Development of an Optical Assay to Detect SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein Binding Interactions with ACE2 and Disruption of these Interactions Using Electric Current

Experimental Design

The experimental setup utilized in this study is shown in Fig. 2(a), incorporating a mini spectrometer and a smart mobile phone that was employed as a light source with its power spectrum depicted in Fig. 2(b). The measured optical power of the beam exhibited maximum power at a wavelength of 623 nm³⁵. The mini-spectrometer C11708MA (Hamamatsu/Japan) was used to measure the light intensity as it passes through test substances with spectral response ranging from 640 to 1010 nm³⁶. The wavelength reproducibility was between −0.5 to 0.5 nm and a maximum of 20 nm FWHM spectra, under constant light conditions. The sample under test was placed between the mobile light source and the mini-spectrometer, as shown in Fig. 2(a). The measurements were conducted with the room lights on. The distances between the light source, the spectrometer, and the sample holder were adjusted to eliminate any possible interference and to stabilize the spectrometer performance. Furthermore, the spectrometer was aligned with the light source and sample cuvette to achieve a straight path of light. Figure 2(c) illustrates the incident, reflected, and transmitted light intensities. The light intensities were linked through the Kirchhoff’s Law of Radiation³⁷, which correlates the optical absorbance, transmittance, and reflection along with the incident wave.

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 2:

The proposed concept of optical detection and the experimental design: (a) The optical measurement setup is shown consisting of a smart phone as a light source and the mini-spectrometer utilized to collect the light waves passing through the sample kept in the holder. (b) The smart phone power spectra versus wavelength. (c) Illustration of the spectrometer detection principle.

This experimental setup was first used to characterize the two spike proteins subunits, S1 and S2 that are encoded by all coronaviruses and, as mentioned, allow virus entry into susceptible cells (Fig. 1(b)). Figure 3(a) shows the optical responses for both proteins along with their corresponding blank samples. The measured optical intensity changed from 600 to 750 nm, within the light source spectrum measured earlier in Fig. 2(b). The response of the blank samples was performed first, followed by the two protein suspensions, the responses to which were recorded individually as shown in Fig. 3(a).

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 3:

Optical measurements of the spike protein subunits S1 and S2: (a) Measured responses for spikes proteins S1 and S2 at the highest concentration individually (S1B and S2B, respectively), along with their corresponding blanks. (b) Time domain measurements of the microcentrifuge tube, the blank (shown in gray circles) versus water (red circles) at a wavelength of 623 nm. (c) Measured optical responses for the mixed protein samples versus time. Samples S1B and S2B were at 5000 copies per ml, S2C, S2D, S2E and S2F are the serial dilutions of S2B at 10-, 100-, 1,000- and 10,000-fold, respectively. (d) Relative change in light intensity per light path versus loaded mass. All optical responses were measured at 623 nm. Light intensity was measured as arbitrary units (a.u).

Figure 3(a) reveals that S2 exhibited a higher “back scattering” and/or absorbance than S1. The response of the two blank samples was quite comparable, showing the reproducibility of the results. Since the maximum difference between the blank and the two protein samples was observed at 623 nm, this wavelength was chosen for further experimentation, which is also the wavelength at which the optical power of the smart phone is at its maximum.

Optimization of the Sample Reading Conditions

Initial test of this experimental setup revealed that it had one major drawback; i.e., when samples were loaded into the holder, the angle and position of the microcentrifuge tube changed which affected the results obtained. To ensure that the results were reproducible, the measurements for the same samples were conducted over different days and on each day the setup was standardized since the position of the mobile phone, spectrometer and samples could vary. To overcome this caveat and have more consistence measurements without constant standardization, advantage was made of the ability of the spectrometer to provide light intensity measurements over time. Hence, after placing the microcentrifuge tube into the holder, the measurement mode would be started and the corresponding “blank” recorded. Then the sample would be added after ∼ 100 mSecond, while keeping the measurement mode on. Figure 3(b) illustrates the corresponding measurement profile for S1B and S2B individual samples suspended in water over time. Initially, a fluctuation in the light intensity was observed with time as each sample was added to the tube, but then it stabilized with time. As expected, the blank exhibited the maximum measured light intensity, while the suspended samples showed lower light intensity than the blank once stabilized.

