| Literature DB >> 34150187 |
Ahmed Nabil1,2,3, Erika Yoshihara1,4, Keita Hironaka1,5, Ayman A Hassan3, Gamal Shiha3,6, Mitsuhiro Ebara1,4,5.
Abstract
The current commercially available SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic approaches including nucleic acid molecular assaying usingEntities:
Keywords: Enrichment; Misdiagnosis; Responsive polymers; SARS-CoV-2; Sensitivity
Year: 2021 PMID: 34150187 PMCID: PMC8200327 DOI: 10.1016/j.csbj.2021.06.016
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Comput Struct Biotechnol J ISSN: 2001-0370 Impact factor: 7.271
Fig. 1We developed a portable, fast, easy, and sensitive strategy based on the concepts of immune-affinity and responsive smart polymeric materials to be used as a preanalytical step for SARS-CoV-2 specimens enrichment to avoid the misdiagnosis that usually happens during SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis due to the low viral load in the tested samples.
Scheme 1(I) Synthesis of P(NIPAAm-co-HIPAAm). (II) Synthesis of P(NIPAAm-co-HIPAAm-co-SAKIPAAm). (III) Synthesis of azido-Anti- SARS-CoV-2 Antibody. (IV) Conjugation of azido-Anti- SARS-CoV-2 Antibody with the temperature responsive P(NIPAAm-co-HIPAAm-co-SAKIPAAm) using click chemistry.
Fig. 2Lower critical solution temperature (LCST) (Thermal-response) of the synthesized P(NIPAAm-co-HIPAAm) (A), P(NIPAAm-co-HIPAAm-co-SAKIPAAm) (B) and Polymer antibody conjugate (c). (Solvent: PBS (pH = 7.4), Polymer conc.: 2.0 mg/mL, Heating rate: 0.2 °C/min, Wavelength: 450 nm).
Characterization of the synthesized polymers.
| Polymer | Structure according to | LCST °C | Molecular weight (g/mol) using GPC | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NIPAAm | HIPAAm | SAKIPAAm | |||
| P(NIPAAm-HIPAAm) | 96.4 | 3.6 | 0 | 37.4 | 1.904 × 104 |
| P(NIPAAm-co-HIPAAm-coSAKIPAAm) | 96.4 | 1.2 | 2.4 | 30.1 | 2.014 × 104 |
H NMR (Solvent: D2O, DMSO‑d), GPC (Solvent:DMF, Standard: PSt), LCST was measured by Spectrophotometer (Solvent: PBS (pH = 7.5), Polymer conc.: 2.0 mg/mL, Heating rate: 0.2 °C/min, Wavelength: 450 nm).
Fig. 3Introduction of azido-(EG)4-NHS per SARS-CoV-2 antibody measured by fluorescamine. (mean ± SD, n = 3).
Fig. 4SDS-PAGE for evaluation of Click reaction between the antibody and different concentrations of the synthesized polymer (1) Protein ladder (2) Antibody: polymer = 1:1 (mol/mol) (3) 1:2 (4) 1:4 (5) 1:8 (6) 1:15 (7) 1:30 (8) free polymer (9) Azido- Antibody (10) Antibody (11) protein ladder.
Fig. 5Conjugate enrichment folds before and after thermal induction. (mean ± SD, n = 3).
Fig.6Recombinant SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein enrichment folds with different concentrations of antibody conjugates. (mean ± SD, n = 3).
Fig. 7Lateral flow immune assay (LFIA) evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 antibody-temperature-responsive polymer enrichment efficacy, Fig. A Different concentrations of recombinant SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein was tested using lateral flow immunoassay, a1: 20.83 × 10−15, a2: 10.42 × 10−15, a3 :4.17 × 10−15, a4: 2.08 × 10−15and a5: 1.04 × 10−15 mol/mL. Fig. B Comparing samples before and after enrichment using SARS-CoV-2 antibody-temperature-responsive polymer, b1: 1.04 × 10−15 mol/mL without enrichment, b2: 1.04 × 10−15 mol/mL after enrichment, b3: 2.08 × 10−15 mol/mL without enrichment, b4: 2.08 × 10−15 mol/mL after enrichment.
Fig. 8SDS-PAGE for evaluation of designed material strategy and polymeric conjugation in real biological samples (1) Protein ladder (2) Antibody (3) Azido- Antibody (4) only polymer (5) PBS (6) polymer conjugate in PBS (7) Nasopharyngeal sample (8) polymer conjugate in Nasopharyngeal sample (9) Oropharyngeal sample (10) Polymer conjugate in Oropharyngeal sample (11) Urine sample (12) Polymer conjugate in urine sample (13) protein ladder.