Sniffing Out Colorectal Cancer
Sonoda H, Kohnoe S, Yamazato T, et al
Gut. 2011 Jan 31. [Epub ahead of print]
Do the stools or breath of patients who have colorectal cancer have a detectable odor? The authors used a specially trained dog to sniff stool (n = 37) and breath (n = 33) samples from patients with and without colorectal cancer as determined by colonoscopy. The sensitivity and specificity of this unique testing method for breath samples were 0.91 and 0.99, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity for stool samples were 0.97 and 0.99, respectively. The results were independent of blood in the stool and were not affected by patient's smoking status.
Previous reports have suggested that the canine sense of smell is sufficiently keen to detect tumors in other locations such as the lung and the breast. The sensitivity and specificity results reported here for colorectal cancer are comparable with other widely used screening procedures. Because of the extensive training required and the limited number of consecutive examinations that can be performed by a single animal, it is unlikely that this method will ever replace colonoscopy. However, the results suggest that tumors do give off a faint scent that could be detected with specially designed instruments.
Abstract
Colorectal Cancer Screening With Odour Material by Canine Scent Detection
Sonoda H, Kohnoe S, Yamazato T, et al
Gut. 2011 Jan 31. [Epub ahead of print]
Summary
Do the stools or breath of patients who have colorectal cancer have a detectable odor? The authors used a specially trained dog to sniff stool (n = 37) and breath (n = 33) samples from patients with and without colorectal cancer as determined by colonoscopy. The sensitivity and specificity of this unique testing method for breath samples were 0.91 and 0.99, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity for stool samples were 0.97 and 0.99, respectively. The results were independent of blood in the stool and were not affected by patient's smoking status.
Viewpoint
Previous reports have suggested that the canine sense of smell is sufficiently keen to detect tumors in other locations such as the lung and the breast. The sensitivity and specificity results reported here for colorectal cancer are comparable with other widely used screening procedures. Because of the extensive training required and the limited number of consecutive examinations that can be performed by a single animal, it is unlikely that this method will ever replace colonoscopy. However, the results suggest that tumors do give off a faint scent that could be detected with specially designed instruments.
Abstract
SHARE
