Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are nanosized circulating assemblies that contain biomarkers considered promising for early diagnosis within neurology, cardiology, and oncology. Recently, acoustic wave biosensors, in particular based on quartz crystal microbalance with dissipation monitoring (QCM-D), have emerged as a sensitive, label-free, and selective EV characterization platform. A rational approach to further improving sensing detection limits relies on the nanostructuration of the sensor surfaces. To this end, inorganic inverse opals (IOs) derived from colloidal self-assembly present a highly tunable and scalable nanoarchitecture of suitable feature sizes and surface chemistry. This work systematically investigates their use in two-dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) for enhanced QCM-D EV detection. Precise tuning of the architecture parameters delivered improvements in detection performance to sensitivities as low as 6.24 × 107 particles/mL. Our findings emphasize that attempts to enhance acoustic immunosensing via increasing the surface area by 3D nanostructuration need to be carefully analyzed in order to exclude solvent and artifact entrapment effects. Moreover, the use of 2D nanostructured electrodes to compartmentalize analyte anchoring presents a particularly promising design principle.
Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are nanosized circulating assemblies that contain biomarkers considered promising for early diagnosis within neurology, cardiology, and oncology. Recently, acoustic wave biosensors, in particular based on quartz crystal microbalance with dissipation monitoring (QCM-D), have emerged as a sensitive, label-free, and selective EV characterization platform. A rational approach to further improving sensing detection limits relies on the nanostructuration of the sensor surfaces. To this end, inorganic inverse opals (IOs) derived from colloidal self-assembly present a highly tunable and scalable nanoarchitecture of suitable feature sizes and surface chemistry. This work systematically investigates their use in two-dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) for enhanced QCM-D EV detection. Precise tuning of the architecture parameters delivered improvements in detection performance to sensitivities as low as 6.24 × 107 particles/mL. Our findings emphasize that attempts to enhance acoustic immunosensing via increasing the surface area by 3D nanostructuration need to be carefully analyzed in order to exclude solvent and artifact entrapment effects. Moreover, the use of 2D nanostructured electrodes to compartmentalize analyte anchoring presents a particularly promising design principle.
Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are nanosized
assemblies contained
by a lipid bilayer membrane that are released from cells as part of
their routine processing.[1−4] Depending on the cell of origin, EVs are found to
carry biomolecular content that is essential for intercellular communication
and disease propagation, in the form of proteins, DNA, RNA, and lipids.[5,6] Evidence now demonstrates that the detection and quantification
of EVs can help to unravel pathological pathways for many diseases,
particularly within neurology, cardiology, and oncology, emphasizing
the necessity to establish sensitive, specific, and reproducible EV
detection techniques.[7−9] X-ray scattering,[10] fluorescence
spectroscopy,[11] Raman spectroscopy,[12] or electrochemical measurements[13] are just some of the novel EV characterization approaches
recently reported. However, in general, none of these techniques currently
meets the combination of prerequisites on the detection limit, specificity,
label-free recognition, and minimal sample volume. As a result, available
approaches lack the sensitivity of detecting at clinically relevant
biomarker concentrations; are unable to discern reliably between EV
and non-EV artifacts with increasing risk of false-positive results;
require diagnostic reagents for labeling that increase the assay complexity
and cost; and/or are unsuitable for minimally invasive liquid biopsies
because of the requisite sample volume.A particularly promising
analytical principle for multimodal biosensing
is based on acoustic resonance.[14] The application
of a quartz crystal microbalance with dissipation monitoring (QCM-D)
has been shown to uniquely leverage differences between EVs and associated
contaminants in colloidal suspension by assessing both mass and viscoelastic
properties, thus offering a superior level of analytical discrimination.
The dual mechanisms of measurement offered by QCM-D helped to overcome
the current limitations of specificity within the EV sensing field,
providing an important addition to the characterization tool kit.
Specifically, the immunocapture of CD63-positive EVs on gold-coated
QCM sensor surfaces induces a change in resonance frequency of the
QCM sensor because of the mass of the analyte. This was witnessed
alongside a concomitant increase in dissipation, attributed to the
soft, viscoelastic, nature of the EVs, which are bound as discrete
particles that also undergo rocking and translational movement, incurring
energy loss at the sensor surface.[15] Such
findings have built upon previous citations demonstrating surface
acoustic wave detection of EVs that only offer a single mode of measurement.[16]Despite the fact that QCM-D offers rich
data on the build-up of
functional interfaces, its limit-of-detection (LOD) remains relatively
high (1.4 × 108 particles/mL). Therefore, while the
technique presents a valuable complementary tool for biosensor development,
further improvements are required in terms of detection sensitivity
to effectively integrate QCM-D within minimally invasive disease diagnostics.
