| Literature DB >> 30205821 |
Xuan Wu1, Tingyu Xiao1, Zhang Luo1, Rongxiang He1, Yiping Cao2, Zhenzhong Guo3, Weiying Zhang4, Yong Chen1,5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Due to the high transfer ability of cancer cell, cancer has been regarded as a world-wide high mortality disease. Quantitative analysis of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) can provide some valuable clinical information that is particularly critical for cancer diagnosis and treatment. Along with the rapid development of micro-/nano-fabrication technique, the three-dimensional (3D) bionic interface-based analysis method has become a hot research topic in the area of nanotechnology and life science. Micro-/nano-structure-based devices have been identified as being one of the easiest and most effective techniques for CTCs capture applications.Entities:
Keywords: Circulating tumor cells; Micropillar; Nanofiber; Quantum dots; Three-dimensional cytosensor
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30205821 PMCID: PMC6131777 DOI: 10.1186/s12951-018-0390-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Nanobiotechnology ISSN: 1477-3155 Impact factor: 10.435
Scheme 1Schematic representation of the integrated fabrication of 3D cytosensor and electrochemical detection of CTCs. a–f Fabrication procedure of the Ni micropillars on the ITO glass. g Fabrication of electrospun PLGA nanofibers on Ni micropillars. h CTCs were captured and i QDs-anti-EpCAM antibody conjugates were recognized. j The amplification of captured CTC and k SEM image of CTC in microenvironment. m, n Principles of electrochemical assay
Fig. 1The 3D Ni/PLGA micro-/nano-chip local topographic interactions among the micropillars, nanofibers and CTCs. The SEM images of a, b Ni micropillars, c PLGA nanofibers and d MCF7 cells were captured on 3D Ni/PLGA micro-/nano-chip. FDA fluorescence micrographs of target cells were captured on e Ni micropillars substrate, f PLGA nanofibers substrate and g 3D Ni/PLGA patterned substrate
Fig. 2The three-color immunocytochemistry technique with Alexa Fluor® 488-labeled anti-CK, PE-labeled anti-CD45 and Hoechst nuclear staining was used to distinguish a CTCs from b non-specifically trapped WBCs on the 3D micro-/nano-chip. c Isolation of CTCs from mixed cell suspension on 3D bionic interface
Fig. 3Optimization of parameters of the 3D cytosensor. a Qdot-anti-EpCAM conjugates concentration on the signal-to-noise (S/N) ratio of cytosensor. b The relationship among the electrospinning time, the PLGA nanofiber density and MCF7 capture density. c Immunoreaction time on the signal responses of cytosensor. They were performed by applying a 105 cell mL−1 to the substrate
Fig. 4Differential pulse voltammetry responses of the supersandwich cytosensor incubated with (a) Jurkat cells at 105 cells mL−1 and (b–f) different concentrations of MCF7 cells: 101, 102, 103, 104, 105 cells mL−1. Insert: Calibration curve of MCF7
Comparison of the sensitivity of different CTCs detection methods
| Methods | Linear range (cells mL−1) | Detection limit (cells mL−1) | Refs |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3D cytosensor | 101–105 | 8 | Present work |
| SERS nanoprobes | 1–102 | 1 | [ |
| SERS nanoparticles | 5–500 | 5 | [ |
| GASI chip | 1–51 | 1 | [ |
| Microchip cytosensor | 101–107 | 10 | [ |
| LSAW aptasensor | 102–107 | 32 | [ |
| PEC biosensor | 102–106 | 58 | [ |
| Colorimetric aptasensor | 102–104 | 40 | [ |
| Aptamer/QDs cytosensor | 102–106 | 50 | [ |
Comparison of cytosensor values with known amounts of MCF7 spiked in human plasma
| Sample no. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Know (cell mL−1) | 20 | 50 | 100 | 200 | 500 |
| Cytosensor (cell mL−1) | 21 ± 1 | 51 ± 2 | 101 ± 5 | 187 ± 10 | 482 ± 19 |
| Recovery (%) | 105.0% | 102.0% | 101.0% | 93.5% | 96.4% |
Fig. 5Detection of CTC amounts in the 1 mL blood samples collected from cancer patients. Green columns: gastric cancer patients. Red columns: lung cancer patients. The amounts were calculated from the calibration curve