Home Journals Progress in Chemistry
Progress in Chemistry

Abbreviation (ISO4): Prog Chem      Editor in chief: Jincai ZHAO

About  /  Aim & scope  /  Editorial board  /  Indexed  /  Contact  / 
Review

Surface-Enhanced Raman Scattering for Metastasis Detection and Treatment Evaluation in Breast Cancer

  • Sisi Wang 1 ,
  • Jierong Xiao 2 ,
  • Fabiao Yu , 2, * ,
  • Rui Wang , 2, * ,
  • Guisheng He , 1, *
Expand
  • 1 Department of Breast and Thyroid Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital, Hainan Medical University, Haikou 571199, China
  • 2 Key Laboratory of Emergency and Trauma, Ministry of Education, Key Laboratory of Hainan Trauma and Disaster Rescue, Hainan Medical University, Haikou 571199, China
* (Fabiao Yu);
(Rui Wang);
(Guisheng He)

Received date: 2025-05-12

  Revised date: 2025-06-11

  Online published: 2025-10-25

Supported by

Hainan Province Science and Technology Special Fund(ZDYF2024SHFZ104)

National Natural Science Foundation of China(22564013)

National Natural Science Foundation of China(22264013)

Abstract

Breast cancer remains one of the most prevalent malignancies and the second leading cause of cancer-related mortality among women worldwide. Metastasis represents the critical determinant of poor prognosis in breast cancer patients. Conventional detection methods face limitations, including insufficient sensitivity, invasiveness, and inability to dynamically monitor tumor microenvironment alterations, thereby failing to meet the demands of precision medicine. In recent years, surface-enhanced Raman spectroscopy (SERS) has emerged as a powerful tool for breast cancer metastasis monitoring and treatment evaluation, owing to its ultra-high sensitivity at the single-molecule level, exceptional spatiotemporal resolution, and multiplex detection capability. Functionalized SERS probes targeting tumor-specific biomarkers enable non-invasive identification of circulating tumor cells (CTCs), exosomes(Exos), and metastasis-associated metabolites, facilitating molecular-level diagnosis of breast cancer metastasis. Furthermore, SERS technology permits real-time monitoring of drug delivery efficiency, release kinetics, and therapeutic responses at tumor sites, providing dynamic molecular profiles for personalized treatment evaluation. This review systematically summarizes recent advancements in SERS-based detection of metastasis-related biomarkers, tumor microenvironment analysis, and treatment efficacy assessment. Key challenges, including probe targeting optimization, signal stability enhancement, and clinical translation, are critically discussed. Looking forward, the integration of multimodal SERS probe design with artificial intelligence-powered data analytics is anticipated to propel breast cancer management into a new era of precision medicine and visualization-guided therapeutics.

Contents

1 Introduction

2 SERS overview and probe design

2.1 Overview of SERS

2.2 Technical advantages of SERS

2.3 Principles of SERS probe design

3 Detection and treatment evaluation of breast cancer metastasis based on SERS

3.1 Detection of metastatic markers in liquid

3.2 Imaging of metastatic lesions

4 Evaluation of therapeutic efficacy

5 Conclusion and outlook

Cite this article

Sisi Wang , Jierong Xiao , Fabiao Yu , Rui Wang , Guisheng He . Surface-Enhanced Raman Scattering for Metastasis Detection and Treatment Evaluation in Breast Cancer[J]. Progress in Chemistry, 2025 , 37(11) : 1631 -1651 . DOI: 10.7536/PC20250506

1 Introduction

In summary, existing scoring systems have limited predictive capabilities for bleeding events, and their results are inconsistent[25,30,33].. Metastatic breast cancer is the primary cause of treatment failure and patient mortality in clinical practice. Its biological complexity and treatment resistance make it a central challenge in tumor research. Metastatic lesions not only significantly shorten patients’ survival but can also lead to multi-organ dysfunction (e.g., pathological fractures caused by bone metastases, neurological deficits resulting from brain metastases), severely impacting patients’ quality of life[1]. Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is the most aggressive subtype, accounting for approximately 15%–20% of all breast cancer cases, and is prone to distant organ metastasis[2]. Breast cancer metastasis generally indicates a poor prognosis: although the five-year survival rate for early-stage breast cancer exceeds 90%, once the disease progresses to metastatic breast cancer (MBC), the five-year survival rate drops sharply to about 30%, with TNBC exhibiting an especially poor prognosis[3]. Therefore, effective control of breast cancer metastasis is crucial for improving patient survival rates.
In recent years, significant progress has been made in the diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer; however, the complexity of its treatment and issues related to patient prognosis remain major challenges[4]. Although various imaging techniques and molecular biomarkers are currently available for the diagnosis and detection of breast cancer, there are still shortcomings in the detection of MBC[5]. Conventional imaging techniques—ultrasound (Ultrasound imaging, US), computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), positron emission tomography (PET), single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), and positron emission tomography–computed tomography (PET-CT)—can localize metastatic lesions, but their sensitivity and specificity are limited, with notable constraints particularly in detecting small metastatic lesions[6]. Histopathological biopsy is regarded as the “gold standard” for tumor diagnosis; however, its invasive nature and tumor heterogeneity—where molecular differences between primary and metastatic lesions can reach up to 40%—make it difficult to dynamically reflect the metastatic process[7]. Although liquid biopsy can detect circulating tumor cells (CTCs) and exosomes (exos), the sensitivity and stability of these markers in breast cancer metastasis still require further clinical validation[8].
In the treatment of MBC, multiple challenges arise. First, anatomical barriers (such as the blood-brain barrier) and the tumor microenvironment (such as hypoxia and acidic pH) significantly reduce the delivery efficiency of chemotherapeutic agents (such as paclitaxel and anthracyclines)[9]. Second, the immunosuppressive microenvironment (such as high PD-L1 expression and infiltration by regulatory T cells) diminishes the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (such as atezolizumab), with objective response rates to single-agent immunotherapy in TNBC patients falling short of 15%[10]. In addition, the drug resistance and quiescent state of cancer stem cells (CSCs) contribute to early recurrence after treatment, with approximately 60% of patients with metastatic breast cancer experiencing disease progression within one year of initiating therapy[11]. Although novel therapies (such as the antibody-drug conjugate T-DXd and the PARP inhibitor olaparib) have shown promise in certain subgroups, their efficacy remains limited by biomarker selection and acquired resistance mechanisms[12]. Therefore, there is an urgent clinical need to advance research on the mechanisms of breast cancer metastasis and to develop innovative detection technologies. SERS technology, with its high sensitivity, non-invasiveness, and multi-target detection capabilities, has emerged as a crucial tool for detecting breast cancer metastasis. SERS can effectively track small metastatic foci and guide individualized treatment, while addressing the limitations of existing technologies and providing new solutions for the early diagnosis and treatment evaluation of breast cancer metastasis[13-16].

2 Overview of SERS and Optimization of Probe Design

2.1 Overview of SERS

Raman scattering (RS) is a spectroscopic analytical technique based on molecular vibrational characteristics. The underlying principle is that when incident light interacts with molecules, the energy of the photons undergoes a minute change, resulting in a frequency shift in the scattered light. This frequency shift is correlated with the molecular vibrational modes. Consequently, Raman spectroscopy can provide fingerprint-like information about molecular structures and is widely used in fields such as chemistry, biology, and materials science. However, the scattering cross-section of conventional Raman scattering is extremely small, on the order of 10-6~10-8of the incident light, leading to an extremely weak signal. In addition, background fluorescence interference and low detection sensitivity have limited the application of Raman technology in trace analysis. In 1974, Fleischmann et al. observed an anomalously enhanced signal from pyridine molecules on a roughened silver electrode surface. In 1977, Van Duyne and Jeanmaire et al. revealed that the underlying mechanism stems from the enhancement of local electromagnetic fields by noble metal nanostructures, and formally introduced the concept of surface-enhanced Raman scattering (SERS)[17-18]. With the advancement of laser technology and nanomaterials and nanotechnology, the synergistic mechanisms of electromagnetic field enhancement and chemical enhancement have been progressively elucidated, and the base materials such as gold and silver have been optimized, laying the theoretical foundation for single-molecule detection.
Since the 21st century, breakthroughs in nanotechnology have driven the rapid development of SERS. By precisely tuning nanostructures (such as core-shell structures and nanogap arrays) to generate “hotspots,” sensitivity has been significantly enhanced, and applications have expanded into biomedicine, environmental monitoring, and public safety[19-20].Current research focuses on non-precious metal substrates, smart responsive materials, and optimization of single-molecule detection, while also exploring multimodal integration with microfluidics and machine learning. In the future, SERS is expected to achieve broader practical applications in areas such as precision medicine and real-time environmental monitoring, and its theoretical refinement and technological innovation will continue to drive advances in analytical science.
The introduction of nanomaterials is pivotal to the development of SERS technology. Nanomaterials, particularly noble-metal nanostructures (such as silver and gold) and two-dimensional nanomaterials (such as graphene), have demonstrated tremendous potential in the diagnosis of various diseases[21-23]. As shown in Figure 1, SERS-based disease detection methods have attracted considerable attention. Under the influence of nanomaterials, Raman signals can be enhanced by several orders of magnitude (typically by a factor of 103to 108)[24-26]. When molecules adsorb onto the surface of specific structures (such as noble-metal nanostructures), the Raman signal is significantly enhanced through two mechanisms: electromagnetic enhancement and chemical enhancement[27-28]. Electromagnetic enhancement typically occurs on the surfaces of noble-metal nanostructures and arises from the excitation of localized surface plasmon resonance (LSPR) (Figure 1A). When incident light interacts with metal nanoparticles, the free electrons on their surfaces undergo collective oscillations, generating a strong electromagnetic field near the nanostructure. This localized enhancement of the electromagnetic field can significantly increase the intensity of the Raman signal. The LSPR phenomenon can be excited by electromagnetic waves ranging from the ultraviolet to the visible spectrum and constitutes a key mechanism underlying SERS enhancement in noble-metal nanostructures. However, this enhancement mechanism is generally not applicable to most semiconductor nanomaterials, as they typically lack the free-electron density required to generate LSPR[29-30]. In semiconductor nanomaterials, chemical enhancement is the primary source of SERS signal enhancement (Figure 1B). This mechanism relies on electronic coupling between the molecule and the substrate, which is influenced by the material’s energy-level structure and electron-state density, including the bandgap energy and the positions of the highest occupied molecular orbital and the lowest unoccupied molecular orbital. When a molecule adsorbs onto a semiconductor surface, charge-transfer processes may occur, thereby enhancing the Raman scattering signal. Although the effect of chemical enhancement is usually several orders of magnitude weaker than that of electromagnetic enhancement, it offers greater selectivity and is suitable for certain molecular systems that cannot be enhanced via LSPR.
图1 (A)SERS中常规拉曼、局域表面等离子体共振(LSPR)和电磁增强机制的示意图;(B) 无标记SERS检测原理:吸附介导的无标记SERS检测和抗体/配体介导的无标记SERS检测;(C) 典型SERS探针的制备流程

