Browse
Submit Data
Databases
API
Help

Dataset Information

11 Views

0 Connections

0 Citations

0 Reanalyses

0 Downloads

Omics score: 0

DRUL for school: Opening Pre-K with safe, simple, sensitive saliva testing for SARS-CoV-2.

ABSTRACT: To address the need for simple, safe, sensitive, and scalable SARS-CoV-2 tests, we validated and implemented a PCR test that uses a saliva collection kit use at home. Individuals self-collected 300 μl saliva in vials containing Darnell Rockefeller University Laboratory (DRUL) buffer and extracted RNA was assayed by RT-PCR (the DRUL saliva assay). The limit of detection was confirmed to be 1 viral copy/μl in 20 of 20 replicate extractions. Viral RNA was stable in DRUL buffer at room temperature up to seven days after sample collection, and safety studies demonstrated that DRUL buffer immediately inactivated virus at concentrations up to 2.75x106 PFU/ml. Results from SARS-CoV-2 positive nasopharyngeal (NP) swab samples collected in viral transport media and assayed with a standard FDA Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) test were highly correlated with samples placed in DRUL buffer. Direct comparison of results from 162 individuals tested by FDA EUA oropharyngeal (OP) or NP swabs with co-collected saliva samples identified four otherwise unidentified positive cases in DRUL buffer. Over six months, we collected 3,724 samples from individuals ranging from 3 months to 92 years of age. This included collecting weekly samples over 10 weeks from teachers, children, and parents from a pre-school program, which allowed its safe reopening while at-risk pods were quarantined. In sum, we validated a simple, sensitive, stable, and safe PCR-based test using a self-collected saliva sample as a valuable tool for clinical diagnosis and screening at workplaces and schools.

SUBMITTER: Frank MO

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8232451 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Json Xml

Similar Datasets

WHotLAMP: A simple, inexpensive, and sensitive molecular test for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in saliva.

Project description:Despite the development of effective vaccines against SARS-CoV-2, epidemiological control of the virus is still challenging due to slow vaccine rollouts, incomplete vaccine protection to current and emerging variants, and unwillingness to get vaccinated. Therefore, frequent testing of individuals to identify early SARS-CoV-2 infections, contact-tracing and isolation strategies remain crucial to mitigate viral spread. Here, we describe WHotLAMP, a rapid molecular test to detect SARS-CoV-2 in saliva. WHotLAMP is simple to use, highly sensitive (~4 viral particles per microliter of saliva) and specific, as well as inexpensive, making it ideal for frequent screening. Moreover, WHotLAMP does not require toxic chemicals or specialized equipment and thus can be performed in point-of-care settings, and may also be adapted for resource-limited environments or home use. While applied here to SARS-CoV-2, WHotLAMP can be modified to detect other pathogens, making it adaptable for other diagnostic assays, including for use in future outbreaks.

| S-EPMC8445428 | biostudies-literature

Pooled Saliva Specimens for SARS-CoV-2 Testing.

Project description:We evaluated saliva (SAL) specimens for SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing by comparison of 459 prospectively paired nasopharyngeal (NP) or mid-turbinate (MT) swabs from 449 individuals with the aim of using saliva for asymptomatic screening. Samples were collected in a drive-through car line for symptomatic individuals (N=380) and in the emergency department (ED) (N=69). The percent positive and negative agreement of saliva compared to nasopharyngeal swab were 81.1% (95% CI: 65.8% - 90.5%) and 99.8% (95% CI: 98.7% - 100%), respectively. The sensitivity increased to 90.0% (95% CI: 74.4% - 96.5%) when considering only samples with moderate to high viral load (Cycle threshold (Ct) for the NP <=34). Pools of five saliva specimens were also evaluated on three platforms: bioMérieux NucliSENS easyMAG with ABI 7500Fast (CDC assay), Hologic Panther Fusion, and Roche COBAS 6800. The median loss of signal upon pooling was 2-4 Ct values across the platforms. The sensitivity of detecting a positive specimen in a pool compared with testing individually was 100%, 93%, and 95% for CDC 2019-nCoV Real-Time RT-PCR, Panther Fusion® SARS-CoV-2 assay, and cobas® SARS-CoV-2 test respectively, with decreased sample detection trending with lower viral load. We conclude that although pooled saliva testing, as collected in this study, is not quite as sensitive as NP/MT testing, saliva testing is adequate to detect individuals with higher viral loads in an asymptomatic screening program, does not require swabs or viral transport media for collection, and may help to improve voluntary screening compliance for those individuals averse to various forms of nasal collections.

