4.5 Article

Effects of blood sample anticoagulants on lateral flow assays using luminescent photon-upconverting and Eu(III) nanoparticle reporters

Journal

ANALYTICAL BIOCHEMISTRY
Volume 492, Issue -, Pages 13-20

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ab.2015.09.009

Keywords

Lateral flow; Immunochromatography; Fluorescence; Upconversion; Interference

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Many quantitative and semiquantitative lateral flow (LF) assays have been introduced for clinical analytes such as biomarkers for cancer or acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Various detection technologies involving quantitative analyzing devices have been reported to have sufficient analytical sensitivity and quantification capability for clinical point-of-care tests. Fluorescence-based detection technologies such as quantum dots, Eu(III) nanoparticles, and photon-upconverting nanoparticles (UCNPs) have been introduced as promising solutions for point-of-care devices because of their high detectability by optical sensors. Lateral flow assays can be used for various sample types, e.g., urine, saliva, cerebrospinal fluid, and blood. This study focuses on the properties of serum and plasma because of their relevance in cancer and AMI diagnostics. The limit of detection was compared in LF assays having Eu(III) nanoparticles or UCNPs as reporters and the antibody configurations for two different analytes (prostate-specific antigen and cardiac troponin I (cTnI)). The results indicate a significant effect of anticoagulants in venipuncture tubes. The samples in K(3)EDTA tubes resulted in significant interference by decreased reporter particle mobility, and thus the limit of detection was up to eightfold less sensitive compared to serum samples. Despite the matrix interference in the cTnI assay with UCNP reporters, limits of detection of 41 ng/L with serum and 66 ng/L with the Li-heparin sample were obtained. (C) 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available