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.
> Trained dogs can identify breath samples from patients with lung cancer with 98 percent accuracy.
Do you know any details if this was ever properly tested? Recently there was an article[1] on HN[2] that suggested we might be putting too much faith in dogs for drug/explosives detection, as it was never properly tested if they really are that good at it, or whether they just pick up subtle clues from their handlers, AKA Clever Hans effect[3]. I wonder if this effect is accounted for in case of 'cancer detection' dogs.
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...
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.