Project description:Testing for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) by RT-PCR is a vital public health tool in the pandemic. Self-collected samples are increasingly used as an alternative to nasopharyngeal swabs. Several studies suggested that they are sufficiently sensitive to be a useful alternative. However, there are limited data directly comparing several different types of self-collected materials to determine which material is preferable. A total of 102 predominantly symptomatic adults with a confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection self-collected native saliva, a tongue swab, a mid-turbinate nasal swab, saliva obtained by chewing a cotton pad and gargle lavage, within 48 h of initial diagnosis. Sample collection was unsupervised. Both native saliva and gargling with tap water had high diagnostic sensitivity of 92.8% and 89.1%, respectively. Nasal swabs had a sensitivity of 85.1%, which was not significantly inferior to saliva (p = 0.092), but 16.6% of participants reported they had difficult in self-collection of this sample. A tongue swab and saliva obtained by chewing a cotton pad had a significantly lower sensitivity of 74.2% and 70.2%, respectively. Diagnostic sensitivity was not related to the presence of clinical symptoms or to age. When comparing self-collected specimens from different material, saliva, gargle lavage or mid-turbinate nasal swabs may be considered for most symptomatic patients. However, complementary experiments are required to verify that differences in performance observed among the five sampling modes were not attributed to collection impairment.
Project description:Proteome profile changes post-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (post-SARS-CoV-2) infection in different body sites of humans remains an active scientific investigation whose solutions stand a chance of providing more information on what constitutes SARS-CoV-2 pathogenesis. While proteomics has been used to understand SARS-CoV-2 pathogenesis, there are limited data about the status of proteome profile in different human body sites infected by the SARS-CoV-2 virus. To bridge this gap, our study aims to characterize the proteins secreted in urine, bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF), gargle solution, and nasopharyngeal samples and assess the proteome differences in these body samples collected from SARS-CoV-2-positive patients. We downloaded publicly available proteomic data from (https://www.ebi.ac.uk/pride/). The data we downloaded had the following identifiers: (i) PXD019423, n = 3 from Charles Tanford Protein Center in Germany. (ii) IPX0002166000, n = 15 from Beijing Proteome Research Centre, China. (iii) IPX0002429000, n = 5 from Huazhong University of Science and Technology, China, and (iv) PXD022889, n = 18 from Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905 USA. MaxQuant was used for the human peptide spectral matching using human and SARS-CoV-2 proteome database which we downloaded from the UniProt database (access date 13th October 2021). The individuals infected with SARS-CoV-2 viruses displayed a different proteome diversity from the different body sites we investigated. Overally, we identified 1809 proteins across the four sample types we compared. Urine and BALF samples had significantly more abundant SARS-CoV-2 proteins than the other body sites we compared. Urine samples had 257(33.7%) unique proteins, followed by nasopharyngeal with 250(32.8%) unique proteins. Gargle solution and BALF had 38(5%) and 73(9.6%) unique proteins respectively. Urine, gargle solution, nasopharyngeal, and bronchoalveolar lavage fluid samples have different protein diversity in individuals infected with SARS-CoV-2. Moreover, our data also demonstrated that a given body site is characterized by a unique set of proteins in SARS-CoV-2 seropositive individuals.
Project description:Antibody assay for SARS-CoV-2 has become increasingly important to track latent and asymptomatic infections, check the individual's immune status, and confirm vaccine efficacy and durability. However, current SARS-CoV-2 antibody assays require invasive blood collection, requiring a remote laboratory and a trained phlebotomist. Direct detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies from clinical saline gargle samples has been considered challenging due to the smaller number of antibodies in such specimens and the high limit of detection of currently available rapid tests. This work demonstrates simple and non-invasive methods for detecting SARS-CoV-2 salivary antibodies. Competitive particle immunoassays were developed on a paper microfluidic chip using the receptor-binding domain (RBD) antigens on spike proteins. Using a smartphone, they were monitored by counting the captured fluorescent particles or evaluating the capillary flow velocities. The limit of detection (LOD), cross-binding between alpha- and omicron-strains, and the effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) presence were investigated. LODs were 1-5 ng/mL in both 10% and 1% saliva. Clinical saline gargle samples were assayed using both methods, showing a statistical difference between virus-negative and virus-positive samples, although the assays targeted antibodies. Only a small number of virus-positive samples were antibody-negative. The high assay sensitivity detected a small number of antibodies developed even during the early phase of infections. Overall, this work demonstrates the ability to detect SARS-CoV-2 salivary IgG antibodies on simple, cost-effective, portable platforms towards mitigating SARS-CoV-2 and potentially other respiratory viruses.
