Scent dog identification of SARS-CoV-2 infections in different body fluids.

BACKGROUND: The main strategy to contain the current SARS-CoV-2 pandemic remains to implement a comprehensive testing, tracing and quarantining strategy until vaccination of the population is adequate. Scent dogs could support current testing strategies. METHODS: Ten dogs were trained for 8 days to detect SARS-CoV-2 infections in beta-propiolactone inactivated saliva samples. The subsequent cognitive transfer performance for the recognition of non-inactivated samples were tested on three different body fluids (saliva, urine, and sweat) in a randomised, double-blind controlled study. RESULTS: Dogs were tested on a total of 5242 randomised sample presentations. Dogs detected non-inactivated saliva samples with a diagnostic sensitivity of 84% (95% CI: 62.5-94.44%) and specificity of 95% (95% CI: 93.4-96%). In a subsequent experiment to compare the scent recognition between the three non-inactivated body fluids, diagnostic sensitivity and specificity were 95% (95% CI: 66.67-100%) and 98% (95% CI: 94.87-100%) for urine, 91% (95% CI: 71.43-100%) and 94% (95% CI: 90.91-97.78%) for sweat, 82% (95% CI: 64.29-95.24%), and 96% (95% CI: 94.95-98.9%) for saliva respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The scent cognitive transfer performance between inactivated and non-inactivated samples as well as between different sample materials indicates that global, specific SARS-CoV-2-associated volatile compounds are released across different body secretions, independently from the patient's symptoms. All tested body fluids appear to be similarly suited for reliable detection of SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals.

Wearing N95 masks decreases the odor discrimination ability of healthcare workers: a self-controlled before-after study.

Objective: During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the N95 mask is an essential piece of protective equipment for healthcare workers. However, the N95 mask may inhibit air exchange and odor penetration. Our study aimed to determine whether the use of N95 masks affects the odor discrimination ability of healthcare workers. Methods: In our study, all the participants were asked to complete three olfactory tests. Each test involved 12 different odors. The participants completed the test while wearing an N95 mask, a surgical mask, and no mask. The score for each olfactory test was documented. Results: The olfactory test score was significantly lower when the participants wore N95 masks than when they did not wear a mask (7 vs. 10, p < 0.01). The score was also lower when the participants wore N95 masks than surgical masks (7 vs. 8, p < 0.01). Conclusion: Wearing N95 masks decreases the odor discrimination ability of healthcare workers. Therefore, we suggest that healthcare workers seek other clues when diagnosing disease with a characteristic odor.

ß-Propiolactone (BPL)-inactivation of SARS-Co-V-2: In vitro validation with focus on saliva from COVID-19 patients for scent dog training.

ß-Propiolactone (BPL) is an organic compound widely used as an inactivating agent in vaccine development and production, for example for SARS-CoV, SARS-CoV-2 and Influenza viruses. Inactivation of pathogens by BPL is based on an irreversible alkylation of nucleic acids but also on acetylation and cross-linking between proteins, DNA or RNA. However, the protocols for BPL inactivation of viruses vary widely. Handling of infectious, enriched SARS-CoV-2 specimens and diagnostic samples from COVID-19 patients is recommended in biosafety level (BSL)- 3 or BSL-2 laboratories, respectively. We validated BPL inactivation of SARS-CoV-2 in saliva samples with the objective to use saliva from COVID-19 patients for training of scent dogs for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 positive individuals. Therefore, saliva samples and cell culture medium buffered with NaHCO3 (pH 8.3) were comparatively spiked with SARS-CoV-2 and inactivated with 0.1 % BPL for 1 h (h) or 71 h ( ± 1 h) at 2-8 °C, followed by hydrolysis of BPL at 37 °C for 1 or 2 h, converting BPL into non-toxic beta-hydroxy-propionic acid. SARS-CoV-2 inactivation was demonstrated by a titre reduction of up to 10^4 TCID50/ml in the spiked samples for both inactivation periods using virus titration and virus isolation, respectively. The validated method was confirmed by successful inactivation of pathogens in saliva samples from COVID-19 patients. Furthermore, we reviewed the currently available literature on SARS-CoV-2 inactivation by BPL. Accordingly, BPL-inactivated, hydrolysed samples can be handled in a non-laboratory setting. Furthermore, our BPL inactivation protocols can be adapted to validation experiments with other pathogens.

