Kristin M Byers1, Anna R Bird1,2, HyunDae D Cho3, Jacqueline C Linnes1. 1. Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana 47907, United States. 2. University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB3 0AS, U.K. 3. CrossLife Technologies Inc., Carlsbad, California 92008, United States.
Abstract
Two-dimensional paper networks (2DPNs) have enabled the use of paper-based platforms to perform multistep immunoassays for detection of pathogenic diseases at the point-of-care. To date, however, detection has required the user to provide multiple signal enhancement solutions and been limited to protein targets. We solve these challenges by using mathematical equations to guide the device design of a novel 2DPN, which leverages multiple fluidic inputs to apply fully dried solutions of hydrogen peroxide, diaminobenzidine, and horseradish peroxidase signal enhancement reagents to enhance the limit-of-detection of numerous nucleic acid products. Upon rehydration in our unique 2DPN design, the dried signal enhancement solution reduces the limit-of-detection (LOD) of the device to 5 × 1011 nucleic acid copies/mL without increasing false positive detection. Our easy-to-use device retains activity after 28 days of dry storage and produces reliable signal enhancement 40 min after sample application. The fully integrated device demonstrated versatility in its ability to detect double-stranded and single-stranded DNA samples, as well as peptide nucleic acids.
Two-dimensional paper networks (2DPNs) have enabled the use of paper-based platforms to perform multistep immunoassays for detection of pathogenic diseases at the point-of-care. To date, however, detection has required the user to provide multiple signal enhancement solutions and been limited to protein targets. We solve these challenges by using mathematical equations to guide the device design of a novel 2DPN, which leverages multiple fluidic inputs to apply fully dried solutions of hydrogen peroxide, diaminobenzidine, and horseradish peroxidase signal enhancement reagents to enhance the limit-of-detection of numerous nucleic acid products. Upon rehydration in our unique 2DPN design, the dried signal enhancement solution reduces the limit-of-detection (LOD) of the device to 5 × 1011 nucleic acid copies/mL without increasing false positive detection. Our easy-to-use device retains activity after 28 days of dry storage and produces reliable signal enhancement 40 min after sample application. The fully integrated device demonstrated versatility in its ability to detect double-stranded and single-stranded DNA samples, as well as peptide nucleic acids.
While plate-based enzyme-linked
immunosorbent assays (ELISAs) or
polymerase chain reaction (PCR) is still the gold standard to detect
viral pathogens,[1−3] paper-based point-of-care (POC) diagnostics have
revolutionized global health care by improving access and efficiency
of these otherwise complex laboratory assays. Lateral flow immunoassays
(LFIAs), which are single-channel microfluidic paper devices that
detect a pathogen antigen or host antibody response, have miniaturized,
automated, and simplified much of the diagnostic process necessary
for bacterial and viral pathogen detection.[4] The low-cost, long-term stability, and ease-of-use of LFIAs make
them advantageous in low-resource settings.[5,6] However,
LFIAs have limited sensitivity and POC accessibility due to the inability
to easily perform signal enhancement via multistep assays. This is
because the one-dimensional flow from a single sample pad in LFIAs
dictates that the user manually pipettes each fluid sequentially at
precisely timed intervals. The need to perform more complex reactions
has given rise to two-dimensional paper networks (2DPNs), which typically
consist of more than one fluidic input and multiple carefully designed
channels to control fluid flow in the paper-based device.[5,6] 2DPNs have shown potential for conducting multistep assays in the
paper, such as amplifying nucleic acids,[7] detecting more than one target of interest,[8] or enhancing the visual signal at the detection zone compared to
LFIA alone.[9]Previous works have
set a promising precedent by using 2DPNs as
a platform to perform ELISAs for protein detection. By tagging nucleic
acid (NA) amplicons with proteins, ELISAs have been translated for
detection of NA samples for improved signal clarity as well.[5,7,10] Recent developments in chemical
ligation assays resulting in enzyme-free NA amplification and CRISPR-based
diagnostics have created exciting new molecular platforms for rapid
pathogenic detection at low-temperatures and have the potential for
improved sensitivities at the POC. However, many of these processes,
including template-assisted rapid assay (TARA), produce low product
yields (102 amplicons of the initial target concentration)
when compared to loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) or
PCR (109 amplicons).[11,12] To improve this, we
have integrated an ELISA into a 2DPN to provide secondary signal enhancement
in the detection zone. This enables us to maintain a high sensitivity
for these low-yield samples.The design of a fully integrated
2DPN ELISA requires optimization
of the reagent delivery to improve performance and produce reliable
signal enhancement.[13] Existing 2DPN devices
are categorized by the location of fluidic inputs: the “leg”
design, where reagent pads are placed at the far end of the leg, which
then extends and intersects with the main lateral flow body (typically
