ACS Publications. Most Trusted. Most Cited. Most Read
My Activity
CONTENT TYPES
ADDITION / CORRECTIONThis article has been corrected. View the notice.

Nuclease Hydrolysis Does Not Drive the Rapid Signaling Decay of DNA Aptamer-Based Electrochemical Sensors in Biological Fluids

  • Alexander Shaver
    Alexander Shaver
    Department of Pharmacology and Molecular Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland 21202, United States
  • Nandini Kundu
    Nandini Kundu
    Department of Chemistry, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas 77842, United States
  • Brian E. Young
    Brian E. Young
    Department of Chemistry, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas 77842, United States
  • Philip A. Vieira
    Philip A. Vieira
    Department of Psychology, California State University Dominguez Hills, Carson, California 90747, United States
  • Jonathan T. Sczepanski
    Jonathan T. Sczepanski
    Department of Chemistry, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas 77842, United States
  • , and 
  • Netzahualcóyotl Arroyo-Currás*
    Netzahualcóyotl Arroyo-Currás
    Department of Pharmacology and Molecular Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland 21202, United States
    Department of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering and Institute for NanoBioTechnology, Whiting School of Engineering, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland 21218, United States
    *Email: [email protected]. Phone: 443-287-4798.
Cite this: Langmuir 2021, 37, 17, 5213–5221
Publication Date (Web):April 20, 2021
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.langmuir.1c00166

Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by American Chemical Society. This publication is licensed under

CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0.
  • Open Access

Article Views

1685

Altmetric

-

Citations

LEARN ABOUT THESE METRICS
PDF (4 MB)
Supporting Info (1)»

Abstract

Electrochemical aptamer-based (E-AB) sensors are a technology capable of real-time monitoring of drug concentrations directly in the body. These sensors achieve their selectivity from surface-attached aptamers, which alter their conformation upon target binding, thereby causing a change in electron transfer kinetics between aptamer-bound redox reporters and the electrode surface. Because, in theory, aptamers can be selected for nearly any target of interest, E-AB sensors have far-reaching potential for diagnostic and biomedical applications. However, a remaining critical weakness in the platform lies in the time-dependent, spontaneous degradation of the bioelectronic interface. This progressive degradation─seen in part as a continuous drop in faradaic current from aptamer-attached redox reporters─limits the in vivo operational life of E-AB sensors to less than 12 h, prohibiting their long-term application for continuous molecular monitoring in humans. In this work, we study the effects of nuclease action on the signaling lifetime of E-AB sensors, to determine whether the progressive signal loss is caused by hydrolysis of DNA aptamers and thus the loss of signaling moieties from the sensor surface. We continuously interrogate sensors deployed in several undiluted biological fluids at 37 °C and inject nuclease to reach physiologically relevant concentrations. By employing both naturally occurring d-DNA and the nuclease-resistant enantiomer l-DNA, we determine that within the current lifespan of state-of-the-art E-AB sensors, nuclease hydrolysis is not the dominant cause of sensor signal loss under the conditions we tested. Instead, signal loss is driven primarily by the loss of monolayer elements─both blocking alkanethiol and aptamer monolayers─from the electrode surface. While use of l-DNA aptamers may extend the E-AB operational life in the long term, the critical issue of passive monolayer loss must be addressed before those effects can be seen.

This publication is licensed under

CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0.
  • cc licence
  • by licence
  • nc licence
  • nd licence

Introduction

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

Synthetic nucleic acids are increasingly being used in biosensors, drug delivery systems, and other biotechnologies due to their ease of synthesis, wide range of available modifications, and cost effectiveness. However, these molecules are susceptible to catalytic hydrolysis by naturally occurring nucleases when deployed in biological environments, such as blood or cytosol, sometimes being fully degraded within minutes of exposure to such environments. (1) Additionally, nucleic acids are known to interact non-specifically with proteins and other biomolecules, (2) which can further hinder their usefulness when selective interactions are needed. These unwanted interactions, coupled with nuclease-driven degradation, can severely limit their lifetime when used in biotechnological applications that rely on the in vivo administration and functionality of synthetically produced nucleic acids.
Electrochemical aptamer-based (E-AB) sensors are an example platform that relies on the affinity and dynamics of synthetic oligonucleotides in biological fluids. (3,4) E-AB sensors consist of electrode-bound, redox reporter-modified nucleic acid aptamers co-deposited with alkanethiol monolayers onto gold electrodes via self-assembly (Figure 1A). (5) In the presence of their specific target, the aptamers undergo binding-induced conformational changes that alter the electron transfer efficiency between the redox reporters and the electrode surface, an event easily detected electrochemically. (6) E-AB sensors already support the continuous, real-time measurement of specific molecular targets within the body of living animals. (4) However, their in vivo operation is limited to less than 12 h due, in large part, to progressive signal degradation of the sensor interface. Specifically, in prior work, we (7) and others (8) have demonstrated that E-AB signal degradation is driven by the progressive desorption of monolayer components, including aptamers, from the electrode surface. In an effort to determine if nuclease-driven hydrolysis of aptamers also contributes to progressive E-AB signal decay, here, we study the effects of enantiomeric aptamer modifications on E-AB target binding and nuclease resistance.

Figure 1

Figure 1. Anatomy of E-AB sensors. (A) We fabricated sensors using aptamers of either naturally occurring d-DNA or the nuclease-resistant enantiomer l-DNA. These aptamers are modified on the 5′ end with an alkanethiol linker for self-assembly onto a gold electrode surface and on the 3′ end with a redox reporter for electrochemical interrogation. Both d- and l-DNA-functionalized sensors maintain similar signaling when interrogated by cyclic voltammetry (CV) (B) and square wave voltammetry (C). CV was measured in S1 buffer (5 mM HEPES, 50 mM NaCl, and 100 μΜ ZnCl2, pH ∼ 5.4) at 0.1 V/s. Square wave voltammetry was recorded in S1 buffer with a frequency of 80 Hz and an amplitude of 25 mV. Shaded areas represent the standard deviation calculated from four independent electrodes.

Nucleic acid modifications such as peptide nucleic acids, locked nucleic acids, and phosphorothioate linkages are known to confer nuclease resistance to oligonucleotides. (9−12) However, the application of these and other oligonucleotide modifications in biological environments is limited by their potential toxicity and/or immunogenicity. (13−15) Additionally, such modifications can greatly alter the target binding and conformational dynamics of nucleic acids, negatively affecting their performance in biosensor technologies. (16) As a viable alternative, enantiomeric modification of nucleic acids is known to confer complete nuclease resistance while simultaneously maintaining the expected conformational dynamics, target affinity, and low immunogenicity. (17) While naturally occurring d-DNA can degrade within minutes in certain biological environments, chirally inverted l-DNA has been shown to be stable for up to 72 h within the same environments. (18−20) With this knowledge in mind, here, we fabricated E-AB sensors using either d- or l-DNA aptamers (Figure 1A) to determine the effects of enantiomeric modification on sensor operation and lifetime.

Results and Discussion

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

l-DNA Sensors Maintain Achiral Target Affinity

The signaling performance of E-AB sensors is highly sensitive to the structure of their bioelectronic interface. (21,22) As such, any alteration to the chemistries of the blocking monolayer, aptamers, or redox reporters must be evaluated for its effects on sensor selectivity, affinity, and signal gain. Specifically, structural changes to the aptamers such as enantiomeric reversal must be evaluated for effects on target binding. To evaluate these effects, we used the cocaine-binding aptamer (Table 1) as a model system, (23) synthesized in both the d- and l-DNA forms. Notably, this aptamer has been shown to lack specificity, binding to many structurally different targets including chiral and achiral molecules. (24) This characteristic is important because chirality plays a critical role in DNA–small molecule interactions. For example, prior studies have demonstrated that selection of a d-DNA aptamer for a chiral molecule allows the l-DNA form of the aptamer to bind equally to the enantiomer of the aforesaid chiral molecule, a property referred to as reciprocal chiral specificity. (1,25) Relatedly, achiral targets have the ability to bind both d- and l-forms of an aptamer selected against them. (26) As such, we hypothesized that this phenomenon would translate to the surface of E-AB sensors.
Table 1. DNA Sequences Employed in This Work
targetsequenceref.
Cocaine5′- GGC GAC AAG GAA AAT CCT TCA ACG AAG GTG GGT GGC C -3′ (19)
N/A5′- GGA TCG AAC TGG TAC GCC -3′ 
To test our hypothesis, we first examined the achiral target procaine (Figure S1), which binds to the cocaine-binding aptamer. We chemically synthesized both d- and l-DNA versions of this aptamer (d-coc and l-coc, respectively) using commercially available d- and l-nucleoside phosphoramidites. The 3′ end of each aptamer was functionalized with a thiol and the 5′ end was functionalized with the redox reporter methylene blue (MB). We then fabricated sensors by incubating gold electrodes overnight in an aqueous solution containing 1 mM 6-mercaptohexanol (MCH) and 500 nM (either) d-coc or l-coc. Evaluating the redox response of these sensors by either CV or square wave voltammetry (SWV), we see no significant difference between the baseline voltammograms obtained from either d-coc or l-coc sensors (Figure 1B,C) under identical deposition conditions and technique parameters. To then determine the optimal frequencies for E-AB interrogation using SWV, we built “quasi-reversible maximum” maps as initially described by Lovrić and colleagues (Figures 2A and S2) (27,28) and adapted to E-AB interrogation by Dauphin-Ducharme and Plaxco. (29) Briefly, we interrogated both d-coc and l-coc sensors across a range of square wave frequencies in both the absence and presence of a saturating amount of procaine and identified two maxima, one corresponding to the unbound state and the other to the bound state of the aptamer. We selected the frequencies at which these maxima are observed, 5 and 250 Hz, for further SWV interrogation of our E-AB sensors.