Fig.1 (A) Schematics of normal Raman, localized surface plasmon resonance (LSPR), and electromagnetic enhancement mechanism in SERS, including the two-step enhancement; (B) principles of label-free SERS detections: adsorption-mediated label-free SERS detection and antibody/ligand-mediated label-free SERS detection; (C) general procedure for the fabrication of a typical SERS probe

SERS can achieve single-molecule detection largely because molecules adsorbed onto nanostructured metals, such as the surfaces of gold or silver nanoparticles, experience an enhancement in inelastic light scattering (106~108)[31-32]. Compared with other high-sensitivity techniques, SERS detection does not require complex sample preparation procedures, thereby reducing pre-processing steps. Overall, SERS is rapidly emerging as a key analytical technique with successful applications in bioanalysis, disease detection, and diagnosis[33]. In addition, biocompatible SERS-active nanoparticles or substrates can be coated with appropriate surfactants or protective shells to enhance their stability in biological environments. These nanoparticles or substrates can be used for direct detection or for indirect detection via specific receptors, aptamers, etc., thereby enabling efficient identification of bioanalytes. Whether for direct or indirect detection, SERS technology demonstrates high precision and exceptional sensitivity, providing a reliable means of detection for the early diagnosis and treatment evaluation of breast cancer metastasis.
SERS technology encompasses two methods: direct detection and indirect detection. Direct detection involves identifying target molecules by analyzing their intrinsic Raman fingerprint signals, without the need for any external signal labels (Figure 1B) [34-35]. This method is highly attractive, particularly for its outstanding performance in high-sensitivity detection at the single-molecule level, as it can directly obtain unique information about the target molecule while avoiding potential interference or errors that may be introduced by conventional methods[36].
However, its practical application is limited by two key issues: First, most biomolecules themselves have small Raman scattering cross-sections, resulting in weak signals. Second, in biological systems, the surfaces of nanoprobes are prone to adsorption of serum proteins, forming a “protein corona.” This structure not only shields active sites but also significantly attenuates SERS signal intensity, reduces selectivity, and compromises in vivo circulation stability[37-39]. In contrast, indirect SERS detection can, to some extent, overcome the limitations of direct detection. This approach typically involves modifying the surfaces of noble metal nanoparticles with various organic molecules as Raman reporter molecules, coating the outer layer with a protective shell, and attaching specific targeting ligands, thereby enabling indirect detection of proteins, DNA, and other biomarkers (Fig. 1C)[40-41]. In indirect SERS detection, the targeting moiety is first attached to the nanomaterial, and then the SERS tag is bound to the molecular target, with the target being identified through the Raman signal of the reporter molecule[42-43].

2.2 Technical Advantages of SERS

Compared with spontaneous Raman scattering, the significant enhancement of SERS signals at the nanoscale enables the detection of biomolecules at extremely low concentrations, even at the single-molecule level. By modifying the surface of SERS probes with targeting units—such as monoclonal antibodies, small-molecule ligands, or specific peptide chains—it is possible to achieve specific recognition of breast cancer–related molecules, including Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), and mucin 1 (MUC1)[44].Targeting units bind with high affinity to receptors on the surface of tumor cells, effectively enhancing signal selectivity and thereby reducing background interference. This strategy not only improves the reliability of detection but also facilitates the differentiation of tumor cell subpopulations, providing data support for the analysis of tumor heterogeneity[45].
SERS technology can be integrated with other clinical imaging modalities and molecular imaging techniques to enable multimodal imaging. At the molecular level, SERS provides high-resolution, fingerprint-like information, while other imaging techniques offer macroscopic structural visualization or anatomical localization capabilities. Multimodal fusion not only enhances imaging accuracy and spatial resolution but also enables multidimensional visualization of breast cancer lesions, such as detecting the precise location of tumors, the clarity of their boundaries, and potential metastatic foci. When used in conjunction with fluorescence imaging, MRI, and other techniques, SERS can simultaneously achieve both microscopic detection and macroscopic observation, providing a more reliable basis for precise diagnosis[46]..
In real-time monitoring of breast cancer metastasis, SERS boasts high detection sensitivity and rapid response capabilities, enabling direct detection of trace CTCs and Exos without the need for complex sample pre-processing. Its spectral characteristics—narrow peak width and low background interference—allow it to precisely distinguish between structurally similar biomolecules, thereby overcoming the spectral overlap issues inherent in traditional fluorescence detection. Furthermore, compared with conventional methods such as hematoxylin-eosin staining (HE staining), immunohistochemistry (IHC), and polymerase chain reaction (PCR), SERS enables immediate spectral acquisition, significantly enhancing detection efficiency and making it particularly suitable for intraoperative rapid assessment and dynamic disease monitoring[47]..
Breast cancer is a malignant tumor characterized by high molecular heterogeneity and a propensity for metastasis. Tumor cells from different patients, or even from different sites within the same patient, often exhibit significant differences in molecular expression[48]. For example, the expression levels of markers such as HER2, the estrogen receptor (ER), and the progesterone receptor (PR) may be downregulated or absent due to heterogeneity among cell subpopulations or changes in the tumor microenvironment[49]. This situation can easily lead to false-negative results in single-marker detection, thereby compromising the accuracy of disease diagnosis and treatment decisions[50]. SERS probes, through the design of multi-target recognition platforms, can simultaneously carry multiple Raman reporter molecules and target different molecular markers[51]. This multiplexed detection strategy can significantly enhance the ability to capture breast cancer–related biological signals, improve detection sensitivity and specificity, and effectively reduce the false-negative rate. For instance, simultaneous detection of HER2, EGFR, and MUC1 can cover a broader range of breast cancer subtypes, thereby compensating for lesion information that might be missed by a single marker[52]. From a clinical perspective, identifying multiple molecular markers not only helps precisely locate small or occult metastatic lesions but also enables the assessment of tumor invasiveness and drug resistance, providing an important basis for developing personalized treatment plans. In particular, during preoperative subtyping, intraoperative navigation, and postoperative efficacy monitoring, multi-target detection can provide clinicians with more comprehensive and dynamic disease information, helping physicians achieve earlier and more accurate interventions[53]. Moreover, the multi-marker strategy is also suitable for monitoring treatment-related biological changes, such as alterations in markers associated with immune cell infiltration in the tumor microenvironment and the epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) process, thereby providing strong technical support for research on drug resistance mechanisms and the identification of new therapeutic targets[54]. Therefore, SERS-based multi-target detection platforms not only represent an effective approach to addressing the molecular complexity of breast cancer but also offer a viable solution for advancing precision medicine.
To further enhance the efficiency and accuracy of breast cancer diagnosis, SERS platforms are progressively integrating with a variety of advanced technologies, driving their development toward intelligent and integrated systems. This cross-technology integration not only enhances the multidimensional capabilities of detection but also endows SERS with greater application flexibility, meeting the diverse needs of complex clinical scenarios. First, the introduction of microfluidic chip technology enables automation and high-throughput operation of sample processing[55]. The miniaturized structure allows precise control of liquid flow, enabling sample preprocessing, mixing, and reaction to be completed entirely within microchannels. This significantly reduces human error and sample loss while markedly improving detection efficiency. Such integrated systems are particularly well suited for applications requiring rapid response, such as liquid biopsies and intraoperative rapid testing. Second, artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms, especially deep learning and pattern recognition techniques, are playing an increasingly important role in the signal analysis of SERS spectra[56]. By training models to recognize Raman feature peaks associated with different biomarkers, AI can effectively improve the accuracy of signal identification, with particular advantages in samples featuring weak signals or complex backgrounds. The combination of immunoassay technology with SERS forms an immuno-SERS platform that enables highly sensitive detection of breast cancer–related proteins through antibody–antigen–specific recognition[57]. Compared with traditional immunostaining, SERS provides faster and more quantitative results. At the genetic level, SERS probes can specifically target cancer–related mutation sites, such as PIK3CA (Phosphoinositide-3-kinase catalytic subunit alpha) and Breast cancer 1 (BRCA1)[58]. By functionalizing nucleic acid probes and modifying them onto the SERS substrate, specificity is enhanced, and mutation information can be obtained directly without PCR amplification, providing a technological foundation for early molecular diagnosis[59]. Finally, the application of smart nanoprobes expands SERS’s capabilities in metabolic detection. By loading pH–responsive units, enzymes, or targeting molecules onto the probe surface, these nanostructures can enable real–time monitoring of metabolites such as lactate, glucose, and glutathione, thereby supporting the assessment of tumor metabolic status and the dynamic tracking of treatment efficacy[60]. Overall, the integration of SERS platforms with these cutting-edge technologies not only broadens their application scenarios across multiple stages of breast cancer, including screening, intraoperative navigation, treatment efficacy evaluation, and personalized therapy, but also enhances operational flexibility and system scalability. Clinically, physicians can flexibly select detection modes based on specific clinical needs, enabling the integration of multidimensional information from the molecular level to the systemic level and providing stronger support for precision medicine.

2.3 Principles of SERS Probe Design

In summary, existing scoring systems have limited predictive capabilities for bleeding events, and their results are inconsistent[25,30,33].
图2 SERS探针结合基底和拉曼报告分子: (A) 拉曼报告分子;(B) 使用AuNP比色检测分析的RNA检测方法;(C) 肽和氨基酸如何使金纳米颗粒功能化;(D) 金纳米粒子的能隙增强

Fig.2 SERS probes incorporating both substrate and Raman reporter molecules. (A) Raman reporter molecule; (B) RNA detection method using AuNP colorimetric detection assay; (C) how peptides and amino acids functionalize gold nanoparticles; (D) gap enhancement on gold nanoparticles

