In-Depth Longitudinal Comparison of Clinical Specimens to Detect SARS-CoV-2

Sniffing out safety: canine detection and identification of SARS-CoV-2 infection from armpit sweat

Detection dogs were trained to detect SARS-CoV-2 infection based on armpit sweat odor. Sweat samples were collected using cotton pads under the armpits of negative and positive human patients, confirmed by qPCR, for periods of 15-30 min. Multiple hospitals and organizations throughout Belgium participated in this study. The sweat samples were stored at -20°C prior to being used for training purposes. Six dogs were trained under controlled atmosphere conditions for 2-3 months. After training, a 7-day validation period was conducted to assess the dogs' performances. The detection dogs exhibited an overall sensitivity of 81%, specificity of 98%, and an accuracy of 95%. After validation, training continued for 3 months, during which the dogs' performances remained the same. Gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS) analysis revealed a unique sweat scent associated with SARS-CoV-2 positive sweat samples. This scent consisted of a wide variety of volatiles, including breakdown compounds of antiviral fatty acids, skin proteins and neurotransmitters/hormones. An acceptability survey conducted in Belgium demonstrated an overall high acceptability and enthusiasm toward the use of detection dogs for SARS-CoV-2 detection. Compared to qPCR and previous canine studies, the detection dogs have good performances in detecting SARS-CoV-2 infection in humans, using frozen sweat samples from the armpits. As a result, they can be used as an accurate pre-screening tool in various field settings alongside the PCR test.

Similar Sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 Detection in Oropharyngeal/Nasopharyngeal and Saliva Samples on the Hologic Panther Platform

BACKGROUND

Oropharyngeal (OP) and nasopharyngeal (NP) sampling has historically been considered the reference specimen type used for respiratory virus detection. Saliva could be a less invasive alternative for SARS-CoV-2 detection, but limited evidence is available.

METHODS

The technical and clinical performance of saliva was compared to OP/NP on the Hologic Panther platform with two Aptima assays, the End-Point Transcription-Mediated Amplification assay (EP-TMA) and Real-Time Transcription-Mediated Amplification assay (RT-TMA). The samples were collected at the Public Health Service Testing Site XL location in Schiphol Amsterdam Airport. At the site, the Regional Public Health Laboratory Kennemerland (RPHLK) has a fully equipped laboratory facility.

RESULTS

A total of 374 samples (187 OP/NP swabs and 187 saliva samples) were collected from 187 unique patients. The Real-Time Transcription-Mediated Amplification assay (RT-TMA) resulted in comparable sensitivities for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in both the OP/NP swabs (88.3%; 113/128) and saliva samples (87.5%; 112/128). The End-Point Transcription-Mediated Amplification assay (EP-TMA) analyses showed a similar sensitivity (86.7%; 111/128) in the OP/NP swabs but a lower sensitivity in the saliva samples (80.5%; 103/128). Within the discordant analyses, we found no associations in the symptoms, earlier SARS-CoV-2 infections and eating, smoking, drinking and tooth brushing habits within one hour before testing.

CONCLUSIONS

The Hologic Panther platform Real-Time Transcription-Mediated Amplification assay (RT-TMA) yields a sensitivity for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in saliva that is comparable to the OP/NP swabs derived from participants presenting themselves at a public health testing facility with minimal or mild symptoms.

Increased KL-6 levels in moderate to severe COVID-19 infection

BACKGROUND

The global coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has presented significant challenges and created concerns worldwide. Besides, patients who have experienced a SARS-CoV-2 infection could present post-viral complications that can ultimately lead to pulmonary fibrosis. Serum levels of Krebs von den Lungen 6 (KL-6), high molecular weight human MUC1 mucin, are increased in the most patients with various interstitial lung damage. Since its production is raised during epithelial damages, KL-6 could be a helpful non-invasive marker to monitor COVID-19 infection and predict post-infection sequelae.

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated KL-6 levels of 222 COVID-19 infected patients and 70 healthy control. Serum KL-6, fibrinogen, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), platelet-lymphocytes ratio (PLR) levels and other biological parameters were analyzed. This retrospective study also characterized the relationships between serum KL-6 levels and pulmonary function variables.