Figure 2

Figure 2. Sensors employing d- or l-coc aptamers respond equivalently to achiral target additions. (A) We demonstrate this equivalence by, first, highlighting the fact that signal ON and OFF frequencies remain the same between sensor types. (B) By challenging both d-coc and l-coc-functionalized sensors with increasing concentrations of the achiral target procaine, we determine that the enantiomeric inversion of aptamers does not alter either signal gain (magnitude of current change at saturation, GainD-coc = 910% vs GainL-coc = 890%) or apparent target affinity (KD.d-DNA = 10.6 ± 0.6 mM vs KD.l-DNA = 10.3 ± 0.6 mM). These consistencies remain when sensors are challenged with targets other than procaine. Specifically, both d-coc and l-coc sensors respond similarly to the achiral target 6-hydroxyquinoline (C, Gaind-coc = 260% vs Gainl-coc = 300%; KD.d-DNA = 2.37 ± 0.10 mM vs KD.l-DNA = 2.29 ± 0.10 mM) and the chiral target quinine (D, Gaind-coc = 390% vs Gainl-coc = 360%; KD.d-DNA = 523 ± 40 μM vs KD.l-DNA = 686 ± 32 μM). The latter still binds to l-coc sensors because quinine contains an achiral quinoline backbone moiety. All SWV experiments were recorded from 0 to −0.5 V versus Ag/AgCl with an amplitude of 25 mV. Shaded areas in all panels represent the standard deviation calculated from eight independent sensors.

The chirality of the nucleic acid aptamers (d vs l) is inconsequential for binding achiral targets and chiral targets with achiral moieties involved in aptamer binding. Accordingly, binding of achiral procaine to either d-coc or l-coc sensors is not significantly different (Figure 2B). We demonstrate this by building calibration curves for each sensor type, in which we challenge them with increasing amounts of targets while serially interrogating at 5 and 250 Hz. Procaine has been previously identified as a 1:1 minor groove binder and an electron donor to DNA, with strongest interactions with adenine and thymine, which represent 50% of the cocaine aptamer sequence used in this work. (30) Moreover, it is speculated that the structural flexibility of procaine allows it to reorient itself and bind to either DNA enantiomer, with no significant difference in affinity. To further demonstrate the idea that achiral structures can interact with both d- and l-DNA-functionalized sensors equally, we also built calibration curves for the chiral molecule quinine and its achiral backbone analogue 6-hydroxyquinoline. Johnson and colleagues demonstrated that the cocaine aptamer binds to the achiral quinoline ring, commonly shared between these two targets. (23,24) Interrogating E-AB sensors at each target’s respective maxima (Figure S2), again, we observed no significant difference between the dissociation constants for d-coc and l-coc (Figure 2C,D). These results demonstrate that although quinine is a chiral molecule, the strongest interaction of the cocaine aptamer is with the quinoline ring. Therefore, E-AB sensors employing aptamers that are optimized in the d-DNA form against achiral targets or achiral target moieties can be directly translated to the l-DNA enantiomer without affinity losses.

E-AB Sensors Functionalized with l-DNA Resist Nuclease-Driven Hydrolysis

Motivated by the retained analytical performance of l-coc sensors with achiral targets, we investigated how sensitive these sensors were to the presence of nucleases in buffer. As a model enzyme, we used S1 nuclease, which is known to have strong activity against single-stranded DNA. (31) For these experiments, we used unstructured oligonucleotides (Table 1) to ensure that the secondary structure did not affect nuclease activity. Of note, when comparing the cocaine aptamer and the unstructured oligonucleotides, we saw no difference in their sensitivity to nuclease-driven signal decay (Figure S3). We prepared sensors via overnight incubation in an aqueous solution of 500 nM DNA and 1 mM 1-hexanethiol (HxSH). In prior work, (7) we demonstrated that HxSH monolayers remain on the surface of E-AB sensors for periods of days under continuous electrochemical interrogation, whereas benchmark MCH monolayers significantly desorb from sensor surfaces starting at 24 h. Additionally, HxSH monolayers allow greater resolution of faradaic peaks related to the redox conversion of DNA-attached MB. Thus, here, we employed HxSH to decouple signal loss caused by short-chain monolayer desorption from that of receptor desorption or nuclease-driven hydrolysis of receptors (all processes cause a drop in E-AB signaling).
l-DNA sensors resist nuclease-dependent degradation across four orders of magnitude of nuclease concentration. To demonstrate this resistance, we simultaneously interrogated electrodes functionalized with either d-DNA or l-DNA constructs within the same electrochemical cell (Figure 3). We note that 0 h in all graphs represents the time immediately after sensor fabrication, when electrodes are first placed into the cell without any prior electrochemical pre-treatment. We interrogated these sensors in S1 buffer (5 mM HEPES, 50 mM NaCl, and 100 μM ZnCl2, pH ∼ 5.4) by CV every 25 s for 4 h and extracted the peak current related to the oxidation of DNA-attached redox reporters (leucomethylene blue to MB) over time. We then normalized the peak current at every point to the initial peak current for each sensor, giving us a readout of the remaining concentration of intact DNA constructs on the surface, while removing noise due to variability in sensor-to-sensor fabrication. Additionally, for these experiments, the electrochemical cell was held at a constant temperature of 37 °C using a temperature-controlled bath to ensure maximum nuclease activity and more accurately reflect an in vivo environment. After determining a baseline of sensor drift (Figure 3, left of vertical lines), we then injected S1 nuclease directly into the cell in an amount sufficient to reach the final intended concentration in U/mL. To most accurately represent the concentration of nuclease found in the human body, where we ultimately want to deploy our E-AB sensors, we initially tested three orders of magnitude in nuclease concentration, as this entire range has been reported in the previous literature. (32,33) Following additions of 0.1–10 U/mL S1 nuclease, d-DNA sensors reveal an increased rate of degradation, as indicated by the increased slopes after the injection of nuclease (Figure 3A, vertical line). In contrast, the slow drift of l-DNA sensors remains constant and unaffected by nuclease additions, save for a transient increase in signal loss upon addition of 10 U/mL, indicating that the l-DNA constructs are resistant to hydrolysis across the entire physiological range of nuclease concentrations (Figure 3B). To further demonstrate this point of nuclease resistance, we also injected a large, non-physiological excess of S1 nuclease, 500 U/mL, after which we see near-complete signal disappearance in d-DNA functionalized sensors within 1 h, while l-DNA-functionalized sensors again remain resistant to hydrolysis by the added nuclease (Figure 3C). Note that the slightly decreased current seen with l-DNA upon the addition of nuclease (relative to the absence of nuclease) is most likely due to a combination of low nuclease activity on l-DNA and non-specific binding of protein onto the electrode surface. This conclusion is supported by a control experiment where we injected 10 U/mL inactivated nuclease (Figure 3D) and saw equivalent signal loss, albeit less than that seen in Figure 3B, with both d-DNA and l-DNA sensors.

Figure 3

Figure 3. l-DNA-functionalized sensors resist nuclease-driven hydrolysis. To illustrate this effect, we serially measured cyclic voltammograms on electrodes functionalized with d-DNA and l-DNA oligonucleotides, 18 nt long, every 25 s for 4 h. By monitoring the peak current from the oxidation of DNA-attached leucomethylene blue reporters, (A) we observed changes in the d-DNA electrode signal driven by both progressive monolayer desorption (constant, initial negative drift in all panels) and nuclease-driven hydrolysis across the range of physiological concentrations. The solid lines indicate the time at which we injected S1 nuclease into the electrochemical cell. (B) l-DNA-functionalized electrodes, in contrast, presented only slight signal loss upon exposure to added S1 nuclease. (C) This remains true even with a 50× excess of S1 nuclease relative to physiological levels of nucleases in human circulation. (D) If we first inactivate the nuclease by heating to 70 °C in the presence of ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA), no additional degradation is seen on either form of DNA. Peak currents were extracted from cyclic voltammograms measured at scanning rates of 0.1 V s–1. Shaded areas for all traces represent the standard deviation calculated from at least four electrodes. 0 h in all graphs represents the time immediately after sensor fabrication, when electrodes are first placed into the cell without any prior electrochemical pre-treatment.

Rapid Signal Decay of State-of-the-Art Sensors in Biological Fluids is Not Driven by Nuclease Hydrolysis

The nuclease-dependent degradation of d-DNA-functionalized sensors seen in buffer does not translate to biological fluids. Because our ultimate goal for E-AB sensing is prolonged deployment in vivo, we repeated the previously described nuclease injection experiments in six different biological fluids: serum, saliva, urine, plasma, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), and whole blood (Figure 4). For these experiments, we used both E-AB sensors functionalized with the benchmark MCH monolayer and sensors with a HxSH monolayer. Of note, when using MCH monolayers in S1 buffer, we are unable to see nuclease-dependent degradation of the sensor signal (Figure S4). We suggest that this could be due to either or both of the following effects: (1) the polarity of MCH groups could slow down or prevent non-specific binding of nucleases to the sensor surface relative to hydrophobic HxSH monolayers, decreasing the extent of aptamer hydrolysis, or (2) the enhanced signal-to-noise ratio we see with HxSH monolayers (Figure S5) could enable better visualization of aptamer hydrolysis by nucleases. In our measurements, we used both d-coc and l-coc to elucidate the stability between enantiomers. We again interrogated these sensors at 37 °C by CV, extracted the peak current related to the oxidation of DNA-attached leucomethylene blue over time, and normalized values to the original peak current for each sensor. In these experiments, we injected 250 U/mL S1 nuclease after determining the baseline signal drift. While this concentration of nuclease is much higher than the physiological range, we used a large excess to allow clear distinction of nuclease-driven signal decay versus the drift caused by monolayer desorption, as seen in Figure 3C. Notably, the baseline drift seen in biological fluids is accelerated compared to that in buffer, seen as biexponential decay versus linear, respectively. This difference is expected because in biological fluids, signal decay occurs through both the loss of monolayer materials and adsorption of proteins on the sensor surface, whereas decay in buffer occurs only through the former mechanism.

