The present invention relates to providing an electronically readable signal in lateral-flow immunoassays.
Lateral-flow immunoassays (LFIAs) are common point-of-care (POC) tests for a wide variety of diseases and compounds. They are best known as home pregnancy tests and more recently as COVID 19 tests. LFIAs have the advantages of rapid results, no instrumentation required, and being self-timed due to the capillary flow of the analytes on the strip. LFIAs typically use colored particles as the visual label—most often colloidal gold particles or colored latex that are localized at a line due to a biological binding event (immunocomplex) of the various binding partners—for example antibodies or nucleic acids (Yu et al. 2011). The sensitivity of LFIAs is limited by the optical density of the gold label and this sensitivity is inadequate for some applications.
A number of researchers have proposed methods to increase the sensitivity of LFIAs. For example, Zhang, et al. have proposed gold nanoflowers as the labels (Zhang et al. 2019) whereas Yang, et. al. have proposed gold nanocages (Yang, Ozsoz, and Liu 2017). Basically, both systems just increase the size of the gold labels and thus show only a modest 2-3 fold increase in sensitivity over conventional labels. Labels other than gold show more promise in increasing sensitivity. For example, Linares, et al., following on the work of Rayev and Shmagel (Rayev and Shmagel 2008), has reviewed other labels and shown that carbon was about 10 fold more sensitive than gold (Linares et al. 2012).
There is only so much optical density a nanoparticle can have in the size regimen of about 50 nm and carbon, as shown by Linares et al., has reached that limit. One can increase the size of the nanoparticle label and thereby increase the optical density at the expense of performance in the LFIA, but even that has its limits as very large particles will not migrate up the strip. Alternatively, the size of the gold label can be increased after the biological binding event by forming complexes of complexes at a cost of increased steps for the user (Gao et al. 2017).
To increase the sensitivity of LFIAs, further amplification schemes have been proposed to increase the absorbance of the label after biological binding event by precipitation of metal at the site of the label. For example, Han et al. (Han, Choi, and Kwon 2016) have used the well-known autometallographic process of silver enhancement to enhance the colloidal gold labels detectability three fold. However, this chemical enhancement comes at the cost of increased complexity and user intervention in the LFIA system. Alternatively, the manufacturer must provide ways to delay the chemistry until after the biological events have occurred and deal with any manufacturing difficulties that complexity will entail. For example: Fu et al., have used two-dimensional structures for incorporation of multistep processes for improved sensitivity but at the cost of complex manufacturing (Fu et al. 2011).
To increase the sensitivity of LFIAs, other amplification schemes have been proposed. Building on much earlier catalytic work of Conyers and Kidwell (Conyers and Kidwell 1991), Kidwell has shown that appropriate dye systems and selected nanoparticles can enhance the sensitivity of LFIAs more than 1000 fold over gold labels by catalytically precipitating a dye at the site of the label. (Kidwell et al., “Catalytic Nanoparticles to Enhance the Sensitivity of Lateral Flow Immunoassays,” Nanotech 2019 Conference and Exposition, Boston, Mass., Jun. 17, 2019; (Kidwell 2018), (Kidwell 2021); (Kidwell 2022); and (Mulvaney et al. 2020))
Tominaga has used both enzymatic catalysts as well as chemical catalysts to localize a dye at the site of the label by manually applying a substrate after the biological event has occurred ((Tominaga 2017) and (Tominaga 2018)).
As was shown by the work of Mulvaney, et al., catalytic LFIA systems have a considerable sensitivity advantage over colorimetric labels. If the substrate of the catalyst is applied contemporaneously with the analyte solution, the catalyst will start developing the dye system (catalytic chemistry or substrate chemistry) thereby precipitating the dye along the strip as the capillary flow occurs. Thus, the substrate chemistry needs to be delayed until after the biological binding event and preferably after all the excess catalyst is wicked from the strip into the top absorbent pad. Delaying the substrate chemistry also has the advantage that the reagents need not be compatible to biology as often once the nanoparticle labels are localized by biology, they are hard to remove. Thus, unusual pH or strong oxidizing or reducing conditions can be used to optimize the catalyst activity rather than the biological activity of the binding partners.
