ABSTRACT
Background Exhaled breath contains thousands of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) that reflect on biochemical and biophysical activities both outside and within the human body. Breath analysis could provide non-invasive, cost-effective, real time early disease diagnosis and monitoring of therapeutic responses.
Objectives The primary objective of this study was to assess the effectiveness of alveolar breath testing in diagnosing idiopathic systemic body and breath odors. Key secondary objectives were to assess if breath tests can reliably differentiate subtypes of idiopathic malodor in different environments and dietary regimens, and to map metabolites to biomedical functions and pathways.
Study Design The basic design was to measure a cohort of idiopathic odor in order to identify potential molecular correlates with genotypic and phenotypic variables. Participants were subdivided in several different ways allowing for different cases and controls within the cohort, using prior and later test results and observations. Thus, this study was an observational retrospective case-cohort/nested case-control study.
Setting/Participants Participants were recruited online via MEBO and TMAU support groups and on site, during the 3rd Annual MEBO Research conference held at Miami South Beach on June 23, 2012 and local meetups of support groups (Miami, Florida; New York, New York; Chicago, Illinois, US and Birmingham, England). Study population is individuals self-reporting systemic idiopathic malodor production. Inclusion criteria were good general health, desire and ability to travel to one of the participating sites and pay the lab fee. Exclusion Criteria were medical conditions that could prevent participation and age under 18.
Study Interventions and Measures The main study procedure was the application of a rapid point-of-care breath testing system to collect and concentrate alveolar breath VOCs on a sorbent trap, using breath collection apparatus (BCA) 5.0. Samples were sent to central laboratory and analyzed with gas chromatography and mass spectroscopy. In addition, the participants filled out food frequency questionnaires and were offered to use Aurametrix, online software tool based on a participant-initiated ecological momentary assessment approach, allowing to recall the events at any time later. The tool analyzed dietary intakes, activities and environmental exposures for both individual and aggregate level data.
The primary endpoint was the composition of VOCs in breath samples, while diet and activity data, and results of alternative testing assessments were secondary endpoints. The main study outcome measure is the diagnostic accuracy of alveolar breath test in differentiating profiles of two main pre-defined sub-cohorts. Index of concordance with accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value will be reported. A number of factors was assessed for confounding.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Clinical Trial
NCT03451994
Funding Statement
The author received no financial support for the research, authorship, and publication of this article.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
MEBO Research Institutional Review Board (IRB00010169) provided approval for both the original prospective (Protocol Number MR2012-01, approved on February 28, 2012) and retrospective secondary study (Protocol Number 20111001005MEBO, approved on February 15, 2018).
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
