ArticleJournal of nanobiotechnology2011
Comparison of radioimmuno and carbon nanotube field-effect transistor assays for measuring insulin-like growth factor-1 in a preclinical model of human breast cancer.
Article in Journal of nanobiotechnology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- CNT and Graphene-Based Transistor Biosensors for Cancer Detection: A Review.Biomolecules · 2023Review
- Highly Sensitive Electrochemical Aptasensor for Detecting the VEGFBiosensors · 2021Article
- Spiral Countercurrent Chromatography Enrichment, Characterization, and Assays of Carbon Nanotube Chiralities for Use in Biosensors.ACS omega · 2017Article
- Hormones in Dairy Foods and Their Impact on Public Health - A Narrative Review Article.Iranian journal of public health · 2015Review
- High-throughput Peptide epitope mapping using carbon nanotube field-effect transistors.International journal of peptides · 2013Article
- Abnormal Mammary Adipose Tissue Environment of Brca1 Mutant Mice Show a Persistent Deposition of Highly Vascularized Multilocular Adipocytes.Journal of cancer science & therapy · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo realize the promise of personalized medicine, diagnostic instruments used for detecting and measuring biomarkers must become smaller, faster and less expensive. Although most techniques used currently to detect biomarkers are sensitive and specific, many suffer from several disadvantages including their complexity, high cost and long turnaround time. One strategy to overcome these problems is to exploit carbon nanotube (CNT) based biosensors, which are sensitive, use inexpensive disposable components and can be easily adapted to current assay protocols. In this study we investigated the applicability of using a CNT field-effect transistor (CNT-FET) as a diagnostic instrument for measuring cancer biomarkers in serum using a mouse model of Breast Cancer Susceptibility 1-related breast cancer. Insulin like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) was chosen because it is highly relevant in breast cancer and because measuring serum IGF-1 levels by conventional methods is complicated due to specific IGF-1 serum binding proteins.
findingsOur results show that there is good correlation between the two platforms with respect to detecting serum IGF-1. In fact, the CNT-FETs required only one antibody, gave real-time results and required approximately 100-fold less mouse serum than the radioimmunoassay.
conclusionsBoth IGF-1 radioimmuno and CNT-FET assays gave comparable results. Indeed, the CNT-FET assay was simpler and faster than the radioimmunoassay. Additionally, the low serum sample required by CNT-FETs can be especially advantageous for studies constricted by limited amount of human clinical samples and for mouse studies, since animals often need to be sacrificed to obtain enough serum for biomarker evaluation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.