当前位置:首页 > 医学进展 > 肿瘤 > 正文

研究发现用呼气测试胃癌的快速办法

研究发现用呼气测试胃癌的快速办法

安徽医科大学第一附属医院和以色列科学家的最新研究发现,一个简单快速的呼气测试,就能查出你是否患了胃癌。在对130名胃病患者的试验中发现,这项呼气测试对胃癌诊断的准确性高达90%。这一呼气测试能彻底改变和加速胃癌的诊断方法。相关研究成果发表在近期出版的《英国癌症杂志》上。

目前医生诊断胃癌的办法是活检,用内窥镜通过口腔和食道进入胃部,然后从病人的胃壁上取胃粘膜采样。呼气测试方式则采用检测病人呼气中提取的化学组合成份的办法,来区分出胃癌患者。

癌症看起来能散发出独特的挥发性有机化合物的气味,而使用合适的医疗器具则能探测出这一气味,这种味道可能狗也能辨认出。这一测试研究并不新鲜,多年来许多国家的科学家都一直在寻求用呼气测试来查找包括肺癌在内的癌症。而这一由中国和以色列科学家所作的测试结果,显示了人类可以用更好的办法来治疗胃癌。

在130名测试对象中,37名病人患有胃癌,32人有胃溃疡,另外61人患的是其它类型的胃病。呼气测试除了能够准确测出90%的胃癌患者之外,还能测出胃癌病人的病情阶段,以及癌症的发展是早期还是晚期。

进行这一研究的中国和以色列科学家目前正在对更多病人做测试,以验证他们的这一新发现。

英国癌症研究中心临床研究负责人凯特·罗博士说,这一最新研究结果令人鼓舞,当然,还需要进行更大规模的临床试验来确证。目前被诊断出患了胃癌的病人中只有5分之一能做手术,其余的病人都因为癌症已经到了晚期而无法接受更有效的治疗。

所以科学家说,任何能够让医生提前诊断出胃癌的办法,都会帮助病人延长生命。

了解更多:

A nanomaterial-based breath test for distinguishing gastric cancer from benign gastric conditions

British Journal of Cancer, 5 March 2013 | doi:10.1038/bjc.2013.44

background: Upper digestive endoscopy with biopsy and histopathological evaluation of the biopsy material is the standard method for diagnosing gastric cancer (GC). However, this procedure may not be widely available for screening in the developing world, whereas in developed countries endoscopy is frequently used without major clinical gain. There is a high demand for a simple and non-invasive test for selecting the individuals at increased risk that should undergo the endoscopic examination. Here, we studied the feasibility of a nanomaterial-based breath test for identifying GC among patients with gastric complaints.

methods: Alveolar exhaled breath samples from 130 patients with gastric complaints (37 GC/32 ulcers/ 61 less severe conditions) that underwent endoscopy/biopsy were analyzed using nanomaterial-based sensors. Predictive models were built employing discriminant factor analysis (DFA) pattern recognition, and their stability against possible confounding factors (alcohol/tobacco consumption;Helicobacter pylori) was tested. Classification success was determined (i) using leave-one-out cross-validation and (ii) by randomly blinding 25% of the samples as a validation set. Complementary chemical analysis of the breath samples was performed using gas chromatography coupled with mass spectrometry.

results: Three DFA models were developed that achieved excellent discrimination between the subpopulations: (i) GC vs benign gastric conditions, among all the patients (89% sensitivity; 90%specificity); (ii) early stage GC (I and II) vs late stage (III and IV), among GC patients (89%sensitivity; 94% specificity); and (iii) ulcer vs less severe, among benign conditions (84% sensitivity; 87% specificity). The models were insensitive against the tested confounding factors. Chemical analysis found that five volatile organic compounds (2-propenenitrile, 2-butoxy-ethanol, furfural, 6-methyl-5-hepten-2-one and isoprene) were significantly elevated in patients with GC and/or peptic ulcer, as compared with less severe gastric conditions. The concentrations both in the room air and in the breath samples were in the single p.p.b.v range, except in the case of isoprene.

conclusion: The preliminary results of this pilot study could open a new and promising avenue to diagnose GC and distinguish it from other gastric diseases. It should be noted that the applied methods are complementary and the potential marker compounds identified by gas-chromatography/mass spectrometry are not necessarily responsible for the differences in the sensor responses. Although this pilot study does not allow drawing far-reaching conclusions, the encouraging preliminary results presented here have initiated a large multicentre clinical trial to confirm the observed patterns for GC and benign gastric conditions.

阅读次数:  

发表评论