Hackner Klaus, Errhalt Peter, Mueller Michael Rolf, Speiser Manulea, Marzluf Beatrice A, Schulheim Andrea, Schenk Peter, Bilek Johannes, Doll Theodor
Department of Pneumonology, Krems University Hospital, Krems, Austria. Karl Landsteiner University of Health Sciences, Krems, Austria. Author to whom any correspondence should be addressed.
J Breath Res. 2016 Sep 27;10(4):046003. doi: 10.1088/1752-7155/10/4/046003.
The prognosis in lung cancer depends largely on early stage detection, and thus new screening methods are attracting increasing attention. Canine scent detection has shown promising results in lung cancer detection, but there has only been one previous study that reproduces a screening-like situation. Here breath samples were collected from 122 patients at risk for lung cancer (smokers and ex-smokers); 29 of the subjects had confirmed diagnosis of lung cancer but had not yet been treated and 93 subjects had no signs or symptoms of lung cancer at the time of inclusion. The breath samples were presented to a trained sniffer dog squadron in a double-blind manner. A rigid scientific protocol was used with respect to earlier canine scent detection studies, with one difference: instead of offering one in five positive samples to the dogs, we offered a random number of positive samples (zero to five). The final positive and negative predictive values of 30.9% and 84.0%, respectively, were rather low compared to other studies. The results differed from those of previous studies, indicating that canine scent detection might not be as powerful as is looked for in real screening situations. One main reason for the rather poor performance in our setting might be the higher stress from the lack of positive responses for dogs and handlers.
肺癌的预后很大程度上取决于早期检测,因此新的筛查方法正受到越来越多的关注。犬类嗅觉检测在肺癌检测中已显示出有前景的结果,但之前仅有一项研究重现了类似筛查的情况。在此,从122名有肺癌风险的患者(吸烟者和已戒烟者)中采集了呼吸样本;其中29名受试者已确诊肺癌但尚未接受治疗,93名受试者在纳入研究时没有肺癌的迹象或症状。呼吸样本以双盲方式提供给一个经过训练的嗅探犬中队。相对于早期的犬类嗅觉检测研究,采用了严格的科学方案,有一个不同之处:不是给犬类提供五分之一的阳性样本,而是提供随机数量的阳性样本(零到五个)。与其他研究相比,最终的阳性预测值和阴性预测值分别为30.9%和84.0%,相当低。结果与之前的研究不同,表明犬类嗅觉检测在实际筛查情况下可能不像预期的那么有效。在我们的研究中表现相当差的一个主要原因可能是犬类和训练者因缺乏阳性反应而承受的压力更大。