Talk:Loop-mediated isothermal amplification

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Molecular Biology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Molecular Biology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Molecular BiologyWikipedia:WikiProject Molecular BiologyTemplate:WikiProject Molecular BiologyMolecular Biology articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Genetics task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Molecular and Cell Biology task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Could use update on commercial application

Someone who knows more than me might want to add this, but since the article was first written there are numerous companies that are working on diagnostic tests based on LAMP. There are not-for-profits involved in this for global health (PATH, FIND), and I believe Gates Foundation has funded some of the development of LAMP tests. Eiken has licensed the LAMP IP to numerous companies. I believe at least a couple of LAMP tests have gone through clinical trials although I'm not sure, and there are also I believe kits or devices intended for research or veterinary applications on the market.

The article also implies that there is a limited range of pathogens for which LAMP has been extensively tested, and cites a 2010 book chapter or review article. I think it may be out of date; there are by now probably >1000 papers reporting LAMP assays for numerous bacteria, viruses, and parasites for clinical as well as environmental samples. It is my impression from reading scientific literature, although I don't have an encyclopedic reference for this, that LAMP is now the most popular of the many isothermal amplification chemistries. I suspect it's not that LAMP is superior to other isothermal techniques (HDA, SDA, NEAR, NASBA, etc) but that the inventor (Eiken) licenses the IP non-exclusively, and the recipe and primer design guidelines are freely published, and all the reagents are commercially available, so anyone can design their own LAMP assay without having to enter into a contract with a vendor. Not sure how to address that in a succinct, NPOV way because all of these techniques are pushed and promoted by companies hoping to make money off of them, and they all have their pros and cons.RobertM75 (talk) 21:10, 13 April 2014 (UTC)RobertM75[reply]

unclear wording, please fix

"A consequence of having such a cocktail of primers can be non-specific amplification in the late amplification."

"the late amplification" means literally "the deceased amplification" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:67C:10EC:578F:8000:0:0:28E (talk) 11:00, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Adding further information regarding the limitations of LAMP

Dear Wikipedia Colleagues,

One of the major limitations of LAMP assays which has been hampering the widespread use of these assays is nonspecific amplification due to the absence of temperature gating mechanisms eventually leading to false-positive results (https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10408363.2021.1884640). Please consider adding this to the limitations section of this page.--GeneticsFeed (talk) 14:31, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered.

@GeneticsFeed: Could you provide an exact wording that you suggest? It is unlikely someone will spend the time to read this very complex paper and try to make their own sentence. Providing an already assembled sentence for an edit request greatly speeds up the request :) AdmiralEek (talk) 14:59, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@AdmiralEek: sure! I believe the following sentence would be accurate:

"The absence of temperature gating mechanisms leading to non-specific amplification can cause false-positive results in different diagnostic assays based on this method" --GeneticsFeed (talk) 10:18, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@GeneticsFeed: The problem with this is that it's not the whole story (i.e. it's not just temperature gating or lack thereof that causes non-specific amplifications). See https://doi.org/10.1080/14737159.2021.1873769 (from the same journal as your above cite) and https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkaa099. It is true that non-specific amplification can be a limitation of LAMP, and it is often swept under the rug. There are also mitigation strategies.RobertM75 (talk) 16:51, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Can either or both of you GeneticsFeed and RobertM75, who seem proficient in the topic, agree on a suitable wording for the edit? The Edit Request has been open for over a month, and there seems to be a quick fix. Thank you ! Ferkijel (talk) 18:20, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Ferkijel: Of course. Here is my opinion based on what was mentioned in the discussion:

"Although different mitigation strategies have been proposed for false-positive results in assays based on this method, nonspecific amplification due to various factors including the absence of temperature gating mechanisms is one of the major limitations of Loop-mediated isothermal amplification. (REF 1: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10408363.2021.1884640, REF2: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14737159.2021.1873769)" GeneticsFeed (talk) 18:44, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done, thank you GeneticsFeed. It’s been implemented.