This was partly achieved by coupling the QCM-D assessment with tandem
electrochemical impedance measurements via an EQCM-D-based detection
platform (LOD 6.7 × 107 particles/mL),[17] but further efforts are needed.An alternative
route to further improve analytical sensitivity
and specificity in QCM-D is via nanostructuration of the electrode
surface, with the rationale being to increase the sensing surface
area (surface-to-volume ratio) for enhanced binding capacity and/or
to modify the aspect ratio (length to diameter ratio) for optimal
ligand arrangement. Da Kyeong Oh and co-workers showed improved specificity,
faster kinetics, and higher sensitivity with the introduction of 2D
and 3D molecularly imprinted polymers on 2D inverse opals (IOs) for
the recognition of Bisphenol A and macromolecular proteins, respectively.[18,19] Other nanoarchitectures such as anodic aluminum oxide or ZnO nanotips
have been used to increase the surface area of the QCM-D sensor against
different targets (such as enzymes,[20] liposomes,[21] and antibodies[22])
or for enhanced cell adhesion and proliferation.[23]In this context, inorganic IOs derived by colloidal
self-assembly
present a highly tunable and scalable nanoarchitecture of suitable
feature sizes and surface chemistry.[24−26] IOs are three-dimensional
porous structures with a regular arrangement of interconnected spheroid
cavities that have a large internal surface area and a uniformity
in the pore size (ranging between 100 and 1000 nm) on the macroscale.[27] These properties make them ideal candidates
for a myriad of applications, such as in catalytic systems,[28,29] photonics,[30,31] electrochemistry, and energy
devices.[32−34] 3D inverse opals (3D IOs) may be fabricated using
top-down techniques such as photo- and electron beam lithography or
nanoimprinting,[35,36] or via bottom-up techniques such
as colloidal assembly with sacrificial spheres.[30,37] One particularly attractive route is by co-assembly, where an inorganic
sol–gel precursor is added to a colloidal suspension and therefore
participates in an evaporative self-assembly process at the meniscus
of a substrate. The result is minimized cracking and inhomogeneities
associated with the multistep process of standard colloidal assembly.[27,38] While colloids offer precise control over porous networks on the
100 nm to micrometer length scale, co-assembly techniques involving
block copolymer micelles are particularly suited for pore diameters
below 100 nm.[39−43]The establishment of such precise and facile manufacturing
methods
for 3D IOs has facilitated their integration into biosensing.[44] The enhanced surface area offered by the incorporation
of 3D IO structures, in combination with their optical properties,
has been successfully exploited for improving the analytical performance
of multiple sensing platforms. To this end, Li and co-workers developed
a label-free biosensor based on TiO2 inverse opal films
and reflectometry interference spectroscopy.[45] The physical adsorption of proteins on the pore surface was monitored
by the shift in the reflection peak, allowing detection limits as
low as 1 μg mL–1. Following a similar approach,
Lee et al. successfully immobilized antibodies onto silica 3D IO nanostructures
to create a label-free optical immunosensor capable of detecting influenza
viruses with high sensitivity (103–105 plaque-forming units) and specificity.[46] Other examples of IO-based biosensors include an immunosorbent assay
built on an amylase-based enzymatic 3D IOs[47] and a DNA sensor based on the immobilization of fluorescent aptamers
to 3D IO silica structures.[48] Of closer
relevance to the work described herein, Dong et al. created gold-coated
TiO2 3D IOs to successfully capture EVs and obtain spectroscopic
information from bonds within exosomal phosphoproteins, enabling specific
differentiation between EVs isolated from cancer patients and healthy
individuals.[49] However, the application
of nanostructured surfaces for QCM-D-based EV biosensing remains unexplored.
Moreover, solvent and artifact entrapment effects on the 2D and 3D
nanostructured sensing surfaces have been constantly disregarded,
preventing their full validation for real-world applications.In response, this work explores the formation of IO porous structures
atop QCM-D silica sensors for EV detection. Through the optimization
of two different colloidal co-assembly methods (a vertical withdrawal
and an evaporative deposition technique), FCC-structured silica IOs
without cracks and low defect density were successfully formed in
2D and 3D. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and grazing incidence
small-angle X-ray scattering (GISAXS) were used to confirm the structural
properties of the created structures, including the layer thickness,
pore size, and porosity. The impact of these parameters on detection
sensitivity was subsequently investigated on a QCM-D platform, following
silane-based functionalization of the silica surfaces and immunocapture
of CD63-positive EVs in complex media. Evaluation of detection limits
for mono- and multilayer IOs and flat silica surfaces was achieved
by determining their contributions to background (nonspecific) signals.
