Stability of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in Nonsupplemented Saliva

An electrochemical genomagnetic assay for detection of SARS-CoV-2 and Influenza A viruses in saliva

Viral respiratory infections represent a major threat to the population's health globally. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) causes COVID-19 disease and in some cases the symptoms can be confused with Influenza disease caused by the Influenza A viruses. A simple, fast, and selective assay capable of identifying the etiological agent and differentiating the diseases is essential to provide the correct clinical management to the patient. Herein, we described the development of a genomagnetic assay for the selective capture of viral RNA from SARS-CoV-2 and Influenza A viruses in saliva samples and employing a simple disposable electrochemical device for gene detection and quantification. The proposed method showed excellent performance detecting RNA of SARS-CoV-2 and Influenza A viruses, with a limit of detection (LoD) and limit of quantification (LoQ) of 5.0 fmol L-1 and 8.6 fmol L-1 for SARS-CoV-2, and 1.0 fmol L-1 and 108.9 fmol L-1 for Influenza, respectively. The genomagnetic assay was employed to evaluate the presence of the viruses in 36 saliva samples and the results presented similar responses to those obtained by the real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), demonstrating the reliability and capability of a method as an alternative for the diagnosis of COVID-19 and Influenza with point-of-care capabilities.

Diagnostic accuracy of direct reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction using guanidine-based and guanidine-free inactivators for SARS-CoV-2 detection in saliva samples

This study aimed to evaluate diagnostic accuracy of SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection in saliva samples treated with a guanidine-based or guanidine-free inactivator, using nasopharyngeal swab samples (NPS) as referents. Based on the NPS reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) results, participants were classified as with or without COVID-19. Fifty sets of samples comprising NPS, self-collected raw saliva, and saliva with a guanidine-based, and guanidine-free inactivator were collected from each group. In patients with COVID-19, the sensitivity of direct RT-PCR using raw saliva and saliva treated with a guanidine-based and guanidine-free inactivator was 100.0%, 65.9%, and 82.9%, respectively, with corresponding concordance rates of 94.3% (κ=88.5), 82.8% (κ=64.8), and 92.0% (κ=83.7). Among patients with a PCR Ct value of <30 in the NPS sample, the positive predictive value for the three samples was 100.0%, 80.0%, and 96.0%, respectively. The sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection was lower in inactivated saliva than in raw saliva and lower in samples treated with a guanidine-based than with a guanidine-free inactivator. However, in individuals contributing to infection spread, inactivated saliva showed adequate accuracy regardless of the inactivator used. Inactivators can be added to saliva samples collected for RT-PCR to reduce viral transmission risk while maintaining adequate diagnostic accuracy.

Cohort profile: evaluation of immune response and household transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in Costa Rica: the RESPIRA study

PURPOSE

The RESPIRA cohort aims to describe the nature, magnitude, time course and efficacy of the immune response to SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination, population prevalence, and household transmission of COVID-19.

PARTICIPANTS

From November 2020, we selected age-stratified random samples of COVID-19 cases from Costa Rica confirmed by PCR. For each case, two population-based controls, matched on age, sex and census tract were recruited, supplemented with hospitalised cases and household contacts. Participants were interviewed and blood and saliva collected for antibodies and PCR tests. Participants will be followed for 2 years to assess antibody response and infection incidence.

FINDINGS TO DATE

Recruitment included 3860 individuals: 1150 COVID-19 cases, 1999 population controls and 719 household contacts from 304 index cases. The age and regional distribution of cases was as planned, including four age strata, 30% rural and 70% urban. The control cohort had similar sex, age and regional distribution as the cases according to the study design. Among the 1999 controls recruited, 6.8% reported at enrolment having had COVID-19 and an additional 12.5% had antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. Compliance with visits and specimens has been close to 70% during the first 18 months of follow-up. During the study, national vaccination was implemented and nearly 90% of our cohort participants were vaccinated during follow-up.

FUTURE PLANS

RESPIRA will enable multiple analyses, including population prevalence of infection, clinical, behavioural, immunological and genetic risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 acquisition and severity, and determinants of household transmission. We are conducting retrospective and prospective assessment of antibody levels, their determinants and their protective efficacy after infection and vaccination, the impact of long-COVID and a series of ancillary studies. Follow-up continues with bimonthly saliva collection for PCR testing and biannual blood collection for immune response analyses. Follow-up will be completed in early 2024.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04537338.

Influenza A, like Omicron SARS-CoV-2, Is Similarly Detected in Saliva or Nasopharyngeal Samples via RT-qPCR

After the Coronavirus pandemic, the importance of virus surveillance was highlighted, reinforcing the constant necessity of discussing and updating the methods for collection and diagnoses, including for other respiratory viruses. Although the nasopharyngeal swab is the gold-standard sample for detecting and genotyping SARS-CoV-2 and Influenza viruses, its collection is uncomfortable and requires specialized teams, which can be costly. During the pandemic, non-invasive saliva samples proved to be a suitable alternative for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis, but for Influenza virus the use of this sample source is not recognized yet. In addition, most SARS-CoV-2 comparisons were conducted before the Omicron variant emerged. Here, we aimed to compare Influenza A and Omicron RT-qPCR analysis of nasopharyngeal swabs and saliva self-collection in paired samples from 663 individuals. We found that both nasopharyngeal swab and saliva collection are efficient for the diagnosis of Omicron (including sub-lineages) and for Influenza A, with high sensitivity and accuracy (>90%). The kappa index is 0.938 for Influenza A and 0.905 for SARS-CoV-2. These results showed excellent agreement between the two samples reinforcing saliva samples as a reliable source for detecting Omicron and highlighting saliva as a valid sample source for Influenza detection, considering this cheaper and more comfortable alternative.

Repurposing a SARS-CoV-2 surveillance program for infectious respiratory diseases in a university setting

Standard multiplex RT-qPCR diagnostic tests use nasopharyngeal swabs to simultaneously detect a variety of infections, but commercially available kits can be expensive and have limited throughput. Previously, we clinically validated a saliva-based RT-qPCR diagnostic test for SARS-CoV-2 to provide low-cost testing with high throughput and low turnaround time on a university campus. Here, we developed a respiratory diagnostic panel to detect SARS-CoV-2, influenza A and B within a single saliva sample. When compared to clinical results, our assay demonstrated 93.5% accuracy for influenza A samples (43/46 concordant results) with no effect on SARS-CoV-2 accuracy or limit of detection. In addition, our assay can detect simulated coinfections at varying virus concentrations generated from synthetic RNA controls. We also confirmed the stability of influenza A in saliva at room temperature for up to 5 days. The cost of the assay is lower than standard nasopharyngeal swab respiratory panel tests as saliva collection does not require specialized swabs or trained clinical personnel. By repurposing the lab infrastructure developed for the COVID-19 pandemic, our multiplex assay can be used to provide expanded access to respiratory disease diagnostics, especially for community, school, or university testing applications where saliva testing was effectively utilized during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Method versatility in RNA extraction-free PCR detection of SARS-CoV-2 in saliva samples

Early in the pandemic, a simple, open-source, RNA extraction-free RT-qPCR protocol for SARS-CoV-2 detection in saliva was developed and made widely available. This simplified approach (SalivaDirect) requires only sample treatment with proteinase K prior to PCR testing. However, feedback from clinical laboratories highlighted a need for a flexible workflow that can be seamlessly integrated into their current health and safety requirements for the receiving and handling of potentially infectious samples. To address these varying needs, we explored additional pre-PCR workflows. We built upon the original SalivaDirect workflow to include an initial incubation step (95 °C for 30 min, 95 °C for 5 min or 65 °C for 15 min) with or without addition of proteinase K. The limit of detection for the workflows tested did not significantly differ from that of the original SalivaDirect workflow. When tested on de-identified saliva samples from confirmed COVID-19 individuals, these workflows also produced comparable virus detection and assay sensitivities, as determined by RT-qPCR analysis. Exclusion of proteinase K did not negatively affect the sensitivity of the assay. The addition of multiple heat pretreatment options to the SalivaDirect protocol increases the accessibility of this cost-effective SARS-CoV-2 test as it gives diagnostic laboratories the flexibility to implement the workflow which best suits their safety protocols.

