Elsevier

Biosensors and Bioelectronics

Volume 21, Issue 10, 15 April 2006, Pages 1932-1942
Biosensors and Bioelectronics

Point-of-care biosensor systems for cancer diagnostics/prognostics

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bios.2006.01.006Get rights and content

Abstract

With the growing number of fatalities resulting from the 100 or so cancer-related diseases, new enabling tools are required to provide extensive molecular profiles of patients to guide the clinician in making viable diagnosis and prognosis. Unfortunately with cancer-related diseases, there is not one molecular marker that can provide sufficient information to assist the clinician in making effective prognoses or even diagnoses. Indeed, large panels of markers must typically be evaluated that cut across several different classes (mutations in certain gene fragments—DNA; over/under-expression of gene activity as monitored by messenger RNAs; the amount of proteins present in serum or circulating tumor cells). The classical biosensor format (dipstick approach for monitoring the presence of a single element) is viewed as a valuable tool in many bioassays, but possesses numerous limitations in cancer due primarily to the single element nature of these sensing platforms. As such, if biosensors are to become valuable tools in the arsenal of the clinician to manage cancer patients, new formats are required. This review seeks to provide an overview of the current thinking on molecular profiling for diagnosis and prognosis of cancers and also, provide insight into the current state-of-the-art in the biosensor field and new strategies that must be considered to bring this important technology into the cancer field.

Introduction

Cancers arise as a result of the disruption of normal cell signaling pathways, which can produce cells (cancer cells) that exhibit a decisive growth advantage compared to their neighbors. These growth advantages are typically produced from a number of different genetic and/or epigenetic changes, which result in the activation of oncogenes and the inactivation of tumor suppressor genes. Unfortunately in terms of diagnosis, no single oncogene or tumor suppressor gene has been discovered to be universally altered in all adult cancers. In addition, patterns of genetic and/or epigenetic changes differ not only in terms of tumor location (i.e., organ), but also among tumors from the same location. Besides genome-related changes, other complex molecular alterations result during the course of tumorigenesis, such as gene over/under-expression (mRNA changes) or protein over/under-expression. As such, a plethora of molecular biomarkers can potentially be analyzed via different sensing platforms for tumor classification to guide diagnosis, prognosis, monitoring treatment and disease recurrence.

As depicted in Fig. 1, the age-adjusted death rate for heart disease has dramatically declined over the last 50 years, while in the case of cancer this same trend has not occurred (Leaf, 2004). In 2004, nearly 563,700 patients were diagnosed with one or several of the 100 diseases belonging to the cancer family with one in two and one in three men and women, respectively, expected to contract one of these diseases during their lifetime. It is interesting to note that ∼90% of all cancer-related deaths occur from metastasis and not directly from the primary tumor site.

In spite of the rapid explosion of new technology platforms and biomarkers that have been discovered and reported in the literature for cancer diagnostics, prognostics, therapeutics and monitoring disease recurrence, few of these technologies or biomarkers have transitioned into the clinical arena. The common method for cancer diagnosis and prognosis relies heavily on technologies that are over 100 years old (paraffin fixation of tissues with visual inspection of cell morphology by a pathologist). Therefore, in spite of the significant investment by a number of agencies into discovery of new molecular markers and the technologies to utilize these biomarkers, most have not entered the clinic. The major fundamental question then arises: Why have the incidence and survival rates of cancers not shown marked decreases in line with the large financial and time investments that have been waged against this disease? In this paper, information will be presented that provides information on potentially new technologies in the form of point-of-care (POC) biosensors for biomarker analysis and the merging of new biomarkers with the appropriate technology platform to develop systems that provide clinically relevant information to assist the physician and clinician in disease diagnosis, prognosis, treatment and recurrence. The major technology platform that will be the focus of this discussion is biosensors, and their integration into POC systems for the analysis of clinically significant cancer biomarkers.