Results and Discussion
Size Exclusion Chromatography Isolation of EVs from Cell Culture
Media
Prior to the detection of EVs on silica substrates,
effective isolation from cell culture media was achieved through the
implementation of a size exclusion chromatography (SEC) protocol.
Nanoparticle tracking analysis (NTA) of the 10 eluted SEC fractions
identified fraction 4 as possessing the highest concentration of EV-sized
particles (ESPs) per mL. Concentrations of ESPs reduced steadily in
subsequent fractions (Figure A). This designated fraction 4 for further analysis and confirmed
EV presence. The size distribution profile of the particles in fraction
4 confirmed >91% of particles as being ESPs, with a modal size
of
98 nm (Figure B).
Western blot analysis successfully identified enriched exosomal proteins,
namely, CD81, Alix, and CD63 (Figure C). This confirmed not only EV presence among the ESPs
but also that the vesicles possessed good biological integrity. Moreover,
it ensured that CD63 was in sufficient abundance to be used as the
target protein molecule for subsequent immunodetection.
Figure 1
Concentration
and particle size characterization of ESP obtained
via a SEC protocol. (A) ESP concentration of SEC fractions. Standard
deviation determined from three independent experiments. (B) Particle
size distribution of SEC fraction 4. (C) Capillary gel-based electrophoresis
western blot of SEC fraction 4, identifying EV enriched proteins,
CD81 (26 kDa), Alix (93 kDa), and CD63 (57 kDa).
Concentration
and particle size characterization of ESP obtained
via a SEC protocol. (A) ESP concentration of SEC fractions. Standard
deviation determined from three independent experiments. (B) Particle
size distribution of SEC fraction 4. (C) Capillary gel-based electrophoresis
western blot of SEC fraction 4, identifying EV enriched proteins,
CD81 (26 kDa), Alix (93 kDa), and CD63 (57 kDa).
Inverse Opal Structure Formation
IO structures with
different pore sizes and thicknesses were obtained following the methodology
illustrated in Figure . As a first step, co-assembly of poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA)
colloidal spheres (of two different diameters: 250 and 600 nm, respectively)
along with a silicate containing sol–gel solution was achieved
using two approaches: vertical withdrawal (for 250 nm diameter spheres)
and evaporative deposition (600 nm spheres). The sample holder apparatus
for both techniques is displayed in Figure S1. Vertical withdrawal involved immersing a silica-coated substrate
in the co-assembly mixture at room temperature. The slow withdrawal
of the substrate at 0.01 mm/min created capillary forces at the meniscus
that drive the assembly of the spheres and entrapment of the sol–gel
matrix (hydrolyzed tetraethyl orthosilicate) in between. Evaporative
deposition used elevated temperatures to initiate assembly. After
the deposition was complete (the substrate withdrawn or mixture evaporated),
opal structures (crystals) were subject to O2 ion etching
(post-vertical withdrawal) or calcination (post-evaporative deposition)
to remove the PMMA colloidal spheres and reveal the inorganic SiO2 IO network of pores. The rationale for selecting 600 nm-sized
PMMA spheres for multilayer IOs was to provide sufficient pore and
neck size for ESPs to infiltrate deeper within the porous network.
Figure 2
Schematic
representation of implemented colloidal co-assembly methods
and resulting inverse opal structures. (A) Evaporative deposition
for multilayered IO formation approach. (B) Vertical withdrawal for
monolayer formation.
Schematic
representation of implemented colloidal co-assembly methods
and resulting inverse opal structures. (A) Evaporative deposition
for multilayered IO formation approach. (B) Vertical withdrawal for
monolayer formation.
Inverse Opal Structure Characterization
Top-view SEM
images of the IO structures obtained after polymer removal show in
both cases a crack-free and homogeneous porous structure. IOs produced
via the vertical withdrawal method present a monolayer configuration,
with excellent ordering as confirmed by FFT analysis (Figure A,C). This type of surface
could provide the analyte with direct access to the underlying substrate
and ensure that bound analytes are kept at a close distance to the
oscillatory surface. IOs structures fabricated following the evaporative
deposition approach produced a multilayer. The IO structure displayed
a thickness of approximately 1500 nm (Figure B, D). The geometrical architecture of the
close-packed pore structure could increase the tortuosity for analytes
to reach the sensor surface and provide a greater internal surface
area for immune-functionalization. The structural order of the 3D
IO was further confirmed by small-angle X-ray scattering, displaying
a face-centered cubic (FCC) structure with the {111} plane being parallel
to the surface.[50−52] Furthermore, films were seen to grow along the {110}
direction of the deposited FCC structure (Figure S2).
