Abstract
Identifying and monitoring the presence of cancer metastasis and highlighting inter-and intratumoral heterogeneity is a central tenet of targeted precision oncology medicine (POM). This process of relocation of cancer cells is often referred to as the missing link between a tumor and metastasis. In recent years, microfluidic technologies have been developed to isolate a plethora of different biomarkers, such as circulating tumor cells (CTCs), tumor-derived vesicles (exosomes), or cell/free nucleic acids and proteins directly from patients’ blood samples. With the advent of microfluidic developments, minimally invasive and quantitative assessment of different tumors is becoming a reality. This short review article will touch briefly on how microfluidics at early-stage achievements can be combined or developed with the active vs passive microfluidic technologies, depending on whether they utilize external fields and forces (active) or just microchannel geometry and inherent fluid forces (passive) from the market to precision oncology research and our future prospectives in terms of the emergence of ultralow cost and rapid prototyping of microfluidics in precision oncology.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
Genomic, cellular, and molecular cancer profiling allows the identification of improved and personalized disease diagnostics, monitoring, and treatment for cancer which will be the central idea of personalized cancer medicine. Microfluidic technology has great potential characterized by the micro-nano scale engineered manipulation of fluids and cells [1,2,3,4] and has therefore shown considerable promise as cancer prognostic devices at point-of-care monitoring [5,6,7,8]. Cancer diagnosis relies typically on clinical imaging modalities, genomic and molecular profiling [5, 9,10,11,12,13,14], and often in combination with invasive tumor solid biopsy [15] (“solid biopsy”). However, metastatic organotropism [16] has remained one of the tumor’s greatest mysteries; hence, predicting successful cancer treatment remains difficult, due to its inter-and intra-tumoral heterogeneity [17]. Numerous technologies have been developed in the past decade to tackle the challenge of cancer diagnosis and monitoring [7, 18,19,20]. Among these, microfluidic technology provides a powerful platform for sample processing (e.g., separation, enrichment) platform to study bodily liquids [21, 22] (otherwise known as “liquid biopsy”) which is a less invasive approach and can be taken numerous times directly from patients. The integration of microfluidics and biosensors offers a powerful tool to replace the bulky laboratory instruments that enable more sensitive detection with high-throughput detection at the micrometer scale, including a reduced sample volume and reduced time and costs [23, 24]. There is growing evidence that supports the cellular and molecular profiling [25,26,27,28,29] of cancer cell methodology which is fast becoming the preferred method of tumor grades classification and assessment of therapeutic efficacy. A detailed discussion on cellular and molecular profiling technologies was published in other precedents [9, 13, 21, 25, 26, 30]. In this short review, we focus on the impact of “personalized” solutions that utilize micro-and nanoscale integrated technologies to solve problems in diagnostics in cancer biology. Finally, we will discuss the emergence of ultra-low-cost rapid prototyping microfluidic in precision oncology (Fig. 1).
Search strategy and selection criteria in literature research
The search strategy of this review is based on the most recent research published in major medical and biomedical journals focusing on “Microfluidics,” “circulating tumor cells” (CTCs), and related cancer studies. We used different search strategies: (1) literature databases such as PubMed, (2) customized Google search engines, and (3) targeted market search web links and relevant articles using the terms such as “microfluidics” and “circulating tumor cells.” Our own research on the subject is also included in this review. The literature of the last 10 years was covered, but for more information, our literature search extended beyond the mentioned years (i.e., 2008 to the present). These literature search strategies were used to gather relevant information for this review, and we did not follow any exclusion criteria in the PubMed search.
Microfluidics design based on tumor cell parametrization
Characterizing the cellular, molecular, genetic, and functional heterogeneity of cancer at the single-cell level has become a major limitation for POM. In recent times, single cell-based assays reveal structural heterogeneities, cell function, composition, and genetic information of identical cells. An accurate analysis of biomolecules in cancer cells can help to improve a fundamental understanding of cancer biology at the cellular and molecular levels. But the present knowledge is mostly based on bulk experimental approaches, such as Western blotting or DNA sequencing which are performed in sample volume on a microliter scale. In recent years, microfluidics has emerged as an enabling powerful tool in cellular interactions to cancer diagnosis, and treatment such as multidrug resistance (MDR) modulation and cancer drug discovery due to their inherent miniaturization, low sample volume, integration, and portability. Researchers can take advantage of this scale and its intrinsic physical laws (such as laminar or dean flows), and the large surface area/volume ratio. Its further flexibility allows the relatively low-cost and rapid fabrication of devices with various geometries transforming precision oncology in new and unconventional ways [1, 3, 7, 31,32,33,34].
In addition, circulating tumor cells (CTCs) (Fig. 2) which are known as a liquid biopsy and present in low quantity in a complex blood sample have been confirmed to have a maximum level of heterogeneity in single-cell analysis experiments using live single-cell spectroscopic techniques integrated with microfluidic-based cell enrichments. Hence, cancer profiling at the single-cell level using microfluidics has gained large attraction.
In this context, microfluidics is a suitable tool to analyze complex body fluids (including peripheral blood, urine, stools, cerebrospinal fluid, tears, and saliva) in vitro. Currently, numerous emerging technologies have been demonstrated for the separation of rare cells obtained through liquid biopsy of cancer patients [27,28,29, 35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42] based on their physical and/or immunochemical characteristics. These techniques are based on different principles [35, 43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51] and target distinctive physical properties [52] (e.g., size and/or deformability harder), polarizability, density, and dielectric properties [53] (Tables 1 and 2). Another of the most widely used methods to isolate rare cells is based on the affinity of a specific immunocytochemical antigen (Table 3) expressed on the target cell surface to its corresponding antibody [54,55,56]. In this way, CTCs are trapped on the device surface specifically while most of the undesired billion blood cells are sorted out of extremely rare tumor cells that are found in the blood of cancer patients.
Microfluidics for single-cell analysis cancer diagnosis and monitoring
The single cell is the fundamental component of biological phenomena. The advent of the microfluidic platform promptly introduced high-throughput techniques for isolating single cells by precise control, automation, and low volume from large populations with selectivity and sensitivity. The sensitivity of these microfluidics has become sufficiently large to enable the isolation of rare cells such as CTCs from complex media, cells shed from primary tumors into the whole blood [91]. Numerous tumors can be monitored for prognosis and their efficacy using the single CTCs extracted from circulating blood. Due to heterogeneity in cancer cells, current CTC detection technologies primarily rely on biomarker-intermediated technologies like magnetic beads, microfluidic chips, or size-sensitive microfiltration, which might reduce detection sensitivity [92]. The accurate enumeration and characterization for prognostic, diagnostic, and personalized therapeutic discovery, therefore, require high throughput characterization of CTCs at the microfluidic single-cell level. Recent work has provided high-throughput and label-free alternatives [93,94,95], and a significant number of microfluidic platforms have been developed for single-cell analysis based on polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) [96, 97], glass [98], and paper [99,100,101] microfluidic platforms. Numerous geometries have been explored to isolate single cells, such as microwells, microvalves, and U-shaped micro dams [102,103,104,105]. Other active methods such as DEP [106, 107] have also been developed to isolate single cells on different microfluidic platforms.
Commercialized microfluidics technologies
The growing incidences of chronic diseases such as cancer have raised the need for effective early monitoring tools for the application of precision medicine in oncology. In the past, numerous technologies have been developed to tackle the challenge of capturing CTCs. Microfluidic technologies offer the tantalizing possibility of providing cost-effective rapid diagnostic results in a non-laboratory setup. The global microfluidics market is expected to reach 111.95 USD billion by 2023 (https://www.360marketupdates.com/global-microfluidics-market-12883671; Accessed on 16th June 2023). Commercialized microfluidics for CTC isolation and analysis is summarized in Table 4. Due to the unique nature of CTCs, microfluidics in precision oncology should be designed in a tubing-like manner. Avoiding CTC loss and complex programming to meet the needs of various users are the main factors to consider in designing automated microfluidic for personalized oncology in medicine. For example, Daktari Diagnostics Inc. has utilized microfluidic technology to integrate sample preparation and SERS detection.