Remote Medical Scent Detection of Cancer and Infectious Diseases With Dogs and Rats: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Remote medical scent detection of cancer and infectious diseases with dogs and rats has been an increasing field of research these last 20 years. If validated, the possibility of implementing such a technique in the clinic raises many hopes. This systematic review was performed to determine the evidence and performance of such methods and assess their potential relevance in the clinic. METHODS: Pubmed and Web of Science databases were independently searched based on PRISMA standards between 01/01/2000 and 01/05/2021. We included studies aiming at detecting cancers and infectious diseases affecting humans with dogs or rats. We excluded studies using other animals, studies aiming to detect agricultural diseases, diseases affecting animals, and others such as diabetes and neurodegenerative diseases. Only original articles were included. Data about patients' selection, samples, animal characteristics, animal training, testing configurations, and performances were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 62 studies were included. Sensitivity and specificity varied a lot among studies: While some publications report low sensitivities of 0.17 and specificities around 0.29, others achieve rates of 1 sensitivity and specificity. Only 6 studies were evaluated in a double-blind screening-like situation. In general, the risk of performance bias was high in most evaluated studies, and the quality of the evidence found was low. CONCLUSIONS: Medical detection using animals' sense of smell lacks evidence and performances so far to be applied in the clinic. What odors the animals detect is not well understood. Further research should be conducted, focusing on patient selection, samples (choice of materials, standardization), and testing conditions. Interpolations of such results to free running detection (direct contact with humans) should be taken with extreme caution. Considering this synthesis, we discuss the challenges and highlight the excellent odor detection threshold exhibited by animals which represents a potential opportunity to develop an accessible and non-invasive method for disease detection.

The Luminescence Hypothesis of Olfaction.

A new hypothesis for the mechanism of olfaction is presented. It begins with an odorant molecule binding to an olfactory receptor. This is followed by the quantum biology event of inelastic electron tunneling as has been suggested with both the vibration and swipe card theories. It is novel in that it is not concerned with the possible effects of the tunneled electrons as has been discussed with the previous theories. Instead, the high energy state of the odorant molecule in the receptor following inelastic electron tunneling is considered. The hypothesis is that, as the high energy state decays, there is fluorescence luminescence with radiative emission of multiple photons. These photons pass through the supporting sustentacular cells and activate a set of olfactory neurons in near-simultaneous timing, which provides the temporal basis for the brain to interpret the required complex combinatorial coding as an odor. The Luminescence Hypothesis of Olfaction is the first to present the necessity of or mechanism for a 1:3 correspondence of odorant molecule to olfactory nerve activations. The mechanism provides for a consistent and reproducible time-based activation of sets of olfactory nerves correlated to an odor. The hypothesis has a biological precedent: an energy feasibility assessment is included, explaining the anosmia seen with COVID-19, and can be confirmed with existing laboratory techniques.