Figure 3
Top-view SEM micrographs of (A) inverse opal monolayer (scale bar:
400 nm) and (B) inverse opal multilayer (scale bars: 1 μm).
Insets: FFT of respective SEM image. Cross-section SEM images of (C)
monolayer and (D) multilayer IO architectures.
Top-view SEM micrographs of (A) inverse opal monolayer (scale bar:
400 nm) and (B) inverse opal multilayer (scale bars: 1 μm).
Insets: FFT of respective SEM image. Cross-section SEM images of (C)
monolayer and (D) multilayer IO architectures.Image analysis of the top-view SEM images (via
the software Pebbles)[53] enabled the calculation
of average pore size
distribution and total porosity in both structures. Monolayer IO pores
were found to have a modal pore size of 247 ± 3 nm, which suggests
minimal shrinkage from the original 250 nm PMMA sphere size during
the ion etching process (Figure S3A). Multilayer
IO pores displayed an estimated surface diameter of 494 ± 5 nm,
which confirmed significant (17.7%) shrinkage of pores compared to
the original 600 nm PMMA sphere size during the calcination process
(Figure S3B). This is in line with previous
studies and may be linked to the concurrent volume shrinkage of PMMA
spheres and sol–gel precursors during the condensation reaction
upon heating.[54,55]Pore size analysis of the
cross-sectional SEM image for multilayer
IO suggests that the shrinkage of the pores occurred with a directional
bias, with the modal height being 381 ± 4 nm, representing a
36.5% shrinkage (Figure S3C). The full
pore width by comparison was determined to be 501 ± 3 nm, marking
a 16.5% shrinkage and highlighting significant pore anisotropy to
give an oblate ellipsoid (Figure S3D).
In terms of total porosity, values of 73.1% (IO monolayer) and 64.7%
(3D IO) were calculated. Both results are in line with conventionally
reported porosity values for FCC-structured inverse opals.[27]In a subsequent step, the internal surface
area of both the IO
monolayer and multilayer was estimated using previous structural information.
The internal surface area for a single oblate ellipsoidal pore within
the multilayer structure can be calculated following eq .where S is
the surface area, a and b represent
the in-plane radial dimensions, and c being the out-of-plane
dimension from ellipsoid center to its surface.Using structural
values previously calculated by SEM, the total
internal surface area for multilayer IO films was established at ∼215
μm2, marking a 43-fold increase in the surface area
compared to a 5 μm2 flat silica surface. A similar
calculation for the monolayer IOs was also made, although a correction
was applied by halving the figure to account for the hemispherical
shape of the obtained open porous monolayer. In comparison, the equivalent
total internal surface area of the pores formed from the smaller 250
nm spheres was estimated to be ∼9.9 μm2, that
is, a doubling of the surface area. This underlines the scope of IO
structures for a significant increase in the detection surface area.
3DIO Modified Sensors for QCM-D Detection of EVs
IO
structures were applied to QCM sensors to understand the impact on
the detection of ESP using the QCM-D platform and an immunosensing
method, following the methodology displayed in Figure A. Silane-based chemistry was initially used
to functionalized flat, monolayer IO and multilayer IO silica surfaces
with a mixed-SAM that presents biotin molecules for subsequent streptavidin
(Sav) conjugation. The QCM-D response to the fabrication process is
shown in Figure B,
C, confirming the adsorption of the relevant immuno-detection layers.
The small magnitude of frequency and dissipation response is in line
with the low mass and rigid nature of the proteins and with previously
reported responses.[14] It is important to
note that while the additional decrease of frequency for multilayer
inverse opals of ∼6 Hz (or ∼12%) is evident, the extend
does not scale linearly with the surface area.
Figure 4
(A) Schematic representation
of immunosensor fabrication atop IO
coated sensors. QCM-D frequency (B) and dissipation (C) profiles captured
for the immunosensor fabrication process on flat silica substrates
compared with the IO monolayer and multilayer.