However, this enabling technology has had a relatively limited number of consumer products and limited clinical acceptance for commercialization because of performance issues. Furthermore, existing commercial products have not been widely accepted due to their expensive equipment (∼600,000 USD) [108], expensive consumables such as antibodies to capture the CTCs in the patient’s blood, long detection time for each sample, complicated CTC enrichment step, very low purity of the captured CTCs (< 0.5%), because it cannot be used for phenotype identification and molecular analysis, and moreover, high false positive and false negative results, and none of the devices is standalone systems. Furthermore, using polymeric materials such as PDMS, the developed technologies are not suitable for scaling due to their cost. In addition, errors in the fabrication process and costs remain high.
Microfluidic devices for analysis of solid tumor biopsies
Traditional approaches, which require huge amounts of samples and reagents for each assay, are hampering the growth of “personalized medicine,” where an increasing amount of biomarkers should be examined on the individual patient sample. Diagnosing solid tumor markers in sera at a low cost and with good accuracy and specificity has been a significant problem [141]. Many studies have been performed using microfluidic technology to build biosensors that are sensitive and perform rapid analysis of biomarkers of cancer like CTCs, DNA, proteins, miRNA, and exosomes [142]. Early detection of ovarian cancer (OC) and breast cancer (BC) can dramatically improve patient survival [143]. Microfabricated microfluidic–based biosensing devices continue to make significant strides in the precise and rapid detection of solid tumor biomarkers alongside aptamer (Ap)-dependent sensors. The Ap-based microfluidics utilizes Aps as targeting ligands and offers a novel method for the identification of single cells and in-depth studies [144]. Additionally, the combination of various SELEX (systematic evolution of ligands by exponential enrichment) as well as microfluidic approaches might enhance the screening of Aps against tumor markers and cancer cells while also offering on-chip SELEX methods for the automatic identification of strong-affinity Aps [145]. Hung et al. introduced a microfluidic method to study numerous OC cell lines and effective cell-SELEX to identify specific Aps that target OC cells [146]. They were able to identify 13 Aps that were active in the case of OC cells; 3 of them had a higher affinity for OC cells. The developed on-chip cell-SELEX system has a lot of potential for successful screening. They also highlighted the system’s potential applicability in the individualized selection of Aps and the establishment of advantageous Aps-based diagnostic biosensors [146]. Similarly, Tsai et al. used the clinical tissue SELEX technique to design a microfluidic system with rapid and pre-programmed Aps screening. This study created tissue SELEX using an ssDNA library unique to the membrane of cancerous cells [145, 147]. HER2 amplification is found in 14–20% of patients with breast cancer, and consequent overexpression in breast cancer is related to an additional aggressive medical course [148]. Pretreatments like histological diagnosis, core needle biopsies, HER2 status, and hormone receptors are all used in the early diagnosis and risk classification of breast cancer. A qPCR is a reliable option for HER2 evaluation methods in breast malignancies [148, 149]. Quake et al. created an RT-PCR using a microfluidic approach as droplet microfluidics that offers sensitivity to a single cell [150]. Later, the magnetic tweezer technique was used that facilitated the purification of mRNA from a raw sample to the world of droplet microfluidics. It includes a thermocycler that performs RT and pre-amplification cycles of PCR in droplets. This entire technique was set up as a succession of enclosed globules consisting of all necessary samples and reagents [151, 152]. Pekin et al. made an approach performing PCR in several millions of droplets in picolitre using a droplet-based microfluidic device. They described the development and validation of a digital PCR-based method with high sensitivity for screening of mutations in the KRAS oncogene in wild-type DNA sequences [153, 154]. DNA molecules with single target partitioned in droplets using validated clinical fluorescence-based TaqMan probes, particularly for mutated and wild-type KRAS [155], measured the ratio of mutant to wild-type DNA with the microfluidic system [153]. The following review [156,157,158,159] provides an overview of recent advances in the selection, isolation, and detection of biopsy markers for various solid tumors.
Microfluidic devices for analysis of tumor-derived exosomes
Exosomes are a type of extracellular vesicle that is released by diverse cells and detected in various physiological fluids. Exosomes, which indicate the state and source of the cell from where they are produced, have been used as markers to detect and evaluate therapeutic efficacy in a variety of disorders. There are many exosome isolation strategies based on microfluidics. Exosome separation based on physical features such as density and size or biomarker properties through antibody and antigen interactions is now the focus of microfluidic-based isolation approaches [160]. By altering the tumor microenvironment, exosomes have been demonstrated to have a role in cancer development, including tumor formation, proliferation, metastasis, and medication resistance. With microfluidic devices, it is now possible to manipulate individual components as well as incorporate complex compounds into the metastatic microenvironment for therapeutic target discovery and drug effect screening [20].
Compared to other methods such as ultracentrifugation, ultrafiltration, size exclusion chromatography (SEC), precipitation, and immunoaffinity-based capture for exosome isolation, microfluidic strategies offer efficient, rapid, high recovery and purity, and integrated isolation of exosomes from a small volume of samples. Because of these advantages, numerous microfluidic strategies for exosome isolation have been proposed, including antibody-based sensing, trapping-based isolation, magnetic isolation, acoustic isolation, and electroactive isolation. Protein and nucleic acid biomarkers from tumor-derived exosomes by microfluidic strategies are reviewed elsewhere [161].
Exosomal mRNAs and long non-coding RNAs in blood samples might be employed as biomarkers for colon and rectal cancer diagnosis, according to Dong et al. Furthermore, it was found that exosomes are a promising tool for cancer diagnostics since they contain considerably more RNA than apoptotic bodies and microvesicles [162]. When compared to traditional separation techniques, microfluidic devices can extract exosomes in a variety of samples with excellent selectivities and yields while reducing processing time, cost, and sample consumption [163]. Wu et al. used an acoustofluidic device (a mix of microfluidics and acoustics) to isolate an exosome sample from undiluted whole blood with high purity and yield. Fabricating microfluidic devices based on single exosome separation and analysis might be a significant tool for the diagnosis of cancer [164]. Zhang et al., on the other hand, created an integrated microfluidic device that used a layer of graphene oxide/polydopamine (GO-PDA) coating to achieve ultrasensitive exosome detection in plasma samples [165]. Exosomes have shown promise as individualized targeted medication delivery vehicles in addition to functioning as a source of biomarkers. Exosomes may be loaded with chemotherapeutic medicines like methotrexate to reduce tumor development in mouse cancer models, while paclitaxel loaded on macrophage-derived exosomes exhibited great anticancer activity in a murine model of pulmonary metastases [166, 167]. Using magnetic nanoparticles linked to the CD63 antibody, Fang et al. developed a lab-on-chip platform for identifying breast cancer-derived exosomes in patient plasma [168]. Plasma from breast cancer patients has been shown to contain more EpCAM-positive exosomes than plasma from healthy controls. Most lab-on-chip techniques use EpCAM to find CTCs. The EpCAM-based approach may be more accurate due to their variability and rarity in circulation [169]. In-depth analysis of microfluidic-assisted analysis of exosome-based liquid biopsy was reviewed in [161, 170].
Future perspectives
In this short review, we have introduced some recent microfluidic techniques for precision cancer medicine. Despite the many promising work already completed, microfluidic modules for personalized cancer medicine, paradigm translational shifts are still needed, and these translational steps will also be fuelled by new methodologies and applications. One of the main obstacles is the use of soft lithography which require access to cleanroom fabrication techniques that are costly and time-consuming. The original technique was “borrowed” from the MEMS community. The earliest work of microfluidic performed using soft lithography [171, 172] can be traced back to the Whiteside group [173, 174]. The term “soft lithography” was first introduced back then, referring to a technique based on printing and replica molding using elastomeric soft materials and photomasks with the patterns of interest. The processes of soft lithography are well documented and therefore will not be elaborated on in this article [175,176,177,178,179,180,181].
