An electronic nose in the discrimination of patients with asthma and controls

Silvano Dragonieri, Robert Schot, Bart J A Mertens, Saskia Le Cessie, Stefanie A. Gauw, Antonio Spanevello, Onofrio Resta, Nico P. Willard, Teunis J. Vink, Klaus F. Rabe, Elisabeth H. Bel, Peter J. Sterk

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background: Exhaled breath contains thousands of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) that could serve as biomarkers of lung disease. Electronic noses can distinguish VOC mixtures by pattern recognition. Objective: We hypothesized that an electronic nose can discriminate exhaled air of patients with asthma from healthy controls, and between patients with different disease severities. Methods: Ten young patients with mild asthma (25.1 ± 5.9 years; FEV1, 99.9 ± 7.7% predicted), 10 young controls (26.8 ± 6.4 years; FEV1, 101.9 ± 10.3), 10 older patients with severe asthma (49.5 ± 12.0 years; FEV1, 62.3 ± 23.6), and 10 older controls (57.3 ± 7.1 years; FEV1, 108.3 ± 14.7) joined a cross-sectional study with duplicate sampling of exhaled breath with an interval of 2 to 5 minutes. Subjects inspired VOC-filtered air by tidal breathing for 5 minutes, and a single expiratory vital capacity was collected into a Tedlar bag that was sampled by electronic nose (Cyranose 320) within 10 minutes. Smellprints were analyzed by linear discriminant analysis on principal component reduction. Cross-validation values (CVVs) were calculated. Results: Smellprints of patients with mild asthma were fully separated from young controls (CVV, 100%; Mahalanobis distance [M-distance], 5.32), and patients with severe asthma could be distinguished from old controls (CVV, 90%; M-distance, 2.77). Patients with mild and severe asthma could be less well discriminated (CVV, 65%; M-distance, 1.23), whereas the 2 control groups were indistinguishable (CVV, 50%; M-distance, 1.56). The duplicate samples replicated these results. Conclusion: An electronic nose can discriminate exhaled breath of patients with asthma from controls but is less accurate in distinguishing asthma severities. Clinical implication: These findings warrant validation of electronic noses in diagnosing newly presented patients with asthma.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)856-862
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology
Volume120
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Oct 2007

Fingerprint

Electronic Nose
Asthma
Volatile Organic Compounds
Air
Polyethylene Terephthalates
Vital Capacity
Discriminant Analysis
Lung Diseases
Respiration
Cross-Sectional Studies
Biomarkers

Keywords

  • Asthma mild
  • asthma severe
  • biomarkers
  • diagnosis
  • electronic nose
  • exhaled breath
  • volatile organic compounds

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Immunology and Allergy
  • Immunology

Cite this

Dragonieri, S., Schot, R., Mertens, B. J. A., Le Cessie, S., Gauw, S. A., Spanevello, A., ... Sterk, P. J. (2007). An electronic nose in the discrimination of patients with asthma and controls. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 120(4), 856-862. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaci.2007.05.043

An electronic nose in the discrimination of patients with asthma and controls. / Dragonieri, Silvano; Schot, Robert; Mertens, Bart J A; Le Cessie, Saskia; Gauw, Stefanie A.; Spanevello, Antonio; Resta, Onofrio; Willard, Nico P.; Vink, Teunis J.; Rabe, Klaus F.; Bel, Elisabeth H.; Sterk, Peter J.

