ArticleAnalytical and bioanalytical chemistry2024
The pros and cons of nucleic acid-amplified immunoassays-a comparative study on the quantitation of prostate-specific antigen with and without rolling circle amplification.
Article in Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Integrating isothermal nucleic acid amplification strategies into immunoassays can significantly decrease analytical limits of detection (LODs). On the other hand, an amplification step adds time, complication, reagents, and costs to the assay format. To evaluate the pros and cons in the context of heterogeneous multistep immunoassays, we quantified prostate-specific antigen (PSA) with and without rolling circle amplification (RCA). In addition, we compared time-gated (TG) with continuous-wave (CW) photoluminescence (PL) detection using a terbium complex and a fluorescein dye, respectively. For both direct (non-amplified) and amplified assays, TG PL detection provided circa four- to eightfold lower LODs, illustrating the importance of autofluorescence background suppression even for multi-wash assay formats. Amplified assays required an approximately 2.4 h longer assay time but led to almost 100-fold lower LODs down to 1.3 pg/mL of PSA. Implementation of TG-FRET (using a Tb-Cy5.5 donor-acceptor pair) into the RCA immunoassay resulted in a slightly higher LOD (3.0 pg/mL), but the ratiometric detection format provided important benefits, such as higher reproducibility, lower standard deviations, and multiplexing capability. Overall, our direct comparison demonstrated the importance of biological background suppression even in heterogeneous assays and the potential of using isothermal RCA for strongly decreasing analytical LODs, making such assays viable alternatives to conventional enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs).
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.