Despite significant improvements in SERS substrate performance, large-scale applications still face challenges such as complex fabrication, difficulty in controlling uniformity, and poor signal consistency. Although noble metal nanomaterials are highly sensitive, they are prone to oxidation or aggregation, requiring additional modifications to function effectively in complex environments. To address these issues, researchers have proposed several solutions: (1) biomimetic modification by coating the substrate surface with a silica or polymer layer to enhance stability and biocompatibility; (2) loading metal nanostructures onto polymer or fiber membranes to fabricate flexible substrates that can adapt to curved surfaces or flexible devices for on-site detection; (3) using photothermal or pH-sensitive materials to dynamically regulate “hotspot” distribution, enabling on-demand enhancement. In addition, 3D porous substrates can significantly increase detection throughput by increasing molecular adsorption sites.
SERS probes enable highly sensitive detection of biomolecules by immobilizing Raman reporter molecules on the surface of noble metal nanoparticles. Commonly used Raman reporter molecules typically exhibit the following structural characteristics. First, they should possess a high Raman scattering cross-section (such as rhodamine and methylene blue) to significantly enhance signal intensity. Second, they contain specific functional groups (such as 4-mercaptobenzoic acid, mercapto pyridine, and mercapto pyrimidine) that allow them to adsorb firmly onto the surface of noble metal nanoparticles. In addition, they feature a conjugated electron system (such as tetramethylrhodamine and crystal violet), which can increase the change in polarizability and enhance the Raman signal. Finally, these molecules exhibit good stability and are resistant to degradation (such as azo dyes and triphenylmethane dyes), thereby ensuring signal reliability. In SERS probe applications, these Raman reporter molecules are immobilized on the surface of noble metal nanoparticles and, in combination with targeting ligands on the protective shell, enable highly sensitive detection of biomolecules (such as proteins and DNA).
To ensure that SERS probes can efficiently identify breast cancer cells, the design must involve functionalization modifications targeting specific molecular markers. By modifying antibodies, peptide chains, or other targeting molecules onto the surface of nanoparticles, the probes can precisely recognize specific antigens on the surface of breast cancer cells (such as HER2, ER, etc.), thereby achieving highly efficient targeted recognition of tumor cells. To enhance the signal intensity of the probes, the probe design must select appropriate particle size and shape (such as nanospheres, nanorods, nanostars, etc.) as well as suitable metal materials (such as gold or silver) and optimize the LSPR effect of the metal nanoparticles, thereby amplifying the signal[61]. In addition, a protective layer or functionalization modification on the probe surface can prevent oxidation or aggregation of the metal nanoparticles in the in vivo environment, thereby maintaining their stability [62-64]. In terms of specific modification methods, the surface of SERS probes is typically functionalized using biocompatible materials such as polyethylene glycol (PEG) and albumin to reduce the toxicity and immunogenicity of the metal nanoparticles[65]. Polymer materials or water-soluble substances like PEG are often used for surface modification to enhance the biocompatibility of the probes and minimize their adverse effects on cells or tissues[66-67]. Targeting molecules can also be attached to metal nanoparticles via electrostatic adsorption or chemical covalent bonding. Through these modifications, the probes not only improve their biocompatibility but also enhance their specificity and stability in recognizing breast cancer cells. The sensitivity of SERS probes is crucial for their application in breast cancer detection. To enhance sensitivity, nanomaterials with strong surface-enhancement effects are typically selected, and it is ensured that their surfaces have sufficient functional groups to strengthen interactions with target molecules. By optimizing the size, morphology, and distribution of the metal nanoparticles, the intensity of the Raman signal can be further increased, thereby improving the detection sensitivity of the probes.
表1 不同SERS探针检测性能对比

Table 1 Comparison of detection performance of different SERS probes

Detection Targets SERS Probes Linear range Limits of Detection (LODs) Ref
CTCs Gold nanoprobe targeting mesenchymal transition markers (EpCAM, E-cadherin, N-cadherin, ABCB5) 10~104 cells/mL EpCAM/E-cadherin (6/1 MCF7 cells/mL)
N-cadherin/ABCB5 (3/105 MDA-MB-231 cells/mL)
83
Serum EXOs (HER2 and MUC1) Au nanostars conjugated with DTNB-HER2 aptamer/4-MBA-MUC1 aptamer 107~1011
particles/mL
3.2×106particles/mL for SKBR EXOs and 4.80×106 particles/mL for MCF EXOs 90
Human breast cancer-associated miRNAs (let-7b, miRNA-1, 10b, 125b, 126, 133a, 143, 155 and 21 3D SERS holography chip 10-8~10-18 mol/L 1 amol/L 103
Luciferase-labeled 4T1 tumor cells N3-labeled macrophage membrane-encapsulated SERS probes NA NA 114
CD47 CD47-specific gold nanoprobes 0.01~1 μg/mL 0.005 μg/mL 121
GRB-7, CD63, GAPDH, and HER2 Au@Ag core-shell nanoprobe NA NA 128
HER2 AuSt@SiO2 core-shell nanoprobe conjugated with HER2 specific aptamer 0~100 μg/mL 0.46 μg/mL 130

NA: not available

3 SERS-Based Detection and Screening of Breast Cancer Metastasis

Due to its high sensitivity and high spatiotemporal resolution, SERS technology has demonstrated tremendous potential in the detection of breast cancer metastasis and the evaluation of treatment outcomes. Through liquid biopsies, SERS technology can sensitively detect metastatic biomarkers such as CTCs and EXOs, providing a non-invasive and efficient means of monitoring metastasis. At the same time, SERS imaging technology can precisely locate small metastatic lesions, thereby improving early diagnosis and surgical localization of breast cancer. In histopathological biopsies of breast cancer tissue, SERS technology directly analyzes molecular information within the tissue, providing faster and more accurate diagnostic results than traditional histological methods while eliminating human error introduced during staining and immunohistochemistry. These advantages position SERS technology as a promising tool for detecting breast cancer metastasis and assessing personalized treatment strategies.

3.1 Liquid biopsy

Liquid biopsy, as a non-invasive diagnostic technique, analyzes tumor-derived substances such as CTCs, EXOs, and microRNAs (miRNA), offering advantages in early diagnosis and dynamic monitoring[68-71]. Liquid biopsy can overcome the heterogeneity of breast cancer tumor cells, comprehensively reflecting the biochemical information of tumor tissue, and provides reliable support for the early diagnosis, treatment monitoring, and surgical evaluation of breast cancer[72-74].
Epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) is a key mechanism that promotes breast cancer metastasis. It enhances the metastatic potential of CTCs by facilitating their detachment from the primary tumor, enhancing their migratory and invasive capabilities, increasing their circulation survival rate, and promoting distant colonization[75-77]. Histopathological biopsy is currently the gold standard for EMT monitoring; however, SERS technology, with its non-invasive nature and high sensitivity, shows potential as an alternative[78-82]. Monitoring strategies based on CTC phenotypic characteristics and the dynamic process of EMT have been developed. During EMT, tumor cells gradually transition from an epithelial phenotype to a mesenchymal phenotype. This transformation enables tumor cells to detach from the primary tumor, invade the vascular system to form CTCs, and subsequently disseminate via the bloodstream to distant organs (Figure 3A). To monitor CTC phenotypic heterogeneity in real time, researchers have developed a multiplexed SERS nanoprobe labeling technique (Figure 3B). This technique employs four gold nanoprobes, each targeting a specific marker: the epithelial marker EpCAM (1338 cm-1), E-cadherin (1080 cm-1), N-cadherin (1379 cm-1), and the tumor stem cell marker ABCB5 (1000 cm-1)[83-85]. By analyzing SERS spectra (Figure 3C(i)), we can simultaneously detect the phenotypic characteristics of different CTC subpopulations. Combined with a multiplexed labeling strategy (Figure 3C(ii)Figure 3C(iii)
图3 通过表征循环肿瘤细胞表型及其异质性的动态演变追踪上皮-间充质转化过程,其中SERS光谱信号分布曲线的展宽程度与异质性水平呈正相关,同时该技术也可用于单个外泌体的SERS光谱构建:(A) 上皮-间质转化(EMT)过程同时发生于肿瘤原发灶和循环系统,当肿瘤细胞/循环肿瘤细胞(CTCs)暴露于TGF-β等EMT诱导因子时,会导致细胞表型和形态发生从上皮型向间质型的转变;(B) 通过功能化SERS纳米标签标记CTCs后,在激光激发下进行检测;(C) (i) 功能化SERS纳米标签的特征峰分别位于:DTNB (1338 cm⁻¹)、MBA (1080 cm⁻¹)、TFMBA (1379 cm⁻¹)和MPY (1000 cm⁻¹);(ii) 标志物特异性SERS纳米标签的特征峰强度可显示CTCs在上皮状态和间质状态下的EMT相关表型;(iii) 信号分布曲线反映了CTCs在上皮和间质状态下的表型异质性;(D) (i) HER2和MUC1探针的结构示意图;(ii) 探针与外泌体表面HER2和MUC1的特异性结合;(iii) 通过多元曲线分辨-交替最小二乘法(MCR-ALS)将SKBR和MCF细胞来源外泌体的复杂SERS光谱解析为两个组分光谱(CHER2和CMUC1),它们分别与HER2和MUC1探针的SERS光谱高度相似; (E) 经MCR-ALS解析得到的相对SERS强度比(α/β)在SKBR外泌体(n=50)和MCF外泌体(n=50)中的分布情况;(F) 单个SKBR和MCF外泌体的复合SERS光谱(Specexo)可通过两个结合探针SERS光谱的加权求和构建:Specexo = α·CHER2 + β·CMUC1,其中α和β分别代表相应外泌体中HER2和MUC1蛋白标志物的权重(丰度)

Fig.3 Tracking the epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) process by characterizing the dynamic evolution of circulating tumor cell (CTC) phenotypes and heterogeneity, where the broadening of SERS spectral distribution curves positively correlates with heterogeneity levels, while this technique can also be applied to construct SERS spectra of individual exosomes. (A) EMT process occurs in both tumor sites and circulation when tumor cells/CTCs are exposed to the EMT inducers (e.g., TGF-β), resulting in phenotypic and morphological changes from epithelial type to mesenchymal type. (B) CTCs are labeled with functionalized SERS nanotags and detected under laser excitation. (C) (i) Signals of functionalized SERS nanotags, showing the characteristic peaks at 1338, 1080, 1379, and 1000 cm-1 for DTNB, MBA, TFMBA, and MPY, respectively. (ii) Characteristic peak intensities of marker-specific SERS nanotag signals show EMT-associated phenotypes of CTCs at epithelial and mesenchymal status. (iii) Signal distribution curves reflect the phenotypic heterogeneity of CTCs at epithelial and mesenchymal status. (D) Schematic illustration of (i) the structures of the HER2 and MUC1 probes, (ii) their targeted binding onto exosomal HER2 and MUC1, and (iii) MCR-ALS spectral unmixing of the complex SERS spectra of SKBR and MCF exos into two component spectra (CHER2 and CMUC1) with high similarity to the SERS spectra of HER2 and MUC1 probes, respectively. (E) Relative SERS intensity (α/β) in SKBR exos (n = 50) and MCF exos (n = 50) from the MCR-ALS spectral unmixing, and (F) complex SERS spectra (Specexo) of the individual SKBR and MCF exos, constructed by the weighted sum of the SERS spectra of the two bound probes: Specexo = α·CHER2 + β·CMUC1, where α and β are the weights (abundances) of exosomal HER2 and MUC1 protein biomarkers in the corresponding exos, respectively

