Nanomaterials in Biosensing of Neurodegenerative Disease Biomarkers: Comparison
View Latest Version
Please note this is a comparison between Version 2 by Catherine Yang and Version 1 by Simone Morais.

The unique and outstanding properties of nanomaterials (such as graphene, carbon nanotubes, gold, silver and magnetic nanoparticles, polymers and quantum dots) have been contributing to enhance the electrochemical and optical behavior of transducers while offering a suitable matrix for the immobilization of biological recognition elements. Therefore, optical and electrochemical immuno- and DNA-biosensors with higher sensitivity, selectivity and longer stability have been reported. This review aims to provide insights into the conjugation of nanomaterials with different transducers highlighting their crucial role in the construction of biosensors for detection of Alzheimer's disease (AD) main biomarkers.

  • Biosensor
  • Carbon nanotubes
  • Graphene
  • Gold Nanoparticles

In recent decades, novel modified transducers have been developed based on the unique properties of nanoscale materials and the ability to tailor their size and structure. As a result of quantum-size effects, nanomaterials exhibit great electronic, mechanical, thermal and optical properties and are recognized as one of the most attractive ways to promote the design of biosensors with enhanced analytical performance [1][2][3][4]. Integration of nanomaterials into biosensors has been found to improve the conductivity and catalytic activity of the transducer while favoring the immobilization of a large amount of biological recognition elements, as a result of their high surface area, in addition to improving the accessibility of specific analytes to these elements [2][3][4][5][6][7]. In fact, functionalization of nanomaterials has contributed to the development of highly sensitive and selective bioassays and biosensors for nucleic acids and proteins by integrating the biological recognition elements with the components of the various transduction mechanisms [5][7][8][9]. In this regard, considerable attention has been devoted to the immobilization of biological recognition elements as this aspect will have an impact on detection sensitivity, reproducibility and robustness, among other analytical parameters [4][8][10][11]. The performance of a biosensor is predominantly dependent on the binding affinity and specificity of binding molecules, their coating density onto the transducer’s surface and, finally and most importantly, the orientation of the biological recognition elements after immobilization, which should retain their full biological activity by ensuring that its binding sections remain intact and accessible while also providing an effective electronic connection between the redox active sites in the biomolecules and the transducer’s surface [3][5][12][13][14].

The most frequently applied nanomaterials in the development of immunosensors and DNA biosensors are carbon materials such as graphene and carbon nanotubes (CNTs), gold nanoparticles (AuNPs) and polymers, all having unique and specific properties applicable in the development of novel transduction schemes. Other nanomaterials such as silver (AgNPs) and magnetic nanoparticles, dendrimers and quantum dots (QDs) are also used, but to a lesser extent. These nanomaterials have most commonly been reported for the development of biosensors performing detection via sandwich immunoassays/DNA assays or through direct detection (Figure 1).

Nanomaterials 09 01663 g001

 Figure 1. Schematic illustration of the most common detection schemes developed using nanomaterials: (A) sandwich assay with secondary antibodies conjugated with nanomaterials and without labels; (B) sandwich assay with labeled secondary antibodies; (C) direct detection.

1. Carbon Nanomaterials

Carbon Nanomaterials

Carbon-based materials including CNTs, graphene, fullerenes, carbon fibers, graphene quantum dots and carbon dots have been receiving a lot of attention in the development of biosensing analytical tools [12][15][16][17][18], with CNTs [19][20][21][22] and graphene [23][24][25] being the most commonly applied carbon nanomaterials for the development of biosensors for the detection of AD biomarkers. Although the specific characteristics of carbon nanomaterials vary between them, their most prominent advantages are reflected in their electrochemical activity, electrical conductivity, large surface area, high surface-to-volume ratio, ease of functionalization, biocompatibility and anti-fouling effect [8][4][9][12][15][17].

