Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Validation of RT-qPCR test for SARS-CoV-2 in saliva specimens.
Ávila, Luis Miguel Sosa; Galvis, Martha Lucía Díaz; Campos, Mayra Alejandra Jaimes; Lozano-Parra, Anyela; Villamizar, Laura Andrea Rodríguez; Arenas, Myriam Oróstegui; Martínez-Vega, Ruth Aralí; Cala, Lina María Vera; Bautista, Leonelo E.
  • Ávila LMS; Universidad Industrial de Santander, Cra. 32 # 29-31, Bucaramanga, Colombia. Electronic address: lmsosavi@uis.edu.co.
  • Galvis MLD; Universidad Industrial de Santander, Cra. 32 # 29-31, Bucaramanga, Colombia. Electronic address: mldiazga@correo.uis.edu.co.
  • Campos MAJ; Universidad Industrial de Santander, Cra. 32 # 29-31, Bucaramanga, Colombia. Electronic address: maaljaca@correo.uis.edu.co.
  • Lozano-Parra A; Universidad Industrial de Santander, Cra. 32 # 29-31, Bucaramanga, Colombia. Electronic address: anyela.lozano@redaedes.org.
  • Villamizar LAR; Universidad Industrial de Santander, Cra. 32 # 29-31, Bucaramanga, Colombia. Electronic address: laurovi@uis.edu.co.
  • Arenas MO; Universidad Industrial de Santander, Cra. 32 # 29-31, Bucaramanga, Colombia. Electronic address: ciepi_uis@hotmail.com.
  • Martínez-Vega RA; Universidad de Santander, Calle 70 No. 55-210, Bucaramanga, Colombia. Electronic address: ruth.martinez@udes.edu.co.
  • Cala LMV; Universidad Industrial de Santander, Cra. 32 # 29-31, Bucaramanga, Colombia. Electronic address: limavera@uis.edu.co.
  • Bautista LE; University of Wisconsin-Madison, 610 Walnut Street, WARF 703, Madison, United States. Electronic address: lebautista@wisc.edu.
J Infect Public Health ; 15(12): 1403-1408, 2022 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2095663
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Saliva samples may be an easier, faster, safer, and cost-saving alternative to NPS samples, and can be self-collected by the patient. Whether SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR in saliva is more accurate than in nasopharyngeal swaps (NPS) is uncertain. We evaluated the accuracy of the RT-qPCR in both types of samples, assuming both approaches were imperfect.

METHODS:

We assessed the limit of detection (LoD) of RT-qPCR in each type of sample. We collected paired NPS and saliva samples and tested them using the Berlin Protocol to detect SARS-CoV-2 envelope protein (E). We used a Bayesian latent class analysis (BLCA) to estimate the sensitivity and specificity of each test, while accounting for their conditional dependence.

RESULTS:

The LoD were 10 copies/mL in saliva and 100 copies/mL in NPS. Paired samples of saliva and NPS were collected in 412 participants. Out of 68 infected cases, 14 were positive only in saliva. RT-qPCR sensitivity ranged from 82.7 % (95 % CrI 54.8, 94.8) in NPS to 84.5 % (50.9, 96.5) in saliva. Corresponding specificities were 99.1 % (95 % CrI 95.3, 99.8) and 98.4 %(95 % CrI 92.8, 99.7).

CONCLUSIONS:

SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR test in saliva specimens has a similar or better accuracy than RT-qPCR test in NPS. Saliva specimens may be ideal for surveillance in general population, particularly in children, and in healthcare or other personnel in need of serial testing.
Subject(s)
Keywords

Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Main subject: SARS-CoV-2 / COVID-19 Type of study: Diagnostic study / Experimental Studies / Prognostic study Limits: Child / Humans Language: English Journal: J Infect Public Health Journal subject: Communicable Diseases / Public Health Year: 2022 Document Type: Article

Similar

MEDLINE

...
LILACS

LIS


Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Main subject: SARS-CoV-2 / COVID-19 Type of study: Diagnostic study / Experimental Studies / Prognostic study Limits: Child / Humans Language: English Journal: J Infect Public Health Journal subject: Communicable Diseases / Public Health Year: 2022 Document Type: Article