at a 90° angle),[14] or the “linear”
design, where the reagent pads are placed directly on the main lateral
flow body.[5] Previous 2DPN ELISAs required
as many as five to six fluid inputs with one or more wet reagents
that had to be prepared fresh.[5,10] By analyzing these
linear and leg designs and performing mathematical modeling of capillary
flow through various nitrocellulose channel widths, we designed a
device that utilizes a combination of the leg and linear design, as
well as a unique delay valve, to sequentially deliver reagents to
the detection zone for a fully automated 2DPN ELISA. This enabled
us to incorporate the enzymatic signal amplification more effectively
in our sequential flow, reduce the number and volume of washes, and
allow the user to add only a single rehydrating buffer rather than
storing and mixing refrigerated reagents in the field.Here,
we present the development and integration of several innovations
that improve reagent flow and 2DPN usability, as well as expand 2DPN
applicability to detect nucleic acid amplification products. Our device
(Figure ) builds upon
the previous literature to incorporate fully dried ELISA reagents:
horseradish peroxidase (HRP)-conjugated antibody label, its colorimetric
substrate diaminobenzidine (DAB), and redox activator hydrogen peroxide
(H2O2), which are all hydrated by the application
of a single solution: phosphate-buffered saline with 0.05% Tween 20
(PBST). We utilize the high affinity of streptavidin–biotin
binding, protein conjugation to gold nanoparticles (AuNPs), and ELISA-based
signal enhancement to optimize the signal output. By using AuNPs that
are conjugated with both streptavidin and HRP and incorporating all
reagents as dried source pads, we reduced the number of fluidic inputs
to four (one sample and three sites of buffer addition), in comparison
to six used in current paper-based ELISAs.[15] Our device demonstrates a limit-of-detection (LOD) of 5 × 1011 NA copies/mL, which is comparable to other RNA-based assays
quantified in one-dimensional LFIAs with an enhancement solution.[16] Our platform can detect single-stranded DNA
(ssDNA), double-stranded DNA (dsDNA), and peptide nucleic acid (PNA)
samples at or above this concentration. This platform is currently
intended for use with amplified NA samples tagged with carboxyfluorescein
(FAM) and biotin and can be used to detect any amplification product
with these tags.
Figure 1
(A) Schematic of fully assembled 2DPN and location of
dried reagent
pads. (B) Target binding: fresh nucleic acid samples with fluorescein
isothiocyanate (FITC) and biotin tags applied to the dried SA–HRP–AuNP
pad. Nucleic acid binding to SA–HRP–AuNPs occurs, followed
by capture at the test line in the main lateral flow channel. Unbound
AuNPs bind to the biotin-tagged control line. Signal enhancement:
DAB and hydrogen peroxide solution flows from the signal enhancement
leg to the main lateral flow channel and is oxidized by AuNP-bound
poly-HRP at test and control lines, producing a visually darkened
(enhanced) signal.
(A) Schematic of fully assembled 2DPN and location of
dried reagent
pads. (B) Target binding: fresh nucleic acid samples with fluorescein
isothiocyanate (FITC) and biotin tags applied to the dried SA–HRP–AuNP
pad. Nucleic acid binding to SA–HRP–AuNPs occurs, followed
by capture at the test line in the main lateral flow channel. Unbound
AuNPs bind to the biotin-tagged control line. Signal enhancement:
DAB and hydrogen peroxide solution flows from the signal enhancement
leg to the main lateral flow channel and is oxidized by AuNP-bound
poly-HRP at test and control lines, producing a visually darkened
(enhanced) signal.
Results and Discussion
Flow Parameter
Change with Nitrocellulose Geometry
In hollow glass capillary
channels, as studied in Berthier’s
capillary flow resistors,[17] the surface
tension is primarily indicative of the physical properties of the
fluid, and the cohesion describes fluid interaction with the surrounding
glass. Nitrocellulose, however, is a porous membrane. As such, the
environment surrounding the fluid varies greatly and can change depending
on the geometry of the channel.Our one-dimensional flow testing
results (Table S3) demonstrate that in
nitrocellulose legs with very small widths, as the width of the channel
decreases, the apparent surface tension of a solution containing DAB
or AuNPs in nitrocellulose decreases. This is indicated by a channel
width-dependent change in the k parameter (defined
in Computational Methods) for a given fluid.
For example, AuNP flow testing showed a decreasing trend of k = 230.3, k = 126.1, and k = 75.2 for 5, 2, and 1 mm, respectively. A similar trend was seen
in DAB flow testing results, which had k values of
326.4, 137.2, and 52.76 for the 5, 2, and 1 mm channels, respectively.As the width of the nitrocellulose channel decreases, a reduction
in the surface tension is observed. This indicates a reduction in
capillary pressure, and therefore a decrease in fluid velocity in
the channel. While these results contradict findings from Berthier,
they do agree with Dharmaraja et al.’s work, which discusses
the decreasing channel width as a method to increase “resistance”
of flow on wetted nitrocellulose when the sequential flow is occurring.[18] This more closely matches our reagent delivery
in the constructed 2DPN. The R2 values
for thinner channels (<5 mm) (Table S3) indicate flow that is less consistent than in wider channels. This
inconsistency was particularly prevalent in the first 15 mm of the
channels.