A novel strategy to avoid sensitivity loss in pooled testing for SARS-CoV-2 surveillance: validation using nasopharyngeal swab and saliva samples

At the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic, pooled surveillance strategies were employed to alleviate the overwhelming demand for clinical testing facilities. A major drawback of most pooled-testing methods is the dilution of positive samples, which leads to a loss of detection sensitivity and the potential for false negatives. We developed a novel pooling strategy that compensates for the initial dilution with an appropriate concentration during nucleic acid extraction and real-time PCR. We demonstrated the proof of principle using laboratory-created 10-sample pools with one positive and corresponding individual positive samples by spiking a known amount of heat-inactivated SARS-CoV-2 into viral transport medium (VTM) or pooled negative saliva. No Ct difference was observed between a 10-sample pool with one positive vs. the corresponding individually analyzed positive sample by this method, suggesting that there is no detectable loss of sensitivity. We further validated this approach by using nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) specimens and showed that there is no loss of sensitivity. Serial dilutions of the virus were spiked into VTM and pooled with negative saliva in simulated 10-sample pools containing one positive to determine the LOD and process efficiency of this pooling methodology. The LOD of this approach was 10 copies/PCR, and the process efficiencies are ~95%-103% for N1 and ~87%-98% for N2 with samples in different matrices and with two different master mixes tested. Relative to TaqPath 1-step master mix, the TaqMan Fast Virus 1-Step master mix showed better sensitivity for the N2 assay, while the N1 assay showed no Ct difference. Our pooled testing strategy can facilitate large-scale, cost-effective SARS-CoV-2 surveillance screening and maintain the same level of sensitivity when analyzed individually or in a pool. This approach is highly relevant for public health surveillance efforts aimed at mitigating SARS-CoV-2 spread.

Recent advances in RNA sample preparation techniques for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in saliva and gargle

Molecular detection of SARS-CoV-2 in gargle and saliva complements the standard analysis of nasopharyngeal swabs (NPS) specimens. Although gargle and saliva specimens can be readily obtained non-invasively, appropriate collection and processing of gargle and saliva specimens are critical to the accuracy and sensitivity of the overall analytical method. This review highlights challenges and recent advances in the treatment of gargle and saliva samples for subsequent analysis using reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and isothermal amplification techniques. Important considerations include appropriate collection of gargle and saliva samples, on-site inactivation of viruses in the sample, preservation of viral RNA, extraction and concentration of viral RNA, removal of substances that inhibit nucleic acid amplification reactions, and the compatibility of sample treatment protocols with the subsequent nucleic acid amplification and detection techniques. The principles and approaches discussed in this review are applicable to molecular detection of other microbial pathogens.

Antiviral Effect of Candies Containing Persimmon-Derived Tannin against SARS-CoV-2 Delta Strain

Inactivation of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in the mouth has the potential to reduce the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), due to the virus being readily transmitted by dispersed saliva. Persimmon-derived tannin has strong antioxidant and antimicrobial activity owing to its strong adhesion to proteins, and it also exhibited antiviral effects against non-variant and Alpha-variant SARS-CoV-2 in our previous study. In this study, we first demonstrated the antiviral effects of persimmon-derived tannin against the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2 in vitro via the plaque assay method. We then examined the effects of candy containing persimmon-derived tannin. Remarkably, the saliva samples provided by healthy volunteers while they were eating tannin-containing candy showed that the virus titers of the SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant were suppressed. In addition, we found that the SARS-CoV-2 viral load in saliva from patients with COVID-19 collected immediately after they had eaten the tannin-containing candy was below the level of detection via PCR for SARS-CoV-2. These data suggest that adding persimmon-derived tannin to candy and holding such candy in the mouth is an effective method for inactivating SARS-CoV-2 in saliva, and the application of this approach shows potential for inhibiting the transmission of COVID-19.

Salivary SARS-CoV-2 RNA for diagnosis of COVID-19 patients: a systematic revisew and meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy

Accurate, self-collected, and non-invasive diagnostics are critical to perform mass-screening diagnostic tests for COVID-19. This systematic review with meta-analysis evaluated the accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of salivary diagnostics for COVID-19 based on SARS-CoV-2 RNA compared with the current reference tests using a nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) and/or oropharyngeal swab (OPS). An electronic search was performed in seven databases to find COVID-19 diagnostic studies simultaneously using saliva and NPS/OPS tests to detect SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR. The search resulted in 10,902 records, of which 44 studies were considered eligible. The total sample consisted of 14,043 participants from 21 countries. The accuracy, specificity, and sensitivity for saliva compared with the NPS/OPS was 94.3% (95%CI= 92.1;95.9), 96.4% (95%CI= 96.1;96.7), and 89.2% (95%CI= 85.5;92.0), respectively. Besides, the sensitivity of NPS/OPS was 90.3% (95%CI= 86.4;93.2) and saliva was 86.4% (95%CI= 82.1;89.8) compared to the combination of saliva and NPS/OPS as the gold standard. These findings suggest a similarity in SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection between NPS/OPS swabs and saliva, and the association of both testing approaches as a reference standard can increase by 3.6% the SARS-CoV-2 detection compared with NPS/OPS alone. This study supports saliva as an attractive alternative for diagnostic platforms to provide a non-invasive detection of SARS-CoV-2.

Optimization and Improvement of qPCR Detection Sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 in Saliva

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has been a major public health threat globally, especially during the beginning of the pandemic in 2020. Reverse transcription-quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR) is utilized for viral RNA detection as part of control measures to limit the spread of COVID-19. Collecting nasopharyngeal swabs for RT-qPCR is a routine diagnostic method for COVID-19 in clinical settings, but its large-scale implementation is hindered by a shortage of trained health professionals. Despite concerns over its sensitivity, saliva has been suggested as a practical alternative sampling approach to the nasopharyngeal swab for viral RNA detection. In this study, we spiked saliva from healthy donors with inactivated SARS-CoV-2 from an international standard to evaluate the effect of saliva on viral RNA detection. On average, the saliva increased the cycle threshold (CT) values of the SARS-CoV-2 RNA samples by 2.64 compared to the viral RNA in viral transport medium. Despite substantial variation among different donors in the effect of saliva on RNA quantification, the outcome of the RT-qPCR diagnosis was largely unaffected for viral RNA samples with CT values of <35 (1.55 log10 IU/mL). The saliva-treated viral RNA remained stable for up to 6 h at room temperature and 24 h at 4°C. Further supplementing protease and RNase inhibitors improved the detection of viral RNA in the saliva samples. Our data provide practical information on the storage conditions of saliva samples and suggest optimized sampling procedures for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis. IMPORTANCE The primary method for detection of SARS-CoV-2 is using nasopharyngeal swabs, but a shortage of trained health professionals has hindered its large-scale implementation. Saliva-based nucleic acid detection is a widely adopted alternative, due to its convenience and minimally invasive nature, but the detection limit and direct impact of saliva on viral RNA remain poorly understood. To address this gap in knowledge, we used a WHO international standard to evaluate the effect of saliva on SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection. We describe the detection profile of saliva-treated SARS-CoV-2 samples under different storage temperatures and incubation periods. We also found that adding protease and RNase inhibitors could improve viral RNA detection in saliva. Our research provides practical recommendations for the optimal storage conditions and sampling procedures for saliva-based testing, which can improve the efficiency of COVID-19 testing and enhance public health responses to the pandemic.