Exosomes are a class of nanoscale vesicles secreted by cells, widely present in various body fluids. As an important mediator of intercellular communication, they can carry a variety of bioactive molecules, including proteins, lipids, DNA, and multiple types of RNA (including miRNA and lncRNA)[86-87]. Recent studies have shown that tumor-derived exosomes play a crucial role in the initiation, progression, metastasis, and treatment response of breast cancer. They not only participate in regulating the tumor microenvironment, promoting angiogenesis, and facilitating immune evasion, but can also alter the biological behavior of target cells through interactions with them. Given that the molecular composition of exosomes is closely linked to the tumor state, they are regarded as a highly promising non-invasive biomarker that can be used for the early diagnosis, prognosis assessment, and treatment monitoring of breast cancer[88-89]. As shown in Figure 3D(i, ii), the schematic process depicts the incubation of exosomes derived from three SK human breast cancer cell lines (SK breast cancer 3, SKBR3) and Michigan Cancer Foundation-7 cells (MCF) with HER2 and MUC1 aptamer probes, respectively. By using high-concentration, equimolar aptamer probes, saturation binding to the target molecules is achieved. The single-exosome SERS spectra are then analyzed using the multivariate curve resolution-alternating least squares (MCR-ALS) method, successfully deconvoluting two characteristic end-member spectra: the HER2-specific spectrum (α coefficient, major peak at 1580 cm⁻¹) and the MUC1-specific spectrum (β coefficient, characteristic peak at 1120 cm⁻¹)[90-91]. The α/β ratio in each exosome can quantitatively reflect the relative expression levels of HER2 and MUC1, providing a multi-parameter analysis at the single-vesicle level for molecular subtyping of breast cancer (Figure 3D(iii)). The statistical distribution of the average intensity ratio (α/β) between SKBR-EXOs and MCF-EXOs reveals significant differences in their surface marker expression (Figure 3E). This result is highly consistent with the HER2/MUC1 expression ratio determined by Western blotting (WB), thereby indirectly validating the reliability of the unmixing model. SERS spectral reconstruction confirms that weighted HER2/MUC1 signals can accurately resolve EXO surface markers (Figure 3F). This model demonstrates a comprehensive technological workflow for SERS-based single-exosome analysis, enabling integrated analysis from exosome capture to molecular phenotyping.
MicroRNAs are a class of endogenous non-coding RNAs that play a crucial role in regulating gene expression, cell proliferation, invasion, and migration. Their aberrant expression is closely associated with the development and metastasis of breast cancer[92-93]. Existing studies have shown that in the serum of ER-/PR-negative breast cancer patients, microRNA-21 (miR-21), microRNA-106a (miR-106a), and microRNA-155 (miR-155) are significantly upregulated, while microRNA-126 (miR-126), microRNA-199a (miR-199a), and microRNA-335 (miR-335) are significantly downregulated, suggesting that miRNAs hold potential as biomarkers for molecular subtyping and treatment evaluation in breast cancer[94-95]. Current mainstream miRNA detection technologies include Northern blotting, reverse transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR), next-generation sequencing (NGS), and microarrays; however, each of these techniques has its own limitations, such as insufficient sensitivity, lengthy assay times, or difficulties in labeling[96-97]. Therefore, there is an urgent need for a novel detection method that offers high sensitivity, convenient operation, and high-throughput analysis. SERS technology, with its exceptionally high signal enhancement capability (enhancement factor up to 1012–1014) and strong resistance to background interference, is regarded as an ideal tool for achieving precise miRNA detection[98-99]. However, simultaneously detecting multiple miRNAs in complex clinical samples such as tissues, serum, or plasma remains challenging, primarily due to: (1) the subtle differences in Raman signals among different miRNA molecules, making them difficult to distinguish; and (2) the time-consuming nature of point-by-point scanning[100-102]. To overcome these limitations, researchers have proposed combining SERS with microfluidic chips and digital holographic imaging technology to enable rapid, multiplexed, high-throughput detection. A recent study has developed a three-dimensional (3D) SERS holographic chip platform that can complete the qualitative and quantitative analysis of breast cancer–related miRNAs within 9 minutes[103]. The system first uses Exo III enzyme for isothermal amplification of miRNAs, then directs the amplified products into a microfluidic device embedded with a silver nanoparticle array. Each miRNA triggers a change in the SERS signal by opening a probe-specific stem-loop structure, causing the fluorescent dye to move away from the metal substrate. Finally, by scanning the array area and integrating spatial–spectral information, a 3D SERS hologram is generated that can simultaneously identify nine breast cancer–related miRNAs, including lethal-7b microRNA (let-7b), microRNA-1 (miR-1), microRNA-10b (miR-10b), microRNA-125b (miR-125b), miR-126, microRNA-133a (miR-133a), microRNA-143 (miR-143), miR-155, and miR-21. The platform achieves a minimum detection limit of 1 aM and exhibits approximately 85% detection consistency with RT-qPCR in clinical samples, demonstrating excellent sensitivity and accuracy.
With the advancement of liquid biopsy and the concept of non-invasive benchmark medicine, the application of SERS in breast cancer screening has attracted increasing attention. Traditional breast cancer screening methods, such as mammography, are recognized as standard screening approaches; however, they have significant limitations in detecting early, small lesions, which can easily lead to missed diagnoses[104]. In addition, mammographic screening involves radiation exposure, making frequent testing inadvisable, and it lacks the ability to detect molecular-level abnormalities. In contrast, SERS technology offers advantages such as high sensitivity, high molecular specificity, and multi-target detection. By capturing molecular fingerprint characteristics in serum or plasma, SERS provides new technical support for the early detection of breast cancer[105]. Furthermore, SERS-based detection does not require complex sample pre-processing or tissue sampling; only a small blood sample is needed to complete the test, making it suitable for large-scale population screening. Existing studies have attempted to combine SERS spectra with multivariate statistical analysis methods (such as principal component analysis PCA, linear discriminant analysis LDA, and support vector machines SVM) to establish discrimination models that successfully differentiate blood samples from healthy individuals and breast cancer patients[106]. This technological approach offers advantages such as low cost, high throughput, and rapid response, providing a viable new tool for future primary healthcare facilities to conduct non-invasive breast cancer screening.
In addition to screening for individual cancer types, SERS can also be used for differential analysis between breast cancer and other cancers. In a large-scale study involving 253 total serum samples, researchers collected samples from healthy volunteers as well as patients with breast cancer, lung cancer, colorectal cancer, oral cancer, and ovarian cancer, and systematically evaluated the classification accuracy based on SERS spectra. The results showed that SERS technology demonstrates good discriminative ability in distinguishing between different cancer types, suggesting its potential application value in cancer type–specific screening and differential diagnosis[107]..

3.2 Imaging of metastatic lesions

Preoperative detection of lymph node metastasis (LNM) in breast cancer has always been a major challenge in clinical diagnosis and treatment. To track potential metastatic foci, various imaging techniques have been widely used in clinical practice, including US, CT, MRI, SPECT, and PET-CT[108].Although PET-CT is widely regarded as the “gold standard” for imaging detection of various malignant tumors, it still faces challenges in terms of insufficient sensitivity and specificity for detecting small metastatic foci in breast cancer. US is easy to perform, non-invasive, and provides real-time dynamic imaging, and is commonly used to assess the size, shape, and internal structure of lymph nodes. However, its ability to detect deep or small metastatic lymph nodes is limited, and it is highly dependent on the operator. US also has relatively low specificity: benign lesions such as inflammation and infection can cause lymph node enlargement, leading to an increased false-positive rate and compromising diagnostic accuracy. CT offers high spatial resolution for assessing anatomical structures and can visualize lymph node size and calcification; however, its ability to resolve small lesions is limited, and it relies primarily on morphological features for assessment, lacking functional information and making it difficult to accurately distinguish between benign and malignant lesions. MRI provides excellent soft-tissue contrast and can clearly depict anatomical details in the breast and axillary regions. However, MRI imaging is time-consuming and relatively expensive, and it has certain limitations in detecting small metastatic foci, especially those with low signal intensity differences. As a functional imaging technique, SPECT can reflect the metabolic and blood flow characteristics of tumor tissue and is used for locating lymphatic drainage pathways or sentinel lymph nodes. However, its spatial resolution is relatively low, making it difficult to clearly visualize small structures, and its images are prone to artifacts, which limits its suitability for evaluating fine anatomical structures. PET-CT combines the advantages of metabolic and anatomical imaging and is widely used in breast cancer staging and systemic metastasis evaluation. Although it exhibits good detection capability for large, highly metabolically active lesions, it is prone to missing low-metabolism or small metastatic foci, particularly those with diameters less than 5 mm. In addition, PET-CT is expensive, requires sophisticated equipment, and is not suitable for routine screening[109-111].Traditional imaging techniques generally suffer from insufficient sensitivity, limited specificity, and inadequate spatial or metabolic resolution when it comes to detecting small metastatic foci in breast cancer. Morphology-based diagnostic approaches struggle to meet the clinical need for early detection of small metastases, which has driven the gradual development of highly sensitive molecular imaging technologies.
SERS technology demonstrates unique advantages in the visual detection of breast cancer metastatic lesions, particularly in terms of sensitivity, molecular specificity, and spatial resolution. SERS imaging relies on the specific binding of functionalized nanoprobes to tumor-associated molecules or tumor microenvironment characteristics (such as pH and enzyme activity), with Raman-active molecules labeled on the surface of metal nanostructures. The "hotspot" effect significantly amplifies the signal, enabling the visualization and tracking of trace biomarkers. In the detection of breast cancer metastases, SERS nanoprobes can enter metastatic lymph nodes or distant metastatic sites either through active targeting or passive permeation and accumulation. With the aid of a Raman spectrometer, metastatic and non-metastatic tissues can be effectively distinguished. Compared with traditional imaging modalities, SERS enables early and precise localization and monitoring of small metastatic lesions, providing strong technical support for the early diagnosis, intraoperative navigation, and efficacy assessment of breast cancer metastatic lesions. With its extremely high detection sensitivity and molecular specificity, SERS technology holds promise for offering a new approach to the early diagnosis and precise monitoring of breast cancer metastasis[112-113]. Triple-negative breast cancer, as an aggressive subtype of breast cancer, is characterized by early metastasis and poor prognosis, and traditional detection techniques often lack the sensitivity and molecular specificity required for early detection of metastatic lesions. Moreover, due to the absence of effective target sites, recognition units such as antibodies, peptides, and aptamers struggle to specifically target tumor cells and track tumor metastasis in real time. To address these limitations, a dual-modal imaging strategy based on SERS and bioluminescence has been developed, combined with bioorthogonal metabolic sugar labeling technology. Tumor cells (4T1-Luc) labeled with luciferase are modified with a bicyclo[6.1.0]nonyne (BCN) group, and click chemistry is used to facilitate the precise binding of the probe to 4T1-Luc cells. This dual-modal imaging approach enables highly sensitive, real-time monitoring of small metastatic lesions, providing a non-invasive and accurate method for assessing in vivo tumor metastasis and treatment response (Figure 4)[114-115].
图4 SERS和生物发光双模态成像结合生物标记实时追踪三阴性乳腺癌(TNBC)肿瘤转移示意图:(a) M-SERS 探针的制备;(b) 作用机理及其在肿瘤转移监测中的应用

Fig.4 Schematic representation of bioorthogonal labelling for real-time tracking tumor metastasis in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) through SERS and bioluminescence imaging. (a) Preparation of M-SERS Probes. (b) Mechanism of action and application in tumor metastasis monitoring

