Exhaled Breath Analysis Detects the Clearance of Staphylococcus aureus from the Airways of Children with Cystic Fibrosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Electronic nose (eNose) technology can be used to characterize volatile organic compound (VOC) mixes in breath. While previous reports have shown that eNose can detect lung infections with pathogens such as Staphylococcus aureus (SA) in people with cystic fibrosis (CF), the clinical utility of eNose for longitudinally monitoring SA infection status is unknown. Methods: In this longitudinal study, a cloud-connected eNose, the SpiroNose, was used for the breath profile analysis of children with CF at two stable visits and compared based on changes in SA infection status between visits. Data analysis involved advanced sensor signal processing, ambient correction, and statistics based on the comparison of breath profiles between baseline and follow-up visits. Results: Seventy-two children with CF, with a mean (IQR) age of 13.8 (9.8–16.4) years, were studied. In those with SA-positive airway cultures at baseline but SA-negative cultures at follow-up (n = 19), significant signal differences were detected between Baseline and Follow-up at three distinct eNose sensors, i.e., S4 (p = 0.047), S6 (p = 0.014), and S7 (p = 0.014). Sensor signal changes with the clearance of SA from airways were unrelated to antibiotic treatment. No changes in sensor signals were seen in patients with unchanged infection status between visits. Conclusions: Our results demonstrate the potential applicability of the eNose as a non-invasive clinical tool to longitudinally monitor pulmonary SA infection status in children with CF.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".