ArticleAnalytical chemistry2014
Toward rapid, high-sensitivity, volume-constrained biomarker quantification and validation using backscattering interferometry.
Article in Analytical chemistry, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- A deeper evaluation of cytokeratin fragment 21-1 as a lung cancer tumor marker and comparison of different assays.Biosensors & bioelectronics: X · 2025Article
- Theoretical Basis for Refractive Index Changes Resulting from Solution Phase Molecular Interaction.The journal of physical chemistry. B · 2025Article
- The impact of the lung EDRN-CVC on Phase 1, 2, & 3 biomarker validation studies.Cancer biomarkers : section A of Disease markers · 2022Article
- In situ growth of electroactive polymers via ATRP to construct a biosensing interface for tumor marker.Mikrochimica acta · 2021Article
- Unlabeled lysophosphatidic acid receptor binding in free solution as determined by a compensated interferometric reader.Journal of lipid research · 2020Article
- Rapid quantification of two chemical nerve agent metabolites in serum.Biosensors & bioelectronics · 2019Article
- Label-free quantification of calcium-sensor targeting to photoreceptor guanylate cyclase and rhodopsin kinase by backscattering interferometry.Scientific reports · 2017Article
- Physiologically relevant binding affinity quantification of monoclonal antibody PF-00547659 to mucosal addressin cell adhesion molecule for in vitro in vivo correlation.British journal of pharmacology · 2017Article
- Origin and prediction of free-solution interaction studies performed label-free.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2016Article
- Quantification of Plasmodium-host protein interactions on intact, unmodified erythrocytes by back-scattering interferometry.Malaria journal · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Realizing personalized medicine, which promises to enable early disease detection, efficient diagnostic staging, and therapeutic efficacy monitoring, hinges on biomarker quantification in patient samples. Yet, the lack of a sensitive technology and assay methodology to rapidly validate biomarker candidates continues to be a bottleneck for clinical translation. In our first direct and quantitative comparison of backscattering interferometry (BSI) to fluorescence sensing by ELISA, we show that BSI could aid in overcoming this limitation. The analytical validation study was performed against ELISA for two biomarkers for lung cancer detection: Cyfra 21-1 and Galectin-7. Spiked serum was used for calibration and comparison of analytical figures of merit, followed by analysis of blinded patient samples. Using the ELISA antibody as the probe chemistry in a mix-and-read assay, BSI provided significantly lower detection limits for spiked serum samples with each of the biomarkers. The limit of quantification (LOQ) for Cyrfa-21-1 was measured to be 230 pg/mL for BSI versus 4000 pg/mL for ELISA, and for Galectin-7, it was 13 pg/mL versus 500 pg/mL. The coefficient of variation for 5 day, triplicate determinations was <15% for BSI and <10% for ELISA. The two techniques correlated well, ranging from 3-29% difference for Cyfra 21-1 in a blinded patient sample analysis. The label-free and free-solution operation of BSI allowed for a significant improvement in analysis speed, with greater ease, improved LOQ values, and excellent day-to-day reproducibility. In this unoptimized format, BSI required 5.5-fold less sample quantity needed for ELISA (a 10 point calibration curve measured in triplicate required 36 μL of serum for BSI vs 200 μL for ELISA). The results indicate that the BSI platform can enable rapid, sensitive analytical validation of serum biomarkers and should significantly impact the validation bottleneck of biomarkers.
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.