Figure 4

Figure 4. E-AB signal decay in biological fluids. By interrogating d-coc and l-coc sensors with either MCH or HxSH monolayers in (A) unfiltered human serum, (B) saliva, (C) urine, (D) plasma, (E) CSF, or (F) whole blood, we demonstrate that signal decay is not driven by nuclease hydrolysis. While some difference in signal loss can be seen for sensors with HxSH monolayers before injection of excess nuclease (left of vertical lines), no significant difference is seen between d-coc and l-coc sensors with MCH monolayers in any of the biological fluids, either before or after injection of excess nuclease. This lack of nuclease-dependent signal decay likely indicates that the operational life of E-AB sensors is not limited by nuclease action but rather by monolayer desorption. Peak currents were extracted from cyclic voltammograms measured at scanning rates of 0.1 V s–1. Shaded areas for all traces represent the standard deviation calculated from at least four electrodes.

Across both enantiomers of the aptamer, both monolayer chemistries, and all six biological fluids, there is no significant drop in the E-AB signal upon the injection of excess nuclease (Figure 4). Specifically, addition of S1 nuclease (vertical lines in all graphs) to unfiltered human serum (Figure 4A), saliva (Figure 4B), urine (Figure 4C) plasma (Figure 4D), CSF (Figure 4E), or whole blood (Figure 4F) did not cause the expected slope change seen with d-DNA/HxSH-functionalized sensors in S1 buffer (Figure 3). We speculate that this effect is due to two reasons. On one hand, native d-DNA has been reported to tolerate longer exposure to serum and other extracellular fluids than to intracellular environments, either because of low nuclease activity or low enzyme concentrations. (34) On the other hand, sensors functionalized with hydrophobic HxSH monolayers may undergo rapid fouling via non-specific protein adsorption in each of the biological fluids considered, forming films that preclude the approach of added nuclease to the sensor interface and subsequent cleavage of aptamers. However, because nucleases inherent to each fluid also contribute to the sensor-fouling process, a significant acceleration of signal decay is still observed for sensors containing d-DNA relative to those functionalized with l-DNA. This point is illustrated by the steeper slope of d-DNA traces compared to l-DNA traces before nuclease injection in each of the HxSH graphs (Figure 4, right columns, left of vertical lines). We presume that this effect is maintained in sensors functionalized with MCH monolayers, except that the total current magnitude in these is much lower (Figure S5), resulting in larger noise and standard deviations that overlap between sensor types (not significantly different).
The fact that this signal decay is related to the disappearance of the leucomethylene blue oxidation peak indicates one or more of the following degradative mechanisms. (A) MB could be cleaved from the end of the DNA, causing signal decay from loss of the reporter alone. While possible in small amounts, previous studies (35,36) have demonstrated that the weakest bonds in thiol-on-gold SAMs are the S–Au and Au–Au bonds, so cleavage there is more likely than within the linker between the DNA and MB. (B) MB could be degrading, thereby reducing the signal without loss of surface materials. This possibility is an area of active research in our laboratory. However, this mechanism would likely not portray the increase in CV capacitance we see over time. As such, MB degradation can only account for part of the signal decay. (C) The aptamer monolayer is desorbing from the electrode surface. This mechanism accounts for both the disappearance of the oxidation peak and the accompanying increase in CV capacitance. Based on the data presented, this desorption occurs in faster time scales than the signal decay caused by nuclease-driven aptamer hydrolysis. Thus, our results suggest that state-of-the-art E-AB sensors are not limited in operational life by the action of nucleases at a time scale of hours. On the contrary, the main issue concerning the lifetime of E-AB sensors is that of monolayer loss of both aptamers and short-chain alkanethiols.

Conclusions

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

We have studied the effects of enantiomeric inversion of aptamers on the signaling and operational lifetime of E-AB sensors. Our results indicate two major points. First, direct conversion of d-DNA aptamers to the enantiomeric l-DNA form does not affect E-AB sensor signaling where an achiral target is concerned. While multiple groups have demonstrated before that aptamer affinity is not altered upon enantiomeric inversion, (1,25,37) it has never been shown with respect to E-AB sensors, where conformational dynamics and response to electrochemical perturbations, in addition to aptamer affinity, play a critical role in signaling. (29,38) As such, we have demonstrated that the concept of enantiomeric inversion can be translated to this up-and-coming technology. Additionally, our results suggest that even if an aptamer is selected to bind a chiral target, if the main binding motif is an achiral portion of that target, the aptamer can still be converted to the l-DNA form without significant losses in target affinity.
The second major point is that of the nuclease-dependent sensor signal loss. When using a HxSH monolayer─which we have previously shown to resist desorption from the electrode surface and thus allow distinction of alternate causes of signal loss (7)─our results indicate that d-DNA-functionalized sensors do experience some nuclease-dependent signal loss in the physiological range of nuclease concentrations related to human circulation. When switched to l-DNA, the sensors are resistant to nuclease-dependent signal loss in buffer, even at concentrations much higher than those found in human circulation. Additionally, sensors with HxSH monolayers reveal a slight difference in signal loss between d-DNA and l-DNA when deployed in various biological fluids. However, this effect is not seen when using sensors with a MCH monolayer, the most commonly used and state-of-the-art monolayer chemistry. Across buffer and six different biological fluids, our results indicate no difference in signal loss between d-DNA- and l-DNA-functionalized sensors when using MCH monolayers. We attribute this result to a combination of the low signal-to-noise measurements obtained when using the MCH monolayer and the rapid desorption of the aptamer monolayer from the electrode surface. Likely, the desorption of aptamers is causing signal loss at a much faster rate than nuclease-driven hydrolysis of aptamers.
The results of this work reveal a critical deficiency in the technology of E-AB sensors. While a main goal of the technology is prolonged sensing in biological fluids, past studies have shown that sensors can last no more than 12 h in such media, (39) greatly limiting their widespread application. This work now demonstrates that the limited operational life is, under the conditions we tested, not due to hydrolysis of surface-attached aptamers by the nucleases in biological fluids. On the contrary, desorption of the self-assembled monolayers appears to be the limiting factor in sensor lifetime. While short-chain monolayer desorption can be limited with highly hydrophobic monolayer chemistries, (7) such chemistries prevent sensor use in biological fluids due to rapid fouling of the surface. (40,41) As such, if the operational lifetime of E-AB sensors in biological fluids is to be extended beyond the current limit, it appears that the monolayer chemistry itself must be changed. Perhaps then, with a more stable monolayer, E-AB sensor lifetime will be limited by nuclease action, at which time use of l-DNA aptamers could be a viable solution.

Materials and Methods

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

Chemicals and Materials

Oligonucleotide synthesis reagents, d-nucleoside phosphoramidites, 3′-PT-Amino-Modifier C6 CPG, Thiol-Modifier C6 S–S phosphoramidite, MB NHS ester, and Glen-Pak DNA purification cartridges were purchased from Glen Research (Sterling, VA). l-nucleoside phosphoramidites were purchased from ChemGenes (Wilmington, MA). Acrylamide/bisacrylamide solution for denaturing polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (PAGE) was purchased from BioRad Laboratories (Hercules, CA). Deprotection reagents were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich (St. Louis, MO).
6-mercapto-1-hexanol (MCH), HxSH, and Tris(2-carboxyethyl)phosphine hydrochloride (TCEP) were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich (St. Louis, MO). Phosphate-buffered saline (PBS, 11.9 mM HPO32–; 137 mM NaCl; 2.7 mM KCl; pH = 7.4) trace-metal grade sulfuric acid (H2SO4), sodium hydroxide (NaOH), EDTA, and sodium chloride (NaCl) were purchased from Fisher Scientific (Waltham, MA). Zinc chloride was purchased from Alfa Aesar (Ward Hill, MA). HEPES was purchased from J.T. Baker (Phillipsburg, NJ). Biological fluids were purchased from BioreclamationIVT (Washington, D.C.). S1 nuclease was purchased from ThermoScientific (Lithuania). We prepared all aqueous solutions using deionized water from a Milli-Q Direct purification system, with a resistivity of 18 MΩ. S1 buffer (pH ∼ 5.4) contained 5 mM HEPES, 50 mM NaCl, and 100 μM ZnCl2. Gold working electrodes (PN: 002314, diameter: 1.6 mm) and coiled platinum wire counter electrodes (PN: 012961) were obtained from ALS Inc. (Tokyo, Japan). Silver/silver chloride reference electrodes (PN: CHI111) were purchased from CH Instruments (Austin, TX). For polishing electrodes, 1200/P2500 silicon carbide grinding paper (PN: 36-08-1200) was bought from Buehler (Lake Bluff, IL); cloth pads (PN: MF-1040) and alumina slurry (PN: CF-1050) were purchased from BASi (West Lafayette, IN).

