Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38082708

ABSTRACT

The clinical significance of volatile organic compounds (VOC) in detecting diseases has been established over the past decades. Gas chromatography (GC) devices enable the measurement of these VOCs. Chromatographic peak alignment is one of the important yet challenging steps in analyzing chromatogram signals. Traditional semi-automated alignment algorithms require manual intervention by an operator which is slow, expensive and inconsistent. A pipeline is proposed to train a deep-learning model from artificial chromatograms simulated from a small, annotated dataset, and a postprocessing step based on greedy optimization to align the signals.Clinical Relevance- Breath VOCs have been shown to have a significant diagnostic power for various diseases including asthma, acute respiratory distress syndrome and COVID-19. Automatic analysis of chromatograms can lead to improvements in the diagnosis and management of such diseases.


Subject(s)
Deep Learning , Volatile Organic Compounds , Chromatography, Gas/methods , Algorithms , Computer Simulation , Volatile Organic Compounds/analysis
2.
JAMA Netw Open ; 6(2): e230982, 2023 02 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36853606

ABSTRACT

Importance: Breath analysis has been explored as a noninvasive means to detect COVID-19. However, the impact of emerging variants of SARS-CoV-2, such as Omicron, on the exhaled breath profile and diagnostic accuracy of breath analysis is unknown. Objective: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracies of breath analysis on detecting patients with COVID-19 when the SARS-CoV-2 Delta and Omicron variants were most prevalent. Design, Setting, and Participants: This diagnostic study included a cohort of patients who had positive and negative test results for COVID-19 using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction between April 2021 and May 2022, which covers the period when the Delta variant was overtaken by Omicron as the major variant. Patients were enrolled through intensive care units and the emergency department at the University of Michigan Health System. Patient breath was analyzed with portable gas chromatography. Main Outcomes and Measures: Different sets of VOC biomarkers were identified that distinguished between COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2 Delta and Omicron variants) and non-COVID-19 illness. Results: Overall, 205 breath samples from 167 adult patients were analyzed. A total of 77 patients (mean [SD] age, 58.5 [16.1] years; 41 [53.2%] male patients; 13 [16.9%] Black and 59 [76.6%] White patients) had COVID-19, and 91 patients (mean [SD] age, 54.3 [17.1] years; 43 [47.3%] male patients; 11 [12.1%] Black and 76 [83.5%] White patients) had non-COVID-19 illness. Several patients were analyzed over multiple days. Among 94 positive samples, 41 samples were from patients in 2021 infected with the Delta or other variants, and 53 samples were from patients in 2022 infected with the Omicron variant, based on the State of Michigan and US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention surveillance data. Four VOC biomarkers were found to distinguish between COVID-19 (Delta and other 2021 variants) and non-COVID-19 illness with an accuracy of 94.7%. However, accuracy dropped substantially to 82.1% when these biomarkers were applied to the Omicron variant. Four new VOC biomarkers were found to distinguish the Omicron variant and non-COVID-19 illness (accuracy, 90.9%). Breath analysis distinguished Omicron from the earlier variants with an accuracy of 91.5% and COVID-19 (all SARS-CoV-2 variants) vs non-COVID-19 illness with 90.2% accuracy. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this diagnostic study suggest that breath analysis has promise for COVID-19 detection. However, similar to rapid antigen testing, the emergence of new variants poses diagnostic challenges. The results of this study warrant additional evaluation on how to overcome these challenges to use breath analysis to improve the diagnosis and care of patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Volatile Organic Compounds , United States , Adult , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Female , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , COVID-19/diagnosis , Breath Tests
3.
Transl Lung Cancer Res ; 11(6): 1009-1018, 2022 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35832450

ABSTRACT

Background: Lung cancer remains the leading cause of cancer deaths accounting for almost 25% of all cancer deaths. Breath-based volatile organic compounds (VOCs) have been studied in lung cancer but previous studies have numerous limitations. We conducted a prospective matched case to control study of the ability of preidentified VOC performance in the diagnosis of stage 1 lung cancer (S1LC). Methods: Study participants were enrolled in a matched case to two controls study. A case was defined as a patient with biopsy-confirmed S1LC. Controls included a matched control, by risk factors, and a housemate control who resided in the same residence as the case. We included 88 cases, 88 risk-matched, and 49 housemate controls. Each participant exhaled into a Tedlar® bag which was analyzed using gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. For each study participant's breath sample, the concentration of thirteen previously identified VOCs were quantified and assessed using area under the curve in the detection of lung cancer. Results: Four VOCs were above the limit of detection in more than 10% of the samples. Acetoin was the only compound that was significantly associated with S1LC. Acetoin concentration below the 10th percentile (0.026 µg/L) in the training data had accuracy of 0.610 (sensitivity =0.649; specificity =0.583) in the test data. In multivariate logistic models, the best performing models included Acetoin alone (AUC =0.650). Conclusions: Concentration of Acetoin in exhaled breath has low discrimination performance for S1LC cases and controls, while there was not enough evidence for twelve additional published VOCs.

4.
Chemosphere ; 256: 127063, 2020 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32438130

ABSTRACT

Inhalation of PM2.5, particles with an aerodynamic diameter <2.5 µm, from sea spray after crude oil spills could present serious health concerns. The addition of dispersants to effectively spread the crude oil throughout the water column has been practiced in recent years. Here, we investigated the possibility of an increase in the toxic content of fine PM after adding dispersant. A laboratory setup consisted of a vertical tank filled with seawater, 31.5 L airspace for aerosol sampling, and a bubble generating nozzle that aerosolized the oily droplets. Four different cases were studied: no slick, 0.5-mm-thick slick of pure crude oil (MC252 surrogate), dispersant (Corexit 9500A) mixed with crude oil at dispersant to oil ratio (DOR) 1:25, and DOR 1:100. The resulting airborne droplets were sampled for gravimetric and chemical analyses through development of a gas chromatography and mass spectrometry technique. Also, PM2.5 particles were size-fractioned into 13 size bins covering <60 nm to 12.1 µm using a low-pressure cascade impactor. The highest PM2.5 concentration (20.83 ± 5.21 µg/m3) was released from a slick of DOR 1:25, 8.83× greater than the case with pure crude oil. The average ratio of crude oil content from the slick of DOR 1:25 to the case with pure crude oil was 2.37 (1.83 vs 0.77 µg/m3) that decreased to 1.17 (0.90 vs 0.77 µg/m3) at DOR 1:100. For particles <220 nm, the resultant crude oil concentrations were 0.64 and 0.29 µg/m3 at DOR 1:25 and 1:100, both higher than 0.11 µg/m3 from the slick of pure crude oil.


Subject(s)
Petroleum/analysis , Seawater/chemistry , Water Pollutants, Chemical/analysis , Aerosols/analysis , Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry , Lipids , Particulate Matter/analysis , Petroleum Pollution/analysis , Surface-Active Agents/chemistry
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...