Project description:BackgroundGargle samples have been proposed as a noninvasive method for detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA. The clinical performance of gargle specimens diluted in Cobas® PCR Media and in Cobas® Omni Lysis Reagent was compared to oropharyngeal/nasopharyngeal swab (ONPS) for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA.Study designParticipants were recruited prospectively in two COVID-19 screening clinics. In addition to the ONPS, participants gargled with 5 ml of natural spring water split in the laboratory as follows: 1 ml was added to 4.3 ml of polymerase chain reaction (PCR) media and 400 μl was added to 200 μl of lysis buffer. Testing was performed with the Cobas® SARS-CoV-2 test on the Cobas® 6800 or 8800 platforms.ResultsOverall, 134/647 (20.7%) participants were considered infected because the ONPS or at least one gargle test was positive. ONPS had, respectively, a sensitivity of 96.3% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 91.3-98.5); both gargle processing methods were slightly less but equally sensitive (90.3% [95% CI: 83.9-94.3]). When ONPS and gargle specimens were both positive, the mean cycle threshold (Ct ) was significantly higher for gargles, suggesting lower viral loads.ConclusionGargle specimens directly added in PCR Media provide a similar clinical sensitivity to chemical lysis, both having a slightly, not significantly, lower sensitivity to ONPS.
Project description:We assessed the performance, stability, and user acceptability of swab-independent self-collected saliva and saline mouth rinse/gargle sample types for the molecular detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in adults and school-aged children. Outpatients who had recently been diagnosed with COVID-19 or were presenting with suspected COVID-19 were asked to have a nasopharyngeal (NP) swab collected and provide at least one self-collected sample type. Participants were also asked about sample acceptability using a five-point Likert scale. For those previously diagnosed with COVID-19, all samples underwent real-time PCR testing using a lab-developed assay, and the majority were also tested using an FDA-authorized assay. For those presenting with suspected COVID-19, only those with a positive nasopharyngeal swab sample went on to have other samples tested. Saline mouth rinse/gargle and saliva samples were tested daily at time zero, day 1, and day 2 to assess nucleic acid stability at room temperature. Fifty participants (aged 4 to 71 years) were included; of these, 40 had at least one positive sample and were included in the primary sample yield analysis. Saline mouth rinse/gargle samples had a sensitivity of 98% (39/40), while saliva samples had a sensitivity of 79% (26/33). Both saline mouth rinse/gargle and saliva samples showed stable viral RNA detection after 2 days of room temperature storage. Mouth rinse/gargle samples had the highest (mean, 4.9) and health care worker (HCW)-collected NP swabs had the lowest acceptability scores (mean, 3.1). In conclusion, saline mouth rinse/gargle samples demonstrated higher combined user acceptability ratings and analytical performance than saliva and HCW-collected NP swabs. This sample type is a promising swab-independent option, particularly for outpatient self-collection in adults and school-aged children.
Project description:Current procurement of specimens for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) detection requires trained personnel and dedicated equipment. We compared standard nasopharyngeal swabs with self-collected gargle lavage fluid obtained from 80 mostly symptomatic outpatients. After RNA extraction, RT-PCR to detect SARS-CoV-2 was performed. Qualitative results obtained with the paired samples from individual outpatients were 100% congruent. Therefore, self-collected gargle lavage fluid can serve as a suitable specimen for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) testing in outpatients. IMPORTANCE The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic still strains health care systems worldwide. While COVID-19 testing is considered an essential pillar in combating this infectious disease, shortages in supplies and trained health care personnel often limit the procurement of patient samples, in particular in outpatient settings. Here, we compared the simple self-collection of gargle lavage fluid with the gold standard nasopharyngeal swab as a specimen for COVID-19 testing. By finding complete congruence of results obtained with paired samples of a sizeable patient cohort, our results strongly support the idea that the painless self-collection of gargle lavage fluid provides a suitable and uncomplicated sample for reliable SARS-CoV-2 detection.
Project description:Respiratory viruses, especially coronaviruses, have resulted in worldwide pandemics in the past couple of decades. Saliva-based paper microfluidic assays represent an opportunity for noninvasive and rapid screening, yet both the sample matrix and test method come with unique challenges. In this work, we demonstrated the rapid and sensitive detection of SARS-CoV-2 from saliva samples, which could be simpler and more comfortable for patients than existing methods. Furthermore, we systematically investigated the components of saliva samples that affected assay performance. Using only a smartphone, an antibody-conjugated particle suspension, and a paper microfluidic chip, we made the assay user-friendly with minimal processing. Unlike the previously established flow rate assays that depended solely on the flow rate or distance, this unique assay analyzes the flow profile to determine infection status. Particle-target immunoagglutination changed the surface tension and subsequently the capillary flow velocity profile. A smartphone camera automatically measured the flow profile using a Python script, which was not affected by ambient light variations. The limit of detection (LOD) was 1 fg/μL SARS-CoV-2 from 1% saliva samples and 10 fg/μL from simulated saline gargle samples (15% saliva and 0.9% saline). This method was highly specific as demonstrated using influenza A/H1N1. The sample-to-answer assay time was <15 min, including <1-min capillary flow time. The overall accuracy was 89% with relatively clean clinical saline gargle samples. Despite some limitations with turbid clinical samples, this method presents a potential solution for rapid mass testing techniques during any infectious disease outbreak as soon as the antibodies become available.
