The "olfactory fingerprint": can diagnostics be improved by combining canine and digital noses?

A sniffer (detecting) dog is conventionally defined as an animal trained to use its olfactory perceptions for detecting a vast array of substances, mostly volatile organic compounds (VOCs), including those exceptionally or exclusively generated in humans bearing specific pathologies. Such an extraordinary sniffing performance translates into the capability of detecting compounds close to the femtomolar level, with performance comparable to that of current mass spectrometry-based laboratory applications. Not only can dogs accurately detect "abnormal volatilomes" reflecting something wrong happening to their owners, but they can also perceive visual, vocal and behavioral signals, which altogether would contribute to raise their alertness. Although it seems reasonable to conclude that sniffer dogs could never be considered absolutely "diagnostic" for a given disorder, several lines of evidence attest that they may serve as efficient screening aids for many pathological conditions affecting their human companions. Favorable results have been obtained in trials on cancers, diabetes, seizures, narcolepsy and migraine, whilst interesting evidence is also emerging on the capability of early and accurately identifying patients with infectious diseases. This would lead the way to proposing an "olfactory fingerprint" loop, where evidence that dogs can identify the presence of human pathologies provides implicit proof of the existence of disease-specific volatilomes, which can be studied for developing laboratory techniques. Contextually, the evidence that specific pathologies are associated with abnormal VOC generation may serve as reliable basis for training dogs to detect these compounds, even (or especially) in patients at an asymptomatic phase.

Pre-analytical issues in liquid biopsy – where do we stand?

It is well documented that in the chain from sample to the result in a clinical laboratory, the pre-analytical phase is the weakest and most vulnerable link. This also holds for the use and analysis of extracellular nucleic acids. In this short review, we will summarize and critically evaluate the most important steps of the pre-analytical phase, i.e. the choice of the best control population for the patients to be analyzed, the actual blood draw, the choice of tubes for blood drawing, the impact of delayed processing of blood samples, the best method for getting rid of cells and debris, the choice of matrix, i.e. plasma vs. serum vs. other body fluids, and the impact of long-term storage of cell-free liquids on the outcome. Even if the analysis of cell-free nucleic acids has already become a routine application in the area of non-invasive prenatal screening (NIPS) and in the care of cancer patients (search for resistance mutations in the EGFR gene), there are still many unresolved issues of the pre-analytical phase which need to be urgently tackled.

PREDICT: a checklist for preventing preanalytical diagnostic errors in clinical trials

Although the importance of guaranteeing a high level of preanalytical quality in routine diagnostic testing has already been largely acknowledged over the past decades, minor emphasis is currently being placed on the fact that accurate performance and standardization of many preanalytical activities are also necessary prerogatives of clinical trials. Reliable evidence exists that clear indications on how to manage the different preanalytical steps are currently lacking in many clinical trials protocols, nor have detailed authoritative documents been published or endorsed on this matter to the best of our knowledge. To fill this gap, the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) Working Group for Preanalytical Phase (WG-PRE) will provide here a specific checklist for preventing preanalytical diagnostic errors in clinical trials (PREDICT), especially focused on covering the most important preanalytical aspects of blood sample management in clinical studies, and thus encompassing test selection, patient preparation, sample collection, management and storage, sample transportation, as well as specimen retrieval before testing. The WG-PRE members sincerely hope that these recommendations will provide a useful contribution for increasing the success rate in clinical trials.