The Coronavirus Calendar (CoronaCal): a simplified SARS-CoV-2 test system for sampling and retrospective analysis

Objectives

To develop a biological diary (CoronaCal) that allows anyone in the community to collect and store serial saliva samples and chart symptoms on ordinary printer paper.

Methods

Diaries were analyzed for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA using established polymerase chain reaction (PCR) procedures. CoronaCal diaries were distributed to volunteer subjects in the community during the peak of the COVID-19 outbreak in New York. Volunteers collected their own daily saliva samples and self-reported symptoms.

Results

SARS-CoV-2 RNA extracted from CoronaCals was measured using qPCR and RNA levels were correlated with reported symptoms. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected in CoronaCals from nine of nine people with COVID-19 symptoms or exposure to someone with COVID-19, and not in one asymptomatic person. CoronaCals were stored for up to 70 days at room temperature during collection and then frozen for up to four months before analysis, suggesting that SARS-CoV-2 RNA is stable once dried onto paper.

Conclusions

Sampling saliva on simple paper provides a useful method to study the natural history and epidemiology of COVID-19. The CoronaCal collection and testing method is easy to implement, inexpensive, non-invasive and scalable. The approach can inform the historical and epidemiological understanding of infections in individuals and populations.

Comparison of SARS-CoV-2 Detection in Nasopharyngeal Swab and Saliva Samples from Patients Infected with Omicron Variant

To compare the detection of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant in nasopharyngeal-swab (NPS) and oral saliva samples. 255 samples were obtained from 85 Omicron-infected patients. SARS-CoV-2 load was measured in the NPS and saliva samples by using Simplexa™ COVID-19 direct and Alinity m SARS-CoV-2 AMP assays. Results obtained with the two diagnostic platforms showed very good inter-assay concordance (91.4 and 82.4% for saliva and NPS samples, respectively) and a significant correlation among cycle threshold (Ct) values. Both platforms revealed a highly significant correlation among Ct obtained in the two matrices. Although the median Ct value was lower in NPS than in saliva samples, the Ct drop was comparable in size for both types of samples after 7 days of antiviral treatment of the Omicron-infected patients. Our result demonstrates that the detection of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant is not influenced by the type of sample used for PCR analysis, and that saliva can be used as an alternative specimen for detection and follow-up of Omicron-infected patients.

Detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection by saliva and nasopharyngeal sampling in frontline healthcare workers: An observational cohort study

BACKGROUND

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has caused an unprecedented strain on healthcare systems worldwide, including the United Kingdom National Health Service (NHS). We conducted an observational cohort study of SARS-CoV-2 infection in frontline healthcare workers (HCW) working in an acute NHS Trust during the first wave of the pandemic, to answer emerging questions surrounding SARS-CoV-2 infection, diagnosis, transmission and control.

METHODS

Using self-collected weekly saliva and twice weekly combined oropharyngeal/nasopharyngeal (OP/NP) samples, in addition to self-assessed symptom profiles and isolation behaviours, we retrospectively compared SARS-CoV-2 detection by RT-qPCR of saliva and OP/NP samples. We report the association with contemporaneous symptoms and isolation behaviour.

RESULTS

Over a 12-week period from 30th March 2020, 40·0% (n = 34/85, 95% confidence interval 31·3-51·8%) HCW had evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection by surveillance OP/NP swab and/or saliva sample. Symptoms were reported by 47·1% (n = 40) and self-isolation by 25·9% (n = 22) participants. Only 44.1% (n = 15/34) participants with SARS-CoV-2 infection reported any symptoms within 14 days of a positive result and only 29·4% (n = 10/34) reported self-isolation periods. Overall agreement between paired saliva and OP/NP swabs was 93·4% (n = 211/226 pairs) but rates of positive concordance were low. In paired samples with at least one positive result, 35·0% (n = 7/20) were positive exclusively by OP/NP swab, 40·0% (n = 8/20) exclusively by saliva and in only 25·0% (n = 5/20) were the OP/NP and saliva result both positive.

CONCLUSIONS

HCW are a potential source of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in hospitals and symptom screening will identify the minority of infections. Without routine asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 screening, it is likely that HCW with SARS-CoV-2 infection would continue to attend work. Saliva, in addition to OP/NP swab testing, facilitated ascertainment of symptomatic and asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections. Combined saliva and OP/NP swab sampling would improve detection of SARS-CoV-2 for surveillance and is recommended for a high sensitivity strategy.

Single-walled carbon nanotubes-based RNA protection and extraction improves RT-qPCR sensitivity for SARS-CoV-2 detection

The false-negative result of nucleic acid testing is an important cause of continued spread of COVID-19, while SARS-CoV-2 RNA degradation during transportation and nucleic acid extraction can lead to false-negative results. Here, we investigated that single-walled carbon nanotubes (SCNTs) could protect RNA from degradation for at least 4 days at room temperature. By constructing magnetism-functionalized SCNTs (MSCNTs), we developed a method that enabled protection and simple extraction of SARS-CoV-2 RNA, and the RNA-bound MSCNTs can be directly used for reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) detection. The experimental results showed that 1 μg of MSCNTs adsorbed up to 24 ng of RNA. Notably, the MSCNTs-based method for extracting SARS-CoV-2 RNA from simulated nasopharyngeal swabs and saliva samples with mean recovery rates of 103% and 106% improved the sensitivity of RT-qPCR detection by 8-32 fold in comparison to current common methods. This improvement was largely attributable to the protection of RNA, enabling increased RNA load for downstream assays.

Mouth rinses efficacy on salivary SARS-CoV-2 viral load: A randomized clinical trial

Considering the global trend to confine the COVID-19 pandemic by applying various preventive health measures, preprocedural mouth rinsing has been proposed to mitigate the transmission risk of SARS-CoV-2 in dental clinics. The study aimed to investigate the effect of different mouth rinses on salivary viral load in COVID-19 patients. This study was a single-center, randomized, double-blind, six-parallel-group, placebo-controlled clinical trial that investigated the effect of four mouth rinses (1% povidone-iodine, 1.5% hydrogen peroxide, 0.075% cetylpyridinium chloride, and 80 ppm hypochlorous acid) on salivary SARS-CoV-2 viral load relative to the distilled water and no-rinse control groups. The viral load was measured by quantitative reverse transcription PCR (RT-qPCR) at baseline and 5, 30, and 60 min post rinsing. The viral load pattern within each mouth rinse group showed a reduction overtime; however, this reduction was only statistically significant in the hydrogen peroxide group. Further, a significant reduction in the viral load was observed between povidone-iodine, hydrogen peroxide, and cetylpyridinium chloride compared to the no-rinse group at 60 min, indicating their late antiviral potential. Interestingly, a similar statistically significant reduction was also observed in the distilled water control group compared to the no-rinse group at 60 min, proposing mechanical washing of the viral particles through the rinsing procedure. Therefore, results suggest using preprocedural mouth rinses, particularly hydrogen peroxide, as a risk-mitigation step before dental procedures, along with strict adherence to other infection control measures.

