Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2014 Jun 16.
Published in final edited form as: Nano Today. 2013 Aug 6;8(4):347–387. doi: 10.1016/j.nantod.2013.07.001

Table 1.

Advantages and disadvantages of various CTC isolation/detection technologies.

Device Method Sensitivity Purity Cell viability Recovery Throughput Sample
volume
Advantages Limitations
CellSearch [138144] Immunomagnetic and fluorescence imaging High 0.1–1.4% Fixed for counting and molecular profiling 42–85% ~90 min per detection round 7.5 mL High intra- and inter-assay precision; standardized and semi- automated Unable to detect antigen (−) cancer cells; detection only; expensive facility
MagSweeper [145] Immunomagnetic based 100% 51–100% 94% ~50% 120 min per detection round ~9 mL Simple; easy to handle; fast Require additional antibody functionalized magnetic microbeads
ISET [146] Size based High N/A 85–90%, or fixed for counting and molecular profiling; high retrieval efficiency 80–90% Filtration for 3 min 10 mL Label free; not relying on capture antibodies; simple; fast; satisfies cell lysis, cell Unable to capture small size cancer cells; poor specificity
Cellsievo [147] ~80% (cancer cell lines) N/A 1–2 mL blood per hour 1 mL collection, and molecular profiling
CTChip [148] ~80% (cancer cell lines) N/A 1 mL blood per 25 min 2 mL
Micropore Chip [18] Size, elasticity High N/A N/A ~40–70% ~0.1 mL per hour ~0.1–0.2 mL Not requiring tumor-specific target molecules; label-free Low throughput.
Low specificity
Inertial force [149] Size, weight and shape based 68–90% (cancer cell lines) [150] N/A ~95% [151] N/A ~1 million cells per min N/A Label free; not relying on capture antibody; simple; fast; inexpensive Low specificity
Dielectrophoresis [152] Dielectric property based 1 cancer cell (cancer cell lines) in 1000 mononuclear cells N/A 70–90% 10–92% Handle 30 million cells within 30 min 0.25–4.5 mL Not requiring tumor-specific target molecules; label-free Strict requirements on cell number, ratio, frequency of electric field, and cell type
CTC-Chip [11] Bioaffinity based ~65% ~50% ~98%, allows for reliable molecular analysis ~60% 1–2 mL blood per hour 0.9–5.1 mL Satisfies cell lysis, cell collection, molecular profiling; rapid High cost; unable to capture antigen (−)cancer cells
CTC-iChip [153] N/A >0.1% for posCTC- iChip N/A 77–98% 10 million cells per sec 8 mL May or may not require tumor-specific target molecules Low purity in the case of negCTC-iChip
Microvortex Chip [154] 93% 14% 95% 92% 1–2 mL blood per hour 4 mL Satisfies cell lysis, cell collection, molecular profiling; rapid Unable to detect antigen (−) cancer cells
MicroGEDI Chip [155] 94% 62–74% N/A 80–100% 1 mL blood per hour 1 mL Satisfy cell lysis, cell collection, molecular profiling; rapid Unable to detect antigen (−) cancer cells
Micropillar [156] N/A N/A N/A 71% 1 mL blood per hour 1 mL Satisfies cell lysis, cell collection, molecular profiling; rapid Unable to detect antigen (−) cancer cells
MicroeDAR cytometer [157] 100% 10–50% N/A 93% 3 mL blood per hour 2 mL Satisfies cell lysis, cell collection, molecular profiling; rapid Requires fluorescence labeling; Unable to detect antigen (−) cancer cells
Nanostructured substrates [25,87,92,100] Bioaffinity based or surface structure based 80–95%; normally ~90% N/A 91–95% 94–99% Capture cells within 30 min 0.1–0.5 mL With or without antibody for cell isolation; satisfies cell lysis, cell collection, molecular profiling; rapid The increased sensitivity decreases specificity to a certain degree