Efficacy of Combined Visual-Olfactory Training With Patient-Preferred Scents as Treatment for Patients With COVID-19 Resultant Olfactory Loss: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The number of olfactory dysfunction cases has increased dramatically because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Identifying therapies that aid and accelerate recovery is essential. Objective: To determine the efficacy of bimodal visual-olfactory training and patient-preferred scents vs unimodal olfactory training and physician-assigned scents in COVID-19 olfactory loss. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a randomized, single-blinded trial with a 2-by-2 factorial design (bimodal, patient preferred; unimodal, physician assigned; bimodal, physician assigned; unimodal, patient preferred) and an independent control group. Enrollment occurred from February 1 to May 27, 2021. Participants were adults 18 to 71 years old with current olfactory loss defined as University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT) score less than 34 for men and less than 35 for women and duration of 3 months or longer. Olfactory loss was initially diagnosed within 2 weeks of COVID-19 infection. Interventions: Participants sniffed 4 essential oils for 15 seconds with a 30-second rest in between odors for 3 months. Participants in the physician-assigned odor arms trained with rose, lemon, eucalyptus, and clove. Participants randomized to the patient-preferred arms chose 4 of 24 available scents. If assigned to the bimodal arm, participants were shown digital images of the essential oil they were smelling. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was postintervention change in UPSIT score from baseline; measures used were the UPSIT (validated, objective psychometric test of olfaction), Clinical Global Impressions Impression-Improvement (CGI-I; self-report improvement scale), and Olfactory Dysfunction Outcomes Rating (ODOR; olfaction-related quality-of-life questionnaire). Results: Among the 275 enrolled participants, the mean (SD) age was 41 (12) years, and 236 (86%) were female. The change in UPSIT scores preintervention to postintervention was similar between the study arms. The marginal mean difference for change in UPSIT scores preintervention to postintervention between participants randomized to patient-preferred vs physician-assigned olfactory training was 0.73 (95% CI, -1.10 to 2.56), and between participants randomized to bimodal vs unimodal olfactory training was 1.10 (95% CI, -2.92 to 0.74). Five (24%) participants in the control arm had clinically important improvement on UPSIT compared with 18 (53%) in the bimodal, patient-preferred arm for a difference of 29% (95% CI, 4%-54%). Four (19%) participants in the control group self-reported improvement on CGI-I compared with 12 (35%) in the bimodal, patient-preferred arm for a difference of 16% (95% CI, -7% to 39%). The mean change in ODOR score preintervention to postintervention was 11.6 points (95% CI, 9.2-13.9), which was not deemed clinically important nor significantly different between arms. Conclusions and Relevance: Based on the change in UPSIT scores, this randomized clinical trial did not show any difference between intervention arms, but when exploring within-patient change in UPSIT as well as self-reported impression of improvement, active interventions were associated with larger improvement than controls with a potential advantage of bimodal intervention. While not definitive, these results suggest that patients with COVID-19 olfactory loss may benefit from bimodal visual-olfactory training with patient-preferred scents. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04710394.

Identification of anti-SARS-CoV-2 agents based on flavor/fragrance compositions that inhibit the interaction between the virus receptor binding domain and human angiotensin converting enzyme 2.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic poses a threat to human beings and numerous cases of infection as well as millions of victims have been reported. The binding of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spike protein receptor binding domain (RBD) to human angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (hACE2) is known to promote the engulfment of the virus by host cells. Employment of flavor/fragrance compositions to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection by inhibiting the binding of viral RBD (vRBD) to hACE2 might serve as a favorable, simple, and easy method for inexpensively preventing COVID-19, as flavor/fragrance compositions are known to directly interact with the mucosa in the respiratory and digestive systems and have a long history of use and safety assessment. Herein we report the results of screening of flavor/fragrance compositions that inhibit the binding of vRBD to hACE2. We found that the inhibitory effect was observed with not only the conventional vRBD, but also variant vRBDs, such as L452R, E484K, and N501Y single-residue variants, and the K417N+E484K+N501Y triple-residue variant. Most of the examined flavor/fragrance compositions are not known to have anti-viral effects. Cinnamyl alcohol and Helional inhibited the binding of vRBD to VeroE6 cells, a monkey kidney cell line expressing ACE2. We termed the composition with inhibitory effect on vRBD-hACE2 binding as "the molecularly targeted flavor/fragrance compositions". COVID-19 development could be prevented by using these compositions with reasonable administration methods such as inhalation, oral administration, and epidermal application.

The Use of Biological Sensors and Instrumental Analysis to Discriminate COVID-19 Odor Signatures.

