Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T09:49:00.502Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Label-free Electrochemical Impedance Detection of Ovarian Cancer Markers CA-125 and CEA

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 January 2011

Allison M Whited ,
Kanwar V Singh ,
Raj Solanki  and
David R Evans
Allison M Whited
Affiliation:
[email protected], Portland State University, Physics, Portland, Oregon, United States
Kanwar V Singh
Affiliation:
[email protected], Portland State University, Physics, Portland, Oregon, United States
Raj Solanki
Affiliation:
[email protected], Portland State University, Physics, Portland, Oregon, United States
David R Evans
Affiliation:
[email protected], Sharp Laboratories of America, Camas, Washington, United States
Get access

Abstract

CA-125 and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) are two biomarkers present in blood that can indicate the presence of ovarian cancer. They can also be used, both in conjunction with each other and independently, to determine the effectiveness of the treatment being meted for the disease. A label-free multiplexed interdigitated electrode array (IDEA) immunosensor was developed to detect both CA-125 and CEA in buffer solution at levels typically seen in patients with ovarian cancer . Electrochemical impedance spectroscopy was used to measure the increase in impedance when a binding event occurred between the target antigen and its specific antibody that was anchored to the surface of an interdigitated electrode array. CA-125 was detected in concentrations as low as 10units/mL and as high as 80units/mL. CEA was detected in concentrations as low as 1pg/mL and as high as 10μg/mL.

Keywords

biologicalbiological synthesis (assembly)biological synthesis (chemical reaction)
Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 1236: Symposium SS – Biosurfaces and Biointerfaces , 2009 , 1236-SS05-09
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Gizeli, E. and Lowe, C. R. Current Opinion in Biotechnology, 7(1), 66–71 (1996).Google Scholar
2 Sadik, O.A. Aluoch, A.O. and Zhou, A. Biosens. Bioelectron. 24, 2749–2765 (2009).Google Scholar
3 Wang, J. Biosens. and Bioelectron. 21, 1887–1892 (2006).Google Scholar
4 Heller, A. Acc. Chem. Res. 23, 128 (1990).Google Scholar
5 Gpel, W. and Heiduschka, P. Biosens. Bioelectron. 10, 853 (1995).Google Scholar
6 Zhong, C.-J. and Porter, M. D. Anal. Chem. 67, 709A (1995).Google Scholar
7, 8, 9. Bourdillon, C. Demaille, C. Gueris, J. Moiroux, J. and Savéant, J.-M., J. Am. Chem. Soc. 115, 12264 (1993); 116, 10328 (1994); 29, 529 (1996)Google Scholar
10 Rogers, K. R. Mol. Biotechnol. 14, 109 (2000).Google Scholar
11 Yang, M. McGovern, M. E. and Thompson, M. Anal. Chim. Acta 346, 259 (1996).Google Scholar
12 Willner, I. Katz, E. Willner, B. Electroanalytical Methods of Biological Materials, ed. Brajter-Toth, A., Chambers, J. Q.. (Marcel Dekker, New York, 2002) p. 43.Google Scholar
13 Campbell, C. N. Gal, D. Cristler, N. Banditrat, C. and Heller, A. Anal. Chem. 74, 158 (2002).Google Scholar
14 Bardea, A. Katz, E. Bückmann, A. F., and Willner, I. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 119, 9114 (1997).Google Scholar
15 Anzai, J. Takeshita, H. Kobayashi, Y. Osa, T. and Hoshi, T. Anal. Chem. 70, 811 (1998).Google Scholar
16 Willner, I. Rubin, S. and Cohen, Y. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 115, 4937 (1993).Google Scholar
17 Suri, C. R. Boro, R. Nangia, Y. Gandhi, S. Sharma, P. Wangoo, N. Rajesh, K. and Shekhawat, G. S., Trends Anal. Chem. 28(1), 29 (2009).Google Scholar
18 Kharitonov, A.B. Alfonta, L. Katz, E. and Willner, I. Electroanal. Chem. 487, 133 (2000).Google Scholar
19 Dharuman, V. Grunwald, T. Nebling, E. Albers, J. Blohm, L. and Hintsche, R. Biosens. Bioelectron. 21, 645 (2005).Google Scholar
20 Valera, E. Ramon-Azcon, J., Rodriguez, A. Castener, L. M. Sanchez, F.-J. and Marco, M.-P. Sensors and Actuators B 125, 526 (2007)Google Scholar
21 Brewood, G. P. Rangineni, Y. Fish, D. J. Bhandiwad, A. S. Evans, D. R. Solanki, R. and Benight, A., Nucl. Acids Res. 36: e98 (2008)Google Scholar
22 Bard, A. J. and Faulkner, L. R. Electrochemical Methods: Fundamentals and Applications (Wiley, New York, 1980).Google Scholar
23 Stoynov, Z. B. Grafov, B. M. Savova-Stoynova, B. S., and Elkin, V. V. Electrochemical Impedance (Nauka, Moscow, 1991).Google Scholar
24 Randles, J. E. B. Discuss Faraday Soc. 1, 11 (1947).Google Scholar
25 Ershler, B. V. Discuss Faraday Soc. 1, 269 (1947).Google Scholar
26Gynecologic Neoplasms at Merck Manual of Diagnosis and Therapy Professional Edition.Google Scholar
27 Goff, B. A. Mandel, L. Muntz, H.G. and Melancon, C.H. Cancer 89 (10): 2068 (2000).Google Scholar
28Survival rates based on SEER incidence and NCHS mortality statistics, as cited by the National Cancer Institute.Google Scholar
29General information about ovarian epthelial cancer, as cited by the National Cancer Institute.Google Scholar
30 Gold, P. Freedman, S.O. J. Exp. Med. 121:439 (1965).Google Scholar
31 markers, Tumor, as cited by the American Cancer Society.Google Scholar
32 Killard, AJ, in The Encyclopedia of Analytical Chemistry, edited by Myers, R. A. (John Wiley & Sons Ltd., New York, 2000) pp. 173–207.Google Scholar
33 Katz, E. and Willner, I. Electroanalysis 15, 913–947 (2003).Google Scholar