Until recently, PDMS is a popular choice among researchers [182, 183] due to its biocompatibility, transparency (for optical detection), and low cost [184, 185]. The PDMS-based chip, however, is not the best choice for mass production due to issues in upscaling such as cost- and time-consuming in chip production in comparison to other non-lithographic methods (e.g., injection molding, embossing) [152] (Table 5).
Other non-lithographic methods were seen as more viable techniques for large-scale production, increasing the interest of the industrial and research community to develop simple, rapid, and low-cost microfluidic structures. The emergence of bench-top-sized equipment such as a 3D printer, laser ablation [186, 187], and milling system (Table 6) has since become the breeding ground for a new phenomenon for ultra-low-cost, rapid prototyping of microfluidic in a non-lithographic manner (Table 7). We argue that technological democratization has enabled a wide range of users from professional researchers to hobbyists whose wish is to embark on the same journey. Despite the exciting technological progress, there are some limitations due to the number of analytes in a single cell being very limited, and most current platforms for single-cell analysis focus on the detection of very limited biomolecules (DNA or RNA or proteins). However, exploring uncharted cancer biology will require integrating multiple characterization techniques for post-capture analysis of multiple analytes.
Microfluidic systems with simple steps for sample preparation (e.g., enrichment, isolation) have always been envisioned as a lab-on-a-chip. However, they are still always used in conjunction with large detection systems such as light/fluorescence microscopy. Moving forward, integrating microfluidic systems [188,189,190] with spectroscopic-based platforms (e.g., micro NMR [41, 191,192,193], SERS [194, 195], or electrochemical-based [196, 197] platform) is critical for its use as a point of care system. But we envision the integration of analysis in the same microfluidic device rather than doing off-chip analysis. The spectroscopic analysis allows deep phenotyping preferably in a label-free format of cell/tissue where acquiring information rapidly is vital in disease monitoring [198,199,200]. This will be covered in our upcoming reviews.
In conclusion, it is hoped that this short review will stimulate further developments in new microfluidics for precision oncology medicine and highlight some directions for clinical validation. Thus far, only CellSearch and a few other microfluidic systems have made the transition as a technology from exploratory to clinical decision-making status, and only for a few types of “War on Cancer.” The newer microfluidic devices still face the challenges of development as accredited technologies for decision-making. At present, practical and marketable devices are needed rather than technical novelty. Although the nascent field of microfluidics for cancer cells/biomarkers is exciting and promising, there are gaps in our current knowledge of cancer pathogenesis that need to be filled alongside overcoming technical challenges to guide future advances. Multidisciplinary teams of bioengineers, biologists, and clinicians should work together in a strategic and integrated manner to find answers to, but not limited to, the following. For which cancer that is early in its growth or precancerous stage with lethal potential are the biology and pathogenesis sufficiently understood to advance the development of sensors?
How can machine learning and mathematical models support the identification of key features within complex biological datasets to achieve the predictive power for cancer biomarkers? How individualized/personalized medicine will benefit from early diagnosis? How can patient and tumor heterogeneity be overcome to ensure a more precise cancer diagnosis?
Like any new initiative, precision medicine faces many challenges. The large amounts of data that must be collected and analyzed not only represent an economic burden but also are labor-intensive and costly for technical know-how. Capacity building needs to happen at breakneck speed, especially with regard to the training of health workers and the availability of high-quality artificial intelligence, machine learning, and laboratory equipment. The search for precision-based treatments may put the health of the population at risk. However, microfluidic technology can enable advanced cell culture when intrinsic control over the patient’s microenvironment is crucial, in ways that are not possible with traditional methods. POC devices and personalized medicine will make medical decisions and outcomes more timely and relevant to each patient, which will impact the choice of medical interventions and pharmacological therapies.
References
Sackmann EK, Fulton AL, Beebe DJ. The present and future role of microfluidics in biomedical research. Nat. 2014a;507(7491):181–9.
Soitu C, Feuerborn A, Tan AN, Walker H, Walsh PA, Castrejón-Pita AA, et al. Microfluidic chambers using fluid walls for cell biology. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2018;115(26):E5926–E33.
Zhong Q, Ding H, Gao B, He Z, Gu Z. Advances of microfluidics in biomedical engineering. Adv Mater Technol. 2019;4(6):1800663.
Webster A, Greenman J, Haswell SJ. Development of microfluidic devices for biomedical and clinical application. J Chem Technol Biotechnol. 2011;86(1):10–7.
Chang K, Creighton CJ, Davis C, Donehower L, Drummond J, Wheeler D, et al. The cancer genome atlas pan-cancer analysis project. Nat Genet. 2013;45(10):1113–20.
Hayes B, Murphy C, Crawley A, O'Kennedy R. Developments in point-of-care diagnostic technology for cancer detection. Diagnostics. 2018;8(2):39.
Kulasinghe A, Wu H, Punyadeera C, Warkiani ME. The use of microfluidic technology for cancer applications and liquid biopsy. Micromachines. 2018a;9(8):397.
Vaidyanathan R, Soon RH, Zhang P, Jiang K, Lim CT. Cancer diagnosis: from tumor to liquid biopsy and beyond. Lab Chip. 2019;19(1):11–34.
Chen F, Zhang Y, Varambally S, Creighton CJ. Molecular correlates of metastasis by systematic pan-cancer analysis across the cancer genome atlas. Mol Cancer Res. 2019;17(2):476–87.
Hamburg MA, Collins FS. The path to personalized medicine. N Engl J Med. 2010;363(4):301–4.
Konecny G. The path to personalized medicine in women cancers: challenges and recent advances. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2014;27:45–7.
Meyer JM, Ginsburg GS. The path to personalized medicine. Curr Opin Chem Biol. 2002;6(4):434–8.
Roth SM. Functional genomics and the path to personalized medicine. Exerc Sport Sci Rev. 2008;36(2):49–50.
Tremblay J, Hamet P. Role of genomics on the path to personalized medicine. Metab Clin Exp. 2013;62(Suppl 1):S2–5.
Hussain T, Nguyen QT. Molecular imaging for cancer diagnosis and surgery. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2014;66:90–100.
Seyfried TN, Huysentruyt LC. On the origin of cancer metastasis. Crit Rev Oncog. 2013;18(1-2):43–73.
Lee J-K, Wang J, Sa JK, Ladewig E, Lee H-O, Lee I-H, et al. Spatiotemporal genomic architecture informs precision oncology in glioblastoma. Nat Genet. 2017;49(4):594–9.
Huang X, Tang J, Hu L, Bian R, Liu M, Cao W, et al. Arrayed microfluidic chip for detection of circulating tumor cells and evaluation of drug potency. Anal Biochem. 2019;564:64–71.
Kühlbach C, da Luz S, Baganz F, Hass VC, Mueller MM. A Microfluidic system for the investigation of tumor cell extravasation. Bioeng. 2018;5(2):40.
Ma Y-HV, Middleton K, You L, Sun Y. A review of microfluidic approaches for investigating cancer extravasation during metastasis. Microsyst Nanoeng. 2018a;4(1):17104.
Bellosillo B, Montagut C. High-accuracy liquid biopsies. Nat Med. 2019;25(12):1820–1.
Mattox AK, Bettegowda C, Zhou S. Applications of liquid biopsies for cancer. Sci Transl Med. 2019;11:507.
Ayuso JM, Virumbrales-Muñoz M, Lang JM, Beebe DJ. A role for microfluidic systems in precision medicine. Nat Commun. 2022;13(1):3086.
Xie Y, Xu X, Wang J, Lin J, Ren Y, Wu A. Latest advances and perspectives of liquid biopsy for cancer diagnostics driven by microfluidic on-chip assays. Lab Chip. 2023;23:2922–41.
