New insights into SARS-CoV-2 Lumipulse G salivary antigen testing: accuracy, safety and short TAT enhance surveillance.

OBJECTIVES: The rapid, accurate and safe detection of SARS-CoV-2 is the key to improving surveillance and infection containment. The aim of the present study was to ascertain whether, after heat/chemical inactivation, SARS-CoV-2 N antigen chemiluminescence (CLEIA) assay in saliva remains a valid alternative to molecular testing. METHODS: In 2022, 139 COVID-19 inpatients and 467 healthcare workers were enrolled. In 606 self-collected saliva samples (Salivette), SARS-CoV-2 was detected by molecular (TaqPath rRT-PCR) and chemiluminescent Ag assays (Lumipulse G). The effect of sample pre-treatment (extraction solution-ES or heating) on antigen recovery was verified. RESULTS: Salivary SARS-CoV-2 antigen assay was highly accurate (AUC=0.959, 95% CI: 0.943-0.974), with 90% sensitivity and 92% specificity. Of the 254 antigen positive samples, 29 were false positives. We demonstrated that heterophilic antibodies could be a cause of false positive results. A significant antigen concentration decrease was observed after ES treatment (p=0.0026), with misclassification of 43 samples. Heat had a minimal impact, after treatment the correct classification of cases was maintained. CONCLUSIONS: CLEIA SARS-CoV-2 salivary antigen provides accurate, timely and high-throughput results that remain accurate also after heat inactivation, thus ensuring a safer work environment. This supports the use of salivary antigen detection by CLEIA in surveillance programs.

The University of Padua salivary-based SARS-CoV-2 surveillance program minimized viral transmission during the second and third pandemic wave.

BACKGROUND: The active surveillance of students is proposed as an effective strategy to contain SARS-CoV-2 spread and prevent schools' closure. Saliva for molecular testing is as sensitive as naso-pharyngeal swab (NPS), self-collected and well accepted by participants. This prospective study aimed to verify whether the active surveillance of the Padua University employees by molecular testing of self-collected saliva is an effective and affordable strategy for limiting SARS-CoV-2 spread. METHODS: A surveillance program based on self-collection of saliva every 2 weeks (October 2020-June 2021) was conducted. Among 8183 employees of the Padua University, a total of 6284 subjects voluntarily took part in the program. Eight collection points guaranteed the daily distribution and collection of barcoded salivary collection devices, which were delivered to the laboratory by a transport service for molecular testing. Quarantine of positive cases and contact tracing were promptly activated. RESULTS: Among 6284 subjects, 206 individuals were SARS-CoV-2 positive (99 by salivary testing; 107 by NPS performed for contact tracing or symptoms). The cumulative SARS-CoV-2 incidence in this cohort was 3.1%, significantly lower than that of employees not in surveillance (8.0%), in Padua (7.1%) and in the Veneto region (7.2%). Employees with positive saliva results were asymptomatic or had mild symptoms. The levels of serum antibodies after 3 months from the infection were correlated with age and Ct values, being higher in older subjects with greater viral loads. CONCLUSIONS: Salivary-based surveillance with contact tracing effectively allowed to limit SARS-CoV-2 contagion, also in a population with a high incidence.

Hyris bCUBE SARS-CoV-2 rapid molecular saliva testing: a POCT innovation on its way.

OBJECTIVES: The reliable identification of individuals with SARS-CoV-2 infection is the cornerstone for containing viral spread. Rapid molecular point-of-care testing (POCT) of saliva might reduce analysis time, thus increasing the efficacy of contact tracing. In this study, a new POCT RT-PCR assay for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in saliva was evaluated and compared with an already validated CE-IVD method. METHODS: An evaluation was made of 160 left-over salivary samples (27 frozen, kept at -80 °C and 133 fresh), collected using Salivette (Sarstedt, Germany). Samples were analyzed by TaqPath COVID-19 CE-IVD RT-PCR kit, QuantStudio5 Real-Time (Applied Biosystems, USA) (TaqPath) and bKIT Virus Finder COVID-19 Saliva (Hyris Global Diagnostics, Italy). Performances of three- and fivefold pooling strategies were also evaluated. Blood assay interference in saliva was also tested with Hyris. RESULTS: On using TaqPath, SARS-CoV-2 positivity was detected in 35 samples. Another 10 positive samples were artificially-generated by blind mixing of positive with negative samples. Hyris positive and negative percentages of agreement were 97.6 (95% CI: 87.2-99.9%) and 100 (95% CI: 97.0-100%), respectively. Seventeen positive pools, evaluated for threefold strategy, were all correctly determined by both systems. For the 5-pool strategy, 94.7% (18/19) of samples resulted positive with the Hyris system, and 100% with TaqPath. The presence of 1% of blood (v/v) in saliva did not interfere with the accuracy of Hyris assay. CONCLUSIONS: The sensitivity and specificity of the bKIT Virus Finder COVID-19 Saliva were optimal with respect to TaqPath. In view of the safe and straightforward pre-analytical procedure involved, and the small size of the Hyris bCube, the Hyris system can be used for POCT.

