Back

Saliva as testing sample for SARS-CoV-2 detection by RT-PCR in low prevalence community setting.

Gavars, D.; Gavars, M.; Perminovs, D.; Stasulans, J.; Stana, J.; Metla, Z.; Pavare, J.; Tauckels, E.; Gulbis, E.; Dumpis, U.

2020-10-21 infectious diseases
10.1101/2020.10.20.20216127 medRxiv
Show abstract

ObjectivesThe number of COVID-19 cases is increasing globally and there is an urgency for a simple non-invasive method for the detection of SARS-CoV-2. Our study aimed to demonstrate that saliva can be used as a specimen for SARS-CoV-2 detection notably for the screening of extensive population groups via pooling. MethodsTo demonstrate that saliva is an appropriate specimen for SARS-CoV-2 detection a field study including 3,660 participants was performed between September 29 and October 1, 2020. We collected paired nasopharyngeal/oropharyngeal swabs (NPS) and saliva specimens and processed them within 24 hours of collection. We performed 36 serial measurements of 8 SARS-CoV-2 positive saliva samples to confirm the stability of the specimen and completed 37 pools of saliva samples by adding one positive specimen per pool. ResultsSaliva specimens were stable for testing for up to 24 hours. Overall, 44 salival samples (1.2%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 during the field study. The results of saliva samples were consistent with those obtained from NPS from the same patient with 90% sensitivity (95% CI 68.3%-98.7%) and 100% specificity during the first two weeks after the onset of symptoms. Using pooling strategy 796 RT-PCR tests were performed. All pools showed 100% positivity in different pooling proportions. ConclusionsOur findings demonstrate that saliva is an appropriate specimen for pooling and SARS-CoV-2 screening with accurate diagnostic performance. Patient-performed simple specimen collection allows testing an extensive number of people rapidly, obtaining results of the spread of SARS-CoV-2 and allowing authorities to take timely measures.

Matching journals

The top 10 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 13%
14.3%
2
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 19%
6.3%
3
Diagnostics
48 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
6.3%
4
International Journal of Infectious Diseases
126 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
3.9%
5
Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology
98 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
3.9%
6
Journal of Clinical Virology
62 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.8%
7
Clinical Infectious Diseases
231 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.6%
8
Clinical Microbiology and Infection
60 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.9%
9
Emerging Infectious Diseases
103 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
2.7%
10
Journal of Infection
71 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
2.6%
50% of probability mass above
11
Journal of Virological Methods
36 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.3%
12
Journal of Medical Virology
137 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.1%
13
Microbiology Spectrum
435 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.1%
14
The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene
60 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.1%
15
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 9%
1.7%
16
European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.7%
17
Journal of Medical Microbiology
20 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.5%
18
PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases
378 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.5%
19
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 8%
1.5%
20
BMC Infectious Diseases
118 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.3%
21
Frontiers in Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.2%
22
Journal of Clinical Virology Plus
10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.2%
23
Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease
21 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.2%
24
Heliyon
146 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.1%
25
Microorganisms
101 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.1%
26
Science of The Total Environment
179 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
27
BMC Public Health
147 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.9%
28
Eurosurveillance
80 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
29
Journal of Clinical Microbiology
120 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
30
Journal of Medical Internet Research
85 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%