4.7 Article

Improved LFIAs for highly sensitive detection of BNP at point-of-care

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF NANOMEDICINE
Volume 12, Issue -, Pages 4455-4465

Publisher

DOVE MEDICAL PRESS LTD
DOI: 10.2147/IJN.S135735

Keywords

heart failure; biomarker; colorimetric assays; personalized medicine

Funding

  1. National Instrumentation Program of China [2013YQ190467]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Heart failure (HF) has become a major cause of morbidity and mortality with a significant global economic burden. Although well-established clinical tests could provide early diagnosis, access to these tests is limited in developing countries, where a relatively higher incidence of HF is present. This has prompted an urgent need for developing a cost-effective, rapid and robust diagnostic tool for point-of-care (POC) detection of HF. Lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA) has found widespread applications in POC diagnostics. However, the low sensitivity of LFIA limits its ability to detect important HF biomarkers (e.g., brain natriuretic peptide [BNP]) that are normally present in low concentration in blood. To address this issue, we developed an improved LFIA by optimizing the gold nanoparticle (GNP)-antibody conjugate conditions (e.g., the conjugate pH and the amount of added antibody), the diameter of GNP and the concentration of antibody embedded on the test line and modifying the structure of test strip. Through these improvements, the proposed test strip enabled the detection of BNP down to 0.1 ng/mL within 10-15 min, presenting similar to 15-fold sensitivity enhancement over conventional lateral flow assay. We also successfully applied our LFIA in the analysis of BNP in human serum samples, highlighting its potential use for clinical assessment of HF. The developed LFIA for BNP could rapidly rule out HF with the naked eye, offering tremendous potential for POC test and personalized medicine.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available