Test of the Spike Proteins Using the Proposed Experimental Set Up

To test the proof-of-principle, initially a mixing experiment was conducted at a light wavelength of 623 nm. Towards this end, 250 μL of S1B protein solution was tested at the same maximum concentration at 5,000 copies/mL followed by addition of same amount of S2B. Figure 3(c) shows the light intensity (as arbitrary units, a.u.) with time as the protein samples were added to the transparent measurement container in a sequential manner. This was followed by addition of 250 μL of ten-fold serial dilutions of the S2 protein at equal time intervals to the S1B + S2B samples. As can be seen from Fig. 3(c), with the addition of the S2 protein, the light intensity increased. The biggest increase was observed with the concentrated S2B sample followed by its ten-fold dilution samples S2C, S2D, S2E, etc., until S2F addition as a 1:10,000 dilution had no extra effect on the increase in light intensity, revealing the limit of detection of the assay (5000 molecules per mL x 250 µl x 1/10,000 = 125 molecule per mL). These results reveal that the ratio between the S1 and S2 protein concentration plays an important role in the light intensity levels measured. The ratio of S1 and S2 in the virus is the same since both originate from the cleavage of S protein. However, the S1 subunit is expressed on the cell surface, while the S2 subunit is embedded in the lipid bilayer of the cell membrane; therefore, S2 is less available at the cells surface, which should affect light intensity less than S1 despite equal ratios. Table 1 lists the extracted parameters at specific time points. The relative change in light intensity per light path length is a constructed parameter that should correlate with the loaded mass (concentration) of the protein in a suspension.

Figure 3(d) shows the change in relative light intensity divided by the light path length versus the total mass of the tested samples. As shown in Table 1, it reveals that as the mass of the protein increased in our experimental system, the intensity of light also increased, revealing that length of the light path was directly proportional to the amount of protein in the sample.

Figure 4(a) and (b) illustrate the definition of the light intensities and light path length. The smart mobile integrated light source emits a light intensity (I₀) that is the maximum intensity that can be measured in this experimental setup. The blank intensity (I_b) is the measured intensity that goes through the empty container responsible for holding the sample, such as the microcentrifuge tube. The instantaneous measured intensity (I) is the recorded light when it passes through the sample. This amount of light intensity strongly depends upon the buffer in which the sample is solubilized/dissolved in, its composition, the light path length, the kind of the suspended analytes and its size in the buffer. The light path length depends upon the loaded amount of suspension inside the container. The path length varies from zero up to the container length (L). For a sample with a specific volume (V), the corresponding path length is equal to the volume over the cross-sectional area of the container (A). Equation (1) expresses the relationship between the relative change in light intensity per light path length and loaded mass (m), as follows: Where: m_i, m_f and l are the initial mass of the buffer, the mass of the final suspension composite, and the light path length, respectively. α is the decay factor, unique for each control buffer. Its unit is in mm and could be correlated with the material absorptivity. ΔI is the relative change in light intensity expressed as follows: where: I and I_b are the instantaneous measured light intensity of the suspension and the corresponding blank, respectively. Figure 4(c) shows the relationship between mass and the relative change per length after fitting the measured points with the exponential function. As can be seen, with more sample volume the path length increases and light intensity decreases; hence, the relative change decreases dramatically.

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 4:

Illustration of light intensity and its path length: (a) the blank representation, and (b) light path length of the sample. L and A are the length and cross-sectional area of container, l is the light path length. I₀, I_b and I are the incident, blank and instantaneous sample intensities, respectively. (c) Loaded mass versus relative change in light intensity per light-path length. The measured points were fitted with exponential function expressed by equation (1) with the following parameters: m_i= 1.003μ ± 2.68n, m_f= 2.163 μ ± 34.7n and α-factor is 1.28435 ± 0.030. The other fitting model accuracy parameters are: Reduced Chi-Sqr, R-Square (COD), Adj. R-Square are 28.8 atto, 1 and 1, respectively, which indicates the best possible fit.

