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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: 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
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