Optimizing 2DPN Flow
We made design choices based on
the results of our component characterizations and one-dimensional
flow tests (described in Experimental Methods). The width of the main lateral flow channel for the AuNP-bound
sample solution was chosen to be 5 mm because it produced the fastest
and most consistent flow (Figure A). The width of the signal enhancement leg for the
DAB solution was set at 2 mm (Figure B) because the fluidic resistance of the smaller channel
was designed to reduce the backflow of the fluid from the main channel
into the signal enhancement leg. In initial experiments, when the
fluid from the main channel flowed back into the enhancement leg,
reaction of SA–HRP–AuNP-bound sample with the DAB began
before sample binding in the detection region. This resulted in reduced
sample binding at the detection zone and increase smearing or background
noise. We found the 2 mm channel alone was not enough to prevent backflow.
Therefore, we added a 5 μL “delay valve”[19] (2 × 5 mm2) near the intersection
of the 2 mm channel and the 5 mm channel. The capillary pressure exerted
by the saturation of the signal enhancement leg prevented the backflow
of the sample from the main channel.
Figure 2
2DPN flow optimization. (A, B) Experimental
data (circles) fit
with eq (line). k refers to the parameter from eq and R2 is the
coefficient of determination for the fit of eq to the data shown. (A) AuNP solution velocity
over distance in a 5 mm wide channel. (B) DAB solution velocity over
distance in a 2 mm wide channel. (C) Proof-of-concept 2DPN flow with
food coloring in PBST demonstrating the sequential delivery of reagents
to the detection region (boxed).
2DPN flow optimization. (A, B) Experimental
data (circles) fit
with eq (line). k refers to the parameter from eq and R2 is the
coefficient of determination for the fit of eq to the data shown. (A) AuNP solution velocity
over distance in a 5 mm wide channel. (B) DAB solution velocity over
distance in a 2 mm wide channel. (C) Proof-of-concept 2DPN flow with
food coloring in PBST demonstrating the sequential delivery of reagents
to the detection region (boxed).A unique aspect of our design compared to the previous literature
is the location of the leg–channel intersection downstream
of the sample pad. Importantly, this allows us to deliver the DAB
and H2O2 upstream from the detection zone but
downstream from the sample pad to prevent premature signal development
and high background signal at the detection zone. Additionally, the
intersection is set at a 20° angle from the main channel to ensure
flow in only one direction. Previously, inferior performance for leg
devices was reported due to parallel reagent delivery, which results
in a signal appearing only in the middle of the test zone.[5] To ensure this would not be a problem, we assessed
the “clean delivery” of each reagent. Clean delivery
was defined as each model fluid (food coloring) being delivered across
a minimum of 90% of the 5 mm channel width at the detection zone (Figure C). We established
that the DAB leg intersection must be a minimum of 10 mm upstream
of the detection zone for this clean delivery to occur (Figure S4).The length of the leg was chosen
based on distance and time results
from flow testing to ensure that the DAB and H2O2 arrived at the detection zone after the sample and wash fluids.
The volume of the DAB and H2O2 pads was then
adjusted to compensate for the volume capacity of the nitrocellulose
leg. Similarly, sample and wash volumes were adjusted based on the
volume capacity of the nitrocellulose platform (Table S3).Several innovations set this work apart from
previous 2DPNs. We
performed rigorous assessment of nine different parameters of the
device design to ensure optimal signal development (Table S4). We did not use a final wash upstream of the DAB
because DAB does not require a “stop solution” to arrest
color development, unlike most other colorimetric enhancement reactions
including gold and silver enhancement and tetramethylbenzidine (TMB).[20] Additionally, reducing the number of fluidic
inputs also decreases the number of user steps.
2DPN Flow Timing
Following one-dimensional flow testing
studies and 2DPN optimization, a food coloring timing study was performed
in the final, fully optimized nitrocellulose design (Figure C). Based on the results of
these flow studies, the SA–HRP–AuNP-bound sample reached
the detection zone at approximately 5 min, followed by clean delivery
of the wash solution at the detection zone at 10 min. Therefore, the
pre-enhancement signal, occurring prior to DAB and H2O2 delivery, was defined as the signal intensity at 10 min.
The DAB and H2O2 signal enhancement solution
arrived at the detection zone at 25 min and produced a reliable signal
increase at 40 min. To allow time for the signal enhancement reaction
to complete, we measured the post-enhancement signal at 60 min although
amplification remained stable between 40 and 90 min (Figure A). In the future, scaling
down the device size and liquid volumes could reduce some of the total
flow time. However, it is critical to ensure that the unbound SA–HR–AuNPs
are fully rinsed to prevent background noise from nonspecific signal
development.
Figure 3
Signal development over time. (A) Signal intensity of
the test
line over time for 5 × 1012 and 5 × 1011 copies of ssDNA/mL. Dashed lines indicate time points when the AuNP
signal and the DAB-enhanced signal data are compared. (B) Detection
region of 2DPN imaged at 10 min (AuNP signal) and at 60 min (DAB-enhanced
signal). (C) Normalized test line intensities at 10 min (AuNP signal)
and at 60 min (DAB-enhanced signal) for varying ssDNA concentrations.
The visible threshold at 0.02 is indicated by a dashed line. (Dunnett’s
multiple comparison vs 0 copies/mL, *p < 0.05,
***p < 0.001, ****p < 0.0001, n = 3, replicates shown in Figure S5).
Signal development over time. (A) Signal intensity of
the test
line over time for 5 × 1012 and 5 × 1011 copies of ssDNA/mL. Dashed lines indicate time points when the AuNP
signal and the DAB-enhanced signal data are compared. (B) Detection
region of 2DPN imaged at 10 min (AuNP signal) and at 60 min (DAB-enhanced
signal). (C) Normalized test line intensities at 10 min (AuNP signal)
and at 60 min (DAB-enhanced signal) for varying ssDNA concentrations.
The visible threshold at 0.02 is indicated by a dashed line. (Dunnett’s
multiple comparison vs 0 copies/mL, *p < 0.05,
***p < 0.001, ****p < 0.0001, n = 3, replicates shown in Figure S5).
Signal Enhancement Stability
Over Time
In Figure A, our signal is
above the visible threshold and maintains steady contrast for consistent
ease of reading at any time past the 40 min mark, up to our final
measurement at 90 min. 2DPNs also maintained this steady-state contrast
several hours after testing (not shown). Lathwal and Sikes have investigated
a number of enzymatic colorimetric enhancement agents for the improvement
of signal visualization on paper-based diagnostics.[20] They found that many common visualization agents did not
retain distinguishable positive or negative signals after 40 min and
that specifically timed reagent additions, wash steps, stop solutions,
and reading times would be necessary. A previous study showed that
the visible threshold for an untrained user without instruction was
quantified at 0.02 grayscale intensity when normalized to the background
using a custom MATLAB program.[21,22] Based on this, we used
the 0.02 grayscale intensity as the visible threshold for a positive
result in our experiments.
ELISA-Enhanced 2DPN Decreases LOD
In our experiments,
in which all components had been dried within the last 7 days, DAB
signal enhancement improves the LOD from 1 × 1012 to
5 × 1011 copies/mL (Figure C, replicates shown in Figure S5). For 5 × 1011 copies/mL, the average
AuNP signal is 0.01, which is well below the 0.02 visible threshold,
while the average DAB-enhanced signal is 0.03. This LOD is comparable
to that of RNA-based assays in one-dimensional LFIAs with an enhancement
solution, which was found to be ∼1 × 1011 copies/mL.[16]Figure B demonstrates the ability of our 2DPN enhancement solution
to increase the intensity of the test line above the visible threshold
when the AuNP signal alone was not visible. Additionally, this visual
enhancement does not increase the visibility of a negative sample
test line and does not create false positives with negative (PBST
only) samples.Others have presented improvements in signal
intensity and visibility with viral detection platforms, but few have
measured the true change in LOD in terms of copies/mL. For example,
the Richards-Kortum group reports a visual signal increase of 15%
with silver enhancement and 25% with gold enhancement.[16] We achieved an average 122% increase in signal
intensity for the dried 2DPN with our LOD sample of 25 μL containing
5 × 1011 copies/mL ssDNA (Table S5). We detected an average signal enhancement of 116% for
all samples above the LOD. Our device with signal enhancement can
detect sample concentrations 5 times smaller than our device with
AuNPs alone. Therefore, the signal enhancement translates to a five-fold
reduction in the LOD.
Signal Intensity Varies with Sample Concentration
The
signal output of the 2DPN showed test line intensity changes as a
function of sample concentration. The fit of the ELISA (R2 = 0.9771) with our data indicates that our paper-based
dried reagent ELISA assay can generate results like that of a traditional
ELISA (Figure S7). This demonstrates the
potential of this paper diagnostic to quantitatively determine sample
loads, which is crucial for chronic disease monitoring applications.
Reagents Retain Activity After 28 Days of Dry Storage
Incorporating
all necessary reagents predried on the 2DPN improves
ease-of-use by eliminating reagent preparation steps. It also simplifies
storing, packing, and shipping of the devices, which is critical for
the translation of 2DPNs into clinical use. Other researchers have
dried different individual components of the DAB/HRP/H2O2 reaction for LFIAs and 2DPNs, but prior to this work,
no one had successfully demonstrated and measured LOD improvements
of all components in a dry state.[5,10]We tested
the ability to dry and store all reagents to determine the practicality
of this device for real-world use. After drying, assembling, and storing
all components of the 2DPN device for 1, 7, and 28 days, we still
observed similarly detectable signals. There were no statistically
significant decreases in the signal intensity after 7 or 28 days of
dry storage for a sample concentration of 5 × 1012 dsDNA copies/mL (hybridized probes 1 and 2, Table S1). Although the high concentration sample of 1 ×
1014 copies/mL on the 2DPN did show a significant decrease
in signal intensity after 28 days, the intensity remained well above
the visible threshold (Figure ). These results show that our dried SA–HRP–AuNPs,
DAB, and H2O2 retained activity for at least
28 days of dry storage on a fully assembled device. Because signal
intensity at lower sample concentrations did not significantly degrade,
we conclude that the sensitivity of our device is the same before
and after 28 days of storage. In the future, lower sample concentrations
and devices older than 28 days can be tested to establish the LOD
of dried 2DPNs after long-term storage.
