2010 10th IEEE International Conference on Solid-State and Integrated Circuit Technology 2010
DOI: 10.1109/icsict.2010.5667621
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Label-free biomarker detection from whole blood

Abstract: Label-free nanosensors can detect disease markers to provide point-of-care diagnosis that is low-cost, rapid, specific and sensitive. However, detecting these biomarkers in physiological fluid samples is difficult because of ionic screening. Here, we overcome this limitation by using distinct components within the sensor to perform purification and detection. 1 A microfluidic purification chip captures multiple biomarkers simultaneously from blood samples and releases them, after washing, into purified buffer … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
134
0
1

Year Published

2011
2011
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 103 publications
(135 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
0
134
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…In short, the screening length in physiological solutions, <1 nm, reduces the field produced by charged macromolecules at the FET surface and thus makes real-time label-free detection difficult. The first method reported to overcome this intrinsic limitation of FET biosensors involved desalting to enable subsequent low-ionic-strength detection (8,20), although this also precludes true real-time measurements. Truncated antibody receptors (21) and small aptamers (22) also have been used to reduce the distance between target species and the FET surfaces, although the generality of such methods for real-time sensing in physiological conditions requires further study.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In short, the screening length in physiological solutions, <1 nm, reduces the field produced by charged macromolecules at the FET surface and thus makes real-time label-free detection difficult. The first method reported to overcome this intrinsic limitation of FET biosensors involved desalting to enable subsequent low-ionic-strength detection (8,20), although this also precludes true real-time measurements. Truncated antibody receptors (21) and small aptamers (22) also have been used to reduce the distance between target species and the FET surfaces, although the generality of such methods for real-time sensing in physiological conditions requires further study.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…2,3 In particular, researchers around the world have been tailor-making a multitude of nanomaterials-based electrical biosensors and developing new strategies to apply them in ultrasensitive biosensing. Examples of such nanomaterials include carbon nanotubes, [4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13] nanowires, 11,[14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21] nanoparticles, 6,[22][23][24][25] nanopores, 26,27 nanoclusters 28 and graphene. 5,[29][30][31][32] Compared with conventional optical, biochemical and biophysical methods, nanomaterial-based electronic biosensing offers significant advantages, such as high sensitivity and new sensing mechanisms, high spatial resolution for localized detection, facile integration with standard wafer-scale semiconductor processing and label-free, real-time detection in a nondestructive manner.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Another system reported by Stern et al (13) uses a two-step approach, incorporating microfluidic purification chips that capture multiple biomarkers from whole blood, concentrating the biomarkers of interest and releasing the biomarkers for quantitative detection with silicon nanoribbon detectors. This technique reduces the minimum required sensitivity of the system (13).…”
Section: Nanowiresmentioning
confidence: 99%