Back to Search Start Over

Prostate cancer risk stratification via eNose urine odor analysis: a preliminary report

Authors :
Gianluigi Taverna
Fabio Grizzi
Carmen Bax
Lorenzo Tidu
Matteo Zanoni
Paolo Vota
Cinzia Mazzieri
Maria Chiara Clementi
Giovanni Toia
Mohamed A. A. A. Hegazi
Beatrice Julia Lotesoriere
Rodolfo Hurle
Laura Capelli
Source :
Frontiers in Oncology, Vol 14 (2024)
Publication Year :
2024
Publisher :
Frontiers Media S.A., 2024.

Abstract

IntroductionProstate cancer (PCa) is known for its highly diverse clinical behavior, ranging from low-risk, slow-growing tumors to aggressive and life-threatening forms. To avoid over-treatment of low-risk PCa patients, it would be very important prior to any therapeutic intervention to appropriately classify subjects based on tumor aggressiveness. Unfortunately, there is currently no reliable test available for this purpose. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the ability of risk stratification of PCa subjects using an electronic nose (eNose) detecting PCa-specific volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in urine samples.MethodsThe study involved 120 participants who underwent diagnostic prostate biopsy followed by robot assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). PCa risk was categorized as low, intermediate, or high based on the D’Amico risk classification and the pathological grade (PG) assessed after RARP. The eNose’s ability to categorize subjects for PCa risk stratification was evaluated based on accuracy and recall metrics.ResultsThe study population comprised 120 participants. When comparing eNose predictions with PG an accuracy of 79.2% (95%CI 70.8 – 86%) was found, while an accuracy of 74.2% (95%CI 65.4 – 81.7%) was found when compared to D’Amico risk classification system. Additionally, if compared low- versus -intermediate-/high-risk PCa, the eNose achieved an accuracy of 87.5% (95%CI 80.2-92.8%) based on PG or 90.8% (95%CI 84.2–95.3%) based on D’Amico risk classification. However, when using low-/-intermediate versus -high-risk PCa for PG, the accuracy was found to be 91.7% (95%CI 85.2-95.9%). Finally, an accuracy of 80.8% (95%CI72.6-87.4%) was found when compared with D’Amico risk classification.DiscussionThe findings of this study indicate that eNose may represent a valid alternative not only for early and non-invasive diagnosis of PCa, but also to categorize patients based on tumor aggressiveness. Further studies including a wider sample population will be necessary to confirm the potential clinical impact of this new technology.

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
2234943X
Volume :
14
Database :
Directory of Open Access Journals
Journal :
Frontiers in Oncology
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
edsdoj.62d6c7fc174644958b53340fbb57812c
Document Type :
article
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2024.1339796