Abstract
While the term flow cytometry refers to the measurement of cells, the approach of making sensitive multiparameter optical measurements in a flowing sample stream is a very general analytical approach. The past few years have seen an explosion in the application of flow cytometry technology for molecular analysis and measurements using micro-particles as solid supports. While microsphere-based molecular analyses using flow cytometry date back three decades, the need for highly parallel quantitative molecular measurements that has arisen from various genomic and proteomic advances has driven the development in particle encoding technology to enable highly multiplexed assays. Multiplexed particle-based immunoassays are now common place, and new assays to study genes, protein function, and molecular assembly. Numerous efforts are underway to extend the multiplexing capabilities of microparticle-based assays through new approaches to particle encoding and analyte reporting. The impact of these developments will be seen in the basic research and clinical laboratories, as well as in drug development.
Key terms: microarray, systems biology, proteomics, protein array, high throughput screening, drug discovery, diagnostics
A major goal for biomedical research in the 21st century will be to collect and integrate molecular information about genes, proteins, and numerous other biomolecules into the working models of cell and organism function from which predictions can be made. The rationale for pursuing such an ambitious goal stems from the very significant advances in molecular analysis that enable the sequencing of whole genomes, the highly parallel analysis of gene expression levels, and large scale identification of proteins in complex samples. These advances resulted from new molecular reagents and assay chemistries, new instrumentation with improved sensitivity and throughput, new computational tools, and a significant change in focus for experimental biology from one that focuses on individual molecules to one that considers the abundance and interactions of many different molecules as they function in networks of biochemical pathways in living systems.
However, just as these new technologies have enabled the rapid acceleration of data collection and interpretation, continued progress toward transforming this information into biological understanding is dependent on continued improvement in analytical technologies. In particular, it is critical to augment qualitative analysis methods that allow the identification of important molecules with quantitative measurements of their abundance and function. The ability to make quantitative measurements of the concentrations of many individual proteins, their interactions and the formation of macromolecular assemblies, and the measurement of these assemblies in live cells and organisms represent major challenges in understanding the systems of molecular networks and pathways that underlie physiology and disease. These challenges are being addressed through developments in microscopic imaging, optical spectroscopy, and mass spectrometry. In this article, we highlight how a new class of applications for flow cytometry, multiplexed molecular analyses using suspension array technology, is providing an important new set of tools for quantitative systems biology.
EXPANDING THE APPLICATIONS OF FLOW CYTOMETRY: MULTIPLEXED MOLECULAR ANALYSIS
Flow cytometry is a term that aptly describes the major application of a very general analytical technique for the optical analysis of single particles in flowing sample streams. This approach to the study of cells has become so important that thousands of flow cytometers are present in universities, medical schools, and other academic and industrial research facilities throughout the world, and flow cytometric methods have impacted nearly every area of biomedical science. In the shadow of applications that focus on the analysis of whole cells, the general approach of making sensitive optical measurements in flowing sample streams has been exploited to make high resolution measurements of a variety of biological systems ranging from whole organisms(1,2) to single fluorescent molecules (3). For these measurements, the more general term of flow microfluorimetry might be used, but regardless of the terminology preferred, it is evident that the principles that underlie flow cytometry are useful for a great many more biological applications in addition to measuring cells.
One such application has its roots in the 1970s, when it was recognized that microparticles bearing antigen could serve as solid supports for the capture of antibodies from blood, and that by using differently-sized microspheres that could be distinguished by their light scatter properties several analytes may be detected simultaneously (4). In the 1980s and 1990s, this approach was extended to include antibodies (5), DNA (6), and lipids (7) displayed on the surface of microparticles. Today, this approach is gaining wide use; thanks to the ready availability of color-coded sets of multiplexing microspheres, assay kits, and instruments and softwares especially designed to facilitate bead-based multiplexed assays.
BEADS, DYES, INSTRUMENTS, AND ASSAYS
As described earlier, the use of microspheres as solid supports for molecular analysis using flow cytometry dates back to the 1970s, but a renewed interest in this approach, stimulated by a new set of biological questions that demand multiplexed measurements, has led to the development of reagents and instruments specifically designed to support multiplexed microparticle-based analyses. The key factor in the resurgence of microsphere-based assays was the development of fluorescence-encoded microspheres exhibiting discrete intensities of fluorescence from two different fluorescence dyes from Luminex Corporation. Ten intensities of two colors enable the encoding of 102 different microspheres that can be discriminated by a flow cytometer. These color codes can be thought of as forming a microarray, similar in function to the popular flat microarrays, but with single beads serving as array elements in a two dimensional fluorescence space replacing “spots” on a flat surface. The addition of ten intensities of one or two additional dyes would add dimensions to the encoding space and enable the development of microsphere sets with 103 or 104 discrete particle populations. While the analysis of such multi-color beads would be trivial for most flow cytometers, the preparation of such microspheres is apparently not, and the largest set of commercially available beads currently numbers ∼100 encoded populations. Additional factors that limit the level of multiplexing are the reagents (antibodies, oligonucleotides, etc) and assay chemistries used (antibody sandwich assay, hybridization, PCR), which can exhibit significant cross reactivity and loss of quantitative response at high multiplex levels.
While the multiplexing levels on any platform can be limited by the features of the assay chemistry, there are many biological applications that are greatly enhanced by multiplexed analysis at the level of one hundred, or even a dozen, analytes. To address these more modest scale multiplex applications, microspheres encoded with different intensities of a single fluorophore in one or more sizes are now available from several commercial sources. These microsphere sets are designed to be used in conjunction with commonly available commercial bench top flow cytometers and enable anyone with access to a flow cytometry core facility to set up their own assays. The development of multiplexed assays requires some time and experience and, while resources are available to guide the researcher (8), many biologists will prefer to purchase assay kits that have been optimized and validated. At present, commercially available assay kits are available for the multiplexed measurement of cytokine and chemokine levels and for a handful of other immunology applications. In the following sections we highlight the major classes of multiplexed assays.
MULTIPLEXED ANALYSIS OF PROTEIN ABUNDANCE
Key measurements for understanding cell function are the amount and modification state of proteins. Mass spectrometry is presently the technique most closely identified with proteomic analysis. Coupled to a separation method, such as two dimensional gel electrophoresis, this tool is invaluable for identifying proteins in complex mixtures. While the excellent mass resolution of mass spectrometry is very useful for the qualitative identification of proteins, or more specifically peptide fragments thereof, variability in ionization efficiencies makes quantification of peptide/protein abundance difficult (9). Approaches using pre-analysis derivitization of samples with isotope-coded affinity tags have been developed to measure the relative abundance of proteins from an experimental and control sample (10) in a manner analogous to the two color fluorescence labeling method described earlier, but these provide limited information of the absolute concentrations of targets, owing to uncertainties in ionization efficiency for different molecules.