1.1. Carbon Nanotubes

Carbon Nanotubes

CNTs are cylindrical large molecules consisting of a hexagonal arrangement of hybridized carbon atoms, which can be classified as single-walled carbon nanotubes (SWCNTs), composed of a single graphite sheet rolled into a seamless hollow nanoscale tube, and multi-walled carbon nanotubes (MWCNTs), characterized by the presence of multiple concentric tubes encircling one another [16][26][27]. SWCNTs present a diameter in the range of 0.4–2 nm, while MWCNTs, depending on the number of layers, can display a diameter in the range of 2–100 nm, with the distance between each layer being approximately 0.34 nm [4][5][16][27][28][29][30][31][32]. Since their discovery in 1991 [33], they have increasingly attracted research interest due to their high surface-to-volume ratio, exceptional electronic properties, and the presence of edge-plane-like defects which make them very interesting for biosensing applications [5][4][16][27][31][34]. In addition, another major advantage of CNTs is that they can be easily functionalized with different chemical groups through covalent and non-covalent bonds, which will further promote the immobilization of biomolecules or organic molecules [4][5][12][31]. Four studies reported the use of CNTs for the development of biosensors towards determination of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) main biomarkers. Oh et al. [19] developed a SWCNTs film-based biosensor with a metal semiconductor field effect transistor structure for determination of amyloid-beta 42 (Aβ42). In a different work Yu et al.[20] used SWCNTs to develop a ratiometric electrochemical biosensor for the simultaneous determination of Cu2+ and Aβ based on a glassy carbon electrode. For the determination of Aβ42/Aβ40 levels in cerebrospinal fluid and targeted brain tissue of AD rats, Yu et al.[21] developed an electrochemical affinity biosensor based on MWCNTs modified with AuNPs. In the last reported study using CNTs for biosensing of AD biomarkers, Lisi et al.[22] developed a biosensor for tau protein detection using a layer-by-layer approach for amplification of the surface plasmon resonance (SPR) signal.

1.2. Graphene

Graphene

Graphene is a planar sheet of carbon atoms arranged into a rigid honeycomb structure, and like CNTs, the carbon bonds are sp2-hybridized [35][36][37][38][39][40]. As a result of its electron configuration, graphene exhibits large surface area, high mechanical strength, high electrical conductivity, high elasticity and thermal conductivity [35][36][37][39][39][41]. Graphene oxide (GO) and reduced GO (rGO) are derivatives of graphene with a vast applicability in the biosensing field. Graphene can be easily functionalized into GO containing various oxygen functional groups, such as epoxide, carbonyl, carboxyl and hydroxyl groups [37][38][41]. These hydrophilic groups make GO more soluble in water, while exhibiting better selectivity towards functionalization with biomolecules, which are highly important features in biosensor applications [35][37][38]. On the other hand, rGO is the form of GO that is processed by chemical, thermal and other procedures which will ultimately influence its composition and properties [37]. The reduction process will reduce the oxygen content while introducing structural defects that will contribute to high thermal conductivity as the electrochemistry of graphene sheets occurs at the edges and defects (where heterogeneous electron transfer is fast) and not at the basal plane [36][37][38][41]. Usually, rGO presents advantages over graphene and GO for application in biosensing technology as it combines some of the negatively charged groups of GO along with the excellent conductive properties of graphene [40][42].

Graphene has been used in three different ways for the development of electrochemical immuno- and DNA biosensors for determination of AD biomarkers, namely, Aβ and apolipoprotein (ApoE), respectively. Two works performed determination of  ApoE through DNA detection, with Mars et al.[23] using graphene quantum dots for a dual biosensing platform with electrochemical and fluorescence determination, while Wu et al. [24] conjugated graphene with mesoporous silica for the development of a hybrid nanomaterial that served as the basis for ratiometric determination. Finally, Kurkina et al.[25] applied rGO for the development of a FET electrochemical immunosensor for Aβ determination.

2. Nanoparticles

Nanoparticles

Nanoparticles with varied configurations and properties have been the most frequently used nanomaterials for the development of novel immuno- and DNA-biosensors [43][44]. Owing to their small size and high surface area, nanoparticles offer unique chemical, physical and electronic properties that are advantageous for the development of high-performance biosensors either by using them as amplifying labels for signal enhancement or by working as an appropriate platform for the immobilization of biological recognition elements. The most common applied nanoparticles are metal nanoparticles, which are typically synthesized by chemical reduction of the corresponding transition metal salts in the presence of a stabilizer promoting the synthesis of nanoparticles with high stability, rich linking chemistry and solubility [43][44][45][46][47].

