Table 1 Biosensor performance for cancer biomarker Detection.
Biosensor Type | Best Performing Biomarker | Detection Mechanism | Key Strengths | Limitations | Nernst Potential (V) | Absorbance (A) | Data Rate (Mbps) | Shannon Entropy |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Wearable Biosensors | CEA, HER2 | Electrochemical (Nernst Equation) | High sensitivity, real-time monitoring | Lower response for PSA and AFP | −0.133 | 0.22 | 50.6 | 0.5 |
Implantable Biosensors | AFP, HER2, CEA | Optical Absorbance (Beer’s Law) | High absorbance for AFP, effective for nanoplasmonic biosensing | PSA and CA-125 show weak optical signals | −0.135 | 0.26 | 49.3 | 0.48 |
Portable Biosensors | CEA, HER2 | Wireless Transmission (Shannon-Hartley Model) | Fast data rates for real-time IoT monitoring | AFP has weak transmission efficiency | −0.14 | 0.21 | 51.7 | 0.521 |
