Skip to main content

Table 1 Methods and developments in ROS detection

From: The role of cellular reactive oxygen species in cancer chemotherapy

  Advantages Disadvantages References
ROS detection method
 Secondary oxidation product detection Minimally invasive; Clinically used currently; Quantification feasible Cannot visualize spatio-temporal ROS [60]
 Small molecule colorimetric assays Simple chemistry; Quantification feasible Cannot visualize ROS in real time [42]
 Redox sensitive fluorescent small molecules High sensitivity; High spatial resolution (subcellular levels); Less expensive; Detect specific ROS types; Ex vivo histological detection possible Drawbacks with stability and imaging time; Cytotoxicity of certain probes; Not good for longitudinal studies [61, 62]
 Redox sensitive Fluorescent proteins Tracking over unlimited time (built-in probes); Allows whole-body scanning; Targeted localization (subcellular levels) Genetic modifications of cells/animals required [49,50,51]
Recent technological optimization
 FLIM and FRET based probes Increased specificity and sensitivity; Multimodal imaging capability; High sensitivity; High spatial resolution (molecular levels) More complex probe construction; Costly equipment [43, 44]
 Nanoparticle delivery systems Capacity for multiple cargos; Increased specificity and sensitivity; Enable targeted probe delivery More complex probe construction [63]
  1. Abbreviations: FRET Fluorescence resonance energy transfer, FLIM fluorescence-lifetime imaging