Point-of-care breath sample analysis by semiconductor-based E-Nose technology discriminates non-infected subjects from SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia patients: a multi-analyst experiment

Abstract

Metal oxide sensor-based electronic nose (E-Nose) technology provides an easy to use method for breath analysis by detection of volatile organic compound (VOC)-induced changes of electrical conductivity. Resulting signal patterns are then analyzed by machine learning (ML) algorithms. This study aimed to establish breath analysis by E-Nose technology as a diagnostic tool for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pneumonia within a multi-analyst experiment. Breath samples of 126 subjects with (n = 63) or without SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia (n = 63) were collected using the ReCIVA® Breath Sampler, enriched and stored on Tenax sorption tubes, and analyzed using an E-Nose unit with 10 sensors. ML approaches were applied by three independent data analyst teams and included a wide range of classifiers, hyperparameters, training modes, and subsets of training data. Within the multi-analyst experiment, all teams successfully classified individuals as infected or uninfected with an averaged area under the curve (AUC) larger than 90% and misclassification error lower than 19%, and identified the same sensor as most relevant to classification success. This new method using VOC enrichment and E-Nose analysis combined with ML can yield results similar to polymerase chain reaction (PCR) detection and superior to point-of-care (POC) antigen testing. Reducing the sensor set to the most relevant sensor may prove interesting for developing targeted POC testing.

Keywords

breath gas / COVID-19 / E-Nose / machine learning / mass spectrometry / metal oxide sensor / pneumonia / volatile organic compounds

References

[1] Dolch ME, Chouker A, Hornuss C, et al. Quantification of propionaldehyde in breath of patients after lung transplantation. Free Radic Biol Med. 2015; 85: 157-164.

[2] Aleksic M, Simeon A, Vujic D, Giannoukos S, Brkic B. Food and lifestyle impact on breath VOCs using portable mass spectrometer-pilot study across European countries. J Breath Res. 2023; 17.

[3] Chou H, Arthur K, Shaw E, et al. Metabolic insights at the finish line: deciphering physiological changes in ultramarathon runners through breath VOC analysis. J Breath Res. 2024; 18.

[4] Amann A, de Lacy Costello B, Miekisch W, et al. The human volatilome: volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in exhaled breath, skin emanations, urine, feces and saliva. J Breath Res. 2014; 8: 034001.

[5] Dolch ME, Hornuss C, Klocke C, et al. Volatile compound profiling for the identification of Gram-negative bacteria by ion-molecule reaction-mass spectrometry. J Appl Microbiol. 2012; 113: 1097-1105.

[6] Filipiak W, Beer R, Sponring A, et al. Breath analysis for in vivo detection of pathogens related to ventilator-associated pneumonia in intensive care patients: a prospective pilot study. J Breath Res. 2015; 9: 016004.

[7] Traxler S, Bischoff AC, Sass R, et al. VOC breath profile in spontaneously breathing awake swine during Influenza A infection. Sci Rep. 2018; 8: 14857.

[8] Aksenov AA, Sandrock CE, Zhao W, et al. Cellular scent of influenza virus infection. Chembiochem. 2014; 15: 1040-1048.

[9] Behera B, Joshi R, Anil Vishnu GK, Bhalerao S, Pandya HJ. Electronic nose: a non-invasive technology for breath analysis of diabetes and lung cancer patients. J Breath Res. 2019; 13: 024001.

[10] Keogh RJ, Riches JC. The use of breath analysis in the management of lung cancer: is it ready for primetime? Curr Oncol. 2022; 29: 7355-7378.

[11] Taverna G, Grizzi F, Tidu L, et al. Accuracy of a new electronic nose for prostate cancer diagnosis in urine samples. Int J Urol. 2022: 890-896.

[12] van de Goor RM, Leunis N, van Hooren MR, et al. Feasibility of electronic nose technology for discriminating between head and neck, bladder, and colon carcinomas. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2017; 274: 1053-1060.

[13] Dragonieri S, Pennazza G, Carratu P, Resta O. Electronic nose technology in respiratory diseases. Lung. 2017; 195: 157-165.

[14] Licht JC, Grasemann H. Potential of the electronic nose for the detection of respiratory diseases with and without infection. Int J Mol Sci. 2020; 21:9416.

[15] Ruszkiewicz DM, Sanders D, O’Brien R, et al. Diagnosis of COVID-19 by analysis of breath with gas chromatography-ion mobility spectrometry—a feasibility study. EClinicalMedicine. 2020; 29: 100609.

[16] Shlomo IB, Frankenthal H, Laor A, Greenhut AK. Detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection by exhaled breath spectral analysis: introducing a ready-to-use point-of-care mass screening method. EClinicalMedicine. 2022; 45: 101308.

