Volatilomic patterns of gastric juice and their potential for diagnosis of gastric cancer

Manohar Prasad Bhandari 1, Pawel Mochalski 2,3, Viktors Veliks 1, Daria Slefarska-Wolak 2,3, Linda Mezmale 1,4,5, Linda Anarkulova 1,6,7, Gidi Shani 8, Hossam Haick 8, Veronika Patsko 9, Emmanuel Dias-Neto 10, Raúl Murillo 11, Mārcis Leja 1,4,5,12 

1. University of Latvia, Institute of Clinical and Preventive Medicine, Riga, Latvia,

2. Institute for Breath Research, University of Innsbruck,
Dornbirn, Austria,

3. Institute of Chemistry, Jan Kochanowski University, Kielce, Poland,

4. University of Latvia, Faculty of Medicine, Riga, Latvia,

5. Riga East University Hospital, Riga, Latvia,

6. Liepaja Regional Hospital, Liepaja, Latvia,

7. Riga Stradins University, Faculty of Residency, Riga, Latvia,

8. Department of Chemical Engineering and Russell Berrie Nanotechnology Institute, Technion−Israel Institute of Technology,
Haifa, Israel,

9. National Cancer Institute of Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine,

10. A. C. Camargo Cancer Center, São Paulo, Brazil,

11. University Hospital San Ignacio, Bogotá, Colombia, 12Digestive Diseases Centre “GASTRO”, Riga, Latvia.

Poster PDF

View presentation

Abstract: 

Volatilomics is an effective and economic approach for non-invasive disease diagnosis. This study centers upon the volatilomic signatures of gastric juice obtained from gastric cancer patients and non-gastric cancer controls. Its main goal was to characterize the chemical patterns formed by VOCs released by this fluid and evaluate if cancer-related alterations could be employed for gastric cancer detection. HS-SPME-GC-MS was used to identify gastric juice VOCs from 35 cancer patients and 58 controls. A total of 1181 distinct compounds were identified in the headspace of gastric juice samples. However, only 13% of species found in samples from cancer patients exhibited incidence above 20%; whereas, in controls, this percentage amounted to 10%. The volatiles: 2-propanol, propofol, hexafluoroisopropanol, and their metabolites are related to hospital environment or the treatment site ambient air. The relative distribution of VOCs in cancer and control groups under study was similar with aldehydes as dominant class (17vs18 compounds), followed by hydrocarbons (13vs14), alcohols (13 in both), ketones (15vs11), aromatics (7 in both), terpenes (3vs5), heterocyclics (4 in both), and phenols (2vs3). Only exception was esters–represented by 9 species in samples from patients, whereas only by 3 in controls. Interestingly, only 6 VOCs (hexanal, benzaldehyde, ethyl acetate, acetone, ethanol, pyridine) occurred in at least 80% of samples obtained from controls. While comparing the peak abundance of VOCs with occurrence above 30%, 9 compounds out of 11 appeared at significantly higher levels in patient group than in controls: 2 ketones (2-pentanone, 2-heptanone), 4 aldehydes (2-methylpropanal, 3-methyl-butanal, benzeneacetaldehyde, 4-ethyl-benzaldehyde), 2 alcohols (1-propanol, 2-ethyl-1-hexanol), and phenol. 2-butanone and p-Xylene showed lower abundance in patients. Gastric juice seems to be promising fluid providing information on potential biomarkers of gastric cancer.