(A) Schematic representation
of immunosensor fabrication atop IO
coated sensors. QCM-D frequency (B) and dissipation (C) profiles captured
for the immunosensor fabrication process on flat silica substrates
compared with the IO monolayer and multilayer.After functionalization, the performance of all
three surfaces
was assessed against a spiked concentration of CD63 protein. Figure A, B shows that an
incremental increase in response occurs with the increasing internal
surface area of the structure. The monolayer exhibited a marginal
improvement in CD63 detection compared to the flat silica, while the
multilayer IO increased the response further by approximately 30%
in terms of frequency change. Dissipation changes upon the addition
of CD63 were small in nature, which was expected due to the largely
nonviscoelastic properties of the spiked protein. This suggests that
the protein was able to bind rigidly to the IO structure, irrespective
of the layer thickness. Spiked CD63 is a small molecule (2.4 nm) compared
to the pore size, and thus would not induce any pore blockage but
rather likely infiltrate the entire IO structure through the interpore
necks.
Figure 5
Comparison of frequency (A) and dissipation (B) profiles for 2
μg/mL CD63 detection on flat silica, inverse opal monolayer,
and multilayer surfaces. QCM-D analysis of EV detection using IO immunofunctionalized
sensors. QCM-D frequency (C) and dissipation (D) profiles comparing
responses to CD63-positive EVs in 25% v/v human serum of flat silica,
silica inverse opal monolayer, and multilayer surfaces.
Comparison of frequency (A) and dissipation (B) profiles for 2
μg/mL CD63 detection on flat silica, inverse opal monolayer,
and multilayer surfaces. QCM-D analysis of EV detection using IO immunofunctionalized
sensors. QCM-D frequency (C) and dissipation (D) profiles comparing
responses to CD63-positive EVs in 25% v/v human serum of flat silica,
silica inverse opal monolayer, and multilayer surfaces.The detection of the considerably larger, fluid-filled,
ESP structures
on these surfaces was explored via the addition of 5 × 108 ESPs/mL in 25% v/v serum (Figure C, D). The net decrease in frequency following
a post-adsorption rinse signified the adsorption of particles to all
three sensor surfaces, the most significant of which was seen with
the multilayer IO structure, offering almost a 100 and 40% increase
in response compared to flat and monolayer IO surfaces, respectively
(Figure C). The corresponding
improvement in dissipation was also detected (Figure D). Further analysis of the adsorption and
desorption of EVs on flat SiO2 vs multilayer IO is shown
in the Supporting Information. A linear
fit of the initial phase of mass uptake and release based on the response
of the frequency channel (Figure S4) provides
an enhanced rate of adsorption of −0.46 Hz s−1 for the multilayer IO structure in comparison to −0.36 Hz
s−1 for flat SiO2. The rate of desorption
was comparable with 0.21 Hz s−1 for the multilayer
IO and 0.21 Hz s−1 for the flat SiO2,
respectively. The adsorption and desorption kinetics of the process
were further investigated across a longer timescale to obtain characteristic
time constants (Figure S5). Herein, a mass
viscoelastic model was used for quantitative comparison.[56] As expected, the mass uptake of the flat SiO2 sensor could be fitted with a single exponential function,
resulting in a τad of 41 s. In contrast, the mass
uptake of the multilayer IO sensor did not follow one growth rate
constant throughout. The process can be better approximated with a
bi-exponential fit, resulting in τad,1 of 25 s and
τad,2 of 417 s. This may be explained using a two-stage
adsorption process. Initially, the multilayer IO provides an enhanced
surface area for EV anchoring. However, with every binding event,
the number of percolation paths for further uptake is reduced in the
3D architecture, requiring more complex diffusion processes for additional
mass uptake. (Note that with a bi-exponential fit, the corresponding
values for flat SiO2 were τad,1 = 30 s
and τad,2 = 87 s.) Importantly, the desorption process
was comparable for both flat SiO2 and multilayer IO, with
τdes, flat of 45 s and τdes, IO of 48 s, respectively. These findings provide further evidence that
the 3D architecture was well accessible for EVs.To gain more
insights into the ESP binding process across the different
architectures, dissipation change was assessed as a function of frequency
for ESP adsorption and rinse steps (Figure ). All three sensor surfaces demonstrated
an initial linear relationship between dissipation and frequency as
ESPs were captured, with a subsequent decrease in the relative dissipation
response as the surface nears saturation. The follow-up rinsing of
the sensor surface resulted in significant frequency and dissipation
reduction for both flat and monolayer IO surfaces, indicating comprehensive
removal of many loosely bound, or nonspecifically adsorbed, artifacts
from the sensing surface. These are assumed to be the serum content
of the running buffer. In contrast, the multilayer IO sensor exhibited
a stunted removal of such artifacts and a prolonged period of frequency
reduction alongside a minimal decrease in dissipation. This may be
a result of the continual removal of surface-bound contaminants, albeit
to a lesser extent. Moreover, the thickness and interconnectivity
of the multilayer IO could result in the entrapment of artifacts and
small non-ESP particles within the porous network, which contributed
to the elevated dissipation signal.
