RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Prospective comparison of saliva and nasopharyngeal swab sampling for mass screening for COVID-19
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2020.09.23.20150961
DO 10.1101/2020.09.23.20150961
A1 Nacher, Mathieu
A1 Mergeay-Fabre, Mayka
A1 Blanchet, Denis
A1 Benois, Orelie
A1 Pozl, Tristan
A1 Mesphoule, Pauline
A1 Sainte-Rose, Vincent
A1 Vialette, Véronique
A1 Toulet, Bruno
A1 Moua, Aurélie
A1 Saout, MONA
A1 Simon, Stéphane
A1 Guidarelli, Manon
A1 Galindo, Muriel
A1 Biche, Barbara
A1 Faurous, William
A1 Abad, Fanny
A1 Fahrasmane, Aniza
A1 Rochemont, Devi
A1 Vignier, Nicolas
A1 Vabret, Astrid
A1 Demar, Magalie
YR 2020
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/09/24/2020.09.23.20150961.abstract
AB Current testing for COVID-19 relies on quantitative reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction from a nasopharyngeal swab specimen. Saliva samples have advantages regarding ease and painlessness of collection, which does not require trained staff and may allow self-sampling. We enrolled 776 persons at various field-testing sites and collected nasopharyngeal and pooled saliva samples. 162 had a positive COVID-19 RT-PCR, 61% were mildly symptomatic and 39% asymptomatic. The sensitivity of RT-PCR on saliva samples versus nasopharygeal swabs varied depending on the patient groups considered or on Ct thresholds. There were 10 (6.2%) patients with a positive saliva sample and a negative nasopharyngeal swab, all of whom had Ct values<25. For symptomatic patients for whom the interval between symptoms onset and sampling was <10 days sensitivity was 77% but when excluding persons with isolated Ngen positivity (54/162), sensitivity was 90%. In asymptomatic patients, the sensitivity was only 24%. When we looked at patients with Cts <30, sensitivity was 83% or 88.9% when considering 2 genes. The relatively good performance for patients with low Cts suggests that Saliva testing could be a useful and acceptable tool to identify infectious persons in mass screening contexts, a strategically important task for contact tracing and isolation in the community.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding Statementthe project was funded by the ministere de l'enseignement superieur et de la rechercheAuthor DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:CPP sud mediterraneeAll necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.Yesdata can be made available after further authorization from the commission nationale informatique et libertes as required by french law