4.8 Article

Immunospot assay based on fluorescent nanoparticles for Dengue fever detection

期刊

BIOSENSORS & BIOELECTRONICS
卷 41, 期 -, 页码 180-185

出版社

ELSEVIER ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
DOI: 10.1016/j.bios.2012.08.005

关键词

Immunospot assay; Dengue fever; Fluorescent nanoparticles; ELISA

资金

  1. International Doctorate Program NanoBioTechnology (IDK-NBT)
  2. Elite Network of Bavaria (ENB)
  3. cluster of excellence Nano Initiative Munich (NIM)
  4. Center of Nanoscience (CeNS)
  5. DAAD
  6. CAPES

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Dengue fever is one of the most neglected tropical diseases and of highest international public health importance, with 50 million cases worldwide every year. Early detection can decrease mortality rates from more than 20% to less than 1% and the relevant early diagnosis analyte is the viral non-structural glycoprotein, NS1. Currently, enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) is the method of choice to detect NS1. However, this is a time consuming method, requiring 3-5 h, and it is the bottleneck for routine of clinical analysis laboratory in epidemic periods, when hundreds of samples should be tested. Here we describe an easy method combining principles of fluorophore linked immunosorbent assay (FLISA) and enzyme linked immunospotting (ELISPOT). For detection, we used mouse anti-NS1 IgG labeled with fluorescent nanoparticles. The presented procedure needs only 4 mu L of serum samples and requires 45-60 min. The detection limit, 5.2 ng/mL, is comparable to ELISA tests. The comparison of 83 samples with a commercial ELISA revealed a sensitivity of 81% and specificity of 88%. The use of fluorescent nanoparticles provides a higher sensitivity than an assay using usual fluorescent dye molecules, besides avoiding bleaching effects. Based on the results, the proposed method provides fast, specific and sensitive results, and proves to be a suitable method for Dengue NS1 detection in impoverished regions or epidemic areas. (C) 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.8
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