The standard for quantitative protein analysis is the enzyme-linked immunosorbant assay (ELISA). While the mode of reporting may vary (absorbance, chemiluminescence, fluorescence), the essence of the ELISA is the formation of a antibody–antigen “sandwich” complex involving an immobilized capture antibody, the target of interest captured from a sample, and a labeled reporter antibody. The sensitivity of the sandwich immunoassay is generally determined by the affinity of the antibodies used, and can be in the pg/ml range with monoclonal antibodies with high affinity and specificity. The microwell plate is the most commonly used solid support for capture antibody determination, providing a format that is compatible with automation and the analysis of many samples. However, microplate-based ELISAs typically require ∼100 μl of sample and measure only a single analyte.
Building on the approach of microarray-based gene expression analysis, several configurations of antibody arrays are being used for protein analysis. These arrays are comprised of antibodies spotted onto membranes, glass slides, or other solid supports and with detection being performed in a couple of different ways. The most quantitative approach employs the same sandwich assay format used for the ELISA (11), with purified protein standards being used for quantification. These approaches can give sensitivities approaching or even surpassing that of a conventional microwell plate-based single analyte ELISA, but require care to set up. Antibody cross reactivity can compromise both the sensitivity and specificity of the assay, and so antibodies must be screened and characterized in a multiplexed environment before use. Competitive assay formats can have a wider linear dynamic range (11), but generally have lower sensitivity and face the same limitations for multiplexing as the sandwich assays. A second class of assays involves the prelabeling of proteins prior to binding to immobilized antibodies (12). In this format, no second reporter antibody is required, making antibody cross-reactivity less of an issue and sample preparation times shorter. However, uncertainties regarding the variation of labeling among protein targets and the reproducibility between samples make this approach semi-quantitative at best. Purified protein standards are not typically used. A variation on this approach labels an experimental sample with one color of dye and a control sample with a second color of dye, and measures the ratio of the two colors after mixing and application to the antibody array (13). This two-color method allows for some normalization for sample to sample variation, but still measures only relative abundance rather than absolute concentrations.
While the spotted slide or membrane are the best known microarray platforms for highly parallel analysis, the advantages of encoded microparticles for multiplexed analysis are being increasingly appreciated. The most well-developed systems involve fluorescently-encoded microspheres analyzed via flow cytometry (14–16). The concept of using microspheres as solid supports for multiplexed assays by flow cytometry goes back nearly to three decades, but has recently been realized as a general use platform for the analysis of molecular interactions (14,17) and multiplexed analysis (18–21) through the availability of relatively low cost instruments with multiplexed assays as a primary appplication (Luminex LX100, Becton Dickenson FACSArray), commercial assay kits (Becton Dickenson, Bender Medsystems-BioRad, Biosource, OneLambda, R&D Systems, Upstate, and others), and encoded beads (Bang’s Laboratories, Duke Scientific, Luminex, Spherotech). The microsphere-based platform has been used for analysis of receptor–ligand interactions, enzyme–substrate interactions, genetic analysis, and, most widely, immunoassays.
Bead-based immunoassays generally employ the sandwich assay design in which a microsphere-bound antibody captures an analyte and a fluorescence-labeled antibody is used as a reporter for measurement. By employing different capture antibodies on distinct microspheres and cocktails of reporter antibodies, it is possible to measure simultaneously the levels of multiple analytes. Standards relate the assessed fluorescence to concentration of analyte in the experimental sample. Early examples of these multiplexed assays featured “home-brewed” kits designed by individual researchers to detect multiple cytokines (18,22,23). Assay kits that detect as many as 22 different cytokines simultaneously based on this approach are currently available from a number of commercial sources. Smaller panels are available for phosphorylated signaling molecules, transcription factors, and matrix metalloproteases.
A second class of immunoassays, in which antigen is displayed on beads, aim to detect and characterize antibodies circulating in blood. In a typical assay configuration, purified antigen is immobilized on beads and used to capture antibodies present in blood or plasma, which is detected with a labeled class-or isotype-specific secondary antibody. This general approach has been used to detect exposure to infectious disease (5,24–27) and to monitor antigen-specific antibody responses to infection or vaccination (28,29).
In general, the bead-based systems provide sensitivity equal to or better than the conventional ELISA counterpart, require less sample processing time, and have the ability to measure multiple analytes simultaneously in samples as small as 20 μl or less of sample. Like the ELISA or any other immunoassay, the sensitivity and specificity of multiplexed microsphere assays depend on the use of high affinity, high specificity antibodies. Issues of specificity become even more critical in multiplexed assays and are major factors limiting high levels of multiplexing in immunoassays.
MICROSPHERE-BASED NUCLEIC ACID ANALYSIS
A second major area where optically encoded micro-sphere arrays are making an impact is in the area of nucleic acid analysis. For genetic and genomic analysis, the number of molecular features targeted for analysis can be quite large, tens of thousands in the case of gene expression analysis, hundreds of thousands in the case of single nucleotide polymorphisms. The flat DNA microarray, or DNA chip, developed from the need to make highly parallel molecular measurements from a single sample, and has emerged as a workhorse analysis platform (30). However, for studies involving large numbers of samples, the flat chip format is not especially well-suited to high throughput analysis. Optically encoded arrays of micro-spheres offer numerous advantages in terms of preparation and use over the conventional flat microarray.
Multiplexed nucleic acid applications can be grouped into two main categories: sequence detection and sequence analysis. Sequence detection applications include gene expression analysis and the detection of PCR products. Sequence analysis is generally concerned with variations in nucleic acid sequence. The analysis of single nucleotide polymorphisms (or SNPs) has important implications for areas ranging from disease diagnostics and drug discovery to bacterial identification and forensic analysis, and the combination of a high level of multiplexing with the high serial throughput of flow cytometry make micro-sphere arrays an attractive format for these applications.