Routine saliva testing for SARS-CoV-2 in children: Methods for partnering with community childcare centers

While considerable attention was placed on SARS-CoV-2 testing and surveillance programs in the K-12 setting, younger age groups in childcare centers were largely overlooked. Childcare facilities are vital to communities, allowing parents/guardians to remain at work and providing safe environments for both children and staff. Therefore, early in the COVID-19 pandemic (October 2020), we established a PCR-based COVID-19 surveillance program in childcare facilities, testing children and staff with the goal of collecting actionable public health data and aiding communities in the progressive resumption of standard operations and ways of life. In this study we describe the development of a weekly saliva testing program and provide early results from our experience implementing this in childcare centers. We enrolled children (aged 6 months to 7 years) and staff at seven childcare facilities and trained participants in saliva collection using video chat technology. Weekly surveys were sent out to assess exposures, symptoms, and vaccination status changes. Participants submitted weekly saliva samples at school. Samples were transported to a partnering clinical laboratory or RT-PCR testing using SalivaDirect and results were uploaded to each participant's online patient portal within 24 h. SARS-CoV-2 screening and routine testing programs have focused less on the childcare population, resulting in knowledge gaps in this critical age group, especially as many are still ineligible for vaccination. SalivaDirect testing for SARS-CoV-2 provides a feasible method of asymptomatic screening and symptomatic testing for children and childcare center staff. Given the relative aversion to nasal swabs in younger age groups, an at-home saliva collection method provides an attractive alternative, especially as a routine surveillance tool. Results can be shared rapidly electronically through participants' private medical chart portals, and video chat technology allows for discussion and instruction between investigators and participants. This study fosters a cooperative partnership with participating childcare centers, parents/guardians, and staff with the goal of mitigating COVID-19 transmission in childcare centers. Age-related challenges in saliva collection can be overcome by working with parents/guardians to conceptualize new collection strategies and by offering parents/guardians continued virtual guidance and support.

Comparison of SARS-CoV-2 Detection from Saliva Sampling and Oropharyngeal Swab

We examined the detection rate of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) using reverse transcription-PCR (RT-PCR) of side-by-side saliva and oropharyngeal swab (OPS) samples from 639 symptomatic and asymptomatic subjects, of which 47 subjects were found to be positive for SARS-CoV-2 in the OPS or saliva sample or both. It was found that the detection rate (93.6% for both OPS and saliva) as well as the sensitivity and specificity were comparable between the two sampling methods in this cohort. The sensitivity was 0.932 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.818 to 0.977) and the specificity was 0.995 (95% CI, 0.985 to 0.998), both for saliva when OPS sampling was used as the reference and for OPS when saliva was used as the reference. Furthermore, the Cohen's kappa value was 0.926 (95% CI, 0.868 to 0.985), indicating strong agreement between the two sampling methods. In addition, the viral RNA stability in pure saliva and saliva mixed with preservation buffers was examined following storage at room temperature and at 4°C. It was found that pure saliva kept the viral RNA stable for 9 days at both temperatures and that the type of preservation buffer can either enhance or reduce the stability of the RNA. We conclude that self-administered saliva sampling is an attractive alternative to oropharyngeal swabbing for SARS-CoV-2 detection, and it might be useful in large-scale testing. IMPORTANCE It is not inconceivable that we will witness recurring surges of COVID-19 before the pandemic finally recedes. It is therefore still relevant to look for feasible, simple, and flexible screening methods so that schools, workplaces, and communities in general can avoid lockdowns. In this work, we analyzed two different sampling methods: oropharyngeal swabs and saliva collection. Oropharyngeal swabs must be collected by trained health personnel at clinics, whereas self-assisted saliva collection can be performed at any given location. It was found that the two sampling methods were comparable. Saliva sampling is a simple method that allows easy mass testing using minimal resources from the existing health care system, and this method may therefore prove to be an effective tool for containing the COVID-19 pandemic.

DETERMINATION OF COVID-19 VIRUSES IN SALIVA USING FOURIER TRANSFORM INFRARED SPECTROSCOPY

The rapid spread of severe syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has led to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) worldwide pandemic. Scientists and researchers all over the world studied different methods in order to accelerate the testing results. In this review, we present some of the most important papers related to the determination of COVID – 19 in saliva using the Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy technique.

SARS-CoV-2 reliably detected in frozen saliva samples stored up to one year

Viability of saliva samples stored for longer than 28 days has not been reported in the literature. The COVID-19 pandemic has spawned new research evaluating various sample types, thus large biobanks have been started. Residual saliva samples from university student surveillance testing were retested on SalivaDirect and compared with original RT-PCR (cycle threshold values) and quantitative antigen values for each month in storage. We conclude that saliva samples stored at -80°C are still viable in detecting SARS-CoV-2 after 12 months of storage, establishing the validity of these samples for future testing.

Saliva for molecular detection of SARS‐CoV ‐2 in preschool and school‐age children

SARS‐CoV‐2 diagnosis is a cornerstone for the management of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19). Numerous studies have assessed saliva performance over nasopharyngeal sampling (NPS), but data in young children are still rare. We explored saliva performance for SARS‐CoV‐2 detection by RT‐PCR according to the time interval from initial symptoms or patient serological status. We collected 509 NPS and saliva paired samples at initial diagnosis from 166 children under 12 years of age (including 57 children under 6), 106 between 12 and 17, and 237 adults. In children under 12, overall detection rate for SARS‐CoV‐2 was comparable in saliva and NPS, with an overall agreement of 89.8%. Saliva sensitivity was significantly lower than that of NPS (77.1% compared to 95.8%) in pre‐school and school‐age children but regained 96% when considering seronegative children only. This pattern was also observed to a lesser degree in adolescents but not in adults. Sensitivity of saliva was independent of symptoms, in contrary to NPS, whose sensitivity decreased significantly in asymptomatic subjects. Performance of saliva is excellent in children under 12 at early stages of infection. This reinforces saliva as a collection method for early and unbiased SARS‐CoV‐2 detection and a less invasive alternative for young children.

Saliva as an alternative specimen to nasopharyngeal swabs for COVID-19 diagnosis: Review

Almost 2 years ago, the novel coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was discovered to be the causative agent of the disease COVID-19. Subsequently, SARS-CoV-2 has spread across the world infecting millions of people, resulting in the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. The current 'gold standard' for COVID-19 diagnosis involves obtaining a nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) from the patient and testing for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in the specimen using real-time reverse transcription PCR (RT-qPCR). However, obtaining a NPS specimen is an uncomfortable and invasive procedure for the patient and is limited in its applicability to mass testing. Interest in saliva as an alternative diagnostic specimen is of increasing global research interest due to its malleability to mass testing, greater patient acceptability and overall ease of specimen collection. However, the current literature surrounding the sensitivity of saliva compared to NPS is conflicting. The aim of this review was to analyse the recent literature to assess the viability of saliva in COVID-19 diagnosis. We hypothesize that the discrepancies in the current literature are likely due to the variations in the saliva collection and processing protocols used between studies. The universal adaptation of an optimised protocol could alleviate these discrepancies and see saliva specimens be as sensitive, if not more, than NPS for COVID-19 diagnosis. Whilst saliva specimens are more complimentary to mass-testing, with the possibility of samples being collected from home, the RT-qPCR diagnostic process remains to be the rate-limiting step and therefore interest in salivary rapid antigen tests, which negate the wait-times of RT-qPCR with results available within 15-30 min, may be an answer to this.

Detection and Stability of SARS-CoV-2 in Three Self-Collected Specimen Types: Flocked Midturbinate Swab (MTS) in Viral Transport Media, Foam MTS, and Saliva

Respiratory specimen collection materials shortages hampers severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing. We compared specimen alternatives and evaluated SARS-CoV-2 RNA stability under simulated shipping conditions. We compared concordance of RT-PCR detection of SARS-CoV-2 from flocked midturbinate swabs (MTS) in viral transport media (VTM), foam MTS without VTM, and saliva. Specimens were collected between August 2020 and April 2021 from three prospective cohorts. We compared RT-PCR cycle quantification (Cq) for Spike (S), Nucleocapsid (N), and the Open Reading Frame 1ab (ORF) genes for flocked MTS and saliva specimens tested before and after exposure to a range of storage temperatures (4-30°C) and times (2, 3, and 7 days). Of 1,900 illnesses with ≥2 specimen types tested, 335 (18%) had SARS-CoV-2 detected in ≥1 specimen; 304 (91%) were concordant across specimen types. Among illnesses with SARS-CoV-2 detection, 97% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 94-98%) were positive on flocked MTS, 99% (95% CI: 97-100%) on saliva, and 89% (95% CI: 84-93%) on foam MTS. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected in flocked MTS and saliva stored up to 30°C for 7 days. All specimen types provided highly concordant SARS-CoV-2 results. These findings support a range of viable options for specimen types, collection, and transport methods that may facilitate SARS-CoV-2 testing during supply and personnel shortages. IMPORTANCE Findings from this analysis indicate that (1) self-collection of flocked and foam MTS and saliva samples is feasible in both adults and children, (2) foam MTS with VTM and saliva are both viable and reasonable alternatives to traditional flocked MTS in VTM for SARS-CoV-2 detection, and (3) these sample types may be stored and transported at ambient temperatures for up to 7 days without compromising sample quality. These findings support methods of sample collection for SARS-CoV-2 detection that may facilitate widespread community testing in the setting of supply and personnel shortages during the current pandemic.

On-Site Viral Inactivation and RNA Preservation of Gargle and Saliva Samples Combined with Direct Analysis of SARS-CoV-2 RNA on Magnetic Beads

Samples of nasopharyngeal swabs (NPS) are commonly used for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 and diagnosis of COVID-19. As an alternative, self-collection of saliva and gargle samples minimizes transmission to healthcare workers and relieves the pressure of resources and healthcare personnel during the pandemic. This study aimed to develop an enhanced method enabling simultaneous viral inactivation and RNA preservation during on-site self-collection of saliva and gargle samples. Our method involves the addition of saliva or gargle samples to a newly formulated viral inactivation and RNA preservation (VIP) buffer, concentration of the viral RNA on magnetic beads, and detection of SARS-CoV-2 using reverse transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction directly from the magnetic beads. This method has a limit of detection of 25 RNA copies per 200 μL of gargle or saliva sample and 9-111 times higher sensitivity than the viral RNA preparation kit recommended by the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The integrated method was successfully used to analyze more than 200 gargle and saliva samples, including the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in 123 gargle and saliva samples collected daily from two NPS-confirmed positive SARS-CoV-2 patients throughout the course of their infection and recovery. The VIP buffer is stable at room temperature for at least 6 months. SARS-CoV-2 RNA (65 copies/200 μL sample) is stable in the VIP buffer at room temperature for at least 3 weeks. The on-site inactivation of SARS-CoV-2 and preservation of the viral RNA enables self-collection of samples, reduces risks associated with SARS-CoV-2 transmission, and maintains the stability of the target analyte.

Development and implementation of a simple and rapid extraction-free saliva SARS-CoV-2 RT-LAMP workflow for workplace surveillance

Effective management of the COVID-19 pandemic requires widespread and frequent testing of the population for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Saliva has emerged as an attractive alternative to nasopharyngeal samples for surveillance testing as it does not require specialized personnel or materials for its collection and can be easily provided by the patient. We have developed a simple, fast, and sensitive saliva-based testing workflow that requires minimal sample treatment and equipment. After sample inactivation, RNA is quickly released and stabilized in an optimized buffer, followed by reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and detection of positive samples using a colorimetric and/or fluorescent readout. The workflow was optimized using 1,670 negative samples collected from 172 different individuals over the course of 6 months. Each sample was spiked with 50 copies/μL of inactivated SARS-CoV-2 virus to monitor the efficiency of viral detection. Using pre-defined clinical samples, the test was determined to be 100% specific and 97% sensitive, with a limit of detection of 39 copies/mL. The method was successfully implemented in a CLIA laboratory setting for workplace surveillance and reporting. From April 2021-February 2022, more than 30,000 self-collected samples from 755 individuals were tested and 85 employees tested positive mainly during December and January, consistent with high infection rates in Massachusetts and nationwide.

Saliva versus Upper Respiratory Swabs: Equivalent for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 University Screening while Saliva Positivity Is Prolonged After Symptom Onset in Coronavirus Disease 2019 Hospitalized Patients

Reopening of schools and workplaces during the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic requires affordable and convenient population-wide screening methods. Although upper respiratory swab is considered the preferable specimen for testing, saliva offers several advantages, such as easier collection and lower cost. In this study, we compared the performance of saliva with upper respiratory swab for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) detection. Paired saliva and anterior nares specimens were collected from a largely asymptomatic cohort of students, faculty, and staff from the University of Pennsylvania. Paired saliva and combined nasopharyngeal/oropharyngeal (NP/OP) specimens were also collected from hospitalized patients with symptomatic COVID-19 following confirmatory testing. All study samples were tested by real-time PCR in the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania. In the university cohort, positivity rates were 37 of 2500 for saliva (sensitivity, 86.1%) and 36 of 2500 for anterior nares (sensitivity, 83.7%), with an overall agreement of 99.6%. In the hospital study cohort, positivity rates were 35 of 49 for saliva (sensitivity, 89.3%) and 28 of 49 for NP/OP (sensitivity, 75.8%), with an overall agreement of 75.6%. A larger proportion of saliva than NP/OP samples tested positive after 4 days of symptom onset in hospitalized patients. Our results show that saliva has an acceptable sensitivity and is comparable to upper respiratory swab, supporting the use of saliva for SARS-CoV-2 detection in both symptomatic and asymptomatic populations.

Hyris bCUBE SARS-CoV-2 rapid molecular saliva testing: a POCT innovation on its way

OBJECTIVES

The reliable identification of individuals with SARS-CoV-2 infection is the cornerstone for containing viral spread. Rapid molecular point-of-care testing (POCT) of saliva might reduce analysis time, thus increasing the efficacy of contact tracing. In this study, a new POCT RT-PCR assay for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in saliva was evaluated and compared with an already validated CE-IVD method.

METHODS

An evaluation was made of 160 left-over salivary samples (27 frozen, kept at -80 °C and 133 fresh), collected using Salivette (Sarstedt, Germany). Samples were analyzed by TaqPath COVID-19 CE-IVD RT-PCR kit, QuantStudio5 Real-Time (Applied Biosystems, USA) (TaqPath) and bKIT Virus Finder COVID-19 Saliva (Hyris Global Diagnostics, Italy). Performances of three- and fivefold pooling strategies were also evaluated. Blood assay interference in saliva was also tested with Hyris.

RESULTS

On using TaqPath, SARS-CoV-2 positivity was detected in 35 samples. Another 10 positive samples were artificially-generated by blind mixing of positive with negative samples. Hyris positive and negative percentages of agreement were 97.6 (95% CI: 87.2-99.9%) and 100 (95% CI: 97.0-100%), respectively. Seventeen positive pools, evaluated for threefold strategy, were all correctly determined by both systems. For the 5-pool strategy, 94.7% (18/19) of samples resulted positive with the Hyris system, and 100% with TaqPath. The presence of 1% of blood (v/v) in saliva did not interfere with the accuracy of Hyris assay.

CONCLUSIONS

The sensitivity and specificity of the bKIT Virus Finder COVID-19 Saliva were optimal with respect to TaqPath. In view of the safe and straightforward pre-analytical procedure involved, and the small size of the Hyris bCube, the Hyris system can be used for POCT.