Figure 4
Quantification of test
line intensity. Background-subtracted grayscale
test line intensity for hybridized DNA samples run on fully dried
and assembled 2DPNs imaged after 60 min. The visible threshold at
0.02 is indicated by a dashed line. (n = 6, **p < 0.01 in Dunnett’s multiple comparison with
1 day dried storage 2DPN as the control).
Quantification of test
line intensity. Background-subtracted grayscale
test line intensity for hybridized DNA samples run on fully dried
and assembled 2DPNs imaged after 60 min. The visible threshold at
0.02 is indicated by a dashed line. (n = 6, **p < 0.01 in Dunnett’s multiple comparison with
1 day dried storage 2DPN as the control).
2DPNs Detect Amplified MERS-CoV TARA Products
To extend
the application of our device beyond the detection of a model probe,
we tested diluted TARA product on our dried 2DPN (Figure A, replicates shown in Figure S6). The TARA reaction can produce detectable
PNA strands at a concentration ∼100× higher than the initial
target RNA concentration at room temperature in as little as 15 min.[11] The average background-subtracted grayscale
signal produced by the TARA-amplified sample (10× diluted) after
60 min on the dried 2DPN was 0.08 (Figure B). Based on the ELISA calibration curve,
this translates to a sample concentration of 2.7 × 1012 copies/mL (eq , Figure S7). Given that 2 × 1011 copies/mL of target RNA was input into the TARA reaction and the
TARA reaction was diluted 1:10, the estimated concentration of the
TARA-amplified sample was 2.7 × 1013 copies/mL. This
confirms that TARA amplifies concentrations ∼100-fold.
Figure 5
Results of
TARA sample (1:10 dilution in PBST) on a dried 2DPN.
(A) Scans taken of a representative test at 10 and 60 min. (B) Test
line signal intensity analysis of the TARA sample on 2DPNs before
and after signal enhancement (paired t-test, *p < 0.05, n = 3, replicates shown in Figure S6).
Results of
TARA sample (1:10 dilution in PBST) on a dried 2DPN.
(A) Scans taken of a representative test at 10 and 60 min. (B) Test
line signal intensity analysis of the TARA sample on 2DPNs before
and after signal enhancement (paired t-test, *p < 0.05, n = 3, replicates shown in Figure S6).Based on these results, combining TARA and 2DPN technologies could
result in a LOD as low as 5 × 109 copies/mL. Clinical
samples from lower respiratory samples (aspirate) of MERS-CoV-infectedpatients had a mean virus concentration/mL of 5.0 × 106 (maximum 6.3 × 1010).[23] With a combination of TARA and our 2DPN, we could detect samples
in the upper range of clinically relevant concentrations without the
need for heating or multiple pipetting steps. Test results can be
produced within as little as 1 h (based on a 15 min amplification,
5 min sample and reagent application, and 40 min of signal enhancement
on the 2DPN). Further optimization or increased amplification time
of the TARA reaction and additional characterization of the AuNP–SA–HRP
signal enhancement is feasible to further improve overall LOD. Specifically,
the amount of signal enhancement on the 2DPN can be further improved
by characterizing the HRP reagent, as the protein used in this assay
was a preconjugated, proprietary SA–HRP product with an unspecified
amount of HRP molecules attached.We calculated the cost of
materials for this platform, as seen
in Table S6. We estimate that the total
cost of goods for our 2DPN is approximately 1.82 USD. Commercially
available one-dimensional LFIAs with an anti-FITC test line and a
biotin control are available from 3.75 USD.[24] Reported cost estimate calculations for other lab-based LFIAs for
viral detection platforms to range from 0.80[16] to 12.70[25] USD. While the general cost
of materials for any platform should be considered for theoretical
commercial translation, over-reliance on cost reduction as a feature
of POC designs without consideration of other cost factors is an issue
we do not want to promote.[26] While this
platform is considered of low cost from a material perspective, we
recognize that significant manufacturing costs may be a barrier to
commercialization. Although the assembly of 2DPNs is not as straightforward
as that of one-dimensional LFIAs, we anticipate that robotic advancements
such as pick-n-place, cut-sheet manufacturing, and roll-to-roll will
enable scale-up of devices.
Conclusions
We
have demonstrated a 2DPN design that automates the flow of a
signal enhancement solution to improve the LOD of nucleic acid samples
labeled with FITC and biotin. We improved upon previous 2DPN designs
that use DAB as a signal enhancer by reducing the number of fluidic
inputs and detection time and by incorporating dry storage of all
necessary reagents, including a source for reactive hydrogen peroxide.
