| Literature DB >> 32824351 |
Ekaterina Khristunova1,2,3, Elena Dorozhko1, Elena Korotkova1, Bohumil Kratochvil1,3, Vlastimil Vyskocil2, Jiri Barek1,2.
Abstract
A highly effective way to improve prognosis of viral infectious diseases and to determine the outcome of infection is early, fast, simple, and efficient diagnosis of viral pathogens in biological fluids. Among a wide range of viral pathogens, Flaviviruses attract a special attention. Flavivirus genus includes more than 70 viruses, the most familiar being dengue virus (DENV), Zika virus (ZIKV), and Japanese encephalitis virus (JEV). Haemorrhagic and encephalitis diseases are the most common severe consequences of flaviviral infection. Currently, increasing attention is being paid to the development of electrochemical immunological methods for the determination of Flaviviruses. This review critically compares and evaluates recent research progress in electrochemical biosensing of DENV, ZIKV, and JEV without labelling. Specific attention is paid to comparison of detection strategies, electrode materials, and analytical characteristics. The potential of so far developed biosensors is discussed together with an outlook for further development in this field.Entities:
Keywords: Flavivirus; electrochemical biosensors; label-free
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32824351 PMCID: PMC7472106 DOI: 10.3390/s20164600
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1Randles equivalent circuit of an electrochemical cell. Zi—imaginary impedance, Zr—real impedance, Rs—solution resistance, Rct—charge transfer resistance, W—Warburg impedance, Cdl—double-layer capacitance, ϕ—phase angle, ω—angular frequency.
Figure 2(a) Schematic representation of the gold nanostructure-based working electrode fabrication and the subsequent DNA immobilization protocol; (b) schematic representation of the process flow for the miniaturized electrochemical biosensor platform fabrication. SU8—Epoxy-based negative photoresist, PDMS—poly(dimethylsiloxane); (c) differential pulse voltammetry (DPV) recordings for Ti/Au/probe electrodes at different target DNA concentrations; (d) influence of interferents (NC—non-complementary DNA, C—complementary DNA, HSA—human serum albumin) as non-complementary targets at probe concentration 1 µM. Adapted with permission from [50].
Figure 3Fabrication protocol of the impedimetric immunosensor. DRP-110—carbon model of screen-printed electrodes, rNS1—non-structural recombinant protein 1, EIS—electrochemical impedance spectroscopy. Adapted with permission from [93].
Figure 4Schematic illustration of the peptide-decorated electrochemical sensor for the detection of dengue fever biomarker, NS1. DGV peptides—synthetic phage-displayed peptides, specific for NS1, MUA—11-mercaptoundecanoic acid, EDC—1-ethyl-3-(3-dimethylaminopropyl)carbodiimide, NHS—N-hydroxysuccinimide, BSA—bovine serum albumin. Adapted with permission from [44].
Survey of electrochemical label-free biosensors and commercially available assays for dengue diagnostic.
|
| ||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| A nanoporous alumina membrane/Pt | DPV, CV | Mouse anti-DENV2 monoclonal antibody | DENV2 | 1 pfu/mL | Chikungunya virus, West Nile virus, DENV3 | a, f | b, d, e | [ |
| A nanoporous alumina membrane/Pt | DPV, CV | DENV probe | DENV1 | 9.55 × 10−12 mol/L | DENV3 | e, f | b, d, e | [ |
| Mn2O3/GCE | DPV | DENV probe | DENV comple- | 1.2 × 10−19 mol/L | DENV non-complementary DNA | d, e, f | c, e | [ |