Effect of RNA quality to SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR detection from saliva

Saliva is an alternative sample material to nasopharyngeal swab in SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics. We investigated possible aspects to improve the reliability of SARS-CoV-2 detection from saliva. Saliva was collected from asymptomatic healthy subjects (n=133) and COVID-19 patients (n=9). SARS-CoV-2 detection was performed with quantitative reverse-transcriptase PCR (RT-qPCR) with two viral and one host target serving as an internal control. The use of internal control revealed that in the first RT-qPCR run 25-30 % of assays failed. The failure is associated with poor RNA quality. When the amount of RNA was cut down to half from the original amount, the performance of RT-qPCR was greatly enhanced (95 % of the assays succeeded). The quality of RNA was not affected by the use of different nucleic acid stabilizing buffers. Our study showed that saliva is suitable material for RT-qPCR based SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics, but the use of internal control is essential to distinguish the true negative samples from failed assays.

Reverse-Transcription Loop-Mediated Isothermal Amplification Has High Accuracy for Detecting Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 in Saliva and Nasopharyngeal/Oropharyngeal Swabs from Asymptomatic and Symptomatic Individuals

Previous studies have described reverse-transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) for the rapid detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in nasopharyngeal/oropharyngeal swab and saliva samples. This multisite clinical evaluation describes the validation of an improved sample preparation method for extraction-free RT-LAMP and reports clinical performance of four RT-LAMP assay formats for SARS-CoV-2 detection. Direct RT-LAMP was performed on 559 swabs and 86,760 saliva samples and RNA RT-LAMP on extracted RNA from 12,619 swabs and 12,521 saliva samples from asymptomatic and symptomatic individuals across health care and community settings. For direct RT-LAMP, overall diagnostic sensitivity (DSe) was 70.35% (95% CI, 63.48%-76.60%) on swabs and 84.62% (95% CI, 79.50%-88.88%) on saliva, with diagnostic specificity of 100% (95% CI, 98.98%-100.00%) on swabs and 100% (95% CI, 99.72%-100.00%) on saliva, compared with quantitative RT-PCR (RT-qPCR); analyzing samples with RT-qPCR ORF1ab CT values of ≤25 and ≤33, DSe values were 100% (95% CI, 96.34%-100%) and 77.78% (95% CI, 70.99%-83.62%) for swabs, and 99.01% (95% CI, 94.61%-99.97%) and 87.61% (95% CI, 82.69%-91.54%) for saliva, respectively. For RNA RT-LAMP, overall DSe and diagnostic specificity were 96.06% (95% CI, 92.88%-98.12%) and 99.99% (95% CI, 99.95%-100%) for swabs, and 80.65% (95% CI, 73.54%-86.54%) and 99.99% (95% CI, 99.95%-100%) for saliva, respectively. These findings demonstrate that RT-LAMP is applicable to a variety of use cases, including frequent, interval-based direct RT-LAMP of saliva from asymptomatic individuals who may otherwise be missed using symptomatic testing alone.

Development of a high sensitivity RT-PCR assay for detection of SARS-CoV-2 in individual and pooled nasopharyngeal samples

The COVID-19 pandemic requires sensitive detection of the SARS-CoV-2 virus from samples to ensure accurate detection of infected patients, an essential component of effective national track and trace programs. Due to the scaling challenges of large sample numbers, sample pooling is an attractive solution to reduce both extraction and amplification reagent costs, if high sensitivity can be maintained. We demonstrate that the Erba Molecular ErbaMDx SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR Kit (EM kit) delivers high sensitivity, achieving analytical detection of 5 copies/reaction SARS-CoV-2 genomic RNA, and 200 copies/mL SARS-CoV-2 inactivated virus spiked into nasopharyngeal swab (NP) samples and extracted through workflow. Furthermore, the EM Kit demonstrates high sensitivity in both pooled (1 in 5) and non-pooled NP samples when compared to an FDA Emergency Use Authorization approved assay, following published FDA guidelines. These findings demonstrate that the EM Kit is suitable for sample pooling, with minimal impact on assay performance. As the COVID-19 pandemic progresses, high sensitivity assays such as the EM Kit will have an important role in ensuring high throughput and sensitive testing using pooled samples can be maintained, delivering the most cost-effective sample extraction and amplification option for national test and trace programs.

Evaluation of saliva self-collection devices for SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics

BACKGROUND

There is an urgent need to expand testing for SARS-CoV-2 and other respiratory pathogens as the global community struggles to control the COVID-19 pandemic. Current diagnostic methods can be affected by supply chain bottlenecks and require the assistance of medical professionals, impeding the implementation of large-scale testing. Self-collection of saliva may solve these problems, as it can be completed without specialized training and uses generic materials.

METHODS

We observed 30 individuals who self-collected saliva using four different collection devices and analyzed their feedback. Two of these devices, a funnel and bulb pipette, were used to evaluate at-home saliva collection by 60 individuals. SARS-CoV-2-spiked saliva samples were subjected to temperature cycles designed to simulate the conditions the samples might be exposed to during the summer and winter seasons and sensitivity of detection was evaluated.

RESULTS

All devices enabled the safe, unsupervised self-collection of saliva. The quantity and quality of the samples received were acceptable for SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic testing, as determined by human RNase P detection. There was no significant difference in SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid gene (N1) detection between the freshly spiked samples and those incubated with the summer and winter profiles.

CONCLUSION

We demonstrate inexpensive, generic, buffer free collection devices suitable for unsupervised and home saliva self-collection.

SARS-CoV-2 Survival in Common Non-Alcoholic and Alcoholic Beverages

SARS-CoV-2, the causative agent of COVID-19, is known to be transmitted by respiratory droplets and aerosols. Since the virus is shed at high concentrations in respiratory secretions and saliva, SARS-CoV-2 would also be expected to be transmitted through activities that involve the transfer of saliva from one individual to another, such as kissing or sharing beverages. To assess the survival of infectious SARS-CoV-2 in common beverages, we quantified infectious virus by plaque assays one hour after inoculation into 18 non-alcoholic and 16 alcoholic beverages, plus saliva, and also 7 days later for 5 of these beverages. SARS-CoV-2 remains infectious with minimal reductions in several common beverages, including milk and beer. However, cocoa, coffee, tea, fruit juices, and wine contain antiviral compounds that inactivate SARS-CoV-2. Although hard liquors containing 40% alcohol immediately inactivate SARS-CoV-2, mixing with non-alcoholic beverages reduces the antiviral effects. In summary, SARS-CoV-2 can be recovered from commonly consumed beverages in a beverage type and time-dependent manner. Although aerosol or droplet transmission remains the most likely mode of transmission, our findings combined with others suggest that beverages contaminated with SARS-CoV-2 during handling, serving, or through sharing of drinks should be considered as a potential vehicle for virus transmission.

Saliva Sampling for Prospective SARS-CoV-2 Screening of Healthcare Professionals

Objective

The objective of this study was to analyze the feasibility and acceptance of a non-invasive, daily and proactive screening program for SARS-CoV-2 infection employing serial saliva testing, in combination with a digital questionnaire among healthcare providers (HCPs) in a multi-professional setting.

Design

This was a prospective cohort study involving HCPs from different units at a single tertiary care center, over a pilot phase of 4 weeks during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic from April 18th to June 6th, 2020.

Setting

Pediatric tertiary patient care units, Comprehensive Center for Pediatrics, Medical University of Vienna.

Subjects

HCPs from different units, including physicians, nurses, midwives, and administrative staff (with patient contact) were considered eligible for the study. Study participants were working in different settings in our center at varying levels of risk exposure.

Interventions

Saliva collection from mouth gargle and electronic symptom and exposure monitoring (eSEM) was performed by participants at the onset of each regular clinical shift (day or night shift), using an anonymous ID for matching the results.

Measurements

RT-PCR of all saliva samples, eSEM, as well as feasibility and acceptance thereof.