2.1. Gold Nanoparticles

Gold Nanoparticles

Gold nanoparticles (AuNPs) are one of the most frequently applied nanomaterials in the biosensing field due to their inherent characteristics such as extraordinary optical and electronic properties, controllable morphology and size, and simple preparation methods [48][49]. In addition, AuNPs exhibit high chemical stability, excellent conducting capability and catalytic activity, large surface area and high surface-to-volume ratio, biological compatibility, and ease of functionalization, favoring the immobilization of biological recognition elements as DNA, antibodies and enzymes [3][8][9][12][48]. These features make AuNPs an outstanding nanomaterial for bridging the biological elements with the transduction systems [49].

AuNPs have been extensively used for the development of immuno- and DNA-biosensors for detection of AD biomarkers, being the nanomaterial more frequently reported throughout the reviewed studies. Being very versatile, AuNPs have been applied with different and complementary functions, such as promotion of the conductivity and electrochemical activity of the transducer, immobilization of the biological recognition elements for direct/sandwich detection or conjugated with other nanomaterials. The most common applications of AuNPs were with self-assembled monolayers (SAM), either by being deposited on a SAM-modified platform or serving as the platform for promoting the chemical modification with different SAMs [50][51][52][53], and as amplifying agents modified with secondary antibodies and labels for sandwich immunoassays [21][54][55][56][57]. Finally, AuNPs have also been applied in an isolated manner to transducer surfaces [58][59][60] or in conjugation with other materials such as polyethylene glycol (PEG) [61], MWCNTs [21], and ionic liquid [62]. The published studies clearly acknowledge the vast scope of AuNPs application.

Moreover, other nanomaterials such as AgNPs and magnetic nanoparticles, QDs, natural and synthetic polymers have also been used for the development of high-performance biosensors with varied configurations.

 

The publication can be found here: https://www.mdpi.com/2079-4991/9/12/1663/htm

 

