

Cancer Breath Test Enters Clinical Trials - skmurphy
http://www.technologyreview.com/biomedicine/39709/?p1=A3

======
skmurphy
Key points:

<http://metabolomx.com/> a startup in Mountain View, California, recently
completed a clinical trial that shows that its breath test can spot lung
cancer with 83 percent accuracy and can also distinguish between several
different types of the disease, something that usually requires a biopsy. The
accuracy of the test matches what's possible with low-dose computerized
tomography imaging of the lungs.

Trained dogs can identify breath samples from patients with lung cancer with
98 percent accuracy.

Rhodes expects a test to cost $75. Also, because it's not specific to a
particular group of chemicals, the Metabolomx sensor could, in theory at
least, be used to screen for any disease that has a metabolic breath
signature—the company is currently exploring tests for other diseases,
including tuberculosis. "A breath signature could give a snapshot of overall
health," Rhodes says.

~~~
asdkl234890
It's amazing dogs are at 98 percent while the latest and best technology is at
83 percent.

I am sure some day we will at least match dogs, but still, damn.

~~~
possibilistic
If this works anything like GCxHPLC, peak detection and separation algorithms
will certainly help improve our resolution. From there we use ML techniques to
train the classifier; doing more sample studies will improve the model's
accuracy.

Urine sample tests are also quite interesting and will probably unlock an even
larger metabolome full of breakdown products to analyze.

I wouldn't be surprised if toilets of the future keep track of your general
health and screen for disease states. They may even be able to quantify an
ever increasing risk as we age...

------
Sniffnoy
When they say "accuracy", do they mean sensitivity, specificity, or what?

~~~
DanBC
Also, how "big"[1] does the cancer have to be before it's detectable with this
new test?

[1] apologies for my awful medical terminology.

