ReviewBiosensors2026
Paper-Based Biosensors for Monitoring Binding, Blocking, and Surrogate Neutralizing Antibody Responses Against Viral Infections.
Review in Biosensors, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Virus-specific antibody responses, including binding antibodies and neutralizing antibodies (nAbs), are important indicators of antiviral immune status after infection or immunization. They provide complementary information on antiviral humoral immunity after infection or vaccination. Antigen-binding antibodies indicate previous exposure and the magnitude of the immune response, whereas receptor-blocking and functional neutralization assays assess whether antibodies interfere with viral entry or infection. Conventional neutralization assays, such as plaque reduction neutralization tests and pseudovirus neutralization tests, provide functional information but are labor-intensive, time-consuming, biosafety-restricted, and difficult to deploy for large-scale or decentralized monitoring. Paper-based biosensors, including lateral flow assays (LFAs), microfluidic paper-based analytical devices (μPADs), and paper-based ELISA, have emerged as promising point-of-care tools owing to their low cost, portability, simple operation, and compatibility with visual or digital readouts. This review critically evaluates these platforms according to whether they measure antigen-binding antibodies, receptor-blocking activity, surrogate neutralization, or functional neutralization and summarizes the applications of these three platforms for monitoring antibody responses against SARS-CoV-2, influenza, dengue, Zika, and monkeypox viruses. Unlike previous reviews that mainly focus on general paper-based biosensor design or conventional nAb assays, this review emphasizes the distinction between antigen-binding, receptor-blocking, and surrogate neutralization readouts, and critically discusses how paper-based signals should be interpreted in relation to functional immunity. We further analyze key translational challenges, including quantitative accuracy, antigen cross-reactivity, standardization, clinical validation, regulatory positioning, and real-world implementation. Future development should combine multiplex detection, standardized calibration, digital and AI-assisted interpretation, and clinically validated assay formats. Paper-based biosensors have considerable potential for decentralized antibody monitoring and public health surveillance, but their clinical utility depends on clear assay positioning and validation against appropriate functional or reference methods.
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.