Dummy imprinted electrochemical sensor for the selective detection of camostat mesylate


Cetinkaya A., ÜNAL M. A., Çorman M. E., UZUN L., ÖZKAN S. A.

Microchimica Acta, cilt.192, sa.8, 2025 (SCI-Expanded, Scopus) identifier identifier identifier

  • Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
  • Cilt numarası: 192 Sayı: 8
  • Basım Tarihi: 2025
  • Doi Numarası: 10.1007/s00604-025-07342-3
  • Dergi Adı: Microchimica Acta
  • Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus, Academic Search Premier, Aerospace Database, Analytical Abstracts, Aqualine, Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA), Biotechnology Research Abstracts, CAB Abstracts, Chemical Abstracts Core, Chimica, Communication Abstracts, Food Science & Technology Abstracts, Metadex, Pollution Abstracts, Civil Engineering Abstracts
  • Anahtar Kelimeler: Camostat mesylate, Dimethylformamide, Dummy imprinted polymers, Electropolymerization, Guanidine, Screen-printed gold electrode
  • Ankara Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet

Özet

Both molecularly imprinted polymer (MIP) and dummy-imprinted polymer (DIP) sensors were designed and comparatively analyzed for the determination of camostat mesylate (CAM). MIP and DIP sensors were designed with CAM, guanidine (GUA), and dimethylformamide (DMF) as target molecules and para-aminobenzoic acid (p-ABA) as a functional monomer using the electropolymerization (EP) method on the surface of screen-printed gold electrodes (SPAuE). The created sensors’ morphological and electrochemical characteristics were examined to verify their construction. Additionally, the alterations on the electrode surface at the molecular and electronic levels were assessed using quantum chemistry calculations. The dynamic linear range of the MIP-based sensors designed under optimized experimental conditions was 2.5 × 10−13–2.5 × 10−12 M, while it was 2.5 × 10−12–2.5 × 10−11 M and 2.5 × 10−12–5.0 × 10−11 M for the DIP-based sensors prepared using GUA and DMF, respectively. The impact of several interfering compounds on the CAM peak current was assessed to determine the selectivity. The RSD and recovery values were computed with 100 times more interfering agents present. The reproducibility of peak current RSD values of poly(Py-co-p-ABA)@CAM@MIP/SPAuE, poly(Py-co-p-ABA)@GUA@DIP/SPAuE, and poly(Py-co-p-ABA)@DMF@DIP/SPAuE sensors were 1.85%, 2.25%, and 2.33%, respectively. In addition, the recovery values ​​of MIP and DIP-based sensors in commercial serum samples were 99.36%, 99.47%, and 100.51%, respectively. The imprinting factor (IF) values were computed for the competitive compounds with comparable chemical structures. The developed sensor was also effectively used to measure CAM in commercial serum samples. In summary, the designed sensors demonstrated high sensitivity, selectivity, repeatability, and reproducibility against the CAM molecule.