Experimental comparison shows electrochemical and quantum transport methods differ in sensitivity and specificity for RNA biomarkers, suggesting integrated use for better cancer detection.
Cancer remains a leading cause of death worldwide and early‑stage detection is essential to improve patient outcomes. Recent advances in nanoscale sensing have opened up new pathways for ultrasensitive, label-free detection of nucleic acid biomarkers. In this work, we compare two sensor platforms for a KRAS G12V RNA biomarker: (i) a classical bioelectrochemical sensor that exploits the redox activity of methylene blue modified DNA probes, and (ii) a recently reported quantum transport-based single-molecule sensor that measures conductance changes of individual DNA: RNA hybrids using scanning ‑ tunneling‑microscopy break‑junctions (STM‑BJ). By comparing both approaches, we evaluate their key performance metrics -limit of detection, specificity, and robustness- in biologically relevant complex media. The electrochemical sensor reaches a femtomolar detection limit, but fails to discriminate a single‑base mismatch under the tested conditions. In contrast, the STM-BJ platform delivers attomolar sensitivity and single-base resolution; however, its operation is hindered in complex media, particularly in protein-rich environments. However, this weakness is also shared with the electrochemical approach. Our comparative analysis highlights the complementary strengths of these platforms, suggesting that integrating both could improve point-of-care cancer screening by combining sensitivity, specificity, and robustness in complex samples.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Williams et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: