Abstract
Previous studies have described RT-LAMP methodology for the rapid detection of SARS-CoV-2 in nasopharyngeal/oropharyngeal swab and saliva samples. Here we describe the validation of an improved simple sample preparation method for Direct SARS-CoV-2 RT-LAMP, removing the need for RNA extraction, using 559 swabs and 86,760 saliva samples from asymptomatic and symptomatic individuals across multiple healthcare settings. Using this improved method we report a diagnostic sensitivity (DSe) of 70.35% (95% CI 63.48-76.60%) on swabs and 84.62% (79.50-88.88%) on saliva, with diagnostic specificity (DSp) 100% (98.98-100.00%) on swabs and 100% (99.72-100.00%) on saliva when compared to RT-qPCR. Analysing samples with RT-qPCR ORF1ab CT values of ≤25 and ≤33 (high and medium-high viral loads, respectively), we found DSe of 100% (96.34-100%) and 77.78% (70.99-83.62%) for swabs, and 99.01% (94.61-99.97%) and 87.32% (80.71-92.31%) for saliva. We also describe RNA RT-LAMP (on extracted RNA) performed on 12,619 swabs and 12,521 saliva samples to provide updated performance data with DSe and DSp of 95.98% (92.74-98.06%) and 99.99% (99.95-100%) for swabs, and 80.65% (73.54-86.54%) and 99.99% (99.95-100%) for saliva, respectively. We also report on daily samples collected from one individual from symptom onset where both Direct and RNA RT-LAMP detected SARS-CoV-2 in saliva collected on all six days where symptoms were recorded, with RNA RT-LAMP detecting SARS-CoV-2 for an additional further day.
The findings from these studies demonstrate that RT-LAMP testing of swabs and saliva is potentially applicable to a variety of use-cases, including frequent, interval-based testing of saliva from asymptomatic individuals via Direct RT-LAMP that may be missed using symptomatic testing alone.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This work was partially funded by a Department of Health and Social Care award to the University of Southampton (Grant Reference Number 2020/032 (Feasibility study for city-wide testing using saliva 315 based LAMP testing)). The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Department of Health and Social Care. KMG is supported by the UK Medical Research Council 317 (MC_UU_12011/4), the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR Senior Investigator (NF-SI-0515- 318 10042) and NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre (IS-BRC-1215-20004)) and the British 319 Heart Foundation (RG/15/17/3174). For part of this project, Emma Howson was on secondment at GeneSys Biotech Ltd., which was part funded by The Pirbright Institute Flexible Talent Mobility Account (FTMA) under BBSRC grant BB/S507945/1. ADB is currently supported by a Cancer Research UK Advanced Clinician Scientist award (C31641/A23923) and his laboratory is supported by CRUK Centre Birmingham (C17422/A25154) and the Birmingham Experimental Cancer Medicine Centre (C11497/A25127). Veronica Fowler, Stephen Kidd, Bryony Armson and Zandra Deans were on secondment to the Department of Health and Social Care for a period during this study. APHA laboratory activities and expertise was supported by both the Safe and Certain project APHACSKL0085 and Defra project APHANSOM0416.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
National Research Ethics Service Committee West Midlands - South Birmingham 2002/201 Amendment Number 4.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I 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).
Yes
I 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.
Yes
Footnotes
↵† Denotes co-first authorship
Data Availability
I 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.