Our fully dried device has shown versatility in the ability to detect
multiple types of nucleic acid samples, including PNA products from
a room-temperature RNA amplification reaction, TARA. The applicability
of this 2DPN can be extended to detect a variety of pathogens and
incorporate other amplification reactions with FITC and biotin-tagged
products. The HRP signal enhancement retains activity after 28 days
of dry storage on a fully assembled device. The fully dried and assembled
device (after a total of 60 min run time) achieved a LOD of 5 ×
1011 copies of ssDNA per mL, comparable to other hybridization-based
nucleic acid detection devices. When combined with TARA, the LOD can
reach as low as 5 × 109 target copies/mL and can be
further reduced by using other NA amplification methods with higher
outputs. The signal in the detection zone is maintained well after
the sample is run, reducing the need for the strictly timed reading
of results.These critical advancements enable sample detection
and enhancement
of amplified NA products with an average signal enhancement of 116%
for samples above the LOD. Our 2DPN produces a signal intensity increase
much greater than commercially available gold or silver enhancement
solutions and requires only simple rehydration of pads and folding
to perform. We determined not only the increase in signal intensity
but also how that increase affects the true LOD (in copies/mL), a
practice we believe should be applied to the design of all LFIAs incorporating
signal enhancement agents. This proof-of-concept for a fully dried,
deployable 2DPN shows promise for detecting many other pathogens beyond
Mers-CoV and can be employed with other nucleic acid amplification
techniques. Our fully dried, automated viral detection platform has
shown to be a successful proof-of-concept with multiple types of NA
samples. These results are promising for the future applications of
this technology at the POC.
Computational Methods
To characterize
capillary flow parameters necessary to establish
channel widths and lengths in our 2DPN, we evaluated and modeled one-dimensional
flow rates using an extension of the Lucas–Washburn and Darcy
equations as previously demonstrated by Gosselin et al.[27] The flow rate of each of the reagents was analyzed
using mathematical models for capillary pressure. Capillary pressure
(Pc) in a rectangular channel is described
by the equationwhere γ is the surface tension,
θ is the contact angle of fluid
on each i surface, h is the height
of the membrane,
and w is the width of the membrane.[28] If we assume a rectangular cross-section of nitrocellulose
and that particles are diluted in water, then Pc = γ(2 cos (θ)/h + 2 cos (θ)/w), where every
surface i is nitrocellulose and θ is the advancing
contact angle of pure water on nitrocellulose. Given that our nitrocellulose
membrane, FF80HP (GE Healthcare), has pore size comparable to HF135
(Millipore),[21] which can pass particles
of up to 0.5 μm,[29] we can assume
an approximate pore size of 0.5 μm. For water on 0.45 μm
pore size nitrocellulose, the advancing contact angle is measured
to be approximately 40°.[30] The capillary
force is then equal to Fcap = Pc × hw. Substituting in
the expression for Pc, the equation becomes Fcap = γ2 cos (θ) (w + h). Due to the low Reynold’s
numbers in small capillary channels, the inertial effects can be neglected,
and the capillary force can be equated to the drag force Fdrag = 6μVzC,[27] where μ is the viscosity of the fluid, V is the velocity, z is the distance traveled in
the capillary channel, and C is the geometric constant: C = 2h/w + w/h. Then, 6μVzC = γ2 cos (θ)
(w + h). Then, rearranging to solve
for velocity giveswhere nitrocellulose width (w) and height (h) are maintained and k is defined as γ/μ
and is determined experimentally for
DAB and AuNP solutions.
Experimental Methods
Reagents and Materials
Reagents used throughout this
work include PBST (0.05% Tween 20, Millipore Sigma, Inc., Burlington,
MA), 40 kDa poly(vinylpyrrolidone) (PVP40) (Millipore Sigma, Inc.,
Burlington, MA), fraction V bovineserum albumin (BSA) (Biotium, Fremont,
CA), sucrose (IBI Scientific, Dubuque, IA), poly(ethylene glycol)
(PEG) (MW 3350 Da, 0.2% w/v), trehalose (Thermo Fisher Scientific,
NJ), FeSO4-EDTA (Fe-EDTA) (Millipore Sigma, Inc.), and
molecular biology water (Thermo Fisher Scientific). DAB and urea hydrogen
peroxide SigmaFast tablets (#D4168, Millipore Sigma, Inc.) were rehydrated
according to product specifications for initial dried enzymatic signal
testing. For long-term storage tests, hydrogen peroxide urea-adduct
(#95314-250G, Millipore Sigma, Inc.,) tablets were crushed into a
powder.Streptavidin poly-HRP (SA–HRP, #21140, Pierce
Biotechnology, Rockford, IL) and 40 nm AuNPs (G-40-100, Cytodiagnostics
Inc., Burlington, ON) for SA–HRP–AuNP conjugation (SA–HRP–AuNPs).