Campos CDM, Jackson JM, Witek MA, Soper SA. Molecular profiling of liquid biopsy samples for precision medicine. Cancer J. 2018;24(2):93–103.
Liotta L, Petricoin E. Molecular profiling of human cancer. Nat Rev Genet. 2000;1(1):48–56.
Leslie M. Advancing cancer screening with liquid biopsies. Cancer Discov. 2018;8(3):256.
Barlebo Ahlborn L, Østrup O. Toward liquid biopsies in cancer treatment: application of circulating tumor DNA. APMIS: acta pathologica, microbiologica, et immunologica Scandinavica. 2019;127(5):329–36.
Campos-Fernández E, Barcelos LS, de Souza AG, Goulart LR, Alonso-Goulart V. Research landscape of liquid biopsies in prostate cancer. Am J Cancer Res. 2019;9(7):1309–28.
Nolan J, Pearce OMT, Screen HRC, Knight MM, Verbruggen SW. Organ-on-a-chip and microfluidic platforms for oncology in the UK. Cancers. 2023;15(3):635.
Sun Y, Haglund TA, Rogers AJ, Ghanim AF, Sethu P. Review: microfluidics technologies for blood-based cancer liquid biopsies. Anal Chim Acta. 2018a;1012:10–29.
Iliescu FS, Poenar DP, Yu F. Recent advances in microfluidic methods in cancer liquid biopsy. Biomicrofluidics. 2019a;13(4):041503.
Casavant BP, Mosher R, Warrick JW, Maccoux LJ, Berry SMF, Becker JT, et al. A negative selection methodology using a microfluidic platform for the isolation and enumeration of circulating tumor cells. Methods. 2013;64(2):137–43.
Lee Y, Guan G, Bhagat AA. ClearCell® FX, a label-free microfluidics technology for enrichment of viable circulating tumor cells. Cytometry Part A. 2018;93(12):1251–4.
Cheng X, Zhang L, Chen Y, Qing C. Circulating cell-free DNA and circulating tumor cells, the “liquid biopsies” in ovarian cancer. J Ovarian Res. 2017;10(1):1–10.
Ghazani AA, McDermott S, Pectasides M, Sebas M, Mino-Kenudson M, Lee H, et al. Comparison of select cancer biomarkers in human circulating and bulk tumor cells using magnetic nanoparticles and a miniaturized micro-NMR system. Nanomed. 2013;9(7):1009–17.
Heitzer E, Perakis S, Geigl JB, Speicher MR. The potential of liquid biopsies for the early detection of cancer. NPJ Precis Oncol. 2017;1(1):1–9.
Lim SB, Di Lee W, Vasudevan J, Lim W-T, Lim CT. Liquid biopsy: one cell at a time. NPJ Precis Oncol. 2019;3(1):1–9.
Mari R, Mamessier E, Lambaudie E, Provansal M, Birnbaum D, Bertucci F, et al. Liquid biopsies for ovarian carcinoma: how blood tests may improve the clinical management of a deadly disease. Cancers. 2019;11(6):774.
O'Shannessy DJ, Davis DW, Anderes K, Somers EB. Isolation of circulating tumor cells from multiple epithelial cancers with ApoStream® for detecting (or monitoring) the expression of folate receptor alpha. Biomark Insights. 2016;11:BMI. S35075.
Yu X, Wang B, Zhang N, Yin C, Chen H, Zhang L, et al. Capture and release of cancer cells by combining on-chip purification and off-chip enzymatic treatment. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. 2015;7(43):24001–7.
Zhu J, Strickler JH. Clinical applications of liquid biopsies in gastrointestinal oncology. J Gastrointest Oncol. 2016;7(5):675.
Bankó P, Lee SY, Nagygyörgy V, Zrínyi M, Chae CH, Cho DH, et al. Technologies for circulating tumor cell separation from whole blood. J Hematol Oncol. 2019;12(1):1–20.
Chen F, Wang S, Fang Y, Zheng L, Zhi X, Cheng B, et al. Feasibility of a novel one-stop ISET device to capture CTCs and its clinical application. Oncotarget. 2017;8(2):3029.
Chen W, Allen SG, Reka AK, Qian W, Han S, Zhao J, et al. Nanoroughened adhesion-based capture of circulating tumor cells with heterogeneous expression and metastatic characteristics. BMC Cancer. 2016;16(1):1–12.
Fan X, Jia C, Yang J, Li G, Mao H, Jin Q, et al. A microfluidic chip integrated with a high-density PDMS-based microfiltration membrane for rapid isolation and detection of circulating tumor cells. Biosens Bioelectron. 2015;71:380–6.
Gascoyne PR, Noshari J, Anderson TJ, Becker FF. Isolation of rare cells from cell mixtures by dielectrophoresis. Electrophor. 2009;30(8):1388–98.
Khetani S, Mohammadi M, Nezhad AS. Filter-based isolation, enrichment, and characterization of circulating tumor cells. Biotechnol Bioeng. 2018;115(10):2504–29.
Shim S, Stemke-Hale K, Noshari J, Becker FF, Gascoyne PR. Dielectrophoresis has broad applicability to marker-free isolation of tumor cells from blood by microfluidic systems. Biomicrofluidics. 2013;7(1):011808.
Theil G, Fischer K, Weber E, Medek R, Hoda R, Lücke K, et al. The use of a new cellcollector to isolate circulating tumor cells from the blood of patients with different stages of prostate cancer and clinical outcomes-a proof-of-concept study. PLoS One. 2016;11(8):e0158354.
Todenhöfer T, Park ES, Duffy S, Deng X, Jin C, Abdi H, et al. Microfluidic enrichment of circulating tumor cells in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer. In: Urologic Oncology: Seminars and Original Investigations, vol. 34. Elsevier; 2016. p. 483-e9.
Hao S-J, Wan Y, Xia Y-Q, Zou X, Zheng S-Y. Size-based separation methods of circulating tumor cells. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2018;125:3–20.
Low WS, Wan Abas WAB. Benchtop technologies for circulating tumor cells separation based on biophysical properties. Biomed Res Int. 2015;2015:1–22.
Leone K, Poggiana C, Zamarchi R. The interplay between circulating tumor cells and the immune system: from immune escape to cancer immunotherapy. Diagnostics. 2018;8(3):59.
Murlidhar V, Rivera-Báez L, Nagrath S. Affinity versus label-free isolation of circulating tumor cells: who wins? Small. 2016;12(33):4450–63.
Sharma S, Zhuang R, Long M, Pavlovic M, Kang Y, Ilyas A, et al. Circulating tumor cell isolation, culture, and downstream molecular analysis. Biotechnol Adv. 2018;36(4):1063–78.
Masuda T, Niimi M, Nakanishi H, Yamanishi Y, Arai F. Cancer cell separator using size-dependent filtration in microfluidic chip. Sens Actuators B: Chem. 2013;185:245–51.
Huang T, Jia C-P, Sun W-J, Wang W-T, Zhang H-L, Cong H, et al. Highly sensitive enumeration of circulating tumor cells in lung cancer patients using a size-based filtration microfluidic chip. Biosens Bioelectron. 2014;51:213–8.
Lin E, Rivera-Báez L, Fouladdel S, Yoon HJ, Guthrie S, Wieger J, et al. High-throughput microfluidic labyrinth for the label-free isolation of circulating tumor cells. Cell Syst. 2017;5(3):295–304. e4.
Aghaamoo M, Aghilinejad A, Chen X, Xu J. On the design of deterministic dielectrophoresis for continuous separation of circulating tumor cells from peripheral blood cells. Electrophor. 2019;40(10):1486–93.
Gascoyne PR, Shim S. Isolation of circulating tumor cells by dielectrophoresis. Cancers. 2014;6(1):545–79.
Lee G-B, Wu H-C, Yang P-F, Mai JD. Optically induced dielectropheresis sorting with automated medium exchange in an integrated optofluidic device resulting in higher cell viability. Lab Chip. 2014;14(15):2837–43.
van der Toom EE, Verdone JE, Gorin MA, Pienta KJ. Technical challenges in the isolation and analysis of circulating tumor cells. Oncotarget. 2016;7(38):62754.
Shim S, Gascoyne P, Noshari J, Stemke HK. Dynamic physical properties of dissociated tumor cells revealed by dielectrophoretic field-flow fractionation. Integr Biol. 2011;3(8):850–62.
Gupta V, Jafferji I, Garza M, Melnikova VO, Hasegawa DK, Pethig R, et al. ApoStream™, a new dielectrophoretic device for antibody independent isolation and recovery of viable cancer cells from blood. Biomicrofluidics. 2012a;6(2):024133.
Tellez-Gabriel M, Cochonneau D, Cadé M, Jubelin C, Heymann M-F, Heymann D. Circulating tumor cell-derived pre-clinical models for personalized medicine. Cancers. 2018;11(1):19.
Farace F, Massard C, Vimond N, Drusch F, Jacques N, Billiot F, et al. A direct comparison of CellSearch and ISET for circulating tumour-cell detection in patients with metastatic carcinomas. Br J Cancer. 2011;105(6):847–53.
Dizdar L, Fluegen G, van Dalum G, Honisch E, Neves RP, Niederacher D, et al. Detection of circulating tumor cells in colorectal cancer patients using the GILUPI CellCollector: results from a prospective, single-center study. Mol Oncol. 2019;13(7):1548–58.
Shashni B, Ariyasu S, Takeda R, Suzuki T, Shiina S, Akimoto K, et al. Size-based differentiation of cancer and normal cells by a particle size analyzer assisted by a cell-recognition PC software. Biol Pharm Bull. 2018;41(4):487–503.
Manukyan G, Mikulkova Z, Turcsanyi P, Savara J, Trajerová M, Kubova Z, et al. Towards a better characterisation of leukemic cells in chronic lymphocytic leukaemia: cell-size heterogeneity reflects their activation status and migratory abilities. Cancers. 2021;13(19):4922.
Nakamura M, Ono D, Sugita S. Mechanophenotyping of B16 melanoma cell variants for the assessment of the efficacy of (-)-epigallocatechin gallate treatment using a tapered microfluidic device. Micromachines. 2019;10(3):207.
Lange JR, Steinwachs J, Kolb T, Lautscham LA, Harder I, Whyte G, et al. Microconstriction arrays for high-throughput quantitative measurements of cell mechanical properties. Biophys J. 2015;109(1):26–34.
Nath B, Raza A, Sethi V, Dalal A, Ghosh SS, Biswas G. Understanding flow dynamics, viability and metastatic potency of cervical cancer (HeLa) cells through constricted microchannel. Sci Rep. 2018;8(1):17357.
Jiang RD, Shen H, Piao YJ. The morphometrical analysis on the ultrastructure of A549 cells. Rom J Morphol Embryol. 2010;51(4):663–7.
Sato Y, Fu Y, Liu H, Lee MY, Shaw MH. Tumor-immune profiling of CT-26 and Colon 26 syngeneic mouse models reveals mechanism of anti-PD-1 response. BMC Cancer. 2021;21(1):1222.
Fumarola C, La Monica S, Alfieri RR, Borra E, Guidotti GG. Cell size reduction induced by inhibition of the mTOR/S6K-signaling pathway protects Jurkat cells from apoptosis. Cell Death Differ. 2005;12(10):1344–57.
Lin HP, Chang JY, Lin SR, Lee MH, Huang SS, Hsu LJ, et al. Identification of an in vivo MEK/WOX1 complex as a master switch for apoptosis in T cell leukemia. Genes Cancer. 2011;2(5):550–62.
Wojtowicz W, Wróbel A, Pyziak K, Tarkowski R, Balcerzak A, Bębenek M, et al. Evaluation of MDA-MB-468 cell culture media analysis in predicting triple-negative breast cancer patient sera metabolic profiles. Metab. 2020;10(5):173.
Manrique N. Modulation of apoptosis in breast cancer cells MDA-MB-157, 93A and 93B by aqueous extract of Chinese medical herb Scutellaria barbata. In: Honors Theses. Andrews University; 2021. p. 253.
Huot JR, Pin F, Essex AL, Bonetto A. MC38 tumors induce musculoskeletal defects in colorectal cancer. Int J Mol Sci. 2021;22(3):1486.
Nagrath S, Sequist LV, Maheswaran S, Bell DW, Irimia D, Ulkus L, et al. Isolation of rare circulating tumour cells in cancer patients by microchip technology. Nat. 2007;450(7173):1235–9.
Jan YJ, Chen J-F, Zhu Y, Lu Y-T, Chen SH, Chung H, et al. NanoVelcro rare-cell assays for detection and characterization of circulating tumor cells. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2018;125:78–93.
Sheng W, Ogunwobi OO, Chen T, Zhang J, George TJ, Liu C, et al. Capture, release and culture of circulating tumor cells from pancreatic cancer patients using an enhanced mixing chip. Lab Chip. 2014;14(1):89–98.
Gao W, Huang T, Yuan H, Yang J, Jin Q, Jia C, et al. Highly sensitive detection and mutational analysis of lung cancer circulating tumor cells using integrated combined immunomagnetic beads with a droplet digital PCR chip. Talanta. 2018;185:229–36.
Hyun K-A, Koo G-B, Han H, Sohn J, Choi W, Kim S-I, et al. Epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition leads to loss of EpCAM and different physical properties in circulating tumor cells from metastatic breast cancer. Oncotarget. 2016;7(17):24677.
Gribko A, Künzel J, Wünsch D, Lu Q, Nagel SM, Knauer SK, et al. Is small smarter? Nanomaterial-based detection and elimination of circulating tumor cells: current knowledge and perspectives. Int J Nanomedicine. 2019;14:4187.
Yoon HJ, Shanker A, Wang Y, Kozminsky M, Jin Q, Palanisamy N, et al. Tunable thermal-sensitive polymer–graphene oxide composite for efficient capture and release of viable circulating tumor cells. Adv Mater. 2016;28(24):4891–7.
Che J, Yu V, Dhar M, Renier C, Matsumoto M, Heirich K, et al. Classification of large circulating tumor cells isolated with ultra-high throughput microfluidic Vortex technology. Oncotarget. 2016;7(11):12748.
Su W, Yu H, Jiang L, Chen W, Li H, Qin J. Integrated microfluidic device for enrichment and identification of circulating tumor cells from the blood of patients with colorectal cancer. Dis Markers. 2019;2019:1–9.
Yoon HJ, Kim TH, Zhang Z, Azizi E, Pham TM, Paoletti C, et al. Sensitive capture of circulating tumour cells by functionalized graphene oxide nanosheets. Nat Nanotechnol. 2013;8(10):735–41.
Macaraniag C, Luan Q, Zhou J, Papautsky I. Microfluidic techniques for isolation, formation, and characterization of circulating tumor cells and clusters. APL Bioeng. 2022;6(3):031501.
Deng Z, Wu S, Wang Y, Shi D. Circulating tumor cell isolation for cancer diagnosis and prognosis. EBioMedicine. 2022;83:104237.
Murlidhar V, Zeinali M, Grabauskiene S, Ghannad-Rezaie M, Wicha MS, Simeone DM, et al. A radial flow microfluidic device for ultra-high-throughput affinity-based isolation of circulating tumor cells. Small. 2014;10(23):4895–904.
Sarioglu AF, Aceto N, Kojic N, Donaldson MC, Zeinali M, Hamza B, et al. A microfluidic device for label-free, physical capture of circulating tumor cell clusters. Nat Methods. 2015;12(7):685–91.
Huang S-B, Wu M-H, Lin Y-H, Hsieh C-H, Yang C-L, Lin H-C, et al. High-purity and label-free isolation of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) in a microfluidic platform by using optically-induced-dielectrophoretic (ODEP) force. Lab Chip. 2013;13(7):1371–83.
