“…Supplementary Table S1 (SI) shows the comparison of the detection of CEA using different methods ( Li et al, 2017 ; Barman et al, 2018 ; Han et al, 2018 ; Ma et al, 2019 ; Li et al, 2020 ; Tang et al, 2020 ; Wu et al, 2021 ). The LOD is lower than that obtained using nanopipette analysis based on CEA aptamer modified magnetic Fe 3 O 4 -Au nanoparticles (Apt-MNPs), ( Tang et al, 2020 ), or fluorescence determination using CEA aptamer modified Cu 2+ -loaded UiO-66 metal-organic framework (Cu-UiO-66/CEA-Apt) ( Wu et al, 2021 ), or photoelectrochemical determination based on WO 3 @BiOI modified indium-tin oxide electrode followed with loading CdS NWs (CdS@BiOI@WO 3 /ITO) ( Han et al, 2018 ), or electrochemical determination based on immobilization of Ab on poly(ethyleneglycol)-NH 2 connected pyrenebutyric acid functionalized graphene/gold nanoparticles (BSA/Ab/AuNPs/PPYGR/GCE) ( Li et al, 2017 ), and Pd@Au@Pt nanocomposite/-COOH terminated reduced graphene oxide ( Barman et al, 2018 ). The LOD is higher than the that obtained using sandwich-type electrochemical determination based on trimetallic yolk-shell Au@AgPt nanocubes loaded on amino-functionalized MoS 2 nanoflowers (MoS 2 NFs/Au@AgPt YNCs) and Au triangular nanoprisms (Au TNPs) ( Ma et al, 2019 ), and immunointerface using NH 2 -functionalized CEA aptamer on Fe-MOF modified with self-polymerized dopamine-decorated Au (NH 2 -aptamer/Au@PDA@Fe-MOF/GCE) ( Li et al, 2020 ).…”