Project description:Mediterranean spotted fever (MSF) has been diagnosed clinically in the Crimean Peninsula since the 1930s. We describe the recent illness of an elderly patient from Crimea who had developed a classic triad of MSF symptoms consisting of fever, maculopapular rash, and eschar. Clinical diagnosis of rickettsiosis was confirmed using real-time PCR and sequencing of 4 Rickettsia protein genes. The strain causing clinical illness was characterized as Rickettsia conorii subspecies conorii Malish 7. This report corroborates the utility of eschar swab material as a source of DNA for PCR-based diagnostics that enables timely patient treatment and management.
Project description:To validate recent guidance changes by establishing the performance of cut-off values for embryo crown-rump length and mean gestational sac diameter to diagnose miscarriage with high levels of certainty. Secondary aims were to examine the influence of gestational age on interpretation of mean gestational sac diameter and crown-rump length values, determine the optimal intervals between scans and findings on repeat scans that definitively diagnose pregnancy failure.)Prospective multicentre observational trial.Seven hospital based early pregnancy assessment units in the United Kingdom.2845 women with intrauterine pregnancies of unknown viability included if transvaginal ultrasonography showed an intrauterine pregnancy of uncertain viability. In three hospitals this was initially defined as an empty gestational sac <20 mm mean diameter with or without a visible yolk sac but no embryo, or an embryo with crown-rump length <6 mm with no heartbeat. Following amended guidance in December 2011 this definition changed to a gestational sac size <25 mm or embryo crown-rump length <7 mm. At one unit the definition was extended throughout to include a mean gestational sac diameter <30 mm or embryo crown-rump length <8 mm.Mean gestational sac diameter, crown-rump length, and presence or absence of embryo heart activity at initial and repeat transvaginal ultrasonography around 7-14 days later. The final outcome was pregnancy viability at 11-14 weeks' gestation.The following indicated a miscarriage at initial scan: mean gestational sac diameter ? 25 mm with an empty sac (364/364 specificity: 100%, 95% confidence interval 99.0% to 100%), embryo with crown-rump length ? 7 mm without visible embryo heart activity (110/110 specificity: 100%, 96.7% to 100%), mean gestational sac diameter ? 18 mm for gestational sacs without an embryo presenting after 70 days' gestation (907/907 specificity: 100%, 99.6% to 100%), embryo with crown-rump length ? 3 mm without visible heart activity presenting after 70 days' gestation (87/87 specificity: 100%, 95.8% to 100%). The following were indicative of miscarriage at a repeat scan: initial scan and repeat scan after seven days or more showing an embryo without visible heart activity (103/103 specificity: 100%, 96.5% to 100%), pregnancies without an embryo and mean gestational sac diameter <12 mm where the mean diameter has not doubled after 14 days or more (478/478 specificity: 100%, 99.2% to 100%), pregnancies without an embryo and mean gestational sac diameter ? 12 mm showing no embryo heartbeat after seven days or more (150/150 specificity: 100%, 97.6% to 100%).Recently changed cut-off values of gestational sac and embryo size defining miscarriage are appropriate and not too conservative but do not take into account gestational age. Guidance on timing between scans and expected findings on repeat scans are still too liberal. Protocols for miscarriage diagnosis should be reviewed to account for this evidence to avoid misdiagnosis and the risk of terminating viable pregnancies.
Project description:BackgroundWidespread testing for severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is necessary to curb the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but testing is undermined when the only option is a nasopharyngeal swab. Self-collected swab techniques can overcome many of the disadvantages of a nasopharyngeal swab, but they require evaluation.MethodsThree self-collected non-nasopharyngeal swab techniques (saline gargle, oral swab and combined oral-anterior nasal swab) were compared to a nasopharyngeal swab for SARS-CoV-2 detection at multiple COVID-19 assessment centers in Toronto, Canada. The performance characteristics of each test were assessed.ResultsThe adjusted sensitivity of the saline gargle was 0.90 (95% CI 0.86-0.94), the oral swab was 0.82 (95% CI, 0.72-0.89) and the combined oral-anterior nasal swab was 0.87 (95% CI, 0.77-0.93) compared to a nasopharyngeal swab, which demonstrated a sensitivity of ˜90% when all positive tests were the reference standard. The median cycle threshold values for the SARS-CoV-2 E-gene for concordant and discordant saline gargle specimens were 17 and 31 (P < .001), for the oral swabs these values were 17 and 28 (P < .001), and for oral-anterior nasal swabs these values were 18 and 31 (P = .007).ConclusionsSelf-collected saline gargle and an oral-anterior nasal swab have a similar sensitivity to a nasopharyngeal swab for the detection of SARS-CoV-2. These alternative collection techniques are cheap and can eliminate barriers to testing, particularly in underserved populations.