References

  1. Malhotra, B.D.; Ali, M.A. . Chapter 1—Nanomaterials in biosensors: Fundamentals and applications. In Nanomaterials for Biosensors; William Andrew Publishing-Elsevier: Amsterdam, Netherlands, 208; pp. 1-74.
  2. Syedmoradi, L.; Daneshpour, M.; Alvandipour, M.; Gomez, F.A.; Hajghassem, H.; Omidfar, K.; Point of care testing: The impact of nanotechnology. Biosensors & Bioelectronics 2017, 87, 373-387, 10.1016/j.bios.2016.08.084.
  3. Conde, J.; Dias, J.T.; Grazú, V.; Moros, M.; Baptista, P.V.; de la Fuente, J.M.; Revisiting 30 years of biofunctionalization and surface chemistry of inorganic nanoparticles for nanomedicine. Frontiers in Chemistry 2014, 2, 48, 10.3389/fchem.2014.00048.
  4. Farka, Z.; Juřík, T.; Kovář, D.; Trnková, L.; Skládal, P.; Nanoparticle-based immunochemical biosensors and assays: Recent advances and challenges.. Chemical Reviews 2017, 117, 9973-10042, 10.1021/acs.chemrev.7b00037.
  5. Walcarius, A.; Minteer, S.D.; Wang, J.; Lin, Y.; Merkoci, A.; Nanomaterials for bio-functionalized electrodes: Recent trends.. J. Mater. Chem. B 2013, 1, 4878-4908, 10.1039/C3TB20881H.
  6. Wen, W.; Yan, X.; Zhu, C.; Du, D.; Lin, Y.; Recent advances in electrochemical immunosensors. Analytical Chemistry 2017, 89, 138-156, 10.1021/acs.analchem.6b04281.
  7. Pumera, M.; Sánchez, S.; Ichinose, I.; Tang, J.; Electrochemical nanobiosensors. Sensors and Actuators B: Chemical 2007, 123, 1195-1205, 10.1016/j.snb.2006.11.016.
  8. Chen, A.; Chatterjee, S.; Nanomaterials based electrochemical sensors for biomedical applications. . Chemical Society Reviews 2013, 42, 5425-5438, 10.1039/C3CS35518G.
  9. Maduraiveeran, G.; Sasidharan, M.; Ganesan, V.; Electrochemical sensor and biosensor platforms based on advanced nanomaterials for biological and biomedical applications.. Biosensors and Bioelectronics 2018, 103, 113-129, 10.1016/j.bios.2017.12.031.
  10. Zhu, C.; Yang, G.; Li, H.; Du, D.; Lin, Y.; Electrochemical sensors and biosensors based on nanomaterials and nanostructures. . Analytical Chemistry 2015, 87, 230-249, 10.1021/ac5039863.
  11. Zhang, A.; Lieber, C.M.; Nano-bioelectronics. . Chemical Reviews 2016, 116, 215-257, 10.1021/acs.chemrev.5b00608.
  12. Holzinger, M.; Le Goff, A.; Cosnier, S.; Nanomaterials for biosensing applications: A review.. Frontiers in Chemistry 2014, 2, 63, 10.3389/fchem.2014.00063.
  13. Stephanopoulos, N.; Francis, M.B.; Choosing an effective protein bioconjugation strategy. Nature Chemical Biology 2011, 7, 876-884, 10.1038/nchembio.720.
  14. Steen Redeker, E.; Ta, D.T.; Cortens, D.; Billen, B.; Guedens, W.; Adriaensens, P.; Protein engineering for directed immobilization. Bioconjugate Chemistry 2013, 24, 1761-1777, 10.1021/bc4002823.
  15. Choudhary, N.; Hwang, S.; Choi, W.. Carbon Nanomaterials: A Review: Datasheet from Volume. In Handbook of Nanomaterials Properties in Springermaterials; Bhushan, B; Luo, D; Schricker, S.R.; Sigmund, W.; Zauscher, S., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2014; pp. 709-769.
  16. Wang, Z.; Dai, Z.; Carbon nanomaterial-based electrochemical biosensors: An overview.. Nanoscale 2015, 7, 6420-6431, 10.1039/C5NR00585J.
  17. Yang, C.; Denno, M.E.; Pyakurel, P.; Venton, B.J.; Recent trends in carbon nanomaterial-based electrochemical sensors for biomolecules: A review. . Analytica Chimica Acta 2015, 887, 17-37, 10.1016/j.aca.2015.05.049.