Dou M, García JM, Zhan S, Li X. Interfacial nano-biosensing in microfluidic droplets for high-sensitivity detection of low-solubility molecules. Chem Commun. 2016;52(17):3470–3.
Li L, Li Y, Shao Z, Luo G, Ding M, Liang Q. Simultaneous assay of oxygen-dependent cytotoxicity and genotoxicity of anticancer drugs on an integrated microchip. Anal Chem. 2018;90(20):11899–907.
Yun C-K, Hwang JW, Kwak TJ, Chang W-J, Ha S, Han K, et al. Nanoinjection system for precise direct delivery of biomolecules into single cells. Lab Chip. 2019;19(4):580–8.
Nilghaz A, Lu X. Detection of antibiotic residues in pork using paper-based microfluidic device coupled with filtration and concentration. Anal Chim Acta. 2019;1046:163–9.
Ma L, Qiao Y, Jones R, Singh N, Su M. Single cell HaloChip assay on paper for point-of-care diagnosis. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2016;408(27):7753–9.
Thuo MM, Martinez RV, Lan W-J, Liu X, Barber J, Atkinson MB, et al. Fabrication of low-cost paper-based microfluidic devices by embossing or cut-and-stack methods. Chem Mater. 2014;26(14):4230–7.
Lin C-H, Hsiao Y-H, Chang H-C, Yeh C-F, He C-K, Salm EM, et al. A microfluidic dual-well device for high-throughput single-cell capture and culture. Lab Chip. 2015;15(14):2928–38.
Tran QD, Kong TF, Hu D, Lam RH. Deterministic sequential isolation of floating cancer cells under continuous flow. Lab Chip. 2016;16(15):2813–9.
Rho HS, Yang Y, Hanke AT, Ottens M, Terstappen LW, Gardeniers H. Programmable v-type valve for cell and particle manipulation in microfluidic devices. Lab Chip. 2016;16(2):305–11.
Kim HS, Devarenne TP, Han A. A high-throughput microfluidic single-cell screening platform capable of selective cell extraction. Lab Chip. 2015;15(11):2467–75.
Khamenehfar A, Beischlag T, Russell P, Ling M, Nelson C, Li P. Label-free isolation of a prostate cancer cell among blood cells and the single-cell measurement of drug accumulation using an integrated microfluidic chip. Biomicrofluidics. 2015;9(6):064104.
Sharifi Noghabi H, Soo M, Khamenehfar A, Li PC. Dielectrophoretic trapping of single leukemic cells using the conventional and compact optical measurement systems. Electrophor. 2019;40(10):1478–85.
Shen Z, Wu A, Chen X. Current detection technologies for circulating tumor cells. Chem Soc Rev. 2017;46(8):2038–56.
He W, Kularatne SA, Kalli KR, Prendergast FG, Amato RJ, Klee GG, et al. Quantitation of circulating tumor cells in blood samples from ovarian and prostate cancer patients using tumor-specific fluorescent ligands. Int J Cancer. 2008;123(8):1968–73.
Cristofanilli M, Budd GT, Ellis MJ, Stopeck A, Matera J, Miller MC, et al. Circulating tumor cells, disease progression, and survival in metastatic breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2004;351(8):781–91.
Politaki E, Agelaki S, Apostolaki S, Hatzidaki D, Strati A, Koinis F, et al. A comparison of three methods for the detection of circulating tumor cells in patients with early and metastatic breast cancer. Cell Physiol Biochem. 2017;44(2):594–606.
Lustberg M, Jatana KR, Zborowski M, Chalmers JJ. Emerging technologies for CTC detection based on depletion of normal cells. In: Ignatiadis M, Sotiriou C, Pantel K, editors. Minimal Residual Disease and Circulating Tumor Cells in Breast Cancer. Recent Results in Cancer Research, vol. 195. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer; 2012. p. 97–110.
Tan W, Liang G, Xie X, Jiang W, Tan L, Sanders AJ, et al. Incorporating MicroRNA into molecular phenotypes of circulating tumor cells enhances the prognostic accuracy for patients with metastatic breast cancer. Oncol. 2019;24(11):e1044–e54.
Kuessel L, Kasimir-Bauer S, Zeillinger R, Pateisky P, Ott J, Zeisler H, et al. Detection of circulating trophoblast particles in maternal blood using density gradient centrifugation in preeclampsia and in normotensive pregnancies. Hypertens Pregnancy. 2016;35(3):323–9.
Rosenberg R, Gertler R, Friederichs J, Fuehrer K, Dahm M, Phelps R, et al. Comparison of two density gradient centrifugation systems for the enrichment of disseminated tumor cells in blood. Cytom: J Int Soc Anal Cytol. 2002;49(4):150–8.
Sun N, Li X, Wang Z, Li Y, Pei R. High-purity capture of CTCs based on micro-beads enhanced isolation by size of epithelial tumor cells (ISET) method. Biosens Bioelectron. 2018b;102:157–63.
Hofman V, Bonnetaud C, Ilie MI, Vielh P, Vignaud JM, Fléjou JF, et al. Preoperative circulating tumor cell detection using the isolation by size of epithelial tumor cell method for patients with lung cancer is a new prognostic biomarker. Clin Cancer Res. 2011;17(4):827–35.
Lecharpentier A, Vielh P, Perez-Moreno P, Planchard D, Soria J, Farace F. Detection of circulating tumour cells with a hybrid (epithelial/mesenchymal) phenotype in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer. Br J Cancer. 2011;105(9):1338–41.
Vona G, Sabile A, Louha M, Sitruk V, Romana S, Schütze K, et al. Isolation by size of epithelial tumor cells: a new method for the immunomorphological and molecular characterization of circulating tumor cells. Am J Pathol. 2000;156(1):57–63.
Yap Y-S, Leong MC, Chua YW, Loh KWJ, Lee GE, Lim EH, et al. Detection and prognostic relevance of circulating tumour cells (CTCs) in Asian breast cancers using a label-free microfluidic platform. PLoS One. 2019;14(9):e0221305.
Warkiani ME, Khoo BL, Wu L, Tay AKP, Bhagat AAS, Han J, et al. Ultra-fast, label-free isolation of circulating tumor cells from blood using spiral microfluidics. Nat Protoc. 2016;11(1):134–48.
Brychta N, Drosch M, Driemel C, Fischer JC, Neves RP, Esposito I, et al. Isolation of circulating tumor cells from pancreatic cancer by automated filtration. Oncotarget. 2017;8(49):86143.
Xu L, Mao X, Imrali A, Syed F, Mutsvangwa K, Berney D, et al. Optimization and evaluation of a novel size based circulating tumor cell isolation system. PloS one. 2015;10(9):e0138032.
Miller MC, Robinson PS, Wagner C, O'Shannessy DJ. The Parsortix™ cell separation system—a versatile liquid biopsy platform. Cytometry A. 2018;93(12):1234–9.
Winer-Jones JP, Vahidi B, Arquilevich N, Fang C, Ferguson S, Harkins D, et al. Circulating tumor cells: clinically relevant molecular access based on a novel CTC flow cell. PLoS One. 2014;9(1):e86717.
De Luca F, Rotunno G, Salvianti F, Galardi F, Pestrin M, Gabellini S, et al. Mutational analysis of single circulating tumor cells by next generation sequencing in metastatic breast cancer. Oncotarget. 2016;7(18):26107–19.
Bobek V, Gurlich R, Eliasova P, Kolostova K. Circulating tumor cells in pancreatic cancer patients: enrichment and cultivation. World J Gastroenterol. 2014;20(45):17163–70.
Mayer JA, Pham T, Wong KL, Scoggin J, Sales EV, Clarin T, et al. FISH-based determination of HER2 status in circulating tumor cells isolated with the microfluidic CEE™ platform. Cancer Gene Ther. 2011;204(11):589–95.
Guckenberger DJ, de Groot TE, Wan AM, Beebe DJ, Young EW. Micromilling: a method for ultra-rapid prototyping of plastic microfluidic devices. Lab Chip. 2015;15(11):2364–78.