RESULTS

Our results showed that serum KL-6 levels in COVID-19 patients were increased compared to healthy subjects (470 U/ml vs 254 U/ml, P <0.00001). ROC curve analysis enabled us to identify that KL-6 > 453.5 U/ml was associated with COVID-19 (AUC = 0.8415, P < 0.0001). KL-6 level was positively correlated with other indicators of disease severity such as fibrinogen level (r = 0.1475, P = 0.0287), LDH level (r = 0,31, P = 0,004) and PLR level (r = 0.23, P = 0.0005). However, KL-6 levels were not correlated with pulmonary function tests (r = 0.04, P = 0.69).

CONCLUSIONS

KL-6 expression was correlated with several disease severity indicators. However, the association between mortality and long-term follow-up outcomes needs further investigation. More extensive trials are required to prove that KL-6 could be a marker of disease severity in COVID-19 infection.

Saliva as a sample type for SARS-CoV-2 detection: implementation successes and opportunities around the globe

INTRODUCTION

Symptomatic testing and asymptomatic screening for SARS-CoV-2 continue to be essential tools for mitigating virus transmission. Though COVID-19 diagnostics initially defaulted to oropharyngeal or nasopharyngeal sampling, the worldwide urgency to expand testing efforts spurred innovative approaches and increased diversity of detection methods. Strengthening innovation and facilitating widespread testing remains critical for global health, especially as additional variants emerge and other mitigation strategies are recalibrated.

AREAS COVERED

A growing body of evidence reflects the need to expand testing efforts and further investigate the efficiency, sensitivity, and acceptability of saliva samples for SARS-CoV-2 detection. Countries have made pandemic response decisions based on resources, costs, procedures, and regional acceptability - the adoption and integration of saliva-based testing among them. Saliva has demonstrated high sensitivity and specificity while being less invasive relative to nasopharyngeal swabs, securing saliva's position as a more acceptable sample type.

EXPERT OPINION

Despite the accessibility and utility of saliva sampling, global implementation remains low compared to swab-based approaches. In some cases, countries have validated saliva-based methods but face challenges with testing implementation or expansion. Here, we review the localities that have demonstrated success with saliva-based SARS-CoV-2 testing approaches and can serve as models for transforming concepts into globally-implemented best practices.

Factors influencing the adoption and participation rate of nursing homes staff in a saliva testing screening programme for COVID-19

Testing strategies are crucial to prevent and control the spread of covid-19 but suffer from a lack of investment in understanding the human factors that influence their implementation. The aim of this study was to understand the factors that encourage participation and the level of engagement of nursing homes staff in a routine saliva testing programme for COVID-19 In December 2020, nursing homes (n = 571) in Wallonia (Belgium) were invited to participate in a saliva testing programme for their staff. The directors were questioned by telephone at the end of a 3-week pilot phase. 445 nursing homes took part in the evaluation questionnaire, of which 36(8%) answered that they chose not to participate in the testing programme. The average participation rate of nursing staff was 49(±25)%. Perception of the justification of the efforts required for testing and perception of practicability of the procedure were significantly associated with the adoption of the system by the nursing homes directors (OR(95%CI): 5.96(1.97–18.0), p = 0.0016); OR(95%CI): 5.64(1.94–16.4), p = 0.0015 respectively). Staff support, incentives and meetings increased the level of engagement in testing (p<0.05). While the adoption of the programme confirmed the acceptability of salivary testing as a means of screening, the participation rate confirmed the need for studies to understand the factors that encourage health care staff to take part. The results suggested rethinking strategies to consider staff engagement from a health promotion perspective.

