Early detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection is critical to reduce asymptomatic and presymptomatic transmission, curb the spread of variants, and maximize treatment efficacy. Low-analytical-sensitivity nasal-swab testing is commonly used for surveillance and symptomatic testing, but the ability of these tests to detect the earliest stages of infection has not been established. In this study, conducted between September 2020 and June 2021 in the greater Los Angeles County, California, area, initially SARS-CoV-2-negative household contacts of individuals diagnosed with COVID-19 prospectively self-collected paired anterior-nares nasal-swab and saliva samples twice daily for viral-load quantification by high-sensitivity reverse-transcription quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR) and digital-RT-PCR assays. We captured viral-load profiles from the incidence of infection for seven individuals and compared diagnostic sensitivities between respiratory sites. Among unvaccinated persons, testing saliva with a high-analytical-sensitivity assay detected infection up to 4.5 days before viral loads in nasal swabs reached concentrations detectable by low-analytical-sensitivity nasal-swab tests. For most participants, nasal swabs reached higher peak viral loads than saliva but were undetectable or at lower loads during the first few days of infection. High-analytical-sensitivity saliva testing was most reliable for earliest detection. Our study illustrates the value of acquiring early (within hours after a negative high-sensitivity test) viral-load profiles to guide the appropriate analytical sensitivity and respiratory site for detecting earliest infections. Such data are challenging to acquire but critical to designing optimal testing strategies with emerging variants in the current pandemic and to respond to future viral pandemics. 

Quantitative SARS-CoV-2 Viral-Load Curves in Paired Saliva Samples and Nasal Swabs Inform Appropriate Respiratory Sampling Site and Analytical Test Sensitivity Required for Earliest Viral Detection

Multiorgan tropism of SARS-CoV-2 has previously been shown for several major organs. We have comprehensively analyzed 25 different formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissues/organs from autopsies of fatal COVID-19 cases (n = 8), using histopathological assessment, detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA using polymerase chain reaction and RNA in situ hybridization, viral protein using immunohistochemistry, and virus particles using transmission electron microscopy. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was mainly localized in epithelial cells across all organs. Next to lung, trachea, kidney, heart, or liver, viral RNA was also found in tonsils, salivary glands, oropharynx, thyroid, adrenal gland, testicles, prostate, ovaries, small bowel, lymph nodes, skin and skeletal muscle. Viral RNA was predominantly found in cells expressing ACE2, TMPRSS2, or both. The SARS-CoV-2 replicating RNA was also detected in these organs. Immunohistochemistry and electron microscopy were not suitable for reliable and specific SARS-CoV-2 detection in autopsies. These findings were validated using in situ hybridization on external COVID-19 autopsy samples (n = 9). Apart from the lung, correlation of viral detection and histopathological assessment did not reveal any specific alterations that could be attributed to SARS-CoV-2. In summary, SARS-CoV-2 and its replication could be observed across all organ systems, which co-localizes with ACE2 and TMPRSS2 mainly in epithelial but also in mesenchymal and endothelial cells. Apart from the respiratory tract, no specific (histo-)morphologic alterations could be assigned to the SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Multisystemic Cellular Tropism of SARS-CoV-2 in Autopsies of COVID-19 Patients.

Early detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection is critical to reduce asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic spread of COVID-19, curb the spread of viral variants by travelers, and maximize efficacy of therapeutic treatments We designed a study to evaluate the preferred test sensitivity and sample type (saliva and nasal swab) for detecting early infections of COVID-19 We performed a case-ascertained study to monitor household contacts of individuals recently diagnosed with a SARS-CoV-2 infection From those individuals, we obtained twice-daily self-collected anterior-nares nasal swabs and saliva samples and quantified SARS-CoV-2 RNA viral loads in those samples using high-sensitivity RT-qPCR and RT-ddPCR assays We found that SARS-CoV-2 RNA first appears in saliva and then in nasal-swab samples A high-sensitivity (limit of detection of ~103 copies/mL) RNA test detected SARS-CoV-2 virus in saliva 15 to 45 days before the viral load in the paired nasal-swab samples exceeded the limit of detection of low-sensitivity tests It was possible to observe a high (>107-108 copies/mL) viral load in saliva samples while the paired nasal swab was either negative or had low (~103 copies/mL) viral load Our results indicate that both sampling site and test sensitivity must be considered to ensure early detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection: high-sensitivity tests that use saliva can detect SARS-CoV-2 infection days earlier than low-sensitivity tests that use nasal swabs Furthermore, early in the infection, low-sensitivity tests that use nasal swabs may miss SARS-CoV-2-positive individuals with very high and potentially infectious viral loads in saliva