Oligonucleotide Synthesis and Purification

Both d-DNA and l-DNA versions of the cocaine aptamer (Table 1) were prepared by solid-phase synthesis on an Expedite 8909 DNA/RNA synthesizer. A 3′-amine modification was installed by initiating each synthesis on 3′-PT-amino-modifier CPGs, followed by coupling of either d-nucleoside phosphoramidites or l-nucleoside phosphoramidites according to the manufacturer’s recommended protocols. The 5′-thiol modification was introduced as a disulfide during synthesis by coupling the thiol-modifier C6 S-S phosphoramidite to the 5′-terminus of each oligonucleotide as recommended by the manufacturer. The terminal 4,4′-dimethoxytrityl (DMT) group was retained for downstream purification. Following deprotection of the oligonucleotides by AMA (ammonium hydroxide/40% aqueous methylamine 1:1 v/v), the oligonucleotides were desalted using a Glen-Pak DNA purification cartridge and concentrated by ethanol precipitation. In order to attach the MB reporter, the crude oligonucleotide pellet was dissolved in 500 μL of 0.1 M bicarbonate buffer (pH 9) to which a solution containing ∼2 mg of MB NHS ester in 12 μL of DMSO was added. The coupling reaction was allowed to proceed overnight at room temperature and was quenched by ethanol precipitation. The modified oligonucleotides were purified by 20% denaturing PAGE (19:1 acrylamide/bisacrylamide), and the products were excised from the gel and eluted overnight at room temperature in a buffer consisting of 200 mM NaCl, 10 mM EDTA, and 10 mM Tris (pH 7.6). The solution was filtered to remove gel fragments, and the oligonucleotides were desalted by ethanol precipitation. The obtained pellet was resuspended in water, and the concentration was determined by measuring the absorbance at 260 nm using a Nanodrop 2000c spectrophotometer (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA). The purity and identity of all synthetic oligonucleotides were confirmed by mass spectrometric analysis (Novatia LLC, Newton, PA) (Figures S6 and S7).
The oligonucleotide modifications employed in this work had the following structures:
Hexanethiol modification at the 5′ terminus:
MB modification at the 3′ terminus:
To prepare the DNA solutions, we first incubated 1 μL of 100 μM thiolated MB-modified DNA with 2 μL of 5 mM TCEP to reduce the disulfide bond. We then diluted the DNA with freshly prepared 1 mM thiol solution to a final concentration of 500 nM, as determined via molecular absorbance measurements employing an Implen NP80 NanoPhotometer.

Electrode and Nuclease Preparation

Gold electrodes were polished for ∼2 min on 1200/P2500 silicon carbide grinding paper and subsequently for ∼4 min on a cloth pad with alumina slurry. After rinsing with water to remove polishing debris, they were then electrochemically cleaned in 0.5 M NaOH and 0.5 M H2SO4 following a previously reported protocol. (5) Briefly, (1) in 0.5 M NaOH, we scanned from −1 to −1.8 V versus Ag/AgCl, 400 times at a scan rate of 1 V/s and (2) in 0.5 M H2SO4, we scanned from 0.4 to −0.5 to 1.75 back to 0.4 V versus Ag/AgCl, 300 times at a scan rate of 1 V/s. Once electrodes were clean, we rinsed them with water and placed them immediately into 1 mM alkanethiol solutions with 500 nM DNA and then left them to incubate overnight. Post incubation, we rinsed the electrodes with water and placed them into a custom, water-jacketed electrochemical cell containing 1× PBS, S1 buffer, or biological fluid. The cell was kept at a constant temperature of either 25 or 37 °C by running temperature-controlled water through the cell jacket using a Huber Microprocessor Control MPC water recirculation bath. For control nuclease experiments, S1 nuclease was inactivated by incubation in S1 buffer with 5 mM EDTA at 70 °C for 10 min, according to the product information manual’s instructions for inhibition.

Electrochemical Measurements

A CH Instruments electrochemical analyzer (CHI 1040C, Austin, TX) multichannel potentiostat and associated software were used for all CV and SWV measurements. We used a three-electrode cell configuration consisting of gold disk working, coiled platinum wire counter, and Ag/AgCl (saturated KCl) reference electrodes. CV measurements were recorded at a scan rate of 100 mV/s in one of the two potential windows: (1) −0.5 to 0.2 V vs Ag/AgCl in PBS or biological fluids and (2) −0.3 to 0.2 V versus Ag/AgCl in S1 buffer. Current was sampled every millisecond. SWV measurements were performed from 0 to −0.5 V versus Ag/AgCl with a square wave amplitude of 25 mV, step size of 1 mV, and various frequencies. Temperature of the electrochemical cell was held constant using a Huber Microprocessor Control MPC water recirculation bath (Huber, Cary, NC).

Data Analysis

We employed a previously reported, open-source Python script called SACMES (42) for the batch processing of our electrochemical measurements. SACMES allows us to extract specific capacitive and faradaic currents from our electrochemical measurements, including peak currents, in real time. We determined dissociation constants for each sensor architecture using the specific signal ON frequency data, producing the best fit to the Hill equation. We employed non-linear regression function Igor Pro v8 graphing software to determine KD values.

Supporting Information

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

The Supporting Information is available free of charge at https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.langmuir.1c00166.

  • Aptamer secondary structure and target chemical structures, quasi-reversible maximum maps for hydroxyquinoline and quinine, deconvoluted mass spectrum of the synthesiszed l-cocaine aptamer, and deconvoluted mass spectrum of the synthesiszed d-cocaine aptamer (PDF)

Terms & Conditions

Most electronic Supporting Information files are available without a subscription to ACS Web Editions. Such files may be downloaded by article for research use (if there is a public use license linked to the relevant article, that license may permit other uses). Permission may be obtained from ACS for other uses through requests via the RightsLink permission system: http://pubs.acs.org/page/copyright/permissions.html.

Author Information

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

  • Corresponding Author
    • Netzahualcóyotl Arroyo-Currás - Department of Pharmacology and Molecular Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland 21202, United StatesDepartment of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering and Institute for NanoBioTechnology, Whiting School of Engineering, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland 21218, United StatesOrcidhttp://orcid.org/0000-0002-2740-6276 Email: [email protected]
  • Authors
    • Alexander Shaver - Department of Pharmacology and Molecular Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland 21202, United StatesOrcidhttp://orcid.org/0000-0002-5478-5291
    • Nandini Kundu - Department of Chemistry, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas 77842, United States
    • Brian E. Young - Department of Chemistry, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas 77842, United States
    • Philip A. Vieira - Department of Psychology, California State University Dominguez Hills, Carson, California 90747, United StatesOrcidhttp://orcid.org/0000-0003-0792-2836
    • Jonathan T. Sczepanski - Department of Chemistry, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas 77842, United StatesOrcidhttp://orcid.org/0000-0002-9275-2597
  • Author Contributions

    A.S., N.A.-C., and J.T.S. developed the idea. N.K. and B.E.Y. synthesized and purified DNA constructs. A.S. and P.A.V. fabricated E-AB sensors. A.S. performed all electrochemical experiments. All authors participated in the writing and editing of this manuscript.

  • Notes
    The authors declare no competing financial interest.

Acknowledgments

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

A.S. and N.A.-C. thank the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine for providing the funds used to perform the research reported in this work. N.K., B.E.Y., and J.T.S. were supported by the National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R35GM124974) and the Welch Foundation (A1909). P.A.V. was also supported by the National Institute of General Medical Sciences (SC2GM127268). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.

References

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

This article references 42 other publications.

