Cargando…
Saliva as alternative to naso-oropharyngeal swab for SARS-CoV-2 detection by RT-qPCR: a multicenter cross-sectional diagnostic validation study
Saliva has been demonstrated as feasible alternative to naso-oropharyngeal swab (NOS) for SARS-CoV-2 detection through reverse transcription quantitative/real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR). This study compared the diagnostic agreement of conventional NOS, saliva with RNA extraction (SE) a...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group UK
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9308781/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35871257 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-16849-1 |
_version_ | 1784753026869755904 |
---|---|
author | Tee, Michael L. Abrilla, Aedrian A. Tee, Cherica A. Dalmacio, Leslie Michelle M. Villaflor, Vivencio Jose P. Abubakar, Al-Zamzam A. Tagayuna, Pedrito Y. Aquino, Sheldon Steven C. Bernardo, Vicente Aaron L. Matias, Ronald R. |
author_facet | Tee, Michael L. Abrilla, Aedrian A. Tee, Cherica A. Dalmacio, Leslie Michelle M. Villaflor, Vivencio Jose P. Abubakar, Al-Zamzam A. Tagayuna, Pedrito Y. Aquino, Sheldon Steven C. Bernardo, Vicente Aaron L. Matias, Ronald R. |
author_sort | Tee, Michael L. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Saliva has been demonstrated as feasible alternative to naso-oropharyngeal swab (NOS) for SARS-CoV-2 detection through reverse transcription quantitative/real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR). This study compared the diagnostic agreement of conventional NOS, saliva with RNA extraction (SE) and saliva without RNA extraction (SalivaDirect) processing for RT-qPCR in identifying SARS-CoV-2. All techniques were also compared, as separate index tests, to a composite reference standard (CRS) where positive and negative results were defined as SARS-CoV-2 detection in either one or no sample, respectively. Of 517 paired samples, SARS-CoV-2 was detected in 150 (29.01%) NOS and 151 (29.21%) saliva specimens. The saliva-based tests were noted to have a sensitivity, specificity and accuracy (95% confidence interval) of 92.67% (87.26%, 96.28%), 97.55% (95.40%, 98.87%) and 96.13% (94.09%, 97.62%), respectively, for SE RT-qPCR and 91.33% (85.64%, 95.30%), 98.91% (97.23%, 99.70%) and 96.71% (94.79%, 98.07%), respectively, for SalivaDirect RT-qPCR compared to NOS RT-qPCR. Compared to CRS, all platforms demonstrated statistically similar diagnostic performance. These findings suggest that both conventional and streamlined saliva RT-qPCR are at least non-inferior to conventional NOS RT-qPCR in detecting SARS-CoV-2. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9308781 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group UK |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-93087812022-07-25 Saliva as alternative to naso-oropharyngeal swab for SARS-CoV-2 detection by RT-qPCR: a multicenter cross-sectional diagnostic validation study Tee, Michael L. Abrilla, Aedrian A. Tee, Cherica A. Dalmacio, Leslie Michelle M. Villaflor, Vivencio Jose P. Abubakar, Al-Zamzam A. Tagayuna, Pedrito Y. Aquino, Sheldon Steven C. Bernardo, Vicente Aaron L. Matias, Ronald R. Sci Rep Article Saliva has been demonstrated as feasible alternative to naso-oropharyngeal swab (NOS) for SARS-CoV-2 detection through reverse transcription quantitative/real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR). This study compared the diagnostic agreement of conventional NOS, saliva with RNA extraction (SE) and saliva without RNA extraction (SalivaDirect) processing for RT-qPCR in identifying SARS-CoV-2. All techniques were also compared, as separate index tests, to a composite reference standard (CRS) where positive and negative results were defined as SARS-CoV-2 detection in either one or no sample, respectively. Of 517 paired