Polyclonal goat anti-rabbitbiotin conjugate (#31822, Thermo Fisher
Scientific). A monoclonal anti-FITC antibody (1F8-1E4, Invitrogen,
Rockford, IL) was used for long-term dry storage tests. Due to product
changes and subsequent lack of binding for different lot numbers,
we switched antibodies and used polyclonal anti-FITC antibody (20C-CR1056SP,
Fitzgerald, Bath BA1 1BE, U.K.) for LOD dried tests and for the remainder
of the investigation. All oligonucleotide probes were custom-ordered
from IDT (Integrated DNA Technologies, Inc., Coralville, IA). Food
coloring for one-dimensional flow testing (McCormick Assorted Food
Color & Egg Dye).2DPN materials for fabrication and storage
include nitrocellulose
(FF80HP) and the cellulose absorbent pad (#3001-861) from GE Healthcare
Bio-Science Corp. (Pittsburgh, PA), Grafix Dura-Lar Clear Adhesive-Backed
Film (Dick Blick Art Materials, Galesburg, IL), glass fiber reagent
storage pads (#GFCP103000, Millipore Sigma, Inc.), and silica gel
desiccant (S-3903, ULINE, Pleasant Prairie, WI).
Characterization
of LFIA Components
The volume capacity
of the nitrocellulose membrane and the glass fiber conjugate pads
was calculated by determining the dry mass of the membrane using a
ME-T Analytical Balance (Mettler Toledo), submerging the membrane
in deionized (DI) water for 2 min, and then determining the wet mass
of the membrane. Using the density of water, the total volume held
by the membrane segment was calculated and divided by the area of
the segment. The volume released from the glass fiber pads was estimated
by first measuring the wet mass of the membrane. Then, the membrane
was placed on nitrocellulose with a 2 mm overlap and covered with
adhesive. The post-flow mass was measured after leaving the wet membrane
in contact with nitrocellulose for 20 min. The volume released is
expressed as a percentage difference of post-flow mass and wet mass
relative to the initial wet mass.
Flow Rate Analysis
One-dimensional flow studies were
performed with reagents in nitrocellulose channels of varying width.
Linear nitrocellulose patterns were designed in Adobe Illustrator
CS6. Designs were 50 mm long with a width of either 1, 2, or 5 mm
and included a fluid collection segment at the end with an area of
100 mm2. The nitrocellulose patterns were cut from with
a Silhouette Cameo 3 cutter (Silhouette America, Inc., Lindon, UT).
The nitrocellulose was blocked with a solution of 0.25% PVP40, 2%
BSA, and 5% sucrose in PBST to prevent nonspecific binding.[31] The volume used in each test was adjusted for
the nitrocellulose and glass fiber pad volume capacity. The sample
of conjugated AuNPs or prepared DAB was applied to the source pad.
The flow was video-recorded with an iPhone 6 at 30 frames per second
with a 5 mm reference length in the frame until the fluid front reached
the fluid collection segment. The distance and time measurements were
plotted at the location of the fluid front for each frame in the video.
The average velocity was calculated over 5 s intervals. The velocity
vs distance graphs were fit with a nonlinear curve of eq using the least-squares method
to find the parameter k using GraphPad Prism v8.
We assumed that dynamic viscosity (μ) is constant for each fluid.
Therefore, we interpret a change in the k value as
a change in surface tension (γ), as surface tension is dependent
on the surrounding environment, as well as the properties of the fluid.
2DPN Assembly
We created the 2DPN design in the Adobe
Illustrator software (CS6, Adobe Inc., San Jose, CA). Nitrocellulose
and adhesive patterns were laser cut with a VLS3.50 laser cutter (Universal
Laser Systems Inc., Scottsdale, AZ). Adhesive patterns were cut from
Dura-Lar Clear Adhesive. Goat anti-rabbitbiotin conjugate (0.2–0.4
μL of 1.3 mg/mL) was pipetted onto the nitrocellulose for the
control line. Anti-FTIC antibody (0.2–0.4 μL of 1.5 mg/mL)
was pipetted onto the nitrocellulose for the test line. Glass fiber
pads and the cellulose waste pad were hand cut. The 2DPN components
were assembled on the adhesive backing, as shown in Figure A. 2DPN storage conditions
are shown in Figure S1.
Drying of Reagents
For the dried components of the
AuNP signal and subsequent enzymatic enhancement, we employed specific
methods proven by the previous literature to maintain the stability
of each reagent. SA–HRP was added to each 1 mL of 1 optical
density (OD) 40 nm AuNPs for a final SA–HRP concentration of
0.01 mg/mL. The solution was incubated on a rocker for 30 min at room
temperature. The solution was blocked with the BSA Fraction V (1%
w/v) for 1 h at room temperature followed by blocking with PEG (0.2%
w/v) for 1 h at room temperature. The AuNPs were centrifuged at 900×g for 30 min. The supernatant was discarded, preserving
the AuNP pellet. The pellet was resuspended in drying buffer (0.5×
PBS, pH 7.4, 10% sucrose, 1% Tween 20, 0.5% BSA Fraction V, 0.2% PEG,
0.5% PVP40), and the OD was measured using a NanoDrop 2000c (Thermo
Fisher Scientific). OD was adjusted by diluting conjugated AuNPs with
drying buffer. Trehalose (4% w/v) and 0.01 M Fe-EDTA were added prior
to drying. Twenty five microliters of the conjugated SA–HRP–AuNP
solution was then deposited on an 8 × 5 mm2 glass
fiber pad and dried under vacuum with a desiccant at room temperature
overnight.To prepare dry DAB pads, one DAB tablet was rehydrated
in 500 μL of PBST, for a concentration of 1.4 mg/mL. Trehalose
(4% w/v) was added to the DAB solution.[10] Fifty microliters of DAB solution was deposited on an 8 × 10
mm2 glass fiber pad, then dried under vacuum at room temperature
overnight. H2O2 tablets were crushed into a
powder, and 2 mg of the tablet powder was affixed on the adhesive
under a 50 μL capacity glass fiber pad.
