DNA Nanospheres with Microfluidics: a Promising Platform for Cancer Diagnosis?
Z Hugh Fan,Weihong Tan
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2217/nnm.13.163
2013-01-01
Abstract:NanomedicineVol. 8, No. 11 EditorialFree AccessDNA nanospheres with microfluidics: a promising platform for cancer diagnosis?Z Hugh Fan & Weihong TanZ Hugh Fan* Author for correspondenceInterdisciplinary Microsystems Group, Department of Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering, J Crayton Pruitt Family Department of Biomedical Engineering, & Department of Chemistry, University of Florida, PO Box 116250, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA. Search for more papers by this authorEmail the corresponding author at hfan@ufl.edu & Weihong TanCenter for Research at the Bio/Nano Interface, Department of Chemistry, Department of Physiology & Functional Genomics & Shands Cancer Center, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611-7200, USA.Search for more papers by this authorPublished Online:24 Oct 2013https://doi.org/10.2217/nnm.13.163AboutSectionsPDF/EPUB ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail Keywords: aptamercirculating tumor cellmicrofluidicsmultivalencynanoparticleThe mortality rate from cancer in the USA reached more than 570,000 in 2012, or equal to more than 1500 Americans each day [1]. More than 90% of cancer deaths result from metastasis [2], hence methods for early-stage cancer detection are vital for the reduction of mortality and they will have a significant medical and social impact. However, according to the Early Detection Research Network of the National Cancer Institute, ‘there are no validated molecular biomarker tests for the early detection of any cancer’ [3], even though a handful of biomarkers have been approved by the US FDA.It is known that, during metastasis, some cancer cells escape from the primary tumor through exfoliation, entering the bloodstream and becoming circulating tumor cells (CTCs) in the peripheral blood stream [2,4]. Some of these CTCs acquire the capability to colonize secondary sites, spreading tumors to distant organs [2,4]. Therefore, CTCs have the potential to serve as important biomarkers for early diagnosis of cancer metastasis [2,4]. An additional benefit is that CTC enumeration is less invasive than biopsy, while providing a quantifiable method for cancer diagnosis and prognosis.However, CTCs are extremely rare; the number of CTCs is in the order of one to 100 cells in 1 ml of blood [4]. For comparison, other cells in 1 ml of blood include approximately 5 × 109 erythrocytes, 7.8 × 106 leukocytes and approximately 3.5 × 108 platelets [5]. Therefore, detection of CTCs in peripheral blood is a needle-in-a-haystack challenge. Currently, CellSearch® (Veridex LLC, NJ, USA) is the only FDA-approved method, and it relies on antibody-coated magnetic particles for isolation of CTCs from blood [4]. One of its key drawbacks is low capture efficiency.Microfluidics could play an important role in enhancing the capture efficiency of CTCs. Microfluidics is a multidisciplinary field that involves microfabrication to make devices, microflows to study fluids in the micron scale and a variety of other applications. One aim of microfluidics is to shrink an assembly of laboratory instruments onto a device the size of a computer chip, known as a ‘lab-on-a-chip’. This is analogous to reducing a room-sized computer of the 1950s to a laptop today. Examples of commercially available microfluidics-enabled apparatuses include the Bioanalyzer 2100 from Agilent Technologies (CA, USA) and the BioMark™ HD System from Fluidigm Corp. (CA, USA).The application of microfluidics to cell capture affords a number of advantages. First, cells in a sample must diffuse from the bulk of the solution to the solid surface before interacting with the immobilized antibodies, as in CellSearch. Diffusion distance is in the millimeter scale; however, the diffusion distance in microchannels is in the micrometer scale, significantly increasing the interaction opportunities between CTCs and capture agents. As a result, the capture efficiency should increase, along with decreased incubation time. Second, microchannels offer a significantly higher surface-to-volume ratio than macroscale reaction vessels. Consequently, the amount of capture agents on the surfaces could be in excess, driving their reactions with CTCs to completion. In addition, micropillars and other geometries may be created to enhance the surface areas. Third, microfluidics enables integration with other components, such as mixers and detectors. Mixing can propel CTCs to the proximity of channel surfaces, thus, enhancing capture efficiency. Detection components may allow the sorted cells to be further analyzed using on-chip biological assays, speeding up the process compared with conventional methods in which sorting is performed first, followed by analysis in another apparatus.Applying microfluidics to CTC isolation has been recently demonstrated by a few research groups [6–12]. Using the same CTC definition as in CellSearch, Nagrath and coworkers isolated CTCs in blood samples from breast cancer patients; they showed that >50 CTCs/ml were enumerated in 80% of the cohort [6]. However, <7 CTCs/ml (or 50 CTCs/7.5 ml) were obtained in 88% of breast cancer patients when CellSearch was used [4]. These results suggest that the use of microfluidics is advantageous for CTC detection, with higher capture efficiency, as discussed above.The capture agents most commonly used in CTC research are antibodies. An alternative to antibodies is aptamers. Aptamers are oligonucleic acid