| Literature DB >> 34363087 |
Nikan Momenbeitollahi1, Teran Cloet1, Huiyan Li2.
Abstract
Proteins are one of the main constituents of living cells. Studying the quantities of proteins under physiological and pathological conditions can give valuable insights into health status, since proteins are the functional molecules of life. To be able to detect and quantify low-abundance proteins in biofluids for applications such as early disease diagnostics, sensitive analytical techniques are desired. An example of this application is using proteins as biomarkers for detecting cancer or neurological diseases, which can provide early, lifesaving diagnoses. However, conventional methods for protein detection such as ELISA, mass spectrometry, and western blotting cannot offer enough sensitivity for certain applications. Recent advances in optical-based micro- and nano-biosensors have demonstrated promising results to detect proteins at low quantities down to the single-molecule level, shining lights on their capacities for ultrasensitive disease diagnosis and rare protein detection. However, to date, there is a lack of review articles synthesizing and comparing various optical micro- and nano-sensing methods of enhancing the limits of detections of the antibody-based protein assays. The purpose of this article is to critically review different strategies of improving assay sensitivity using miniaturized biosensors, such as assay miniaturization, improving antibody binding capacity, sample purification, and signal amplification. The pros and cons of different methods are compared, and the future perspectives of this research field are discussed.Entities:
Keywords: Antibody binding capacity; Assay sensitivity; Miniaturization; Protein quantification; Sample purification; Signal enhancement
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34363087 PMCID: PMC8346249 DOI: 10.1007/s00216-021-03566-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Anal Bioanal Chem ISSN: 1618-2642 Impact factor: 4.142
Fig. 1(a) A schematic of the single chain fragment variable (scFv) assay. First, the ScFv antibodies (shown in pink) were physiosorbed on the surface. The blocking agent (shown in green) was then utilized to reduce unspecific binding of biotinylated serum proteins (shown in blue). These serum proteins were targeted by fluorescently labelled streptavidin (shown in dark red). (b, c) A schematic of the assay on a flat substrate can be seen in (b) as well as a light-guiding nanowire substrate. (c) The supported waveguides to be reemitted at the tip were excited by the emission of fluorophores on the nanowire surface, which led to an enhanced signal at nanowires’ tip. (d–f) Epifluorescence images in top-view can be viewed of (d) a GaP nanowire substrate, (e) a silicon substrate, and (f) a MaxiSorp black polymer substrate, dotted with antibodies. The biotinylated serum concentration was diluted to 0.4% (which was the highest concentration used in this application). Individual nanowires can be seen in (d) as bright spots. The edge of the scFv spot is shown in (e,f), which shows the change in signal between specific and unspecific binding to the antibodies. Reproduced from Reference [27] with permission
Fig. 2Schematic for application of immuno-HCR after micro-engraving to allow for the detection of proteins secreted from single cells. Cells were deposited into microwells at a density of ∼1 cell/well, and sealed with a glass slide containing a mixture of capture antibodies. After incubation, the glass was removed, and the signal was amplified relative to each capture event used from the immuno-HCR. Reproduced from Reference [38] with permission
Fig. 3Droplet-free digital ELISA based on tyramide signal amplification system illustration. (a) Capture of single-protein molecules on beads and labelling with HRP. (b) Reaction of biotinylated tyramides with HRP and conversion into tyramide radicals to deposit onto the beads with labeled HRP. (c) Binding of streptavidin-labeled fluorescent dyes to biotin on the beads. (d) Digital counting of the beads by flow cytometry. Reproduced from reference [40] with permission
Fig. 4Schematic of the FRANC assay process: (A) protein samples. (B) The protein samples were biotinylated. (C) The samples were then conjugated to magnetic microbeads by biotin-streptavidin interactions. (D) Microbeads were then exposed to fluorescently labelled antibodies to tag the proteins of interest. (E) They were then fluorescently labeled to find out the total protein amount, which was required for normalization against protein amount. (F–H) Microbeads were analyzed by flow cytometry. (F) Forward vs. side scatter plots were utilized to differentiate between singlet microbeads and aggregates. (G) Antibody detection for each sample-conjugated microbead set is shown. (H) Total protein signal detection is shown for each sample-conjugated microbead set. Reproduced from reference [44] with permission
Fig. 5Strategy for the detection of proteins using wax barriers on top of a nitrocellulose membrane. (A) Schematic of different pads present in the LFA strip. (B) In the standard LFA, the flow constantly moved to the absorbent pad and the bio-recognition event occurred within seconds. Few labelled antibodies were captured in the test line (TL); therefore, the signal intensity was weak. (C) In the LFA modified with a wax barrier, the flow was temporarily stopped on the TL, resulting in increased time for the bio-recognition event. (D) Fluorescence microscope pictures (40×) of the wax barrier on the LFA strip. The wax barrier temporarily held the solution for 12 min. Reproduced with permission from reference [54]
Fig. 6A schematic diagram for the Aβ1–42 sandwich assay using double antibody. Reproduced from reference [61] with permission
Fig. 7A schematic of the solid-phase PLA protocol (SP-PLA). (A) The samples were incubated with pre-immobilized antibodies on microparticles. (B) The microparticles were washed and incubated with pairs of PLA probes. (C) Upon binding of an antigen and adding connector oligonucleotides, the oligonucleotides on the PLA probes were ligated. This process was followed by enhancement and detection of the ligated products by PCR, with the primers shown in arrows. Reproduced from reference [65] with permission
Methods and results of the selected technologies for improving the sensitivity of the protein assays
| Technique | Sample | Detection methods | LODs | Multiplexed? | Assay time | Main instrument or reagent | Pros/cons |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Optically enhanced protein microarray [ | Diluted serum | Amperometry | 10 fg/mL | Y | Hours | Gold compact discs | Pros: High sensitivity, simplicity Cons: Requires gold discs |
| dELISA with micro-beads [ | Serum | Fluorescence | ~10–20 enzyme-labeled complexes in 100 mL of sample | Y | Hours | dELISA setup | Pros: High sensitivity, no need for complex equipment Cons: Requires multiple repetitive steps |
| Hydrogel microparticle immunoassay [ | Serum | Fluorescence | 17. 7 pg/mL | Y | Hours | Microfluidic chip | Pros: High sensitivity Cons: Multiple assay steps required |
| CNT-assembly nanosensor [ | Serum | Dielectrophoretic | 100 fM | N | Hours | CNTs | Pros: Low limit of detection Cons: Requiring access to carbon nanotubes implemented on a gold electrode |
| Beads-in-hydrogel droplet microarray [ | Serum | Fluorescence | <100 pg/mL | Y | Hours | Microarray scanner | Pros: Multiplexing capacity, low cost, and high sensitivity Cons: Requiring handling with care during the assay as hydrogel droplets are fragile |
| Microfluidic plasma separation and ELISA device [ | Whole blood | Absorbance-based optical detection | 0.7 ng/mL | Y | 22 min | Microfluidic ELISA device | Pros: Analyzing whole blood in a short amount of time, high sensitivity, and requiring small sample volume Cons: required microfabrication |
| QDs-based protein detection [ | Cell media | Luminescence | 180 attomolar | Y | Hours | A spectrophotometer | Pros: achieved single-cell level Cons: required microfabrication to isolate single cells |
| Proximity ligation assay [ | Plasma | Quantitative real-time PCR (q-PCR). | 3.1 pg/mL | Y | Mins-hours | PLA probes, PCR setup | Pros: High sensitivity and specify Cons: Multiple steps in the manufacturing and assay procedure required |
| Fiber optic SPR probe for immunoassay [ | Serum | Surface plasmon resonance (SPR) | 0.1 μg/mL | N | Mins–hours | SPR biosensors | Pros: High sensitivity, simplicity, miniaturization, and low cost Cons: Required microfabrication process |
| Gold and silver nanoboxes with SERS [ | Serum | SERS with nanotags | 0.68 pg/mL | Y | Mins–hours | UV−vis spectrophotometer | Pros: High sensitivity and multiplexity Cons: Required access to gold-silver nanoboxes |
| Affinity-MS assays [ | Serum/plasma | MS | 2 μg of total starting protein from digested cell culture lysates | Y | Hours | MALDI mass spectrometer | Pros: multiplexed, sensitive, specific Cons: Required a high-end MALDI mass spectrometer |