Diagnosis of Lung Cancer Through Exhaled Breath: A Comprehensive Study.

OBJECTIVES

Exhaled breath analysis is an attractive lung cancer diagnostic tool. However, various factors that are not related to the disease status, comorbidities, and other diseases must be considered to obtain a reliable diagnostic model.

METHODS

Exhaled breath samples from 646 individuals including 273 patients with lung cancer (LC), 90 patients with cancer of other localizations (OC), 150 patients with noncancer lung diseases (NLD), and 133 healthy controls (HC) were analyzed using gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS). The samples were collected in Tedlar bags. Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) were preconcentrated on Tenax TA sorbent tubes with subsequent two-stage thermal desorption followed by GC-MS analysis. The influence of age, gender, smoking status, time since last food consumption, and comorbidities on exhaled breath were evaluated. Also, the effect of histology, TNM, tumor localization, treatment status, and the presence of a tumor on VOC profile of patients with lung cancer were assessed. Intergroup statistics were estimated, diagnostic models were created using artificial neural networks (ANNs) and gradient boosted decision trees (GBDTs).

RESULTS

Smoking status and food consumption affect exhaled breath VOC profile: benzene, ethylbenzene, toluene, 1,3-pentadiene 1,4-pentadiene acetonitrile, and some ratios are significantly different in exhaled breath of smokers and nonsmokers; the ratios 2,3-butandione/2-pentanone, 2,3-butandione/dimethylsulfide, and 2-butanone/2-pentanone are affected by time since last food consumption. Exhaled breath of LC is affected by the form of the disease and comorbidities. One-pentanol and 2-butanone were different in exhaled breath of patients with various tumor localization; 2-butanone was different in exhaled breath of patients before and during treatment. Diabetes as a comorbidity affects the pentanal level in exhaled breath; obesity affects the ratios of 2,3-butanedione/dimethylsulfide and 2-butanone/isoprene. Sensitivity and specificity of diagnostic models aimed to discriminate LC and HC, OC, and NLD were 78.7% and 51.0%, 62.2% and 53.4%, and 60.4% and 58.0%, respectively. HC and patients, regardless of the disease, can be classified with sensitivity of 76.6% and specificity of 68.2%.

CONCLUSIONS

The models created to diagnose lung cancer can also classify OC and NLD as patients with lung cancer. Additionally, the influence of comorbidities and factors not related to the disease status must be considered before the creation of diagnostic models to avoid false results.