sequences, such as short DNA or RNA, with a high binding affinity to a target of interest. Aptamers possess binding capability comparable with that of monoclonal antibodies, and they have been shown to bind to a variety of targets, including small molecules, proteins, nucleic acids and cells [13,14]. In contrast to antibodies, aptamers have the following advantages: complete engineering in test tubes rather than in animals; straightforward production by chemical synthesis through DNA synthesizers; and long-term stability during storage [13,14].Aptamers are selected through an approach called systematic evolution of ligands by exponential enrichment [15]. In their pioneering work, Tuerk and Gold found two RNA sequences with a dissociation constant of 5 × 10-9 M with T4 DNA polymerase [15]. Cell-based systematic evolution of ligands by exponential enrichment is a newer hybrid process developed to select aptamers for target cells [16]. A wide range of DNA aptamers have been selected and shown to have strong binding affinity with a variety of cells, including acute lymphoblastic leukemia, lymphoma and hepatocellular carcinoma cells, as well as bacterial pathogens [14,16].Aptamers have now been incorporated with microfluidic devices for tumor cell isolation from unprocessed whole blood [12]. It was found that a compromise must be made between capture efficiency and cell purity by optimizing key parameters such as device geometry and flow rate. Capture efficiency is defined as the ratio of the number of target cells captured to the number of target cells introduced. Cell purity is defined as the ratio of the number of target cells captured to the number of total cells captured. For instance, capture efficiency decreases with increasing flow rate as a result of larger shear force at a higher flow rate, and reduced interaction time between cells and binding agents on channel surfaces. However, cell purity increases with increasing flow rate owing to the fact that cells bound nonspecifically are washed away with a stronger shear force at a higher flow rate. Therefore, an optimal flow rate exists that results in satisfactory capture efficiency with decent cell purity.To further enhance capture efficiency, we recently reported the development of a platform combining DNA nanospheres with microfluidics for CTC isolation [17]. Each nanosphere consisted of a gold nanoparticle (AuNP) that was conjugated with a number of DNA aptamers. Conjugation between gold and thio-ended DNA has been well established, and attachment of multiple DNA oligonucleotides to a AuNP has been demonstrated for various applications [18,19]. Up to 95 aptamers were attached to each AuNP, forming a DNA nanosphere (AuNP-aptamers). Multiple aptamers on each AuNP were able to interact simultaneously with several receptors on a tumor cell, resulting in multivalent binding between AuNP-aptamers and the tumor cell. It was found that the binding affinity of AuNP-aptamers was 39-times higher than aptamers themselves alone. The capture efficiency of human acute leukemia cells increased from 49% using aptamers alone to 92% using AuNP-aptamers. Results show that combining DNA nanospheres with microfluidics are a promising platform for CTC isolation and cancer diagnosis and prognosis.Future studies will include applying this platform to the isolation of CTCs from peripheral blood samples of patients with metastatic cancer. For example, CTCs have been enumerated for a study investigating the efficacy of a chemotherapy drug combination for pancreatic cancer. Preliminary results of this double-blind study indicate that our CTC counts correlate very well with the clinical data. We currently use the same CTC definition as in the FDA-approved CellSearch: nucleated cells lacking CD45 and expressing EpCAM and cytokeratin (CK) [4]. However, it is very likely that this definition of CTCs, that is EpCAM-positive/CK-positive/DAPI-positive/CD45-negative cells, is too narrow because those tumor cells with little or no EpCAM expression are overlooked. During metastasis, tumor cells undergo epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition, in which tumor cells change from epithelial to mesenchymal morphology to acquire increased migratory and invasive capabilities [2,20]. Importantly, during epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition, some cells lose biomarkers associated with epithelial origin, such as EpCAM [2,20]. As a result, affinity ligands are needed to isolate both EpCAM-positive and EpCAM-negative cells. From this perspective, aptamers are advantageous since a panel of aptamers can be selected for both types of CTCs.AcknowledgementsThe authors wish to thank W Sheng and T Chen for their work related to this editorial.Financial & competing interests disclosureThe authors are grateful for the financial support from the NIH (K25CA149080, R21GM103535, GM079359 and CA133086). A provisional patent application has been filed by the authors’ employer, the University of Florida. The authors have no other relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript apart from those disclosed.No writing assistance was utilized in the production of this manuscript.References1 American Cancer Society. Cancer Facts and Figures 2012. American Cancer Society, GA, USA (2012).Google Scholar2 Chaffer CL, Weinberg RA. A perspective on cancer cell metastasis. Science331(6024),1559–1564 (2011).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar3 National Cancer Institute. The Early Detection Research Network Fourth Report. NIH, MD, USA (2008).Google Scholar4 Cristofanilli M, Budd GT, Ellis MJ et al. Circulating tumor cells, disease progression, and survival in metastatic breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med.351(8),781–791 (2004).