Cargando…

Comparison of SARS-CoV-2 Detection in Nasopharyngeal Swab and Saliva Samples from Patients Infected with Omicron Variant

To compare the detection of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant in nasopharyngeal-swab (NPS) and oral saliva samples. 255 samples were obtained from 85 Omicron-infected patients. SARS-CoV-2 load was measured in the NPS and saliva samples by using Simplexa™ COVID-19 direct and Alinity m SARS-CoV-2 AMP ass...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bordi, Licia, Sberna, Giuseppe, Lalle, Eleonora, Fabeni, Lavinia, Mazzotta, Valentina, Lanini, Simone, Corpolongo, Angela, Garbuglia, Anna Rosa, Nicastri, Emanuele, Girardi, Enrico, Vaia, Francesco, Antinori, Andrea, Maggi, Fabrizio
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10003189/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36902277
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijms24054847
_version_ 1784904549449859072
author Bordi, Licia
Sberna, Giuseppe
Lalle, Eleonora
Fabeni, Lavinia
Mazzotta, Valentina
Lanini, Simone
Corpolongo, Angela
Garbuglia, Anna Rosa
Nicastri, Emanuele
Girardi, Enrico
Vaia, Francesco
Antinori, Andrea
Maggi, Fabrizio
author_facet Bordi, Licia
Sberna, Giuseppe
Lalle, Eleonora
Fabeni, Lavinia
Mazzotta, Valentina
Lanini, Simone
Corpolongo, Angela
Garbuglia, Anna Rosa
Nicastri, Emanuele
Girardi, Enrico
Vaia, Francesco
Antinori, Andrea
Maggi, Fabrizio
author_sort Bordi, Licia
collection PubMed
description To compare the detection of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant in nasopharyngeal-swab (NPS) and oral saliva samples. 255 samples were obtained from 85 Omicron-infected patients. SARS-CoV-2 load was measured in the NPS and saliva samples by using Simplexa™ COVID-19 direct and Alinity m SARS-CoV-2 AMP assays. Results obtained with the two diagnostic platforms showed very good inter-assay concordance (91.4 and 82.4% for saliva and NPS samples, respectively) and a significant correlation among cycle threshold (Ct) values. Both platforms revealed a highly significant correlation among Ct obtained in the two matrices. Although the median Ct value was lower in NPS than in saliva samples, the Ct drop was comparable in size for both types of samples after 7 days of antiviral treatment of the Omicron-infected patients. Our result demonstrates that the detection of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant is not influenced by the type of sample used for PCR analysis, and that saliva can be used as an alternative specimen for detection and follow-up of Omicron-infected patients.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10003189
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-100031892023-03-11 Comparison of SARS-CoV-2 Detection in Nasopharyngeal Swab and Saliva Samples from Patients Infected with Omicron Variant Bordi, Licia Sberna, Giuseppe Lalle, Eleonora Fabeni, Lavinia Mazzotta, Valentina Lanini, Simone Corpolongo, Angela Garbuglia, Anna Rosa Nicastri, Emanuele Girardi, Enrico Vaia, Francesco Antinori, Andrea Maggi, Fabrizio Int J Mol Sci Communication To compare the detection of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant in nasopharyngeal-swab (NPS) and oral saliva samples. 255 samples were obtained from 85 Omicron-infected patients. SARS-CoV-2 load was measured in the NPS and saliva samples by using Simplexa™ COVID-19 direct and Alinity m SARS-CoV-2 AMP assays. Results obtained with the two diagnostic platforms showed very good inter-assay concordance (91.4 and 82.4% for saliva and NPS samples, respectively) and a significant correlation among cycle threshold (Ct) values. Both platforms revealed a highly significant correlation among Ct obtained in the two matrices. Although the median Ct value was lower in NPS than in saliva samples, the Ct drop was comparable in size for both types of samples after 7 days of antiviral treatment of the Omicron-infected patients. Our result demonstrates that the detection of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant is not influenced by the type of sample used for PCR analysis, and that saliva can be used as an alternative specimen for detection and follow-up of Omicron-infected patients. MDPI 2023-03-02 /pmc/articles/PMC10003189/ /pubmed/36902277 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijms24054847 Text en © 2023 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Communication
Bordi, Licia
Sberna, Giuseppe
Lalle, Eleonora
Fabeni, Lavinia
Mazzotta, Valentina
Lanini, Simone
Corpolongo, Angela
Garbuglia, Anna Rosa
Nicastri, Emanuele
Girardi, Enrico
Vaia, Francesco
Antinori, Andrea
Maggi, Fabrizio
Comparison of SARS-CoV-2 Detection in Nasopharyngeal Swab and Saliva Samples from Patients Infected with Omicron Variant
title Comparison of SARS-CoV-2 Detection in Nasopharyngeal Swab and Saliva Samples from Patients Infected with Omicron Variant
title_full Comparison of SARS-CoV-2 Detection in Nasopharyngeal Swab and Saliva Samples from Patients Infected with Omicron Variant
title_fullStr Comparison of SARS-CoV-2 Detection in Nasopharyngeal Swab and Saliva Samples from Patients Infected with Omicron Variant
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of SARS-CoV-2 Detection in Nasopharyngeal Swab and Saliva Samples from Patients Infected with Omicron Variant
title_short Comparison of SARS-CoV-2 Detection in Nasopharyngeal Swab and Saliva Samples from Patients Infected with Omicron Variant
title_sort comparison of sars-cov-2 detection in nasopharyngeal swab and saliva samples from patients infected with omicron variant
topic Communication
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10003189/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36902277
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijms24054847
work_keys_str_mv AT bordilicia comparisonofsarscov2detectioninnasopharyngealswabandsalivasamplesfrompatientsinfectedwithomicronvariant
AT sbernagiuseppe comparisonofsarscov2detectioninnasopharyngealswabandsalivasamplesfrompatientsinfectedwithomicronvariant
AT lalleeleonora comparisonofsarscov2detectioninnasopharyngealswabandsalivasamplesfrompatientsinfectedwithomicronvariant
AT fabenilavinia comparisonofsarscov2detectioninnasopharyngealswabandsalivasamplesfrompatientsinfectedwithomicronvariant
AT mazzottavalentina comparisonofsarscov2detectioninnasopharyngealswabandsalivasamplesfrompatientsinfectedwithomicronvariant
AT laninisimone comparisonofsarscov2detectioninnasopharyngealswabandsalivasamplesfrompatientsinfectedwithomicronvariant
AT corpolongoangela comparisonofsarscov2detectioninnasopharyngealswabandsalivasamplesfrompatientsinfectedwithomicronvariant
AT garbugliaannarosa comparisonofsarscov2detectioninnasopharyngealswabandsalivasamplesfrompatientsinfectedwithomicronvariant
AT nicastriemanuele comparisonofsarscov2detectioninnasopharyngealswabandsalivasamplesfrompatientsinfectedwithomicronvariant
AT girardienrico comparisonofsarscov2detectioninnasopharyngealswabandsalivasamplesfrompatientsinfectedwithomicronvariant
AT vaiafrancesco comparisonofsarscov2detectioninnasopharyngealswabandsalivasamplesfrompatientsinfectedwithomicronvariant
AT antinoriandrea comparisonofsarscov2detectioninnasopharyngealswabandsalivasamplesfrompatientsinfectedwithomicronvariant
AT maggifabrizio comparisonofsarscov2detectioninnasopharyngealswabandsalivasamplesfrompatientsinfectedwithomicronvariant