2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.aca.2020.01.032
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Development of sandwich chemiluminescent immunoassay based on an anti-staphylococcal enterotoxin B Nanobody–Alkaline phosphatase fusion protein for detection of staphylococcal enterotoxin B

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
23
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 38 publications
(24 citation statements)
references
References 45 publications
1
23
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The assay showed a low cross-reactivity to staphylococcal enterotoxin C (SEC) but none to staphylococcal enterotoxin A (SEA) or to SpA, avoiding the false positive problems described previously. The substitution of the capture nanobody by a mAb and of the detection phage-nanobody by an anti-SEB nanobody-AP fusion and chemiluminescent detection did not improve either the LOD (1.44 ng/mL) or the dynamic range of the assay (3.12-50 ng/mL), although the cross-reactivity in the presence of SEA was also negligible [104]. The production of singledomain antibody fragments has also been reported for the analysis of the biomarker OmpU a major protein of the membrane of V. parahaemolyticus, a pathogenic bacterium that can be present in raw and undercooked seafood, although the assays were not applied to food analysis [114].…”
Section: Foodborne Pathogens and Other Biotoxinsmentioning
confidence: 91%
“…The assay showed a low cross-reactivity to staphylococcal enterotoxin C (SEC) but none to staphylococcal enterotoxin A (SEA) or to SpA, avoiding the false positive problems described previously. The substitution of the capture nanobody by a mAb and of the detection phage-nanobody by an anti-SEB nanobody-AP fusion and chemiluminescent detection did not improve either the LOD (1.44 ng/mL) or the dynamic range of the assay (3.12-50 ng/mL), although the cross-reactivity in the presence of SEA was also negligible [104]. The production of singledomain antibody fragments has also been reported for the analysis of the biomarker OmpU a major protein of the membrane of V. parahaemolyticus, a pathogenic bacterium that can be present in raw and undercooked seafood, although the assays were not applied to food analysis [114].…”
Section: Foodborne Pathogens and Other Biotoxinsmentioning
confidence: 91%
“… Nouri et al (2018) designed a new kit for the detection of SEA in milk, with a detection time of about 15 min and a sensitivity of 15.6 ng of toxin. For instance, Sun et al (2020) developed a sandwich chemiluminescent immunoassay (CLIA) to detect SEB, an anti-SEB monoclonal antibody was used as the capture antibody, and Nb37-ALP was used as the detector antibody; the detection limit was 1.44 ng/ml. In another sandwich ELISA assay, nano-antibodies acted as capturing antibodies, and the detection antibodies were acted by phage nanoantibodies with amplified signal properties.…”
Section: Available Methods For Detecting S Aureusmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In contrast to the therapeutic use, phage display was applied to generate nanobodies against SEB from camel immune and naive libraries useful as a diagnostic tool. These nanobodies were either directly coupled with alkaline phosphatase in a sandwich-ELISA ( Sun T. et al., 2020 ), or used for western-blot and ELISA in an indirect detection system ( Zanganeh et al., 2019 ).…”
Section: Antibodies Against Toxinsmentioning
confidence: 99%