| S-EPMC7553188 | biostudies-literature

Pooled Saliva Specimens for SARS-CoV-2 Testing.

Project description:We evaluated saliva (SAL) specimens for SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR) testing by comparison of 459 prospectively paired nasopharyngeal (NP) or midturbinate (MT) swabs from 449 individuals with the aim of using saliva for asymptomatic screening. Samples were collected in a drive-through car line for symptomatic individuals (n = 380) and in the emergency department (ED) (n = 69). The percentages of positive and negative agreement of saliva compared to nasopharyngeal swab were 81.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 65.8% to 90.5%) and 99.8% (95% CI, 98.7% to 100%), respectively. The percent positive agreement increased to 90.0% (95% CI, 74.4% to 96.5%) when considering only samples with moderate to high viral load (cycle threshold [CT ] for the NP, ≤34). Pools of five saliva specimens were also evaluated on three platforms, bioMérieux NucliSENS easyMAG with ABI 7500Fast (CDC assay), Hologic Panther Fusion, and Roche Cobas 6800. The average loss of signal upon pooling was 2 to 3 CT values across the platforms. The sensitivities of detecting a positive specimen in a pool compared with testing individually were 94%, 90%, and 94% for the CDC 2019-nCoV real-time RT-PCR, Panther Fusion SARS-CoV-2 assay, and Cobas SARS-CoV-2 test, respectively, with decreased sample detection trending with lower viral load. We conclude that although pooled saliva testing, as collected in this study, is not quite as sensitive as NP/MT testing, saliva testing is adequate to detect individuals with higher viral loads in an asymptomatic screening program, does not require swabs or viral transport medium for collection, and may help to improve voluntary screening compliance for those individuals averse to various forms of nasal collections.

| S-EPMC8106731 | biostudies-literature

A simple, safe and sensitive method for SARS-CoV-2 inactivation and RNA extraction for RT-qPCR.

Project description:The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has created an urgent need for diagnostic tests to detect viral RNA. Commercial RNA extraction kits are often expensive, in limited supply, and do not always fully inactivate the virus. Together, this calls for the development of safer methods for SARS-CoV-2 extraction that utilize readily available reagents and equipment present in most standard laboratories. We optimized and simplified a RNA extraction method combining a high molar acidic guanidinium isothiocyanate (GITC) solution, phenol and chloroform. First, we determined the GITC/RNA dilution thresholds compatible with an efficient two-step RT-qPCR for B2M mRNA in nasopharyngeal (NP) or oropharyngeal (OP) swab samples. Second, we optimized a one-step RT-qPCR against SARS-CoV-2 using NP and OP samples. We furthermore tested a SARS-CoV-2 dilution series to determine the detection threshold. The method enables downstream detection of SARS-CoV-2 by RT-qPCR with high sensitivity (~4 viral RNA copies per RT-qPCR). The protocol is simple, safe, and expands analysis capacity as the inactivated samples can be used in RT-qPCR detection tests at laboratories not otherwise classified for viral work. The method takes about 30 min from swab to PCR-ready viral RNA and circumvents the need for commercial RNA purification kits.

| S-EPMC8250463 | biostudies-literature

Multicenter evaluation of a simple and sensitive nucleic acid self-testing for SARS-CoV-2.