Results

Two hundred and seventy-five volunteers collected 1,865 saliva samples and responded 1,378 times in the eSEM during a 4-week period. 1,331 (96.7%) responses were that the testing was feasible and acceptable. The most common severe symptom during the 4-week period mentioned by HCPs was headache, reported 54 times (3.9%). Two SARS-CoV-2 positive samples—one of them being associated with symptoms—were identified. The acceptance rate among HCPs was 96.6%.

Conclusion

Serial saliva screening was a well-accepted and feasible method for monitoring SARS-CoV-2 infectious state in health care professionals. Combination of regular SARS-CoV-2 tests with sequential saliva collection and storage could potentially represent a highly efficient strategy to identify and trace virus positive staff for employee and patient safety.

A Community Study of SARS-CoV-2 Detection by RT-PCR in Saliva: A Reliable and Effective Method

Efficient, wide-scale testing for SARS-CoV-2 is crucial for monitoring the incidence of the infection in the community. The gold standard for COVID-19 diagnosis is the molecular analysis of epithelial secretions from the upper respiratory system captured by nasopharyngeal (NP) or oropharyngeal swabs. Given the ease of collection, saliva has been proposed as a possible substitute to support testing at the population level. Here, we used a novel saliva collection device designed to favour the safe and correct acquisition of the sample, as well as the processivity of the downstream molecular analysis. We tested 1003 nasopharyngeal swabs and paired saliva samples self-collected by individuals recruited at a public drive-through testing facility. An overall moderate concordance (68%) between the two tests was found, with evidence that neither system can diagnose the infection in 100% of the cases. While the two methods performed equally well in symptomatic individuals, their discordance was mainly restricted to samples from convalescent subjects. The saliva test was at least as effective as NP swabs in asymptomatic individuals recruited for contact tracing. Our study describes a testing strategy of self-collected saliva samples, which is reliable for wide-scale COVID-19 screening in the community and is particularly effective for contact tracing.

Alternative SARS-CoV-2 detection protocol from self-collected saliva for mass diagnosis and epidemiological studies in low-incoming regions

Until mass vaccination befalls, control of the new betacoronavirus-associated severe acute respiratory syndrome pandemic (SARS-CoV-2) is based on decreasing virus circulation by social distancing and blocking transmission foci after diagnosis. Globally adopted SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic criteria embrace viral RNA detection by quantitative reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) on nasopharynx secretions, which requires healthcare facilities and specialized personnel for sample collection. To develop an alternative protocol, hydrophilic cotton as the material and saliva as the source for biological sample collection in qRT-PCR/RT-endpoint-PCR SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic methods prepared with local consumables were evaluated using 99 archived nasopharynx samples previously diagnosed as positive for SARS-CoV-2 and 111 prospective saliva samples pared with nasopharynx samples from patients attending the local reference ABC Medical School diagnostic laboratory. The kappa agreement coefficient between the SARS-CoV-2 qRT-PCR and RT-endpoint-PCR was k = 0.97 (95 % CI 0.92-1.00) and k = 0.90 (95 % CI 0.81-0.99), respectively, on SARS-CoV-2-positive archived samples, with the initial qRT-PCR C_T under 25. The agreement coefficient of the SARS-CoV-2 alternative saliva diagnostic protocol, when used to test the paired nasopharynx samples, was k = 0.79 (95 % CI 0.56-1,00). These data support that the SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic assay based on self-collected saliva on cotton represents an alternative protocol for mass diagnosis and epidemiological studies in low-income regions.

Validation of a Saliva-Based Test for the Molecular Diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 Infection

BACKGROUND

Since the beginning of the pandemic, clinicians and researchers have been searching for alternative tests to improve the screening and diagnosis of the SARS-CoV-2 infection. Currently, the gold standard for virus identification is the nasopharyngeal (NP) swab. Saliva samples, however, offer clear, practical, and logistical advantages but due to a lack of collection, transport, and storage solutions, high-throughput saliva-based laboratory tests are difficult to scale up as a screening or diagnostic tool. With this study, we aimed to validate an intralaboratory molecular detection method for SARS-CoV-2 on saliva samples collected in a new storage saline solution, comparing the results to NP swabs to determine the difference in sensitivity between the two tests.

METHODS

In this study, 156 patients (cases) and 1005 asymptomatic subjects (controls) were enrolled and tested simultaneously for the detection of the SARS-CoV-2 viral genome by RT-PCR on both NP swab and saliva samples. Saliva samples were collected in a preservative and inhibiting saline solution (Biofarma Srl). Internal method validation was performed to standardize the entire workflow for saliva samples.

RESULTS

The identification of SARS-CoV-2 conducted on saliva samples showed a clinical sensitivity of 95.1% and specificity of 97.8% compared to NP swabs. The positive predictive value (PPV) was 81% while the negative predictive value (NPV) was 99.5%. Test concordance was 97.6% (Cohen's Kappa = 0.86; 95% CI 0.81-0.91). The LoD of the test was 5 viral copies for both samples.

CONCLUSIONS

RT-PCR assays conducted on a stored saliva sample achieved similar performance to those on NP swabs, and this may provide a very effective tool for population screening and diagnosis. Collection of saliva in a stabilizing solution makes the test more convenient and widely available; furthermore, the denaturing properties of the solution reduce the infective risks belonging to sample manipulation.

Sequencing SARS-CoV-2 Genomes from Saliva

Genomic sequencing is crucial to understanding the epidemiology and evolution of SARS-CoV-2. Often, genomic studies rely on remnant diagnostic material, typically nasopharyngeal swabs, as input into whole genome SARS-CoV-2 next-generation sequencing pipelines. Saliva has proven to be a safe and stable specimen for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA via traditional diagnostic assays, however saliva is not commonly used for SARS-CoV-2 sequencing. Using the ARTIC Network amplicon-generation approach with sequencing on the Oxford Nanopore MinION, we demonstrate that sequencing SARS-CoV-2 from saliva produces genomes comparable to those from nasopharyngeal swabs, and that RNA extraction is necessary to generate complete genomes from saliva. In this study, we show that saliva is a useful specimen type for genomic studies of SARS-CoV-2.

Performance of Self-Collected Anterior Nasal Swabs and Saliva Specimens for Detection of SARS-CoV-2 During Symptomatic and Asymptomatic Periods

Background

Anterior nasal swabs (ANS) are established specimen collection methods for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection detection. While saliva (SA) specimens provide an alternative, few studies have comprehensively characterized the performance of SA specimens in longitudinal studies.

Methods

We compared SARS-CoV-2 detections between paired self-collected ANS and SA specimens from a household transmission study. Participants recorded symptoms and paired ANS and SA specimens daily for 14 days. Specimens were tested using RT-PCR. We calculated the proportion of detections identified by each specimen type among the detections from both types combined. We computed percent agreement and Kappa statistics to assess concordance in detections. We also computed estimates stratified by presence of symptoms and examined the influence of traditional and inactivating transport media on the performance of ANS.

Results

We examined 2535 self-collected paired specimens from 216 participants. Among 1238 (49%) paired specimens with detections by either specimen type, ANS identified 77.1% (954; 95% CI, 74.6% to 79.3%) and SA 81.9% (1014; 95% CI, 79.7% to 84.0%), with a difference of 4.9% (95% CI, 1.4% to 8.5%). Overall agreement was 80.0%, and Kappa was 0.6 (95% CI, 0.5 to 0.6). Nevertheless, the difference in the proportion of detections identified by ANS and SA using traditional and inactivating transport media was 32.5% (95% CI, 26.8% to 38.0%) and –9.5% (95% CI, −13.7% to –5.2%), respectively. Among participants who remained asymptomatic, the difference in detections between SA and ANS was 51.2% (95% CI, 31.8% to 66.0%) and 26.1% (95% CI, 0% to 48.5%) using traditional and inactivating media, respectively.

