Medical Department III, University Hospital Großhadern, Ludwig-Maximilians-University , Munich , Germany.
Department of Pulmonary Rehabilitation, Philipps-University of Marburg, German Center for Lung Research (DZL) , Marburg , Germany.
Acta Oncol. 2019 Sep;58(9):1216-1224. doi: 10.1080/0284186X.2019.1634284. Epub 2019 Jul 16.
It has been reported that canine scent tests offer the possibility to screen for cancer. Assuming that breath samples can be collected with carrier materials, we tested the practicability of different carrier materials to be presented to dogs and validated and compared results with an electronic nose (eNose). Moreover, we hypothesized that cancer detection ability of dogs differs according to their working experience. In a methodological approach, two dog teams participated, one using experienced working dogs and the other ordinary household dogs to find the most qualified dogs and training method. To find best carrier material for breath sampling we compared charcoal containing glass tubes and fleece masks. In a second validating part, experienced working dogs were trained with improved training strategies. For breath sampling, two different, previously successfully tested fleece-based carrier materials were used: one was used with the dog team and both materials were compared with eNose. In the methodological approach, it turned out that the charcoal-based sampling strategy qualified not sufficiently for VOC-detection. Moreover, we could determine that using experienced working dogs provided several advantages. Overall results of dogs in the validating part regarding specificity were 83%, regarding sensitivity 56%, but with great variability among dogs. Using eNose for breath analysis collected with both fleece carrier materials, specificity was 97% and sensitivity 89-100%. Our data confirmed that the diagnostic accuracy of dogs depended on the type of dog training and on the carrier materials. A comparison of breath samples analysis with an eNose achieved better results for both, sensitivity and specificity than for dogs. The use of fleece masks or fleeces in glass tubes as a sampling material can be recommended as successful VOC carriers, encouraging their use for clinical screenings.
据报道,犬类嗅觉测试具有筛查癌症的可能性。假设可以用载体材料收集呼吸样本,我们测试了不同载体材料呈现给狗的实用性,并与电子鼻 (eNose) 进行了验证和比较。此外,我们假设狗的癌症检测能力因工作经验而异。
在方法学方法中,两个犬队参与其中,一个使用有经验的工作犬,另一个使用普通家庭犬,以找到最合格的犬和训练方法。为了找到最佳的呼吸采样载体材料,我们比较了含碳玻璃管和羊毛口罩。在第二个验证部分,经验丰富的工作犬接受了改进的训练策略的训练。对于呼吸采样,使用了两种之前经过成功测试的基于羊毛的不同载体材料:一种用于犬队,两种材料均与电子鼻进行了比较。
在方法学方法中,结果表明基于碳的采样策略不足以进行 VOC 检测。此外,我们可以确定使用有经验的工作犬提供了几个优势。验证部分中狗的总体结果在特异性方面为 83%,在敏感性方面为 56%,但狗之间的差异很大。使用电子鼻对两种基于羊毛的载体材料收集的呼吸分析,特异性为 97%,敏感性为 89-100%。
我们的数据证实,狗的诊断准确性取决于犬训练的类型和载体材料。与狗相比,使用电子鼻分析呼吸样本在敏感性和特异性方面都取得了更好的结果。作为成功的 VOC 载体,使用羊毛口罩或玻璃管中的羊毛作为采样材料是值得推荐的,鼓励将其用于临床筛查。