• FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster. The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website. By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
  • We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.

Sci Rep . Performance assessment of disposable carbon-based immunosensors for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 infections

tetano

Editor, Senior Moderator
Sci Rep


. 2025 Mar 5;15(1):7741.
doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-92104-7. Performance assessment of disposable carbon-based immunosensors for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 infections

Olga L Agudelo[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Vanessa Reyes-Loaiza[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Lina Giraldo-Parra[SUP] 3 4 [/SUP], Mariana Rosales-Chilama[SUP] 3 4 [/SUP], Sammy Perdomo[SUP] 2 [/SUP], María Adelaida Gómez[SUP] 3 4 [/SUP], John W Rodriguez[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Viviana Ortega[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Carlos F Daza Rivera[SUP] 5 [/SUP], Diana Galindo[SUP] 5 [/SUP], Drochss P Valencia[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Mauricio Quimbaya[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Simón Plata[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Robert Bogdanowicz[SUP] 6 [/SUP], Fernando Rosso[SUP] 1 4 [/SUP], Andres Jaramillo-Botero[SUP] 7 8 [/SUP]



Affiliations
Abstract

We designed, developed, and clinically tested two rapid antigen-based immunosensors for SARS-CoV-2 detection, enabling diagnosis and viral load quantification for under USD $2. In a first clinical study, a screen-printed disposable carbon-based (SPC) sensor was assessed on prospectively recruited adult participants classified into three study groups: healthy donors (n = 46); SARS-CoV-2-infected symptomatic patients (n = 58); and co-habitants of patients without prior testing (n = 38). Nasopharyngeal aspirates (NA), oropharyngeal swabs (OS), and saliva (SA) samples were obtained from all participants. Performance was measured in terms of clinical sensitivity and specificity against a reference diagnostic RT-qPCR kit and analytical sensitivity (limit of detection, LoD) and specificity using recombinant material in lab tests. A second study was performed using the same sensor design, albeit with laser-induced graphene (LIG) electrodes, using nasopharyngeal swabs (NS) on 224 patient samples obtained at different stages of the pandemic, of which 110 tested negative and 114 positive via RT-qPCR. We find OS was the most informative sample, when compared to NA and SA. The SPC-based sensors had a 93.8% sensitivity and 61.5% specificity with OS samples, while the LIG-based sensors with NS had a lower sensitivity of 68.93%, albeit a significantly higher specificity of 86.17%. We believe specificity values for the SPC sensors were driven by positive results from co-habitants and healthy donors and were affected by the low sensitivity (75.5%) and high LoD (> 20,000 viral copies/mL) of the reference RT-qPCR kit used, and the lower sensitivity of the LIG-based was due to a reduced set of effective antigen-binding sites caused by the non-covalent LIG-mAb ligands used. The immunosensor's LoD to spike protein in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) for both types of sensors was near 1 fg/mL and showed no cross-reactivity to recombinant structural proteins of Epstein-Barr and Influenza. Performance metrics and time-to-result (5 < 12 min) provide proof-of-principle of the immunosensor's applicability as a low-cost, rapid technology for determining SARS-CoV-2 infections. Changing the working electrode material to LIG, instead of SPC, improved specificity even in the presence of pathogen variants. Discordant results between our two immunosensor versions and RT-qPCR tests are attributed not only to limited antibody effectiveness in the former but also to the quality of RT-qPCR probes used at the height of the pandemic.

Keywords: Antigen; Biosensor; Immunoassays; Point-of-care testing; SARS-CoV-2; Spike protein.

 
Back
Top Bottom