The spread of SARS-CoV-2, which causes the disease COVID-19, is difficult to control as some positive individuals, capable of transmitting the disease, can be asymptomatic. Thus, it remains critical to generate noninvasive, inexpensive COVID-19 screening systems. Two such methods include detection canines and analytical instrumentation, both of which detect volatile organic compounds associated with SARS-CoV-2. In this study, the performance of trained detection dogs is compared to a noninvasive headspace-solid phase microextraction-gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (HS-SPME-GC-MS) approach to identifying COVID-19 positive individuals. Five dogs were trained to detect the odor signature associated with COVID-19. They varied in performance, with the two highest-performing dogs averaging 88% sensitivity and 95% specificity over five double-blind tests. The three lowest-performing dogs averaged 46% sensitivity and 87% specificity. The optimized linear discriminant analysis (LDA) model, developed using HS-SPME-GC-MS, displayed a 100% true positive rate and a 100% true negative rate using leave-one-out cross-validation. However, the non-optimized LDA model displayed difficulty in categorizing animal hair-contaminated samples, while animal hair did not impact the dogs' performance. In conclusion, the HS-SPME-GC-MS approach for noninvasive COVID-19 detection more accurately discriminated between COVID-19 positive and COVID-19 negative samples; however, dogs performed better than the computational model when non-ideal samples were presented.

Loss of olfactory sensitivity is an early and reliable marker for COVID-19.

Detection of early and reliable symptoms is important in relation to limiting the spread of an infectious disease. For COVID-19, the most specific symptom is either losing or experiencing reduced olfactory functions. Anecdotal evidence suggests that olfactory dysfunction is also one of the earlier symptoms of COVID-19, but objective measures supporting this notion are currently missing. To determine whether olfactory loss is an early sign of COVID-19, we assessed available longitudinal data from a web-based interface enabling individuals to test their sense of smell by rating the intensity of selected household odors. Individuals continuously used the interface to assess their olfactory functions and at each login, in addition to odor ratings, recorded their symptoms and results from potential COVID-19 test. A total of 205 COVID-19-positive individuals and 156 pseudo-randomly matched control individuals lacking positive test provided longitudinal data which enabled us to assess olfactory functions in relation to their test result date. We found that odor intensity ratings started to decline in the COVID-19 group as early as 6 days prior to the test result date (±1.4 days). Symptoms, such as sore throat, aches, and runny nose appear around the same point in time; however, with a lower predictability of a COVID-19 diagnosis. Our results suggest that olfactory sensitivity loss is an early symptom but does not appear before other related COVID-19 symptoms. Olfactory loss is, however, more predictive of a COVID-19 diagnosis than other early symptoms.

The 8-Odorant Barcelona Olfactory Test (BOT-8): Validation of a New Test in the Spanish Population During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Most smell tests are difficult to implement in daily clinical practice owing to their long duration. The aim of the present study was to develop and validate a short, easy-to-perform, and reusable smell test to be implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: The study population comprised 120 healthy adults and 195 patients with self-reported olfactory dysfunction (OD). The 8-Odorant Barcelona Olfactory Test (BOT-8) was used for detection, memory/recognition, and forced-choice identification. In addition, a rose threshold test was performed, and a visual analog scale was applied. The Smell Diskettes Olfaction Test (SDOT) was used for correlation in healthy volunteers, and the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT) was used for patients with OD to establish cut-offs for anosmia and hyposmia. In order to take account of the COVID-19 pandemic, disposable cotton swabs with odorants were compared with the original test. RESULTS: In healthy persons, the mean (SD) BOT-8 score was 100% for detection, 94.5% (1.07) for memory/recognition, and 89.6% (0.86) for identification. In patients with OD, the equivalent values were 86% (32.8), 73.2% (37.9), and 77.1% (34.2), respectively. BOT-8 demonstrated good test-retest reliability, with agreement of 96.7% and a quadratic k of 0.84 (P<.001). A strong correlation was observed between BOT-8 and SDOT (r=0.67, P<.001) and UPSIT (r=0.86, P<.001). Agreement was excellent for disposable cotton swabs, with a k of 0.79 compared with the original test. The cut-off point for anosmia was ≤3 (area under the curve, 0.83; sensitivity, 0.673; specificity, 0.993). CONCLUSION: BOT-8 offers an efficient and fast method for assessment of smell threshold, detection, memory, and identification in daily clinical practice. Disposable cotton swabs with odorants proved to be useful and safe during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Rational Design of Peptides Derived from Odorant-Binding Proteins for SARS-CoV-2-Related Volatile Organic Compounds Recognition.

