Diagnostic Performance of Electronic Nose Technology in Sarcoidosis.
breath test
diagnostic tool
electronic nose
interstitial lung disease
sarcoidosis
Journal
Chest
ISSN: 1931-3543
Titre abrégé: Chest
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0231335
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 2022
03 2022
Historique:
received:
10
08
2021
revised:
28
09
2021
accepted:
12
10
2021
pubmed:
11
11
2021
medline:
8
4
2022
entrez:
10
11
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Diagnosing sarcoidosis can be challenging, and a noninvasive diagnostic method is lacking. The electronic nose (eNose) technology profiles volatile organic compounds in exhaled breath and has potential as a point-of-care diagnostic tool. Can eNose technology be used to distinguish accurately between sarcoidosis, interstitial lung disease (ILD), and healthy control subjects, and between sarcoidosis subgroups? In this cross-sectional study, exhaled breath of patients with sarcoidosis and ILD and healthy control subjects was analyzed by using an eNose (SpiroNose). Clinical characteristics were collected from medical files. Partial least squares discriminant and receiver-operating characteristic analyses were applied to a training and independent validation cohort. The study included 252 patients with sarcoidosis, 317 with ILD, and 48 healthy control subjects. In the validation cohorts, eNose distinguished sarcoidosis from control subjects with an area under the curve (AUC) of 1.00 and pulmonary sarcoidosis from other ILD (AUC, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.82-0.93) and hypersensitivity pneumonitis (AUC, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.75-1.00). Exhaled breath of sarcoidosis patients with and without pulmonary involvement, pulmonary fibrosis, multiple organ involvement, pathology-supported diagnosis, and immunosuppressive treatment revealed no distinctive differences. Breath profiles differed between patients with a slightly and highly elevated soluble IL-2 receptor level (median cutoff, 772.0 U/mL; AUC, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.64-0.92). Patients with sarcoidosis can be distinguished from ILD and healthy control subjects by using eNose technology, indicating that this method may facilitate accurate diagnosis in the future. Further research is warranted to understand the value of eNose in monitoring sarcoidosis activity.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Diagnosing sarcoidosis can be challenging, and a noninvasive diagnostic method is lacking. The electronic nose (eNose) technology profiles volatile organic compounds in exhaled breath and has potential as a point-of-care diagnostic tool.
RESEARCH QUESTION
Can eNose technology be used to distinguish accurately between sarcoidosis, interstitial lung disease (ILD), and healthy control subjects, and between sarcoidosis subgroups?
STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS
In this cross-sectional study, exhaled breath of patients with sarcoidosis and ILD and healthy control subjects was analyzed by using an eNose (SpiroNose). Clinical characteristics were collected from medical files. Partial least squares discriminant and receiver-operating characteristic analyses were applied to a training and independent validation cohort.
RESULTS
The study included 252 patients with sarcoidosis, 317 with ILD, and 48 healthy control subjects. In the validation cohorts, eNose distinguished sarcoidosis from control subjects with an area under the curve (AUC) of 1.00 and pulmonary sarcoidosis from other ILD (AUC, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.82-0.93) and hypersensitivity pneumonitis (AUC, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.75-1.00). Exhaled breath of sarcoidosis patients with and without pulmonary involvement, pulmonary fibrosis, multiple organ involvement, pathology-supported diagnosis, and immunosuppressive treatment revealed no distinctive differences. Breath profiles differed between patients with a slightly and highly elevated soluble IL-2 receptor level (median cutoff, 772.0 U/mL; AUC, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.64-0.92).
INTERPRETATION
Patients with sarcoidosis can be distinguished from ILD and healthy control subjects by using eNose technology, indicating that this method may facilitate accurate diagnosis in the future. Further research is warranted to understand the value of eNose in monitoring sarcoidosis activity.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34756945
pii: S0012-3692(21)04250-1
doi: 10.1016/j.chest.2021.10.025
pmc: PMC8941620
pii:
doi:
Substances chimiques
Volatile Organic Compounds
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
738-747Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Références
Chest. 2015 Jan;147(1):224-231
pubmed: 25560860
Eur Respir J. 2019 Sep 29;54(3):
pubmed: 31273044
BMC Med. 2015 Jan 06;13:1
pubmed: 25563062
J Breath Res. 2019 Jun 24;13(3):036015
pubmed: 30901768
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1999 Aug;160(2):736-55
pubmed: 10430755
Eur Respir J. 2021 Jan 5;57(1):
pubmed: 32732331
Respir Res. 2012 Dec 21;13:117
pubmed: 23259710
Expert Rev Clin Immunol. 2019 Apr;15(4):391-405
pubmed: 30632406
J Breath Res. 2017 Nov 29;12(1):016004
pubmed: 28775245
Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2019 Jul 4;5(1):45
pubmed: 31273209
Curr Opin Pulm Med. 2014 Sep;20(5):496-502
pubmed: 25035964
Clin Rev Allergy Immunol. 2015 Aug;49(1):63-78
pubmed: 25274450
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2018 Sep 1;198(5):e44-e68
pubmed: 30168753
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2021 Oct 1;204(7):865-868
pubmed: 34233145
J Breath Res. 2015 Oct 15;9(4):046001
pubmed: 26469298
PLoS One. 2019 Jun 13;14(6):e0217963
pubmed: 31194793
Clin Exp Allergy. 2013 Jul;43(7):705-15
pubmed: 23786277
Tuberculosis (Edinb). 2013 Mar;93(2):232-8
pubmed: 23127779
Eur Respir J. 2018 Jan 11;51(1):
pubmed: 29326334
Respir Med. 2013 Jul;107(7):1073-8
pubmed: 23647864
Expert Rev Respir Med. 2020 Jul;14(7):749-756
pubmed: 32248706
J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2019 May;143(5):1811-1820.e7
pubmed: 30529449
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2020 Apr 15;201(8):e26-e51
pubmed: 32293205
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2013 Sep 15;188(6):733-48
pubmed: 24032382
Sensors (Basel). 2011;11(1):1105-76
pubmed: 22346620