3.3 Application of SERS in Breast Cancer Tissue Biopsy

In summary, early diagnosis of breast cancer is crucial for improving patient survival rates. Histopathological biopsy is the “gold standard” for confirming a breast cancer diagnosis, providing information on the tumor’s histological type, molecular characteristics, and degree of invasiveness, thereby guiding personalized treatment plans[116].Currently, clinical practice primarily relies on fine-needle aspiration cytology (FNA), core needle biopsy (CNB), and surgical excision biopsy. Due to their invasive nature, histopathological biopsy methods may cause infection, bleeding, or tissue damage, and may result in insufficient sampling or failure to capture key lesion areas, leading to a relatively high false-negative rate[117].Furthermore, sample processing and pathological analysis typically require several days to weeks, which may delay treatment decisions[118]. These challenges have prompted researchers to explore more efficient alternative diagnostic methods.
SERS technology, with its ultra-high sensitivity, rapid detection capability, and molecular fingerprint specificity, shows great potential in breast tissue biopsies. SERS probes can bind to specific biomarkers in tissues via minimally invasive or non-invasive methods, enabling real-time detection and reducing patient discomfort[119]. SERS signals are highly sensitive to molecular changes, allowing even low-concentration biomarkers to be efficiently detected, thereby enhancing diagnostic accuracy[120]. As shown in Figure 5, compared with traditional pathological methods, SERS detection does not require complex sample preparation. By detecting the molecular fingerprint characteristics of specific biomarkers and their metabolites in breast cancer tissues, SERS enables highly sensitive detection of changes in the tumor microenvironment, thereby predicting the potential malignant transformation capacity of breast cancer tissues[121]. Studies have shown that SERS combined with functionalized nanoprobes can enable real-time detection of EMT-related proteins (such as E-cadherin and N-cadherin), revealing early signals of increased tumor invasiveness[122]. By detecting these tissue-type changes at an early stage, SERS technology can provide critical information for MBC and clinical interventions, helping to improve treatment precision and patient prognosis.
图5 乳腺癌组织和小鼠异种移植模型中正常相邻组织的拉曼成像:(A) 施用纳米粒子后的切除组织数字照片;(B) 组织样本的拉曼成像;(C) 拉曼成像与组织样本的叠加,注意乳腺癌组织中纳米粒子的结合增加,相较于正常相邻组织;(D) 定量比值分析特定CD47 SERS纳米粒子与非特异性同型IgG SERS纳米粒子在每个组织样本上的结合情况,注意癌症组织与正常相邻组织之间有显著差异,表示为*(P < 0.05);误差条表示标准误(SEM),拉曼图像右侧的颜色条表示拉曼强度,红色表示最高的拉曼信号,黑色表示没有相关的拉曼信号

Fig.5 Raman imaging of breast cancer tissues and normal adjacent tissue harvested from mouse xenograft. (A) Digital photo of excised tissue after NPs administration; (B) Raman imaging of tissue samples; (C) overlay of Raman imaging with tissue sample, notice the increased NP binding in the breast cancer tissue as opposed to the normal adjacent tissue; (D) quantitative ratiometric analysis of specific CD47 SERS NP binding to non-specific Isotype IgG SERS NP binding on each of the tissue samples. Notice the significant differences represented by * (P < 0.05) between the cancer tissue and the normal adjacent tissues; error bars represent standard error of mean (SEM). Color bar to the right of Raman images represents Raman intensity, where red represents the highest Raman signal and black represents no associated Raman signal

4 SERS Technology for Efficacy Assessment

In breast cancer treatment, efficacy assessment holds significant clinical value. There are pronounced individual differences among patients, leading to varied treatment responses. Scientifically evaluating treatment efficacy not only helps determine disease progression and optimize treatment strategies but also avoids ineffective or overtreatment, thereby enhancing treatment precision and improving patients’ quality of life[123].Currently, clinical practice primarily relies on imaging techniques and serum tumor markers, such as Cancer antigen 15-3 (CA15-3) and Carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), for treatment monitoring. These methods still have limitations in terms of detection sensitivity and specificity, particularly in the early stages, where they often fail to accurately reflect treatment outcomes[124].Therefore, there is an urgent need to develop molecular diagnostic technologies with higher sensitivity, greater timeliness, and enhanced specificity.
There are many subtypes of breast cancer, and the associated tumor cell lines are complex. SERS technology can effectively evaluate treatment efficacy for different molecular subtypes of breast cancer. Molecular subtyping of breast cancer is typically based on the expression status of the estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2). ER and PR are expressed in approximately 75% of breast cancers and serve as prognostic markers for hormone therapy; positive expression generally indicates lower invasiveness. About 15% of breast cancers overexpress HER2, which is more aggressive but responds well to HER2-targeted therapies. The remaining 10%–15% of breast cancers are triple-negative breast cancers (TNBC), which lack expression of ER, PR, and HER2, are usually high-grade, and have a poorer prognosis. Hormone receptor-positive breast cancers (ER+/PR+) respond well to hormone therapy, such as selective estrogen receptor modulators like tamoxifen and aromatase inhibitors like letrozole[125]. SERS can identify drug resistance risks and assist in treatment regimen adjustments by detecting estrogen metabolites, ER expression, or mutations in the relevant gene (ESR1). HER2-positive breast cancers are more sensitive to targeted drugs such as trastuzumab and pertuzumab, and SERS can be used to dynamically monitor changes in HER2 and CTC expression, assessing the suitability of antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) therapy[126-127]. In companion diagnostics for metastatic breast cancer, monitoring drug efficacy is crucial. A deep-learning-assisted SERS-based immunoassay has been developed to monitor trastuzumab efficacy using exosomes from mouse urine with HER2 overexpression (Figure 6)[128]. SERS–deep learning analysis was used to detect antigen levels in exosomes derived from five different cell types, thereby enabling the analysis and monitoring of drug efficacy.
图6 用于监测曲妥珠单抗在乳腺癌患者中的疗效的外泌体生物标志物的深度学习辅助SERS免疫测定的示意图

Fig.6 Schematic illustration of the deep learning-assisted SERS immunoassay of exosomal biomarkers for monitoring the efficacy of trastuzumab in breast cancer patients

In summary, breast cancer metastasis is closely related to tumor cell surface markers and the microenvironment, and clinical practice still faces challenges such as insufficient sensitivity and difficulties in treatment evaluation. To address these issues, researchers have developed a gold-silver core-shell nanoprobe that, through modification with targeting antibodies and Raman reporter molecules, achieves highly sensitive detection of tumor markers. In a breast cancer xenograft model, the probe successfully enabled dynamic monitoring of tumor markers via systemic administration, providing molecular imaging-based evidence for evaluating treatment efficacy and determining the extent of surgical resection[129].Incomplete resection of tiny tumors often leads to a high risk of fatal postoperative recurrence in breast tumor surgery. If tumor margins can be precisely delineated and minute tumor lesions can be removed in real time during surgery to ensure complete tumor excision, surgical outcomes can be significantly improved, and the probability of tumor recurrence can be reduced. SERS probes constructed using HER2-targeting aptamers exhibit ultra-high detection sensitivity and can significantly inhibit HER2 expression and cell proliferation, thereby utilizing photothermal ablation to eliminate tumor cells. In a mouse model of HER2-positive breast tumors, SERS imaging can guide surgical resection and real-time intraoperative photothermal ablation, effectively suppressing tumor recurrence.
Breast-conserving surgery has become an ideal choice for breast cancer patients due to its minimal invasiveness and excellent cosmetic outcomes; however, incomplete tumor resection often leads to recurrence. SERS-based surgical strategies can precisely delineate tumor margins and eliminate microscopic tumors in real time, ensuring complete tumor resection and preventing local recurrence (Figure 7). By using SERS probes targeted to HER2, combined with high-sensitivity detection, inhibition of cell proliferation, and photothermal ablation, this strategy achieved a 100% tumor-free survival rate in HER2-positive breast tumor mouse models, suggesting that this approach holds promise for improving the survival rates of HER2-positive breast cancer patients[130-132].
图7 表面增强拉曼散射成像引导的乳腺癌转移诊疗:(A) SERS成像引导手术流程图,包括术前肿瘤边缘勾画指导保乳手术、术中SERS检测以及实时光热消除手术床残留的微观肿瘤病灶三部分;(B) SERS探针结构示意图:以等离子金纳米星(AuSt)为核心,表面包裹对硝基苯硫酚(p-NTP)拉曼分子层,外层覆以二氧化硅壳层,最终通过HER2特异性适配体(HApt)实现靶向功能化;(C) SERS探针在HER2阳性乳腺癌荷瘤小鼠体内通过静脉给药后,借助增强渗透与滞留(EPR)效应及适配体HApt介导的主动靶向机制在肿瘤部位富集

Fig.7 SERS imaging-guided breast cancer metastasis. (A) The workflow of SERS imaging-guided surgery, including preoperative tumor margin delineation to guide breast-conserving surgery, intraoperative SERS detection, and real-time photothermal elimination of microscopic tumor lesions in the surgical bed;(B) The structure of SERS probes, featuring a plasmonic AuSt core with a layer of p-NTP Raman molecules encapsulated within a silica shell. These probes are conjugated with HER2-specific aptamer (HApt) for targeting; (C) SERS probes accumulate in the tumor after intravenous administration in a HER2+ breast tumor-bearing mouse through the enhanced permeability and retention (EPR) effect and HApt-based active targeting mechanism

SERS imaging technology can also be integrated with therapeutic approaches to create an “theranostic” system, offering a new pathway for the precise treatment and efficacy assessment of breast cancer. By modifying the surface of noble metal nanoparticles with specific targeting ligands (such as antibodies or aptamers) and therapeutic molecules (such as photosensitizers or chemotherapeutic drugs), SERS probes with dual imaging and therapeutic functions can be constructed. These probes not only enable highly sensitive and specific localization of tumor tissues and real-time Raman imaging but can also trigger therapeutic responses under laser irradiation, thereby performing photodynamic therapy (PDT) or photothermal therapy (PTT) to achieve precise ablation of tumor cells[133]..
In recent years, the rapid advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AI) technology has provided a new approach to analyzing complex SERS spectral data. By leveraging advanced algorithms such as deep learning, machine learning, and pattern recognition, AI can efficiently and automatically extract key features from high-dimensional, complex SERS spectra, significantly enhancing data processing efficiency and diagnostic accuracy. More importantly, AI can integrate patients’ multi-omics information (such as genomics, transcriptomics, and metabolomics) to construct individualized risk assessment and prognosis prediction models, thereby providing robust data support for developing precision treatment strategies. AI algorithms also demonstrate superior performance in spectral background correction, signal denoising, and classification and identification tasks, particularly showing great potential in distinguishing between benign and malignant lesions, identifying molecular subtypes of breast cancer, and tracking treatment responses. As shown in Figure 8,with the continuous optimization of multifunctional nanomaterials, the deep integration of AI analysis techniques, and the accumulation of clinical big data, AI platforms based on SERS are expected to become an important component in the diagnosis of breast cancer metastasis and the evaluation of treatment efficacy, thereby facilitating the implementation of precision medicine in clinical practice[134-135].
图8 人工智能在SERS流程中的整合:优化流程与拓展应用:(A) 在整个SERS流程中,人工智能可用于SERS基底、报告分子及其合成路线的设计,仪器优化和数据预处理方法的改进,以及SERS相关应用的推动;(B) 人工智能辅助的SERS应用方面;(C) 定性分析用于确认未知样品中是否存在特定分子物种[134];(D) PCA-TLNN促进靶标识别

Fig.8 Integration of AI into the SERS Pipeline: Advancing Workflow and Expanding Applications. (A) Along the whole SERS pipeline, AI can be used in the design of SERS substrates, the reporter molecules and the synthetic routes, the optimization of instrumentations and data preprocessing methods, as well as SERS related applications; (B) aspects of AI assisted SERS applications;(C) qualification ascertains the existence of certain molecular species in an unknown sample. Reproduced with permission [134]. Copyright 2023, Elsevier;(D) PCA-TLNN facilitated target identification

