Dataset Information

Detection of Neisseria meningitidis in saliva and oropharyngeal samples from college students.

ABSTRACT: Carriage of Neisseria meningitidis is an accepted endpoint in monitoring meningococcal vaccines effects. We have assessed N. meningitidis and vaccine-type genogroup carriage prevalence in college students at the time of MenACWY vaccine introduction in the Netherlands, and evaluated the feasibility of saliva sampling for the surveillance of carriage. For this, paired saliva and oropharyngeal samples collected from 299 students were cultured for meningococcus. The DNA extracted from all bacterial growth was subjected to qPCRs quantifying meningococcal and genogroup-specific genes presence. Samples negative by culture yet positive for qPCR were cultured again for meningococcus. Altogether 74 (25%) of students were identified as meningococcal carrier by any method. Sixty-one students (20%) were identified as carriers with qPCR. The difference between number of qPCR-positive oropharyngeal (n = 59) and saliva (n = 52) samples was not significant (McNemar's test, p = 0.07). Meningococci were cultured from 72 students (24%), with a significantly higher (p < 0.001) number of oropharyngeal (n = 70) compared with saliva (n = 54) samples. The prevalence of genogroups A, B, C, W, and Y was none, 9%, 1%, 1% and 6%, respectively, and 8% of students carried MenACWY vaccine-type genogroup meningococci. Saliva is easy to collect and when combined with qPCR detection can be considered for meningococcal carriage studies.

SUBMITTER: Miellet WR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8632920 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:INTRODUCTION AND AIMS:Improved sensitivity and efficiency of detection and quantification of carriage of Neisseria meningitidis (Nm) in young people is important for evaluation of the impact of vaccines upon transmission and associated population-wide effects. Saliva collection is quick, non-invasive and facilitates frequent sampling, but has been reported to yield low sensitivity by culture. We re-evaluated this approach in a follow-up cross sectional study using direct and culture-amplified PCR. MATERIAL/METHODS:In April 2016 we collected paired oropharyngeal swabs (OPS) and saliva samples from 1005 healthy students in Portugal into STGG broth and stored them at -80°C until DNA extraction and batched qPCR analysis. Samples were also cultured on GC agar plates for 72h and PCR done on DNA extracts from overall growth. Nm isolates were also sought from a selection of 50 samples. qPCR amplification targets were superoxide dismutase sodC and capsular locus/genogroup-specific genes (B, C, W, X and Y) and, for cultured isolates only, porA. Cycle threshold values of ≤36 were considered positive. RESULTS:556 tests (460 samples, 363 subjects, 36.1%) were positive for Nm (sodC) and 65 (45, 36, 3.6%) for MenB. More salivas were positive by direct sodC qPCR (211, 21.0%) than OPS (126, 12.5%) but fewer were positive by culture-amplified qPCR (94 vs. 125). For both sample types, many that were negative on direct qPCR came positive on culture-amplification and Nm was consistently isolated from salivas in which culture amplified the PCR signal. Using both methods on both samples yielded 36.1% Nm and 5.5% encapsulated Nm carriage rates while direct qPCR on OPS alone detected 12.5% and 2.2%. CONCLUSIONS:Detectable MenB carriage rates (2.9%) were lower than 4 years earlier (6.8%) in this population (p = 0.0003). Viable meningococci were often present in saliva. Although evidence of encapsulated Nm was less frequent in saliva than OPS, collection is more acceptable to subjects allowing more frequent sampling. Use of culture-amplification increases detection sensitivity in both sample types, especially when combined with direct PCR. Combining these samples and/or methodologies could greatly enhance the power of carriage studies to detect the impact of vaccines upon carriage and transmission.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The response in the United States to the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has been hampered by a lack of aggressive testing for the infection. Testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the cornerstone of an effective public health response. However, efforts to test have been hampered by limited reagents, limitations in the availability of swabs used for the collection of nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) specimens, limitations in personal protective equipment (PPE) for health care providers collecting the NPS specimens, and limitations in viral transport media for transporting the specimens. Therefore, more flexible options for screening for SARS-CoV-2 RNA and serologic responses are critical to inform clinical and public health responses. OBJECTIVE:We aim to document the ability of patients to self-collect sufficient specimens for SARS-CoV-2 viral detection and serology. METHODS:Patient self-collection of samples will be done with observation by a health care provider during a telemedicine session. Participants will be mailed a specimen collection kit, engage in a telehealth session with a provider through a HIPPA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996)-compliant video meeting, and collect specimens while being observed by the provider. Providers will record whether they are confident in the suitability of the specimen for laboratory testing that would inform clinical decision making. We will objectively assess the sufficiency of biological material in the mailed-in specimens. RESULTS:The protocol was approved by the Emory University Institutional Review Board (IRB) on March 30, 2020 (Protocol number 371). To date, we have enrolled 159 participants. CONCLUSIONS:Defining a conceptual framework for assessing the sufficiency of patient-collected samples for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA and serologic responses to infection is critical for facilitating public health responses and providing PPE-sparing options to increase testing. Validation of alternative methods of specimen collection should include objective measures of the sufficiency of specimens for testing. A strong evidence base for diversifying testing modalities will improve tools to guide public health responses to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Project description:We examined the detection rate of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) using reverse transcription-PCR (RT-PCR) of side-by-side saliva and oropharyngeal swab (OPS) samples from 639 symptomatic and asymptomatic subjects, of which 47 subjects were found to be positive for SARS-CoV-2 in the OPS or saliva sample or both. It was found that the detection rate (93.6% for both OPS and saliva) as well as the sensitivity and specificity were comparable between the two sampling methods in this cohort. The sensitivity was 0.932 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.818 to 0.977) and the specificity was 0.995 (95% CI, 0.985 to 0.998), both for saliva when OPS sampling was used as the reference and for OPS when saliva was used as the reference. Furthermore, the Cohen's kappa value was 0.926 (95% CI, 0.868 to 0.985), indicating strong agreement between the two sampling methods. In addition, the viral RNA stability in pure saliva and saliva mixed with preservation buffers was examined following storage at room temperature and at 4°C. It was found that pure saliva kept the viral RNA stable for 9 days at both temperatures and that the type of preservation buffer can either enhance or reduce the stability of the RNA. We conclude that self-administered saliva sampling is an attractive alternative to oropharyngeal swabbing for SARS-CoV-2 detection, and it might be useful in large-scale testing. IMPORTANCE It is not inconceivable that we will witness recurring surges of COVID-19 before the pandemic finally recedes. It is therefore still relevant to look for feasible, simple, and flexible screening methods so that schools, workplaces, and communities in general can avoid lockdowns. In this work, we analyzed two different sampling methods: oropharyngeal swabs and saliva collection. Oropharyngeal swabs must be collected by trained health personnel at clinics, whereas self-assisted saliva collection can be performed at any given location. It was found that the two sampling methods were comparable. Saliva sampling is a simple method that allows easy mass testing using minimal resources from the existing health care system, and this method may therefore prove to be an effective tool for containing the COVID-19 pandemic.

Dataset Information

Detection of Neisseria meningitidis in saliva and oropharyngeal samples from college students.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets