Saliva as a diagnostic specimen for detection of SARS-CoV-2 in suspected patients: a scoping review

Validation of Saliva as the Clinical Specimen Type for a University-Wide COVID-19 Surveillance Program

At the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Georgia Institute of Technology made the decision to keep the university doors open for on-campus attendance. To manage COVID-19 infection rates, internal resources were applied to develop and implement a mass asymptomatic surveillance program. The objective was to identify infections early for proper follow-on verification testing, contact tracing, and quarantine/isolation as needed. Program success depended on frequent and voluntary sample collection from over 40,000 students, faculty, and staff personnel. At that time, the nasopharyngeal (NP) swab, not saliva, was the main accepted sample type for COVID-19 testing. However, due to collection discomfort and the inability to be self-collected, the NP swab was not feasible for voluntary and frequent self-collection. Therefore, saliva was selected as the clinical sample type and validated. A saliva collection kit and a sample processing and analysis workflow were developed. The results of a clinical sample-type comparison study between co-collected and matched NP swabs and saliva samples showed 96.7% positive agreement and 100% negative agreement. During the Fall 2020 and Spring 2021 semesters, 319,988 samples were collected and tested. The program resulted in maintaining a low overall mean positivity rate of 0.78% and 0.54% for the Fall 2020 and Spring 2021 semesters, respectively. For this high-throughput asymptomatic COVID-19 screening application, saliva was an exceptionally good sample type.

Highly sensitive extraction-free saliva-based molecular assay for rapid diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2

The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the necessity of fast, sensitive, and efficient methods to test large populations for respiratory viruses. The "gold standard" molecular assays for detecting respiratory viruses, such as quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) and reverse transcription qPCR (RT-qPCR), rely on invasive swab samples and require time-consuming and labor-intensive extraction processes. Moreover, the turnaround time for RT-qPCR-based assays is too lengthy for rapid screening. Extraction-free saliva-based methods provide a non-invasive sampling process with a fast turnaround time and are suitable for high-throughput applications. However, when used with a standard RT-qPCR system, the absence of extraction significantly reduces the assays' sensitivity. Here, using a novel optical modulation biosensing (OMB) platform, we developed a rapid and highly sensitive extraction-free saliva-based molecular assay. We blindly tested 364 paired nasopharyngeal swabs and saliva samples from suspected SARS-CoV-2 cases in Israel. Compared with the gold standard swab-based RT-qPCR assay, the sensitivity of the extraction-free saliva-based OMB assay is 90.7%, much higher than the sensitivity of extraction-free saliva-based RT-qPCR assay (77.8%) with similar specificity (95.3% and 97.6%, respectively). Moreover, out of 12 samples identified by the OMB-based assay as positive, 8 samples were collected from hospitalized patients in a COVID-19 ward and were verified to be SARS-CoV-2-positive upon admission, indicating that the actual clinical sensitivity and specificity of the OMB assay are higher. Considering its user-friendly saliva-based protocol, short and cost-effective extraction-free process, and high clinical accuracy, the OMB-based molecular assay is very suitable for high-throughput testing of large populations for respiratory viruses.

IMPORTANCE

Three years after the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak, there are no molecular tests that combine low-cost and straightforward sample preparation, effective sample handling, minimal reagent and disposable requirements, high sensitivity, and high throughput required for mass screening. Existing rapid molecular techniques typically sacrifice certain requirements to meet others. Yet, localized outbreaks of novel viral diseases happen daily in different parts of the world. In this context, respiratory diseases are of specific importance, as they are frequently airborne and highly contagious, with the potential for a rapid global spread. The widely accepted opinion is that another pandemic is just a question of time. To ensure that the containment efforts for the upcoming "disease X" are successful, introducing rapid, high-throughput, and highly sensitive diagnostic methods for detecting and identifying pathogens is critical. A few months into the pandemic, saliva was suggested as a diagnostic matrix for SARS-CoV-2 detection. The collection of saliva does not require swabs and is minimally invasive. In particular, extraction-free saliva-based assays require fewer reagents and disposables, and therefore are faster and cheaper, offering an appealing alternative for low-income countries. Unfortunately, current extraction-free saliva-based detection methods, such as direct RT-qPCR or isothermal amplification, have either low sensitivity or low throughput. Therefore, we believe that the presented highly sensitive ht-OMBi platform and the extraction-free saliva-based molecular assay can become an essential tool in the infectious disease monitoring toolbox.

Extensive comparison of salivary collection, transportation, preparation, and storage methods: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Human saliva as a bodily fluid-similar to blood-is utilized for diagnostic purposes. Unlike blood sampling, collecting saliva is non-invasive, inexpensive, and readily accessible. There are no previously published systematic reviews regarding different collection, transportation, preparation, and storage methods for human saliva.

DESIGN

This study has been prepared and organized according to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines. This systematic review has been registered at PROSPERO (Registration ID: CRD42023415384). The study question according to the PICO format was as followed: Comparison of the performance (C) of different saliva sampling, handling, transportation, and storage techniques and methods (I) assessed for analyzing stimulated or unstimulated human saliva (P and O). An electronic search was executed in Scopus, Google Scholar, and PubMed.

RESULTS

Twenty-three descriptive human clinical studies published between 1995 and 2022 were included. Eight categories of salivary features and biomarkers were investigated (i.e., salivary flow rate, total saliva quantity, total protein, cortisol, testosterone, DNA quality and quantity, pH and buffering pH). Twenty-two saliva sampling methods/devices were utilized. Passive drooling, Salivette®, and spitting were the most utilized methods. Sampling times with optimum capabilities for cortisol, iodine, and oral cancer metabolites are suggested to be 7:30 AM to 9:00 AM, 10:30 AM to 11:00 AM, and 14:00 PM to 20:00 PM, respectively. There were 6 storage methods. Centrifuging samples and storing them at -70 °C to -80 °C was the most utilized storage method. For DNA quantity and quality, analyzing samples immediately after collection without centrifuging or storage, outperformed centrifuging samples and storing them at -70 °C to -80 °C. Non-coated Salivette® was the most successful method/device for analyzing salivary flow rate.

CONCLUSION

It is highly suggested that scientists take aid from the reported categorized outcomes, and design their study questions based on the current voids for each method/device.

Comparative study on Saliva and Nasopharyngeal swabs and the outcome of RT-PCR test in patients with mild symptoms of SARS-CoV-2

AIM

A simple and reliable method for diagnosing COVID 19 infections is the needed. The role of saliva in the transmission of the infection has already been established.

METHOD

Saliva and nasopharyngeal swabs from patients suspected to have COVID 19 infections were taken simultaneously, and the results of the RT-PCR were compared.

RESULT

Total 405 samples were collected, of which 250 males and 155 females. In the 391 samples included for analysis, 370 (94.63%) samples were found to have concordance results, and 21 (5.37%) samples had discordant results.

CONCLUSION

The use of saliva to diagnose COVID 19 infection is reliable, and its use can be recommended.

Loop-Mediated Isothermal Amplification: From Theory to Practice

Increasing the accuracy of pathogen identification and reducing the duration of analysis remain relevant for modern molecular diagnostics up to this day. In laboratory and clinical practice, detection of pathogens mostly relies on methods of nucleic acid amplification, among which the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) is considered the "gold standard." Nevertheless, in some cases, isothermal amplification methods act as an alternative to PCR diagnostics. Upon more than thirty years of the development of isothermal DNA synthesis, the appearance of loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) has enabled new directions of in-field diagnostics of bacterial and viral infections. This review examines the key characteristics of the LAMP method and corresponding features in practice. We discuss the structure of LAMP amplicons with single-stranded loops, which have the sites for primer annealing under isothermal conditions. The latest achievements in the modification of the LAMP method are analyzed, which allow considering it as a unique platform for creating the next-generation diagnostic assays.

Diffusion-Induced Ingress of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme 2 into the Charge Conducting Path of a Pentacene Channel for Efficient Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in Saliva Samples

Rapid and accurate identification of a pathogen is crucial for disease control and prevention of the epidemic of emerging infectious like SARS-CoV-2. However, no foolproof gold standard assay exists to date. Nucleic acid-based molecular diagnostic tests have been established for identifying COVID-19. However, viral RNAs are highly unstable in handling with poor laboratory procedures, leading to a false negative that accelerates the spread of the disease. Detection of the spike protein (S1) of the SARS-CoV-2 virus through a proper receptor, commonly used in antigen-based rapid testing kits, also suffers from false-negative predictions due to decreasing viral titers in clinical specimens. Organic field-effect transistor (OFET)-based sensors can be highly sensitive upon properly integrating receptors in the conducting channel. This work demonstrates how angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) molecules can be used as receptor molecules of the SARS-CoV-2 virus in the OFET platform. Integration of ACE2 molecules into pentacene grain boundaries has been studied through the statistical analysis of rough surfaces in terms of lateral correlation length and interface width. The uniform coating of ACE2 molecules has been confirmed through growth studies to achieve better ingress of the receptors into the conducting channel at the semiconductor/dielectric interface of OFETs. We have observed less than a minute detection time with 94% sensitivity, which is the highest reported value. The sensor works with a saliva sample, requiring no sample preparation or virus transfer medium. A prototype module developed for remote monitoring confirms the suitability for point-of-care (POC) application at large-scale testing in more crowded areas like airports, railway stations, shopping malls, etc.

Saliva sample for detection of SARS-CoV-2: A possible alternative for mass testing

Molecular diagnostic testing has played a critical role in the global response to the novel Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, since its first outbreak in late 2019. At the inception of the COVID-19 pandemic, nasopharyngeal swab sample analysis for COVID-19 diagnosis using the real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) technique was the most widely used. However, due to the high cost and difficulty of sample collection, the number of available sample types for COVID-19 diagnosis is rapidly increasing, as is the COVID-19 diagnostic literature. The use of nasal swabs, saliva, and oral fluids as viable sample options for the effective detection of SARS-CoV-2 has been implemented successfully in different settings since 2020. These alternative sample type provides a plethora of advantages including decreasing the high exposure risk to frontline workers, enhancing the chances of home self-sampling, reducing the cost, and significantly increasing testing capacity. This study sought to ascertain the effectiveness of Saliva samples as an alternative for COVID-19 diagnosis in Nigeria. Demographic data, paired samples of Nasopharyngeal Swab and Drooling Saliva were obtained from 309 consenting individuals aged 8-83 years presenting for COVID-19 testing. All samples were simultaneously assayed for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RdRp, N, and E genes using the GeneFinder™ COVID-19 Plus RT-PCR test kit. Out of 309 participants, only 299 with valid RT-PCR results comprising 159 (53.2%) males and 140 (46.8%) females were analyzed in this study using the R Statistical package. Among the 299 samples analyzed, 39 (13.0%) had SARS-CoV-2 detected in at least one specimen type. Both swabs and saliva were positive in 20 (51.3%) participants. Ten participants (25.6%) had swab positive/saliva-negative results and 9 participants (23.1%) had saliva positive/swab-negative results. The percentage of positive and negative agreement of the saliva samples with the nasopharyngeal swab were 67% and 97% respectively with positive and negative predictive values as 69% and 96% respectively. The findings indicate that drooling saliva samples have good and comparable diagnostic accuracy to the nasopharyngeal swabs with moderate sensitivities and high specificities.

Performance of saliva compared with nasopharyngeal swab for diagnosis of COVID-19 by NAAT in cross-sectional studies: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Nucleic acid amplification testing (NAAT) is the preferred method to diagnose coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Saliva has been suggested as an alternative to nasopharyngeal swabs (NPS), but previous systematic reviews were limited by the number and types of studies available. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the diagnostic performance of saliva compared with NPS for COVID-19. We searched Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, and Scopus databases up to 24 April 2021 for studies that directly compared paired NPS and saliva specimens taken at the time of diagnosis. Meta-analysis was performed using an exact binomial rendition of the bivariate mixed-effects regression model. Risk of bias was assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool. Of 2683 records, we included 23 studies with 25 cohorts, comprising 11,582 paired specimens. A wide variety of NAAT assays and collection methods were used. Meta-analysis gave a pooled sensitivity of 87 % (95 % CI = 83-90 %) and specificity of 99 % (95 % CI = 98-99 %). Subgroup analyses showed the highest sensitivity when the suspected individual is tested in an outpatient setting and is symptomatic. Our results support the use of saliva NAAT as an alternative to NPS NAAT for the diagnosis of COVID-19.

Influenza A, Influenza B, and SARS-CoV-2 Similarities and Differences – A Focus on Diagnosis

In late December 2019, the first cases of viral pneumonia caused by an unidentified pathogen were reported in China. Two years later, SARS-CoV-2 was responsible for almost 450 million cases, claiming more than 6 million lives. The COVID-19 pandemic strained the limits of healthcare systems all across the world. Identifying viral RNA through real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction remains the gold standard in diagnosing SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, equipment cost, availability, and the need for trained personnel limited testing capacity. Through an unprecedented research effort, new diagnostic techniques such as rapid diagnostic testing, isothermal amplification techniques, and next-generation sequencing were developed, enabling accurate and accessible diagnosis. Influenza viruses are responsible for seasonal outbreaks infecting up to a quarter of the human population worldwide. Influenza and SARS-CoV-2 present with flu-like symptoms, making the differential diagnosis challenging solely on clinical presentation. Healthcare systems are likely to be faced with overlapping SARS-CoV-2 and Influenza outbreaks. This review aims to present the similarities and differences of both infections while focusing on the diagnosis. We discuss the clinical presentation of Influenza and SARS-CoV-2 and techniques available for diagnosis. Furthermore, we summarize available data regarding the multiplex diagnostic assay of both viral infections.

Periodontitis and coronavirus disease 2019

The coronavirus disease 2019 caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 is usually a mild condition; however, in some cases it can result in severe sickness and even death. Thus, understanding the reasons behind these grave outcomes is of great importance. Coronavirus disease 2019 and periodontitis share some intriguing characteristics. They can both lead to systemic inflammation and alterations of coagulation pathways, and both share confounding factors, such as diabetes, hypertension, and obesity. Accordingly, a possible association between these conditions has been hypothesized in the literature. The objective of this review was to evaluate the scientific evidence linking these diseases and the possible underlying mechanisms. Evidence has shown that coronavirus disease 2019 presents oral manifestations and can even affect periodontal tissues. Moreover, some studies have shown a possible association between coronavirus disease 2019 severity and the presence of periodontitis. Current evidence suggests that this association could be explained through the direct role of periodontal bacteria in aggravating lung infections, as well as through the indirect effect of periodontitis in inducing systemic inflammation and priming of the immune system to an exacerbated reaction to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection. Future research is needed to confirm these observations and explore the possible role that periodontal care might play in the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.

Aberrant Fucosylation of Saliva Glycoprotein Defining Lung Adenocarcinomas Malignancy

Aberrant glycosylation is a hallmark of cancer found during tumorigenesis and tumor progression. Lung cancer (LC) induced by oncogene mutations has been detected in the patient's saliva, and saliva glycosylation has been altered. Saliva contains highly glycosylated glycoproteins, the characteristics of which may be related to various diseases. Therefore, elucidating cancer-specific glycosylation in the saliva of healthy, non-cancer, and cancer patients can reveal whether tumor glycosylation has unique characteristics for early diagnosis. In this work, we used a solid-phase chemoenzymatic method to study the glycosylation of saliva glycoproteins in clinical specimens. The results showed that the α1,6-core fucosylation of glycoproteins was increased in cancer patients, whereas α1,2 or α1,3 fucosylation was significantly increased. We further analyzed the expression of fucosyltransferases responsible for α1,2, α1,3, and α1,6 fucosylation. The fucosylation of the saliva of cancer patients is drastically different from that of non-cancer or health controls. These results indicate that the glycoform of saliva fucosylation distinguishes LC from other diseases, and this feature has the potential to diagnose lung adenocarcinoma.

Saliva-based COVID-19 detection: A rapid antigen test of SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein using an electrical-double-layer gated field-effect transistor-based biosensing system

Facing the unstopped surges of COVID-19, an insufficient capacity of diagnostic testing jeopardizes the control of disease spread. Due to a centralized setting and a long turnaround, real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (real-time RT-PCR), the gold standard of viral detection, has fallen short in timely reflecting the epidemic status quo during an urgent outbreak. As such, a rapid screening tool is necessitated to help contain the spread of COVID-19 amid the countries where the vaccine implementations have not been widely deployed. In this work, we propose a saliva-based COVID-19 antigen test using the electrical double layer (EDL)-gated field-effect transistor-based biosensor (BioFET). The detection of SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid (N) protein is validated with limits of detection (LoDs) of 0.34 ng/mL (7.44 pM) and 0.14 ng/mL (2.96 pM) in 1× PBS and artificial saliva, respectively. The specificity is inspected with types of antigens, exhibiting low cross-reactivity among MERS-CoV, Influenza A virus, and Influenza B virus. This portable system is embedded with Bluetooth communication and user-friendly interfaces that are fully compatible with digital health, feasibly leading to an on-site turnaround, an effective management, and a proactive response taken by medical providers and frontline health workers.

Saliva-based COVID-19 detection: A rapid antigen test of SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein using an electrical-double-layer gated field-effect transistor-based biosensing system

Facing the unstopped surges of COVID-19, an insufficient capacity of diagnostic testing jeopardizes the control of disease spread. Due to a centralized setting and a long turnaround, real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (real-time RT-PCR), the gold standard of viral detection, has fallen short in timely reflecting the epidemic status quo during an urgent outbreak. As such, a rapid screening tool is necessitated to help contain the spread of COVID-19 amid the countries where the vaccine implementations have not been widely deployed. In this work, we propose a saliva-based COVID-19 antigen test using the electrical double layer (EDL)-gated field-effect transistor-based biosensor (BioFET). The detection of SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid (N) protein is validated with limits of detection (LoDs) of 0.34 ng/mL (7.44 pM) and 0.14 ng/mL (2.96 pM) in 1× PBS and artificial saliva, respectively. The specificity is inspected with types of antigens, exhibiting low cross-reactivity among MERS-CoV, Influenza A virus, and Influenza B virus. This portable system is embedded with Bluetooth communication and user-friendly interfaces that are fully compatible with digital health, feasibly leading to an on-site turnaround, an effective management, and a proactive response taken by medical providers and frontline health workers.

Surveillance Web System and Mouthwash-Saliva qPCR for Labor Ambulatory SARS-CoV-2 Detection and Prevention

This study provides a safe and low-cost in-house protocol for RT-qPCR-based detection of SARS-CoV-2 using mouthwash-saliva self-collected specimens to achieve clinical and epidemiological surveillance in a real-time web environment applied to ambulatory populations. The in-house protocol comprises a mouthwash-saliva self-collected specimen, heat virus inactivation, and primers to target virus N-gene region and the human RPP30-gene. Aligning with 209 SARS-CoV-2 sequences confirmed specificity including the Alpha variant from the UK. Development, validation, and statistical comparison with official nasopharyngeal swabbing RT-qPCR test were conducted with 115 specimens of ambulatory volunteers. A web-mobile application platform was developed to integrate a real-time epidemiological and clinical core baseline database with mouthwash-saliva RT-qPCR testing. Nine built-in algorithms were generated for decision-making on testing, confining, monitoring, and self-reports to family, social, and work environments. Epidemiological and clinical follow-up and SARS-CoV-2 testing generated a database of 37,351 entries allowing individual decision-making for prevention. Mouthwash-saliva had higher sensitivity than nasopharyngeal swabbing in detecting asymptomatic and mild symptomatic cases with 720 viral copy number (VCN)/mL as the detection limit (Ct = 37.6). Cycling threshold and viral loading were marginally different (p = 0.057) between asymptomatic (35 Ct ± 2.8; 21,767.7 VCN/mL, range 720-77,278) and symptomatic (31.3 Ct ± 4.5; 747,294.3 VCN/mL, range 1433.6-3.08 × 10⁶). We provided proof-of-concept evidence of effective surveillance to target asymptomatic and moderate symptomatic ambulatory individuals based on integrating a bio-safety level II laboratory, self-collected, low-risk, low-cost detection protocol, and a real-time digital monitoring system. Mouthwash-saliva was effective for SARS-CoV-2 sampling for the first time at the community level.

A 2-month field cohort study of SARS-CoV-2 in saliva of BNT162b2 vaccinated nursing home workers

Background

Nursing home (NH) residents have been severely affected during the COVID-19 pandemic because of their age and underlying comorbidities. Infection and outbreaks in NHs are most likely triggered by infected workers. Screening for asymptomatic NH workers can prevent risky contact and viral transmission to the residents. This study examined the effect of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID‑19 (Comirnaty^®; BioNTech and Pfizer) vaccination on the saliva excretion of SARS-CoV-2 among NH workers, through weekly saliva RT-qPCR testing.

Methods

A 2-month cohort study was conducted among 99 NHs in the Walloon region (Belgium), at the start of February 2021. Three groups of workers, i.e., non-vaccinated (n = 1618), one-dosed vaccinated (n = 1454), and two-dosed vaccinated (n = 2379) of BNT162b2 mRNA COVID‑19 vaccine, were followed-up weekly. Their saliva samples were used to monitor the shedding of SARS-CoV-2. All positive samples were sequenced and genotyped to identify the circulating wild-type virus or variants of concern.

Results

The protection fraction against the excretion of the SARS-CoV-2 in the saliva samples of the workers after the second dose is estimated at 0.90 (95% CI: 0.18; 0.99) at 1 week and 0.83 (95% CI: 0.54; 0.95) at 8 weeks. We observe more circulating SARS-CoV-2 and a greater variability of viral loads in the unvaccinated group compared to those of the vaccinated group.

Conclusions

This field cohort study advances our knowledge of the efficacy of the mRNA BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine on the viral shedding in the saliva specimens of vaccinated NH workers, contributing to better decision-making in public health interventions and management.

Nursing homes have been particularly affected by COVID-19 outbreaks with devastating consequences. Screening for SARS-CoV-2 infection in nursing home workers is therefore helpful to prevent transmission of the virus. It is also helpful in determining whether vaccination, which has been widely implemented in this population, is effective at reducing the number of SARS-CoV-2 infections. To this end, we tested saliva samples from workers from 99 nursing homes in the Walloon region of Belgium over a two-month period. Some workers had not been vaccinated and others had received one or two doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2 vaccine. We find that fully vaccinated individuals are significantly protected against SARS-CoV-2 infection compared to non-vaccinated individuals. These findings help to provide evidence that BNT162b2 vaccination is an effective measure to limit the infection of nursing home workers.

Saegerman et al. perform saliva SARS-CoV-2 testing in a cohort of nursing home workers in Belgium who are either unvaccinated or have received one or two doses of the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine. The authors show that vaccination protects against shedding of SARS-CoV-2 into saliva and observe greater variability in viral load in the unvaccinated group.

Amplified parallel antigen rapid test for point-of-care salivary detection of SARS-CoV-2 with improved sensitivity

In the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, simple, rapid, point-of-care tests not requiring trained personnel for primary care testing are essential. Saliva-based antigen rapid tests (ARTs) can fulfil this need, but these tests require overnight-fasted samples; without which independent studies have demonstrated sensitivities of only 11.7 to 23.1%. Herein, we report an Amplified Parallel ART (AP-ART) with sensitivity above 90%, even with non-fasted samples. The virus was captured multimodally, using both anti-spike protein antibodies and Angiotensin Converting Enzyme 2 (ACE2) protein. It also featured two parallel flow channels. The first contained spike protein binding gold nanoparticles which produced a visible red line upon encountering the virus. The second contained signal amplifying nanoparticles that complex with the former and amplify the signal without any linker. Compared to existing dual gold amplification techniques, a limit of detection of one order of magnitude lower was achieved (0.0064 ng·mL^-1). AP-ART performance in detecting SARS-CoV-2 in saliva of COVID-19 patients was investigated using a case-control study (139 participants enrolled and 162 saliva samples tested). Unlike commercially available ARTs, the sensitivity of AP-ART was maintained even when non-fasting saliva was used. Compared to the gold standard reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction testing on nasopharyngeal samples, non-fasting saliva tested on AP-ART showed a sensitivity of 97.0% (95% CI: 84.7-99.8); without amplification, the sensitivity was 72.7% (95% CI: 83.7-94.8). Thus, AP-ART has the potential to be developed for point-of-care testing, which may be particularly important in resource-limited settings, and for early diagnosis to initiate newly approved therapies to reduce COVID-19 severity.

A Rapid Detection of COVID-19 Viral RNA in Human Saliva Using Electrical Double Layer-Gated Field-Effect Transistor-Based Biosensors

In light of the swift outspread and considerable mortality, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) necessitates a rapid screening tool and a precise diagnosis. Saliva is considered as an alternative specimen to detect the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) since the viral load is comparable to what are found in a throat and a nasal cavity. The electrical double layer (EDL)-gated field-effect transistor-based biosensor (BioFET) emerges as a promising candidate for salivary COVID-19 tests due to a high sensitivity, a portable configuration, a label-free operation, and a matrix insensitivity. In this work, the authors utilize EDL-gated BioFETs to detect complementary DNAs (cDNAs) and viral RNAs with various testing conditions such as switches of probes, temperature treatments, and matrices. The selectivity is confirmed with cDNA and noncomplementary DNA (ncDNA), exhibiting an eightfold difference in electrical signals. The matrix insensitivity is evaluated, and BioFETs successfully validate the detection of SARS-CoV-2 N-gene RNA down to 1 fm in diluted human saliva with a 95°C- and a 25°C-treatment, respectively. This proposed system has a high potential to be deployed for an on-site COVID-19 screening, improving the disease control and benefitting frontline healthcare system.

Abnormal sialylation and fucosylation of saliva glycoproteins: Characteristics of lung cancer-specific biomarkers

Dysregulated surface glycoproteins play an important role in tumor cell proliferation and progression. Abnormal glycosylation of these glycoproteins may activate tumor signal transduction and lead to tumor development. The tumor microenvironment alters its molecular composition, some of which regulate protein glycosylation biosynthesis. The glycosylation of saliva proteins in lung cancer patients is different from healthy controls, in which the glycans of cancer patients are highly sialylated and hyperfucosylated. Most studies have shown that O-glycans from cancer are truncated O-glycans, while N-glycans contain fucoses and sialic acids. Because glycosylation analysis is challenging, there are few reports on how glycosylation of saliva proteins is related to the occurrence or progression of lung cancer. In this review, we discussed glycoenzymes involved in protein glycosylation, their changes in tumor microenvironment, potential tumor biomarkers present in body fluids, and abnormal glycosylation of saliva or lung glycoproteins. We further explored the effect of glycosylation changes on tumor signal transduction, and emphasized the role of receptor tyrosine kinases in tumorigenesis and metastasis.

Diagnostic Performance of Self-Collected Saliva Versus Nasopharyngeal Swab for the Molecular Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in the Clinical Setting

Coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19)-caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-has spread rapidly around the world. The global shortage of equipment and health care professionals, diagnostic cost, and difficulty in collecting nasopharyngeal swabs (NPSs) necessitate the use of an alternative specimen type for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis. In this study, we investigated the use of saliva as an alternative specimen type for SARS-CoV-2 detection. Participants presenting COVID-19 symptoms and their contacts were enrolled at the COVID-19 Screening Unit of Dhaka Hospital of the International Centre for Diarrhoeal Disease Research, Bangladesh (icddr,b), from July to November 2020. Paired NPS and saliva specimens were collected from each participant. Reverse transcription-quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR) was performed to detect SARS-CoV-2. Of the 596 suspected COVID-19-positive participants, 231 (38.7%) were detected as COVID-19 positive by RT-qPCR from at least 1 specimen type. Among the positive cases, 184 (79.6%) patients were identified to be positive for SARS-CoV-2 based on NPS and saliva samples, whereas 45 (19.65%) patients were positive for SARS-CoV-2 based on NPS samples but negative for SARS-CoV-2 based on the saliva samples. Two (0.5%) patients were positive for SARS-CoV-2 based on saliva samples but negative for SARS-CoV-2 based on NPS samples. The sensitivity and specificity of the saliva samples were 80.3% and 99.4%, respectively. SARS-CoV-2 detection was higher in saliva (85.1%) among the patients who visited the clinic after 1 to 5 days of symptom onset. A lower median cycle threshold (C_T) value indicated a higher SARS-CoV-2 viral load in NPS than that in saliva for target genes among the positive specimens. The study findings suggest that saliva can be used accurately for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 early after symptom onset in clinical and community settings. IMPORTANCE As the COVID-19 pandemic erupted, the WHO recommended the use of nasopharyngeal or throat swabs for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 etiology of COVID-19. The collection of NPS causes discomfort because of its invasive collection procedure. There are considerable risks to health care workers during the collection of these specimens. Therefore, an alternative, noninvasive, reliable, and self-collected specimen was explored in this study. This study investigated the feasibility and suitability of saliva versus NPS for the detection of SARS-CoV-2. Here, we showed that the sensitivity of saliva specimens was 80.35%, which meets the WHO criteria. Saliva is an easy-to-get, convenient, and low-cost specimen that yields better results if it is collected within the first 5 days of symptom onset. Our study findings suggest that saliva can be used in low-resource countries, community settings, and vulnerable groups, such as children and elderly people.

COVID-19 risks and extra-protective measures practised among Nigerian orthodontists and orthodontic residents

Background and Aims

There is a high possibility of transmitting the coronavirus (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) in the orthodontic clinic because orthodontists and their patients are in very close contact when orthodontic care is being given. The aim of this study was to evaluate the knowledge and perception of Nigerian orthodontists and orthodontic residents about the risks of COVID-19 as well as the extra-protective infection control measures that need to be taken.

Materials and Methods

This was a descriptive, cross-sectional study. The questionnaires were distributed and retrieved from consenting participants through an online platform. The questionnaires were analysed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences software version 23. The results were presented in tables and charts.

Results

Out of a total of 90 members on the association's WhatsApp group as at the time the study was being conducted, a total of 48 respondents participated in this study. There were more females (60.4%) than males. Majority (97.9%) of the respondents agreed/strongly agreed that an infected patient could infect the orthodontic clinic staff members with COVID-19 while most were of the view that debonding (95.8%) and retainer delivery (70.8%) posed a risk for spread of the virus. More than half of the respondents (52.1%) considered it necessary to change N95 masks after each patient as an extra-protective measure against COVID-19.

Conclusions

Majority of the respondents knew about the risks that COVID-19 posed to different aspects of orthodontic practice and were also knowledgeable about some of the extra-protective measures that they should take. There is a need to improve the knowledge of the participants concerning the use of appropriate mouth rinses to reduce the risks of transmission of COVID-19 in the dental/orthodontic clinic.

Annual review of selected scientific literature: A report of the Committee on Scientific Investigation of the American Academy of Restorative Dentistry

The Scientific Investigation Committee of the American Academy of Restorative Dentistry offers this review of the 2020 professional literature in restorative dentistry to inform busy dentists regarding noteworthy scientific and clinical progress over the past year. Each member of the committee brings discipline-specific expertise to this work to cover this broad topic. Specific subject areas addressed include prosthodontics; periodontics, alveolar bone, and peri-implant tissues; implant dentistry; dental materials and therapeutics; occlusion and temporomandibular disorders (TMDs); sleep-related breathing disorders; oral medicine and oral and maxillofacial surgery; and dental caries and cariology. The authors focused their efforts on reporting information likely to influence day-to-day dental treatment decisions with a keen eye on future trends in the profession. With the tremendous volume of dentistry and related literature being published today, this review cannot possibly be comprehensive. The purpose is to update interested readers and provide important resource material for those interested in pursuing greater detail. It remains our intent to assist colleagues in navigating the extensive volume of important information being published annually. It is our hope that readers find this work useful in successfully managing the dental patients they encounter.

Diagnostic performance of different sampling approaches for SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The comparative performance of different clinical sampling methods for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection by RT-PCR among populations with suspected infection remains unclear. This meta-analysis aims to systematically compare the diagnostic performance of different clinical specimen collection methods.

METHODS

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we systematically searched PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, medRxiv, bioRxiv, SSRN, and Research Square from Jan 1, 2000, to Nov 16, 2020. We included original clinical studies that examined the performance of nasopharyngeal swabs and any additional respiratory specimens for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection among individuals presenting in ambulatory care. Studies without data on paired samples, or those that only examined different samples from confirmed SARS-CoV-2 cases were not useful for examining diagnostic performance of a test and were excluded. Diagnostic performance, including sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value, was examined using random effects models and double arcsine transformation.

FINDINGS

Of the 5577 studies identified in our search, 23 studies including 7973 participants with 16 762 respiratory samples were included. Respiratory specimens examined in these studies included 7973 nasopharyngeal swabs, 1622 nasal swabs, 6110 saliva samples, 338 throat swabs, and 719 pooled nasal and throat swabs. Using nasopharyngeal swabs as the gold standard, pooled nasal and throat swabs gave the highest sensitivity of 97% (95% CI 93-100), whereas lower sensitivities were achieved by saliva (85%, 75-93) and nasal swabs (86%, 77-93) and a much lower sensitivity by throat swabs (68%, 35-94). A comparably high positive predictive value was obtained by pooled nasal and throat (97%, 90-100) and nasal swabs (96%, 87-100) and a slightly lower positive predictive value by saliva (93%, 88-97). Throat swabs have the lowest positive predictive value of 75% (95% CI 45-96). Comparably high specificities (range 97-99%) and negative predictive value (range 95-99%) were observed among different clinical specimens. Comparison between health-care-worker collection and self-collection for pooled nasal and throat swabs and nasal swabs showed comparable diagnostic performance. No significant heterogeneity was observed in the analysis of pooled nasal and throat swabs and throat swabs, whereas moderate to substantial heterogeneity (I2 ≥30%) was observed in studies on saliva and nasal swabs.

INTERPRETATION

Our review suggests that, compared with the gold standard of nasopharyngeal swabs, pooled nasal and throat swabs offered the best diagnostic performance of the alternative sampling approaches for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection in ambulatory care. Saliva and nasal swabs gave comparable and very good diagnostic performance and are clinically acceptable alternative specimen collection methods. Throat swabs gave a much lower sensitivity and positive predictive value and should not be recommended. Self-collection for pooled nasal and throat swabs and nasal swabs was not associated with any significant impairment of diagnostic accuracy. Our results also provide a useful reference framework for the proper interpretation of SARS-CoV-2 testing results using different clinical specimens.

FUNDING

Hong Kong Research Grants Council.

Diagnostic performance of different sampling approaches for SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The comparative performance of different clinical sampling methods for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection by RT-PCR among populations with suspected infection remains unclear. This meta-analysis aims to systematically compare the diagnostic performance of different clinical specimen collection methods.

METHODS

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we systematically searched PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, medRxiv, bioRxiv, SSRN, and Research Square from Jan 1, 2000, to Nov 16, 2020. We included original clinical studies that examined the performance of nasopharyngeal swabs and any additional respiratory specimens for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection among individuals presenting in ambulatory care. Studies without data on paired samples, or those that only examined different samples from confirmed SARS-CoV-2 cases were not useful for examining diagnostic performance of a test and were excluded. Diagnostic performance, including sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value, was examined using random effects models and double arcsine transformation.

FINDINGS

Of the 5577 studies identified in our search, 23 studies including 7973 participants with 16 762 respiratory samples were included. Respiratory specimens examined in these studies included 7973 nasopharyngeal swabs, 1622 nasal swabs, 6110 saliva samples, 338 throat swabs, and 719 pooled nasal and throat swabs. Using nasopharyngeal swabs as the gold standard, pooled nasal and throat swabs gave the highest sensitivity of 97% (95% CI 93-100), whereas lower sensitivities were achieved by saliva (85%, 75-93) and nasal swabs (86%, 77-93) and a much lower sensitivity by throat swabs (68%, 35-94). A comparably high positive predictive value was obtained by pooled nasal and throat (97%, 90-100) and nasal swabs (96%, 87-100) and a slightly lower positive predictive value by saliva (93%, 88-97). Throat swabs have the lowest positive predictive value of 75% (95% CI 45-96). Comparably high specificities (range 97-99%) and negative predictive value (range 95-99%) were observed among different clinical specimens. Comparison between health-care-worker collection and self-collection for pooled nasal and throat swabs and nasal swabs showed comparable diagnostic performance. No significant heterogeneity was observed in the analysis of pooled nasal and throat swabs and throat swabs, whereas moderate to substantial heterogeneity (I² ≥30%) was observed in studies on saliva and nasal swabs.

INTERPRETATION

Our review suggests that, compared with the gold standard of nasopharyngeal swabs, pooled nasal and throat swabs offered the best diagnostic performance of the alternative sampling approaches for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection in ambulatory care. Saliva and nasal swabs gave comparable and very good diagnostic performance and are clinically acceptable alternative specimen collection methods. Throat swabs gave a much lower sensitivity and positive predictive value and should not be recommended. Self-collection for pooled nasal and throat swabs and nasal swabs was not associated with any significant impairment of diagnostic accuracy. Our results also provide a useful reference framework for the proper interpretation of SARS-CoV-2 testing results using different clinical specimens.

FUNDING

Hong Kong Research Grants Council.

Evaluation of Self-Collected Midturbinate Nasal Swabs and Saliva for Detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA

Rapid and accurate diagnostic testing is essential to bring the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic to an end. As the demand for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing continues to increase amid supply shortages, many laboratories have investigated the use of sources other than nasopharyngeal (NP) swabs. Saliva and midturbinate (MT) nasal swabs are attractive alternatives, as they allow for self-collection and are well accepted by patients. Saliva also requires limited consumables. We compared the performance of health care provider-collected NP swabs, patient-collected MT swabs, and patient-collected saliva specimens for SARS-CoV-2 detection using a laboratory-developed PCR assay that had received Emergency Use Authorization by the FDA. Of 281 total evaluable samples, 33 (11.7%) NP swabs, 33 (11.7%) MT swabs, and 32 (11.4%) saliva specimens were positive for SARS-CoV-2 following resolution of discordant results. Compared to NP swabs, saliva exhibited a sensitivity of 90.9% (30/33) and specificity of 99.2% (246/248), while patient-collected MT swabs exhibited a sensitivity of 93.9% (31/33) and specificity of 99.2% (246/248). When comparing to the consensus standard, the sensitivity was found to be 100% (31/31) for both NP and MT swabs and 96.8% (30/31) for saliva specimens, while specificity was the same in both NP swabs and saliva specimens (98.8% [247/250]) and 99.2% (248/250) for MT swabs. Pretreatment of saliva with proteinase K and heating for 15 min prior to extraction reduced the invalid rate from 26.7% (52/195) to 0% (0/195). These data show that midturbinate nasal swabs and saliva are suitable sources for self-collection in individuals who require routine monitoring for SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Reduced Relative Sensitivity of the Elecsys SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Assay in Saliva Compared to Nasopharyngeal Swabs

Early identification and isolation of SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals is central to contain the COVID-19 pandemic. Nasopharyngeal swabs (NPS) serve as a specimen for detection by RT-PCR and rapid antigen screening tests. Saliva has been confirmed as a reliable alternative specimen for RT-PCR and has been shown to be valuable for diagnosing children and in repetitive mass testing due to its non-invasive collection. Combining the advantages of saliva with those of antigen tests would be highly attractive to further increase test capacities. Here, we evaluated the performance of the Elecsys SARS-CoV-2 Antigen assay (Roche) in RT-PCR-positive paired NPS and saliva samples (N = 87) and unpaired NPS (N = 100) with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection (Roche cobas SARS-CoV-2 IVD test). We observed a high positive percent agreement (PPA) of the antigen assay with RT-PCR in NPS, reaching 87.2% across the entire cohort, whereas the overall PPA for saliva was insufficient (40.2%). At Ct values ≤ 28, PPA were 100% and 91.2% for NPS and saliva, respectively. At lower viral loads, the sensitivity loss of the antigen assay in saliva was striking. At Ct values ≤ 35, the PPA for NPS remained satisfactory (91.5%), whereas the PPA for saliva dropped to 46.6%. In conclusion, saliva cannot be recommended as a reliable alternative to NPS for testing with the Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Antigen assay. As saliva is successfully used broadly in combination with RT-PCR testing, it is critical to create awareness that suitability for RT-PCR cannot be translated to implementation in antigen assays without thorough evaluation of each individual test system.

Repetitive saliva-based mass screening as a tool for controlling SARS-CoV-2 transmission in nursing homes

Nursing home (NH) residents and staff have been severely affected by the COVID‐19 pandemic. The aim of this study was to examine the use of weekly saliva RT‐qPCR testing for SARS‐CoV‐2 detection among NH workers as a strategy to control disease transmission within NHs in Belgium. From 16 November to 27 December 2020, a voluntary and anonymous weekly screening was implemented in a cohort of 50,000 workers across 572 NHs in the Walloon region of Belgium to detect asymptomatic cases of SARS‐CoV‐2 via saliva RT‐qPCR testing and using the Diagenode saliva sample collection device. Positive workers were isolated to avoid subsequent infections in residents and other staff. RT‐qPCR testing was based on pooled saliva sampling techniques from three workers, followed by individual testing of each positive or inconclusive pool. The majority of NHs (85%) and 55% of their workers participated. Pooling did not affect sensitivity as it only induced a very decrease in sensitivity estimated as 0.33%. Significant decreases in the prevalence (34.4–13.4%) and incidence of NHs with either single (13.8–2%) or multiple positive workers (3.7–0%) were observed over time. In addition, deaths among NH residents and NH worker absences decreased significantly over time. Weekly saliva RT‐qPCR testing for SARS‐CoV‐2 demonstrated large‐scale feasibility and efficacy in disrupting the chain of transmission. Implementation of this testing strategy in NHs could also be extended to other settings with the aim to control viral transmission for maintaining essential activities.

Saliva, a bodily fluid with recognized and potential diagnostic applications

Human whole saliva is a bodily fluid that can be obtained easily by noninvasive techniques. Specimens can be collected by the patient also at home in order to monitor health status and variations of several analytes of clinical interest. The contributions to whole saliva include secretions from salivary glands and, among others, from the gingival crevicular fluid that derives from the epithelial mucosa. Therefore, saliva is currently a relevant diagnostic fluid for many substances, including steroids, nonpeptide hormones, therapeutic drugs, and drugs of abuse. This review at first briefly describes the different contributions to whole saliva. A section illustrates the procedures for the collection, handling, and storage of salivary specimens. Another section describes the present use of whole saliva for diagnostic purposes and its specific utilization for the diagnosis of several local and systemic diseases. The final sections illustrate the future opportunities offered by various not conventional techniques with a focus on the most recent –omic investigations. It describes the various issues that have to be taken into account to avoid false positives and negatives, such as the strength of the experimental plan, the adequacy of the number of samples under study, and the proper choice of controls.

A Novel Saliva RT-LAMP Workflow for Rapid Identification of COVID-19 Cases and Restraining Viral Spread

Rapid diagnostics is pivotal to curb SARS-CoV-2 transmission, and saliva has emerged as a practical alternative to naso/oropharyngeal (NOP) specimens. We aimed to develop a direct RT-LAMP (reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification) workflow for viral detection in saliva, and to provide more information regarding its potential in curbing COVID-19 transmission. Clinical and contrived specimens were used to optimize formulations and sample processing protocols. Salivary viral load was determined in symptomatic patients to evaluate the clinical performance of the test and to characterize saliva based on age, gender and time from onset of symptoms. Our workflow achieved an overall sensitivity of 77.2% (n = 90), with 93.2% sensitivity, 97% specificity, and 0.895 Kappa for specimens containing >102 copies/μL (n = 77). Further analyses in saliva showed that viral load peaks in the first days of symptoms and decreases afterwards, and that viral load is ~10 times lower in females compared to males, and declines following symptom onset. NOP RT-PCR data did not yield relevant associations. This work suggests that saliva reflects the transmission dynamics better than NOP specimens, and reveals gender differences that may reflect higher transmission by males. This saliva RT-LAMP workflow can be applied to track viral spread and, to maximize detection, testing should be performed immediately after symptoms are presented, especially in females.

Association between cycle threshold (Ct ) values and clinical and laboratory data in inpatients with COVID-19 and asymptomatic health workers

In‐house assays for the diagnosis of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) by quantitative reverse‐transcription polymerase chain reaction (qRT‐PCR), are feasible alternatives, particularly in developing countries. Cycle threshold (C_t) values obtained by qRT‐PCR were compared with clinical and laboratory data from saliva of inpatients with COVID‐19 and asymptomatic health workers (AHW) were studied. Saliva specimens from 58 inpatients confirmed by qRT‐PCR for SARS‐CoV‐2 using nasopharyngeal specimens, and 105 AHW were studied by qRT‐PCR using three sets of primers for the N (N1, N2, and N3) gene of SARS‐CoV‐2, according to the CDC Diagnostic Panel protocol, showing a positivity of 88% for inpatients and 8% for AHW. Bivariate analysis revealed an association between C_t < 38.0 values for N2 and mechanical ventilation assistance among patients (p = .013). In addition, values of aspartate‐transaminase, lactate dehydrogenase, and ferritin showed significant correlations with C_t values of N1 and N3 genes in inpatients. Therefore, our results show that C_t values correlate with some relevant clinical data for inpatients with COVID‐19.

Comparing saliva and nasopharyngeal swab specimens in the detection of COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

Due to the easy transmission of COVID-19, the virus is a threat to global health. Early diagnosis of suspected patients will play an essential role in preventing further spread of COVID-19. The aim of this review study was to evaluate saliva specimen in comparison to nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) specimen in studies selected from various databases.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

To achieve the objective of this study, a systematic literature search was carried out in four databases, namely PubMed, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library, and LILACS. The keywords ″COVID-19″, ″Nasopharyngeal Swab″, and ″Saliva″ were utilized via Boolean operators.

RESULTS

14 articles were included in this review study following the eligibility criteria. Based on data presented in studies used in the meta-analysis, there was no significant difference between both specimen types for detection of COVID-19. Heterogeneity test showed that I2 value was 5.790% (<20%). The effect size (risk ratio) of the 14 studies was 0.951 (<1).

CONCLUSION

With the results revealing no significant difference between the two types of specimen in the diagnosis of COVID-19, the use of saliva specimen is preferable for widespread use because it is easily collected without the need for qualified health workers. However, more in vivo studies are required in order to compare and evaluate saliva and NPS specimens in detecting COVID-19 using various techniques.

The diagnostic accuracy of saliva testing for SARS-CoV-2: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Early detection of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is paramount for controlling the progression and spread of the disease. Currently, nasopharyngeal swabbing (NPS) is the standard method for collecting specimens. Saliva was recently proposed as an easy and safe option with many authorities adopting the methodology despite the limited evidence of efficacy.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this review was to systematically evaluate the current literature on the use of saliva test for detecting severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and carry out a meta-analysis to determine its diagnostic accuracy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Prospective studies were searched for in electronic databases, complemented by hand-searching relevant journals. The risk of bias and applicability were assessed using the revised Quality Assessment of Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool. Meta-analyses and meta-regression modeling were performed to calculate the diagnostic accuracy and examine sources of heterogeneity.

RESULTS

A total of 16 studies were included with 2928 paired samples. The overall meta-analysis showed a high sensitivity and specificity for saliva test at 0.88 (95% CI 0.82-0.92) and 0.92 (95% CI 0.75-0.98), respectively. The diagnostic odds ratio was calculated at 87 (95% CI 19-395) and area under the curve was calculated as 0.92 (95% CI 0.90-0.94) suggesting very good performance of the saliva tests in detecting SARS-CoV-2.

CONCLUSION

Saliva testing has a very good discriminative and diagnostic ability to detect of SARS-CoV-2. Additional large and well-designed prospective studies are needed to further validate the diagnostic accuracy and determine a safe sample collection method prior to its recommendation for mass application.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Saliva demonstrated high sensitivity and specificity. The use of saliva will allow for self-collection of specimens and specimen collection in outpatient and community clinics.

Buccal swabs as non-invasive specimens for detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2

Introduction

The current gold standard for detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) RNA involves subjecting nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs to reverse transcription quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR). However, both sample types need to be collected by trained professionals. Using self-collected buccal swabs as an alternative could simplify and accelerate diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

Objective

To assess self-collected buccal swab samples as an alternative method for SARS-CoV-2 detection in patients with COVID-19.

Methods

Buccal swab samples were self-collected by 73 patients with COVID-19. Total RNA was extracted using Qiagen kits. RNA encoding the SARS-CoV-2 Env protein and human RNase P as an internal control was amplified using the TRUPCR^® SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR kit version 2.1 and a Bio-Rad CFX96 Real-Time Detection System.

Result

The sensitivity of RT-qPCR from buccal swabs was 58.9% (43/73; 95% confidence interval [CI] 46.77%–70.27%) and that of RT-qPCR from saliva was 62.90% (39/62; 95% CI 49.69%–74.84%) taking positive SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR from nasopharyngeal swabs as the gold standard.

Conclusion

Self-collected buccal swabs are promising alternatives to nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs for SARS CoV-2 detection.

Salivette, a relevant saliva sampling device for SARS-CoV-2 detection

Background: The gold standard for COVID-19 diagnosis relies on quantitative reverse-transcriptase polymerase-chain reaction (RT-qPCR) from nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) specimens, but NPSs present several limitations. The simplicity, low invasive and possibility of self-collection of saliva imposed these specimens as a relevant alternative for SARS-CoV-2 detection. However, the discrepancy of saliva test results compared to NPSs made of its use controversial. Here, we assessed Salivettes®, as a standardized saliva collection device, and compared SARS-CoV-2 positivity on paired NPS and saliva specimens. Methods: A total of 303 individuals randomly selected among those investigated for SARS-CoV-2 were enrolled, including 30 (9.9%) patients previously positively tested using NPS (follow-up group), 90 (29.7%) mildly symptomatic and 183 (60.4%) asymptomatic. Results: The RT-qPCR revealed a positive rate of 11.6% (n = 35) and 17.2% (n = 52) for NPSs and saliva samples, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of saliva samples were 82.9% and 91.4%, respectively, using NPS as reference. The highest proportion of discordant results concerned the follow-up group (33.3%). Although the agreement exceeded 90.0% in the symptomatic and asymptomatic groups, 17 individuals were detected positive only in saliva samples, with consistent medical arguments. Conclusion Saliva collected with Salivette® was more sensitive for detecting symptomatic and pre-symptomatic infections.

Comparison Between a Standard and SalivaDirect RNA Extraction Protocol for Molecular Diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 Using Nasopharyngeal Swab and Saliva Clinical Samples

During the COVID-19 pandemic, a certified laboratory of Tamaulipas, Mexico has processed over 100,000 samples of COVID-19 suspected patients, working a minimum of 100 tests daily. Thus, it would be beneficial for such certified laboratories nationwide to reduce the time and cost involved in performing the diagnosis of COVID-19, from sample collection, transportation to local lab, processing of samples, and data acquisition. Here, 30 nasopharyngeal swab and saliva samples from the same COVID-19 individuals were assessed by a standard nucleic acid extraction protocol, including protein lysis with proteinase K followed by binding to column, washing, and elution, and by the SalivaDirect protocol based on protein lysis, skipping the other steps to reduce processing time and costs. The genomic RNA was amplified using a SARS-CoV-2 Real-Time PCR kit. A variation (P > 0.05) in the 95% CIs = 72.6%–96.7% was noted by using the SalivaDirect protocol and saliva samples (sensitivity of 88.2%) in comparison to those of standard protocol with oropharyngeal swab samples (95% CIs = 97.5%–100%; sensitivity of 100%) as reported elsewhere. However, when using nasopharyngeal swab samples in the SalivaDirect protocol (sensitivity of 93.6%; 95% CIs = 79.2%–99.2%), it was in concordance (P < 0.05) with those of the standard one. The logical explanation to this was that two samples with Ct values of 38, and 40 cycles for gene E produced two false negatives in the SalivaDirect protocol in relation to the standard one; thus, there was a reduction of the sensitivity of 6.4% in the overall assay performance.

High Efficacy of Saliva in Detecting SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR in Adults and Children

Rising demands for repetitive SARS-CoV-2 screens and mass testing necessitate additional test strategies. Saliva may serve as an alternative to nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) as its collection is simple, non-invasive and amenable for mass- and home testing, but its rigorous validation, particularly in children, is missing. We conducted a large-scale head-to-head comparison of SARS-CoV-2 detection by RT-PCR in saliva and NPS of 1270 adults and children reporting to outpatient test centers and an emergency unit. In total, 273 individuals were tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 in either NPS or saliva. SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR results in the two specimens showed a high agreement (overall percent agreement = 97.8%). Despite lower viral loads in the saliva of both adults and children, detection of SARS-CoV-2 in saliva fared well compared to NPS (positive percent agreement = 92.5%). Importantly, in children, SARS-CoV-2 infections were more often detected in saliva than NPS (positive predictive value = 84.8%), underlining that NPS sampling in children can be challenging. The comprehensive parallel analysis reported here establishes saliva as a generally reliable specimen for the detection of SARS-CoV-2, with particular advantages for testing children, that is readily applicable to increase and facilitate repetitive and mass testing in adults and children.

Corona Viruses: A Review on SARS, MERS and COVID-19

After the outbreak of SARS and MERS, the world is now in the grip of another viral disease named COVID-19 caused by a beta Coronavirus - SARS COV-2 which appears to be the only one with a pandemic potential. The case of COVID-19 was reported in the Hubei province of Wuhan city in Central China at the end of December 2019 and it is suspected that the sea food market played a role in this outbreak which was closed abruptly. Subsequently, a Public Health Emergency of International Concern was declared on 30 January 2020 by the World Health Organization. Both SARS and MERS corona viruses had its reservoir in bats and were transferred to humans from palm civets and camels respectively. This virus can be transmitted through airborne droplets. Natural reservoir and intermediate host of COVID-19 is yet to be identified. This paper reviews the occurrences of viral diseases in the recent times including SARS and MERS. As an addition to this, the paper will contain a detailed examination of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

A Saliva-Based RNA Extraction-Free Workflow Integrated With Cas13a for SARS-CoV-2 Detection

A major bottleneck in scaling-up COVID-19 testing is the need for sophisticated instruments and well-trained healthcare professionals, which are already overwhelmed due to the pandemic. Moreover, the high-sensitive SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics are contingent on an RNA extraction step, which, in turn, is restricted by constraints in the supply chain. Here, we present CASSPIT (Cas13 Assisted Saliva-based & Smartphone Integrated Testing), which will allow direct use of saliva samples without the need for an extra RNA extraction step for SARS-CoV-2 detection. CASSPIT utilizes CRISPR-Cas13a based SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection, and lateral-flow assay (LFA) readout of the test results. The sample preparation workflow includes an optimized chemical treatment and heat inactivation method, which, when applied to COVID-19 clinical samples, showed a 97% positive agreement with the RNA extraction method. With CASSPIT, LFA based visual limit of detection (LoD) for a given SARS-CoV-2 RNA spiked into the saliva samples was ~200 copies; image analysis-based quantification further improved the analytical sensitivity to ~100 copies. Upon validation of clinical sensitivity on RNA extraction-free saliva samples (n = 76), a 98% agreement between the lateral-flow readout and RT-qPCR data was found (Ct<35). To enable user-friendly test results with provision for data storage and online consultation, we subsequently integrated lateral-flow strips with a smartphone application. We believe CASSPIT will eliminate our reliance on RT-qPCR by providing comparable sensitivity and will be a step toward establishing nucleic acid-based point-of-care (POC) testing for COVID-19.

Saliva as a testing specimen with or without pooling for SARS-CoV-2 detection by multiplex RT-PCR test

Background

Sensitive and high throughput molecular detection assays are essential during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The vast majority of the SARS-CoV-2 molecular assays use nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) or oropharyngeal swab (OPS) specimens collected from suspected individuals. However, using NPS or OPS as specimens has apparent drawbacks, e.g. the collection procedures for NPS or OPS specimens can be uncomfortable to some people and may cause sneezing and coughing which in turn generate droplets and/or aerosol particles that are of risk to healthcare workers, requiring heavy use of personal protective equipment. There have been recent studies indicating that self-collected saliva specimens can be used for molecular detection of SARS-CoV-2 and provides more comfort and ease of use for the patients. Here we report the performance of QuantiVirus^™ SARS-CoV-2 test using saliva as the testing specimens with or without pooling.

Methods

Development and validation studies were conducted following FDA-EUA and molecular assay validation guidelines. Using SeraCare Accuplex SARS-CoV-2 reference panel, the limit of detection (LOD) and clinical performance studies were performed with the QuantiVirus^™ SARS-CoV-2 test. For clinical evaluation, 85 known positive and 90 known negative clinical NPS samples were tested. Additionally, twenty paired NPS and saliva samples collected from recovering COVID-19 patients were tested and the results were further compared to that of the Abbott m2000 SARS-CoV-2 PCR assay. Results of community collected 389 saliva samples for COVID-19 screening by QuantiVirus^™ SARS-CoV-2 test were also obtained and analyzed. Additionally, testing of pooled saliva samples was evaluated.

Results

The LOD for the QuantiVirus^™ SARS-CoV-2 test was confirmed to be 100–200 copies/mL. The clinical performance studies using contrived saliva samples indicated that the positive percentage agreement (PPA) of the QuantiVirus^™ SARS-CoV-2 test is 100% at 1xLOD, 1.5xLOD and 2.5xLOD. No cross-reactivity was observed for the QuantiVirus^™ SARS-CoV-2 test with common respiratory pathogens. Testing of clinical samples showed a positive percentage agreement (PPA) of 100% (95% CI: 94.6% to 100%) and a negative percentage agreement (NPA) of 98.9% (95% CI: 93.1% to 99.9%). QuantiVirus^™ SARS CoV-2 test had 80% concordance rate and no significant difference (p = 0.13) between paired saliva and NPS specimens by Wilcoxon matched pairs signed rank test. Positive test rate was 1.79% for 389 saliva specimens collected from local communities for COVID-19 screening. Preliminary data showed that saliva sample pooling up to 6 samples (1:6 pooling) for SARS-CoV-2 detection is feasible (sensitivity 94.8% and specificity 100%).

Conclusion

The studies demonstrated that the QuantiVirus^™ SARS-CoV-2 test has a LOD of 200 copies/mL in contrived saliva samples. The clinical performance of saliva-based testing is comparable to that of NPS-based testing. Pooling of saliva specimens for SARS-CoV-2 detection is feasible. Saliva based and high-throughput QuantiVirus^™ SARS-CoV-2 test offers a highly desirable testing platform during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

Evolution of Specimen Self-Collection in the COVID-19 Era: Implications for Population Health Management of Infectious Disease

Laboratory testing is an important component in the diagnosis of respiratory tract infections such as with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). However, specimen collection not only risks exposure of health care workers and other patients to infection, but also necessitates use of personal protective equipment that may be in short supply during periods of heightened disease activity. Self-collection of nasal or oropharyngeal swabs offers an alternative to address these drawbacks. Although studies in the past decade have demonstrated the utility of this approach for respiratory infections, it has not been widely adopted in routine clinical practice. The rapid spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by SARS-CoV-2, has focused attention on the need for safe, convenient, timely, and scalable methods for collecting upper respiratory specimens for testing. The goals of this article are to highlight the literature regarding self-collected nasal or oropharyngeal specimens for respiratory pathogen testing; discuss the role of self-collection in helping prevent the spread of the COVID-19 disease from infected patients and facilitating a shift toward “virtual” medicine or telemedicine; and describe the current and future state of self-collection for infectious agents, and the impacts these approaches can have on population health management and disease diagnosis and prevention.

Evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 antigen-based rapid diagnostic kits in Pakistan: formulation of COVID-19 national testing strategy

Rapid diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 during pandemic enables timely treatment and prevention of COVID-19. Evaluating the accuracy and reliability of rapid diagnostic testing kits is crucial for surveillance and diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infections in general population, injection drug users, multi-transfused populations, healthcare workers, prisoners, barbers and other high risk populations. The aim of this study was to evaluate performance and effectiveness of nasopharyngeal swab (NSP) and saliva based rapid antigen detection testing kits in comparison with USFDA approved triple target gold standard real-time polymerase chain reaction. A cross-sectional study was conducted on 33,000 COVID-19 suspected patients. From RT-PCR positive patients, nasopharyngeal swab (NSP) and saliva samples were obtained for evaluation of rapid COVID-19 testing kits (RDT). 100/33,000 (0.3%) of specimens were RT-PCR positive for SARS-CoV-2. Among RT-PCR positive, 62% were males, 34% were females, and 4% were children. The NSP-RDT (Lepu Medical China) analysis revealed 53% reactivity among males, 58% reactivity among females, and 25% reactivity among children. However saliva based RDT (Lepu Medical China) analysis showed 21% reactivity among males and 23% among females, and no reactivity in children. False negative results were significantly more pronounced in saliva based RDT as compared to NSP-RDT. The sensitivity of these NSP-RDT and saliva based RDT were 52% and 21% respectively. The RDTs evaluated in this study showed limited sensitivities in comparison to gold standard RT-PCR, indicating that there is a dire need in Pakistan for development of suitable testing to improve accurate COVID-19 diagnosis in line with national demands.

SARS-CoV-2 Detection in Gingival Crevicular Fluid

Understanding the pathophysiology of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection remains a significant challenge of our times. The gingival crevicular fluid being representative of systemic status and having a proven track record of detecting viruses and biomarkers forms a logical basis for evaluating the presence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The study aimed to assess gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) for evidence of SARS-CoV-2 in 33 patients who were deemed to be COVID-19 positive upon nasopharyngeal sampling. An attempt was also made to comparatively evaluate it with saliva in terms of its sensitivity, as a diagnostic fluid for SARS-CoV-2. GCF and saliva samples were collected from 33 COVID-19-confirmed patients. Total RNA was extracted using NucliSENS easyMAG (bioMérieux) and eluted in the elution buffer. Envelope gene (E gene) of SARS-CoV-2 and human RNase P gene as internal control were detected in GCF samples by using the TRUPCR SARS-CoV-2 RT qPCR kit V-2.0 (I) in an Applied Biosystems 7500 real-time machine. A significant majority of both asymptomatic and mildly symptomatic patients exhibited the presence of the novel coronavirus in their GCF samples. Considering the presence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in the nasopharyngeal swab sampling as gold standard, the sensitivity of GCF and saliva, respectively, was 63.64% (confidence interval [CI], 45.1% to 79.60%) and 64.52% (CI, 45.37% to 80.77%). GCF was found to be comparable to saliva in terms of its sensitivity to detect SARS-CoV-2. Saliva samples tested positive in 3 of the 12 patients whose GCF tested negative, and likewise GCF tested positive for 2 of the 11 patients whose saliva tested negative on real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction. The results establish GCF as a possible mode of transmission of SARS-CoV-2, which is the first such report in the literature, and also provide the first quantifiable evidence pointing toward a link between the COVID-19 infection and oral health.