| Nafion/ITO | SWV | DENV probe | DENV2 RNA | 2 × 10−18 mol/L | RNAs (DENV1, −3, −4) | a, e | b, e, f | [ |
| Au nanostructures/Ti | DPV, CV | DENV thiolated probe | DENV comple- | 9.7 × 10−16 mol/L | DENV non-comple- mentary DNA, human | b, c, e | e | [ |
| AuE | SWV, EIS | Synthetic peptides (DGV BP1–BP5) | DENV | 1.49 μg/mL | Bovine | a, f | b, e | [ |
| MUA/6COH/AuE | EIS | Anti-DENV NS1 antibody | DENV | 30 ng/mL | – | b, e, f, | c, e | [ |
| A nanoporous alumina electrode | EIS | Anti-DENV2 antibody | DENV2 | 1 pfu/mL | Chikungunya virus, West Nile virus | a, f | b, d, e | [ |
| Pt film/alumina membrane | EIS | Anti-DENV2 antibody | DENV2 | 0.23 and0.71 pfu/mL | Chikungunya virus | a, b, e | c, d, e, f | [ |
| 4-mercaptobenzoic acid/AuNPs/AuE | EIS | Anti-DENV antibody | DENV1–4 | – | – | a, b, | c, e | [ |
| AuNPs/1,4-phenylenediamine/ITO | EIS | Anti-DENV NS1 antibody | DENV | 5 ng/mL | Malaria-infected sera | b, d, e, f | a, c, f | [ |
| 1-pyrenebutyric acid/SWNT/Au microelectrode | EIS | Anti-DENV NS1 antibody | DENV | 1 ng/mL | Artificial human saliva | a, b, e | b, c, d, e | [ |
| 11-(ferrocenyl)undecanethiol/PEG (poly(ethylene glycol)- | EIS | Anti-DENV NS1 antibody, | DENV | 1.2 ng/mL, | – | b, d, e | a, c, d, e, f | [ |
| Ferrocene-tagged peptide/AuE | EIS | Anti-DENV NS1 antibody | DENV | – | – | b, d | c, d, e, f | [ |
| Poly(4-aminobenzoic acid)/screen-printed electrode | EIS | DENV | – | Uric acid, glucose, water, HBS-EP buffer | b, c, d, f | c | [ | |
| Copolymers + graphene oxide/AuE | EIS | DENV | DENV2 antibody | 0.12 pfu/mL | Influenza A virus | b, e | c, d, e, f | [ |
| Dopamine/polysulfone nanofibers/SPCE | EIS | Imprinted NS1 | DENV | 0.3 ng/mL | Fetal bovine serum, lysozyme | b, c, d, e, f | c, d, e | [ |
| PVB (polyvinyl formal chloroform solution)—Fe3O4/AuE | EIS, CV | CramoLL (lectin and fetuin isolated from Cratylia mollis seeds) | Glycoproteins of DENV2, DENV3 | – | – | f | b, c, d, e | [ |
| PNA/SiNW (silicon nanowire) | Electronic conductivity | DENV comple- mentary fragment | DENV2 | 1.0 × 10−14 mol/L | – | b, c, f | b, c, d, e | [ |
| AuE | Electronic conductivity | Anti-DENV NS1 antibody | DENV | 0.25 μg/mL | – | [ | ||
| Anion exchange nanoporous membrane | Conducto-metry | Negatively charged DNA oligoprobes | DENV2, DENV3 RNA | 1.0 × 10−12 mol/L | – | b, d, f | e | [ |
|
| ||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Test Strips/Abbott SD BIOLINE Dengue Duo | DENV envelope proteins—Au | DENV NS1 | 92.4% | RNAs (DENV1, −3, −4) and other flaviviruses | b, d, e, f | a, c | [ | |
| Microtiter plate/Panbio Dengue Ig M | Membrane attack complex—ELISA | Anti-DENV human-IgM antibody, DENV | DENV | 81% | RNAs (DENV1, −3, −4) and other flaviviruses | d, f | a, c | [ |
| Microtiter plate/Abbott SD ELISA Dengue | Indirect ELISA | Anti-DENV human-IgM antibody, DENV | DENV | 69.2% | RNAs (DENV1, −3, −4) and other flaviviruses | d, f | a, c | [ |
Advantages: a—lower cost of analysis; b—rapid response time; c—portability; d—opportunity to quantify biomolecules in biological liquids; e—high sensitivity; f—representative information about reproducibility and stability. Disadvantages: a—higher cost of analysis; b—suitable only for primary screening and require confirmation of positive results by independent methods; c—complex electrode/platform fabrication; d—limited or unknown sensor stability; e—limited or unknown shelf-life of the sensor; f—limited sensor reproducibility.