Salivary SARS-CoV-2 antigen rapid detection: A prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: SARS-CoV-2 quick testing is relevant for the containment of new pandemic waves. Antigen testing in self-collected saliva might be useful. We compared salivary and naso-pharyngeal swab (NPS) SARS-CoV-2 antigen detection by a rapid chemiluminescent assay (CLEIA) and two different point-of-care (POC) immunochromatographic assays, with results of molecular testing. METHODS: 234 patients were prospectively enrolled. Paired self-collected saliva (Salivette) and NPS were obtained to perform rRT-PCR, chemiluminescent (Lumipulse G) and POC (NPS: Fujirebio and Abbott; saliva: Fujirebio) for SARS-CoV-2 antigen detection. RESULTS: The overall agreement between NPS and saliva rRT-PCR was 78.7%, reaching 91.7% at the first week from symptoms. SARS-CoV-2 CLEIA antigen was highly accurate in distinguishing positive and negative NPS (ROC-AUC = 0.939, 95%CI:0.903-0.977), with 81.6% sensitivity and 93.8% specificity. This assay on saliva reached the optimal value within 7 days from symptoms onset (Sensitivity: 72%; Specificity: 97%). Saliva POC antigen was limited in sensitivity (13%), performing better in NPS (Sensitivity: 48% and 66%; Specificity: 100% and 99% for Espline and Abbott respectively), depending on viral loads. CONCLUSIONS: Self-collected saliva is a valid alternative to NPS for SARS-CoV-2 detection by molecular, but also by CLEIA antigen testing, which is therefore potentially useful for large scale screening.

SARS-CoV-2 identification and IgA antibodies in saliva: One sample two tests approach for diagnosis.

AIM: This study aims to verify whether standardized saliva collection is suitable for SARS-CoV-2 molecular detection and IgA measurement. METHODS: 43 COVID-19 inpatients and 326 screening subjects underwent naso-pharyngeal (NP)-swab and saliva collection (Salivette). Inpatients also underwent repeated blood collections to evaluate inflammation and organs involvement. In all patients and subjects, SARS-CoV-2 (gene E) rRT-PCR was undertaken in saliva and NP-swabs. Salivary IgA and serum IgA, IgG, IgM were measured on inpatients' samples. RESULTS: NP-swabs and saliva were both SARS-CoV-2 positive in 7 (16%) or both negative in 35 (82%) out of 43 patients successfully included in the study. NP-swabs and saliva results did not perfectly match in one patient (saliva positive, NP-swab negative). Positive molecular results were significantly associated with disease duration (p = 0.0049). 326/326 screening subjects were SARS-CoV-2 negative on both NP-swabs and saliva. Among the 27 saliva samples tested for IgA, 18 were IgA positive. Salivary IgA positivity was associated with pneumonia (p = 0.002) and CRP values (p = 0.0183), not with other clinical and molecular data, or with serum immunoglubulins. CONCLUSIONS: A standardized saliva collection can be adopted to detect SARS-CoV-2 infection in alternative to NP-swabs. Preliminary data on salivary IgA support the use of saliva also for patient monitoring.

SARS-CoV-2 RNA identification in nasopharyngeal swabs: issues in pre-analytics.

Objectives: The direct identification of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in nasopharyngeal swabs is recommended for diagnosing the novel COVID-19 disease. Pre-analytical determinants, such as sampling procedures, time and temperature storage conditions, might impact on the end result. Our aim was to evaluate the effects of sampling procedures, time and temperature of the primary nasopharyngeal swabs storage on real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) results. Methods: Each nasopharyngeal swab obtained from 10 hospitalized patients for COVID-19 was subdivided in 15 aliquots: five were kept at room temperature; five were refrigerated (+4 °C); five were immediately mixed with the extraction buffer and refrigerated at +4 °C. Every day and for 5 days, one aliquot per condition was analyzed (rRT-PCR) for SARS-CoV-2 gene E and RNaseP and threshold cycles (Ct) compared. To evaluate manual sampling, 70 nasopharyngeal swabs were sampled twice by two different operators and analyzed separately one from the other. Results: A total of 6/10 swabs were SARS-CoV-2 positive. No significant time or storage-dependent variations were observed in SARS-CoV-2 Ct. Re-sampling of swabs with SARS-CoV-2 Ct lower than 33 resulted in highly reproducible results (CV=2.9%), while a high variability was observed when Ct values were higher than 33 (CV=10.3%). Conclusions: This study demonstrates that time and temperature of nasopharyngeal swabs storage do not significantly impact on results reproducibility. However, swabs sampling is a critical step, and especially in case of low viral load, might be a potential source of diagnostic errors.