| Literature DB >> 34072964 |
Jing Li1, Qingyuan Li1, Xin Wei1, Qing Chen2, Meixiu Sun1, Yingxin Li1.
Abstract
The objective of this study was to investigate the clinical value of exhaled nitric oxide (NO) for diagnosing lung cancer patients by using a relatively large sample. An online and near-real-time ringdown exhaled NO analyzer calibrated by an electrochemical sensor at clinical was used for breath analysis. A total of 740 breath samples from 284 healthy control subjects (H) and 456 lung cancer patients (LC) were collected. The recorded data included exhaled NO, medications taken within the last half month, demographics, fasting status and smoking status. The LC had a significantly higher level of exhaled NO than the H (H: 21.0 ± 12.1 ppb vs. LC: 34.1 ± 17.2 ppb). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for exhaled NO predicting LC and H was 0.728 (sensitivity was 0.798; specificity was 0.55). There was no significant difference in exhaled NO level between groups divided by different types of LC, tumor node metastasis (TNM) stage, sex, smoking status, age, body mass index (BMI) or fasting status. Exhaled NO level alone is not a useful clinical tool for identifying lung cancer, but it should be considered when developing a diagnosis model of lung cancer by using breath analysis.Entities:
Keywords: breath biomarkers; cavity ringdown spectroscopy (CRDS); exhaled NO; lung cancer
Year: 2021 PMID: 34072964 PMCID: PMC8230208 DOI: 10.3390/metabo11060352
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Metabolites ISSN: 2218-1989
Baseline information for all subjects.
| Lung Cancer ( | Heathy Control ( | |
|---|---|---|
| Male (%) | 256 (56%) | 159 (56%) |
| Age (range) | 60 ± 8 (29–81) | 47 ± 14 (22–86) |
| Smokers | 164 | 72 |
| Ex-smokers | 86 | 19 |
| Non-smokers | 206 | 193 |
| BMI | 24.35 ± 3.32 | 23.88 ± 3.22 |
| Fasting (%) | 166 (36%) | 253 (89%) |
| Adenocarcinoma (%) | 292 (64%) | NA |
| Squamous cell carcinoma (%) | 65 (14%) | NA |
| Small-cell lung cancer (%) | 40 (9%) | NA |
| 0 (%) | 19 (5%) | NA |
| I (%) | 140 (35%) | NA |
| II (%) | 74 (19%) | NA |
| III (%) | 70 (18%) | NA |
| IV (%) | 90 (23%) | NA |
| EXHALEDNO (ppb) | 32.0 (21.8, 44.8) | 19 (11.4, 30.1) |
Note: 0, LC at stage 0; I, LC at stage I; II, LC at stage II; III, LC at stage III; IV, LC at stage IV.
Figure 1(a) The number of samples in each 10 ppb interval of exhaled NO concentration for both H and LC. (b) exhaled NO levels in the LC (red) and H (green). The mean exhaled NO was significantly higher in the LC than in the H. The results are presented as medians (25% and 75%).
Figure 2Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves for exhaled NO in LC (n = 456) and H (n = 284).
Exhaled NO levels in patients with three different types of lung cancer.
| Subtype | Exhaled NO (Medians (25% and 75%), ppb) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Adenocarcinoma | 292 (74%) | 31.5 (21.6, 43.1) | |
| Squamous cell carcinoma | 65 (16%) | 31.6 (22.2, 49.1) | |
| Small-cell lung cancer | 41 (10%) | 24.0 (17.0, 39.0) |
Figure 3The exhaled NO levels in the squamous cell carcinoma, adenocarcinoma and small-cell lung cancer groups. exhaled NO levels presented as medians (25% and 75%).
Exhaled NO levels in patients with different lung cancer stages.
| Stage | Exhaled NO (Medians (25% and 75%), ppb) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 19 (5%) | 29.4 (17.8, 41.0) | |
| I | 140 (35%) | 31.6 (22.1, 44.0) | |
| II | 74 (19%) | 31.6 (21.9, 41.9) | |
| III | 70 (18%) | 33.6 (22.9, 45.5) | |
| IV | 90 (23%) | 31.0 (20.5, 48.4) |
Figure 4The exhaled NO levels in LC across different TNM stages (stage 0: carcinoma in situ). exhaled NO levels presented as medians (25% and 75%).
The exhaled NO level in sex, smoking status, age, BMI and fasting status groups.
| Group |
| Exhaled NO (Medians (25% and 75%), ppb) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lung cancer | Smoker | 164 | 30.2 (20.6, 41.9) | 0.064 |
| Ex-smoker | 86 | 29.7 (20.8, 40.8) | ||
| Non-smoker | 206 | 33.8 (23.5, 47.2) | ||
| Fasted | 166 | 31.5 (21.0, 43.8) | 0.811 | |
| Fed | 260 | 31.4 (21.7, 43.0) | ||
| MALE | 256 | 30.9 (21.6, 42.6) | 0.481 | |
| FEMALE | 198 | 32.2 (22.0, 46.0) | ||
| Age > 50 | 395 | 31.9 (21.9, 45.8) | 0.104 | |
| Age < 50 | 58 | 27.7 (20.6, 38.1) | ||
| BMI < 23.9 | 213 | 31.4 (21.6, 45.5) | 0.284 | |
| BMI > 23.9 | 247 | 31.9 (22.0, 44.1) | ||
| Healthy control | Smoker | 72 | 26.9 (16.5, 41.7) | 1 |
| Ex-smoker | 19 | 22.5 (20.3, 33.3) | ||
| Non-smoker | 193 | 30.6 (25.1, 47.3) | ||
| Fasted | 253 | 19.5 (11.8, 30.0) | 0.197 | |
| Fed | 29 | 13.1 (7.8, 31.1) | ||
| MALE | 159 | 19.7 (12.3, 29.7) | 0.59 | |
| FEMALE | 123 | 18.0 (9.6, 31.1) | ||
| Age > 50 | 111 | 18.7 (12.3, 28.0) | 0.866 | |
| Age < 50 | 171 | 19.4 (10.2, 31.2) | ||
| BMI < 23.9 | 146 | 19.2 (11.6, 30.1) | 0.984 | |
| BMI > 23.9 | 136 | 19.3 (10.9, 30.0) |
Figure 5The linear relationship between two methods for measuring exhaled NO (a). Bland–Altman analysis of two techniques of measuring exhaled NO concentration (b).