4.6 Article

A microwell plate-based multiplex immunoassay for simultaneous quantitation of antibodies to infectious viruses

期刊

ANALYST
卷 140, 期 6, 页码 1995-2000

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c4an02262a

关键词

-

资金

  1. KIST
  2. Center for Women In Science, Engineering and Technology (WISET) under the Program for Returners into RD
  3. National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) - Korea government (MSIP) [2014-R1A2A2A04002526]
  4. Proteogenomic Research Program through NRF - MSIP [2012M3A9B9036670]
  5. Korea Healthcare technology RD Project
  6. Ministry of Health & Welfare, Republic of Korea [A121191]
  7. Pioneer Research Center Program through NRF - Ministry of Science, ICT & Future Planning [2014M3C1A3054141]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Antibodies (Abs) to disease-causing viruses in human blood are important indicators of infection status. While ELISA has been widely used to detect these Abs, a multiplex assay system for simultaneous detection of multiple Abs is still a desirable alternative method for a more efficient screening process because of the lack of multiplexing ability in ELISA. However, as all antibodies are based on immunoglobulin and recognized commonly by the same secondary antibody, it is impossible to multiplex the conventional indirect ELISA in a 96-microwell plate-based platform. To overcome this hurdle, we designed an assay consisting of two steps: capturing target Abs by specific antigens on DNA-encoded gold nanoparticles; and quantifying the target Abs by producing RNase H-mediated detection signals based on the DNA and additional RNA probes. With this newly designed method, we could simultaneously analyze three infectious disease-related Abs, anti-HIV Ab, anti-HCV Ab, and anti-HBV Ab, on the microwell-based platform. The assay performance was evaluated by comparison with ELISA. Furthermore, the accuracy and precision of the assay in a practical application was also estimated by determining the amount of target Abs in human serum solutions.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据