Survey of electrochemical label-free biosensors for Zika diagnostic.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| DTSP (dithiobis(succi-nimidyl propionate))/IDE (interdigitated micro-Au electrode) | EIS | ZIKV envelope protein antibody (Zev-Abs) | ZIKV antigen | 1 × 10−11 mol/L | Chikungunya virus, West Nile virus, DENV | c, e, f | b, c | [ |
| EIS, CV, SWV | ZIKV EDIII and NS1 | ZIKV antibodies | 17 fg/mL | DENV | d, e | a, c | [ | |
| PEG/Ti-Pt leads on SiO2/graphene chip | Capacitan-ce measure-ment | Mouse | ZIKV NS1 antigen | 4.5 × 10−10 mol/L | JEV | b, c | a, c, e | [ |
| SIPs-GO composites/AuE | DPV | ZIKV imprinted to the polymer | ZIKV antigen | 2 × 10−4 pfu/mL | DENV2 | d | a, c, d | [ |
| 3-4-AHBA/ PCGE | SWV, EIS | ZIKV aminated ssDNA | ZIKV antigen | 2.54 × 10−11 mol/L | DENV2, −3 | f | b, c, e | [ |
| ZnO nanostructures/PCB | CV | ZIKV NS1 antigen | 1 pg/mL | DENV NS1 antigen | e, f | a, c, e | [ | |
| Disposable AuE/PET | EIS, DPV, CV | ZIKV thiolated probe | ZIKV NS5 antigen | 2.5 × 10−8 mol/L | DENV NS5 protein | a, c | b, e | [ |
| Poly-tyramine/ rGO/graphite electrode | DPV | ZIKV oligonucleotide | ZIKV genomic RNA | 0.1 fg/mL | – | d, f | f | [ |
|
| ||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Test Strips/Abbott SD BIOLINE Zika Ig M | ZIKV | ZIKV | 95.6% | RNAs (DENV1, −3, −4) and other flaviviruses | b, d, e, f | a, c | [ | |
| Microtiter plate/InBios ZIKV Detect™ | Membrane attack complex—ELISA | DENV | 96.5% | Yellow Fever virus, Chikungunya virus | d, e, f | a, c | [ | |
| Microtiter plate precoated with ZIKV NS1/ Euroimmun anti-ZIKV IgM | Indirect ELISA | Antibody-HRP conjugates | DENV | 56% | West Nile virus | d, f | a, c | [ |
Advantages: a—lower consumption of chemical reagents; b—rapid response time; c—portability; d—opportunity to quantify biomolecules in human serum; e—high sensitivity; f—representative information about reproducibility and stability. Disadvantages: a—higher consumption of chemical reagents; b—suitable only for primary screening and require confirmation of positive results by independent methods; c—complex electrode/platform fabrication; d—limited or unknown sensor stability; e—limited or unknown shelf-life of the sensor; f—limited sensor reproducibility.
Survey of electrochemical label-free biosensors for Japanese encephalitis diagnostic.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Nano-Au/ | Amperometry | Antiserum of JEV | JEV | 6 × 10−9 pfu/mL | b, f | c, b | [ |
| Nano-Au/ | Amperometry | Antiserum of JEV | JEV | 6 × 10−9 pfu/mL | b, f | a, b, c | [ |
| Potentiometry | Antiserum of JEV | JEV | 3.5 × 10−8 pfu/mL | b | a, b, c | [ | |
| Silanized surface with protein A/screen-printed electrode | EIS | Serum containing antibodies to JEV | JEV | 0.75 µg/mL | a, b c, d | d, e, f | [ |
| PANI nanowires/PtE | EIS | JEV | 10 ng/mL | e | c, d, e, f, | [ | |
| CNPs/3-aminopropyl triethoxysilane/SPCE | EIS, CV | JEV antibody | JEV | 2 ng/mL | b, d | c, d, e, f, | [ |
| PANI/multiwalled carbon nanotubes/PtE | EIS | JEV | – | a, b | d, e, f | [ | |
| CNPs/chitosan/SPCE | EIS, CV | JEV antibody | JEV | 0.36 ng/mL | b, d, c | a, c, d, e, f | [ |
|
| |||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Microtiter plate/InBios JEV Detect™ | Membrane attack complex—ELISA | JEV | 56% | d, f | a, c | [ | |
| Microtiter plate/XCyton JEV Chex | Membrane attack complex—ELISA | JEV | 19% | d, f | a, c | [ | |
Advantages: a—lower consumption of chemical reagents; b—rapid response time; c—portability; d—opportunity to quantify biomolecules in human serum; e—high sensitivity; f—representative information about reproducibility and stability. Disadvantages: a—higher consumption of chemical reagents; b—suitable only for primary screening and require confirmation of positive results by independent methods; c—complex electrode/platform fabrication; d—limited or unknown sensor stability; e—limited or unknown shelf-life of the sensor; f—limited sensor reproducibility.
Figure 5Schematic illustration of the electrochemical biosensor construction and Zika virus (ZIKV) detection. rGO—reduced graphene oxide, PTyr—polytyramine, ZIKV-Probe—ZIKV DNA probe, gRNA—genomic RNA, DPV—differential pulse voltammetry. Adapted with permission from [26].
Figure 6Schematic diagram of screen-printed carbon electrode (SPCE) modification for fabrication of electrochemical biosensor for the detection of Japanese encephalitis virus (JEV). EDC—1-ethyl-3-(3-dimethylaminopropyl)carbodiimide, NHS—N-hydroxysuccinimide, NP—carbon nanoparticle, BSA—bovine serum albumin. Adapted with permission from [46].