere; Andrea Soricelli; Marco Salvatore
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2021-04-01       Impact factor: 5.428

7.  Comprehensive biomarker profiles and chemometric filtering of urinary metabolomics for effective discrimination of prostate carcinoma from benign hyperplasia.

Authors:  Eleonora Amante; Andrea Cerrato; Eugenio Alladio; Anna Laura Capriotti; Chiara Cavaliere; Federico Marini; Carmela Maria Montone; Susy Piovesana; Aldo Laganà; Marco Vincenti
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-03-14       Impact factor: 4.379

8.  Assessing volatile organic compounds exposure and prostate-specific antigen: National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 2001-2010.

Authors:  Chengcheng Wei; Yumao Chen; Yu Yang; Dong Ni; Yu Huang; Miao Wang; Xiong Yang; Zhaohui Chen
Journal:  Front Public Health       Date:  2022-07-29

9.  A Caenorhabditis elegans behavioral assay distinguishes early stage prostate cancer patient urine from controls.

Authors:  Morgan Thompson; Noemi Sarabia Feria; Ally Yoshioka; Eugene Tu; Fehmi Civitci; Suzanne Estes; Josiah T Wagner
Journal:  Biol Open       Date:  2021-03-26       Impact factor: 2.422

Review 10.  Gas Detection Using Portable Deep-UV Absorption Spectrophotometry: A Review.

Authors:  Sulaiman Khan; David Newport; Stéphane Le Calvé
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2019-11-28       Impact factor: 3.576

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.