Peptides are promising molecular-binding elements and have attracted great interest in novel biosensor development. In this study, a series of peptides derived from odorant-binding proteins (OBPs) were rationally designed for recognition of SARS-CoV-2-related volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Ethanol, nonanal, benzaldehyde, acetic acid, and acetone were selected as representative VOCs in the exhaled breath during the COVID-19 infection. Computational docking and prediction tools were utilized for OBPs peptide characterization and analysis. Multiple parameters, including the docking model, binding affinity, sequence specification, and structural folding, were investigated. The results demonstrated a rational, rapid, and efficient approach for designing breath-borne VOC-recognition peptides, which could further improve the biosensor performance for pioneering COVID-19 screening and many other applications.

Intensive Olfactory Training in Post-COVID-19 Patients: A Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Olfactory dysfunction (OD)-including anosmia and hyposmia-is a common symptom of COVID-19. Previous studies have identified olfactory training (OT) as an important treatment for postinfectious OD; however, little is known about its benefits and optimizations after SARS-CoV-2 infection. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess whether olfactory training performance can be optimized using more fragrances over a shorter period of time in patients with persistent OD after COVID-19. In addition, we determined the presence of other variables related to OD and treatment response in this population. METHODS: This multicenter randomized clinical trial recruited 80 patients with persistent OD and prior COVID-19 infection for less than 3 months. The patients were divided into 2 groups receiving either 4 or 8 essences over 4 weeks. Subjective assessments and the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT) were performed before and after the treatment. RESULTS: Significant olfactory improvement was measured subjectively and using the UPSIT in both groups; however, no significant differences between the groups were observed. Additionally, the presence of olfactory fluctuations was associated with higher UPSIT scores. CONCLUSION: These data suggest that training intensification by increasing the number of essences for 4 weeks does not show superiority over the classical method. Moreover, fluctuant olfaction seems to be related to a higher score on the UPSIT.

Epigenetic rewiring of pathways related to odour perception in immune cells exposed to SARS-CoV-2 in vivo and in vitro.

A majority of SARS-CoV-2 recoverees develop only mild-to-moderate symptoms, while some remain completely asymptomatic. Although viruses, including SARS-CoV-2, may evade host immune responses by epigenetic mechanisms including DNA methylation, little is known about whether these modifications are important in defence against and healthy recovery from COVID-19 in the host. To this end, epigenome-wide DNA methylation patterns from COVID-19 convalescents were compared to uninfected controls from before and after the pandemic. Peripheral blood mononuclear cell (PBMC) DNA was extracted from uninfected controls, COVID-19 convalescents, and symptom-free individuals with SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell-responses, as well as from PBMCs stimulated in vitro with SARS-CoV-2. Subsequently, the Illumina MethylationEPIC 850K array was performed, and statistical/bioinformatic analyses comprised differential DNA methylation, pathway over-representation, and module identification analyses. Differential DNA methylation patterns distinguished COVID-19 convalescents from uninfected controls, with similar results in an experimental SARS-CoV-2 infection model. A SARS-CoV-2-induced module was identified in vivo, comprising 66 genes of which six (TP53, INS, HSPA4, SP1, ESR1, and FAS) were present in corresponding in vitro analyses. Over-representation analyses revealed involvement in Wnt, muscarinic acetylcholine receptor signalling, and gonadotropin-releasing hormone receptor pathways. Furthermore, numerous differentially methylated and network genes from both settings interacted with the SARS-CoV-2 interactome. Altered DNA methylation patterns of COVID-19 convalescents suggest recovery from mild-to-moderate SARS-CoV-2 infection leaves longstanding epigenetic traces. Both in vitro and in vivo exposure caused epigenetic modulation of pathways thataffect odour perception. Future studies should determine whether this reflects host-induced protective antiviral defense or targeted viral hijacking to evade host defence.

