Background: Volatilomics is a powerful tool capable of providing novel biomarkers for medical diagnosis and therapy monitoring. The objective of this study is to identify potential volatile biomarkers of gastric cancer. Methods: The volatilomic signatures of gastric tissues obtained from two distinct populations were investigated using gas chromatography with mass spectrometric detection. Results: Amongst the volatiles emitted, nineteen showed differences in their headspace concentrations above the normal and cancer tissues in at least one population of patients. Headspace levels of seven compounds (hexanal, nonanal, cyclohexanone, 2-nonanone, pyrrole, pyridine, and phenol) were significantly higher above the cancer tissue, whereas eleven volatiles (ethyl acetate, acetoin, 2,3-butanedione, 3-methyl-1-butanol, 2-pentanone, γ-butyrolactone, DL-limonene, benzaldehyde, 2-methyl-1-propanol, benzonitrile, and 3-methyl-butanal) were higher above the non-cancerous tissue. One compound, isoprene, exhibited contradictory alterations in both cohorts. Five compounds, pyridine, ethyl acetate, acetoin, 2,3-butanedione, and 3-methyl-1-butanol, showed consistent cancer-related changes in both populations. Conclusions: Pyridine is found to be the most promising biomarker candidate for detecting gastric cancer. The difference in the volatilomic signatures can be explained by cancer-related changes in the activity of certain enzymes, or pathways. The results of this study confirm that the chemical fingerprint formed by volatiles in gastric tissue is altered by gastric cancer.

No abstract

No abstract

carcinoma cases (for locally advanced stages). Adjuvant systemic chemotherapy was realized to 56% of gastric carcinoma patients, postoperative RCC was realized to only 6 sick. The median overall survival is 18 months with a 95% confidence interval (CI 95%) ranging from 17.04 to 21.9 months. In multivariate analysis according to the Cox model and after stratification by stage, median overall survival by histological type was 12.3 months for ring cell carcinoma versus 19 months for gastric adenocarcinoma with a very significant difference (p < 0.03). Stages I and II had better survival (23 months) compared to stages III and IV (11 months) with p < 0.001. The analysis of other prognostic factors was not statistically significant in our study. Conclusion:In this series, the multivariate study of the different prognostic factors conditioning the survival of gastric carcinomas using Cox model, allowed us to retain only two factors influencing survival in a direct way, namely the histological type of ring cell carcinoma and the TNM stage.

No abstract