ArticleAnalytical and bioanalytical chemistry2023
Comparison of blocking reagents for antibody microarray-based immunoassays on glass and paper membrane substrates.
Article in Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- High-Content Analysis of 3D Chondrogenic Pellets Derived from Primary Cells In Vitro.Biomedicines · 2026Article
- CRISPR-Cas9-based electrochemical biosensor for the detection ofADMET & DMPK · 2025Article
- Allergen Microarrays and New Physical Approaches to More Sensitive and Specific Detection of Allergen-Specific Antibodies.Biosensors · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background noise due to nonspecific binding of biomolecules on the assay substrates is one of the most common challenges that limits the sensitivity of microarray-based immunoassays. Background signal intensity usually increases when complex biological fluids are used because they have a combination of molecules and vesicles that can adsorb onto substrate surfaces. Blocking strategies coupled with surface chemistries can reduce such nonspecific binding and improve assay sensitivity. In this paper, we conducted a systematic optimization of blocking strategies on a variety of commonly used substrates for protein measurement in complex biofluids. Four blocking strategies (BSA, non-fat milk, PEG, and a protein-free solution) coupled with four surface chemistries (3-glycidoxypropyltrimethoxysilane (GPS), poly-L-lysine (PLL), aminoalkylsilane (AAS), and nitrocellulose (NC)) were studied for their effect on background, microspot, and net signal intensities. We have also explored the effect that these blocking strategies have when proteins in complex samples (plasma, serum, cell culture media, and EV lysate) are measured. Irregular spot morphology could affect signal extraction using automated software. We found that the microspots with the best morphology were the ones printed on GPS glass surfaces for all immunoassays. On NC membrane, the protein-based blocking strategies yielded the highest net fluorescent intensity with the antigen contained in PBS, plasma, serum, and serum-free cell culture media. Differently, with EV lysate samples, Pierce™ protein-free blocker yielded the best net signal intensity on both GPS and NC surfaces. The choice of blocking strategies highly depends on the substrate. Moreover, the findings discovered in this study are not limited to microarray-based immunoassays but can provide insights for other assay formats.
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.