/pdf/sars-cov-2-is-detectable-using-sensitive-rna-saliva-testing-5265nkhrez.pdf

SARS-CoV-2 is detectable using sensitive RNA saliva testing days before viral load reaches detection range of low-sensitivity nasal swab tests

The findings of this manuscript are increasingly important with new variants that appear to have shorter incubation periods emerging, which may be more prone to detection in saliva before detection in nasal swabs. Therefore, there is an urgent need to provide the science to support the use of a detection method that is highly sensitive and widely acceptable to the public to improve screening rates and early detection. ABSTRACT Saliva is an attractive sample for detecting SARS-CoV-2. However, contradictory reports exist concerning the sensitivity of saliva versus nasal swabs. We followed close contacts of COVID-19 cases for up to 14 days from the last exposure and collected self-reported symptoms, midturbinate swabs (MTS), and saliva every 2 or 3 days. Ct values, viral load, and frequency of viral detection by MTS and saliva were compared. Fifty-eight contacts provided 200 saliva-MTS pairs, and 14 contacts (13 with symptoms) had one or more positive samples. Saliva and MTS had similar rates of viral detection (P = 0.78) and substantial agreement (κ = 0.83). However, sensitivity varied significantly with time since symptom onset. Early on (days −3 to 2), saliva had 12 times (95% CI: 1.2, 130) greater likelihood of viral detection and 3.2 times (95% CI: 2.8, 3.8) higher RNA copy numbers compared to MTS. After day 2 of symptoms, there was a nonsignificant trend toward greater sensitivity using MTS. Saliva and MTS demonstrated high agreement making saliva a suitable alternative to MTS for SARS-CoV-2 detection. Saliva was more sensitive early in the infection when the transmission was most likely to occur, suggesting that it may be a superior and cost-effective screening tool for COVID-19. IMPORTANCE The findings of this manuscript are increasingly important with new variants that appear to have shorter incubation periods emerging, which may be more prone to detection in saliva before detection in nasal swabs. Therefore, there is an urgent need to provide the science to support the use of a detection method that is highly sensitive and widely acceptable to the public to improve screening rates and early detection. The manuscript presents the first evidence that saliva-based RT-PCR is more sensitive than MTS-based RT-PCR in detecting SARS-CoV-2 during the presymptomatic period – the critical period for unwitting onward transmission. Considering other advantages of saliva samples, including the lower cost, greater acceptability within the general population, and less risk to health care workers, our findings further supported the use of saliva to identify presymptomatic infection and prevent transmission of the virus.

Comparison of Saliva and Midturbinate Swabs for Detection of SARS-CoV-2

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention contracted with laboratories to sequence the SARS-CoV-2 genome from positive samples across the United States to enable public health officials to investigate the impact of variants on disease severity as well as the effectiveness of vaccines and treatment. Herein we present the initial results correlating RT-PCR quality control metrics with sample collection and sequencing methods from full SARS-CoV-2 viral genomic sequencing of 24,441 positive patient samples between April and June 2021.RT-PCR confirmed (N Gene Ct value < 30) positive patient samples, with nucleic acid extracted from saliva, nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swabs were selected for viral whole genome SARS-CoV-2 sequencing. Sequencing was performed using Illumina COVIDSeq™ protocol on either the NextSeq550 or NovaSeq6000 systems. Informatic variant calling, and lineage analysis were performed using DRAGEN COVID Lineage applications on Illumina's Basespace cloud analytical system. All sequence data and variant calls were uploaded to NCBI and GISAID.An association was observed between higher sequencing coverage, quality, and samples with a lower Ct value, with < 27 being optimal, across both sequencing platforms and sample collection methods. Both nasopharyngeal swabs and saliva samples were found to be optimal samples of choice for SARS-CoV-2 surveillance sequencing studies, both in terms of strain identification and sequencing depth of coverage, with NovaSeq 6000 providing higher coverage than the NextSeq 550. The most frequent variants identified were the B.1.617.2 Delta (India) and P.1 Gamma (Brazil) variants in the samples sequenced between April 2021 and June 2021. At the time of submission, the most common variant > 99% of positives sequenced was Omicron.These initial analyses highlight the importance of sequencing platform, sample collection methods, and RT-PCR Ct values in guiding surveillance efforts. These surveillance studies evaluating genetic changes of SARS-CoV-2 have been identified as critical by the CDC that can affect many aspects of public health including transmission, disease severity, diagnostics, therapeutics, and vaccines. 