As exemplified by Tominaga, a user could manually expose the developed strip to the catalytic chemistry, but this approach requires user interaction as well as separate packaging for the reagents. As exemplified by Fu, et al., the delay could be accomplished by having a two arm structure with one arm longer than the other and the length corresponding to a delay. Timing is limited as longer flow channels require more solution for filling. Additionally, this form often requires that the user of the LFIA place different solutions in different wells of the LFIA device and thus increases the complexity of handling as well as the need for several solutions. Another approach is to provide a diffusion barrier as exemplified by Kidwell, where timing is determined by the porosity of the barrier (Kidwell 1993) and (Kidwell 1994). Timing can be varied over a wide range as the diffusion can be adjusted due to pore size and pore density of the barrier. This would again require two wells—one for application of the sample and another for application of the solution to dissolve the reagents—although these solutions could be identical. An alternative to a diffusion barrier is a dissolving barrier as exemplified by Lutz et al. (Lutz et al. 2013). This also has the advantage that the timing can be varied but it exposes the strip and catalyst to whatever the material is used to produce the barrier. For example, if dissolving glucose is used as the barrier, the strip and catalyst would be exposed to a saturated solution of glucose. Another alternative is varying the pressure on individual wells as exemplified by Lawrence, et al. (Lawrence et al. 2019). The method of Lawrence et al. could be thought of as equivalent to having variable diffusion barriers where the diffusion is controlled by squeezing a sponge, which changes the pore size and diffusion rate.
Colorimetric labels have disadvantages in sensitivity, which is partly mitigated using catalytic particles. However, there is an ongoing need in the art for devices and methods that provide quantitative results yet retain the ease of use of LFIAs. For example, such devices may allow medical practitioners to diagnose, monitor, and manage a variety of conditions such as disease burden or treatment progress without an extensive infrastructure. A concrete example is seen in the work of Phillips and Krum (Phillips and Krum 1998) who showed that accurate quantitation of up to ten different cytokines would form patterns that could distinguish normal individuals from those with a virial disease or hay fever. Visual comparison of line density is often not sufficient to be quantitative as shown by Pickering, et al. (Pickering et al. 2021).
A large number of applications have focused on the idea of using digital equipment for quantitation. For example, (Ehrenkranz 2015). One solution is to read the LFIA using a photoreflective reader, as exemplified by the a commercial Digital Pregnancy Test, which contains electronics that measure the color density of the captured line and control line using an LED light source and photodetector. It is sold as First Response Gold Digital Pregnancy Test and is described in Nazareth et al., (Nazareth et al. 2010) and subsequent patents and patent applications. More recent implementations for the use of cameras in a smart phone or scanners is reviewed by Mulvaney, et al. (Mulvaney, et al.). Photographic reading has limitations on lighting levels and the presence of background on the strip that makes the lines difficult to observe.
In a conventional; fuel cell as reviewed by Winter and Brodd (Winter and Brodd 2004), the electrodes must have a catalyst present to rapidly oxidize and reduce the fuels when the fuel cell is operated at temperatures less than about 200° C. For a Polymer Electrolyte Membrane Fuel Cell (PEMFC) based on hydrogen as the fuel, platinum is the common catalyst. In the PEMFC platinum is often employed at about 100 μg/cm2 on the anode to catalyze the hydrogen oxidation. Also in the PEMFC, platinum is used on the cathode at about 500 μg/cm2 to catalyze oxygen reduction.
There is an ongoing need in the art for devices and methods that measure the binding events in an LFIA directly through electronic means without complex electronics.
The present invention provides a system and method to directly read the binding events in a LFIA. Using catalytic particles as the detection reagent allows use of their catalytic properties to transform the LFIA system from a visual system into one based on fuel cells that output a voltage and current. We term this system the fuel-cell Lateral-Flow ImmunoAssay or fcLFIA. As the current generated in the fcLFIA is proportional to the amount of catalyst which is proportional to the binding of the catalyst at the electrode due to biology, the amount of binding and hence target molecules can be measured directly. A further advantage of the fcLFIA platform is that as current can be readily measured electronically; the sensitivity can be increased over colorimetic-based LFIAs.