The primary step in the preparation of microsphere arrays for nucleic acid analysis is the functionalization of the microsphere surface with a nucleic acid. The nucleic acid is most often a synthetic oligonucleotide, but could also be an oligonucleotide analogue or natural DNA or RNA, depending on the application. As for immobilization of antibodies for immunoassays, nucleic acids may be immobilized on the microsphere surface using non-covalent physical adsorption, affinity binding methods, or covalent conjugation. The adsorption of DNA to a variety of surfaces, especially glass, is well known, and while glass beads have been used to display DNA for flow cytometric analysis, the relative lack of stability of the interaction as well as the fact that the current generation of commercial multiplexing microsphere reagents are composed of hydrophobic polymers make this approach of limited utility. More common are the use of affinity tags to tightly, but non-covalently, attach nucleic acid to a surface, especially biotin-modified nucleic acids to avidin- or streptavidin-functionalized surfaces. Such affinity interactions are generally tight, specific, and fairly stable, and have been used in a number of multiplexed applications. However, in terms of stability and specificity, the most widely used nucleic acid immobilization methods involve covalent attachment. The most popular approach is to couple amino-modified nucleic acids to carboxylated surfaces using carbodiimide chemistry. Synthetic oligonucleotides are readily obtained with an amino-modification at one or both ends, or at an internal position. Longer nucleic acids can be produced by enzymatic methods (i.e. PCR) by using amino-modified oligonucleotide primers or amino-modified nucleotide analogues. Sulthydral-modified nucleic acids can be prepared in similar manners for attachment via maleimide chemistry or for binding to gold surfaces. For both covalent and affinity-based non-covalent attachment, the inclusion of a multi-carbon linker to serve as a spacer seems to improve the efficiency of hybridization to a surface immobilized nucleic acid, though the degree of improvement can vary.
In general, nucleic acid analysis methods involve an assay chemistry and a readout, or detection step. Reverse transcriptase (for RNA targets), polymerase chain reaction, and other amplification strategies provide both amplification of the target sequence and opportunities to incorporate labeled nucleotide analogues for detection. For example, when PCR is performed using a labeled primer or nucleotide, the resulting PCR product is labeled. The PCR product can then be captured onto a microsphere by hybridization and detected. This approach has been used to analyze mRNA in gene expression studies (31,32) and leukemia detection (33,34) to measure microRNAs in human cancers (35), to detect nucleic acids from bacteria and viruses (36–40), and to discriminate single nucleotide polymorphisms(41,42). Variants of this method include the use of branched DNA as detection probes to amplify signals in mRNA analysis (43) and employing an immobilized allele-specific capture oligo, and a second allele-specific reporter oligo has been used to determine the haplotype of amplified DNA fragments (44).
Several approaches couple signal generation to the hybridization event for the detection of unlabeled nucleic acids in solution, and some of these have been adapted to microspheres. The Invader assay uses a structure-specific nuclease to cleave a quenched primer annealed to a target DNA (45,46) Performed in solution, this reaction exhibits isothermal amplification, in which a single target molecule can support the cleavage of many reporter molecules, and this approach has been demonstrated in the detection of a single nucleotide polymorphism on beads (47,48). Molecular beacons are hybridization probes with a hairpin structure that keeps a quencher in close proximity to a fluorophore (49). Upon hybridization to a target sequence, the hairpin structure is disrupted and the fluorophore. This approach has recently been adapted to microspheres for the single-plex detection of synthetic oligonucleotides and single stranded PCR products (50).
The direct capture of nucleic acid targets by oligonucleotides immobilized on microspheres is straightforward in concept, but in practice there are several challenges. First, capture of long nucleic acids by an immobilized oligonucleotide is inefficient, and the PCR product must be kept well under 1,000 nucleotides in length. Second, when double stranded DNA is used, the complementary strand competes with the immobilized oligonucleotide for the target strand, further reducing capture efficiency. These issues necessitate additional steps such as preparation of single stranded target prior to capture. For the resolution of single base differences in target DNA it is generally necessary to fine tune the hybridization probes and conditions to achieve the desired specificity, a task that is significantly more involved for multiplexed assays.
To circumvent these issues, assays have been configured to interrogate PCR products in solution rather than directly capturing the target onto a surface. One approach is to use a competitive binding assay in which the target competes with a bead-bound probe for a labeled oligonucleotide. In this case, the presence of target depletes the amount of free-labeled oligonucleotide available to bind to a bead, thus decreasing the signal on the bead (19).
A second approach is to use the target in solution as a template for the incorporation of a label into an oligonucleotide probe, which can then be detected when it is captured onto a bead. The incorporation of this label is generally achieved using enzymes, either a DNA polymerase to incorporate labeled nucleotides or a DNA ligase to attach a labeled oligonucleotide. A key component of the probe capture approach was the development of universal arrays for multiplexed nucleic acid analysis (51–53). Based on sets of oligonucleotides designed to exhibit specific hybridization to a reverse complement, but negligible hybridization to any other oligonucleotide in the set (54,55), Microspheres bearing such oligonucleotide tags offer significant flexibility for assay design and development. By encoding soluble primers and probes with the reverse complement of the microsphere tags, specific detection or genotyping primers can be captured onto specific microspheres for detection. Modification of an existing assay or development of a new assay does not require the preparation of new beads, only the design of new primers with an appropriate capture tags to target the primer to the correct microsphere. Such universal arrays have been combined with a variety of enzyme-based genotyping methods for the analysis of single nucleotide polymorphisms. Polymerase-mediated extension of nucleotide analogues (51,52,56,57), or ligase-mediated coupling of oligonucleotides (53) have been shown to allow high levels of multiplexed SNP genotyping in a variety of systems. These methods take advantage of the requirement of these enzymes for correct nucleotide base pairing to provide exquisite specificity to single nucleotide sequence changes.
Another variant of the capture approach uses capture probes to bind to mRNA in solution followed by capture onto microspheres and detection using a branched DNA detection scheme (43). The use of branched DNA provides significant signal enhancement, allowing the detection of mRNA directly without the need for PCR or other amplification steps. As can be seen from these examples, the approaches to nucleic acid analysis are quite diverse, and new applications appear regularly.
BEYOND ANTIBODIES AND OLIGONUCLEOTIDES
The examples described earlier for immunoassays and nucleic acid analyses represent the best-developed uses of microsphere arrays for multiplexed molecular analysis. A range of different assays have been developed on the microsphere platform for use in screening, detection, structure-function studies, and other applications. Of particular significance are analyses of ligand-receptor, enzyme-substrate, and other interactions that are targets for drug discovery.