  1. 1
    Williams, K. P.; Liu, X. H.; Schumacher, T. N.; Lin, H. Y.; Ausiello, D. A.; Kim, P. S.; Bartel, D. P. Bioactive and Nuclease-Resistant L-DNA Ligand of Vasopressin. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1997, 94, 1128511290,  DOI: 10.1073/pnas.94.21.11285
  2. 2
    Privalov, P. L.; Dragan, A. I.; Crane-Robinson, C. Interpreting Protein/DNA Interactions: Distinguishing Specific from Non-Specific and Electrostatic from Non-Electrostatic Components. Nucleic Acids Res. 2011, 39, 24832491,  DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkq984
  3. 3
    Schoukroun-Barnes, L. R.; Macazo, F. C.; Gutierrez, B.; Lottermoser, J.; Liu, J.; White, R. J. Reagentless, Structure-Switching, Electrochemical Aptamer-Based Sensors. Annu. Rev. Anal. Chem. 2016, 9, 163181,  DOI: 10.1146/annurev-anchem-071015-041446
  4. 4
    Arroyo-Currás, N.; Somerson, J.; Vieira, P. A.; Ploense, K. L.; Kippin, T. E.; Plaxco, K. W. Real-Time Measurement of Small Molecules Directly in Awake, Ambulatory Animals. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2017, 114, 645650,  DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1613458114
  5. 5
    Xiao, Y.; Lai, R. Y.; Plaxco, K. W. Preparation of Electrode-Immobilized, Redox-Modified Oligonucleotides for Electrochemical DNA and Aptamer-Based Sensing. Nat. Protoc. 2007, 2, 28752880,  DOI: 10.1038/nprot.2007.413
  6. 6
    Baker, B. R.; Lai, R. Y.; Wood, M. S.; Doctor, E. H.; Heeger, A. J.; Plaxco, K. W. An Electronic, Aptamer-Based Small-Molecule Sensor for the Rapid, Label-Free Detection of Cocaine in Adulterated Samples and Biological Fluids. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2006, 128, 31383139,  DOI: 10.1021/ja056957p
  7. 7
    Shaver, A.; Curtis, S. D.; Arroyo-Currás, N. Alkanethiol Monolayer End Groups Affect the Long-Term Operational Stability and Signaling of Electrochemical, Aptamer-Based Sensors in Biological Fluids. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2020, 12, 1121411223,  DOI: 10.1021/acsami.9b22385
  8. 8
    Vogiazi, V.; De La Cruz, A.; Heineman, W. R.; White, R. J.; Dionysiou, D. D. Effects of Experimental Conditions on the Signaling Fidelity of Impedance-Based Nucleic Acid Sensors. Anal. Chem. 2021, 93, 812819,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.analchem.0c03269
  9. 9
    Buchardt, O.; Egholm, M.; Berg, R. H.; Nielsen, P. E. Peptide Nucleic Acids and Their Potential Applications in Biotechnology. Trends Biotechnol. 1993, 11, 384386,  DOI: 10.1016/0167-7799(93)90097-S
  10. 10
    Wang, R. E.; Wu, H.; Niu, Y.; Cai, J. Improving the Stability of Aptamers by Chemical Modification. Curr. Med. Chem. 2011, 18, 41264138,  DOI: 10.2174/092986711797189565
  11. 11
    Karlsen, K. K.; Wengel, J. Locked Nucleic Acid and Aptamers. Nucleic Acid Ther. 2012, 22, 366370,  DOI: 10.1089/nat.2012.0382
  12. 12
    Schmidt, K. S.; Borkowski, S.; Kurreck, J.; Stephens, A. W.; Bald, R.; Hecht, M.; Friebe, M.; Dinkelberg, L.; Erdmann, V. A. Application of Locked Nucleic Acids to Improve Aptamer in Vivo Stability and Targeting Function. Nucleic Acids Res. 2004, 32, 57575765,  DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkh862
  13. 13
    Seth, P. P.; Jazayeri, A.; Yu, J.; Allerson, C. R.; Bhat, B.; Swayze, E. E. Structure Activity Relationships of α-l-LNA Modified Phosphorothioate Gapmer Antisense Oligonucleotides in Animals. Mol. Ther.--Nucleic Acids 2012, 1, e47  DOI: 10.1038/mtna.2012.34
  14. 14
    Swayze, E. E.; Siwkowski, A. M.; Wancewicz, E. V.; Migawa, M. T.; Wyrzykiewicz, T. K.; Hung, G.; Monia, B. P.; Bennett, C. F. Antisense Oligonucleotides Containing Locked Nucleic Acid Improve Potency but Cause Significant Hepatotoxicity in Animals. Nucleic Acids Res. 2007, 35, 687700,  DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkl1071
  15. 15
    Shen, W.; De Hoyos, C. L.; Sun, H.; Vickers, T. A.; Liang, X.-h.; Crooke, S. T. Acute Hepatotoxicity of 2′ Fluoro-Modified 5–10–5 Gapmer Phosphorothioate Oligonucleotides in Mice Correlates with Intracellular Protein Binding and the Loss of DBHS Proteins. Nucleic Acids Res. 2018, 46, 22042217,  DOI: 10.1093/nar/gky060
  16. 16
    Lee, E. J.; Lim, H. K.; Cho, Y. S.; Hah, S. S. Peptide Nucleic Acids Are an Additional Class of Aptamers. RSC Adv. 2013, 3, 58285831,  DOI: 10.1039/c3ra40553b
  17. 17
    Young, B. E.; Kundu, N.; Sczepanski, J. T. Mirror-Image Oligonucleotides: History and Emerging Applications. Chem.─Eur. J. 2019, 25, 79817990,  DOI: 10.1002/chem.201900149
  18. 18
    Cui, L.; Peng, R.; Fu, T.; Zhang, X.; Wu, C.; Chen, H.; Liang, H.; Yang, C. J.; Tan, W. Biostable L-DNAzyme for Sensing of Metal Ions in Biological Systems. Anal. Chem. 2016, 88, 18501855,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.analchem.5b04170
  19. 19
    Ke, G.; Wang, C.; Ge, Y.; Zheng, N.; Zhu, Z.; Yang, C. J. L-DNA Molecular Beacon: A Safe, Stable, and Accurate Intracellular Nano-Thermometer for Temperature Sensing in Living Cells. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2012, 134, 1890818911,  DOI: 10.1021/ja3082439
  20. 20
    Kim, K.-R.; Lee, T.; Kim, B.-S.; Ahn, D.-R. Utilizing the Bioorthogonal Base-Pairing System of l-DNA to Design Ideal DNA Nanocarriers for Enhanced Delivery of Nucleic Acid Cargos. Chem. Sci. 2014, 5, 15331537,  DOI: 10.1039/c3sc52601a
  21. 21
    Phares, N.; White, R. J.; Plaxco, K. W. Improving the Stability and Sensing of Electrochemical Biosensors by Employing Trithiol-Anchoring Groups in a Six-Carbon Self-Assembled Monolayer. Anal. Chem. 2009, 81, 10951100,  DOI: 10.1021/ac8021983
  22. 22
    Ricci, F.; Zari, N.; Caprio, F.; Recine, S.; Amine, A.; Moscone, D.; Palleschi, G.; Plaxco, K. W. Surface Chemistry Effects on the Performance of an Electrochemical DNA Sensor. Bioelectrochemistry 2009, 76, 208213,  DOI: 10.1016/j.bioelechem.2009.03.007
  23. 23
    Reinstein, O.; Yoo, M.; Han, C.; Palmo, T.; Beckham, S. A.; Wilce, M. C. J.; Johnson, P. E. Quinine Binding by the Cocaine-Binding Aptamer. Thermodynamic and Hydrodynamic Analysis of High-Affinity Binding of an off-Target Ligand. Biochemistry 2013, 52, 86528662,  DOI: 10.1021/bi4010039
  24. 24
    Slavkovic, S.; Altunisik, M.; Reinstein, O.; Johnson, P. E. Structure-Affinity Relationship of the Cocaine-Binding Aptamer with Quinine Derivatives. Bioorg. Med. Chem. 2015, 23, 25932597,  DOI: 10.1016/j.bmc.2015.02.052
  25. 25
    Dey, S.; Sczepanski, J. T. In Vitro Selection of L-DNA Aptamers That Bind a Structured d-RNA Molecule. Nucleic Acids Res. 2020, 48, 16691680,  DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkz1236
  26. 26
    Feng, X.-N.; Cui, Y.-X.; Zhang, J.; Tang, A.-N.; Mao, H.-B.; Kong, D.-M. Chiral Interaction Is a Decisive Factor to Replace d-DNA with l-DNA Aptamers. Anal. Chem. 2020, 92, 64706477,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.analchem.9b05676
  27. 27
    Lovrić, M.; Komorsky-Lovric, Š. Square-Wave Voltammetry of an Adsorbed Reactant. J. Electroanal. Chem. 1988, 248, 239253,  DOI: 10.1016/0022-0728(88)85089-7
  28. 28
    Komorsky-Lovrić, Š.; Lovrić, M. Measurements of Redox Kinetics of Adsorbed Azobenzene by “a Quasireversible Maximum” in Square-Wave Voltammetry. Electrochim. Acta 1995, 40, 17811784,  DOI: 10.1016/0013-4686(95)00097-X
  29. 29
    Dauphin-Ducharme, P.; Plaxco, K. W. Maximizing the Signal Gain of Electrochemical-DNA Sensors. Anal. Chem. 2016, 88, 1165411662,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.analchem.6b03227
  30. 30
    Ali, M. S.; Farah, M. A.; Al-Lohedan, H. A.; Al-Anazi, K. M. Comprehensive Exploration of the Anticancer Activities of Procaine and Its Binding with Calf Thymus DNA: A Multi Spectroscopic and Molecular Modelling Study. RSC Adv. 2018, 8, 90839093,  DOI: 10.1039/c7ra13647a
  31. 31
    Reddy, L. G.; Shankar, V. Immobilization of Single-Strand Specific Nuclease (S1 Nuclease) from Aspergillus Oryzae. Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol. 1987, 14, 231240,  DOI: 10.1007/BF02800310
  32. 32
    Tamkovich, S. N.; Cherepanova, A. V.; Kolesnikova, E. V.; Rykova, E. Y.; Pyshnyi, D. V.; Vlassov, V. V.; Laktionov, P. P. Circulating DNA and DNase Activity in Human Blood. Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 2006, 1075, 191196,  DOI: 10.1196/annals.1368.026
  33. 33
    Ershova, E.; Sergeeva, V.; Klimenko, M.; Avetisova, K.; Klimenko, P.; Kostyuk, E.; Veiko, N.; Veiko, R.; Izevskaya, V.; Kutsev, S. Circulating Cell-Free DNA Concentration and DNase I Activity of Peripheral Blood Plasma Change in Case of Pregnancy with Intrauterine Growth Restriction Compared to Normal Pregnancy. Biomed. Rep. 2017, 7, 319324,  DOI: 10.3892/br.2017.968
  34. 34
    Zhong, W.; Sczepanski, J. T. Direct Comparison of D-DNA and L-DNA Strand-Displacement Reactions in Living Mammalian Cells. ACS Synth. Biol. 2020, 10, 209212,  DOI: 10.1021/acssynbio.0c00527
  35. 35
    Grandbois, M.; Beyer, M.; Rief, M.; Clausen-Schaumann, H.; Gaub, H. E. How Strong Is a Covalent Bond?. Science 1999, 283, 17271730,  DOI: 10.1126/science.283.5408.1727
  36. 36
    Xue, Y.; Li, X.; Li, H.; Zhang, W. Quantifying Thiol-Gold Interactions towards the Efficient Strength Control. Nat. Commun. 2014, 5, 4348,  DOI: 10.1038/ncomms5348
  37. 37
    Chen, H.; Xie, S.; Liang, H.; Wu, C.; Cui, L.; Huan, S.-Y.; Zhang, X. Generation of Biostable L-Aptamers against Achiral Targets by Chiral Inversion of Existing D-Aptamers. Talanta 2017, 164, 662667,  DOI: 10.1016/j.talanta.2016.11.001
  38. 38
    White, R. J.; Phares, N.; Lubin, A. A.; Xiao, Y.; Plaxco, K. W. Optimization of Electrochemical Aptamer-Based Sensors via Optimization of Probe Packing Density and Surface Chemistry. Langmuir 2008, 24, 1051310518,  DOI: 10.1021/la800801v
  39. 39
    Arroyo-Currás, N.; Dauphin-Ducharme, P.; Scida, K.; Chávez, J. L. From the Beaker to the Body: Translational Challenges for Electrochemical, Aptamer-Based Sensors. Anal. Methods 2020, 12, 12881310,  DOI: 10.1039/d0ay00026d
  40. 40
    Ostuni, E.; Chapman, R. G.; Liang, M. N.; Meluleni, G.; Pier, G.; Ingber, D. E.; Whitesides, G. M. Self-Assembled Monolayers That Resist the Adsorption of Proteins and the Adhesion of Bacterial and Mammalian Cells. Langmuir 2001, 17, 63366343,  DOI: 10.1021/la010552a
  41. 41
    Ostuni, E.; Grzybowski, B. A.; Mrksich, M.; Roberts, C. S.; Whitesides, G. M. Adsorption of Proteins to Hydrophobic Sites on Mixed Self-Assembled Monolayers. Langmuir 2003, 19, 18611872,  DOI: 10.1021/la020649c
  42. 42
    Curtis, S. D.; Ploense, K. L.; Kurnik, M.; Ortega, G.; Parolo, C.; Kippin, T. E.; Plaxco, K. W.; Arroyo-Currás, N. Open Source Software for the Real-Time Control, Processing, and Visualization of High-Volume Electrochemical Data. Anal. Chem. 2019, 91, 1232112328,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.analchem.9b02553