  18. Kumar, S.; Ahlawat, W.; Kumar, R.; Dilbaghi, N.; Graphene, carbon nanotubes, zinc oxide and gold as elite nanomaterials for fabrication of biosensors for healthcare.. Biosensors and Bioelectronics 2015, 70, 498-503, 10.1016/j.bios.2015.03.062.
  19. Oh, J.; Yoo, G.; Chang, Y.W.; Kim, H.J.; Jose, J.; Kim, E.; Pyun, J.C.; Yoo, K.H.; A carbon nanotube metal semiconductor field effect transistor-based biosensor for detection of amyloid-beta in human serum.. Biosensors and Bioelectronics 2013, 50, 345-350, 10.1016/j.bios.2013.07.004.
  20. Yu, Y.; Wang, P.; Zhu, X.; Peng, Q.; Zhou, Y.; Yin, T.; Liang, Y.; Yin, X.; Combined determination of copper ions and β-amyloid peptide by a single ratiometric electrochemical biosensor.. Analyst 2018, 143, 323-331, 10.1039/C7AN01683B.
  21. Yu, Y.; Sun, X.; Tang, D.; Li, C.; Zhang, L.; Nie, D.; Yin, X.; Shi, G.; Gelsolin bound β-amyloid peptides(1–40/1–42): Electrochemical evaluation of levels of soluble peptide associated with alzheimer’s disease.. Biosensors and Bioelectronics 2015, 68, 115-121, 10.1016/j.bios.2014.12.041.
  22. Lisi, S.; Scarano, S.; Fedeli, S.; Pascale, E.; Cicchi, S.; Ravelet, C.; Peyrin, E.; Minunni, M.; Toward sensitive immuno-based detection of tau protein by surface plasmon resonance coupled to carbon nanostructures as signal amplifiers.. Biosensors and Bioelectronics 2017, 93, 289-292, 10.1016/j.bios.2016.08.078.
  23. Mars, A.; Hamami, M.; Bechnak, L.; Patra, D.; Raouafi, N.; Curcumin-graphene quantum dots for dual mode sensing platform: Electrochemical and fluorescence detection of apoe4, responsible of alzheimer’s disease.. Analytica Chimica Acta 2018, 1036, 141-146, 10.1016/j.aca.2018.06.075.
  24. Wu, L.; Ji, H.; Sun, H.; Ding, C.; Ren, J.; Qu, X.; Label-free ratiometric electrochemical detection of the mutated apolipoprotein e gene associated with alzheimer’s disease.. Chemical Communications 2016, 52, 12080-12083, 10.1039/C6CC07099J.
  25. Kurkina, T.; Sundaram, S.; Sundaram, R.S.; Re, F.; Masserini, M.; Kern, K.; Balasubramanian, K.; Self-assembled electrical biodetector based on reduced graphene oxide.. ACS Nano 2012, 6, 5514-5520, 10.1021/nn301429k.
  26. Vashist, S.K.; Zheng, D.; Al-Rubeaan, K.; Luong, J.H.; Sheu, F.S.; Advances in carbon nanotube based electrochemical sensors for bioanalytical applications.. Biotechnology Advances 2011, 29, 169-188, 10.1016/j.biotechadv.2010.10.002.
  27. Oliveira, T.M.B.F.; Morais, S.; New generation of electrochemical sensors based on multi-walled carbon nanotubes. . Applied Science 2018, 8, 1925, 10.3390/app8101925.
  28. Pumera, M.; The electrochemistry of carbon nanotubes: Fundamentals and applications. . Chemistry A European Journal 2009, 15, 4970-4978, 10.1002/chem.200900421.
  29. Georgakilas, V.; Perman, J.A.; Tucek, J.; Zboril, R.; Broad family of carbon nanoallotropes: Classification, chemistry, and applications of fullerenes, carbon dots, nanotubes, graphene, nanodiamonds, and combined superstructures.. Chemical Reviews 2015, 115, 4744-4822, 10.1021/cr500304f.
  30. Yang, N.; Chen, X.; Ren, T.; Zhang, P.; Yang, D.; Carbon nanotube based biosensors.. Sensors and Actuators B: Chemcial 2015, 207, 690-715, 10.1016/j.snb.2014.10.040.
  31. Rivas, G.A.; Rodríguez, M.C.; Rubianes, M.D.; Gutierrez, F.A.; Eguílaz, M.; Dalmasso, P.R.; Primo, E.N.; Tettamanti, C.; Ramírez, M.L.; Montemerlo, A.; et al.et al. Carbon nanotubes-based electrochemical (bio)sensors for biomarkers.. Applied Materials Today 2017, 9, 566-588, 10.1016/j.apmt.2017.10.005.
