Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Identification of breath volatile organic compounds to distinguish pancreatic adenocarcinoma, pancreatic cystic neoplasm, and patients without pancreatic lesions.
Tiankanon, Kasenee; Pungpipattrakul, Nuttanit; Sukaram, Thanikan; Chaiteerakij, Roongruedee; Rerknimitr, Rungsun.
Afiliação
  • Tiankanon K; Division of Gastroenterology, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok 10330, Thailand.
  • Pungpipattrakul N; Center of Excellence for Innovation and Endoscopy in Gastrointestinal Oncology, King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Thai Red Cross Society, Bangkok 10330, Thailand.
  • Sukaram T; Division of Gastroenterology, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok 10330, Thailand.
  • Chaiteerakij R; Division of Gastroenterology, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok 10330, Thailand.
  • Rerknimitr R; Division of Gastroenterology, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok 10330, Thailand.
World J Gastrointest Oncol ; 16(3): 894-906, 2024 Mar 15.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38577457
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) are a promising potential biomarker that may be able to identify the presence of cancers.

AIM:

To identify exhaled breath VOCs that distinguish pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) from intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN) and healthy volunteers.

METHODS:

We collected exhaled breath from histologically proven PDAC patients, radiological diagnosis IPMN, and healthy volunteers using the ReCIVA® device between 10/2021-11/2022. VOCs were identified by thermal desorption-gas chromatography/field-asymmetric ion mobility spectrometry and compared between groups.

RESULTS:

A total of 156 participants (44% male, mean age 62.6 ± 10.6) were enrolled (54 PDAC, 42 IPMN, and 60 controls). Among the nine VOCs identified, two VOCs that showed differences between groups were dimethyl sulfide [0.73 vs 0.74 vs 0.94 arbitrary units (AU), respectively; P = 0.008] and acetone dimers (3.95 vs 4.49 vs 5.19 AU, respectively; P < 0.001). After adjusting for the imbalance parameters, PDAC showed higher dimethyl sulfide levels than the control and IPMN groups, with adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of 6.98 (95%CI 1.15-42.17) and 4.56 (1.03-20.20), respectively (P < 0.05 both). Acetone dimer levels were also higher in PDAC compared to controls and IPMN (aOR 5.12 (1.80-14.57) and aOR 3.35 (1.47-7.63), respectively (P < 0.05 both). Acetone dimer, but not dimethyl sulfide, performed better than CA19-9 in PDAC diagnosis (AUROC 0.910 vs 0.796). The AUROC of acetone dimer increased to 0.936 when combined with CA19-9, which was better than CA19-9 alone (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION:

Dimethyl sulfide and acetone dimer are VOCs that potentially distinguish PDAC from IPMN and healthy participants. Additional prospective studies are required to validate these findings.
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article