In: Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, Vol. 120, No. 4, 10.2007, p. 856-862.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Dragonieri, S, Schot, R, Mertens, BJA, Le Cessie, S, Gauw, SA, Spanevello, A, Resta, O, Willard, NP, Vink, TJ, Rabe, KF, Bel, EH & Sterk, PJ 2007, 'An electronic nose in the discrimination of patients with asthma and controls', Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, vol. 120, no. 4, pp. 856-862. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaci.2007.05.043
Dragonieri, Silvano ; Schot, Robert ; Mertens, Bart J A ; Le Cessie, Saskia ; Gauw, Stefanie A. ; Spanevello, Antonio ; Resta, Onofrio ; Willard, Nico P. ; Vink, Teunis J. ; Rabe, Klaus F. ; Bel, Elisabeth H. ; Sterk, Peter J. / An electronic nose in the discrimination of patients with asthma and controls. In: Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. 2007 ; Vol. 120, No. 4. pp. 856-862.
@article{50c94438b8334f98ae91e16a43f15230,
title = "An electronic nose in the discrimination of patients with asthma and controls",
abstract = "Background: Exhaled breath contains thousands of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) that could serve as biomarkers of lung disease. Electronic noses can distinguish VOC mixtures by pattern recognition. Objective: We hypothesized that an electronic nose can discriminate exhaled air of patients with asthma from healthy controls, and between patients with different disease severities. Methods: Ten young patients with mild asthma (25.1 ± 5.9 years; FEV1, 99.9 ± 7.7{\%} predicted), 10 young controls (26.8 ± 6.4 years; FEV1, 101.9 ± 10.3), 10 older patients with severe asthma (49.5 ± 12.0 years; FEV1, 62.3 ± 23.6), and 10 older controls (57.3 ± 7.1 years; FEV1, 108.3 ± 14.7) joined a cross-sectional study with duplicate sampling of exhaled breath with an interval of 2 to 5 minutes. Subjects inspired VOC-filtered air by tidal breathing for 5 minutes, and a single expiratory vital capacity was collected into a Tedlar bag that was sampled by electronic nose (Cyranose 320) within 10 minutes. Smellprints were analyzed by linear discriminant analysis on principal component reduction. Cross-validation values (CVVs) were calculated. Results: Smellprints of patients with mild asthma were fully separated from young controls (CVV, 100{\%}; Mahalanobis distance [M-distance], 5.32), and patients with severe asthma could be distinguished from old controls (CVV, 90{\%}; M-distance, 2.77). Patients with mild and severe asthma could be less well discriminated (CVV, 65{\%}; M-distance, 1.23), whereas the 2 control groups were indistinguishable (CVV, 50{\%}; M-distance, 1.56). The duplicate samples replicated these results. Conclusion: An electronic nose can discriminate exhaled breath of patients with asthma from controls but is less accurate in distinguishing asthma severities. Clinical implication: These findings warrant validation of electronic noses in diagnosing newly presented patients with asthma.",
keywords = "Asthma mild, asthma severe, biomarkers, diagnosis, electronic nose, exhaled breath, volatile organic compounds",
author = "Silvano Dragonieri and Robert Schot and Mertens, {Bart J A} and {Le Cessie}, Saskia and Gauw, {Stefanie A.} and Antonio Spanevello and Onofrio Resta and Willard, {Nico P.} and Vink, {Teunis J.} and Rabe, {Klaus F.} and Bel, {Elisabeth H.} and Sterk, {Peter J.}",
year = "2007",
month = "10",
doi = "10.1016/j.jaci.2007.05.043",
language = "English",
volume = "120",
pages = "856--862",
journal = "Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology",
issn = "0091-6749",
publisher = "Mosby Inc.",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - An electronic nose in the discrimination of patients with asthma and controls

AU - Dragonieri, Silvano

AU - Schot, Robert

AU - Mertens, Bart J A

AU - Le Cessie, Saskia

AU - Gauw, Stefanie A.

AU - Spanevello, Antonio

AU - Resta, Onofrio

AU - Willard, Nico P.

AU - Vink, Teunis J.

AU - Rabe, Klaus F.

AU - Bel, Elisabeth H.

AU - Sterk, Peter J.

PY - 2007/10

Y1 - 2007/10

N2 - Background: Exhaled breath contains thousands of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) that could serve as biomarkers of lung disease. Electronic noses can distinguish VOC mixtures by pattern recognition. Objective: We hypothesized that an electronic nose can discriminate exhaled air of patients with asthma from healthy controls, and between patients with different disease severities. Methods: Ten young patients with mild asthma (25.1 ± 5.9 years; FEV1, 99.9 ± 7.7% predicted), 10 young controls (26.8 ± 6.4 years; FEV1, 101.9 ± 10.3), 10 older patients with severe asthma (49.5 ± 12.0 years; FEV1, 62.3 ± 23.6), and 10 older controls (57.3 ± 7.1 years; FEV1, 108.3 ± 14.7) joined a cross-sectional study with duplicate sampling of exhaled breath with an interval of 2 to 5 minutes. Subjects inspired VOC-filtered air by tidal breathing for 5 minutes, and a single expiratory vital capacity was collected into a Tedlar bag that was sampled by electronic nose (Cyranose 320) within 10 minutes. Smellprints were analyzed by linear discriminant analysis on principal component reduction. Cross-validation values (CVVs) were calculated. Results: Smellprints of patients with mild asthma were fully separated from young controls (CVV, 100%; Mahalanobis distance [M-distance], 5.32), and patients with severe asthma could be distinguished from old controls (CVV, 90%; M-distance, 2.77). Patients with mild and severe asthma could be less well discriminated (CVV, 65%; M-distance, 1.23), whereas the 2 control groups were indistinguishable (CVV, 50%; M-distance, 1.56). The duplicate samples replicated these results. Conclusion: An electronic nose can discriminate exhaled breath of patients with asthma from controls but is less accurate in distinguishing asthma severities. Clinical implication: These findings warrant validation of electronic noses in diagnosing newly presented patients with asthma.

AB - Background: Exhaled breath contains thousands of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) that could serve as biomarkers of lung disease. Electronic noses can distinguish VOC mixtures by pattern recognition. Objective: We hypothesized that an electronic nose can discriminate exhaled air of patients with asthma from healthy controls, and between patients with different disease severities. Methods: Ten young patients with mild asthma (25.1 ± 5.9 years; FEV1, 99.9 ± 7.7% predicted), 10 young controls (26.8 ± 6.4 years; FEV1, 101.9 ± 10.3), 10 older patients with severe asthma (49.5 ± 12.0 years; FEV1, 62.3 ± 23.6), and 10 older controls (57.3 ± 7.1 years; FEV1, 108.3 ± 14.7) joined a cross-sectional study with duplicate sampling of exhaled breath with an interval of 2 to 5 minutes. Subjects inspired VOC-filtered air by tidal breathing for 5 minutes, and a single expiratory vital capacity was collected into a Tedlar bag that was sampled by electronic nose (Cyranose 320) within 10 minutes. Smellprints were analyzed by linear discriminant analysis on principal component reduction. Cross-validation values (CVVs) were calculated. Results: Smellprints of patients with mild asthma were fully separated from young controls (CVV, 100%; Mahalanobis distance [M-distance], 5.32), and patients with severe asthma could be distinguished from old controls (CVV, 90%; M-distance, 2.77). Patients with mild and severe asthma could be less well discriminated (CVV, 65%; M-distance, 1.23), whereas the 2 control groups were indistinguishable (CVV, 50%; M-distance, 1.56). The duplicate samples replicated these results. Conclusion: An electronic nose can discriminate exhaled breath of patients with asthma from controls but is less accurate in distinguishing asthma severities. Clinical implication: These findings warrant validation of electronic noses in diagnosing newly presented patients with asthma.

KW - Asthma mild

KW - asthma severe

KW - biomarkers

KW - diagnosis

KW - electronic nose

KW - exhaled breath

KW - volatile organic compounds

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=35148827504&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=35148827504&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jaci.2007.05.043

DO - 10.1016/j.jaci.2007.05.043

M3 - Article

C2 - 17658592

AN - SCOPUS:35148827504

VL - 120

SP - 856

EP - 862

JO - Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology

JF - Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology

SN - 0091-6749

IS - 4

ER -