Cited By

This article is cited by 16 publications.

  1. Shaoguang Li, Jun Dai, Man Zhu, Netzahualcóyotl Arroyo-Currás, Hongxing Li, Yuanyuan Wang, Quan Wang, Xiaoding Lou, Tod E. Kippin, Shixuan Wang, Kevin W. Plaxco, Hui Li, Fan Xia. Implantable Hydrogel-Protective DNA Aptamer-Based Sensor Supports Accurate, Continuous Electrochemical Analysis of Drugs at Multiple Sites in Living Rats. ACS Nano 2023, Article ASAP.
  2. Zach Watkins, Aleksandar Karajic, Thomas Young, Ryan White, Jason Heikenfeld. Week-Long Operation of Electrochemical Aptamer Sensors: New Insights into Self-Assembled Monolayer Degradation Mechanisms and Solutions for Stability in Serum at Body Temperature. ACS Sensors 2023, 8 (3) , 1119-1131. https://doi.org/10.1021/acssensors.2c02403
  3. Vincent Clark, Miguel Aller Pellitero, Netzahualcóyotl Arroyo-Currás. Explaining the Decay of Nucleic Acid-Based Sensors under Continuous Voltammetric Interrogation. Analytical Chemistry 2023, 95 (11) , 4974-4983. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.2c05158
  4. Niamat Khuda, Subramaniam Somasundaram, Ajay B. Urgunde, Christopher J. Easley. Ionic Strength and Hybridization Position near Gold Electrodes Can Significantly Improve Kinetics in DNA-Based Electrochemical Sensors. ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces 2023, 15 (4) , 5019-5027. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.2c22741
  5. Erfan Rahbarimehr, Hoi Pui Chao, Zachary R. Churcher, Sladjana Slavkovic, Yunus A. Kaiyum, Philip E. Johnson, Philippe Dauphin-Ducharme. Finding the Lost Dissociation Constant of Electrochemical Aptamer-Based Biosensors. Analytical Chemistry 2023, 95 (4) , 2229-2237. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.2c03566
  6. Saeromi Chung, Naveen K. Singh, Valentin K. Gribkoff, Drew A. Hall. Electrochemical Carbamazepine Aptasensor for Therapeutic Drug Monitoring at the Point of Care. ACS Omega 2022, 7 (43) , 39097-39106. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.2c04865
  7. Alex M. Downs, Kevin W. Plaxco. Real-Time, In Vivo Molecular Monitoring Using Electrochemical Aptamer Based Sensors: Opportunities and Challenges. ACS Sensors 2022, 7 (10) , 2823-2832. https://doi.org/10.1021/acssensors.2c01428
  8. Nathaniel L. Dominique, Shelby L. Strausser, Jacob E. Olson, William C. Boggess, David M. Jenkins, Jon P. Camden. Probing N-Heterocyclic Carbene Surfaces with Laser Desorption Ionization Mass Spectrometry. Analytical Chemistry 2021, 93 (40) , 13534-13538. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.1c02401
  9. Kaylyn K. Leung, Alex M. Downs, Gabriel Ortega, Martin Kurnik, Kevin W. Plaxco. Elucidating the Mechanisms Underlying the Signal Drift of Electrochemical Aptamer-Based Sensors in Whole Blood. ACS Sensors 2021, 6 (9) , 3340-3347. https://doi.org/10.1021/acssensors.1c01183
  10. Naveen K. Singh, Saeromi Chung, An-Yi Chang, Joseph Wang, Drew A. Hall. A non-invasive wearable stress patch for real-time cortisol monitoring using a pseudoknot-assisted aptamer. Biosensors and Bioelectronics 2023, 227 , 115097. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bios.2023.115097
  11. Abdul wahab ALIYU, Badrul Syam ZAINUDDIN, Jen Hou LOW, Chong Yew LEE, Khairul Mohd Fadzli MUSTAFFA. Serum stability of 5 ′ cholesterol triethylene glycol- 26-OKA and 3 ′ cholesterol triethylene glycol- 24-OKA modified protoporphyrin IX DNA-aptamer and their in vitro heme binding characteristics. Chinese Journal of Analytical Chemistry 2023, 51 (3) , 100219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cjac.2022.100219
  12. Miguel Aller Pellitero, Nandini Kundu, Jonathan Sczepanski, Netzahualcóyotl Arroyo-Currás. Os( ii / iii ) complex supports pH-insensitive electrochemical DNA-based sensing with superior operational stability than the benchmark methylene blue reporter. The Analyst 2023, 148 (4) , 806-813. https://doi.org/10.1039/D2AN01901A
  13. Tao Ming, Jinping Luo, Yu Xing, Yan Cheng, Juntao Liu, Shuai Sun, Fanli Kong, Shihong Xu, Yuchuan Dai, Jingyu Xie, Hongyan Jin, Xinxia Cai. Recent progress and perspectives of continuous in vivo testing device. Materials Today Bio 2022, 16 , 100341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mtbio.2022.100341
  14. Vincent Clark, Kelly Waters, Ben Orsburn, Namandjé N. Bumpus, Nandini Kundu, Jonathan T. Sczepanski, Partha Ray, Netzahualcóyotl Arroyo‐Currás. Human Cyclophilin B Nuclease Activity Revealed via Nucleic Acid‐Based Electrochemical Sensors. Angewandte Chemie 2022, 134 (45) https://doi.org/10.1002/ange.202211292
  15. Vincent Clark, Kelly Waters, Ben Orsburn, Namandjé N. Bumpus, Nandini Kundu, Jonathan T. Sczepanski, Partha Ray, Netzahualcóyotl Arroyo‐Currás. Human Cyclophilin B Nuclease Activity Revealed via Nucleic Acid‐Based Electrochemical Sensors. Angewandte Chemie International Edition 2022, 61 (45) https://doi.org/10.1002/anie.202211292
  16. Alexander Shaver, Netzahualcóyotl Arroyo-Currás. The challenge of long-term stability for nucleic acid-based electrochemical sensors. Current Opinion in Electrochemistry 2022, 32 , 100902. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coelec.2021.100902
  • Abstract

    Figure 1

    Figure 1. Anatomy of E-AB sensors. (A) We fabricated sensors using aptamers of either naturally occurring d-DNA or the nuclease-resistant enantiomer l-DNA. These aptamers are modified on the 5′ end with an alkanethiol linker for self-assembly onto a gold electrode surface and on the 3′ end with a redox reporter for electrochemical interrogation. Both d- and l-DNA-functionalized sensors maintain similar signaling when interrogated by cyclic voltammetry (CV) (B) and square wave voltammetry (C). CV was measured in S1 buffer (5 mM HEPES, 50 mM NaCl, and 100 μΜ ZnCl2, pH ∼ 5.4) at 0.1 V/s. Square wave voltammetry was recorded in S1 buffer with a frequency of 80 Hz and an amplitude of 25 mV. Shaded areas represent the standard deviation calculated from four independent electrodes.