It is a goal of the present invention to provide quantitation of the LFIA without greatly affecting the ease of use of conventional LFIAs. It is another goal of the present invention to increase sensitivity over colorimetric LFIAs. It is an additional goal of the present invention to be able to transmit and store the values obtained and performance of the platform either locally or through a connection to a remote site for further analysis of the results as well as provide a historic record.
These and other features and advantages of the invention, as well as the invention itself, will become better understood by reference to the following detailed description, appended claims, and accompanying drawings.
The present invention provides current and voltage proportional to the amount of catalyst immobilized on the electrodes through a biological binding event. In one embodiment, the electrode blanks are prepared as in Example 1. The binding elements can be placed as in Example 2 or Example 3 on the electrode blanks. The fcLFIA cartridge is assembled as in
The fuel cell lateral flow immunoassay is a general term for a system that generates power though a chemical reaction. It may be a fuel cell where the components are not depleted and only fuel needs to be supplied or a battery where both the oxidant and reductant are depleted (sacrificial) or a hybrid where one of the oxidants or reductants is depleted (sacrificial) and the other is supplied remotely. In the fcLFIA, the catalytic nanoparticles are captured at much lower levels of less than 1 μg/cm2 on the anode, when hydrogen is used as the fuel. Additionally, although no catalyst is necessary at the anode in the fcLFIA system, the presence of an easily oxidized material increases the power produced. The easily oxidized material is depleted in that embodiment.
The fcLFIA has some analogy to an electrochemical glucose sensor, which are well known in the art. As described in Yoo and Lee (Yoo and Lee 2010), glucose sensors use a set of enzymes that oxidize or reduce glucose to form higher energy compounds that can be detected electrochemically. One example is to use glucose oxidase, which catalyzes the oxidation of glucose with oxygen to form hydrogen peroxide. Another popular enzyme is glucose dehydrogenase that form NADH from NAD. To detect hydrogen peroxide or NADH, a potential is APPLIED to the electrodes such that at a given potential these molecules are either reduced or oxidized. Selectivity comes from the magnitude of the applied potential and timing. For example, the build-up of the high energy molecules is not instantaneous and during that time a background can be recorded. Because these sensors supply power, other molecules that have similar oxidation or reduction potentials will limit the sensitivity. Additionally, capacitance and conductivity of the media cause a background currents that limit the detection of the additional current from the presence of the high-energy molecule. Through judicious choice of label, other sensors have been developed that reduce interferences. For example, Guo and Yang, (Guo and Yang 2005) have developed sensors based on the oxidation of ruthenium tris(2,29-bipyridine), which is reduced back chemically with oxlate to complete the cycle. However, again they must supply power to cause the oxidation of the label and detection of the resultant current. The label may be either the oxidant or the reductant. In the instant invention, the assay provides power with the judicious choice of oxidant and reductant.
The measurements of pA currents is routinely done with modern electronics. Because of the proportionality constant between current and moles, 1 pA corresponds to approximately 1e-17 moles of a molecules undergoing a one electron change per second.
Fuel in the present invention is supplied either externally or more conveniently in an immobilized pad that gets activated by the flowing test fluid. Since the biology is complete after the fluid passes the electrodes, fuel generating materials can be incorporated in the absorption pad area. Additionally, the conditions in the absorption pad area need not be conducive to biological binding and may have extremes of pH or oxidation or corrosion. One preferred hydrogen generation material is sodium borohydride. This is a stable solid that readily produces hydrogen on contact with acids or water. As hydrogen is a gas, diffusion back to the electrode area can be rapid. Alternatively, the fuel can be generated electrochemically away from the biology and the fuel then diffuses to the biology to allow its detection.
Catalytic nanoparticles are desirable in the instant invention because they provide a current for a long time. However, they are not absolutely needed as electronics can make a reading rapidly. In that case, the nanoparticle could be the fuel rather than a catalyst. Metal-oxidant pairs for batteries are well known in the art. For example, immobilization of 1 ng of Zn nanoparticles would provide 1.5 E-11 moles of Zn to be oxidized to Zn+2. This would provide over 20 nA of current for 100 seconds. Similar results would occur with other metals such as iron. The voltages and hence power of such “batteries” likely would be compromised because the system in the vicinity of the biology is at near neutral pH, room temperature, selective osmolality, and does not have a well engineered cell separator between the electrodes. In a battery, power and energy delivered to the load are important. However in the fcLFIA system, because current is what is needed to determine the mass or number of the nanoparticle labels and hence the amount of target analyte in the test solution, having the voltage optimized is not necessary.
The fcLFIA system lends itself to ready controls since numerous electrodes can be readily integrated. In the embodiment shown in
The nanoparticles are catalysts to electrical chemical events and may be prepared from various metals and metal oxides known in the art such as Pd, Pt, Ag, Fe, Ni, Rh, Rh, V, and Mo or mixtures thereof. The choice of catalytic particle depends on the type of fuel used to generate the power measured by the device. For hydrogen gas as the fuel, Pd and Pt nanoparticles are equally effective, with Pd nanoparticles preferred. For hydrogen peroxide as the fuel, MnO2 nanoparticles are preferred. The nanoparticle need not be metals particles as iron chelates or other chelated metals may be employed as labels such as EDTA chelates of iron attached to the binding pair using chemistry known in the art. For iron as the catalyst and using hydrogen peroxide as the fuel, TAML (Collins and Gordon-Wylie 1998) is preferred.
Biological binding entities are known in the art. They may be antibodies, nucleic acids, proteins, or other molecules that can selectively bind some analyte. They need not be the same group of biological binding elements such as two antibodies or two strands of nucleic acid but could be an antibody paired with a nucleic acid. Alternatively, for small molecules or ions such as lead, the system may contain a molecule that selectively binds the ion and then that complex is recognized by the binding pair in the fcLFIA system.
Cartridge 63 may have writing or characters 66 that identify type of test to the user and to the reader upon insertion. For example, the writing may be a bar code or QR Codes read by the reader upon insertion. Alternatively or in conjuction, the cartridge 63 may have RFID tags embedded for identification of the cartridge and providing other information. Identification may comprise the type of assay i.e. for example what disease such as COVID-19, lot numbers, calibration information, date of manufacture, and other information useful in tracking the device from manufacture to use. The information and results of the test may be displayed to the user by the electronic reader or transmitted either wirelessly or through a cable to a remote facility for storage or analysis through methods known in the art. The transmitted data may be encrypted for privacy.
The ground electrode may be any easily oxidizable or reducible material. They may be coated alone or because the amount needed can be very small, coated over or mixed with the carbon electrode (such as sold by the Gwent Group, Code #C2030519P5 and Code #C2070424P2). They are chosen depending on the chemistry occurring at the working electrodes. For hydrogen oxidation at the working electrode due to the presence of a catalytic nanoparticle, some acceptable materials that are good electron acceptors are known in the art. Some examples are: bare carbon electrodes, Ag/AgCl, MnO2, and dyes such as: Prussian Blue, Meldola Blue, Methylene Blue, Resorufin, Resazurin, 2,6-Dichloroindophenol, Phenazinium Methyl Sulfate, Indigo, Indigo carmine, or tetrazolium salts such as Nitrotetrazolium Blue. MnO2 is preferred for hydrogen as the fuel. For labels that are reduced at the working electrode due to the presence of MnO2 nanoparticles used as labels or H2O2 fuel in the presence of a catalytic nanoparticle, the ground electrode must be easily oxidized. Good electron donors are known in the art. Some examples are zinc, iron, aluminum, magnesium, Al/Mg alloys, or Prussian blue, and reduced forms of the dyes used as electron acceptors. Zinc is preferred for sacrificial (used in the battery mode of detection) MnO2 nanoparticles.