Long-Lasting Olfactory Dysfunction in Hospital Workers Due to COVID-19: Prevalence, Clinical Characteristics, and Most Affected Odorants.

Hospital workers have increased exposure risk of healthcare-associated infections due to the frontline nature of their work. Olfactory dysfunction is highly prevalent. The objectives for this investigation are to study the prevalence of long-lasting olfactory dysfunction associated with COVID-19 infection in hospital workers during the first pandemic wave, to identify clinical characteristics and associated symptomatology, and to analyze how many patients with COVID-19 infection had developed olfactory dysfunction during infection and maintained a reduced olfactory function for approximately 10 weeks after diagnosis. Between June and July of 2020, a cross-sectional study was carried out at the Hospital Central de la Cruz Roja San José and Santa Adela in Madrid, Spain. One hundred sixty-four participants were included, of which 110 were patient-facing healthcare staff and 54 were non-patient-facing healthcare staff. Participants were split into three groups, according to COVID-19 diagnosis and presence of COVID-19 related olfactory symptomatology. Participants were asked to complete a structured online questionnaire along with Sniffin' Stick Olfactory Test measurements. In this study, 88 participants were confirmed for COVID-19 infection, 59 of those participants also reported olfactory symptomatology. The prevalence of COVID-19 infection was 11.35%, and the prevalence for olfactory dysfunction was 67.05%. Olfactory dysfunction associated with COVID-19 infection leads to long-lasting olfactory loss. Objective assessment with Sniffin' Stick Olfactory Test points to odor identification as the most affected process. Lemon, liquorice, solvent, and rose are the odors that are worst recognized. Mint, banana, solvent, garlic, coffee, and pineapple, although they are identified, are perceived with less intensity. The findings of this study confirmed a high prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection among the hospital workers.

Scent dogs in detection of COVID-19: triple-blinded randomised trial and operational real-life screening in airport setting.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate scent dogs' diagnostic accuracy in identification of people infected with SARS-CoV-2 in comparison with reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). We conducted a randomised triple-blinded validation trial, and a real-life study at the Helsinki-Vantaa International Airport, Finland. METHODS: Four dogs were trained to detect COVID-19 using skin swabs from individuals tested for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR. Our controlled triple-blinded validation study comprised four identical sets of 420 parallel samples (from 114 individuals tested positive and 306 negative by RT-PCR), randomly presented to each dog over seven trial sessions. In a real-life setting the dogs screened skin swabs from 303 incoming passengers all concomitantly examined by nasal swab SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR. Our main outcomes were variables of diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value) for scent dog identification in comparison with RT-PCR. RESULTS: Our validation experiments had an overall accuracy of 92% (95% CI 90% to 93%), a sensitivity of 92% (95% CI 89% to 94%) and a specificity of 91% (95% CI 89% to 93%) compared with RT-PCR. For our dogs, trained using the wild-type virus, performance was less accurate for the alpha variant (89% for confirmed wild-type vs 36% for alpha variant, OR 14.0, 95% CI 4.5 to 43.4). In the real-life setting, scent detection and RT-PCR matched 98.7% of the negative swabs. Scant airport prevalence (0.47%) did not allow sensitivity testing; our only SARS-CoV-2 positive swab was not identified (alpha variant). However, ad hoc analysis including predefined positive spike samples showed a total accuracy of 98% (95% CI 97% to 99%). CONCLUSIONS: This large randomised controlled triple-blinded validation study with a precalculated sample size conducted at an international airport showed that trained scent dogs screen airport passenger samples with high accuracy. One of our findings highlights the importance of continuous retraining as new variants emerge. Using scent dogs may present a valuable approach for high-throughput, rapid screening of large numbers of people.

Bees can be trained to identify SARS-CoV-2 infected samples.

