Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1942/30042
Title: Exhaled breath metabolomics reveals a pathogen-specific response in a rat pneumonia model for two human pathogenic bacteria: a proof-of-concept study
Authors: van Oort, Poulin M.
Brinkman, Paul
SLINGERS, Gitte 
Koppen, Gudrun
Maas, Adrie
Roelofs, Joris J.
Schnabel, Ronny
Bergmann, Dennis C.
RAES, Marc 
Goodacre, Royston
Fowler, Stephen J.
Schultz, Marcus J.
Bos, Lieuwe D.
Issue Date: 2019
Publisher: AMER PHYSIOLOGICAL SOC
Source: AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSIOLOGY-LUNG CELLULAR AND MOLECULAR PHYSIOLOGY, 316(5), p. L751-L756
Abstract: Volatile organic compounds in breath can reflect host and pathogen metabolism and might be used to diagnose pneumonia. We hypothesized that rats with Streptococcus pneumoniae (SP) or Pseudomonas aeruginosa (PA) pneumonia can be discriminated from uninfected controls by thermal desorption-gas chromatography- mass-spectrometry (TD-GC-MS) and selected ion flow tubemass spectrometry (SIFT-MS) of exhaled breath. Male adult rats (n = 50) received an intratracheal inoculation of 1) 200 mu l saline, or 2) 1 x 10(7) colony-forming units of SP or 3) 1 x 10(7) CFU of PA. Twenty-four hours later the rats were anaesthetized, tracheotomized, and mechanically ventilated. Exhaled breath was analyzed via TDGC- MS and SIFT-MS. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROCCs) and correct classification rate (CCRs) were calculated after leave-one-out cross-validation of sparse partial least squares-discriminant analysis. Analysis of GC-MS data showed an AUROCC (95% confidence interval) of 0.85 (0.73-0.96) and CCR of 94.6% for infected versus noninfected animals, AUROCC of 0.98 (0.94-1) and CCR of 99.9% for SP versus PA, 0.92 (0.83-1.00), CCR of 98.1% for SP versus controls and 0.97 (0.92-1.00), and CCR of 99.9% for PA versus controls. For these comparisons the SIFT-MS data showed AUROCCs of 0.54, 0.89, 0.63, and 0.79, respectively. Exhaled breath analysis discriminated between respiratory infection and no infection but with even better accuracy between specific pathogens. Future clinical studies should not only focus on the presence of respiratory infection but also on the discrimination between specific pathogens.
Notes: [van Oort, Poulin M.; Brinkman, Paul; Maas, Adrie; Roelofs, Joris J.; Schultz, Marcus J.; Bos, Lieuwe D.] Univ Amsterdam, Med Ctr, Acad Med Ctr, Dept Intens Care, Amsterdam, Netherlands. [Slingers, Gitte; Raes, M.] Hasselt Univ, Hasselt, Belgium. [Koppen, Gudrun] Flemish Inst Technol Res, Mol, Belgium. [Schnabel, Ronny; Bergmann, Dennis C.] Maastricht Univ, Med Ctr, Maastricht, Netherlands. [Goodacre, Royston] Manchester Inst Biotechnol, Manchester, Lancs, England. [Fowler, Stephen J.] Univ Manchester, Manchester, Lancs, England.
Keywords: exhaled breath analysis; pneumonia; infection; biomarkers;biomarkers; exhaled breath analysis; infection; pneumonia
Document URI: http://hdl.handle.net/1942/30042
ISSN: 1040-0605
e-ISSN: 1522-1504
DOI: 10.1152/ajplung.00449.2018
ISI #: 000465073800008
Rights: 2019 the American Physiological Society
Category: A1
Type: Journal Contribution
Validations: ecoom 2020
Appears in Collections:Research publications

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
vanoort2019.pdf
  Restricted Access
Published version2.84 MBAdobe PDFView/Open    Request a copy
Show full item record

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

2
checked on Sep 3, 2020

WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations

15
checked on May 2, 2024

Page view(s)

108
checked on May 20, 2022

Download(s)

110
checked on May 20, 2022

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.