Figure 6
Comparing dissipation response as a function
of frequency change
across inverse opal functionalized surfaces. Response analysis using
(A) flat silica, (B) silica inverse opal monolayer, and (C) silica
inverse opal multilayer substrates toward 1 × 109 ESPs/mL
in 25% v/v serum.
Comparing dissipation response as a function
of frequency change
across inverse opal functionalized surfaces. Response analysis using
(A) flat silica, (B) silica inverse opal monolayer, and (C) silica
inverse opal multilayer substrates toward 1 × 109 ESPs/mL
in 25% v/v serum.To substantiate this theory, control investigations
were conducted
by flowing 1 × 109 ESPs/mL in HEPES buffered saline
(HBS) buffer and 25% v/v serum across the three surface types following
functionalization with a nonspecific IgG control antibody to determine
the background nonspecific binding contribution to the overall response. Figure S6 indicates that the introduction of
the sample to the sensor surface caused a small yet significant response
in frequency and dissipation for multilayer IO surfaces (particularly
in a more complex media), while monolayer IOs demonstrated negligible
change. It is possible that the multilayer architecture entrapped
a greater volume of the sample, increasing the oscillatory mass but
decreasing the layer rigidity and pathways for energy dissipation.
Responses seen with multilayer IOs should therefore be approached
with caution along with the knowledge of buffer composition.Subsequently, the sensing performance of the IO architectures was
explored across a range of ESP concentrations to determine the impact
on detection sensitivity. Data for both frequency and dissipation
response are shown in Figure . Interestingly, multilayer IOs seemed to exhibit stronger
responses across all tested ESP concentrations for both methods of
measurement, as well as increasing the dynamic range of detection
compared to flat silica. It is likely that the increased internal
surface area of the IO supports additional antibody functionalization
and subsequent EV capture. It is also apparent that frequency responses
for all three surfaces converged at the highest concentration of ESPs
(Figure A). Conversely,
the dissipation response for multilayer IOs continued to increase
and at a faster rate than for the flat silica or monolayer IO (Figure B).
Figure 7
QCM-D performance comparison
between flat silica, silica inverse
opal monolayer, and multilayer surfaces against titrated concentrations
of ESPs spiked in 25% v/v serum. QCM-D (A) frequency and (B) corresponding
dissipation profiles. Standard deviation is determined from three
independent experiments.
QCM-D performance comparison
between flat silica, silica inverse
opal monolayer, and multilayer surfaces against titrated concentrations
of ESPs spiked in 25% v/v serum. QCM-D (A) frequency and (B) corresponding
dissipation profiles. Standard deviation is determined from three
independent experiments.Table compares
the LOD of the silica-based sensors. IO structures were shown to improve
detection performance toward ESPs, with high surface area multilayer
IOs demonstrating a frequency and dissipation LOD as low as 6.24 ×
107 and 6.91 × 107 ESPs/mL, respectively.
These results should be evaluated alongside the findings of potential
artifacts and solvent entrapment for the multilayer 3D IOs compared
to the monolayer 2D IOs. Thus, the observed improvement in performance
is somewhat limited. The sensing characteristics compare favorably
to some reports adopting spectroscopic principles, which,[57,58] however, would benefit from further advancement when comparing plasmon
resonance-based approaches, exhibiting LODs as low as 1 × 103 ESPs/mL.[59]
Table 1
QCM-D LOD Values Calculated for the
Different Silica Surfaces Used during This Work
LOD vs
sensor surface type
mode
flat silica
IO monolayer
IO multilayer
frequency
9.60
× 107
9.24 × 107
6.24 × 107
dissipation
9.01 × 107
8.42 × 107
6.91 × 107
Nonetheless, the combination of highly tunable, scalable,
and low-cost
fabrication of the IO structures underlines their potential to comprise
a reliable method for improving QCM-D analytical performance.
