Selection of appropriate protein assay method for a paper microfluidics platform

Abstract

BackgroundPaper-analytical devices (PADs) have gained popularity as a simple and low-cost alternative for determining a wide range of analytes including proteins. Even though several colorimetric PADs methods for protein estimation are reported in literature, they lack justification for the chosen method and parameters therein. AimMajor aim of this work was to thoroughly evaluate the most commonly used colorimetric protein assays and recommend the most appropriate method for PADs platform. MethodWe performed following six colorimetric protein assays on PADs: biuret, lowry, bicinchoninic acid, bradford, bromocresol green, and tetrabromophenol blue. We obtained assay signal by analyzing images of the PADs and then assessed analytical figures of merit. ResultPrecision, accuracy, LOD, and LOQ of PADs protein assay methods ranged from 1.2 to 6.4%, 73.3–102.4%, 0.3–3.8 ​mg/mL, and 1.2–12.8 ​mg/mL, respectively. Out of six methods, we determined bromocresol green and tetrabromophenol blue as the best methods for serum and urine samples, respectively based on their optimized parameters and analytical figures of merit. The total average serum and urine protein in human samples were found to be 94.6 ​± ​16.2 ​mg/mL and 2.1 ​± ​1.5 ​mg/mL, respectively using PADs methods. The PADs result on human samples moderately correlated with the results from spectrophotometric determination (r2 ​> ​0.6). ConclusionPaper-based protein assays were easy to perform and were completed with thousand-fold less volume of samples/reagents without a spectrophotometer compared to conventional assay methods. After testing human samples, we found one protein assay method may not be appropriate for all types of samples.