Test of Binding Interactions between Spike and ACE2 Using the Optical Assay

After successful demonstration that our set up could detect spike proteins in solution using light, we asked if light intensity could be used to characterize the binding interactions of the spike protein with the viral receptor ACE2. Towards this end, two different variants of the S1 subunit of the spike protein, S1X and S1Y were tested (one form that could bind ACE2 with a much stronger affinity than the other one), along with a non-specific control protein, bovine serum albumin (BSA) that should not bind to ACE2. These proteins were selected to demonstrate the detection of the binding process with ACE2 over time. The measurement process started with the blank, and after 200 seconds, 250 μL of ACE2 protein suspension was tested (Fig. 5(a)). This process was repeated for S1X, S1Y, and BSA and their responses to light were measured individually in the same manner as ACE2. The corresponding individual profiles of ACE2, S1X, S1Y and BSA are depicted in Fig. 5(a) which showed a straight constant line over time. Next, each protein was mixed with the ACE2 separately to detect any possible binding effect. The measurements started with first loading the ACE2 in the blank container, then after 200 ms, the test protein was added to the ACE2 in solution. The responses of the various protein mixtures were read over a period of 15 minutes and are shown in Fig. 5(b).

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 5:

Optical detection of binding interactions between ACE2 and other proteins. (a) Measured light intensities over time for individual assessment of ACE2, S1X, S1Y, and BSA. (b) The measured mixed light intensities versus time for ACE2 mixed with either S1X, or S1Y, or BSA. (c) The measured ACE2-S1X interaction profile for an extended time period.

Figure 5(b) shows the corresponding slopes that represent the change of the light intensities over time. The ACE2+BSA and ACE2+S1Y responses exhibited almost constant lines, suggesting highly reduced or lack of any interaction as observed when the proteins were tested individually Figure 5(a). However, the ACE2+S1X profile showed a linear straight line with the maximum-recorded slope. The corresponding light intensity line increased over time, suggesting an interaction between the SIX protein and the ACE2 receptor. We interpret this to mean that there was no protein-protein interaction if the slope of the line was zero; otherwise protein-protein interaction occurred. Based on these observations, our results suggest that the S1X protein exhibits stronger interactions with ACE2, while BSA and S1Y had weaker interactions with ACE2. These observations are confirmed by the fact that whereas S1X has a higher affinity for ACE2 (2 µg/mL S1X can bind 1.5-15 ng/mL ACE2), while S1Y reportedly has a much lower affinity (2 µg/mL S1B binds 0.5-8.7 ng/mL ACE2), as tested in enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA) by the company that synthesized these proteins³⁸.

To explore the interaction and binding characteristics between ACE2 and S1X in more detail, the measurement time between the two proteins was extended over one hour, the results of which are plotted in Fig. 5(c). As can be seen, a nice “hump” was observed as an increase in arbitrary units (a.u.) with time that was not observed in the other protein mixtures tested which we feel is indicative of the binding reaction between the two proteins.

Validation of the Optical Assay Using Known Antigen/Antibody Pairs

Next, we wanted to confirm our observations by using our optical system to detect protein-protein interactions using proteins that are well known to interact with each other. This was addressed by testing the molecular interactions between an antigen and an antibody which is similar to the interaction between the spike protein and its receptor. Towards this end, two proteins were tested along with their specific antibodies: the first protein was the receptor binding domain (RBD) of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein and its antibody and the other was the nucleocapsid protein (NCP) of SARS-CoV-2 and its antibody. Similar to the procedure described earlier, the two proteins were tested individually in our optical assay followed by addition of their corresponding antibodies that were mixed and then tested for their interactions.