Project description:A rapid and accurate COVID-19 diagnosis is a prerequisite for blocking the source of infection as soon as possible and taking the appropriate medical action. Herein, we developed GeneClick, a device for nucleic acid self-testing of SARS-CoV-2, consisting of three modules: a sampling kit, a microfluidic chip-based disposable cartridge, and an amplification reader. In addition, we evaluated the clinical performance of GeneClick using 2162 nasal swabs collected at three medical institutions, using three commercial RT-qPCR kits and an antigen self-test as references. Compared to RT-qPCR, the sensitivity and specificity of the GeneClick assay were 97.93% and 99.72%, respectively, with a kappa value of 0.979 (P < 0.01). Of the 2162 samples, 2076 were also tested for SARS-CoV-2 antigens. Among the 314 positive samples identified by GeneClick assay, 63 samples were undetected by antigen tests. Overall, the GeneClick nucleic acid self-test demonstrated higher accuracy than the antigen-based detection. Based on the additional features, including simple operation, affordable price, portable device, and reliability of smartphone APP-driven sampling and result reporting, GeneClick offers a powerful tool for field-based SARS-CoV-2 detection in primary healthcare institutions or at-home use.

| S-EPMC10436039 | biostudies-literature

Covid SAFE: Rapid Implementation of a Saliva-Based SARS-CoV-2 Surveillance Testing Program with Automated Scheduling and Reporting

Project description:To safely reopen schools and businesses, widespread surveillance testing for Covid-19 will be necessary. We quickly designed and implemented a surveillance testing program that remotely enrolls participants, uses automated bidirectional text message communications, incorporates symptom monitoring, and automatically reports test results. Summary To manage the Covid-19 pandemic, a multi-stakeholder group at Penn Medicine recognized a need to implement a surveillance testing program for its faculty, staff, and students. Such a program would help to identify asymptomatic, presymptomatic, or mildly symptomatic cases that would otherwise go undetected, and could monitor for spread of possible vaccine-resistant viral variants. Covid SAFE (Screening Assessment for Exposure) was designed to leverage separate but existing tools and resources at the health system to accomplish this goal. The data provided by Covid SAFE have allowed health system leadership to make informed decisions about resumption of research and reopening of campus while providing the community with reassurances about their safety. Their experience, having enrolled more than 4,000 participants and conducted more than 25,000 tests, can be used as a framework for other institutions to develop and launch their own programs.

| S-EPMC7924814 | biostudies-literature

Pooling saliva to increase SARS-CoV-2 testing capacity.

Project description:Expanding testing capabilities is integral to managing the further spread of SARS-CoV-2 and developing reopening strategies, particularly in regards to identifying and isolating asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic individuals. Central to meeting testing demands are specimens that can be easily and reliably collected and laboratory capacity to rapidly ramp up to scale. We and others have demonstrated that high and consistent levels of SARS-CoV-2 RNA can be detected in saliva from COVID-19 inpatients, outpatients, and asymptomatic individuals. As saliva collection is non-invasive, extending this strategy to test pooled saliva samples from multiple individuals could thus provide a simple method to expand testing capacity. However, hesitation towards pooled sample testing arises due to the dilution of positive samples, potentially shifting weakly positive samples below the detection limit for SARS-CoV-2 and thereby decreasing the sensitivity. Here, we investigated the potential of pooling saliva samples by 5, 10, and 20 samples prior to RNA extraction and RT-qPCR detection of SARS-CoV-2. Based on samples tested, we conservatively estimated a reduction of 7.41%, 11.11%, and 14.81% sensitivity, for each of the pool sizes, respectively. Using these estimates we modeled anticipated changes in RT-qPCR cycle threshold to show the practical impact of pooling on results of SARS-CoV-2 testing. In tested populations with greater than 3% prevalence, testing samples in pools of 5 requires the least overall number of tests. Below 1% however, pools of 10 or 20 are more beneficial and likely more supportive of ongoing surveillance strategies.

| S-EPMC7480055 | biostudies-literature

Sensitive detection and quantification of SARS-CoV-2 in saliva.