Ligand–receptor analysis is a very important area in both basic research, for understanding molecular mechanisms of signal transduction, and in drug development, for the screening and characterization of potential receptor agonists and antagonists. Flow cytometry has long been used to study receptors in their native environment of the cell, and in recent years microparticle-based methods have been adapted to study receptors under more controlled, in vitro conditions. In both cases, at the particle densities typically used in flow cytometry (1 × 105−1 × 106/ml), the receptor concentration is quite low (less than a nanometer), making it possible to titrate even high affinity ligands without significant ligand depletion (58). This feature facilitates the accurate measurement of binding affinity. The ability of the flow cytometer to resolve free from bound ligand enables real time measurement of ligand association and dissociation, and allows for higher resolution determination of kinetic rate constants than discontinuous methods that require a wash step. These features of flow cytometry, plus the ability to perform multiplex measurements, offer unique advantages for both understanding the mechanisms of ligand-receptor interactions and for identifying and characterizing compounds that can modulate them.
A distinguishing feature of cell surface molecular assemblies is the presence of the lipid bilayer, which determines the environment of receptor molecules and can control function. To facilitate the study of these interactions in controlled in vitro environments, several researchers have used artificial membrane bilayers supported on the surface of glass microspheres. Gilbert and colleagues have measured the binding of a number of plasma proteins including FactorVIII (7,59,60) and lactadherin (61,62) to supported lipid membranes. Nolan and colleagues have used microsphere-supported bilayers to measure the interactions of cholera toxin to its cell surface receptor ganglioside GM1 to measure binding rate constants and affinities, as well as the aggregation of receptor molecules within the membrane. In each of these cases, the supported bilayer membranes exhibited behavior consistent with a fluid membrane in which individual lipid molecules are free to diffuse within the plane of the membrane.
G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are a particularly large and important class of receptors involved in numerous physiological processes. Microspheres have served as solid supports for GPCRs (63), G protein subunits (63–66), their ligands (65) and regulators (67) for use in characterizing various aspects of signaling mechanisms. Neubig and colleagues used immobilized Gα subunits on microspheres to measure the interactions with fluorescence-labeled β/γ subunit (66) and a regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) protein (67). Sklar and colleagues have developed methods for the display of detergent-solubilized GPCRs (68,69) and used these to characterize receptor-binding compounds. By measuring the binding of fluorescent receptor to immobilized ligand on beads, compounds that inhibit the ligand receptor binding were analyzed in a competitive assay format (63). Receptor agonists are identified by their ability to change the affinity of the fluorescent receptor for beads bearing immobilized G protein. Combined with mechanistic models of the ligand-receptor-G protein ternary complex (65), these approaches are providing insight into the molecular basis of full- and partial agonism.
Nuclear receptors are an important class of intracellular receptors and potential drug targets. They regulate gene transcription in coordination with coactivator or corepressor proteins that interact with a receptor’s ligand binding domain. These interactions are attractive targets for drug development, and Iannone and colleagues have arrayed peptide domains corresponding to the different activators or repressors, and measured the effect of small molecule compounds on the binding of labeled nuclear receptors to these immobilized peptides (70–72).
A variety of enzyme–substrate interactions have also been analyzed using microsphere-based methods, including protease (73) (Saunders et al., this issue) and nuclease (74–78). In these applications, a fluorescently labeled substrate is attached to the microsphere in such a way that enzymatic cleavage of the substrate results in release of the label and a decrease in microsphere fluorescence. Because the concentration of the immobilized fluorescent substrate is very low, below the KD for the enzyme substrate–complex, the enzyme is generally provided in excess. In this concentration regime, the reaction can be measured under pre-steady state or single turnover conditions, which allow fundamental kinetic rate constants to be determined in a more straightforward manner than under more conventional steady state conditions. The use of encoded microspheres can allow such quantitative measurements to be made on several targets simultaneously, increasing the throughput of screening assays.
CONCLUSIONS AND PROSPECTS
The increased awareness of flow cytometry as a platform for high resolution in vitro molecular analysis as well as cellular analysis has stimulated a number of new developments in both the technology of flow cytometry as well as its applications.
One area of active research is in the development of novel encoding schemes. For example, semiconductor quantum dots have been employed as an alternative to organic fluorophores for fluorescence-based encoding (79–81). The concept of encoding has been carried beyond fluorescence to encompass Raman-encoded polymer beads (82,83), metallic nanometer rods (84), and light-powered radiofrequency transducers (85). These developments have the potential to lead to more robust encoded microparticles and higher levels of multiplexing than is possible with microspheres encoded with conventional small organic fluorophores.
A logical development in the area of assay design is the integration of cell-based assays and bead-based assays in a single tube. This approach has been used to simultaneously measure activated cells and released cytokines in whole blood (86) and more examples are likely to follow. Further blurring the distinction between cell-based assays and bead-based assays is the notion of using cells as micro-particles for multiplexed analysis (87). In this configuration, fixed bacteria or yeast cells may encode information and display receptors or other molecules, but are not themselves the object of study.
The primary focus of this article has been approaches that employ microparticles as solid supports for molecular analysis, but these methods are related to an expanding set of applications that enable highly multiplexed analysis of particles or cells that are then selected by sorting for analysis. These approaches include yeast (88–90) and bacterial (91,92) display of antibody fragments and other proteins, bead-based display of peptide and other combinatorial chemical libraries (93–95), and microemulsion-based screening of single DNA or protein molecules (96–98). The widespread use of flow cytometry for quantitative cell analysis, for the maturation of microparticle-based multiplexing, and for the development of new molecular screening approaches makes it a key multiuse platform to address the emerging challenges of quantitative biology.
Acknowledgments
Contract grant sponsor: NIH; Contract grant number: EB003824.
Footnotes
Published online 7 April 2006 in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com).
