Microchimica Acta

, 186:170 | Cite as

Voltammetric immunosensor for E-cadherin promoter DNA methylation using a Fe3O4-citric acid nanocomposite and a screen-printed carbon electrode modified with poly(vinyl alcohol) and reduced graphene oxide

  • Roya Khodaei
  • Anita Ahmady
  • Seyyed Mehdi Khoshfetrat
  • Soheila Kashanian
  • Seyed Mohammad Tavangar
  • Kobra OmidfarEmail author
Original Paper


Silencing of tumor suppressor genes (E-cadherin) by promoter DNA methylation may lead to the development of invasive phenotypes in epithelial tissues. The authors describe an electrochemical nanobiosensor for early detection and screening of circulating methylated DNA as a biomarker for cancers. First, the antibody against 5-methylcytosine was physically immobilized onto modified with reduced graphene oxide and polyvinylalcohol. In the next step, methylated target DNA in samples was hybridized with ssDNA probe conjugated to Fe3O4-citric acid nanocomposites and placed on the modified electrode. Then, the hexacyanoferrate redox system was added and electron transfer recorded. Cyclic voltammetry and electrochemical impedance spectroscopy showed that the modification process was well accomplished. Quantitative measurement of E-cadherin DNA promoter methylation was performed using differential pulse voltammetry. The electrochemical analysis achieved in the presence and absence of nonmethylated DNA mixed with samples indicated the high specificity and selectivity in methylation analysis using this system. With the linear range of concentration from 1 × 10−4 ng.mL−1 to 20 ng.mL−1 and the detection limit of 9 × 10−5 ng.mL−1, this method represents a promising approach for analysis of other biomarkers.

Graphical abstract

A label free electrochemical nanobiosensor was constructed for detection of methylated circulating cell-free DNA using screen-printed carbon electrode (SPCE) modified with reduced graphene oxide (rGO) and polyvinylalcohol (PVA).


DNA nanobiosensor Nanocomposite Magnetic nanoparticle DNA methylation Anti-5-methylcytosine antibody 



Research reported in this publication was supported by Elite Researcher Grant Committee under award number [958253] from the National Institutes for Medical Research Development (NIMAD), Tehran, Iran.

Compliance with ethical standards

all procetures performed in this study were in accordance with the ethical stamdards of the Tehran University Of Medical Sciences and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration.

Supplementary material

604_2019_3234_MOESM1_ESM.docx (2.2 mb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 2237 kb)


