Breath tests cover the fraction of nitric oxide in expired gas (), volatile organic compounds (VOCs), variables in exhaled breath condensate (EBC) and other measurements. For EBC and for , official recommendations for standardised procedures are more than 10 years old and there is none for exhaled VOCs and particles. The aim of this document is to provide technical standards and recommendations for sample collection and analytic approaches and to highlight future research priorities in the field. For EBC and, new developments and advances in technology have been evaluated in the current document. This report is not intended to provide clinical guidance on disease diagnosis and management.Clinicians and researchers with expertise in exhaled biomarkers were invited to participate. Published studies regarding methodology of breath tests were selected, discussed and evaluated in a consensus-based manner by the Task Force members.Recommendations for standardisation of sampling, analysing and reporting of data and suggestions for research to cover gaps in the evidence have been created and summarised.Application of breath biomarker measurement in a standardised manner will provide comparable results, thereby facilitating the potential use of these biomarkers in clinical practice.
Molecular profiling of exhaled air can distinguish patients with COPD and asthma and control subjects. Our data demonstrate a potential of electronic noses in the differential diagnosis of obstructive airway diseases and in the risk assessment in asymptomatic smokers. Clinical trial registered with www.trialregister.nl (NTR 1282).
External validation of exhaled breath molecular profiling shows high accuracy in distinguishing asthma and COPD in newly recruited patients with fixed airways obstruction. Exhaled air analysis may therefore reduce misdiagnosis in obstructive airways diseases, potentially leading to more appropriate management.
New 'omics'-technologies have the potential to better define airway disease in terms of pathophysiological and clinical phenotyping. The integration of electronic nose (eNose) technology with existing diagnostic tests, such as routine spirometry, can bring this technology to 'point-of-care'. We aimed to determine and optimize the technical performance and diagnostic accuracy of exhaled breath analysis linked to routine spirometry. Exhaled breath was collected in triplicate in healthy subjects by an eNose (SpiroNose) based on five identical metal oxide semiconductor sensor arrays (three arrays monitoring exhaled breath and two reference arrays monitoring ambient air) at the rear end of a pneumotachograph. First, the influence of flow, volume, humidity, temperature, environment, etc, was assessed. Secondly, a two-centre case-control study was performed using diagnostic and monitoring visits in day-to-day clinical care in patients with a (differential) diagnosis of asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) or lung cancer. Breathprint analysis involved signal processing, environment correction based on alveolar gradients and statistics based on principal component (PC) analysis, followed by discriminant analysis (Matlab2014/SPSS20). Expiratory flow showed a significant linear correlation with raw sensor deflections (R(2) = 0.84) in 60 healthy subjects (age 43 ± 11 years). No correlation was found between sensor readings and exhaled volume, humidity and temperature. Exhaled data after environment correction were highly reproducible for each sensor array (Cohen's Kappa 0.81-0.94). Thirty-seven asthmatics (41 ± 14.2 years), 31 COPD patients (66 ± 8.4 years), 31 lung cancer patients (63 ± 10.8 years) and 45 healthy controls (41 ± 12.5 years) entered the cross-sectional study. SpiroNose could adequately distinguish between controls, asthma, COPD and lung cancer patients with cross-validation values ranging between 78-88%. We have developed a standardized way to integrate eNose technology with spirometry. Signal processing techniques and environmental background correction ensured that the multiple sensor arrays within the SpiroNose provided repeatable and interchangeable results. SpiroNose discriminated controls and patients with asthma, COPD and lung cancer with promising accuracy, paving the route towards point-of-care exhaled breath diagnostics.
Eosinophilic inflammation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is predictive for responses to inhaled steroids. We hypothesised that the inflammatory subtype in mild and moderate COPD can be assessed by exhaled breath metabolomics.Exhaled compounds were analysed using gas chromatography and mass spectrometry (GC-MS) and electronic nose (eNose) in 28 COPD patients (12/16 Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) stage I/II, respectively). Differential cell counts, eosinophil cationic protein (ECP) and myeloperoxidase (MPO) were measured in induced sputum. Relationships between exhaled compounds, eNose breathprints and sputum inflammatory markers were analysed and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were constructed.Exhaled compounds were highly associated with sputum cell counts (eight compounds with eosinophils, 17 with neutrophils; p,0.01). Only one compound (alkylated benzene) overlapped between eosinophilic and neutrophilic profiles. GC-MS and eNose breathprints were associated with markers of inflammatory activity in GOLD stage I (ECP: 19 compounds, p,0.01; eNose breathprint r50.84, p50.002) (MPO: four compounds, p,0.01; eNose r50.72, p50.008). ROC analysis for eNose showed high sensitivity and specificity for inflammatory activity in mild COPD (ECP: area under the curve (AUC) 1.00; MPO: AUC 0.96) but not for moderate COPD.Exhaled molecular profiles are closely associated with the type of inflammatory cell and their activation status in mild and moderate COPD. This suggests that breath analysis may be used for assessment and monitoring of airway inflammation in COPD.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.