The COVID-19 pandemic has illustrated the need for the development of fast and reliable testing methods for novel, zoonotic, viral diseases in both humans and animals. Pathologies lead to detectable changes in the volatile organic compound (VOC) profile of animals, which can be monitored, thus allowing the development of a rapid VOC-based test. In the current study, we successfully trained honeybees (Apis mellifera) to identify SARS-CoV-2 infected minks (Neovison vison) thanks to Pavlovian conditioning protocols. The bees can be quickly conditioned to respond specifically to infected mink's odours and could therefore be part of a wider SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic system. We tested two different training protocols to evaluate their performance in terms of learning rate, accuracy and memory retention. We designed a non-invasive rapid test in which multiple bees are tested in parallel on the same samples. This provided reliable results regarding a subject's health status. Using the data from the training experiments, we simulated a diagnostic evaluation trial to predict the potential efficacy of our diagnostic test, which yielded a diagnostic sensitivity of 92% and specificity of 86%. We suggest that a honeybee-based diagnostics can offer a reliable and rapid test that provides a readily available, low-input addition to the currently available testing methods. A honeybee-based diagnostic test might be particularly relevant for remote and developing communities that lack the resources and infrastructure required for mainstream testing methods.

Pediatric olfactory home testing using regular household items: A cross-over validation study.

OBJECTIVE: To develop an olfactory test that can be conducted by an untrained person using common household items and to introduce a German version of the Chemosensory Pleasure Scale for Children (CPS-C(de)). METHODOLOGY: This olfactory home test was developed in phases including evaluation of odors for suitability in a home setting. Parents of 50 children (ages 6-17) were then equipped with instruction manuals and participants were tested twice in a cross-over design. A validated pediatric olfactory test (the Universal Sniff test (U-Sniff)) served as the comparative gold standard. Additionally, a Chinese-English-German "back-and-forth" translation was conducted to establish the CPS-C(de) and was tested for empirical validity. RESULTS: Fourteen items were tested for feasibility, and all were identified on a sufficient rate (≥66%, mean ±â€¯SD of 93.3% ±â€¯9.5%). Bland Altman Plot analysis between home testing and the U-Sniff test was nearly identical (bias = 0.04). CPS-C(de) showed similar results to the original Chinese version and a moderate correlation was found between CPS-C(de) scores and Body Mass Index of children (r30 = -0.527, p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Remote olfactory testing in children using household items is feasible. The CPS-C(de) may be of value for future olfactory studies.

Smell Changes and Efficacy of Nasal Theophylline (SCENT) irrigation: A randomized controlled trial for treatment of post-viral olfactory dysfunction.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of intranasal theophylline saline irrigation on olfactory recovery in patients with post-viral olfactory dysfunction (PVOD). METHODS: Between May 2019 and April 2020, we conducted a double-blinded, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial of adults with 6-36 months of PVOD. Patients were randomized to nasal theophylline saline irrigation or placebo saline irrigation twice a day for 6 weeks. The primary outcome was the Global Rating of Smell Change. Secondary outcomes were changes in the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT) and Questionnaire of Olfactory Disorders-Negative Statements (QOD-NS). RESULTS: Twenty-two patients (n = 12, theophylline; n = 10, placebo) completed the study. Slightly more patients in the theophylline group (33%) reported improved smell compared to the placebo group (30%, difference 3.3%, 95% CI -35.6% to 42.3%). The median differences in pre- and post-treatment UPSIT and QOD-NS change between the two groups were 1 (95% CI -3 to 5) and -10 (95% CI -15 to -4), respectively in favor of theophylline. Three patients receiving theophylline and 2 receiving placebo had clinically meaningful improvements on the UPSIT (difference 5%, 95% CI -30% to 40%). There were no adverse events, and serum theophylline levels were undetectable in 10/10 patients. CONCLUSIONS: While safe, there were no clinically meaningful differences in olfactory change between the two groups except for olfaction-related quality of life, which was better with theophylline. The imprecise estimates suggest future trials will need substantially larger sample sizes or treatment modifications, such as increasing the theophylline dose, to observe larger treatment effects.