  1. 1.
    Laird PW (2003) Early detection: the power and the promise of DNA methylation markers. Nat Rev Cancer 3(4):253–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Syedmoradi L, Esmaeili F, Norton ML (2016) Towards DNA methylation detection using biosensors. Analyst 141(21):5922–5943CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Takeichi M (1995) Morphogenetic roles of classic cadherins. Curr Opin Cell Biol 7(5):619–627CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Khatami F, Larijani B, Heshmat R, Keshtkar A, Mohammadamoli M, Teimoori-Toolabi L, Nasiri S, Tavangar SM (2017) Meta-analysis of promoter methylation in eight tumor-suppressor genes and its association with the risk of thyroid cancer. PLoS One 12(9):e0184892CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kamińska K, Szczylik C, Bielecka ZF, Bartnik E, Porta C, Lian F, Czarnecka AM (2015) The role of the cell–cell interactions in cancer progression. J Cell Mol Med 19(2):283–296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Guan X (2015) Cancer metastases: challenges and opportunities. Acta Pharm Sin B 5(5):402–418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Yuan Y, Jiang Y-C, Sun C-K, Chen Q-M (2016) Role of the tumor microenvironment in tumor progression and the clinical applications. Oncol Rep 35(5):2499–2515CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rubin H (2008) Cell–cell contact interactions conditionally determine suppression and selection of the neoplastic phenotype. Proc Natl Acad Sci 105(17):6215–6221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Abercrombie M (1979) Contact inhibition and malignancy. Nature 281(5729):259–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Shargh SA, Sakizli M, Khalaj V, Movafagh A, Yazdi H, Hagigatjou E, Sayad A, Mansouri N, Mortazavi-Tabatabaei SA, Khorshid HRK (2014) Downregulation of E-cadherin expression in breast cancer by promoter hypermethylation and its relation with progression and prognosis of tumor. Med Oncol 31(11):250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rashid H, Alam K, Afroze D, Yousuf A, Banday M, Kawoosa F (2016) Hypermethylation status of E-cadherin gene in gastric cancer patients in a high incidence area. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 17(6):2757–2760PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ikoma H, Ichikawa D, Koike H, Ikoma D, Tanini N, Okamoto K, Ochiai T, Ueda Y, Otsuji E, Yamagishi H (2006) Correlation between serum DNA methylation and prognosis in gastric cancer patients. Anticancer Res 26(3B):2313–2316PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wheeler J, Kim H, Efstathiou J, Ilyas M, Mortensen NM, Bodmer W (2001) Hypermethylation of the promoter region of the E-cadherin gene (CDH1) in sporadic and ulcerative colitis associated colorectal cancer. Gut 48(3):367–371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Daneshpour M, Izadi P, Omidfar K (2016) Femtomolar level detection of RASSF1A tumor suppressor gene methylation by electrochemical nano-genosensor based on Fe3O4/TMC/au nanocomposite and PT-modified electrode. Biosens Bioelectron 77:1095–1103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hossain T, Mahmudunnabi G, Masud MK, Islam MN, Ooi L, Konstantinov K, Al Hossain MS, Martinac B, Alici G, Nguyen N-T (2017) Electrochemical biosensing strategies for DNA methylation analysis. Biosens Bioelectron 94:63–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Campuzano S, Pingarrón JM (2018) Electrochemical sensing of cancer-related global and locus-specific DNA methylation events. Electroanalysis 30(7):1201–1216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Omidfar K, Zarei H, Gholizadeh F, Larijani B (2012) A high-sensitivity electrochemical immunosensor based on mobile crystalline material-41–polyvinyl alcohol nanocomposite and colloidal gold nanoparticles. Anal Biochem 421(2):649–656CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Daneshpour M, Karimi B, Omidfar K (2018) Simultaneous detection of gastric cancer-involved miR-106a and let-7a through a dual-signal-marked electrochemical nanobiosensor. Biosens Bioelectron 109:197–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Shoaie N, Forouzandeh M, Omidfar K (2018) Voltammetric determination of the Escherichia coli DNA using a screen-printed carbon electrode modified with polyaniline and gold nanoparticles. Microchim Acta 185(4):217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Omidfar K, Dehdast A, Zarei H, Sourkohi BK, Larijani B (2011) Development of urinary albumin immunosensor based on colloidal AuNP and PVA. Biosens Bioelectron 26(10):4177–4183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Khoshfetrat SM, Mehrgardi MA (2015) Amplified electrochemical genotyping of single-nucleotide polymorphisms using a graphene–gold nanoparticles modified glassy carbon platform. RSC Adv 5(37):29285–29293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Xu Y, Bai H, Lu G, Li C, Shi G (2008) Flexible graphene films via the filtration of water-soluble noncovalent functionalized graphene sheets. J Am Chem Soc 130(18):5856–5857CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Guo H-L, Wang X-F, Qian Q-Y, Wang F-B, Xia X-H (2009) A green approach to the synthesis of graphene nanosheets. ACS Nano 3(9):2653–2659CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Deshmukh S, Kandasamy G, Upadhyay RK, Bhattacharya G, Banerjee D, Maity D, Deshusses MA, Roy SS (2017) Terephthalic acid capped iron oxide nanoparticles for sensitive electrochemical detection of heavy metal ions in water. J Electroanal Chem 788:91–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Shirazi H, Ahmadi A, Darzianiazizi M, Kashanian S, Kashanian S, Omidfar K (2016) Signal amplification strategy using gold/N-trimethyl chitosan/iron oxide magnetic composite nanoparticles as a tracer tag for high-sensitive electrochemical detection. IET Nanobiotechnology 10(1):20–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Goodarzi A, Sahoo Y, Swihart M, Prasad P (2003) Aqueous ferrofluid of citric acid coated magnetite particles. MRS Online Proceedings Library Archive 789:1–6Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Cheraghipour E, Javadpour S, Mehdizadeh AR (2012) Citrate capped superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles used for hyperthermia therapy. J Biomed Sci Eng 5(12):715–719CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Daneshpour M, Omidfar K, Ghanbarian H (2016) A novel electrochemical nanobiosensor for the ultrasensitive and specific detection of femtomolar-level gastric cancer biomarker miRNA-106a. Beilstein J Nanotechnol 7:2023–2036. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Omidfar K, Rasaee MJ, Zaraee AB, Amir MP, Rahbarizadeh F (2002) Stabilization of penicillinase-hapten conjugate for enzyme immunoassay. J Immunoass Immunochem 23(3):385–398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Xu Z, Yin H, Huo L, Zhou Y, Ai S (2014) Electrochemical immunosensor for DNA methyltransferase activity assay based on methyl CpG-binding protein and dual gold nanoparticle conjugate-based signal amplification. Sensors Actuators B Chem 192:143–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kong R-M, Song Z-L, Meng H-M, Zhang X-B, Shen G-L, Yu R-Q (2014) A label-free electrochemical biosensor for highly sensitive and selective detection of DNA via a dual-amplified strategy. Biosens Bioelectron 54:442–447CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Yin H, Sun B, Zhou Y, Wang M, Xu Z, Fu Z, Ai S (2014) A new strategy for methylated DNA detection based on photoelectrochemical immunosensor using Bi2S3 nanorods, methyl bonding domain protein and anti-his tag antibody. Biosens Bioelectron 51:103–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Wang P, Han P, Dong L, Miao X (2015) Direct potential resolution and simultaneous detection of cytosine and 5-methylcytosine based on the construction of polypyrrole functionalized graphene nanowall interface. Electrochem Commun 61:36–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Wang L, Yu F, Wang F, Chen Z (2016) Electrochemical detection of DNA methylation using a glassy carbon electrode modified with a composite made from carbon nanotubes and β-cyclodextrin. J Solid State Electrochem 20(5):1263–1270CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Austria, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Biosensor Research Center, Endocrinology and Metabolism Molecular–Cellular Sciences InstituteTehran University of Medical SciencesTehranIslamic Republic of Iran
  2. 2.Nano Drug Delivery Research CenterKermanshah University of Medical SciencesKermanshahIran
  3. 3.Department of Applied Chemistry, Faculty of ChemistryRazi UniversityKermanshahIran
  4. 4.Department of Pathology, Shariati HospitalTehran University of Medical ScienceTehranIran
  5. 5.Choronic Diseases Research Center, Endocrinology and Metabolism Population Sciences InstituteTehran University of Medical SciencesTehranIran
  6. 6.Endocrinology and Metabolism Research Center, Endocrinology and Metabolism Research InstituteTehran University of Medical SciencesTehranIran

Personalised recommendations