Shoebox-Sized Lab Can Diagnose Infectious Diseases from a Drop of Blood

The device can already detect antibodies for measles and rubella

A microchip similar to the MR Box created by University of Toronto researchers.

A microchip similar to the MR Box created by University of Toronto researchers. 

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Researchers from the University of Toronto have created a shoebox-sized laboratory that can do blood testing in remote, low-resource settings, quickly determining from a drop of blood whether a person has antibodies to specific infectious diseases.

The device, which they called the MR Box—short for measles and rubella, the first diseases for which they tested—is still being fine-tuned. But their hope is that eventually it could be used to test for a variety of diseases, for both outbreak control and research purposes, in parts of the world where conventional lab support is hours—or farther—away, the scientists reported Wednesday.

Device testing was conducted at a refugee camp in Kakuma, Kenya, where pinprick blood samples were examined for antibodies to measles and rubella. But the scientists behind the work said future versions of the mini-lab could be used to test for antibodies to other pathogens and also for the pathogens themselves.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Antibody testing is used to see if someone has been previously infected with, or vaccinated against, a disease agent. Being able to use a test like this to look for who has a targeted disease agent in their blood would help people responding to an outbreak know who was infected and who wasn’t.

“That is the dream, that this type of system with its flexibility could be sent out into the world and really be used very flexibly depending on the conditions on the ground,” said senior author Aaron Wheeler, who leads the lab in which the work was done.

The paper, which also had authors from the Kenyan ministry of health and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, was published in the journal Science Translational Medicine.

The device uses lab-on-a-chip technology, a long cherished dream in the fields of outbreak response and diagnostic testing.

Wheeler’s lab had been working on this type of testing for a while when he was contacted by the CDC, which had seen a publication describing their research. Doing testing in a real-world setting—one where intermittent power outages and other challenges bedevil high-tech equipment—forced the team to get inventive about how to make a device they could operate in such an environment.

The microfluidic chips used in the lab in Toronto cost between $50 and $60 apiece, too expensive for testing lots of blood samples in the field. Team member Darius Rackus said they hacked a regular office printer, programming it to print the electrodes using conductive ink.

They got the cost down to about $6 a chip but believe future modifications could lower the price to pennies a chip, he said.

The team was able to go from blood draw to an answer within 35 minutes in the field.

They also drew vials of blood from the roughly 140 people in the study to validate how well the device worked, testing those vials in a conventional laboratory. The MR Box was correct 86 percent of the time for measles and 84 percent of the time for rubella. The lab has been working to improve those results and has subsequently tested the device in a second pilot project in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Rackus said the group has put the plans for their software and hardware in the public domain so that anyone can download them and try to improve upon them.

This story has been updated to correct the name of Aaron Wheeler. 

Republished with permission from STAT. This article originally appeared on April 26, 2018

Helen Branswell is STAT's infectious diseases and public health reporter. She comes from the Canadian Press, where she was the medical reporter for the past 15 years. Helen cut her infectious diseases teeth during Toronto's SARS outbreak in 2003 and spent the summer of 2004 embedded at the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In 2010-11 she was a Nieman Global Health Fellow at Harvard, where she focused on polio eradication. Warning: Helen asks lots of questions.

More by Helen Branswell

STAT delivers fast, deep, and tough-minded journalism. We take you inside science labs and hospitals, biotech boardrooms, and political backrooms. We dissect crucial discoveries. We examine controversies and puncture hype. We hold individuals and institutions accountable. We introduce you to the power brokers and personalities who are driving a revolution in human health. These are the stories that matter to us all.

More by STAT

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe