ArticleFrontiers in neurology
Protein biomarker discovery in neural tissue: a comparative analysis of immunoassay and colloidal gold lateral flow assay method.
Article in Frontiers in neurology. 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Sensitive detection of protein biomarkers in neural tissue is important for both research and diagnostic applications. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) is a gold-standard immunoassay known for high sensitivity and quantification, whereas colloidal gold lateral flow assays offer rapid, instrument-free testing but are generally qualitative. This study compared ELISA and colloidal gold strip tests for detecting acetylcholinesterase (AChE) in formalin-fixed cadaveric nerve tissues. Five cadavers (3 males, 2 females) without neurological disease or limb trauma provided proximal and distal nerve segments for analysis. Tissues were formalin-fixed, heat-treated to reverse cross-links, and extracted for protein. A bicinchoninic acid (BCA) assay measured total protein yields, and an ELISA quantified AChE concentration. In parallel, a colloidal gold immunochromatographic strip test was applied to diluted extracts to visually detect AChE. Methods: We evaluated detection sensitivity (limit of detection and positive detection rate), reproducibility (intra-assay variability), and quantitative agreement between methods. Results: ELISA detected AChE in 12/12 extracted nerve samples, with concentrations ranging from ~0.2 to 66 ng/mL in tissue extract (mean ~15 ng/mL). The colloidal gold strips, by contrast, returned visible positive lines only for samples above ~10-20 ng/mL AChE; low-level samples yielded no signal. ELISA showed a lower limit of detection around 0.5 ng/mL, approximately one order of magnitude lower than the strip test. ELISA measurements were highly reproducible (the duplicate-well coefficient of variation ~10-15%), whereas the lateral flow results were more variable near the cutoff and required subjective interpretation of faint test lines. A strong rank correlation ( Conclusion: The ELISA demonstrated superior sensitivity and accuracy for AChE in formalin-fixed neural tissue extracts, detecting low concentrations that the colloidal gold lateral flow assay missed. While the rapid strip test may be useful for quick yes/no identification of high-abundance biomarkers in nerve samples, it lacks the sensitivity and quantitative precision necessary for reliable neural protein diagnostics. Integration of more sensitive detection labels or reader devices would be required to bridge the performance gap between lateral flow assays and ELISA in this context.
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.