  32. Cheung, W.; Pontoriero, F.; Taratula, O.; Chen, A.M.; He, H.; DNA and carbon nanotubes as medicine. . Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews 2010, 62, 633-649, 10.1016/j.addr.2010.03.007.
  33. Iijima, S.; Helical microtubules of graphitic carbon. . Nature 1991, 354, 56-58, 10.1038/354056a0.
  34. Kong, L.; Chen, W.; Carbon nanotube and graphene-based bioinspired electrochemical actuators. . Advanced Materials 2014, 26, 1025-1043, 10.1002/adma.201303432.
  35. Wang, Y.; Li, Z.; Wang, J.; Li, J.; Lin, Y.; Graphene and graphene oxide: Biofunctionalization and applications in biotechnology. . Trends in Biotechnology 2011, 29, 205-212, 10.1016/j.tibtech.2011.01.008.
  36. Pumera, M.; Ambrosi, A.; Bonanni, A.; Chng, E.L.K.; Poh, H.L.; Graphene for electrochemical sensing and biosensing.. TrAC Trends in Analytical Chemistry 2010, 29, 954-965, 10.1016/j.trac.2010.05.011.
  37. Pumera, M.; Graphene in biosensing. . Materials Today 2011, 14, 308-315, 10.1016/S1369-7021(11)70160-2.
  38. 38. Justino, C.I.L.; Gomes, A.R.; Freitas, A.C.; Duarte, A.C.; Rocha-Santos, T.A.P.; Graphene based sensors and biosensors.. TrAC Trends in Analytical Chemistry 2017, 91, 53-66, 10.1016/j.trac.2017.04.003.
  39. Nag, A.; Mitra, A.; Mukhopadhyay, S.C.; Graphene and its sensor-based applications: A review.. Sensors and Actuators A: Physical 2018, 270, 177-194, 10.1016/j.sna.2017.12.028.
  40. Malhotra, B.D.; Ali, M.A.. Chapter 2—Functionalized carbon nanomaterials for biosensors. In Nanomaterials for Biosensors.; Malhotra, B.D.; Ali, M.A., Eds.; William Andrew Publishing-Elsevier: Amsterdam, Netherlands, 2018; pp. 75-103.
  41. Tadyszak, K.; Wychowaniec, J.K.; Litowczenko, J.; Biomedical applications of graphene-based structures.. Nanomaterials 2018, 8, 944, 10.3390/nano8110944.
  42. Ahammad, A.J.S.; Islam, T.; Hasan, M.M.. Chapter 12—Graphene-based electrochemical sensors for biomedical applications. In Biomedical Applications of Graphene and 2d Nanomaterials.; Nurunnabi, M., McCarthy, J.R., Eds.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, Netherlands, 2019; pp. 249-282.
  43. Katz, E.; Willner, I.; Integrated nanoparticle-biomolecule hybrid systems: Synthesis, properties, and applications.. Angewandte Chemie International Edition 2004, 43, 6042-6108, 10.1002/anie.200400651.
  44. Malhotra, B.D.; Ali, M.A.. Chapter 3—Bioconjugated nanostructured metals and metal oxides for biosensors. In Nanomaterials for Biosensors.; Malhotra, B.D.; Ali, M.A., Eds.; William Andrew Publishing-Elsevier: Amsterdam, Netherlands, 2018; pp. 105-125.
  45. Mout, R.; Moyano, D.F.; Rana, S.; Rotello, V.M.; Surface functionalization of nanoparticles for nanomedicine.. Chemical Society Reviews 2012, 41, 2539-2544, 10.1039/c2cs15294k.
  46. Niemeyer, C.M.; Nanoparticles, proteins, and nucleic acids: Biotechnology meets materials science.. Angewandte Chemie International Edition 2001, 40, 4128-4158, 10.1002/1521-3773(20011119)40:22<4128::AID-ANIE4128>3.0.CO;2-S.
  47. Wang, J.; Nanoparticle-based electrochemical bioassays of proteins. Electroanalysis 2007, 19, 769-776, 10.1002/elan.200603789.
  48. Saha, K.; Agasti, S.S.; Kim, C.; Li, X.; Rotello, V.M.; Gold nanoparticles in chemical and biological sensing.. Chemical Reviews 2012, 112, 2739-2779, 10.1021/cr2001178.
  49. Omidfar, K.; Khorsand, F.; Darziani Azizi, M.; New analytical applications of gold nanoparticles as label in antibody based sensors.. Biosensors and Bioelectronics 2013, 43, 336-347, 10.1016/j.bios.2012.12.045.
  50. Diba, F.S.; Kim, S.; Lee, H.J.; Electrochemical immunoassay for amyloid-beta 1–42 peptide in biological fluids interfacing with a gold nanoparticle modified carbon surface. . Catalysis Today 2017, 295, 41-47, 10.1016/j.cattod.2017.02.039.
  51. Lien, T.T.N.; Takamura, Y.; Tamiya, E.; Vestergaard, M.C.; Modified screen printed electrode for development of a highly sensitive label-free impedimetric immunosensor to detect amyloid beta peptides. Analytica Chimica Acta 2015, 892, 69-76, 10.1016/j.aca.2015.08.036.
  52. 52. Wu, C.C.; Ku, B.C.; Ko, C.H.; Chiu, C.C.; Wang, G.J.; Yang, Y.H.; Wu, S.J.; Electrochemical impedance spectroscopy analysis of a-beta (1–42) peptide using a nanostructured biochip. . Electrochimica Acta 2014, 134, 249-257, 10.1016/j.electacta.2014.04.132.
  53. 53. Carneiro, P.; Loureiro, J.; Delerue-Matos, C.; Morais, S.; do Carmo Pereira, M.; Alzheimer’s disease: Development of a sensitive label-free electrochemical immunosensor for detection of amyloid beta peptide. . Sensors and Actuators B: Chemical 2017, 239, 157-165, 10.1016/j.snb.2016.07.181.
  54. Kang, D.Y.; Lee, J.H.; Oh, B.K.; Choi, J.W.; Ultra-sensitive immunosensor for beta-amyloid (1–42) using scanning tunneling microscopy-based electrical detection.. Biosensors and Bioelectronics 2009, 24, 1431-1436, 10.1016/j.bios.2008.08.018.
  55. Shui, B.; Tao, D.; Cheng, J.; Mei, Y.; Jaffrezic-Renault, N.; Guo, Z.; A novel electrochemical aptamer-antibody sandwich assay for the detection of tau-381 in human serum. . Analyst 2018, 143, 3549-3554, 10.1039/C8AN00527C.
  56. Liu, L.; Zhao, F.; Ma, F.; Zhang, L.; Yang, S.; Xia, N.; Electrochemical detection of beta-amyloid peptides on electrode covered with n-terminus-specific antibody based on electrocatalytic o2 reduction by abeta(1–16)-heme-modified gold nanoparticles. . Biosensors and Bioelectronics 2013, 49, 231-235, 10.1016/j.bios.2013.05.028.
  57. de la Escosura-Muñiz, A.; Plichta, Z.; Horák, D.; Merkoçi, A.; Alzheimer′s disease biomarkers detection in human samples by efficient capturing through porous magnetic microspheres and labelling with electrocatalytic gold nanoparticles.. Biosensors and Bioelectronics 2015, 67, 162-169, 10.1016/j.bios.2014.07.086.
  58. Rama, E.C.; González-García, M.B.; Costa-García, A.; Competitive electrochemical immunosensor for amyloid-beta 1–42 detection based on gold nanostructurated screen-printed carbon electrodes.. Sensors and Actuators B: Chemical 2014, 201, 567-571, 10.1016/j.snb.2014.05.044.
  59. 59. Hu, T.; Lu, S.; Chen, C.; Sun, J.; Yang, X.; Colorimetric sandwich immunosensor for aβ(1–42) based on dual antibody-modified gold nanoparticles.. Sensors and Actuators B: Chemical 2017, 243, 792-799, 10.1016/j.snb.2016.12.052.
  60. Cheng, X.R.; Hau, B.Y.H.; Endo, T.; Kerman, K.; Au nanoparticle-modified DNA sensor based on simultaneous electrochemical impedance spectroscopy and localized surface plasmon resonance. . Biosensors and Bioelectronics 2014, 53, 513-518, 10.1016/j.bios.2013.10.003.
  61. Kim, H.; Lee, J.U.; Song, S.; Kim, S.; Sim, S.J.; A shape-code nanoplasmonic biosensor for multiplex detection of alzheimer’s disease biomarkers.. Biosensors and Bioelectronics 2018, 101, 96-102, 10.1016/j.bios.2017.10.018.
  62. 62. Ren, X.; Yan, J.; Wu, D.; Wei, Q.; Wan, Y.; Nanobody-based apolipoprotein e immunosensor for point-of-care testing.. ACS Sensors 2017, 2, 1267-1271, 10.1021/acssensors.7b00495.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
Video Production Service
Feedback