An exosome analysis method based on the combination of SERS and artificial neural networks (ANN) is used for molecular subtyping of breast cancer and postoperative efficacy assessment[136].First, exosomes secreted by four representative breast cancer cell lines were collected, including MDA-MB-231 (triple-negative breast cancer), MCF-7 (Luminal A), BT474 (Luminal B), and SKBR-3 (HER2+)[137-139]. As shown in Figure 9 (A–E), a total of 8,265 sets of SERS spectral data were obtained, which were used for training and validating the ANN model. The training set and validation set were divided in an 8:2 ratio, and cross-validation and early stopping strategies were introduced to reduce the risk of overfitting and enhance the model’s generalization ability. During model training, the ANN achieved an identification accuracy of 89.1% on the validation set, demonstrating high stability and reproducibility. Furthermore, the model was applied to analyze SERS data from serum exosomes of clinical breast cancer patients. As shown in Figure 9 (F, G), in patients who had not undergone surgery, the ANN model achieved 100% accuracy in identifying different breast cancer subtypes, reflecting its potential value in practical clinical subtyping. The SERS-ANN combined strategy shows promising prospects in breast cancer subtype identification and dynamic efficacy assessment, particularly with broad application potential in exosome-based non-invasive liquid biopsies.
图9 基于SERS特征构建的深度学习辅助ANN模型,用于乳腺癌分类及血清外泌体预测:(A) ANN模型结构图,包括一个输入层、四个全连接的隐藏层和一个输出层,最终输出为四个介于0到1之间的数值,分别对应四种细胞来源外泌体的预测概率。输入层共引入8265组细胞来源外泌体的SERS光谱数据,分别为MDA-MB-231(2125条)、MCF-7(1900条)、BT474(1800条)和SKBR-3(2440条);(B) 分别来源于MDA-MB-231、MCF-7、BT474和SKBR-3细胞的外泌体SERS光谱图(阴影部分表示标准差);(C) 训练集和验证集的交叉熵损失函数和准确率变化曲线;(D) 经过10次重复训练后所得训练集和验证集的最终准确率与交叉熵损失值;(E) 基于合并的细胞来源外泌体SERS数据集,对MDA-MB-231、MCF-7、BT474和SKBR-3的预测结果混淆矩阵;(F) 从患者血清中分离纯化外泌体的示意图,该过程结合了尺寸排阻色谱法和超滤技术;(G) 经过训练的ANN模型对(i)预测试数据集和(ii)测试数据集的预测得分。预测试数据集来自于各类细胞外泌体加入其对应患者血清外泌体洗脱液后的光谱数据,测试数据集来自实际分离的患者血清外泌体光谱数据。图中颜色条表示预测频率的取值范围(0到1);(H) 不同乳腺癌亚型患者在有无手术干预情况下,血清外泌体SERS光谱的输出评分频率曲线图

Fig.9 Development of a deep learning-assisted ANN model for breast cancer classification and serum exosome prediction using SERS features. (A) Architecture of the ANN model consisting of an input layer, four fully connected hidden layers and an output layer, yielding a final output of four numerical values between 0 and 1, that is, the prediction probability that corresponds to each type of cell-derived exosomes. A total of 8265 SERS spectra of cell-derived exosomes consisting of 2125 for MDA-MB-231, 1900 for MCF-7, 1800 for BT474 and 2440 for SKBR-3 are introduced into the input layer;(B) SERS spectra of exosomes derived from MDA-MB-231, MCF-7, BT474 and SKBR-3 cells, respectively (the shadow represents1 s.d.);(C) cross-entropy loss and accuracy of the training and validation sets;(D) final accuracy and cross-entropy loss of training and validation sets with ten repeating trainings;(E) confusion matrices of prediction results for the combined SERS data set of MDA-MB-231, MCF-7, BT474 and SKBR-3 cell-derived exosomes;(F) schematic illustration of the isolation and purification of serum exosomes from patients’serum, performed by the combination of size-exclusion chromatography and ultrafiltration methods;(G) scores predicted by the trained ANN model using (i) the pretesting data set and (ii) the testing data set. The pretesting data set is from cellular exosomes in their respective eluents for the isolation of serum exosomes, whereas the testing data set is obtained from serum exosomes. The color bars represent scales assigned to prediction frequencies (0 to 1);(H) frequency curves of corresponding output scores of SERS spectra of serum exosomes from patients of different breast cancer subtypes with or without surgery

To advance SERS technology from the laboratory to clinical applications, systematic validation during the preclinical research phase is particularly crucial. Currently, several animal model studies have demonstrated the utility of SERS probes in evaluating the efficacy of breast cancer treatments. In a HER2+ breast cancer xenograft mouse model, SERS probes not only clearly delineate tumor boundaries but can also be combined with photothermal therapy to ablate lesions, thereby reducing the risk of postoperative recurrence[140]. Furthermore, SERS technology has been used to track changes in HER2/MUC1 expression levels in exosomes, with deep learning algorithms assisting in the assessment of treatment outcomes. The detection results obtained from mouse urine samples are highly consistent with those from traditional Western blotting, further enhancing the reliability and translatability of the technology[141]. At the same time, the biocompatibility and safety of SERS probes have been evaluated in multiple preclinical studies. By modifying the probe surface with polyethylene glycol or biodegradable materials, protein adsorption during circulation can be effectively reduced, preventing the formation of a protein corona and thereby improving the probe’s in vivo stability and immune evasion capabilities. Toxicological studies have also shown that well-designed SERS probes exhibit low systemic toxicity and favorable metabolic clearance profiles in vivo, demonstrating good safety[142]. In summary, preclinical systematic studies not only validate the feasibility of SERS probes in breast cancer diagnosis and efficacy assessment but also provide critical data support and theoretical foundations for subsequent clinical trials, making them an indispensable key component in the process of translating laboratory findings into bedside applications.

5 Conclusion and Outlook

Due to its high heterogeneity and the low expression of molecular markers, MBC poses more stringent requirements for the sensitivity and specificity of detection technologies. SERS technology, with its unique molecular fingerprinting capabilities and ultra-high signal-to-noise ratio, has emerged as a crucial tool in the fields of early tumor screening, metastasis monitoring, and treatment efficacy assessment. In terms of multi-technology integration, the combination of SERS with advanced platforms significantly expands its application potential in breast cancer metastasis detection and treatment. When used in conjunction with optical imaging techniques (such as photoacoustic imaging and fluorescence imaging), SERS can balance high molecular resolution with strong tissue penetration, enabling precise localization and real-time dynamic tracking of deep tumor tissues. Integration with microfluidic platforms facilitates the efficient enrichment of CTCs from complex liquid samples, enhancing the sensitivity and specificity of liquid biopsies. Meanwhile, by identifying key membrane proteins, SERS can also help elucidate the mechanisms of tumor cell invasion and metastasis, providing a molecular basis for early warning of tumor metastasis.
As a novel diagnostic and therapeutic platform integrating molecular recognition, non-invasive imaging, and treatment evaluation, SERS is reshaping the technological landscape of breast cancer metastasis detection. AI can automate the processing of complex SERS spectral data through deep learning and machine learning algorithms, extract key features, and perform classification and quantitative analysis. This process not only enhances the efficiency of detecting breast tumor biomarkers but also enables the integration of patients’ clinical information to build metastasis prediction models, thereby providing data support for personalized treatment.
Although SERS technology has made significant progress in the basic research phase, its clinical translation still faces a series of pressing challenges. First, the complex in vivo microenvironment may introduce background noise, disrupting the stability of Raman signals and leading to fluctuations or false-positive results, thereby reducing detection accuracy. Second, metal nanomaterials often exhibit batch-to-batch variability during large-scale fabrication, which in turn affects the performance stability and result reproducibility of SERS substrates. Certain nanomaterials may trigger immune responses or pose potential toxicity in vivo, placing higher demands on their biosafety. To effectively transition SERS technology from the “lab bench” to the “bedside,” it is imperative to deepen and broaden preclinical research. Current priorities include developing SERS substrates with high sensitivity, good batch-to-batch stability, low toxicity, and standardized manufacturability, and validating their imaging stability and distribution characteristics in complex physiological environments using animal models. On this basis, SERS nanoprobes should be integrated with liquid biopsy biomarkers such as exosomes and circulating tumor cells (CTCs) to build a dynamic monitoring platform closely linked to breast cancer metastasis pathways, systematically evaluating the enrichment capacity, targeting specificity, and metabolic safety of SERS nanoprobes at metastatic sites.
These issues to some extent limit the widespread clinical application of SERS technology. To enhance the clinical feasibility of SERS in detecting breast cancer metastasis, future research should focus on developing SERS substrates that are highly stable, low in toxicity, biocompatible, and amenable to standardized large-scale production. At the same time, the structural design of nanoprobes should be further optimized to improve their targeting efficiency, tissue penetration, and metabolic safety, thereby enhancing the reliability and adaptability of detection at the source. This offers new strategies for improving the efficacy of breast cancer treatment, slowing disease progression, and enhancing patients’ quality of life. Through continuous technological innovation and multidisciplinary integration, SERS will play an increasingly central role in the early diagnosis of breast cancer metastasis, dynamic monitoring, and personalized treatment evaluation, providing patients with earlier, more accurate, and more effective intervention strategies.
[1]
Arnedos M, Vicier C, Loi S, Lefebvre C, Michiels S, Bonnefoi H, Andre F. Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol., 2015, 12: 693.

[2]
Zagami P, Carey LA. NPJ Breast Cancer, 2022, 8: 95.

[3]
Pelon F, Bourachot B, Kieffer Y, Magagna I, Mermet-Meillon F, Bonnet I, Costa A, Givel A M, Attieh Y, Barbazan J, Bonneau C, Fuhrmann L, Descroix S, Vignjevic D, Silberzan P, Parrini M C, Vincent-Salomon A, Mechta-Grigoriou F. Nat. Commun., 2020, 11: 404.

[4]
Ungefroren H, Sebens S, Seidl D, Lehnert H, Hass R. Cell Commun. Signal., 2011, 9: 18.

[5]
Klein C A. Nat. Rev. Cancer, 2009, 9: 302.

[6]
Slade M J, Coombes R C. Nat. Clin. Pract. Oncol., 2007, 4: 30.

[7]
Quinn C, Maguire A, Rakha E. Histopathology, 2023, 82: 140.

[8]
Bent A, Raghavan S, Dasari A, Kopetz S. Clin. Colorectal Canc., 2022, 21: 89.

[9]
Mehraj U, Dar A H, Wani N A, Mir M A. Cancer Chemoth. Pharm., 2021, 87: 147.

[10]
Bardia A, Hurvitz S A, Tolaney S M, Loirat D, Punie K, Oliveira M, Brufsky A, Sardesai S D, Kalinsky K, Zelnak A B, Weaver R, Traina T, Dalenc F, Aftimos P, Lynce F, Diab S, Cortés J, O’Shaughnessy J, Diéras V, Ferrario C, Schmid P, Carey L A, Gianni L, Piccart M J, Loibl S, Goldenberg D M, Hong Q, Olivo M S, Itri L M, Rugo H S. New Engl. J. Med., 2021, 384: 1529.

[11]
Zhang L, Chen W, Liu S, Chen C. Int. J. Biol. Sci., 2023, 19(2): 552.