/pdf/identification-of-sars-cov-2-variants-using-viral-sequencing-mpg3v8lf.pdf

Identification of SARS-CoV-2 variants using viral sequencing for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention genomic surveillance program

Saliva as a gold-standard sample for SARS-CoV-2 detection.

ABSTRACT Introduction Symptomatic testing and asymptomatic screening for SARS-CoV-2 continue to be essential tools for mitigating virus transmission. Though COVID-19 diagnostics initially defaulted to oropharyngeal or nasopharyngeal sampling, the worldwide urgency to expand testing efforts spurred innovative approaches and increased diversity of detection methods. Strengthening innovation and facilitating widespread testing remains critical for global health, especially as additional variants emerge and other mitigation strategies are recalibrated. Areas covered A growing body of evidence reflects the need to expand testing efforts and further investigate the efficiency, sensitivity, and acceptability of saliva samples for SARS-CoV-2 detection. Countries have made pandemic response decisions based on resources, costs, procedures, and regional acceptability – the adoption and integration of saliva-based testing among them. Saliva has demonstrated high sensitivity and specificity while being less invasive relative to nasopharyngeal swabs, securing saliva’s position as a more acceptable sample type. Expert opinion Despite the accessibility and utility of saliva sampling, global implementation remains low compared to swab-based approaches. In some cases, countries have validated saliva-based methods but face challenges with testing implementation or expansion. Here, we review the localities that have demonstrated success with saliva-based SARS-CoV-2 testing approaches and can serve as models for transforming concepts into globally-implemented best practices.

Saliva as a sample type for SARS-CoV-2 detection: implementation successes and opportunities around the globe

Abstract As the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) continues to disproportionately affect low- and middle-income countries, the need for simple, accessible and frequent diagnostic testing grows. In lower-resource settings, case detection is often limited by a lack of available testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). To address global inequities in testing, alternative sample types could be used to increase access to testing by reducing the associated costs. Saliva is a sensitive, minimally invasive and inexpensive diagnostic sample for SARS-CoV-2 detection that is appropriate for asymptomatic surveillance, symptomatic testing and at-home collection. Saliva testing can lessen two major challenges faced by lower- and middle-income countries: constrained resources and overburdened health workers. Saliva sampling enables convenient self-collection and requires fewer resources than swab-based methods. However, saliva testing for SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics has not been implemented on a large scale in low- and middle-income countries. While numerous studies based in these settings have demonstrated the usefulness of saliva sampling, there has been insufficient attention on optimizing its implementation in practice. We argue that implementation science research is needed to bridge this gap between evidence and practice. Low- and middle-income countries face many barriers as they continue their efforts to provide mass COVID-19 testing in the face of substantial inequities in global access to vaccines. Laboratories should look to replicate successful approaches for sensitive detection of SARS-CoV-2 in saliva, while governments should act to facilitate mass testing by lifting restrictions that limit implementation of saliva-based methods.

Steph H Tan

Papers

Saliva as a gold-standard sample for SARS-CoV-2 detection.

Saliva as a sample type for SARS-CoV-2 detection: implementation successes and opportunities around the globe

Saliva-based methods for SARS-CoV-2 testing in low- and middle-income countries