Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2017 Jun 12;56(25):7112-7116.
doi: 10.1002/anie.201702403. Epub 2017 May 16.

Bioluminescent Antibodies for Point-of-Care Diagnostics

Affiliations

Bioluminescent Antibodies for Point-of-Care Diagnostics

Lin Xue et al. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. .

Abstract

We introduce a general method to transform antibodies into ratiometric, bioluminescent sensor proteins for the no-wash quantification of analytes. Our approach is based on the genetic fusion of antibody fragments to NanoLuc luciferase and SNAP-tag, the latter being labeled with a synthetic fluorescent competitor of the antigen. Binding of the antigen, here synthetic drugs, by the sensor displaces the tethered fluorescent competitor from the antibody and disrupts bioluminescent resonance energy transfer (BRET) between the luciferase and fluorophore. The semisynthetic sensors display a tunable response range (submicromolar to submillimolar) and large dynamic range (ΔRmax >500 %), and they permit the quantification of analytes through spotting of the samples onto paper followed by analysis with a digital camera.

Keywords: antibodies; bioluminescence; point-of-care monitoring; sensors; therapeutic drug monitoring.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
The design of LUCIDs for PoC diagnostics. a) Schematic representation of the paper‐based device. The LUCID is a fusion protein of SNAP‐tag, NanoLuc luciferase (NLuc), and a binding protein (BP). SNAP‐tag is labeled with a molecule containing a fluorophore (red star) and a ligand (green ball) that binds to BP. The filter paper was printed with wax circles and the signal was collected by a digital camera. b) The variable fragment of the methotrexate antibody (PDB ID: 4OCX) bound to methotrexate (yellow). The N‐termini of both chains are indicated in green. The three CDRs (H1‐3, blue) on the heavy chain (light blue) and three CDRs (L1‐3, red) on the light chain (pink) are involved in antigen binding. c) In Fab‐based LUCIDs, the binding protein is an antibody Fab fragment. SNAP‐tag and NanoLuc are attached to the light chain.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Antibody‐binding of methotrexate (a), theophylline (b), and quinine (c). The chemical structures of the three drugs are shown on the left. The crystal structures of antibodies with the methotrexate (PDB ID: 4OCX), theophylline derivative (PDB ID: 5BMF), and quinine (PDB ID: 4UIN) were superimposed, showing the interactions of the residues with the ligands (carbon atoms in green). Extensive hydrogen bonding (dotted orange lines) links the three antigens to the antibodies, either directly or via water molecules (red balls).
Figure 3
Figure 3
Molecules used for semisynthesis of the sensor proteins. The benzylguanine group serves as the reactive moiety for SNAP‐tag labeling (blue). The fluorophore Cy3 is colored in red. The ligands for different analytes are shown as R groups, which conjugate to the polyethylene glycol linker through amide bonds (green).
Figure 4
Figure 4
LUCIDs for methotrexate, theophylline, and quinine. Emission spectra of 5 nm MTX1‐Lucid (a), Theo1‐Lucid (b), and Quin2‐Lucid (c) in human serum spiked with known concentrations of the corresponding analyte. Emission ratios of methotrexate LUCIDs (d), theophylline LUCIDs (e), and quinine LUCIDs (f) as a function of analyte concentration. The measurements were performed on paper spotted with 5 μL sample (50 mm HEPES, 50 mm NaCl, pH 7.45, 50 % (v/v) serum, 1/100 furimazine). The data (mean±SD) are fitted to a single‐site binding isotherm (dashed line). Insets: pictures of the paper‐based devices in the detection of serum samples with the corresponding analytes (Top: LUCIDs with low c50 values; Bottom: LUCIDs with high c50 values).
Figure 5
Figure 5
Correlation of the results obtained for the spiked samples (black: theophylline, red: methotrexate, and blue: quinine) using a traditional UV/Vis spectrophotometric method and LUCID. The LUCID measurements were performed on paper by spotting 5 μL sample/serum mixture (50 mm HEPES, 50 mm NaCl, pH 7.45, 50 % (v/v) serum, 1/100 furimazine), and the UV/Vis measurements in HEPES buffer (50 mm HEPES, 50 mm NaCl, pH 7.45). Each LUCID measurement is given as the mean±SD of three independent measurements. Regression analysis yielded a Pearson correlation coefficient R=0.994.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Sanavio B., Krol S., Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 2015, 3, 20. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Saint-Marcoux F., Sauvage F.-L., Marquet P., Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 2007, 388, 1327–1349. - PubMed
    1. Dasgupta A., Datta P., Handbook of Drug Monitoring Methods, Humana, Totowa, NJ, 2008, pp. 67–86.
    1. Griss R., Schena A., Reymond L., Patiny L., Werner D., Tinberg C. E., Baker D., Johnsson K., Nat. Chem. Biol. 2014, 10, 598–603. - PubMed
    1. Arts R., den Hartog I., Zijlema S. E., Thijssen V., van der Beelen S. H. E., Merkx M., Anal. Chem. 2016, 88, 4525–4532. - PubMed

Publication types