Evaluation of Screening Program and Phylogenetic Analysis of SARS-CoV-2 Infections among Hospital Healthcare Workers in Liège, Belgium

Healthcare workers (HCWs) are known to be at higher risk of developing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections although whether these risks are equal across all occupational roles is uncertain. Identifying these risk factors and understand SARS-CoV-2 transmission pathways in healthcare settings are of high importance to achieve optimal protection measures. We aimed to investigate the implementation of a voluntary screening program for SARS-CoV-2 infections among hospital HCWs and to elucidate potential transmission pathways though phylogenetic analysis before the vaccination era. HCWs of the University Hospital of Liège, Belgium, were invited to participate in voluntary reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assays performed every week from April to December 2020. Phylogenetic analysis of SARS-CoV-2 genomes were performed for a subgroup of 45 HCWs. 5095 samples were collected from 703 HCWs. 212 test results were positive, 15 were indeterminate, and 4868 returned negative. 156 HCWs (22.2%) tested positive at least once during the study period. All SARS-CoV-2 test results returned negative for 547 HCWs (77.8%). Nurses (p < 0.05), paramedics (p < 0.05), and laboratory staff handling respiratory samples (p < 0.01) were at higher risk for being infected compared to the control non-patient facing group. Our phylogenetic analysis revealed that most positive samples corresponded to independent introduction events into the hospital. Our findings add to the growing evidence of differential risks of being infected among HCWs and support the need to implement appropriate protection measures based on each individual’s risk profile to guarantee the protection of both HCWs and patients. Furthermore, our phylogenetic investigations highlight that most positive samples correspond to distinct introduction events into the hospital.

A qualitative study of rural healthcare providers’ views of social, cultural, and programmatic barriers to healthcare access

Background

Ensuring access to healthcare is a complex, multi-dimensional health challenge. Since the inception of the coronavirus pandemic, this challenge is more pressing. Some dimensions of access are difficult to quantify, namely characteristics that influence healthcare services to be both acceptable and appropriate. These link to a patient’s acceptance of services that they are to receive and ensuring appropriate fit between services and a patient’s specific healthcare needs. These dimensions of access are particularly evident in rural health systems where additional structural barriers make accessing healthcare more difficult. Thus, it is important to examine healthcare access barriers in rural-specific areas to understand their origin and implications for resolution.

Methods

We used qualitative methods and a convenience sample of healthcare providers who currently practice in the rural US state of Montana. Our sample included 12 healthcare providers from diverse training backgrounds and specialties. All were decision-makers in the development or revision of patients’ treatment plans. Semi-structured interviews and content analysis were used to explore barriers–appropriateness and acceptability–to healthcare access in their patient populations. Our analysis was both deductive and inductive and focused on three analytic domains: cultural considerations, patient-provider communication, and provider-provider communication. Member checks ensured credibility and trustworthiness of our findings.

Results

Five key themes emerged from analysis: 1) a friction exists between aspects of patients’ rural identities and healthcare systems; 2) facilitating access to healthcare requires application of and respect for cultural differences; 3) communication between healthcare providers is systematically fragmented; 4) time and resource constraints disproportionately harm rural health systems; and 5) profits are prioritized over addressing barriers to healthcare access in the US.

Conclusions

Inadequate access to healthcare is an issue in the US, particularly in rural areas. Rural healthcare consumers compose a hard-to-reach patient population. Too few providers exist to meet population health needs, and fragmented communication impairs rural health systems’ ability to function. These issues exacerbate the difficulty of ensuring acceptable and appropriate delivery of healthcare services, which compound all other barriers to healthcare access for rural residents. Each dimension of access must be monitored to improve patient experiences and outcomes for rural Americans.

Acceptability of Community Saliva Testing in Controlling the COVID-19 Pandemic: Lessons Learned from Two Case Studies in Nursing Homes and Schools

Current public health debate centers on COVID-19 testing methods and strategies. In some communities, high transmission risk may justify routine testing, and this requires test methods that are safe and efficient for both patients and the administrative or health-care workers administering them. Saliva testing appears to satisfy those criteria. There is, however, little documentation on the acceptability of this method among beneficiaries. This article presents the lessons learned from a pilot study on the use of saliva testing for routine screening of nursing home and secondary school personnel in Wallonia (the French-speaking part of Belgium), conducted in December 2020 to April 2021, respectively. Administrators at the facilities in question seemed to think highly of saliva testing and wished to continue it after the pilot study was over. This result reinforces the criteria (the noninvasive aspect, in particular) supporting a key role for saliva testing in monitoring community spread of the virus. Nevertheless, wider-scale deployment of this particular method will only be possible if the testing strategy as a whole takes a health promotion approach.