Cargando…
Comparative analysis of chemical breath-prints through olfactory technology for the discrimination between SARS-CoV-2 infected patients and controls
BACKGROUND: We identified a global chemical pattern of volatile organic compounds in exhaled breath capable of discriminating between COVID-19 patients and controls (without infection) using an electronic nose. METHODS: The study focused on 42 SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR positive subjects as well as 42 negat...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier B.V.
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8064814/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33901429 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cca.2021.04.015 |
_version_ | 1783682214493421568 |
---|---|
author | Rodríguez-Aguilar, Maribel Díaz de León-Martínez, Lorena Zamora-Mendoza, Blanca Nohemí Comas-García, Andreu Guerra Palomares, Sandra Elizabeth García-Sepúlveda, Christian Alberto Alcántara-Quintana, Luz Eugenia Díaz-Barriga, Fernando Flores-Ramírez, Rogelio |
author_facet | Rodríguez-Aguilar, Maribel Díaz de León-Martínez, Lorena Zamora-Mendoza, Blanca Nohemí Comas-García, Andreu Guerra Palomares, Sandra Elizabeth García-Sepúlveda, Christian Alberto Alcántara-Quintana, Luz Eugenia Díaz-Barriga, Fernando Flores-Ramírez, Rogelio |
author_sort | Rodríguez-Aguilar, Maribel |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: We identified a global chemical pattern of volatile organic compounds in exhaled breath capable of discriminating between COVID-19 patients and controls (without infection) using an electronic nose. METHODS: The study focused on 42 SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR positive subjects as well as 42 negative subjects. Principal component analysis indicated a separation of the study groups and provides a cumulative percentage of explanation of the variation of 98.3%. RESULTS: The canonical analysis of principal coordinates model shows a separation by the first canonical axis CAP1 (r(2) = 0.939 and 95.23% of correct classification rate), the cut-off point of 0.0089; 100% sensitivity (CI 95%:91.5–100%) and 97.6% specificity (CI 95%:87.4–99.9%). The predictive model usefulness was tested on 30 open population subjects without prior knowledge of SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR status. Of these 3 subjects exhibited COVID-19 suggestive breath profiles, all asymptomatic at the time, two of which were later shown to be SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR positive. An additional subject had a borderline breath profile and SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR positive. The remaining 27 subjects exhibited healthy breath profiles as well as SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR test results. CONCLUSIONS: In all, the use of olfactory technologies in communities with high transmission rates as well as in resource-limited settings where targeted sampling is not viable represents a practical COVID-19 screening approach capable of promptly identifying COVID-19 suspect patients and providing useful epidemiological information to guide community health strategies in the context of COVID-19. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8064814 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Elsevier B.V. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-80648142021-04-26 Comparative analysis of chemical breath-prints through olfactory technology for the discrimination between SARS-CoV-2 infected patients and controls Rodríguez-Aguilar, Maribel Díaz de León-Martínez, Lorena Zamora-Mendoza, Blanca Nohemí Comas-García, Andreu Guerra Palomares, Sandra Elizabeth García-Sepúlveda, Christian Alberto Alcántara-Quintana, Luz Eugenia Díaz-Barriga, Fernando Flores-Ramírez, Rogelio Clin Chim Acta Article BACKGROUND: We identified a global chemical pattern of volatile organic compounds in exhaled breath capable of discriminating between COVID-19 patients and controls (without infection) using an electronic nose. METHODS: The study focused on 42 SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR positive subjects as well as 42 negative subjects. Principal component analysis indicated a separation of the study groups and provides a cumulative percentage of explanation of the variation of 98.3%. RESULTS: The canonical analysis of principal coordinates model shows a separation by the first canonical axis CAP1 (r(2) = 0.939 and 95.23% of correct classification rate), the cut-off point of 0.0089; 100% sensitivity (CI 95%:91.5–100%) and 97.6% specificity (CI 95%:87.4–99.9%). The predictive model usefulness was tested on 30 open population subjects without prior knowledge of SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR status. Of these 3 subjects exhibited COVID-19 suggestive breath profiles, all asymptomatic at the time, two of which were later shown to be SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR positive. An additional subject had a borderline breath profile and SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR positive. The remaining 27 subjects exhibited healthy breath profiles as well as SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR test results. CONCLUSIONS: In all, the use of olfactory technologies in communities with high transmission rates as well as in resource-limited settings where targeted sampling is not viable represents a practical COVID-19 screening approach capable of promptly identifying COVID-19 suspect patients and providing useful epidemiological information to guide community health strategies in the context of COVID-19. Elsevier B.V. 2021-08 2021-04-24 /pmc/articles/PMC8064814/ /pubmed/33901429 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cca.2021.04.015 Text en © 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active. |
spellingShingle | Article Rodríguez-Aguilar, Maribel Díaz de León-Martínez, Lorena Zamora-Mendoza, Blanca Nohemí Comas-García, Andreu Guerra Palomares, Sandra Elizabeth García-Sepúlveda, Christian Alberto Alcántara-Quintana, Luz Eugenia Díaz-Barriga, Fernando Flores-Ramírez, Rogelio Comparative analysis of chemical breath-prints through olfactory technology for the discrimination between SARS-CoV-2 infected patients and controls |
title | Comparative analysis of chemical breath-prints through olfactory technology for the discrimination between SARS-CoV-2 infected patients and controls |
title_full | Comparative analysis of chemical breath-prints through olfactory technology for the discrimination between SARS-CoV-2 infected patients and controls |
title_fullStr | Comparative analysis of chemical breath-prints through olfactory technology for the discrimination between SARS-CoV-2 infected patients and controls |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparative analysis of chemical breath-prints through olfactory technology for the discrimination between SARS-CoV-2 infected patients and controls |
title_short | Comparative analysis of chemical breath-prints through olfactory technology for the discrimination between SARS-CoV-2 infected patients and controls |
title_sort | comparative analysis of chemical breath-prints through olfactory technology for the discrimination between sars-cov-2 infected patients and controls |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8064814/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33901429 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cca.2021.04.015 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT rodriguezaguilarmaribel comparativeanalysisofchemicalbreathprintsthrougholfactorytechnologyforthediscriminationbetweensarscov2infectedpatientsandcontrols AT diazdeleonmartinezlorena comparativeanalysisofchemicalbreathprintsthrougholfactorytechnologyforthediscriminationbetweensarscov2infectedpatientsandcontrols AT zamoramendozablancanohemi comparativeanalysisofchemicalbreathprintsthrougholfactorytechnologyforthediscriminationbetweensarscov2infectedpatientsandcontrols AT comasgarciaandreu comparativeanalysisofchemicalbreathprintsthrougholfactorytechnologyforthediscriminationbetweensarscov2infectedpatientsandcontrols AT guerrapalomaressandraelizabeth comparativeanalysisofchemicalbreathprintsthrougholfactorytechnologyforthediscriminationbetweensarscov2infectedpatientsandcontrols AT garciasepulvedachristianalberto comparativeanalysisofchemicalbreathprintsthrougholfactorytechnologyforthediscriminationbetweensarscov2infectedpatientsandcontrols AT alcantaraquintanaluzeugenia comparativeanalysisofchemicalbreathprintsthrougholfactorytechnologyforthediscriminationbetweensarscov2infectedpatientsandcontrols AT diazbarrigafernando comparativeanalysisofchemicalbreathprintsthrougholfactorytechnologyforthediscriminationbetweensarscov2infectedpatientsandcontrols AT floresramirezrogelio comparativeanalysisofchemicalbreathprintsthrougholfactorytechnologyforthediscriminationbetweensarscov2infectedpatientsandcontrols |