[12]
Jiang K, Wang S. Transl. Breast Cancer, 2025, 6: 9.

[13]
Hang Y, Boryczka J, Wu N. Chem. Soc. Rev., 2022, 51: 329.

[14]
Mao J H, van Diest P J, Perez-Losada J, Snijders A M. Sci. Rep., 2017, 7: 12587.

[15]
Johansson A L V, Trewin C B, Hjerkind K V, Ellingjord-Dale M, Johannesen T B, Ursin G. Int. J. Cancer, 2019, 144(6): 1251.

[16]
Gao N, Wang Q, Tang J, Yao S, Li H, Yue X, Fu J, Zhong F, Wang T, Wang J. Anal. Bioanal. Chem., 2021, 413: 4775.

[17]
Chauhan P, Bhargava A, Kumari R, Ratre P, Tiwari R, Srivastava R K, Goryacheva I Y, Mishra P K. Drug Discov. Today, 2022, 27(8): 2121.

[18]
Lin X M, Cui Y, Xu Y H, Ren B, Tian Z Q. Anal. Bioanal. Chem., 2009, 394: 1729.

[19]
Medipally D K R, Cullen D, Untereiner V, Sockalingum G D, Maguire A, Nguyen T N Q, Bryant J, Noone E, Bradshaw S, Finn M, Dunne M, Shannon A M, Armstrong J, Meade A D, Lyng F M. Ther. Adv. Med. Oncol., 2020, 12: 1758835920918499.

[20]
Lin L, Ye J. Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol., 2021, 12: 177.

[21]
Xu Y, Zhang Y, Li C, Ye Z, Bell S E J. Acc. Chem. Res., 2023, 56: 2072.

[22]
Serafinelli C, Fantoni A, Alegria E C B A, Vieira M. Biosensors, 2022, 12: 225.

[23]
Zhang J, Wu J, Wang B, Geng Y, Wang Z. Sensor. Actuat. B Chem., 2024, 410: 135711.

[24]
Wilson A J, Willets K A. Wires Nanomed., 2013, 5: 180.

[25]
Mekonnen M L, Workie Y A, Su W N, Hwang B J. Sensor. Actuat. B Chem., 2021, 345: 130401.

[26]
Li J, Liu F, Bi X, Ye J. Biomaterials, 2023, 302: 122327.

[27]
Wang H, Liu Y, Rao G, Wang Y, Du X, Hu A, Hu Y, Gong C, Wang X, Xiong J. Analyst, 2021, 146: 5008.

[28]
Zhao X, Campbell S, El-Khoury P Z, Jia Y, Wallace G Q, Claing A, Bazuin C G, Masson J F. ACS Sens., 2021, 6: 1649.

[29]
Gorji M B, Ashkarran A A, Hamidinezhad H. Colloid. Surface. A, 2020, 591: 124532.

[30]
Zhang S, Li T, Jiang D, Shi H, Hou H, Fu Z, Shi X. Front. Oncol., 2025, 15: 1664340.

[31]
Panikar S S, Cialla-May D, De la Rosa E, Salas P, Popp J. Trac-Trend. Anal. Chem., 2021, 134: 116122.

[32]
Marro M, Rodríguez-Rivero A M, Araujo-Andrade C, Fernández-Figueras M T, Pérez-Roca L, Castellà E, Navinés J, Mariscal A, Julián J F, Turon P, Loza-Alvarez P. Cancers, 2021, 13: 2658.

[33]
Cupil-Garcia V, Strobbia P, Crawford B M, Wang H N, Ngo H, Liu Y, Vo-Dinh T. J. Raman Spectrosc., 2021, 52: 541.

[34]
Wang Z, Zong S, Wu L, Zhu D, Cui Y. Chem. Rev., 2017, 117: 7910.

[35]
Kim S, Kim W, Bang A, Song J Y, Shin J H, Choi S. Anal. Methods, 2021, 13: 3249.

[36]
Qi J, Li Y, Yang M, Wu Q, Chen Z, Wang W, Lu W, Yu X, Xu J, Sun Q. Nanoscale Res. Lett., 2013, 8: 437.

[37]
Zhang C, Xu L, Miao X, Zhang D, Xie Y, Hu Y, Zhang Z, Wang X, Wu X, Liu Z, Zang W, He C, Li Z, Ren W, Chen T, Xu C, Zhang Y, Wu A, Lin J. Biosens. Bioelectron., 2025, 268: 116897.

[38]
Ashkarran A A, Gharibi H, Voke E, Landry M P, Saei A A, Mahmoudi M. Nat. Commun., 2022, 13: 6610.

[39]
Sheibani S, Basu K, Farnudi A, Ashkarran A, Ichikawa M, Presley J, Bui K, Ejtehadi M R, Vali H, Mahmoudi M. Nat. Commun., 2021, 12: 573.

[40]
De Silva Indrasekara A. J. Appl. Phys., 2021, 129: 231102.

[41]
Liu H, Gao X, Xu C, Liu D. Theranostics, 2022, 12: 1870.

[42]
Zhu R, Zhang P, Xu Y, Ma J, Jia Q. Chinese. Chem. Lett., 2025, 36: 110259.

[43]
Zeng L, Pan Y, Wang S, Wang X, Zhao X, Ren W, Lu G, Wu A. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces, 2015, 7: 16781.

[44]
Pourjafar M, Saidijam M, Miehe M, Najafi R, Soleimani M, Spillner E. J. Immunother., 2023, 46: 245.

[45]
Rotter L K, Berisha N, Hsu H T, Burns K H, Andreou C, Kircher M F. Nanotheranostics, 2022, 6: 256.

[46]
Lv J, Chang S, Wang X, Zhou Z, Chen B, Qian R, Li D. Sensor. Actuat. B-Chem., 2022, 351: 130877.

[47]
Orringer D A, Pandian B, Niknafs Y S, Hollon T C, Boyle J, Lewis S, Garrard M, Hervey-Jumper S L, Garton H J L, Maher C O, Heth J A, Sagher O, Wilkinson D A, Snuderl M, Venneti S, Ramkissoon S H, McFadden K A, Fisher-Hubbard A, Lieberman A P, Johnson T D, Xie X S, Trautman J K, Freudiger C W, Camelo-Piragua S. Nat. Biomed. Eng., 2017, 1: 0027.

[48]
Vishnubalaji R, Alajez N M. Cells, 2023, 12: 1182.

[49]
Bagaria S P, Ray P S, Sim M S, Ye X, Shamonki J M, Cui X, Giuliano A E. JAMA Surg., 2014, 149: 125.

[50]
Ren X, Song Y, Pang J, Chen L, Zhou L, Liang Z, Wu H. Front. Immunol., 2023, 14: 1137561.

[51]
Liu L, Xiong H, Wang X, Jiang H. Anal. Bioanal. Chem., 2024, 416: 3869.

[52]
Wu Y, Wang Y, Mo T, Liu Q. Talanta, 2024, 280: 126717.

[53]
Ying B, Xu W, Nie Y, Li Y. Dis. Markers, 2022, 2022: 8446857.

[54]
Babaei G, Vostakolaei M A, Bazl M R, Gholizadeh-Ghaleh Aziz S, Gholipour E, Nejati-Koshki K. Life Sci., 2022, 310: 121103.

[55]
Cao X, Ge S, Chen M, Mao H, Wang Y. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces, 2023, 15: 21830.

[56]
Kothari R, Jones V, Mena D, Bermúdez Reyes V, Shon Y, Smith J P, Schmolze D, Cha P D, Lai L, Fong Y, Storrie-Lombardi M C. Sci. Rep., 2021, 11: 6482.

[57]
Ilyas A, Dyussupova A, Sultangaziyev A, Shevchenko Y, Filchakova O, Bukasov R. Talanta, 2023, 265: 124818.

[58]
Li X, Yang T, Li C S, Song Y, Lou H, Guan D, Jin L. Theranostics, 2018, 8: 1678.

[59]
Dukes P V, Strobbia P, Ngo H T, Odion R A, Rocke D, Lee W T, Vo-Dinh T. Anal. Chim. Acta, 2020, 1139: 111.

[60]
Yin H, Jin Z, Duan W, Han B, Han L, Li C. Adv. Healthc. Mater., 2022, 11: 2200030.

[61]
Rodal-Cedeira S, Vázquez-Arias A, Bodelón G, Skorikov A, Núñez-Sánchez S, Laporta A, Polavarapu L, Bals S, Liz-Marzán L M, Pérez-Juste J, Pastoriza-Santos I. ACS Nano, 2020, 14: 14655.

[62]
Askaravi M, Rezatofighi S E, Rastegarzadeh S, Seifi Abad Shapouri M R. AMB Express, 2017, 7: 137.

[63]
Tarvirdipour S, Huang X, Mihali V, Schoenenberger C A, Palivan C G. Molecules, 2020, 25, 3482.

[64]
Khlebtsov N G, Lin L, Khlebtsov B N, Ye J. Theranostics, 2020, 10: 2067.

[65]
Timilsina H P, Arya S P, Tan X. Front. Biosci., 2024, 16: 28.

[66]
Perry E, Mills J J, Zhao B, Wang F, Sun Q, Christov P P, Tarr J C, Rietz T A, Olejniczak E T, Lee T, Fesik S. Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett., 2019, 29: 786.

[67]
Verdin A, Malherbe C, Sloan-Dennison S, Faulds K, Graham D, Eppe G. Spectrochim. Acta A., 2024, 322: 124848.

[68]
Xiang S, Lan Y, Mai Z, Tian F, Mao H. Spectrochim. Acta., 2022, 282: 121611.

[69]
Kong K, Kendall C, Stone N, Notingher I. Adv. Drug Deliver. Rev., 2015, 89: 121.

[70]
Diao X, Li X, Hou S, Li H, Qi G, Jin Y. Anal. Chem., 2023, 95: 7552.

[71]
Parachalil D R, McIntyre J, Byrne H J. Anal. Bioanal. Chem., 2020, 412: 1993.

[72]
Blanco-Formoso M, Alvarez-Puebla R A. Int. J. Mol. Sci., 2020, 21: 2253.

[73]
Nargis H F, Nawaz H, Ditta A, Mahmood T, Majeed M I, Rashid N, Muddassar M, Bhatti H N, Saleem M, Jilani K, Bonnier F, Byrne H J. Spectrochim. Acta., 2019, 222: 117210.

[74]
Iancu S D, Cozan R G, Stefancu A, David M, Moisoiu T, Moroz-Dubenco C, Bajcsi A, Chira C, Andreica A, Leopold L F, Eniu D, Staicu A, Goidescu I, Socaciu C, Eniu D T, Diosan L, Leopold N. Spectrochim. Acta., 2022, 273: 120992.

[75]
Lozar T, Gersak K, Cemazar M, Kuhar C G, Jesenko T. Radiol. Oncol., 2019, 53: 131.

[76]
Hong Y, Fang F, Zhang Q. Int. J. Oncol., 2016, 49: 2206.

[77]
Schneider D, Tarantola M, Janshoff A. BBA Mol. Cell Res., 2011, 1813: 2099.

[78]
Dave B, Mittal V, Tan N M, Chang J C. Breast Cancer Res., 2012, 14: 202.