For small-scale development, the electrodes may be made very conveniently by hand through a stencil process. A stencil material (Oratape MT80P) is placed on polycarbonate sheet (3M 665 PPC Film). The stencil is patterned with a computer-controlled, Silhouette Cameo 4 cutter and the appropriate holes weeded. The stencil is then coated with graphite ink (Ercon 3451, Ercon Incorporated, Wareham, Mass.), allowed to air dry or forced air dry, and the stencil overlay removed from the polycarbonate sheet providing a sheet of printed carbon electrodes. Ercon 3449 or Gwent C2030519P4 (Gwent Group, Pontypool, Gwent, UK) may be used in place of Ercon 3451 with equal results. These may be diced in a number of ways known in the art to allow deposition of the requisite chemistries. As this stenciling process is computer controlled, any change in the design can be made trivially. Selective area coating of inks are possible by weeding different areas of the stencil before applying the different inks. For large-scale manufacturing, the electrodes can be made by several processes known in the art such as screen printing or offset printing in roll format for easy assembly.
Streptavidin palladium conjugates were prepared by combining 9 μL of PdCl2 (64 mM), 91 μL of Streptavidin (1 mg/mL in 90 mM phosphate buffer pH 8), and 242.5 μL of distilled water in a microfuge tube. The solution was equilibrated for 5 minutes before rapidly adding 15 μL sodium borohydride (10 mg/mL) with vigorous agitation. The solution immediately changed from a pale yellow to brown/gray color upon addition of the reductant. The microfuge tube was placed on a shaking table for a minimum of one hour to allow the reaction to go to completion. The palladium concentration was about 180 ng/μL.
Streptavidin platinum conjugates were prepared by combining 18 μL of PtCl2 (64 mM), 182 μL of Streptavidin (2 mg/mL), and 970 μL of distilled water in a microfuge tube. The solution was equilibrated for 10 minutes before rapidly adding 30 μL sodium borohydride (10 mg/mL) with vigorous agitation. The solution immediately changed from a pale yellow to black color upon addition of the reductant. The microfuge tube was placed on a shaking table for a minimum of one hour to allow the reaction to go to completion. The platinum concentration was about 190 ng/μL.
To the ground electrode (as defined in
To test which type of ground electrodes provided better performance, various types of oxidants in Table 1 (solids for the Fe2O3 and Fe3O4) or Example 4 for the MnO2 were coated onto Ercon E3451 electrodes as prepared in Example 1 on the Ground electrode as defined in
Referring to
The Streptavidin-platinum was diluted 1:100 and 2 uL applied to each of the working electrodes defined in
Using the Electrodes as defined in
The Streptavidin-platinum was diluted 1:150, 1:100, and 1:200 and 2 uL applied to each of the working electrodes defined in
Slight changes to preparation of the protein-nanoparticle conjugates can affect the catalytic activity. Mulvaney, et al., qualified their nanoparticle conjugates using a colorimetric assay. Although one could expect that the electronic activity should parallel the chemical activity, the reactions are not the same. In the case of Mulvaney, et al., the chemistry is oxidation of a dye. In the instant invention, the chemistry is oxidation of a fuel. For electrical qualification, an appropriated diluted solution of the nanoparticle conjugates is placed on the top electrode 64 of the two electrode assembly in
The above descriptions are those of the preferred embodiments of the invention. Various modifications and variations are possible in light of the above teachings without departing from the spirit and broader aspects of the invention. It is therefore to be understood that the claimed invention may be practiced otherwise than as specifically described. Any references to claim elements in the singular, for example, using the articles “a,” “an,” “the,” or “said,” is not to be construed as limiting the element to the singular.
The present application is a non-provisional application that claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Application No. 63/318,391, filed on Mar. 9, 2022 by David A. Kidwell, entitled “COMPACT, ELECTRONICALLY READABLE POINT-OF-CARE IMMUNOASSAYS,” the entire contents of which are incorporated herein by reference.
This invention was made with government support by the U.S. Department of the Navy. The government has certain rights in the invention.
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
63318391 | Mar 2022 | US |