Zambrana, Francisco and Herrero Langreo, Ana and Vidal de Miguel, Guillermo and Bailador del Pozo, Gonzalo and Criado Hidalgo, Ernesto and Sánchez Ávila, Carmen and Marquina, Isabel and Sereno, María and Gómez Raposo, César and López Gomez, Miriam and Merino, María and Aguayo, Cristina and Álvarez Gallego, Mario and García Olmo, Damián and Erdozain Sosa, José Carlos and Comas, Carmen and Manceñidos, Noemí and Feliu, Jaime and Casado, Enrique
On-line breath analysis of volatile organic compounds as a method for colorectal cancer detection.
In: "2012 ASCO Annual Meeting", 01/06/2012 - 05/06/2012, Chicago, USA. p. 1.
Background: Analysis of exhaled volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in breath is an emerging approach for cancer diagnosis, but little is known about its potential use as a biomarker for colorectal cancer (CRC). We investigated whether a combination of VOCs could distinct CRC patients from healthy volunteers.
Methods: In a pilot study, we prospectively analyzed breath exhalations of 38 CRC patient and 43 healthy controls all scheduled for colonoscopy, older than 50 in the average-risk category. The samples were ionized and analyzed using a Secondary ElectroSpray Ionization (SESI) coupled with a Time-of-Flight Mass Spectrometer (SESI-MS). After a minimum of 2 hours fasting, volunteers deeply exhaled into the system. Each test requires three soft exhalations and takes less than ten minutes. No breath condensate or collection are required and VOCs masses are detected in real time, also allowing for a spirometric profile to be analyzed along with the VOCs. A new sampling system precludes ambient air from entering the system, so background contamination is reduced by an overall factor of ten. Potential confounding variables from the patient or the environment that could interfere with results were analyzed.
Results: 255 VOCs, with masses ranging from 30 to 431 Dalton have been identified in the exhaled breath. Using a classification technique based on the ROC curve for each VOC, a set of 9 biomarkers discriminating the presence of CRC from healthy volunteers was obtained, showing an average recognition rate of 81.94%, a sensitivity of 87.04% and specificity of 76.85%.
Conclusions: A combination of cualitative and cuantitative analysis of VOCs in the exhaled breath could be a powerful diagnostic tool for average-risk CRC population. These results should be taken with precaution, as many endogenous or exogenous contaminants could interfere as confounding variables. On-line analysis with SESI-MS is less time-consuming and doesn’t need sample preparation. We are recruiting in a new pilot study including breath cleaning procedures and spirometric analysis incorporated into the postprocessing algorithms, to better control for confounding variables.