Design of the Model DNA
Probe
To create a hybridized
double-stranded DNA (dsDNA) model, 1 μL of 100 μM of 6-carboxyfluorescein
(FAM)-tagged ssDNA (Table S1, probe 1),
1 μL of 100 μM of biotin-tagged ssDNA (Table S1, probe 2), 10 μL of 10× isothermal amplification
buffer I, and 88 μL of DNase/RNase free water were combined
in a small PCR tube. The PCR tube was placed in a thermocycler and
run on a protocol of 95 °C for 1 min followed by 25 °C for
1 min, for a total of 20 min. The concentration of the probe was determined
using a NanoDrop 2000c (50 ng/μL per 1 OD). The hybridized dsDNA
probe was stored at −20 °C until use. Single-stranded
DNA (ssDNA) tagged with both FAM and biotin (Table S1, probe 3), provided by IDT, was used as the ssDNA model.
Running the 2DPN
Volumes were loaded onto the 2DPN
as follows: 25 μL of the NA sample onto pad (1), 25 μL
PBST onto pad (2), 5 μL PBST onto pad (3), and 50 μL PBST
onto pad (4) (Figure A). Then, the device was folded at the crease to initiate flow through
the channels and sealed around the edges. Devices were imaged every
5 min using a flatbed scanner (V850 Pro, Epson America, Inc., Long
Beach, CA) at 1200 dpi. For flow visualization, food coloring was
added to PBST and deposited on the glass fiber pads. Test and control
line intensities were analyzed with a custom MATLAB script.[21,22] The visible threshold (the visual cutoff for interpreting a test
line as positive) of the background normalized grayscale intensity
was set to 0.02 for all signal analyses according to Phillips et al.[22]For LOD tests, dilutions of 100 μM
probe 3 solution in PBST were used. Tests were run on assembled 2DPNs
stored between 1 and 7 days. ssDNA was used in the LOD tests because
the exact concentration is provided by the manufacturer. NanoDrop
measurements of dsDNA-hybridized probe concentration provide an approximate
concentration but cannot provide information on the amount that hybridized
compared to remaining nonhybridized strands. The previous analysis
of dried 2DPN results tested with comparable concentrations of ssDNA
and dsDNA probes showed no significant differences in intensity (not
shown). For storage tests, a dsDNA-hybridized probe sample was diluted
in PBST to approximate concentrations of 1 × 1014 and
5 × 1012 copies/mL. The same dsDNA samples were used
in all 1-, 7-, and 28-day storage tests. For both LOD and storage
tests, replicates for any given sample concentration and device condition
were performed simultaneously.
ELISA Standard Curve
Four-parameter logistic (4PL)
models are typically used to model signal intensity as a function
of sample concentration in ligand-binding assays, such as ELISAs.[32] Therefore, we selected this model to evaluate
our LOD produced by the DAB-enhanced signal (Figure S7).where y is the signal intensity, x is the log of sample concentration, a is the response
at 0 concentration, d is the response
at infinite concentration, c is the concentration
that gives a signal intensity halfway between a and d, and b is a slope parameter typically
near 1.[33] The 4PL model was fit to the
LOD data in GraphPad Prism v8 with the slope parameter (b) constrained to 1.
Template-Assisted Rapid Assay (TARA)
TARA is a proprietary
RNA amplification technology developed by CrossLife Technologies Inc.[11] TARA is an enzyme-free chemical ligation assay
that leverages a target RNA sequence to initiate hybridization of
a peptide nucleic acid (PNA) backbone containing FAM to a second PNA
strand containing biotin. This results in a single PNA strand with
both markers (Figure S2). PNA probes to
detect the nucleocapsid gene of MERS-CoV were designed using the Applied
Biosystems Primer Express v2 software (structure and sequence details
shown in Figure S3 and Table S2). Probe
hybridization sequences were evaluated by the Basic Local Alignment
Search Tool (BLAST) to select regions conserved across multiple transcript
variants. For the initial design, target complexity and accessibility
were evaluated using Visual OMP (DNA Software Inc., Ann Arbor, MI).
PNAs were synthesized by PNAbio Inc. (Thousand Oaks, CA). ssRNA at
an initial concentration of 2.0 × 1011 copies/mL was
purchased from IDT. TARA was performed with the ssRNA at room temperature
for 15 min. Dilutions of final TARA products were made in PBST and
applied directly to sample pads on 2DPNs that had been dried and assembled
within the previous 7 days. The same diluted sample was used for all
2DPN tests. Replicates were performed simultaneously.