Figure 6(a) shows the binding between RBD and its antibody. Upon the addition of the antibody, as observed earlier, an “interaction peak” was recorded that is circled in blue color. Similarly, Figure 6(b) shows the binding between NCP and its antibody. However, in this case, we realized that the binding effect occurred at specific antibody concentrations; thus, when the antibody was added first, no interaction peak was observed. Therefore, we added more concentrated antibody and upon its addition, the interaction peak was observed. Addition of more antibody did not allow detection of further interaction peaks, revealing that the protein-protein interaction took place at a specific concentration and once the interaction had taken place, no further interaction took place. For a virus-based suspension, it is therefore suggested to use a fixed antibody concentration and serially dilute the virus suspension to conduct the binding measurements. Certainly, at a specific virus concentration, binding effect will appear in the form of an optical response.

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 6:

Optical detection of the binding affinities between: (a) the receptor binding domain (RBD) of the spike protein with its antibody (AB), and (b) the nucleocapsid protein (NCP) and its antibody. The antibody was added again to NCP since no binding interaction was observed the first time. To confirm the result, the antibody was added a third time, but this time once again, the binding interaction was not apparent. (c) NCP binding with the antibody after mixing inside, and (d) NCP binding with the antibody after mixing outside. The interaction peak is circled.

Figure 6(c) and (d) illustrate the corresponding optical responses for NC protein and its corresponding antibody when they were mixed either inside (Fig. 6(c)) or outside (Fig. 6(d)) the microcentrifuge tube, respectively. Inside mixing means that the protein was added to the tube and the antibody was added after 10 seconds, while in the outside mixing scenario, both the protein and antibody were mixed prior to being loaded in the tube for optical measurements. As can be seen, the binding response could be detected in each case in the form of appearance of the hump. However, this “hump” was a lot more pronounced when the protein and the antibody were mixed prior to testing than when they were added sequentially. This is good news for the real-life scenario where in a patient sample, the antibody should be already bound to the viral or bacterial antigen at the time of detection.

Test of the Optical Detection Assay Using a Solid Support

The nitrocellulose membrane is a popular matrix that is frequently used due to its high protein-binding affinity with a pore size of 0.25-0.45 µm in paper-based diagnostics. Protein molecules usually bind to the nitrocellulose membranes through hydrophobic interactions³⁹. Due to the ease of their handling, cheap cost, and the presence of hydrophobic interactions between them and the suspended proteins, we tested whether the binding between the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein and antibody could be detected optically when both were added to each other on the nitrocellulose membrane. Using the experimental setup detailed in Fig. 2(a), the optical responses for nitrocellulose membrane, nitrocellulose membrane and spike protein alone, nitrocellulose membrane and antibody against spike protein alone, and nitrocellulose membrane spike protein-antibody were measured. Figure 7(a) shows that both the antibody alone and spike protein alone exhibited higher light intensity than the nitrocellulose membrane alone with almost a straight line with a constant slope over a time period of 10 seconds. The on-paper measured optical responses exhibited fluctuations as in the samples measured using microcentrifuge tubes. This implies that these fluctuations are not due to any interactions; rather, they are due to the spectrometer conversion process⁴⁰.

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 7:

Test of protein-protein interaction measurements on solid support: (a) Optical responses on nitrocellulose membrane (NM) alone, nitrocellulose membrane and spike protein (NM+P), and nitrocellulose membrane and antibody to spike protein (NM+AB) alone. (b) Optical responses to spike protein-antibody binding on the nitrocellulose membrane.

Figure 7(b) summaries the interaction measurements which start with the membrane alone. After 20 seconds, the antibody suspension was loaded on the membrane and measurements were conducted up to 100 seconds. Next, the spike protein sample was loaded and measurements were continued up to 500 seconds. As revealed from Fig. 7(b), the interaction peak clearly appeared as circled in blue. It is worth noting that the membrane size, shape, and charge of biomolecules, pH and viscosity of the control buffer, as well as the composition influences the corresponding optical response and binding interactions and must be carefully standardized⁴¹.