LITERATURE CITED
- 1.Hertweck M, Baumeister R. Automated assays to study longevity in C. elegans. Mech Ageing Dev. 2005;126:139–145. doi: 10.1016/j.mad.2004.09.010. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Rea SL, Wu D, Cypser JR, Vaupel JW, Johnson TE. A stress-sensitive reporter predicts longevity in isogenic populations of Caenorhabditis elegans. Nat Genet. 2005;37:894–898. doi: 10.1038/ng1608. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Keller RA, Ambrose WP, Arias AA, Gai H, Emory SR, Goodwin PM, Jett JH. Analytical applications of single-molecule detection. Anal Chem. 2002;74:316A–324A. doi: 10.1021/ac022035i. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Horan PK, Wheeless LL., Jr Quantitative single cell analysis and sorting. Science. 1977;198:149–157. doi: 10.1126/science.905822. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.McHugh TM, Miner RC, Logan LH, Stites DP. Simultaneous detection of antibodies to cytomegalovirus and herpes simplex virus by using flow cytometry and a microsphere-based fluorescence immunoassay. J Clin Microbiol. 1988;26:1957–1961. doi: 10.1128/jcm.26.10.1957-1961.1988. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Yang G, Garhwal S, Olson JC, Vyas GN. Flow cytometric immunodetection of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 proviral DNA by heminested PCR and digoxigenin-labeled probes. Clin Diagn Lab Immunol. 1994;1:26–31. doi: 10.1128/cdli.1.1.26-31.1994. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Gilbert GE, Drinkwater D, Barter S, Clouse SB. Specificity of phosphatidylserine-containing membrane binding sites for factor VIII. Studies with model membranes supported by glass microspheres (lipospheres) J Biol Chem. 1992;267:15861–15868. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Robinson JP, editor. Current Protocols in Cytometry, Chapter 13: Multiplexed and Microparticle-based Analyses. New York: Wiley; 2005. [Google Scholar]
- 9.Quadroni M, Ducret A, Stocklin R. Quantify this! Report on a round table discussion on quantitative mass spectrometry in proteomics. Proteomics. 2004;4:2211–2215. doi: 10.1002/pmic.200400868. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Gygi SP, Rist B, Gerber SA, Turecek F, Gelb MH, Aebersold R. Quantitative analysis of complex protein mixtures using isotope-coded affinity tags. Nat Biotechnol. 1999;17:994–999. doi: 10.1038/13690. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Nielsen UB, Geierstanger BH. Multiplexed sandwich assays in micro-array format. J Immunol Methods. 2004;290:107–120. doi: 10.1016/j.jim.2004.04.012. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Espina V, Woodhouse EC, Wulfkuhle J, Asmussen HD, Petricoin EF, III, Liotta LA. Protein microarray detection strategies: Focus on direct detection technologies. J Immunol Methods. 2004;290:121–133. doi: 10.1016/j.jim.2004.04.013. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Hamelinck D, Zhou H, Li L, Verweij C, Dillon D, Feng Z, Costa J, Haab BB. Optimized normalization for antibody microarrays and application to serum-protein profiling. Mol Cell Proteomics. 2005;4:773–784. doi: 10.1074/mcp.M400180-MCP200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Kellar KL, Iannone MA. Multiplexed microsphere-based flow cytometric assays. Exp Hematol. 2002;30:1227–1237. doi: 10.1016/s0301-472x(02)00922-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Nolan JP, Sklar LA. Suspension array technology: evolution of the flat-array paradigm. Trends Biotechnol. 2002;20:9–12. doi: 10.1016/s0167-7799(01)01844-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Vignali DA. Multiplexed particle-based flow cytometric assays. J Immunol Methods. 2000;243:243–255. doi: 10.1016/s0022-1759(00)00238-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Nolan JP, Sklar LA. The emergence of flow cytometry for sensitive, real-time measurements of molecular interactions. Nat Biotechnol. 1998;16:633–638. doi: 10.1038/nbt0798-633. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Carson RT, Vignali DA. Simultaneous quantitation of 15 cytokines using a multiplexed flow cytometric assay. J Immunol Methods. 1999;227:41–52. doi: 10.1016/s0022-1759(99)00069-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Fulton RJ, McDade RL, Smith PL, Kienker LJ, Kettman JR., Jr Advanced multiplexed analysis with the FlowMetrix system. Clin Chem. 1997;43:1749–1756. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Kettman JR, Davies T, Chandler D, Oliver KG, Fulton RJ. Classification and properties of 64 multiplexed microsphere sets. Cytometry. 1998;33:234–243. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Oliver KG, Kettman JR, Fulton RJ. Multiplexed analysis of human cytokines by use of the FlowMetrix system. Clin Chem. 1998;44:2057–2060. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Camilla C, Mely L, Magnan A, Casano B, Prato S, Debono S, Montero F, Defoort JP, Martin M, Fert V. Flow cytometric microsphere-based immunoassay: Analysis of secreted cytokines in whole-blood samples from asthmatics. Clin Diagn Lab Immunol. 2001;8:776–784. doi: 10.1128/CDLI.8.4.776-784.2001. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Kellar KL, Kalwar RR, Dubois KA, Crouse D, Chafin WD, Kane BE. Multiplexed fluorescent bead-based immunoassays for quantitation of human cytokines in serum and culture supernatants. Cytometry. 2001;45:27–36. doi: 10.1002/1097-0320(20010901)45:1<27::aid-cyto1141>3.0.co;2-i. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.McHugh TM, Wang YJ, Chong HO, Blackwood LL, Stites DP. Development of a microsphere-based fluorescent immunoassay and its comparison to an enzyme immunoassay for the detection of antibodies to three antigen preparations from Candida albicans. J Immunol Methods. 1989;116:213–219. doi: 10.1016/0022-1759(89)90206-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Scillian JJ, McHugh TM, Busch MP, Tam M, Fulwyler MJ, Chien DY, Vyas GN. Early detection of antibodies against rDNA-produced HIV proteins with a flow cytometric assay. Blood. 1989;73:2041–2048. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Faucher S, Martel A, Sherring A, Ding T, Malloch L, Kim JE, Bergeron M, Sandstrom P, Mandy FF. Protein bead array for the detection of HIV-1 antibodies from fresh plasma and dried-blood-spot specimens. Clin Chem. 2004;50:1250–1253. doi: 10.1373/clinchem.2004.032995. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Moss DM, Montgomery JM, Newland SV, Priest JW, Lammie PJ. Detection of cryptosporidium antibodies in sera and oral fluids using multiplex bead assay. J Parasitol. 2004;90:397–404. doi: 10.1645/GE-3267. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Emeny RT, Wheeler CM, Jansen KU, Hunt WC, Fu TM, Smith JF, MacMullen S, Esser MT, Paliard X. Priming of human papillomavirus type 11-specific humoral and cellular immune responses in college-aged women with a virus-like particle vaccine. J Virol. 2002;76:7832–7842. doi: 10.1128/JVI.76.15.7832-7842.2002. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Opalka D, Lachman CE, MacMullen SA, Jansen KU, Smith JF, Chirmule N, Esser MT. Simultaneous quantitation of antibodies to neutralizing epitopes on virus-like particles for human papillomavirus types 6, 11, 16, and 18 by a multiplexed luminex assay. Clin Diagn Lab Immunol. 2003;10:108–115. doi: 10.1128/CDLI.10.1.108-115.2003. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Eisen MB, Brown PO. DNA arrays for analysis of gene expression. Methods Enzymol. 1999;303:179–205. doi: 10.1016/s0076-6879(99)03014-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Yang L, Tran DK, Wang X. BADGE, Beads Array for the Detection of Gene Expression, a high-throughput diagnostic bioassay. Genome Res. 2001;11:1888–1898. doi: 10.1101/gr.190901. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Fuja T, Hou S, Bryant P. A multiplex microsphere bead assay for comparative RNA expression analysis using flow cytometry. J Biotechnol. 2004;108:193–205. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiotec.2003.11.012. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Wallace J, Zhou Y, Usmani GN, Reardon M, Newburger P, Woda B, Pihan G. BARCODE-ALL: Accelerated and cost-effective genetic risk stratification in acute leukemia using spectrally addressable liquid bead microarrays. Leukemia. 2003;17:1411–1413. doi: 10.1038/sj.leu.2402986. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.Wallace J, Zhou Y, Usmani GN, Reardon M, Newburger P, Woda B, Pihan G. BARCODE-ALL: Accelerated and cost-effective genetic risk stratification in acute leukemia using spectrally addressable liquid bead microarrays. Leukemia. 2003;17:1404–1410. doi: 10.1038/sj.leu.2402985. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35.Lu J, Getz G, Miska EA, Alvarez-Saavedra E, Lamb J, Peck D, Sweet-Cordero A, Ebert BL, Mak RH, Ferrando AA, Downing JR, Jacks T, Horvitz HR, Golub TR. MicroRNA expression profiles classify human cancers. Nature. 2005;435:834–838. doi: 10.1038/nature03702. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Spiro A, Lowe M, Brown D. A bead-based method for multiplexed identification and quantitation of DNA sequences using flow cytometry. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2000;66:4258–4265. doi: 10.1128/aem.66.10.4258-4265.2000. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37.Spiro A, Lowe M. Quantitation of DNA sequences in environmental PCR products by a multiplexed, bead-based method. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2002;68:1010–1013. doi: 10.1128/AEM.68.2.1010-1013.2002. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Lowe M, Spiro A, Zhang YZ, Getts R. Multiplexed, particle-based detection of DNA using flow cytometry with 3DNA dendrimers for signal amplification. Cytometry A. 2004;60:135–144. doi: 10.1002/cyto.a.20021. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39.Cowan LS, Diem L, Brake MC, Crawford JT. Transfer of a Mycobacterium tuberculosis genotyping method, Spoligotyping, from a reverse line-blot hybridization, membrane-based assay to the Luminex multianalyte profiling system. J Clin Microbiol. 2004;42:474–477. doi: 10.1128/JCM.42.1.474-477.2004. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40.Wallace J, Woda BA, Pihan G. Facile, comprehensive, high-throughput genotyping of human genital papillomaviruses using spectrally addressable liquid bead microarrays. J Mol Diagn. 2005;7:72–80. doi: 10.1016/S1525-1578(10)60011-6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41.Armstrong B, Stewart M, Mazumder A. Suspension arrays for high throughput, multiplexed single nucleotide polymorphism genotyping. Cytometry. 2000;40:102–108. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42.Pickering JW, McMillin GA, Gedge F, Hill HR, Lyon E. Flow cytometric assay for genotyping cytochrome p450 2C9 and 2C19: Comparison with a microelectronic DNA array. Am J Pharmacogenomics. 2004;4:199–207. doi: 10.2165/00129785-200404030-00007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43.Zhang A, Pastor L, Nguyen Q, Luo Y, Yang W, Flagella M, Chavli R, Bui S, Nguyen CT, Zheng Z, He W, McMaster G, Witney F. Small interfering RNA and gene expression analysis using a multiplex branched DNA assay without RNA purification. J Biomol Screen. 2005;10:549–556. doi: 10.1177/1087057105277414. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44.Hurley JD, Engle LJ, Davis JT, Welsh AM, Landers JE. A simple, bead-based approach for multi-SNP molecular haplotyping. Nucleic Acids Res. 2004;32:e186. doi: 10.1093/nar/gnh187. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45.Lyamichev V, Mast AL, Hall JG, Prudent JR, Kaiser MW, Takova T, Kwiatkowski RW, Sander TJ, de Arruda M, Arco DA, Neri BP, Brow MA. Polymorphism identification and quantitative detection of genomic DNA by invasive cleavage of oligonucleotide probes. Nat Biotechnol. 1999;17:292–296. doi: 10.1038/7044. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 46.Hall JG, Eis PS, Law SM, Reynaldo LP, Prudent JR, Marshall DJ, Allawi HT, Mast AL, Dahlberg JE, Kwiatkowski RW, de Arruda M, Neri BP, Lyamichev VI. Sensitive detection of DNA polymorphisms by the serial invasive signal amplification reaction. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2000;97:8272–8277. doi: 10.1073/pnas.140225597. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 47.Rao KV, Stevens PW, Hall JG, Lyamichev V, Neri BP, Kelso DM. Genotyping single nucleotide polymorphisms directly from genomic DNA by invasive cleavage reaction on microspheres. Nucleic Acids Res. 2003;31:e66. doi: 10.1093/nar/gng066. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 48.Stevens PW, Rao KV, Hall JG, Lyamichev V, Neri BP, Kelso DM. Improved sensitivity for solid-support invasive cleavage reactions with flow cytometry analysis. Biotechniques. 2003;34:198–203. doi: 10.2144/03341dd09. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 49.Tyagi S, Kramer FR. Molecular beacons: Probes that fluoresce upon hybridization. Nat Biotechnol. 1996;14:303–308. doi: 10.1038/nbt0396-303. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 50.Horejsh D, Martini F, Poccia F, Ippolito G, Di Caro A, Capobianchi MR. A molecular beacon, bead-based assay for the detection of nucleic acids by flow cytometry. Nucleic Acids Res. 2005;33:e13. doi: 10.1093/nar/gni015. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 51.Cai H, White PS, Torney D, Deshpande A, Wang Z, Keller RA, Marrone B, Nolan JP. Flow cytometry-based minisequencing: A new platform for high-throughput single-nucleotide polymorphism scoring. Genomics. 2000;66:135–143. doi: 10.1006/geno.2000.6218. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 52.Chen J, Iannone MA, Li MS, Taylor JD, Rivers P, Nelsen AJ, Slentz-Kesler KA, Roses A, Weiner MP. A microsphere-based assay for multiplexed single nucleotide polymorphism analysis using single base chain extension. Genome Res. 2000;10:549–557. doi: 10.1101/gr.10.4.549. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 53.Iannone MA, Taylor JD, Chen J, Li MS, Rivers P, Slentz-Kesler KA, Weiner MP. Multiplexed single nucleotide polymorphism genotyping by oligonucleotide ligation and flow cytometry. Cytometry. 2000;39:131–140. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 54.D’Yachkov AG, Erdos PL, Macula AJ, Rykov VV, Torney DC, Tung CS, Vilenkin PA, White PS. Exordium for DNA codes. J Combin Optim. 2003;7:369–379. [Google Scholar]