Conclusions
This work investigated the potential of
inorganic IO networks for
improved QCM-D biosensing performance. Vertical withdrawal and evaporative
deposition techniques were employed as two co-assembly methods to
produce silica IOs with monolayer (2D) and multilayer (3D) thickness,
respectively. SEM characterization confirmed some degree of shrinkage
from the original colloidal sphere size, resulting in the formation
of oblate ellipsoidal pores. This allowed the internal surface area
to be estimated as being 2-fold and 43-fold larger for monolayer and
multilayer IOs, respectively, compared to a flat silica surface. The
generation of these structures on silica QCM sensors supported successful
immunosensing of spiked CD63 protein, followed by CD63-positive EVs.
IO structures were shown to improve detection performance toward ESPs,
with high surface area multilayer IOs demonstrating a frequency and
dissipation LOD as low as 6.24 × 107 and 6.91 ×
107 ESPs/mL, respectively. However, possible findings of
the solvent and artifact entrapment within the 3D IO structures suggest
that careful investigation of such systems is needed to validate their
effectiveness. 2D IO surfaces, on the other hand, offer the scope
for compartmentalized ligand and analyte anchoring. With the reusability
of these sensors previously shown,[14] further
fabrication and sensing strategies will create opportunities for advanced
dual-mode analysis of clinically relevant biomarkers by combining
QCM-D with optical methods that exploit the photonic band gap properties
of the IO architectures.
Experimental Section
EV Isolation and Characterization
SEC isolation of
10 × 1 mL ESPs fractions from human mesenchymal stem-cell cell-culture
media (HUMSCCM) was conducted, as detailed in previous studies.[17] Briefly, 30 mL of the clarified media obtained
after filtering the HUMSCCM source with a 0.45 μm filter (Merck
Millipore, U.S.) was subsequently concentrated via centrifugation
at 4000 g for 30 min at 4 °C, using Amicon Ultra-15 centrifugal
filters with a 10 kDa pore size cut-off (Merck Millipore, USA). In
a next step, 0.5 mL of the obtained concentrated solution was loaded
onto a qEV 35 nm SEC column (Izon Science, UK) and eluted at a flow
rate of 1 mL/min, using an HBS (0.01 M HEPES, pH 7.4, 0.15 M NaCl)
(GE Healthcare Life Sciences, Sweden). Collected SEC fractions were
characterized using NTA analysis (Nanosight LM10 instrument, Malvern
Instruments, UK) and western blot analysis (Biotechne Ltd., USA),
as described in a previous study.[14]
Colloidal Suspension Preparation
A TEOS mixture consisting
of 1:1:1.5 ratio (by weight) of TEOS, 0.10 M HCl, and EtOH (100%)
was prepared. This mixture (0.15 mL) was added to 19.5 mL of deionized
water and 0.5 mL of a 5% w/v colloidal PMMA particle (250 and 600
nm diameter) suspension in water (predispersed by sonication). The
solution was stirred for 1 h at room temperature prior to use.
Monolayer Formation via Vertical Withdrawal Co-Assembly
Bare Si wafers (1 × 2 cm) and silica-coated QCM sensors were
exposed to 60 s of oxygen plasma (20 sccm) using a Diener Electronic
PICO instrument to remove organic contaminants and for oxide activation
to introduce desirable hydrophilic properties for co-assembly. Si
wafers and silica-coated QCM sensors were suspended in a container
of colloid/TEOS suspension using a custom-made motorized sample holder.
The submerged sample was withdrawn at a programmed rate of 0.01 mm/min
over 24 h, inducing thin film deposition at the air-solvent interface.
Post-deposition, wafers/sensors were annealed at 180 °C for 2
h to aid mechanical stability prior to removal of PMMA. The PMMA opal
template was removed by oxygen reactive ion etching using oxygen plasma
exposure for 300 s (20 sccm).
Multilayer Formation via Vertical Evaporative Deposition Co-Assembly
As before, bare Si wafers (1 × 2 cm) and silica-coated QCM
sensors were exposed to 60 s of oxygen plasma (20 sccm) using a Diener
Electronic PICO instrument. Si wafer and silica-coated QCM sensors
were then suspended in a container of colloid/TEOS suspension using
a custom-made sample holder. The colloidal suspension was evaporated
over a 2-day period in a 65 °C oven, inducing film deposition
at the air-solvent interface. Post-deposition, wafers/sensors were
annealed at 180 °C for 2 h to aid mechanical stability prior
to removal of PMMA. The opal substrates were then calcined in air
at 500 °C for 2 h with a 4 h ramp time for the removal of PMMA
and sintering of the silica inverse opal structures.
Scanning Electron Microscopy
Si wafers with inverse
opal films were analyzed with SEM using a JEOL 6701 instrument (Japan).