First report on prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection among health-care workers in Nicaragua

The Nicaraguan COVID-19 situation is exceptional for Central America. The government restricts testing and testing supplies, and the true extent of the coronavirus crisis remains unknown. Dozens of deaths have been reported among health-care workers. However, statistics on the crisis' effect on health-care workers and their risk of being infected with SARS-CoV-2 are lacking. We aimed to estimate the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in health-care workers and to examine correlations with risk factors such as age, sex and comorbidities. Study participants (N = 402, median age 38.48 years) included physicians, nurses and medical assistants, from public and private hospitals, independent of symptom presentation. SARS-CoV-2 was detected on saliva samples using the loop-mediated isothermal amplification assay. A questionnaire was employed to determine subjects' COVID-19-associated symptoms and their vulnerability to complications from risk factors such as age, sex, professional role and comorbidities. The study was performed five weeks into the exponential growth period in Nicaragua. We discovered that 30.35% of health-care workers participating in our study had been infected with SARS-CoV-2. A large percentage (54.92%) of those who tested positive were asymptomatic and were still treating patients. Nearly 50% of health-care workers who tested positive were under 40, an astonishing 30.33% reported having at least one comorbidity. In our study, sex and age are important risk factors for the probability of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 with significance being greatest among those between 30 and 40 years of age. In general, being male resulted in higher risk. Our data are the first non-governmental data obtained in Nicaragua. They shed light on several important aspects of COVID-19 in an underdeveloped nation whose government has implemented a herd-immunity strategy, while lacking an adequate healthcare system and sufficient PPE for health-care workers. These data are important for creating policies for containing the spread of SARS-CoV-2.

Overcoming Supply Shortage for SARS-CoV-2 Detection by RT-qPCR

In February 2020, our laboratory started to offer a RT-qPCR assay for the qualitative detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. A few months after the assay was released to our patients, some materials, reagents, and equipment became in short supply. Alternative protocols were necessary in order to avoid stopping testing to the population. However, the suitability of these alternatives needs to be validated before their use. Here, we investigated if saliva is a reliable alternative specimen to nasopharyngeal swabs; if 0.45% saline is a reliable alternative to guanidine hydrochloride as a collection viral transport media; the stability of SARS-COV-2 in guanidine hydrochloride and in 0.45% saline for 10 and 50 days at room temperature; and if the primers/probe concentration and thermocycling times could be reduced so as to overcome the short supply of these reagents and equipment, without a significant loss of the assay performance. We found that saliva is not an appropriated specimen for our method-nasopharyngeal swabs perform better. Saline (0.45%) and guanidine hydrochloride have a similar SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic capability as tube additives. Reliable SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection can be performed after sample storage for 10 days at room temperature (18-23 °C) in both 0.45% saline and guanidine hydrochloride. Using synthetic RNA, and decreasing the concentration of primers by five-fold and probes by 2.5-fold, changed the assay limit of detection (LOD) from 7.2 copies/reaction to 23.7 copies/reaction and the subsequent reducing of thermocycling times changed the assay LOD from 23.7 copies/reaction to 44.2 copies/reaction. However, using real clinical samples with Cq values ranging from ~12.15 to ~36.46, the results of the three tested conditions were almost identical. These alterations will not affect the vast majority of diagnostics and increase the daily testing capability in 30% and increase primers and probe stocks in 500% and 250%, respectively. Taken together, the alternative protocols described here overcome the short supply of tubes, reagents and equipment during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, avoiding the collapse of test offering for the population: 105,757 samples were processed, and 25,156 SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics were performed from 9 May 2020 to 30 June 2020.

Saliva viral load is a dynamic unifying correlate of COVID-19 severity and mortality

While several clinical and immunological parameters correlate with disease severity and mortality in SARS-CoV-2 infection, work remains in identifying unifying correlates of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) that can be used to guide clinical practice. Here, we examine saliva and nasopharyngeal (NP) viral load over time and correlate them with patient demographics, and cellular and immune profiling. We found that saliva viral load was significantly higher in those with COVID-19 risk factors; that it correlated with increasing levels of disease severity and showed a superior ability over nasopharyngeal viral load as a predictor of mortality over time (AUC=0.90). A comprehensive analysis of immune factors and cell subsets revealed strong predictors of high and low saliva viral load, which were associated with increased disease severity or better overall outcomes, respectively. Saliva viral load was positively associated with many known COVID-19 inflammatory markers such as IL-6, IL-18, IL-10, and CXCL10, as well as type 1 immune response cytokines. Higher saliva viral loads strongly correlated with the progressive depletion of platelets, lymphocytes, and effector T cell subsets including circulating follicular CD4 T cells (cTfh). Anti-spike (S) and anti-receptor binding domain (RBD) IgG levels were negatively correlated with saliva viral load showing a strong temporal association that could help distinguish severity and mortality in COVID-19. Finally, patients with fatal COVID-19 exhibited higher viral loads, which correlated with the depletion of cTfh cells, and lower production of anti-RBD and anti-S IgG levels. Together these results demonstrated that viral load - as measured by saliva but not nasopharyngeal - is a dynamic unifying correlate of disease presentation, severity, and mortality over time.

Customized Orthodontic Triage During COVID-19 Pandemic

COVID-19 pandemic necessitates streamlining patient influx in orthodontic office to avoid cross infection between patients, clinicians, and dental health care workers. A customized orthodontic triage has been proposed in this article to schedule patient appointments through priority triaging and, at the same time, provide self-care advice, virtual assistance, and remote monitoring for patient management in elective circumstances.

Saliva specimens for detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in Kuwait: A cross-sectional study

•

SARS-CoV-2 could be detected in various human secreta.

•

We have screened the saliva for SARS-CoV-2.

•

The positive saliva detection rate was 83.43 %.

•

Agreement between the NPS and saliva specimens demonstrated 91.25 % observed agreement.

•

Saliva-based PCR tests can be used for COVID-19 diganosis.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-COV-2) and represents a global pandemic affecting more than 26 million people and has claimed >870,000 lives worldwide. Diagnostic tests for SARS-COV-2 infection commonly use nasopharyngeal swabs (NPS). As an alternative specimen, we investigated the potential use of the real-time reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR) detection of SARS-COV-2 in saliva samples in large suspected-COVID-19 patients in Kuwait.

NPS and saliva samples pairs were prospectively collected from 891 COVID-19 suspected patients in Kuwait and analyzed using TaqPath™ COVID-19 multiplex RT-PCR.

Of the 891 patients, 38.61 % (344/891) were positive for SARS-CoV-2, 4.83 % (43/891) were equivocal, and 56.56 % (504/891) were negative with NPS by RT-PCR. For saliva, 34.23 % (305/891) were positive for SARS-CoV-2, 3.14 (28/891) were equivocal, and 62.63 % (558/891) were negative. From 344 confirmed cases for SARS-CoV-2 with NPS samples, 287 (83.43 %) (95 % CI, 79.14–86.99) were positive with saliva specimens. Moreover, the diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of RT-PCR for the diagnosis of COVID-19 in saliva were 83.43 % (95 % CI: 79.07–87.20) and 96.71 % (95 % CI: 94.85–98.04 %), respectively. An analysis of the agreement between the NPS and saliva specimens demonstrated 91.25 % observed agreement (κ coefficient = 0.814, 95 % CI, 0.775–0.854).

This study demonstrates that saliva can be a noninvasive specimen for detection of SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR.

Measures to maintain regular operations and prevent outbreaks of SARS-CoV-2 in childcare facilities or schools under pandemic conditions and co-circulation of other respiratory pathogens

After the lockdown and the end of the summer holidays, day-cares and schools need to be reopened and (despite the continued circulation of the new coronavirus SARS-CoV-2) kept open. The need for opening up arises from the right of children to education, participation, support and care. This is possible if appropriate hygiene measures are implemented and community transmission remains stable. In addition, the safety of educators, teachers and carers must be a priority and needs to be addressed by appropriate measures. Finally, the needs of families must also be taken into account. The following document describes in detail how these objectives can be achieved.

Magnetic Nanoparticles Fishing for Biomarkers in Artificial Saliva

Magnetic nanoparticles (MNPs) were synthesized using the colloidal co-precipitation method and further coated with silica using the Stöber process. These were functionalized with carboxylic and amine functionalities for further covalent immobilization of antibodies on these MNPs. The procedure for covalent immobilization of antibodies on MNPs was developed using 1-ethyl-3-(dimethylaminopropyl)carbodiimide (EDC) and N-hydroxysuccinimide (NHS). The evaluation of the efficiency of the coupling reaction was carried out by UV-vis spectrophotometry. The developed antibodies coupled to MNPs were tested for the pre-concentration of two biomarkers tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) and Interleukin-10 (IL-10). Both biomarkers were assessed in the matrix based on phosphate-buffered saline solution (PBS) and artificial saliva (AS) to carry out the demonstration of the format assay. Supernatants were used to determine the number of free biomarkers for both studies. Reduction of the nonspecific saliva protein adsorption on the surface of the complex antibodies-MNPs to levels low enough to allow the detection of biomarkers in complex media has been achieved.