“…The average standard deviation gained from 5 independent experiments for all of the 8 concentrations was 2.9%, indicating good reproducibility and reliability of this method. The linear response range was wider than those based on fluorescence resonance energy transfer (0.257-12.9 ng/mL) [35], electrochemical immunoassay (0.01-100 ng/mL) [36], time-resolved fluoroimmunoassay (1-1000 ng/mL) [37], chemiluminescent immunoassay (5.0-250 ng/mL) [38], laser-induced fluorescence (0.7-80 ng/mL) [39], and gold nanoparticle immunoassay (0.10-80 ng/mL) [40] detections. The LOD was also lower than those of electrochemical immunoassay (0.02 ng/mL) [34], time-resolved fluoroimmunoassay (0.5 ng/mL) [37], chemiluminescent immunoassay (0.61 ng/L) [38], and gold nanoparticle immunoassay (0.04 ng/mL) [40] detections.…”