[17] Snitz K, Andelman-Gur M, Pinchover L, et al. Proof of concept for real-time detection of SARS CoV-2 infection with an electronic nose. PLoS One. 2021; 16: e0252121.

[18] Bikov A, Lazar Z, Horvath I. Established methodological issues in electronic nose research: how far are we from using these instruments in clinical settings of breath analysis? J Breath Res. 2015; 9: 034001.

[19] Reidt U, Helwig A, Müller G, et al. Detection of microorganisms onboard the international space station using an electronic nose. Gravitational Space Res. 2017; 5: 89-111.

[20] Botvinik-Nezer R, Holzmeister F, Camerer CF, et al. Variability in the analysis of a single neuroimaging dataset by many teams. Nature. 2020; 582: 84-88.

[21] Silberzahn R, Uhlmann EL. Crowdsourced research: many hands make tight work. Nature. 2015; 526: 189-191.

[22] Silberzahn R, Uhlmann EL, Martin DP, et al. Many analysts, one data set: making transparent how variations in analytic choices affect results. Adv Methods Practices Psychol Sci. 2018; 1: 337-356.

[23] Wagenmakers EJ, Sarafoglou A, Aczel B. One statistical analysis must not rule them all. Nature. 2022; 605: 423-425.

[24] Hoffmann S, Schonbrodt F, Elsas R, Wilson R, Strasser U, Boulesteix AL. The multiplicity of analysis strategies jeopardizes replicability: lessons learned across disciplines. R Soc Open Sci. 2021; 8: 201925.

[25] Hutson M. Artificial intelligence faces reproducibility crisis. Science. 2018; 359: 725-726.

[26] Aczel B, Szaszi B, Nilsonne G, et al. Consensus-based guidance for conducting and reporting multi-analyst studies. Elife. 2021; 10.

[27] Breiman L. Statistical modeling: the two cultures (with comments and a rejoinder by the author). Statist Sci. 2001; 16(3): 199-231.

[28] Dong J, Rudin C. Exploring the cloud of variable importance for the set of all good models. Nat Mach Intell. 2020; 2: 810-824.

[29] Brummer LE, Katzenschlager S, McGrath S, et al. Accuracy of rapid point-of-care antigen-based diagnostics for SARS-CoV-2: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis with meta-regression analyzing influencing factors. PLoS Med. 2022; 19: e1004011.

[30] Fragkou PC, Moschopoulos CD, Dimopoulou D, et al. Performance of point-of care molecular and antigen-based tests for SARS-CoV-2: a living systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2022; 29(3): 291-301.

[31] Arevalo-Rodriguez I, Buitrago-Garcia D, Simancas-Racines D, et al. False-negative results of initial RT-PCR assays for COVID-19: a systematic review. PLoS One. 2020; 15: e0242958.

[32] Payne D, Newton D, Evans P, Osman H, Baretto R. Preanalytical issues affecting the diagnosis of COVID-19. J Clin Pathol. 2021; 74: 207-208.

[33] Wang W, Xu Y, Gao R, et al. Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in different types of clinical specimens. JAMA. 2020; 323: 1843-1844.

[34] Woloshin S, Patel N, Kesselheim AS. False negative tests for SARS-CoV-2 infection—challenges and implications. N Engl J Med. 2020; 383: e38.

[35] Myers R, Ruszkiewicz DM, Meister A, et al. Breath testing for SARS-CoV-2 infection. EBioMedicine. 2023; 92: 104584.

[36] Ntoutsi E, Fafalios P, Gadiraju U, et al. Bias in data-driven artificial intelligence systems—an introductory survey. WIREs Data Mining Knowledge Discov. 2020; 10: e1356.

[37] Soni A, Herbert C, Lin H, et al. Performance of rapid antigen tests to detect symptomatic and asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection : a prospective cohort study. Ann Intern Med. 2023; 176: 975-982.

[38] He JL, Luo L, Luo ZD, Lyu JX, Ng MY, Shen XP, et al. Diagnostic performance between CT and initial real-time RT-PCR for clinically suspected 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) patients outside Wuhan, China. Respir Med. 2020; 168: 105980.

[39] World Medical Association. World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA. 2013; 310: 2191-2194.

[40] Harshman SW, Mani N, Geier BA, et al. Storage stability of exhaled breath on Tenax TA. J Breath Res. 2016; 10: 046008.

[41] Lomonaco T, Salvo P, Ghimenti S, et al. Stability of volatile organic compounds in sorbent tubes following SARS-CoV-2 inactivation procedures. J Breath Res. 2021; 15.

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

2024 The Author(s). MedComm published by Sichuan International Medical Exchange & Promotion Association (SCIMEA) and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.