TY - JOUR
T1 - Progression of LAMP as a Result of the COVID-19 Pandemic
T2 - Is PCR Finally Rivaled?
AU - Mannier, Cassidy
AU - Yoon, Jeong Yeol
N1 - Funding Information:
Funding: This research was funded by the Test All Test Smart program of the University of Arizona and the Technology and Research Initiative Fund (TRIF) of the Arizona Board of Regents (ABOR).
Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
PY - 2022/7
Y1 - 2022/7
N2 - Reflecting on the past three years and the coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic, varying global tactics offer insights into the most effective public-health responses. In the US, specifically, rapid and widespread testing was quickly prioritized to lower restrictions sooner. Essentially, only two types of COVID-19 diagnostic tests were publicly employed during the peak pandemic: the rapid antigen test and reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). However, neither test ideally suited the situation, as rapid antigen tests are far too inaccurate, and RT-PCR tests require skilled personnel and sophisticated equipment, leading to long wait times. Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) is another exceptionally accurate nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) that offers far quicker time to results. However, RT-LAMP COVID-19 tests have not been embraced as extensively as rapid antigen tests or RT-PCR. This review will investigate the performance of current RT-LAMP-based COVID-19 tests and summarize the reasons behind the hesitancy to embrace RT-LAMP instead of RT-PCR. We will also look at other LAMP platforms to explore possible improvements in the accuracy and portability of LAMP, which could be applied to COVID-19 diagnostics and future public-health outbreaks.
AB - Reflecting on the past three years and the coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic, varying global tactics offer insights into the most effective public-health responses. In the US, specifically, rapid and widespread testing was quickly prioritized to lower restrictions sooner. Essentially, only two types of COVID-19 diagnostic tests were publicly employed during the peak pandemic: the rapid antigen test and reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). However, neither test ideally suited the situation, as rapid antigen tests are far too inaccurate, and RT-PCR tests require skilled personnel and sophisticated equipment, leading to long wait times. Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) is another exceptionally accurate nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) that offers far quicker time to results. However, RT-LAMP COVID-19 tests have not been embraced as extensively as rapid antigen tests or RT-PCR. This review will investigate the performance of current RT-LAMP-based COVID-19 tests and summarize the reasons behind the hesitancy to embrace RT-LAMP instead of RT-PCR. We will also look at other LAMP platforms to explore possible improvements in the accuracy and portability of LAMP, which could be applied to COVID-19 diagnostics and future public-health outbreaks.
KW - loop-mediated isothermal amplification
KW - nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT)
KW - rapid antigen test
KW - RT-LAMP
KW - RT-PCR
KW - SARS-CoV-2
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85134041471&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85134041471&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.3390/bios12070492
DO - 10.3390/bios12070492
M3 - Review article
C2 - 35884295
AN - SCOPUS:85134041471
VL - 12
JO - Biosensors
JF - Biosensors
SN - 2079-6374
IS - 7
M1 - 492
ER -