| Literature DB >> 35464137 |
Maïwenn Kersaudy-Kerhoas, Antonio Liga, Appan Roychoudhury1, Marilena Stamouli1, Rhiannon Grant1, Damaso Sanchez Carrera2, Holger Schulze1, Witold Mielczarek, Wilna Oosthuyzen3, Juan F Quintana4, Paul Dickinson4, Amy H Buck4, Nicholas R Leslie2, Jurgen Haas1, Till T Bachmann1, James W Dear3.
Abstract
Drug-induced liver injury (DILI) results in over 100 000 hospital attendances per year in the UK alone and is a leading cause for the post-marketing withdrawal of new drugs, leading to significant financial losses. MicroRNA-122 (miR-122) has been proposed as a sensitive DILI marker although no commercial applications are available yet. Extracellular blood microRNAs (miRNAs) are promising clinical biomarkers but their measurement at point of care remains time-consuming, technically challenging, and expensive. For circulating miRNA to have an impact on healthcare, a key challenge to overcome is the development of rapid and reliable low-cost sample preparation. There is an acknowledged issue with miRNA stability in the presence of hemolysis and platelet activation, and no solution has been demonstrated for fast and robust extraction at the site of blood draw. Here, we report a novel microfluidic platform for the extraction of circulating miR-122 from blood enabled by a vertical approach and gravity-based bubble mixing. The performance of this disposable cartridge was verified by standard quantitative polymerase chain reaction analysis on extracted miR-122. The cartridge performed equivalently or better than standard bench extraction kits. The extraction cartridge was combined with electrochemical impedance spectroscopy to detect miR-122 as an initial proof-of-concept toward an application in point-of-care detection. This platform enables the standardization of sample preparation and the detection of miRNAs at the point of blood draw and in resource limited settings and could aid the introduction of miRNA-based assays into routine clinical practice.Entities:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35464137 PMCID: PMC9018095 DOI: 10.1063/5.0085078
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomicrofluidics ISSN: 1932-1058 Impact factor: 3.258
FIG. 1.Concept of an integrated and automated protocol to reduce the time to result of microRNA-based diagnostics.
FIG. 2.(a) Normalized fold change in a miRNA panel after same day or 48 h separation of plasma. Fold change is obtained via the ΔΔCt method using Caenorhabditis elegans miR-39 spike-in control. One outlier was identified at −4000-fold change for miR-122 and removed (b) Architecture of the hydrodynamic blood plasma separation (BPS) element. Details about the physical principles of similar hydrodynamic separation and its characterization have been published elsewhere. Details of a separation zone are shown in the bottom inset (dashed line). The top inset features a 3D view of the chip and detailing its overall form factor. (c) Comparisons of miRNA levels between the two plasma extraction methods: standard centrifugation protocol (DC) and blood plasma separation platform (BPS). Duplicate RT-qPCR reactions for the panel of miRNAs (miR-122, miR-126, miR-1913, and let7d) extracted by bench protocol from plasma either fractioned by standard double centrifugation or through the blood plasma separation platform. Data are expressed as the raw Ct values ± SD, N = 3. No significant differences found, paired Student’s t-test. (d) Stabilization of miRNA in separated plasma samples by centrifugation or double centrifugation. Data were normalized via the ΔΔCt method using C. elegans miR-39 spike-in control. N = 3. Paired Student’s t-test.
FIG. 3.(a) Dry cartridge architecture with main elements highlighted. Scale bar is approximately 1 cm. (b) Main functional steps in the operation of the dry cartridge. (c) Photograph of a dry cartridge. Scale bar is approximately 1 cm. (d) Characterization of bench and microfluidic extraction efficiency on 10 pM, 1 pM, 100 fM, and 10 fM. Native plasma samples are indicated as “no” (no spiking) and water controls as “water.” Reported as copies/μl (e) Correlation between spiked miR-122 (in pM) and recovered microfluidic in copies/μl. (f) Correlation between bench and microfluidic copies/μl. Due to the logarithmic axis, not all error bars can be shown.
FIG. 4.(a-i) Architecture of a wet cartridge. (a-ii) Photograph of the wet cartridge. (b-i) Comparison of Ct values for bench and wet cartridge eluates on a miRNA panel. (b-ii) Correlation of Ct values between bench eluates and microfluidic eluates for miR16-5p, miR21-3p, miR451a, let7d, and miR-122. R2 = 0.85. Two data points were not included in this analysis when qPCR duplicates showed Ct values differing more than 5 Cts or within 2 Cts from negative control. When including all of the miRNA panel R2 = 0.65. (c-i) Ct values on water, plasma, and spiked plasma. “Mock healthy samples” are donor plasma samples spiked with 10 fM miR-122 and “Mock Disease samples” are donor plasma samples spiked with 1 pM miR-122. (c-ii) Comparison of electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) results in terms of fold change for miR-122 detection with plasma-spiked microfluidic cartridge extraction. (c-iii) Correlation between bench and microfluidic Ct values. (c-iv) Correlation between bench and microfluidic EIS values.
FIG. 5.(a) Module workflow from patient admission to ALT/EIS comparison (b) ALT results on fresh samples. For ALT > 100 U/l (orange dashed line), liver injury is diagnosed, while for ALT > 1000 U/l (red dashed line), hepatotoxicity is diagnosed. (c) EIS detection of microfluidic cartridge-extracted miR-122 in liver-injured and healthy control serum samples against ALT categorization. A potential threshold value for liver injury is shown as a red dashed line. (d) Comparative table with respective ALT reference value. Six out of eight blinded EIS predictions were correct, against ALT-based diagnostic. Out of the two incorrect predictions, there is one false positive (EDO 203) and one false negative (EDO 206) corresponding to a specificity and sensitivity of 75%.