Role of Electric Current in Disrupting Protein-Protein Interactions

Finally, we studied the effect of direct current (DC biasing) on the ability of two proteins to bind specifically. This was achieved by subjecting the NC protein solution to DC voltage bias, as depicted in Fig. 8(a). An applied bias should result in an induction of current across the suspension. If this current is high enough, it should have the potential to destroy the protein physiology and functionality, resulting in the loss of specific protein-protein interactions. To test this hypothesis, the NC protein solution was loaded in an electroporation cuvette (rather than a microcentrifuge tube) that incorporates two electrodes with a volume of 0.5 mL and a separation distance of 0.4 cm. This should result in a breakdown electric field of 7.5 V/cm. At this field onwards, the binding between the protein and the antibody should be affected. Above this field, the sample should be incapacitated for binding. Figure 8(a) reveals that the optical response decays slowly with the application of DC bias. At 3 volts DC bias, the optical response decays with a considerable step, and increasing the DC bias further should burn the suspension and destroy it.

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 8:

Opto-electrical measurements: (a) Measured NC protein optical response versus time at different DC bias voltages. (b) Binding measurements between NC protein and its corresponding antibody after subjected the solution to an electric field.

The breakdown field depends on the electrical characteristics of both the buffer and the analyte such as proteins, viruses, etc. To explore this further, the suspension of protein was subjected to 3 V for 1 minute and then the antibody to NC was added to the NC protein solution. The corresponding measured response is shown in Fig. 8(b). The measured response was observed to be noisy and did not show a clear binding effect when compared with Fig. 6(c) that reported the optical response for the same protein and antibody without the application of DC bias. It is worth mentioning that it may be possible to create a corresponding vaccine for a disease by subjecting the target viral protein to DC bias which will affect its function and destroy its physiology (denature it) and communicability (binding interactions). Furthermore, the proposed optical detection in time domain can also be used for monitoring and detecting the efficiency of vaccine process development.

Practical Applications of the Proposed Technique

The optical approach presented in this study can be easily turned into a functional working system to detect SARS-CoV-2 or any other viral or bacterial pathogen against which an antibody is available that can detect it sensitively. Currently, there are several available handheld portable spectrophotometers which are compact and lightweight, and equipped with wireless communication system for data transmission. The data can be received by the smart phone through Bluetooth or Wi-Fi technologies equipped with a mobile app designed to process the received optical profiles over time. The collected optical profiles versus time can then be processed immediately using the smart phone processor and computational resources. The results can be displayed on the same smart phone immediately as well. The antibody could be coated on flexible strips and kept inside packs with medium. These strips can be used directly for loading the nasal swab in-position within a fabricated holder using 3D printing technology. The 3D printed holder can be designed to integrate the portable sensor and the smart phone as well. The concept of strips can be further used to detect different specimens taken from blood, breath, urine, nasal swabs, stool, etc. For example, the subject can breathe, exhale, or sniff into a device with a probe coated with antibodies. If binding occurs, the integrated device should be able to pick up the interaction, confirming that the patient is infected with the virus to which the antibodies are directed against.

The current methodology provides a rapid, reproducible and accurate detection mechanism that can be used to create home-based COVID-19 detection tests that can be used by anyone. The authors envision that such tests would not require any laboratory setting, and could be performed using test strips coated with antibodies without prior sample processing. Interestingly, our approach does not require any electrode patterning which makes it the best fit for massive production and high-volume use. It can be adapted as a point-of-care testing platform with high-throughput to be used in schools, airports, malls and public services places as well. The cost per test is expected to be less than one dollar which will make it competitive with current market price. The detection platform can be easily equipped with standard electronic data transmission systems to transmit and process data in place and share it with family, doctors and hospitals over wireless transmission. Furthermore, the platform can be deployed in high-risk areas with ease-of-use and clear steps to load the specimen and easy to understand instructions to operate.

Furthermore, when compared with other detection concepts and methodologies, the presented approach can distinguish between influenza and coronaviruses. ACE2 binds directly to the viral spike protein, while ACE2 plays an important role in acute lung injury induced by influenza viruses⁵⁶ which can be correlated with disease severity⁵⁷. Hence, the proposed methodology can be used in reverse where the spike protein can be used for ACE2 detection.