Section snippets

Description of technology area

A biosensor (see Fig. 2) in the traditional sense is defined as: bioanalytical device incorporating a biological material or a biomimic (e.g., tissue, microorganisms, organelles, cell receptors, enzymes, antibodies, nucleic acids, etc.), intimately associated with or integrated within a physicochemical transducer or transducing microsystem, which may be optical, electrochemical, thermometric, piezoelectric or magnetic. The usual aim of a biosensor is to produce either discrete or continuous

Novel technologies for POC biosensing platforms for cancer diagnostics

POC technologies offer platforms for complex testing by non-specialists and the benefit of increased robustness and reliability due to fewer world-to-device interfaces. These technologies can contribute to the realization of personalized medicine by creating a link between the diagnosis of disease and the ability to tailor therapeutics to the individual. As biomarkers of disease are discovered and validated through genomics and proteomics research, development of new technology platforms can

Summary and conclusions

Extensive work within the physical sciences and engineering fields has resulted in the evolution of a variety of new tools that are well-equipped to monitor the presence or absence of certain biomarkers across a number of different classes (DNA, RNA and proteins). Indeed, many of these devices have already been employed in the clinic for the diagnosis and/or prognosis of certain diseases. However, the use of these sensing platforms for cancer has been slow to evolve due primarily to the

Future perspectives and technology needs for meeting the demands of cancer diagnosis/prognosis

While much research has evolved as a result of opportunities from a variety of agencies, including the NIH, it is clear that new technology-focused funding opportunities will have to be developed to produce a new wave of biosensors that are appropriate for providing clinically relevant information for the 100 or so cancer-related diseases. During the evolution of biosensor related platforms for providing clinical information for cancer patients, the following issues should be kept under

FDA and the regulation of in vitro diagnostic devices (IVDs)

The efficient translation of new technologies into clinical use is benefited by the early involvement of the FDA. FDA began regulating medical devices, including IVDs or laboratory tests, with the passage of the Medical Device Amendments of 1976. This new law put into place a series of general controls for medical devices including the requirement that companies register and list their products with FDA, make these products consistently over time following good manufacturing practices, and

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the National Institutes of Health (National Cancer Institute) for supporting the workshop (June 2005, Bethesda, MD) from which this document evolved.

References (96)

  • J. Gui et al.

    Selection of a peptide with affinity for the tumor-associated TAG72 antigen from a phage-displayed library

    Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun.

    (1996)
  • S. Kim et al.

    Near-infrared fluorescent type II quantum dots for sentinel lymph node mapping

    Nat. Biotechnol.

    (2004)
  • Y. Liu et al.

    Real time kinetic analysis of the interaction between immunoglobulin G and histidine using quartz crystal microbalance biosensor in solution

    Biosens. Bioelectron.

    (2003)
  • I. Mannelli et al.

    Quartz crystal microbalance (QCM) affinity biosensor for genetically modified organisms (GMOs) detection

    Biosens. Bioelectron.

    (2003)
  • M.J. McGuire et al.

    In vitro selection of a peptide with high selectivity for cardiomyocytes in vivo

    J. Mol. Biol.

    (2004)
  • M. Minunni et al.

    Detection of beta-thalassemia by a DNA piezoelectric biosensor coupled with polymerase chain reaction

    Anal. Chim. Acta

    (2003)
  • C.K. O'Sullivan et al.

    Commercial quartz crystal microbalances—theory and applications

    Biosens. Bioelectron.

    (1999)
  • T. Oyama et al.

    Isolation of lung tumor specific peptides from a random peptide library: generation of diagnostic and cell-targeting reagents

    Cancer Lett.

    (2003)
  • D. Pal et al.

    A portable battery-operated chip thermocycler based on induction heating

    Sens. Actuators A-Phys.

    (2002)
  • A.G. Schatzlein et al.

    Phage derived peptides for targeting of doxorubicin conjugates to solid tumours

    J. Control. Release

    (2001)
  • H.B. Su et al.

    Kinetics of hybridization of interfacial RNA homopolymer studied by thickness-shear mode acoustic wave sensor

    Biosens. Bioelectron.

    (1997)
  • C.P. Sun et al.

    Rapid, species-specific detection of uropathogen 16S rDNA and rRNA at ambient temperature by dot–blot hybridization and an electrochemical sensor array

    Mol. Genet. Metab.