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar5 Henry JB. Clinical Diagnosis and Management by Laboratory Methods (19th Edition). Saunders, PA, USA (1996).Google Scholar6 Nagrath S, Sequist LV, Maheswaran S et al. Isolation of rare circulating tumour cells in cancer patients by microchip technology. Nature450(7173),1235–1239 (2007).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar7 Adams AA, Okagbare PI, Feng J et al. Highly efficient circulating tumor cell isolation from whole blood and label-free enumeration using polymer-based microfluidics with an integrated conductivity sensor. J. Am. Chem. Soc.130(27),8633–8641 (2008).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar8 Stott SL, Hsu CH, Tsukrov DI et al. Isolation of circulating tumor cells using a microvortex-generating herringbone-chip. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA107(43),18392–18397 (2010).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar9 Gleghorn JP, Pratt ED, Denning D et al. Capture of circulating tumor cells from whole blood of prostate cancer patients using geometrically enhanced differential immunocapture (GEDI) and a prostate-specific antibody. Lab Chip10(1),27–29 (2010).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar10 Wang S, Liu K, Liu J et al. Highly efficient capture of circulating tumor cells by using nanostructured silicon substrates with integrated chaotic micromixers. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl.50(13),3084–3088 (2011).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar11 Schiro PG, Zhao M, Kuo JS, Koehler KM, Sabath DE, Chiu DT. Sensitive and high-throughput isolation of rare cells from peripheral blood with ensemble-decision aliquot ranking. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl.51(19),4618–4622 (2012).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar12 Sheng W, Chen T, Kamath R, Xiong X, Tan W, Fan ZH. Aptamer-enabled efficient isolation of cancer cells from whole blood using a microfluidic device. . Anal. Chem. 84(9),4199–4206 (2012).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar13 Famulok M, Hartig JS, Mayer G. Functional aptamers and aptazymes in biotechnology, diagnostics, and therapy. Chem. Rev.107(9),3715–3743 (2007).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar14 Fang X, Tan W. Aptamers generated from cell-SELEX for molecular medicine: a chemical biology approach. Acc. Chem. Res.43(1),48–57 (2010).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar15 Tuerk C, Gold L. Systematic evolution of ligands by exponential enrichment: RNA ligands to bacteriophage T4 DNA polymerase. Science249(4968),505–510 (1990).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar16 Shangguan D, Li Y, Tang Z et al. Aptamers evolved from live cells as effective molecular probes for cancer study. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA103(32),11838–11843 (2006).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar17 Sheng W, Chen T, Tan W, Fan ZH. Multivalent DNA nanospheres for enhanced capture of cancer cells in microfluidic devices. ACS Nano7(8),7067–7076 (2013).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar18 Mirkin CA, Letsinger RL, Mucic RC, Storhoff JJ. A DNA-based method for rationally assembling nanoparticles into macroscopic materials. Nature382(6592),607–609 (1996).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar19 Cutler JI, Auyeung E, Mirkin CA. Spherical nucleic acids. J. Am. Chem. Soc.134(3),1376–1391 (2012).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar20 Lianidou ES, Markou A. Circulating tumor cells in breast cancer: detection systems, molecular characterization, and future challenges. Clin. Chem.57(9),1242–1255 (2011).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google ScholarFiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited ByMagnetic nanoparticles in microfluidics-based diagnostics: an appraisalSmriti Sharma & Vinayak Bhatia24 May 2021 | Nanomedicine, Vol. 16, No. 15Microfluidic devices and drug delivery systems3D models in the new era of immune oncology: focus on T cells, CAF and ECM22 March 2019 | Journal of Experimental & Clinical Cancer Research, Vol. 38, No. 1Programmable and Multifunctional DNA-Based Materials for Biomedical Applications1 February 2018 | Advanced Materials, Vol. 30, No. 24Reduction in Migratory Phenotype in a Metastasized Breast Cancer Cell Line via Downregulation of S100A4 and GRM314 June 2017 | Scientific Reports, Vol. 7, No. 1Competitive Volumetric Bar-Chart Chip with Real-Time Internal Control for Point-of-Care Diagnostics18 March 2015 | Analytical Chemistry, Vol. 87, No. 7Lab on a chip and circulating tumor cells1 January 2014 | Lab Chip, Vol. 14, No. 1 Vol. 8, No. 11 Follow us on social media for the latest updates Metrics History Published online 24 October 2013 Published in print November 2013 Information© Future Medicine LtdKeywordsaptamercirculating tumor cellmicrofluidicsmultivalencynanoparticleAcknowledgementsThe authors wish to thank W Sheng and T Chen for their work related to this editorial.Financial & competing interests disclosureThe authors are grateful for the financial support from the NIH (K25CA149080, R21GM103535, GM079359 and CA133086). A provisional patent application has been filed by the authors’ employer, the University of Florida. The authors have no other relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript apart from those disclosed.No writing assistance was utilized in the production of this manuscript.PDF download