- 55.Gerry NP, Witowski NE, Day J, Hammer RP, Barany G, Barany F. Universal DNA microarray method for multiplex detection of low abundance point mutations. J Mol Biol. 1999;292:251–262. doi: 10.1006/jmbi.1999.3063. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 56.Kaderali L, Deshpande A, Nolan JP, White PS. Primer-design for multiplexed genotyping. Nucleic Acids Res. 2003;31:1796–1802. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkg267. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 57.Ye F, Li MS, Taylor JD, Nguyen Q, Colton HM, Casey WM, Wagner M, Weiner MP, Chen J. Fluorescent microsphere-based readout technology for multiplexed human single nucleotide polymorphism analysis and bacterial identification. Hum Mutat. 2001;17:305–316. doi: 10.1002/humu.28. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 58.Nolan JP, Sklar LA. Suspension array technology: Evolution of the flat-array paradigm. Trends Biotechnol. 2002;20:9–12. doi: 10.1016/s0167-7799(01)01844-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 59.Gilbert GE, Drinkwater D. Specific membrane binding of factor VIII is mediated by O-phospho-L-serine, a moiety of phosphatidylserine. Biochemistry. 1993;32:9577–9585. doi: 10.1021/bi00088a009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 60.Gilbert GE, Arena AA. Phosphatidylethanolamine induces high affinity binding sites for factor VIII on membranes containing phosphatidyl-L-serine. J Biol Chem. 1995;270:18500–18505. doi: 10.1074/jbc.270.31.18500. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 61.Shi J, Gilbert GE. Lactadherin inhibits enzyme complexes of blood coagulation by competing for phospholipid-binding sites. Blood. 2003;101:2628–2636. doi: 10.1182/blood-2002-07-1951. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 62.Shi J, Heegaard CW, Rasmussen JT, Gilbert GE. Lactadherin binds selectively to membranes containing phosphatidyl-L-serine and increased curvature. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2004;1667:82–90. doi: 10.1016/j.bbamem.2004.09.006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 63.Simons PC, Shi M, Foutz T, Cimino DF, Lewis J, Buranda T, Lim WK, Neubig RR, McIntire WE, Garrison J, Prossnitz E, Sklar LA. Ligand-receptor-G-protein molecular assemblies on beads for mechanistic studies and screening by flow cytometry. Mol Pharmacol. 2003;64:1227–1238. doi: 10.1124/mol.64.5.1227. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 64.Sarvazyan NA, Lim WK, Neubig RR. Fluorescence analysis of receptor-G protein interactions in cell membranes. Biochemistry. 2002;41:12858–12867. doi: 10.1021/bi026212l. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 65.Simons PC, Biggs SM, Waller A, Foutz T, Cimino DF, Guo Q, Neubig RR, Tang WJ, Prossnitz ER, Sklar LA. Real-time analysis of ternary complex on particles: Direct evidence for partial agonism at the agonist-receptor-G protein complex assembly step of signal transduction. J Biol Chem. 2004;279:13514–13521. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M310306200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 66.Sarvazyan NA, Remmers AE, Neubig RR. Determinants of gi1alpha and beta gamma binding. Measuring high affinity interactions in a lipid environment using flow cytometry. J Biol Chem. 1998;273:7934–7940. doi: 10.1074/jbc.273.14.7934. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 67.Lan KL, Sarvazyan NA, Taussig R, Mackenzie RG, DiBello PR, Dohlman HG, Neubig RR. A point mutation in Galphao and Galphai1 blocks interaction with regulator of G protein signaling proteins. J Biol Chem. 1998;273:12794–12797. doi: 10.1074/jbc.273.21.12794. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 68.Bennett TA, Key TA, Gurevich VV, Neubig R, Prossnitz ER, Sklar LA. Real-time analysis of G protein-coupled receptor reconstitution in a solubilized system. J Biol Chem. 2001;276:22453–22460. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M009679200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 69.Sklar LA, Vilven J, Lynam E, Neldon D, Bennett TA, Prossnitz E. Solubilization and display of G protein-coupled receptors on beads for real-time fluorescence and flow cytometric analysis. Biotechniques. 2000;28:976–980. 982–985. doi: 10.2144/00285rr03. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 70.Iannone MA, Simmons CA, Kadwell SH, Svoboda DL, Vanderwall DE, Deng SJ, Consler TG, Shearin J, Gray JG, Pearce KH. Correlation between in vitro peptide binding profiles and cellular activities for estrogen receptor-modulating compounds. Mol Endocrinol. 2004;18:1064–1081. doi: 10.1210/me.2003-0432. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 71.Pearce KH, Iannone MA, Simmons CA, Gray JG. Discovery of novel nuclear receptor modulating ligands: An integral role for peptide interaction profiling. Drug Discov Today. 2004;9:741–751. doi: 10.1016/S1359-6446(04)03201-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 72.Hoekstra WJ, Patel HS, Liang X, Blanc JB, Heyer DO, Willson TM, Iannone MA, Kadwell SH, Miller LA, Pearce KH, Simmons CA, Shearin J. Discovery of novel quinoline-based estrogen receptor ligands using peptide interaction profiling. J Med Chem. 2005;48:2243–2247. doi: 10.1021/jm040154f. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 73.St Pierre Y, Desrosiers M, Tremblay P, Esteve PO, Opdenakker G. Flow cytometric analysis of gelatinase B (MMP-9) activity using immobilized fluorescent substrate on microspheres. Cytometry. 1996;25:374–380. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0320(19961201)25:4<374::AID-CYTO9>3.0.CO;2-D. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 74.Shen B, Nolan JP, Sklar LA, Park MS. Essential amino acids for substrate binding and catalysis of human flap endonuclease 1. J Biol Chem. 1996;271:9173–9176. doi: 10.1074/jbc.271.16.9173. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 75.Shen B, Nolan JP, Sklar LA, Park MS. Functional analysis of point mutations in human flap endonuclease-1 active site. Nucleic Acids Res. 1997;25:3332–3338. doi: 10.1093/nar/25.16.3332. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 76.Nolan JP, Shen B, Park MS, Sklar LA. Kinetic analysis of human flap endonuclease-1 by flow cytometry. Biochemistry. 1996;35:11668–11676. doi: 10.1021/bi952840+. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 77.Gary R, Park MS, Nolan JP, Cornelius HL, Kozyreva OG, Tran HT, Lobachev KS, Resnick MA, Gordenin DA. A novel role in DNA metabolism for the binding of Fen1/Rad27 to PCNA and implications for genetic risk. Mol Cell Biol. 1999;19:5373–5382. doi: 10.1128/mcb.19.8.5373. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 78.Frank G, Qiu J, Somsouk M, Weng Y, Somsouk L, Nolan JP, Shen B. Partial functional deficiency of E160D flap endonuclease-1 mutant in vitro and in vivo is due to defective cleavage of DNA substrates. J Biol Chem. 1998;273:33064–33072. doi: 10.1074/jbc.273.49.33064. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 79.Gao X, Nie S. Quantum dot-encoded beads. Methods Mol Biol. 2005;303:61–71. doi: 10.1385/1-59259-901-X:061. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 80.Gao X, Nie S. Quantum dot-encoded mesoporous beads with high brightness and uniformity: Rapid readout using flow cytometry. Anal Chem. 2004;76:2406–2410. doi: 10.1021/ac0354600. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 81.Han M, Gao X, Su JZ, Nie S. Quantum-dot-tagged microbeads for multiplexed optical coding of biomolecules. Nat Biotechnol. 2001;19:631–635. doi: 10.1038/90228. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 82.Fenniri H, Ding LH, Ribbe AE, Zyrianov Y. Barcoded resins: A new concept for polymer-supported combinatorial library self-deconvolution. J Am Chem Soc. 2001;123:8151–8152. doi: 10.1021/ja016375h. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 83.Fenniri H, Chun S, Ding LH, Zyrianov Y, Hallenga K. Preparation, physical properties, on-bead binding assay and spectroscopic reliability of 25 barcoded polystyrene-poly(ethylene glycol) graft copolymers. J Am Chem Soc. 2003;125:10546–10560. doi: 10.1021/ja035665q. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 84.Nicewarner-Pena SR, Freeman RG, Reiss BD, He L, Pena DJ, Walton ID, Cromer R, Keating CD, Natan MJ. Submicrometer metallic barcodes. Science. 2001;294:137–141. doi: 10.1126/science.294.5540.137. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 85.Mandecki W, Pappas MG, Kogan N, Wang ZY, Zamlynny B. Light-powered microtransponders for high multiplex-level analyses of nucleic acids. In: Kordal R, Usmani A, Law WT, editors. Microfabricated Sensors. ACS Symposium Series 815. New York: Oxford University Press; 2002. pp. 57–69. [Google Scholar]
- 86.Rodriguez-Caballero A, Garcia-Montero AC, Bueno C, Almeida J, Varro R, Chen R, Pandiella A, Orfao A. A new simple whole blood flow cytometry-based method for simultaneous identification of activated cells and quantitative evaluation of cytokines released during activation. Lab Invest. 2004;84:1387–1398. doi: 10.1038/labinvest.3700162. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 87.Pataki J, Szabo M, Lantos E, Szekvolgyi L, Molnar M, Hegedus E, Bacso Z, Kappelmayer J, Lustyik G, Szabo G. Biological microbeads for flow-cytometric immunoassays, enzyme titrations, and quantitative PCR. Cytometry A. 2005;68:45–52. doi: 10.1002/cyto.a.20180. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 88.Colby DW, Kellogg BA, Graff CP, Yeung YA, Swers JS, Wittrup KD. Engineering antibody affinity by yeast surface display. Methods Enzymol. 2004;388:348–358. doi: 10.1016/S0076-6879(04)88027-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 89.Feldhaus MJ, Siegel RW, Opresko LK, Coleman JR, Feldhaus JM, Yeung YA, Cochran JR, Heinzelman P, Colby D, Swers J, Graff C, Wiley HS, Wittrup KD. Flow-cytometric isolation of human antibodies from a nonimmune Saccharomyces cerevisiae surface display library. Nat Biotechnol. 2003;21:163–170. doi: 10.1038/nbt785. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 90.Wittrup KD. Protein engineering by cell-surface display. Curr Opin Biotechnol. 2001;12:395–399. doi: 10.1016/s0958-1669(00)00233-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 91.Varadarajan N, Gam J, Olsen MJ, Georgiou G, Iverson BL. Engineering of protease variants exhibiting high catalytic activity and exquisite substrate selectivity. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2005;102:6855–6860. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0500063102. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 92.Bessette PH, Rice JJ, Daugherty PS. Rapid isolation of high-affinity protein binding peptides using bacterial display. Protein Eng Des Sel. 2004;17:731–739. doi: 10.1093/protein/gzh084. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 93.Needels MC, Jones DG, Tate EH, Heinkel GL, Kochersperger LM, Dower WJ, Barrett RW, Gallop MA. Generation and screening of an oligonucleotide-encoded synthetic peptide library. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1993;90:10700–10704. doi: 10.1073/pnas.90.22.10700. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 94.Hwang SH, Lehman A, Cong X, Olmstead MM, Lam KS, Lebrilla CB, Kurth MJ. OBOC small-molecule combinatorial library encoded by halogenated mass-tags. Organic Lett. 2004;6:3829–3832. doi: 10.1021/ol048408e. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 95.Tornoe CW, Sanderson SJ, Mottram JC, Coombs GH, Meldal M. Combinatorial library of peptidotriazoles: Identification of [1,2,3]-triazole inhibitors against a recombinant Leishmania mexicana cysteine protease. J Comb Chem. 2004;6:312–324. doi: 10.1021/cc020085v. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 96.Bernath K, Hai M, Mastrobattista E, Griffiths AD, Magdassi S, Tawfik DS. In vitro compartmentalization by double emulsions: Sorting and gene enrichment by fluorescence activated cell sorting. Anal Biochem. 2004;325:151–157. doi: 10.1016/j.ab.2003.10.005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 97.Sepp A, Tawfik DS, Griffiths AD. Microbead display by in vitro compartmentalisation: Selection for binding using flow cytometry. FEBS Lett. 2002;532:455–458. doi: 10.1016/s0014-5793(02)03740-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 98.Dressman D, Yan H, Traverso G, Kinzler KW, Vogelstein B. Transforming single DNA molecules into fluorescent magnetic particles for detection and enumeration of genetic variations. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2003;100:8817–8822. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1133470100. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]