samples, SARS-CoV-2 was detected in 150 (29.01%) NOS and 151 (29.21%) saliva specimens. The saliva-based tests were noted to have a sensitivity, specificity and accuracy (95% confidence interval) of 92.67% (87.26%, 96.28%), 97.55% (95.40%, 98.87%) and 96.13% (94.09%, 97.62%), respectively, for SE RT-qPCR and 91.33% (85.64%, 95.30%), 98.91% (97.23%, 99.70%) and 96.71% (94.79%, 98.07%), respectively, for SalivaDirect RT-qPCR compared to NOS RT-qPCR. Compared to CRS, all platforms demonstrated statistically similar diagnostic performance. These findings suggest that both conventional and streamlined saliva RT-qPCR are at least non-inferior to conventional NOS RT-qPCR in detecting SARS-CoV-2. Nature Publishing Group UK 2022-07-23 /pmc/articles/PMC9308781/ /pubmed/35871257 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-16849-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Article Tee, Michael L. Abrilla, Aedrian A. Tee, Cherica A. Dalmacio, Leslie Michelle M. Villaflor, Vivencio Jose P. Abubakar, Al-Zamzam A. Tagayuna, Pedrito Y. Aquino, Sheldon Steven C. Bernardo, Vicente Aaron L. Matias, Ronald R. Saliva as alternative to naso-oropharyngeal swab for SARS-CoV-2 detection by RT-qPCR: a multicenter cross-sectional diagnostic validation study |
title | Saliva as alternative to naso-oropharyngeal swab for SARS-CoV-2 detection by RT-qPCR: a multicenter cross-sectional diagnostic validation study |
title_full | Saliva as alternative to naso-oropharyngeal swab for SARS-CoV-2 detection by RT-qPCR: a multicenter cross-sectional diagnostic validation study |
title_fullStr | Saliva as alternative to naso-oropharyngeal swab for SARS-CoV-2 detection by RT-qPCR: a multicenter cross-sectional diagnostic validation study |
title_full_unstemmed | Saliva as alternative to naso-oropharyngeal swab for SARS-CoV-2 detection by RT-qPCR: a multicenter cross-sectional diagnostic validation study |
title_short | Saliva as alternative to naso-oropharyngeal swab for SARS-CoV-2 detection by RT-qPCR: a multicenter cross-sectional diagnostic validation study |
title_sort | saliva as alternative to naso-oropharyngeal swab for sars-cov-2 detection by rt-qpcr: a multicenter cross-sectional diagnostic validation study |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9308781/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35871257 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-16849-1 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT teemichaell salivaasalternativetonasooropharyngealswabforsarscov2detectionbyrtqpcramulticentercrosssectionaldiagnosticvalidationstudy AT abrillaaedriana salivaasalternativetonasooropharyngealswabforsarscov2detectionbyrtqpcramulticentercrosssectionaldiagnosticvalidationstudy AT teechericaa salivaasalternativetonasooropharyngealswabforsarscov2detectionbyrtqpcramulticentercrosssectionaldiagnosticvalidationstudy AT dalmaciolesliemichellem salivaasalternativetonasooropharyngealswabforsarscov2detectionbyrtqpcramulticentercrosssectionaldiagnosticvalidationstudy AT villaflorvivenciojosep salivaasalternativetonasooropharyngealswabforsarscov2detectionbyrtqpcramulticentercrosssectionaldiagnosticvalidationstudy AT abubakaralzamzama salivaasalternativetonasooropharyngealswabforsarscov2detectionbyrtqpcramulticentercrosssectionaldiagnosticvalidationstudy AT tagayunapedritoy salivaasalternativetonasooropharyngealswabforsarscov2detectionbyrtqpcramulticentercrosssectionaldiagnosticvalidationstudy AT aquinosheldonstevenc salivaasalternativetonasooropharyngealswabforsarscov2detectionbyrtqpcramulticentercrosssectionaldiagnosticvalidationstudy AT bernardovicenteaaronl salivaasalternativetonasooropharyngealswabforsarscov2detectionbyrtqpcramulticentercrosssectionaldiagnosticvalidationstudy AT matiasronaldr salivaasalternativetonasooropharyngealswabforsarscov2detectionbyrtqpcramulticentercrosssectionaldiagnosticvalidationstudy |