All micrographs were collected at an accelerating voltage of 10 kV.
Samples were mounted for both cross-sectional and longitudinal imaging
on black carbon tape followed by gold sputter coating for 10 s at
0.08 mBarr prior to analysis. In-plane and out-of-plane pore size
distributions were determined using the Pebbles software.[53]
Grazing Incidence Small-Angle X-ray Scattering
GISAXS
experiments were performed at the Centre for Nature Inspired Engineering
(University College London), using a SAXSLab Ganesha 300XL (8 keV)
with an incident angle of 0.18°. 2D scattering patterns were
collected with a PILATUS 300 K detector with a sample-to-detector
distance of 1400 mm. GISAXS data analysis was performed using FitGISAXS
software.[60] Si wafers with inverse opals
formed from 100 nm PMMA spheres using the evaporative deposition approach
were used for analysis to understand the structural order of the pores.
General QCM Apparatus Setup
A Q-Sense E4 QCM-D instrument
(Biolin Scientific, Sweden), coupled with the QTools software (version
3.0.17.560, Biolin Scientific, Sweden), was used to perform and analyze
the QCM-D measurements. All changes in resonance frequency (Δf) presented here correspond to the one recorded
from the fifth overtone because of its optimal signal stability-sensitivity
ratio. Variations of less than 10% in Δf were
observed between all the registered overtones (3th, 5th, 7th, and
11th, respectively). In line with previous studies, samples were degassed
prior to exchange in the QCM-d flow module, and AT-cut 5-MHz gold-coated
quartz crystal sensors with a 0.79 cm2 active area (Biolin,
Sweden) were used. The impact of buffer properties on the sensing
process was minimized by using the same HBS stock solution during
the preparation of all analyte solutions, ensuring maximum reproducibility
and allowing direct comparison between the Δf detected. In a subsequent step, identical volumes (0.25 mL per sensor)
of the prepared analyte solutions were flowed at 10 μL/min over
the sensor surfaces. Baseline measurements were routinely performed
simultaneously to the sample measurements using a bare sensor. Frequency
and dissipation values reported here are postbuffer rinse to account
for the removal of weakly bound analytes. All experiments were conducted
at least in triplicate with representative QCM-D profiles depicted
in Figures and 5.
Silica-Coated QCM Sensor Functionalization
A 5 mM solution
of silane-PEG (2 kDa)-biotin and spacer molecule silane-PEG (600 Da)-COOH
at a 1:9 molar ratio was flowed across the sensor surface at 7.5 μL/min
overnight to form a mixed SAM. Ratios were determined following optimization
studies using molecules of a similar size in previous reports.[14] A 100 μg/mL solution of SAv was flowed
across the sensor surface at 10 μL/min for 20 min, followed
by a rinse step of HBS at 80 μL/min for 15 min. Mouse monoclonal
biotinylated-anti CD63 (20 μg/mL) was immobilized on the surface
at 10 μL/min for 20 min, followed by another rinse step and
response stabilization for 30 min prior to sample addition.
QCM-D Immunodetection of EVs Using Silica Sensors
Silica-based
immunosensor functionality toward spiked CD63 and exosomal CD63 was
assessed. Spiked samples of CD63 tetraspannin protein with a concentration
of 35 nM were used as a positive control. Sensitivity toward CD63-positive
EVs in HBS buffer was tested using dilutions of SEC fraction 4. ESP
samples were titrated in 25% v/v human serum (Sigma Aldrich, USA)
to determine the sensitivity of the platform in complex media. The
sensors were assessed with the following concentrations: 5 ×
107, 7.5 × 107, 1 × 108, 2.5 × 108, 5 × 108, 7.5 ×
108, and 1 × 109 ESPs/mL. The specificity
of the sensor surfaces and the background signal were determined by
replacing the anti-CD63 antibody with a biotin-IgG isotype control
antibody. Responses between sensor surfaces were compared using a
concentration of 1 × 109 ESPs/mL in HBS buffer and
25% v/v serum. LOD and LOQ were defined as the minimum concentration
displaying a signal-to-noise ratio of 3 and 10, respectively.[61] SNR was determined as a ratio of the response
elicited on the target and control sensor surfaces.
Authors: Johan Skog; Tom Würdinger; Sjoerd van Rijn; Dimphna H Meijer; Laura Gainche; Miguel Sena-Esteves; William T Curry; Bob S Carter; Anna M Krichevsky; Xandra O Breakefield Journal: Nat Cell Biol Date: 2008-11-16 Impact factor: 28.824