    (2005)
  • S. Tombelli et al.

    Improved procedures for immobilisation of oligonucleotides on gold-coated piezoelectric quartz crystals

    Biosens. Bioelectron.

    (2002)
  • M.M. Varma et al.

    High-speed label-free detection by spinning-disk micro-interferometry

    Biosens. Bioelectron.

    (2004)
  • I. Willner et al.

    Amplified detection of single-base mismatches in DNA using micro gravimetric quartz-crystal-microbalance transduction

    Talanta

    (2002)
  • X.C. Zhou et al.

    Microgravimetric DNA sensor based on quartz crystal microbalance: comparison of oligonucleotide immobilization methods and the application in genetic diagnosis

    Biosens. Bioelectron.

    (2001)
  • X.D. Zhou et al.

    Detection of hepatitis B virus by piezoelectric biosensor

    J. Pharm. Biomed. Anal.

    (2002)
  • C.H. Ahn et al.

    Disposable Smart lab on a chip for point-of-care clinical diagnostics

    Proc. IEEE

    (2004)
  • O.H. Aina et al.

    Therapeutic cancer targeting peptides

    Biopolymers

    (2002)
  • S.L.R. Barker et al.

    Plastic microfluidic devices modified with polyelectrolyte multilayers

    Anal. Chem.

    (2000)
  • M.A. Barry et al.

    Toward cell-targeting gene therapy vectors: selection of cell-binding peptides from random peptide-presenting phage libraries

    Nat. Med.

    (1996)
  • R.C. Bast et al.

    2000 Update of recommendations for the use of tumor markers in breast and colorectal cancer: clinical practice guidelines of the American Society of Clinical Oncology

    J. Clin. Oncol.

    (2001)
  • M.C. Breadmore et al.

    Microchip-based purification of DNA from biological samples

    Anal. Chem.

    (2003)
  • J.S. Buch et al.

    DNA mutation detection in a polymer microfluidic network using temperature gradient gel electrophoresis

    Anal. Chem.

    (2004)
  • M.A. Burg et al.

    NG2 proteoglycan-binding peptides target tumor neovasculature

    Cancer Res.

    (1999)
  • M.A. Burns et al.

    An integrated nanoliter DNA analysis device

    Science

    (1998)
  • F. Caruso et al.

    Quartz crystal microbalance study of DNA immobilization and hybridization for nucleic acid sensor development

    Anal. Chem.

    (1997)
  • R.S. Chambers et al.

    High-level generation of polyclonal antibodies by genetic immunization

    Nat. Biotechnol.

    (2003)
  • Y.F. Chen et al.

    Luminescent CdS quantum dots as selective ion probes

    Anal. Chem.

    (2002)
  • S.Y. Chou et al.

    Nanoimprint lithography

    J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B

    (1996)
  • L.A. Christel et al.

    Rapid, automated nucleic acid probe assays using silicon microstructures for nucleic acid concentration

    J. Biomech. Eng. Trans. ASME

    (1999)
  • I.B. DeRoock et al.

    Synthetic peptides inhibit adhesion of human tumor cells to extracellular matrix proteins

    Cancer Res.

    (2001)
  • R.P. Ekins et al.

    Multianalyte microspot immunoassay—microanalytical compact-disk of the future

    Clin. Chem.

    (1991)
  • D. Falconnet et al.

    A novel approach to produce protein nanopatterns by combining nanoimprint lithography and molecular self-assembly

    Nano Lett.

    (2004)
  • R.A. Farah et al.

    The development of monoclonal antibodies for the therapy of cancer

    Crit. Rev. Eukaryot. Gene Expr.

    (1998)
  • N.C. Fawcett et al.

    QCM response to solvated, tethered macromolecules

    Anal. Chem.

    (1998)
  • N.C. Fawcett et al.

    Nucleic-acid hybridization detected by piezoelectric resonance

    Anal. Lett.

    (1988)
  • F. Fixe et al.

    Functionalization of poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA) as a substrate for DNA microarrays

    Nucleic Acids Res.

    (2004)
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text