Biomedical Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
(5) An implantable diagnostic device for cancer monitoring (Daniel et al., 2008), and the
binding of CA 123 in solution to anti-CA antibody immobilized on an SPR biosensor
chip surface (
Suwansara-ard et al., 2009
).
A comparison is made of the single-fractal analysis binding of the CA antigen in solution to
the anti-CA immobilized on the SPR sensor chip surface (
Suwansara-ard et al., 2009
) with
the binding (cancer monitoring) in mouse 2 and 3 (
Daniel et al., 2009
). At the outset it should
be noted that the comparison is being made between cancer monitoring in mice (
in vivo
) and
the binding of CA in solution to anti-CA immobilized on a SPR biosensor chip surface. Fur-
thermore, the fractal dimension value obtained from mouse 2 and 3 is equal to zero. This
indicates that the surface acts like a “Cantor-like” dust. The fractal dimension for the
in vitro
binding of the CA is 2.1056. As one goes from the
in vivo
monitoring in mice to
the
in vitro
binding of CA, both the fractal dimension and the binding rate coefficient
increase. This is in accord with the results presented in the different chapters throughout
the topic wherein, generally, increases in the fractal dimension lead to increases in the bind-
ing rate coefficient. This is for the same analyte-receptor system. Here an attempt is made to
compare the binding of the same analyte (albeit not quite the same, but cancer in general) to
different types of biosensor systems. The intent is to provide fresh physical insights into the
binding of cancer and other analytes to different biosensor systems so that a better under-
standing of the interactions occurring on the different surfaces may be obtained, which
should lead to a better control and management of these interactions in desired directions.
Many more of these types of examples are available in the literature. It is hoped that these
five sets of examples to be presented together will help set the stage for the analysis of other
examples. The intent, as indicated previously, is to obtain better physical insights into these
types of examples. Of course, any further insight that may be obtained for biomedically-med-
ically oriented analytes will prove invaluable.
References
Abdel-Hamid I, D Ivnitskii, P Alanasov, and E Wilkins,
Biosensors & Bioelectronics
,
14
(3), 309-316 (1999a).
Abdel-Hamid I, D Ivnitskii, P Alanasov, and E Wilkins,
Analytica Chimica Acta
,
199
(1-2), 99-108 (1999b).
Abu-Rabesh K, A Ashkenazi, D Atlas, L Amir, and RS Marks, Highly sensitive amperometric immunosensor for
the detection of
Escherichia coli
,
Biosensors & Bioelectronics
,
24
(12), 3461-3468 (2009).
Agarwal PK, PC Black, and AM Kamat,
World Journal of Urology
,
26
, 39-44 (2008).
Albareda-Savant M, A Merkocci, and S Alegret,
Sensors & Actuators B
,
69
, 153-163 (2000).
Alexeev VL, S Das, DN Finegold, and SA Asher,
Clinical Chemistry
,
50
, 3353-3360 (2004).
Alves WA, PA Florito, SI Cordosa de Torresi, and RM Torresi, Design of molecular wires based on
supramolecular structures for application in glucose biosensors,
Biosensors & Bioelectronics
, February 14,
2006.
American Diabetes Association ,American diabetes association,
Diabetic Care
,
17
, 81-86 (1994).
American Diabetes Association ,American diabetes association,
Diabetic Care
,
22
, 877-878 (1999).