[79]
Stoyianni A, Goussia A, Pentheroudakis G, Siozopoulou V, Ioachim E, Krikelis D, Golfinopoulos V, Cervantes A, Bobos M, Fotsis T, Bellou S, Fountzilas G, Malamou-Mitsi V, Pavlidis N. Anticancer Res., 2012, 32: 1273.

[80]
Jørgensen C L T, Forsare C, Bendahl P O, Falck A K, Fernö M, Lövgren K, Aaltonen K, Rydén L. Breast Cancer Res. Tr., 2020, 181: 369.

[81]
Bogush T A, Basharina A A, Eliseeva B K, Kaliuzhny S A, Bogush E A, Kirsanov V Y, Davydov M M, Kosorukov V S. BioTechniques, 2020, 69: 257.

[82]
Karacosta L G, Anchang B, Ignatiadis N, Kimmey S C, Benson J A, Shrager J B, Tibshirani R, Bendall S C, Plevritis S K. Nat. Commun., 2019, 10: 5587.

[83]
Zhang Z, Wuethrich A, Wang J, Korbie D, Lin L L, Trau M. Anal. Chem., 2021, 93(50): 16787.

[84]
Zeisberg M, Neilson E G. J. Clin. Invest., 2009, 119: 1429.

[85]
Begicevic R R, Falasca M. Int. J. Mol. Sci., 2017, 18: 2362.

[86]
Yu D, Li Y, Wang M, Gu J, Xu W, Cai H, Fang X, Zhang X. Mol. Cancer, 2022, 21: 56.

[87]
Yang Q, Xu J, Gu J, Shi H, Zhang J, Zhang J, Chen Z S, Fang X, Zhu T, Zhang X. Adv. Sci., 2022, 9: 2201609.

[88]
Su X, Liu X, Xie Y, Chen M, Zheng C, Zhong H, Li M. ACS Nano, 2023, 17: 4077.

[89]
Liu X, Zhang G, Yu T, He J, Liu J, Chai X, Zhao G, Yin D, Zhang C. Cancer Lett., 2022, 543: 215781.

[90]
Su X, Xie Y, Liu X, Chen M, Zheng C, Zhong H, Li M. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces, 2023, 15(31): 37130.

[91]
Xie Y, Wen Y, Su X, Zheng C, Li M. Anal. Chem., 2022, 94: 12762.

[92]
Dai F, Wu Y, Lu Y, An, Zheng X, Dai L, Guo Y, Zhang L, Li H, Xu W, Gao W. Mol. Ther. Nucl. Acids, 2020, 22: 62.

[93]
Fu D, Shi Y, Liu J B, Wu T M, Jia C Y, Yang H Q, Zhang D D, Yang X L, Wang H M, Ma Y. Mol. Ther. Nucl. Acids, 2020, 21: 712.

[94]
Spaziani S, Esposito A, Barisciano G, Quero G, Elumalai S, Leo M, Colantuoni V, Mangini M, Pisco M, Sabatino L, De Luca A, Cusano A. J. Nanobiotechnol., 2024, 22: 350.

[95]
Wang F, Zheng Z, Guo J, Ding X. Gynecol. Oncol., 2010, 119: 586.

[96]
Wen S, Su Y, Dai C, Jia J, Fan G C, Jiang L P, Song R B, Zhu J J. Anal. Chem., 2019, 91: 12298.

[97]
Kang T, Zhu J, Luo X, Jia W, Wu P, Cai C. Anal. Chem., 2021, 93: 2519.

[98]
Chen J, Wu Y, Fu C, Cao H, Tan X, Shi W, Wu Z. Biosens. Bioelectron., 2019, 143: 111619.

[99]
Pang Y, Wang C, Lu L, Wang C, Sun Z, Xiao R. Biosens. Bioelectron., 2019, 130: 204.

[100]
Zong C, Xu M, Xu L, Wei T, Ma X, Zheng X, Hu R, Ren B. Chem. Rev., 2018, 118: 4946.

[101]
Latychevskaia T, Fink H W. Opt. Express, 2014, 22: 20994.

[102]
Liebel M, Pazos-Perez N, van Hulst N F, Alvarez-Puebla R A. Nat. Nanotechnol., 2020, 15: 1005.

[103]
Meng S, Chen R, Xie J, Li J, Cheng J, Xu Y, Cao H, Wu X, Zhang Q, Wang H. Biosens. Bioelectron., 2021, 190: 113470.

[104]
He Z, Chen Z, Tan M, Elingarami S, Liu Y, Li T, Deng Y, He N, Li S, Fu J, Li W. Cell Proliferat., 2020, 53(7): e12822.

[105]
Cervo S, Mansutti E, Del Mistro G, Spizzo R, Colombatti A, Steffan A, Sergo V, Bonifacio A. Anal. Bioanal. Chem., 2015, 407: 7503.

[106]
Wang M, Zhang K, Yue L, Liu X, Lai Y, Zhang H. ACS Appl. Nano Mater., 2024, 7(11): 13672.

[107]
Moisoiu V, Stefancu A, Gulei D, Boitor R, Magdo L, Raduly L, Pasca S, Kubelac P, Mehterov N, Chis V, Simon M, Muresan M, Irimie A I, Baciut M, Stiufiuc R, Pavel I E, Achimas-Cadariu P, Ionescu C, Lazar V, Sarafian V, Notingher I, Leopold N, Berindan-Neagoe I. Int. J. Nanomed., 2019, 14: 6165.

[108]
Kunjachan S, Ehling J, Storm G, Kiessling F, Lammers T. Chem. Rev., 2015, 115: 10907.

[109]
Marino M A, Avendano D, Zapata P, Riedl C C, Pinker K. Oncologist, 2020, 25: e231.

[110]
Kikano E G, Avril S, Marshall H, Jones R S, Montero A J, Avril N. Semin. Nucl. Med., 2021, 51: 474.

[111]
Wilkinson M J, Snow H, Downey K, Thomas K, Riddell A, Francis N, Strauss D C, Hayes A J, Smith M F, Messiou C. BJS Open, 2021, 5: zraa005.

[112]
Hsu J C, Nieves L M, Betzer O, Sadan T, Noël P B, Popovtzer R, Cormode D P. Wires Nanomed. Nanobi., 2020, 12: e1642.

[113]
Ji H, Wang X, Wang P, Gong Y, Wang Y, Liu C, Ji G, Wang X, Wang M. J. Nanobiotechnol., 2022, 20: 60.

[114]
Zhang W, Wang S, Xing Y, Luo X, Wang R, Yu F. Acta Biomater., 2025, 197: 431.

[115]
Yavuz M S, Cheng Y, Chen J, Cobley C M, Zhang Q, Rycenga M, Xie J, Kim C, Song K H, Schwartz A G, Wang L V, Xia Y. Nat. Mater., 2009, 8: 935.

[116]
Abramczyk H, Brozek-Pluska B, Surmacki J, Jablonska-Gajewicz J, Kordek R. Prog. Biophys. Mol. Bio., 2012, 108: 74.

[117]
Yang Y, Liu Z, Huang J, Sun X, Ao J, Zheng B, Chen W, Shao Z, Hu H, Yang Y, Ji M. Theranostics, 2023, 13: 1342.

[118]
Novis D A, Zarbo R J. Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med., 1997, 121: 559.

[119]
Chen X, Li X, Xie J, Yang H, Liu A. Anal. Chim. Acta, 2022, 1191: 339296.

[120]
Wang L, Li C, Cao C, Lei F, Zhao X, Li Z, Zhang C, Jiao Y, Yu J. Adv. Funct. Mater., 2025, 35: 2416789.

[121]
Davis R M, Campbell J L, Burkitt S, Qiu Z, Kang S, Mehraein M, Miyasato D, Salinas H, Liu J T C, Zavaleta C. Nanomaterials, 2018, 8: 953.

[122]
Sabtu S N, Sani S F A, Looi L M, Chiew S F, Pathmanathan D, Bradley D A, Osman Z. Sci. Rep., 2021, 11: 3250.

[123]
Fan M, Chen J, Zheng X, Xu L, Ye J, Lin X, Kong K V, Lin D, Lu Y, Feng S. Laser Photonics Rev., 2025, 19, 2401400.

[124]
Duffy M J, Crown J. Clin. Chem., 2008, 54: 1770.

[125]
Ding W, Ye D, Chen H, Lin Y, Li Z, Tu C. Breast Cancer, 2024, 31: 295.

[126]
Yang T, Li W, Huang T, Zhou J. Int. J. Mol. Sci., 2023, 24: 16607.

[127]
Obidiro O, Battogtokh G, Akala E O. Pharmaceutics, 2023, 15: 1796.

[128]
Kim J, Son H Y, Lee S, Rho H W, Kim R, Jeong H, Park C, Mun B, Moon Y, Jeong E, Lim E K, Haam S. Biosens. Bioelectron., 2024, 258: 116347.

[129]
Qiu C, Zhang W, Zhou Y, Cui H, Xing Y, Yu F, Wang R. Chem. Eng. J., 2023, 459: 141502.

[130]
Wen Y, Liu R, Xie Y, Li M. Adv. Mater., 2024, 36:2405253.

[131]
Ma W, Zhan Y, Zhang Y, Shao X, Xie X, Mao C, Cui W, Li Q, Shi J, Li J, Fan C, Lin Y. Nano Lett., 2019, 19: 4505.

[132]
Lee H, Dam D H M, Ha J W, Yue J, Odom T W. ACS Nano, 2015, 9: 9859.

[133]
Veloso A B, Longo J P F, Muehlmann L A, Tollstadius B F, Souza P E N, Azevedo R B, Morais P C, da Silva S W. Sci. Rep., 2017, 7: 7175.

[134]
Bi X, Lin L, Chen Z, Ye J. Small Methods, 2024, 8: 2301243.

[135]
Bi X, Ai X, Wu Z, Lin L L, Chen Z, Ye J. Anal. Chem., 2025, 97(13): 6826.

[136]
Xie Y, Su X, Wen Y, Zheng C, Li M. Nano Lett., 2022, 22(19): 7910.

[137]
Subik K, Lee J F, Baxter L, Strzepek T, Costello D, Crowley P, Xing L, Hung M C, Bonfiglio T, Hicks D G, Tang P. Breast Cancer-Basic, 2010, 4: 117822341000400004.

[138]
Holliday D L, Speirs V. Breast Cancer Res., 2011, 13(4): 215.

[139]
Dai X, Cheng H, Bai Z, Li J. Cancer, 2017, 8(16): 3131.

[140]
Li L, Yang J, Wei J, Jiang C, Liu Z, Yang B, Zhao B, Song W. Light Sci. Appl., 2022, 11: 286.

[141]
Felten J, Hall H, Jaumot J, Tauler R, de Juan A, Gorzsás A. Nat. Protoc., 2015, 10: 217.

[142]
Sindhwani S, Muhammad S A, Ngai J, Kingston B R, Maiorino L, Rothschild J, MacMillan P, Zhang Y, Rajesh N U, Hoang T, Wu J Stefan W, Andrew Z, Suresh G, Andrew S, Ouyang B, Lin Z, Wang L, Egeblad M, Chan W C W. Nat. Mater., 2020, 19: 566.

Outlines

/