Performance of self-collected saliva samples for SARS-CoV-2 mass testing in community settings

被引:0
作者
Kay, Olivia [1 ]
Futschik, Matthias E. [2 ,3 ]
Turek, Elena [4 ]
Chapman, David [4 ]
Carr, Simon [4 ]
Sudhanva, Malur [5 ]
Klapper, Paul E. [6 ]
Cox, Tony [7 ]
Hill, Michael [8 ]
Cole-Hamilton, Joanna [2 ]
Marks, Peter [2 ]
Tunkel, Sarah A. [2 ]
Peto, Timothy [9 ]
Davies, Lindsey [2 ]
Fowler, Tom [2 ,10 ]
机构
[1] Publ Hlth England, London, England
[2] UK Hlth Secur Agcy, London, England
[3] Univ Plymouth, Fac Hlth, Plymouth, England
[4] Deloitte MCS Ltd, London, England
[5] Kings Coll Hosp NHS Fdn Trust, London, England
[6] Univ Manchester, Manchester, England
[7] UK Bioctr, Milton Keynes, England
[8] Univ Oxford, MRC Populat Hlth Res, Oxford, England
[9] Univ Oxford, Oxford, England
[10] Queen Mary Univ London, William Harvey Res Inst, London, England
来源
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL VIROLOGY PLUS | 2023年 / 3卷 / 03期
关键词
COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; RNA; qRT-PCR; Mass testing; Self-sampling; Saliva;
D O I
10.1016/j.jcvp.2023.100161
中图分类号
R51 [传染病];
学科分类号
100401 ;
摘要
Background: Saliva has been considered a suitable sample material for severe acute respiratory syndrome coro-navirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) RNA testing, but uncertainty remained regarding sensitivity and reliability of different saliva collection methods.Objectives: This study aimed to investigate the potential utility of expectorated saliva (ES) and drooled saliva (DS) for community mass testing.Study design: Self-collected ES and DS samples were obtained in a prospective cohort study with 2,878 partici-pants. The utility of saliva for SARS-CoV-2 qRT-PCR testing was assessed by comparing the capacity to detect SARS-CoV-2 positive cases with results for self-collected combined throat and nose (CTN) swabs. Additionally, quantification cycle (Cq) values were compared.Results: ES-and DS-based tests showed the same high level of concordance (98% vs 98%) with CTN swab-based results. Sensitivity was higher for DS (94%) than for ES (83%) or CTN swab (90%) but differences were statis-tically not significant. Comparing only symptomatic cases, however, a significantly higher sensitivity of DS (96%) than of ES (76%) or CTN swab (91%) was observed. Cq values of saliva and swab specimen were significantly correlated and appeared to be not impacted by age or other potentially confounding factors.Conclusions: Saliva-based SARS-CoV-2 RNA testing showed high diagnostic accuracy and can be considered an alternative where swabbing may not be tolerated or operationally feasible. DS yielded the same or better diagnostic performance compared to ES and may present a preferred option with reduced aerosol risk and increased compliance.
引用
收藏
页数:6
相关论文
共 31 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2021, Nucleic Acid Amplification Tests (NAATs)
[2]   The Sensitivity and Costs of Testing for SARS-CoV-2 Infection With Saliva Versus Nasopharyngeal Swabs A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis [J].
Bastos, Mayara Lisboa ;
Perlman-Arrow, Sara ;
Menzies, Dick ;
Campbell, Jonathon R. .
ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2021, 174 (04) :501-+
[3]   Covid-19: testing times [J].
Beeching, Nick J. ;
Fletcher, Tom E. ;
Beadsworth, Mike B. J. .
BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2020, 369
[4]   Comparison of Saliva and Nasopharyngeal Swab Nucleic Acid Amplification Testing for Detection of SARS-CoV-2 A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis [J].
Butler-Laporte, Guillaume ;
Lawandi, Alexander ;
Schiller, Ian ;
Yao, Mandy C. ;
Dendukuri, Nandini ;
McDonald, Emily G. ;
Lee, Todd C. .
JAMA INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2021, 181 (03) :353-360
[5]   Saliva Quantification of SARS-CoV-2 in Real-Time PCR From Asymptomatic or Mild COVID-19 Adults [J].
Carrouel, Florence ;
Gadea, Emilie ;
Esparcieux, Aurelie ;
Dimet, Jerome ;
Langlois, Marie Elodie ;
Perrier, Herve ;
Dussart, Claude ;
Bourgeois, Denis .
FRONTIERS IN MICROBIOLOGY, 2022, 12
[6]   Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCR (Publication with Expression of Concern) [J].
Corman, Victor M. ;
Landt, Olfert ;
Kaiser, Marco ;
Molenkamp, Richard ;
Meijer, Adam ;
Chu, Daniel K. W. ;
Bleicker, Tobias ;
Bruenink, Sebastian ;
Schneider, Julia ;
Schmidt, Marie Luisa ;
Mulders, Daphne G. J. C. ;
Haagmans, Bart L. ;
van der Veer, Bas ;
van den Brink, Sharon ;
Wijsman, Lisa ;
Goderski, Gabriel ;
Romette, Jean-Louis ;
Ellis, Joanna ;
Zambon, Maria ;
Peiris, Malik ;
Goossens, Herman ;
Reusken, Chantal ;
Koopmans, Marion P. G. ;
Drosten, Christian .
EUROSURVEILLANCE, 2020, 25 (03) :23-30
[7]  
Duncan DB, 2022, CLIN BIOCHEM, V8, DOI [10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2022.08.004,2022S0009-9120(22)00193-X, DOI 10.1016/J.CLINBIOCHEM.2022.08.004,2022S0009-9120(22)00193-X]
[8]  
ECDC, 2021, CONS US SAL SAMPL MA
[9]   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 [J].
El-Sharkawy, Farah ;
Tang, Chi Ngong ;
Fitzgerald, Ayannah S. ;
Khatib, Layla A. ;
Graham-Wooten, Jevon ;
Glaser, Laurel ;
Collman, Ronald G. ;
Van Deerlin, Vivianna M. ;
Herlihy, Sarah E. .
JOURNAL OF MOLECULAR DIAGNOSTICS, 2022, 24 (07) :727-737
[10]   Feasibility of SARS-CoV-2 Surveillance Testing Among Children and Childcare Workers at German Day Care Centers A Nonrandomized Controlled Trial [J].
Forster, Johannes ;
Streng, Andrea ;
Rudolph, Paul ;
Ruecker, Viktoria ;
Wallstabe, Julia ;
Timme, Sandra ;
Pietsch, Franziska ;
Hartmann, Katrin ;
Krauthausen, Maike ;
Schmidt, Julia ;
Ludwig, Timo ;
Gierszewski, David ;
Jans, Thomas ;
Engels, Geraldine ;
Weissbrich, Benedikt ;
Romanos, Marcel ;
Doelken, Lars ;
Heuschmann, Peter ;
Haertel, Christoph ;
Gagyor, Ildiko ;
Figge, Marc Thilo ;
Kurzai, Oliver ;
Liese, Johannes .
JAMA NETWORK OPEN, 2022, 5 (01)