Conclusions

Self-collected saliva specimens provide a noninvasive alternative to nasal swabs, especially to those collected in traditional transport media, for longitudinal field studies that aim to detect both symptomatic and asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections.

Early Adoption of Longitudinal Surveillance for SARS-CoV-2 among Staff in Long-Term Care Facilities: Prevalence, Virologic and Sequence Analysis

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) emerged in 2019 and has become a major global pathogen in an astonishingly short period of time. The emergence of SARS-CoV-2 has been notable due to its impacts on residents in long-term care facilities (LTCFs). LTCF residents tend to possess several risk factors for severe outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 infection, including advanced age and the presence of comorbidities. Indeed, residents of LTCFs represent approximately 40% of SARS-CoV-2 deaths in the United States. Few studies have focused on the prevalence and transmission dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 among LTCF staff during the early months of the pandemic, prior to mandated surveillance testing. To assess the prevalence and incidence of SARS-CoV-2 among LTCF staff, characterize the extent of asymptomatic infections, and investigate the genomic epidemiology of the virus within these settings, we sampled staff for 8 to 11 weeks at six LTCFs with nasopharyngeal swabs from March through June of 2020. We determined the presence and levels of viral RNA and infectious virus and sequenced 54 nearly complete genomes. Our data revealed that over 50% of infections were asymptomatic/mildly symptomatic and that there was a strongly significant relationship between viral RNA (vRNA) and infectious virus, prolonged infections, and persistent vRNA (4+ weeks) in a subset of individuals, and declining incidence over time. Our data suggest that asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2-infected LTCF staff contributed to virus persistence and transmission within the workplace during the early pandemic period. Genetic epidemiology data generated from samples collected during this period support that SARS-CoV-2 was commonly spread between staff within an LTCF and that multiple-introduction events were less common.

IMPORTANCE Our work comprises unique data on the characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 dynamics among staff working at LTCFs in the early months of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic prior to mandated staff surveillance testing. During this time period, LTCF residents were largely sheltering-in-place. Given that staff were able to leave and return daily and could therefore be a continued source of imported or exported infection, we performed weekly SARS-CoV-2 PCR on nasal swab samples collected from this population. There are limited data from the early months of the pandemic comprising longitudinal surveillance of staff at LTCFs. Our data reveal the surprisingly high level of asymptomatic/presymptomatic infections within this cohort during the early months of the pandemic and show genetic epidemiological analyses that add novel insights into both the origin and transmission of SARS-CoV-2 within LTCFs.

Mouth Washing Impaired SARS-CoV-2 Detection in Saliva

BACKGROUND

A previous study demonstrated the performance of the Salivette® (SARSTEDT, Numbrecht, Germany) as a homogeneous saliva collection system to diagnose COVID-19 by RT-qPCR, notably for symptomatic and asymptomatic patients. However, for convalescent patients, the corroboration of molecular detection of SARS-CoV-2 in paired nasopharyngeal swabs (NPS) and saliva samples was unsatisfactory.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the present work was to assess the concordance level of SARS-CoV-2 detection between paired sampling of NPSs and saliva collected with Salivette® at two time points, with ten days of interval.

RESULTS

A total of 319 paired samples from 145 outpatients (OP) and 51 healthcare workers (HW) were collected. Unfortunately, at day ten, 73 individuals were lost to follow-up, explaining some kinetic missing data. Due to significant waiting rates at hospitals, most of the patients ate and/or drank while waiting for their turn. Consequently, mouth washing was systematically proposed prior to saliva collection. None of the HW were diagnosed as SARS-CoV-2 positive using NPS or saliva specimens at both time points (n = 95) by RT-qPCR. The virus was detected in 56.3% (n = 126/224) of the NPS samples from OP, but solely 26.8% (n = 60/224) of the paired saliva specimens. The detection of the internal cellular control, the human RNase P, in more than 98% of the saliva samples, underlined that the low sensitivity of saliva specimens (45.2%) for SARS-CoV-2 detection was not attributed to an improper saliva sample storing or RNA extraction.

CONCLUSIONS

This work revealed that mouth washing decreased viral load of buccal cavity conducting to impairment of SARS-CoV-2 detection. Viral loads in saliva neo-produced appeared insufficient for molecular detection of SARS-CoV-2. At the time when saliva tests could be a rapid, simple and non-invasive strategy to assess large scale schoolchildren in France, the determination of the performance of saliva collection becomes imperative to standardize procedures.

Development of an alternative saliva test for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 using TRIzol: Adapting to countries with lower incomes looking for a large-scale detection program

The use of saliva for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 has shown to be a good alternative to nasopharyngeal swabs (NPS), since it permits self-collection, avoids the exposure of healthy persons to infected patients, reduces waiting times, eliminates the need of personal protective equipment and is non-invasive. Yet current saliva testing is still expensive due to the need of specialized tubes containing buffers to stabilize the RNA of SARS-CoV-2 and inactivate the virus. These tubes are expensive and not always accessible in sufficient quantities. We now developed an alternative saliva testing method, using TRIzol for extraction, viral inactivation, and storage of SARS-CoV-2 RNA, combined with RT-qPCR, which was comparable in its performance to NPS. Paired saliva samples and NPS were taken from 15 asymptomatic healthcare workers and one patient with SARS-CoV-2. Further 13 patients with SARS-CoV-2 were only saliva-tested. All the tests were performed according to CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel. Saliva (4 mL) was taken in sterile 50 mL tubes, 1.5 mL TRIzol were added and mixed. Our results show that 5 μL of saliva RNA extracted with TRIzol allow for an adequate detection of the virus in patients positive for SARS-CoV-2 and was equally sensitive to NPS in TRIzol. We conclude that saliva testing using TRIzol is a recommendable method for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 since it has several advantages over currently used saliva tests: it can be done with normal sterile tubes, does not need cold-chain handling, is stable at room temperature, is non-invasive and less costly, making it more accessible for low-income countries. Cheaper saliva testing using TRIzol is especially relevant for low-income countries to optimize diagnosis and help define quarantine durations for families, healthcare workers, schools, and other public workplaces, thus decreasing infections and mortality caused by SARS-CoV-2.

Evaluation of saliva self-collection devices for SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics

There is an urgent need to expand testing for SARS-CoV-2 and other respiratory pathogens as the global community struggles to control the COVID-19 pandemic. Current diagnostic methods can be affected by supply chain bottlenecks and require the assistance of medical professionals, impeding the implementation of large-scale testing. Self-collection of saliva may solve these problems, as it can be completed without specialized training and uses generic materials. In this study, we observed thirty individuals who self-collected saliva using four different collection devices and analyzed their feedback. Two of these devices, a funnel and bulb pipette, were used to evaluate at-home saliva collection by 60 individuals. All devices enabled the safe, unsupervised self-collection of saliva. The quantity and quality of the samples received were acceptable for SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic testing, as determined by RNase P detection. Here, we demonstrate inexpensive, generic, buffer free collection devices suitable for unsupervised and home saliva self-collection.

Sequencing SARS-CoV-2 Genomes from Saliva

Genomic sequencing is crucial to understanding the epidemiology and evolution of SARS-CoV-2. Often, genomic studies rely on remnant diagnostic material, typically nasopharyngeal swabs, as input into whole genome SARS-CoV-2 next-generation sequencing pipelines. Saliva has proven to be a safe and stable specimen for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA via traditional diagnostic assays, however saliva is not commonly used for SARS-CoV-2 sequencing. Using the ARTIC Network amplicon-generation approach with sequencing on the Oxford Nanopore MinION, we demonstrate that sequencing SARS-CoV-2 from saliva produces genomes comparable to those from nasopharyngeal swabs, and that RNA extraction is necessary to generate complete genomes from saliva. In this study, we show that saliva is a useful specimen type for genomic studies of SARS-CoV-2.