    Figure 2

    Figure 2. Sensors employing d- or l-coc aptamers respond equivalently to achiral target additions. (A) We demonstrate this equivalence by, first, highlighting the fact that signal ON and OFF frequencies remain the same between sensor types. (B) By challenging both d-coc and l-coc-functionalized sensors with increasing concentrations of the achiral target procaine, we determine that the enantiomeric inversion of aptamers does not alter either signal gain (magnitude of current change at saturation, GainD-coc = 910% vs GainL-coc = 890%) or apparent target affinity (KD.d-DNA = 10.6 ± 0.6 mM vs KD.l-DNA = 10.3 ± 0.6 mM). These consistencies remain when sensors are challenged with targets other than procaine. Specifically, both d-coc and l-coc sensors respond similarly to the achiral target 6-hydroxyquinoline (C, Gaind-coc = 260% vs Gainl-coc = 300%; KD.d-DNA = 2.37 ± 0.10 mM vs KD.l-DNA = 2.29 ± 0.10 mM) and the chiral target quinine (D, Gaind-coc = 390% vs Gainl-coc = 360%; KD.d-DNA = 523 ± 40 μM vs KD.l-DNA = 686 ± 32 μM). The latter still binds to l-coc sensors because quinine contains an achiral quinoline backbone moiety. All SWV experiments were recorded from 0 to −0.5 V versus Ag/AgCl with an amplitude of 25 mV. Shaded areas in all panels represent the standard deviation calculated from eight independent sensors.

    Figure 3

    Figure 3. l-DNA-functionalized sensors resist nuclease-driven hydrolysis. To illustrate this effect, we serially measured cyclic voltammograms on electrodes functionalized with d-DNA and l-DNA oligonucleotides, 18 nt long, every 25 s for 4 h. By monitoring the peak current from the oxidation of DNA-attached leucomethylene blue reporters, (A) we observed changes in the d-DNA electrode signal driven by both progressive monolayer desorption (constant, initial negative drift in all panels) and nuclease-driven hydrolysis across the range of physiological concentrations. The solid lines indicate the time at which we injected S1 nuclease into the electrochemical cell. (B) l-DNA-functionalized electrodes, in contrast, presented only slight signal loss upon exposure to added S1 nuclease. (C) This remains true even with a 50× excess of S1 nuclease relative to physiological levels of nucleases in human circulation. (D) If we first inactivate the nuclease by heating to 70 °C in the presence of ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA), no additional degradation is seen on either form of DNA. Peak currents were extracted from cyclic voltammograms measured at scanning rates of 0.1 V s–1. Shaded areas for all traces represent the standard deviation calculated from at least four electrodes. 0 h in all graphs represents the time immediately after sensor fabrication, when electrodes are first placed into the cell without any prior electrochemical pre-treatment.

    Figure 4

    Figure 4. E-AB signal decay in biological fluids. By interrogating d-coc and l-coc sensors with either MCH or HxSH monolayers in (A) unfiltered human serum, (B) saliva, (C) urine, (D) plasma, (E) CSF, or (F) whole blood, we demonstrate that signal decay is not driven by nuclease hydrolysis. While some difference in signal loss can be seen for sensors with HxSH monolayers before injection of excess nuclease (left of vertical lines), no significant difference is seen between d-coc and l-coc sensors with MCH monolayers in any of the biological fluids, either before or after injection of excess nuclease. This lack of nuclease-dependent signal decay likely indicates that the operational life of E-AB sensors is not limited by nuclease action but rather by monolayer desorption. Peak currents were extracted from cyclic voltammograms measured at scanning rates of 0.1 V s–1. Shaded areas for all traces represent the standard deviation calculated from at least four electrodes.

  • References

    ARTICLE SECTIONS
    Jump To

    This article references 42 other publications.

