Back

Feasibility Study on Training Dogs to Detect Lung Cancer: Findings of a Retrospective Evaluation

Grah, C.; Oei, S. L.; Ngandeu Schepanski, S.; Wuestefeld, H. F.; Blazejczyk, K.; Kalinka-Grafe, J.; Seifert, G.

2026-02-06 oncology
10.64898/2026.02.04.26345351 medRxiv
Show abstract

Early detection is critical for lung cancer patients. One lung cancer detection method under study is using sniffer dogs. This study aimed to evaluate, retrospectively, the sensitivity and specificity of the Cancer Detection Dog Collective (CDDC(R)) method under training conditions. A team of five trained sniffer dogs analyzed breath samples from lung cancer patients and cancer-free volunteers, and a cancer sample is positive if at least three dogs indicate it. Dog handlers and experimental observers were blinded to sample identity, and detection accuracy was assessed. Primary endpoint was sensitivity, and selectivity and confounding factors were also assessed. Samples were collected in 2024 from 824 volunteers, including 111 with a confirmed diagnosis of lung cancer (mean age 60, range 34-80, 18% early-stage cancer, 46% not yet oncological treated). A total of 11,900 breath samples were tested with 125 test runs per dog. Individually, the five dogs demonstrated detection performance with sensitivities between 82% and 89%, and specificities of over 95%. The CDDC(R) dog teams corporate decision revealed a sensitivity over 95% and the rate of false positives was 0%. Analysis of potential confounding factors revealed that weather conditions and supervisor skills were associated with the dogs performance. The CDDC(R) method showed high consistency in training scenarios. Further studies should evaluate this method in a controlled clinical study alongside lung cancer screening.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 7%
20.0%
2
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 1%
15.7%
3
Diagnostics
48 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
11.2%
4
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 16%
5.2%
50% of probability mass above
5
Frontiers in Oncology
95 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.8%
6
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 3%
3.3%
7
Microbiology Spectrum
435 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.5%
8
International Journal of Molecular Sciences
453 papers in training set
Top 5%
2.2%
9
Interface Focus
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.9%
10
Journal of Clinical Medicine
91 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.8%
11
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 10%
1.3%
12
Annals of Epidemiology
19 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.3%
13
Methods in Ecology and Evolution
160 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.0%
14
Frontiers in Bioinformatics
45 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.8%
15
Clinical Chemistry
22 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.8%
16
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 60%
0.8%
17
Sensors
39 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
18
Heliyon
146 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.8%
19
Metabolites
50 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
20
Physiological Reports
35 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
21
Annals of Biomedical Engineering
34 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.5%
22
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 28%
0.5%
23
Briefings in Bioinformatics
326 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.5%