| Literature DB >> 20652102 |
Hao Yang1, Qing Guo, Rong He, Ding Li, Xueqing Zhang, Chenchen Bao, Hengyao Hu, Daxiang Cui.
Abstract
Quantum dot is a special kind of nanomaterial composed of periodic groups of II-VI, III-V or IV-VI materials. Their high quantum yield, broad absorption with narrow photoluminescence spectra and high resistance to photobleaching, make them become a promising labeling substance in biological analysis. Here, we report a quick and parallel analytical method based on quantum dots for ToRCH-related antibodies including Toxoplasma gondii, Rubella virus, Cytomegalovirus and Herpes simplex virus type 1 (HSV1) and 2 (HSV2). Firstly, we fabricated the microarrays with the five kinds of ToRCH-related antigens and used CdTe quantum dots to label secondary antibody and then analyzed 100 specimens of randomly selected clinical sera from obstetric outpatients. The currently prevalent enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) kits were considered as "golden standard" for comparison. The results show that the quantum dots labeling-based ToRCH microarrays have comparable sensitivity and specificity with ELISA. Besides, the microarrays hold distinct advantages over ELISA test format in detection time, cost, operation and signal stability. Validated by the clinical assay, our quantum dots-based ToRCH microarrays have great potential in the detection of ToRCH-related pathogens.Entities:
Keywords: Antibody; Diagnosis; Microarray; Quantum dots; Serology
Year: 2009 PMID: 20652102 PMCID: PMC2894333 DOI: 10.1007/s11671-009-9422-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nanoscale Res Lett ISSN: 1556-276X Impact factor: 4.703
Figure 1The rationale of QDs-based microarray
Figure 2Schematic representation of microarray
Figure 3TEM image of prepared QDs
Figure 4Fluorescence spectra of QDs solution before and after labeling with goat-anti-human IgG (inset: images of QDs before and after the coupling with second antibodies under UV irradiation)
Figure 5The microarray results with corresponding control sera (anegative serum;bpositive control serum of Toxoplasmosis;cpositive control serum of Cytomegalovirus;dpositive control serum of Rubella virus;epositive control serum of Herpes simplex virus type 1;fpositive control serum of Herpes simplex virus type 2)
Comparison of results between QDs-based microarray and ELISA
| ELISA | ELISA | ELISA | ELISA | ELISA | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TOX | TOX | Sum | RV | RV | Sum | CMV | CMV | Sum | HSV I | HSV I | Sum | HSV II | HSVII | Sum | |
| + | 81 | 2 | 83 | 90 | 1 | 91 | 80 | 2 | 82 | 71 | 2 | 73 | 14 | 4 | 18 |
| – | 1 | 16 | 17 | 1 | 8 | 9 | 2 | 16 | 18 | 2 | 25 | 27 | 2 | 80 | 82 |
| Sum | 82 | 18 | 100 | 91 | 9 | 100 | 82 | 18 | 100 | 73 | 27 | 100 | 16 | 84 | 100 |
| χ2 | | | 0 | | | 0.5 | | | 0.25 | | | 0.25 | | | 0.17 |
| <0.05 | <0.05 | <0.05 | <0.05 | <0.05 | |||||||||||
p < 0.05, there was no significant difference between the two methods