Shaegh SAM, Pourmand A, Nabavinia M, Avci H, Tamayol A, Mostafalu P, et al. Rapid prototyping of whole-thermoplastic microfluidics with built-in microvalves using laser ablation and thermal fusion bonding. Sens Actuators B: Chem. 2018;255:100–9.
Valino AD, Dizon JRC, Espera AH Jr, Chen Q, Messman J, Advincula RC. Advances in 3D printing of thermoplastic polymer composites and nanocomposites. Prog Polym Sci. 2019;98:101162.
Yen DP, Ando Y, Shen K. A cost-effective micromilling platform for rapid prototyping of microdevices. Technology. 2016;4(4):234–9.
Kussul E, Baidyk T, Ruiz-Huerta L, Caballero-Ruiz A, Velasco G, Kasatkina L, et al. Development of micromachine tool prototypes for microfactories. J Micromech Microeng. 2002;12(6):795.
Pérez R, Dávila O, Molina A, Ramírez-Cadena M. Reconfigurable micro-machine tool design for desktop machining micro-factories. IFAC Proc Vol. 2013;46(9):1417–22.
Zhakypov Z, Uzunovic T, Nergiz AO, Baran EA, Golubovic E, Sabanovic A. Desktop microfactory for high precision assembly and machining. In: 2014 IEEE 23rd International Symposium on Industrial Electronics (ISIE) 2014, pp. 1192–1197). IEEE. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6864783/authors#authors
Mohammed MI, Alam MNHZ, Kouzani A, Gibson I. Fabrication of microfluidic devices: Improvement of surface quality of CO2 laser machined poly (methylmethacrylate) polymer. J Micromech Microeng. 2016;27(1):015021.
Martínez Vázquez R, Trotta G, Volpe A, Bernava G, Basile V, Paturzo M, et al. Rapid prototyping of plastic lab-on-a-chip by femtosecond laser micromachining and removable insert microinjection molding. Micromachines. 2017;8(11):328.
Ho CMB, Ng SH, Li KHH, Yoon YJ. 3D printed microfluidics for biological applications. Lab Chip. 2015;15(18):3627–37.
Comina G, Suska A, Filippini D. Low cost lab-on-a-chip prototyping with a consumer grade 3D printer. Lab Chip. 2014;14(16):2978–82.
Alapan Y, Hasan MN, Shen R, Gurkan UA. Three-dimensional printing based hybrid manufacturing of microfluidic devices. J Nanotechnol Eng Med. 2015;6(2):021007.
Garraway LA, Verweij J, Ballman KV. Precision oncology: an overview. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(15):1803–5.
Wu L, Zhu L, Huang M, Song J, Zhang H, Song Y, et al. Aptamer-based microfluidics for isolation, release and analysis of circulating tumor cells. TrAC-Trends Anal Chem. 2019;117:69–77.
Chen C, Xu Y, Huang X, Mao F, Shen S, Xu Y, et al. Clinical characteristics and survival outcomes of patients with both primary breast cancer and primary ovarian cancer. Med. 2020;99(32):e21560.
Wei Z, Zhou Y, Wang R, Wang J, Chen Z. Aptamers as smart ligands for targeted drug delivery in cancer therapy. Pharm. 2022;14(12):2561.
Tsai S-C, Hung L-Y, Lee G-B. An integrated microfluidic system for the isolation and detection of ovarian circulating tumor cells using cell selection and enrichment methods. Biomicrofluidics. 2017;11(3):034122.
Hung LY, Wang CH, Hsu KF, Chou CY, Lee GB. An on-chip Cell-SELEX process for automatic selection of high-affinity aptamers specific to different histologically classified ovarian cancer cells. Lab Chip. 2014;14(20):4017–28.
Vandghanooni S, Sanaat Z, Barar J, Adibkia K, Eskandani M, Omidi Y. Recent advances in aptamer-based nanosystems and microfluidics devices for the detection of ovarian cancer biomarkers. TrAC Trends Anal Chem. 2021;143:116343. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0165993621001667
Wolff AC, Hammond MEH, Hicks DG, Dowsett M, McShane LM, Allison KH, et al. Recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists clinical practice guideline update. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2014;138(2):241–56.
Lambein K, Van Bockstal M, Denys H, Libbrecht L. 2013 update of the American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing: impact on immunohistochemistry-negative breast cancers. Clin Oncol. 2014;32(17):1856–7.
Marcus JS, Anderson WF, Quake SR. Parallel picoliter RT-PCR assays using microfluidics. Anal Chem. 2006;78(3):956–8.
Ferraro D, Champ J, Teste B, Serra M, Malaquin L, Viovy J-L, et al. Microfluidic platform combining droplets and magnetic tweezers: application to HER2 expression in cancer diagnosis. Sci Rep. 2016;6(1):1–11.
Cong H, Zhang N. Perspectives in translating microfluidic devices from laboratory prototyping into scale-up production. Biomicrofluidics. 2022;16(2):021301.
Pekin D, Skhiri Y, Baret J-C, Le Corre D, Mazutis L, Salem CB, et al. Quantitative and sensitive detection of rare mutations using droplet-based microfluidics. Lab Chip. 2011;11(13):2156–66.
Russo A, Bazan V, Agnese V, Rodolico V, Gebbia N. Prognostic and predictive factors in colorectal cancer: Kirsten Ras in CRC (RASCAL) and TP53CRC collaborative studies. Ann Oncol. 2005;16:iv44–iv9.
Lievre A, Bachet J-B, Boige V, Cayre A, Le Corre D, Buc E, et al. KRAS mutations as an independent prognostic factor in patients with advanced colorectal cancer treated with cetuximab. Clin Oncol. 2008;26(3):374–9.
Ana F, Helen S, Gregori G, Jean-François L. The combined analysis of solid and liquid biopsies provides additional clinical information to improve patient care. J Cancer Metastasis Treat. 2018;4:21.
Christodoulou E, Yellapantula V, O’Halloran K, Xu L, Berry JL, Cotter JA, et al. Combined low-pass whole genome and targeted sequencing in liquid biopsies for pediatric solid tumors. npj Precision. Oncology. 2023;7(1):21.
Jiang B, Xie D, Wang S, Li X, Wu G. Advances in early detection methods for solid tumors. Front Genet. 2023;14:1091223.
Pinzani P, D’Argenio V, Re MD, Pellegrini C, Cucchiara F, Salvianti F, et al. Updates on liquid biopsy: current trends and future perspectives for clinical application in solid tumors. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2021;59(7):1181–200.
Shirejini SZ, Inci F. The Yin and Yang of exosome isolation methods: conventional practice, microfluidics, and commercial kits. Biotechnol Adv. 2021;54:107814.
Wang Y, Wang S, Li L, Zou Y, Liu B, Fang X. Microfluidics-based molecular profiling of tumor-derived exosomes for liquid biopsy. View. 2023;4(2):20220048.
Dong L, Lin W, Qi P, Xu MD, Wu X, Ni S, et al. Circulating long RNAs in serum extracellular vesicles: their characterization and potential application as biomarkers for diagnosis of colorectal cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2016;25(7):1158–66.
Jia Y, Ni Z, Sun H, Wang C. Microfluidic approaches toward the isolation and detection of exosome nanovesicles. IEEE Access. 2019;7:45080–98.
Wu M, Ouyang Y, Wang Z, Zhang R, Huang P-H, Chen C, et al. Isolation of exosomes from whole blood by integrating acoustics and microfluidics. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2017;114(40):10584–9.
Zhang P, He M, Zeng Y. Ultrasensitive microfluidic analysis of circulating exosomes using a nanostructured graphene oxide/polydopamine coating. Lab Chip. 2016;16(16):3033–42.
Silva AK, Kolosnjaj-Tabi J, Bonneau S, Marangon I, Boggetto N, Aubertin K, et al. Magnetic and photoresponsive theranosomes: translating cell-released vesicles into smart nanovectors for cancer therapy. Acs Nano. 2013;7(6):4954–66.
Kim MS, Haney MJ, Zhao Y, Mahajan V, Deygen I, Klyachko NL, et al. Development of exosome-encapsulated paclitaxel to overcome MDR in cancer cells. Nanomed: Nanotechnol Biol Med. 2016;12(3):655–64.
Fang S, Tian H, Li X, Jin D, Li X, Kong J, et al. Clinical application of a microfluidic chip for immunocapture and quantification of circulating exosomes to assist breast cancer diagnosis and molecular classification. PLoS One. 2017;12(4):e0175050.
Firatligil-Yildirir B, Yalcin-Ozuysal O, Nonappa N. Recent advances in lab-on-a-chip systems for breast cancer metastasis research. Nanoscale Adv. 2023;5:2375–93.
Iliescu FS, Vrtačnik D, Neuzil P, Iliescu C. Microfluidic technology for clinical applications of exosomes. Micromachines. 2019b;10(6):392.
Brittain S, Paul K, Zhao X-M, Whitesides G. Soft lithography and microfabrication. Phys World. 1998;11(5):31.
Rose MA, Bowen JJ, Morin SA. Emergent soft lithographic tools for the fabrication of functional polymeric microstructures. ChemPhysChem. 2019;20(7):909–25.
Qin D, Xia Y, Whitesides GM. Soft lithography for micro-and nanoscale patterning. Nat Protoc. 2010;5(3):491.
Xia Y, Whitesides GM. Soft lithography. Annu Rev Mater Sci. 1998;28(1):153–84.
Iwai K, Shih KC, Lin X, Brubaker TA, Sochol RD, Lin L. Finger-powered microfluidic systems using multilayer soft lithography and injection molding processes. Lab Chip. 2014;14(19):3790–9.
Kunnavakkam MV, Houlihan F, Schlax M, Liddle J, Kolodner P, Nalamasu O, et al. Low-cost, low-loss microlens arrays fabricated by soft-lithography replication process. Appl Phys Lett. 2003;82(8):1152–4.
Louis E, Bijkerk F, Shmaenok L, Voorma H-J, van der Wiel M, Schlatmann R, et al. Soft x-ray projection lithography using a high repetition rate laser-induced x-ray source for sub-100 nanometer lithography processes. Microelectron Eng. 1993;21(1-4):67–70.
Malaquin L, Carcenac F, Vieu C, Mauzac M. Using polydimethylsiloxane as a thermocurable resist for a soft imprint lithography process. Microelectron Eng. 2002;61:379–84.
Choi KM, Rogers JA. New advances in molding and printing processes for organic/plastic electronics using chemically modified stiff, photocured poly (dimethylsiloxane)(PDMS) elastomers designed for nano-resolution soft lithography. MRS Online Proc Lib (OPL). 2003;788. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/mrsonline-proceedings-library-archive/article/abs/new-advances-in-molding-and-printing-processes-for-organicplasticelectronics-using-chemically-modified-stiff-photocured-poly-dimethylsiloxane-pdms-elastomers-designed-fornanoresolution-soft-lithography/5D0D058D2EBBC6E4DDD419D481BEDE1C#
Rodrigue H, Bhandari B, Wang W, Ahn S-H. 3D soft lithography: a fabrication process for thermocurable polymers. J Mater Process Technol. 2015;217:302–9.
Teng J, Yan H, Li L, Zhao M, Zhang H, Morthier G. Simple ultraviolet-based soft-lithography process for fabrication of low-loss polymer polysiloxanes-based waveguides. IET Optoelectron. 2011;5(6):265–9.
Berthier E, Young EW, Beebe D. Engineers are from PDMS-land, biologists are from polystyrenia. Lab Chip. 2012;12(7):1224–37.
Gökaltun A, Kang YBA, Yarmush ML, Usta OB, Asatekin A. Simple surface modification of poly (dimethylsiloxane) via surface segregating smart polymers for biomicrofluidics. Sci Rep. 2019;9(1):7377.
Amerian M, Amerian M, Sameti M, Seyedjafari E. Improvement of PDMS surface biocompatibility is limited by the duration of oxygen plasma treatment. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2019;107(12):2806–13.
Lin X, Park S, Choi D, Heo J, Hong J. Mechanically durable superhydrophobic PDMS-candle soot composite coatings with high biocompatibility. J Ind Eng Chem. 2019;74:79–85.
Jamróz W, Szafraniec J, Kurek M, Jachowicz R. 3D printing in pharmaceutical and medical applications - recent achievements and challenges. Pharm Res. 2018;35(9):176.
Malinauskas M, Rekštytė S, Lukoševičius L, Butkus S, Balčiūnas E, Pečiukaitytė M, et al. 3D Microporous scaffolds manufactured via combination of fused filament fabrication and direct laser writing ablation. Micromachines. 2014;5(4):839–58.
Chen J, Tang M, Xu D. Integrated microfluidic chip coupled to mass spectrometry: a minireview of chip pretreatment methods and applications. J Chromatogr Open. 2021;1:100021.
Jenne A, von der Ecken S, Moxley-Paquette V, Soong R. Integrated digital microfluidics NMR spectroscopy: a key step toward automated in vivo metabolomics. Anal Chem. 2023;95(14):5858–66.
Nassar O, Jouda M, Rapp M, Mager D, Korvink JG, MacKinnon N. Integrated impedance sensing of liquid sample plug flow enables automated high throughput NMR spectroscopy. Microsyst Nanoeng. 2021;7(1):30.
Allert RD, Briegel KD, Bucher DB. Advances in nano- and microscale NMR spectroscopy using diamond quantum sensors. Chem Commun. 2022;58(59):8165–81.
Haun JB, Castro CM, Wang R, Peterson VM, Marinelli BS, Lee H, et al. Micro-NMR for rapid molecular analysis of human tumor samples. Sci Transl Med. 2011;3(71):71ra16.
Hopson RE, Peti W. Microcoil NMR spectroscopy: a novel tool for biological high throughput NMR spectroscopy. Methods Mol Biol. 2008;426:447–58.
Guerrini L, Alvarez-Puebla RA. Surface-enhanced Raman spectroscopy in cancer diagnosis, prognosis and monitoring. Cancers. 2019;11(6):748.
Zhang Y, Mi X, Tan X, Xiang R. Recent progress on liquid biopsy analysis using surface-enhanced Raman spectroscopy. Theranostics. 2019;9(2):491.
Ebrahimi G, Pakchin PS, Mota A, Omidian H, Omidi Y. Electrochemical microfluidic paper-based analytical devices for cancer biomarker detection: From 2D to 3D sensing systems. Talanta. 2023;257:124370.
Keyvani F, Debnath N, Ayman Saleh M, Poudineh M. An integrated microfluidic electrochemical assay for cervical cancer detection at point-of-care testing. Nanoscale. 2022;14(18):6761–70.
Blake N, Gaifulina R, Griffin LD, Bell IM, Thomas GMH. Machine learning of raman spectroscopy data for classifying cancers: a review of the recent literature. Diagnostics. 2022;12(6):1491.
Cima I, Wen Yee C, Iliescu FS, Phyo WM, Lim KH, Iliescu C, et al. Label-free isolation of circulating tumor cells in microfluidic devices: current research and perspectives. Biomicrofluidics. 2013;7(1):11810.
Maryam S, Nogueira MS. Label-free optical spectroscopy for early detection of oral cancer. Diagnostics. 2022;12(12):2896.
Acknowledgements
MK and SM thank the support of the Department of Pharmaceuticals, Ministry of Chemicals & Fertilizers, Government of India.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
All authors have reviewed the final version of the manuscript and approved it for publication.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Mishra, S., Kumarasamy, M. Microfluidics engineering towards personalized oncology—a review. In vitro models 2, 69–81 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s44164-023-00054-z
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s44164-023-00054-z