Project description:Saliva has significant advantages as a test medium for detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients, such as ease of collection, minimal requirement of supplies and trained personnel, and safety. Comprehensive validation in a large cohort of prospectively collected specimens with unknown SARS-CoV-2 status should be performed to evaluate the potential and limitations of saliva-based testing. We developed a saliva-based testing pipeline for detection of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acids using real-time reverse transcription PCR (RT-PCR) and droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) readouts, and measured samples from 137 outpatients tested at a curbside testing facility and 29 inpatients hospitalized for COVID-19. These measurements were compared to the nasal swab results for each patient performed by a certified microbiology laboratory. We found that our saliva testing positively detects 100% (RT-PCR) and 93.75% (ddPCR) of curbside patients that were identified as SARS-CoV-2 positive by the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) certified nasal swab testing assay. Quantification of viral loads by ddPCR revealed an extremely wide range, with 1 million-fold difference between individual patients. Our results demonstrate for both community screening and hospital settings that saliva testing reliability is on par with that of the nasal swabs in detecting infected cases, and has potential for higher sensitivity when combined with ddPCR in detecting low-abundance viral loads that evade traditional testing methods.

| S-EPMC8203799 | biostudies-literature

Increased SARS-CoV-2 Testing Capacity with Pooled Saliva Samples.

Project description:We analyzed feasibility of pooling saliva samples for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 testing and found that sensitivity decreased according to pool size: 5 samples/pool, 7.4% reduction; 10 samples/pool, 11.1%; and 20 samples/pool, 14.8%. When virus prevalence is >2.6%, pools of 5 require fewer tests; when <0.6%, pools of 20 support screening strategies.

| S-EPMC8007323 | biostudies-literature

Safe and effective pool testing for SARS-CoV-2 detection.

Project description:ObjectivesThe global spread of SARS-CoV-2 is a serious public health issue. Large-scale surveillance screenings are crucial but can exceed test capacities. We (A) optimized test conditions and (B) implemented pool testing of respiratory swabs into SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics.Study design(A) We determined the optimal pooling strategy and pool size. In addition, we measured the impact of vortexing prior to sample processing, compared a pipette-pooling method (by combining transport medium of several specimens) and a swab-pooling method (by combining several swabs into a test tube filled with PBS) as well as determined the sensitivities of three PCR assays. (B) Finally, we applied high-throughput pool testing for diagnostics.Results(A) In a low prevalence setting, we defined a preferable pool size of ten in a two-stage hierarchical pool testing strategy. Vortexing of swabs (n = 33) increased cellular yield by a factor of 2.34. By comparing Ct-values of 16 pools generated with two different pooling strategies, pipette-pooling was more efficient compared to swab-pooling. Measuring dilution series of 20 SARS-CoV-2 positive samples in three PCR assays simultaneously revealed detection rates of 85% (assay I), 50% (assay II), and 95% (assay III) at a 1:100 dilution. (B) We systematically pooled 55,690 samples in a period of 44 weeks resulting in a reduction of 47,369 PCR reactions.ConclusionsFor implementing pooling strategies into high-throughput diagnostics, we recommend utilizing a pipette-pooling method, performing sensitivity validation of the PCR assays used, and vortexing swabs prior to analyses. Pool testing for SARS-CoV-2 detection is feasible and effective in a low prevalence setting.

| S-EPMC8552800 | biostudies-literature

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

OmicsDI is an Elixir interoperability service. Learn more ›

Tweets

OmicsDI Databases

PRIDE
PeptideAtlas
MassIVE
JPOST Repository
Physiome Model Repository

EGA
EVA
ENA
LINCS
PAXDB
Cell Collective

MetaboLights
Metabolomics Workbench
MetabolomeExpress
GNPS
BioModels
FAIRDOMHub

ArrayExpress
dbGaP
ExpressionAtlas
GEO
NODE

Information

Databases
Help
API
Contact us
Code on GitHub
Terms of use
Submit Data