    1. 1
      Williams, K. P.; Liu, X. H.; Schumacher, T. N.; Lin, H. Y.; Ausiello, D. A.; Kim, P. S.; Bartel, D. P. Bioactive and Nuclease-Resistant L-DNA Ligand of Vasopressin. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1997, 94, 1128511290,  DOI: 10.1073/pnas.94.21.11285
    2. 2
      Privalov, P. L.; Dragan, A. I.; Crane-Robinson, C. Interpreting Protein/DNA Interactions: Distinguishing Specific from Non-Specific and Electrostatic from Non-Electrostatic Components. Nucleic Acids Res. 2011, 39, 24832491,  DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkq984
    3. 3
      Schoukroun-Barnes, L. R.; Macazo, F. C.; Gutierrez, B.; Lottermoser, J.; Liu, J.; White, R. J. Reagentless, Structure-Switching, Electrochemical Aptamer-Based Sensors. Annu. Rev. Anal. Chem. 2016, 9, 163181,  DOI: 10.1146/annurev-anchem-071015-041446
    4. 4
      Arroyo-Currás, N.; Somerson, J.; Vieira, P. A.; Ploense, K. L.; Kippin, T. E.; Plaxco, K. W. Real-Time Measurement of Small Molecules Directly in Awake, Ambulatory Animals. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2017, 114, 645650,  DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1613458114
    5. 5
      Xiao, Y.; Lai, R. Y.; Plaxco, K. W. Preparation of Electrode-Immobilized, Redox-Modified Oligonucleotides for Electrochemical DNA and Aptamer-Based Sensing. Nat. Protoc. 2007, 2, 28752880,  DOI: 10.1038/nprot.2007.413
    6. 6
      Baker, B. R.; Lai, R. Y.; Wood, M. S.; Doctor, E. H.; Heeger, A. J.; Plaxco, K. W. An Electronic, Aptamer-Based Small-Molecule Sensor for the Rapid, Label-Free Detection of Cocaine in Adulterated Samples and Biological Fluids. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2006, 128, 31383139,  DOI: 10.1021/ja056957p
    7. 7
      Shaver, A.; Curtis, S. D.; Arroyo-Currás, N. Alkanethiol Monolayer End Groups Affect the Long-Term Operational Stability and Signaling of Electrochemical, Aptamer-Based Sensors in Biological Fluids. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2020, 12, 1121411223,  DOI: 10.1021/acsami.9b22385
    8. 8
      Vogiazi, V.; De La Cruz, A.; Heineman, W. R.; White, R. J.; Dionysiou, D. D. Effects of Experimental Conditions on the Signaling Fidelity of Impedance-Based Nucleic Acid Sensors. Anal. Chem. 2021, 93, 812819,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.analchem.0c03269
    9. 9
      Buchardt, O.; Egholm, M.; Berg, R. H.; Nielsen, P. E. Peptide Nucleic Acids and Their Potential Applications in Biotechnology. Trends Biotechnol. 1993, 11, 384386,  DOI: 10.1016/0167-7799(93)90097-S
    10. 10
      Wang, R. E.; Wu, H.; Niu, Y.; Cai, J. Improving the Stability of Aptamers by Chemical Modification. Curr. Med. Chem. 2011, 18, 41264138,  DOI: 10.2174/092986711797189565
    11. 11
      Karlsen, K. K.; Wengel, J. Locked Nucleic Acid and Aptamers. Nucleic Acid Ther. 2012, 22, 366370,  DOI: 10.1089/nat.2012.0382
    12. 12
      Schmidt, K. S.; Borkowski, S.; Kurreck, J.; Stephens, A. W.; Bald, R.; Hecht, M.; Friebe, M.; Dinkelberg, L.; Erdmann, V. A. Application of Locked Nucleic Acids to Improve Aptamer in Vivo Stability and Targeting Function. Nucleic Acids Res. 2004, 32, 57575765,  DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkh862
    13. 13
      Seth, P. P.; Jazayeri, A.; Yu, J.; Allerson, C. R.; Bhat, B.; Swayze, E. E. Structure Activity Relationships of α-l-LNA Modified Phosphorothioate Gapmer Antisense Oligonucleotides in Animals. Mol. Ther.--Nucleic Acids 2012, 1, e47  DOI: 10.1038/mtna.2012.34
    14. 14
      Swayze, E. E.; Siwkowski, A. M.; Wancewicz, E. V.; Migawa, M. T.; Wyrzykiewicz, T. K.; Hung, G.; Monia, B. P.; Bennett, C. F. Antisense Oligonucleotides Containing Locked Nucleic Acid Improve Potency but Cause Significant Hepatotoxicity in Animals. Nucleic Acids Res. 2007, 35, 687700,  DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkl1071
    15. 15
      Shen, W.; De Hoyos, C. L.; Sun, H.; Vickers, T. A.; Liang, X.-h.; Crooke, S. T. Acute Hepatotoxicity of 2′ Fluoro-Modified 5–10–5 Gapmer Phosphorothioate Oligonucleotides in Mice Correlates with Intracellular Protein Binding and the Loss of DBHS Proteins. Nucleic Acids Res. 2018, 46, 22042217,  DOI: 10.1093/nar/gky060
    16. 16
      Lee, E. J.; Lim, H. K.; Cho, Y. S.; Hah, S. S. Peptide Nucleic Acids Are an Additional Class of Aptamers. RSC Adv. 2013, 3, 58285831,  DOI: 10.1039/c3ra40553b
    17. 17
      Young, B. E.; Kundu, N.; Sczepanski, J. T. Mirror-Image Oligonucleotides: History and Emerging Applications. Chem.─Eur. J. 2019, 25, 79817990,  DOI: 10.1002/chem.201900149
    18. 18
      Cui, L.; Peng, R.; Fu, T.; Zhang, X.; Wu, C.; Chen, H.; Liang, H.; Yang, C. J.; Tan, W. Biostable L-DNAzyme for Sensing of Metal Ions in Biological Systems. Anal. Chem. 2016, 88, 18501855,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.analchem.5b04170
    19. 19
      Ke, G.; Wang, C.; Ge, Y.; Zheng, N.; Zhu, Z.; Yang, C. J. L-DNA Molecular Beacon: A Safe, Stable, and Accurate Intracellular Nano-Thermometer for Temperature Sensing in Living Cells. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2012, 134, 1890818911,  DOI: 10.1021/ja3082439
    20. 20
      Kim, K.-R.; Lee, T.; Kim, B.-S.; Ahn, D.-R. Utilizing the Bioorthogonal Base-Pairing System of l-DNA to Design Ideal DNA Nanocarriers for Enhanced Delivery of Nucleic Acid Cargos. Chem. Sci. 2014, 5, 15331537,  DOI: 10.1039/c3sc52601a
    21. 21
      Phares, N.; White, R. J.; Plaxco, K. W. Improving the Stability and Sensing of Electrochemical Biosensors by Employing Trithiol-Anchoring Groups in a Six-Carbon Self-Assembled Monolayer. Anal. Chem. 2009, 81, 10951100,  DOI: 10.1021/ac8021983
    22. 22
      Ricci, F.; Zari, N.; Caprio, F.; Recine, S.; Amine, A.; Moscone, D.; Palleschi, G.; Plaxco, K. W. Surface Chemistry Effects on the Performance of an Electrochemical DNA Sensor. Bioelectrochemistry 2009, 76, 208213,  DOI: 10.1016/j.bioelechem.2009.03.007
    23. 23
      Reinstein, O.; Yoo, M.; Han, C.; Palmo, T.; Beckham, S. A.; Wilce, M. C. J.; Johnson, P. E. Quinine Binding by the Cocaine-Binding Aptamer. Thermodynamic and Hydrodynamic Analysis of High-Affinity Binding of an off-Target Ligand. Biochemistry 2013, 52, 86528662,  DOI: 10.1021/bi4010039
    24. 24
      Slavkovic, S.; Altunisik, M.; Reinstein, O.; Johnson, P. E. Structure-Affinity Relationship of the Cocaine-Binding Aptamer with Quinine Derivatives. Bioorg. Med. Chem. 2015, 23, 25932597,  DOI: 10.1016/j.bmc.2015.02.052
    25. 25
      Dey, S.; Sczepanski, J. T. In Vitro Selection of L-DNA Aptamers That Bind a Structured d-RNA Molecule. Nucleic Acids Res. 2020, 48, 16691680,  DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkz1236
    26. 26
      Feng, X.-N.; Cui, Y.-X.; Zhang, J.; Tang, A.-N.; Mao, H.-B.; Kong, D.-M. Chiral Interaction Is a Decisive Factor to Replace d-DNA with l-DNA Aptamers. Anal. Chem. 2020, 92, 64706477,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.analchem.9b05676
    27. 27
      Lovrić, M.; Komorsky-Lovric, Š. Square-Wave Voltammetry of an Adsorbed Reactant. J. Electroanal. Chem. 1988, 248, 239253,  DOI: 10.1016/0022-0728(88)85089-7
    28. 28
      Komorsky-Lovrić, Š.; Lovrić, M. Measurements of Redox Kinetics of Adsorbed Azobenzene by “a Quasireversible Maximum” in Square-Wave Voltammetry. Electrochim. Acta 1995, 40, 17811784,  DOI: 10.1016/0013-4686(95)00097-X
    29. 29
      Dauphin-Ducharme, P.; Plaxco, K. W. Maximizing the Signal Gain of Electrochemical-DNA Sensors. Anal. Chem. 2016, 88, 1165411662,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.analchem.6b03227
    30. 30
      Ali, M. S.; Farah, M. A.; Al-Lohedan, H. A.; Al-Anazi, K. M. Comprehensive Exploration of the Anticancer Activities of Procaine and Its Binding with Calf Thymus DNA: A Multi Spectroscopic and Molecular Modelling Study. RSC Adv. 2018, 8, 90839093,  DOI: 10.1039/c7ra13647a
    31. 31
      Reddy, L. G.; Shankar, V. Immobilization of Single-Strand Specific Nuclease (S1 Nuclease) from Aspergillus Oryzae. Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol. 1987, 14, 231240,  DOI: 10.1007/BF02800310
    32. 32
      Tamkovich, S. N.; Cherepanova, A. V.; Kolesnikova, E. V.; Rykova, E. Y.; Pyshnyi, D. V.; Vlassov, V. V.; Laktionov, P. P. Circulating DNA and DNase Activity in Human Blood. Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 2006, 1075, 191196,  DOI: 10.1196/annals.1368.026
    33. 33
      Ershova, E.; Sergeeva, V.; Klimenko, M.; Avetisova, K.; Klimenko, P.; Kostyuk, E.; Veiko, N.; Veiko, R.; Izevskaya, V.; Kutsev, S. Circulating Cell-Free DNA Concentration and DNase I Activity of Peripheral Blood Plasma Change in Case of Pregnancy with Intrauterine Growth Restriction Compared to Normal Pregnancy. Biomed. Rep. 2017, 7, 319324,  DOI: 10.3892/br.2017.968
    34. 34
      Zhong, W.; Sczepanski, J. T. Direct Comparison of D-DNA and L-DNA Strand-Displacement Reactions in Living Mammalian Cells. ACS Synth. Biol. 2020, 10, 209212,  DOI: 10.1021/acssynbio.0c00527
    35. 35
      Grandbois, M.; Beyer, M.; Rief, M.; Clausen-Schaumann, H.; Gaub, H. E. How Strong Is a Covalent Bond?. Science 1999, 283, 17271730,  DOI: 10.1126/science.283.5408.1727
    36. 36
      Xue, Y.; Li, X.; Li, H.; Zhang, W. Quantifying Thiol-Gold Interactions towards the Efficient Strength Control. Nat. Commun. 2014, 5, 4348,  DOI: 10.1038/ncomms5348
    37. 37
      Chen, H.; Xie, S.; Liang, H.; Wu, C.; Cui, L.; Huan, S.-Y.; Zhang, X. Generation of Biostable L-Aptamers against Achiral Targets by Chiral Inversion of Existing D-Aptamers. Talanta 2017, 164, 662667,  DOI: 10.1016/j.talanta.2016.11.001
    38. 38
      White, R. J.; Phares, N.; Lubin, A. A.; Xiao, Y.; Plaxco, K. W. Optimization of Electrochemical Aptamer-Based Sensors via Optimization of Probe Packing Density and Surface Chemistry. Langmuir 2008, 24, 1051310518,  DOI: 10.1021/la800801v
    39. 39
      Arroyo-Currás, N.; Dauphin-Ducharme, P.; Scida, K.; Chávez, J. L. From the Beaker to the Body: Translational Challenges for Electrochemical, Aptamer-Based Sensors. Anal. Methods 2020, 12, 12881310,  DOI: 10.1039/d0ay00026d
    40. 40
      Ostuni, E.; Chapman, R. G.; Liang, M. N.; Meluleni, G.; Pier, G.; Ingber, D. E.; Whitesides, G. M. Self-Assembled Monolayers That Resist the Adsorption of Proteins and the Adhesion of Bacterial and Mammalian Cells. Langmuir 2001, 17, 63366343,  DOI: 10.1021/la010552a
    41. 41
      Ostuni, E.; Grzybowski, B. A.; Mrksich, M.; Roberts, C. S.; Whitesides, G. M. Adsorption of Proteins to Hydrophobic Sites on Mixed Self-Assembled Monolayers. Langmuir 2003, 19, 18611872,  DOI: 10.1021/la020649c
    42. 42
      Curtis, S. D.; Ploense, K. L.; Kurnik, M.; Ortega, G.; Parolo, C.; Kippin, T. E.; Plaxco, K. W.; Arroyo-Currás, N. Open Source Software for the Real-Time Control, Processing, and Visualization of High-Volume Electrochemical Data. Anal. Chem. 2019, 91, 1232112328,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.analchem.9b02553
  • Supporting Information

    Supporting Information

    ARTICLE SECTIONS
    Jump To

    The Supporting Information is available free of charge at https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.langmuir.1c00166.

    • Aptamer secondary structure and target chemical structures, quasi-reversible maximum maps for hydroxyquinoline and quinine, deconvoluted mass spectrum of the synthesiszed l-cocaine aptamer, and deconvoluted mass spectrum of the synthesiszed d-cocaine aptamer (PDF)


    Terms & Conditions

    Most electronic Supporting Information files are available without a subscription to ACS Web Editions. Such files may be downloaded by article for research use (if there is a public use license linked to the relevant article, that license may permit other uses). Permission may be obtained from ACS for other uses through requests via the RightsLink permission system: http://pubs.acs.org/page/copyright/permissions.html.

Pair your accounts.

Export articles to Mendeley

Get article recommendations from ACS based on references in your Mendeley library.

Pair your accounts.

Export articles to Mendeley

Get article recommendations from ACS based on references in your Mendeley library.

You’ve supercharged your research process with ACS and Mendeley!

STEP 1:
Click to create an ACS ID

Please note: If you switch to a different device, you may be asked to login again with only your ACS ID.

Please note: If you switch to a different device, you may be asked to login again with only your ACS ID.

Please note: If you switch to a different device, you may be asked to login again with only your ACS ID.

MENDELEY PAIRING EXPIRED
Your Mendeley pairing has expired. Please reconnect