Abstract
Purpose Compared to nasopharyngeal/oropharyngeal swabs, non-invasive saliva samples have enormous potential for scalability and routine population screening of SARS-CoV-2. In this study, we are investigating the efficacy of saliva samples relative to nasopharyngeal/oropharyngeal swabs for use as a direct source for the RT-PCR based SARS-CoV-2 detection.
Methods Paired nasopharyngeal/oropharyngeal swabs and saliva samples were collected from suspected positive SARS-CoV-2 patients and tested using RT-PCR. Generalised linear models were used to investigate factors that explain result agreement. Further, we used simulations to evaluate the effectiveness of saliva-based screening in restricting the spread of infection in a large campus such as an educational institution.
Results We observed 75.4% overall result agreement. Prospective positive samples stored for three or more days showed a drastic reduction in the probability of result agreement. We observed 83% result agreement and 74.5% test sensitivity in samples processed and tested within two days of collection. Our simulations suggest that a test with 75% sensitivity, but high daily capacity can be very effective in limiting the size of infection clusters in a workspace. Guided by these results, we successfully implemented a saliva-based screening in the Bangalore Life Sciences Cluster (BLiSC) campus.
Conclusion These results suggest that saliva may be a viable sample source for SARS-CoV-2 surveillance if samples are processed immediately. We strongly recommend the implementation of saliva-based screening strategies for large workplaces and in schools, as well as for population-level screening and routine surveillance as we learn to live with the SARS-CoV-2 virus.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study was primarily supported by NCBS/TIFR core fund (Department of Atomic Energy, Government of India, under Project Identification No. RTI 4006)
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:
The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Bangalore Baptist Hospital (BBB/IRB/2020/010), Institutional Human Ethics Committee, National Centre for Biological Sciences (NCBS/IEC-22/01, NCBS/IEC-26/03), Institutional Biosafety Committee, National Centre for Biological Sciences (TFR: NCBS:34IBSC/UR1).
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
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
Paper in collection COVID-19 SARS-CoV-2 preprints from medRxiv and bioRxiv
The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, the Sergey Brin Family Foundation, California Institute of Technology, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Imperial College London, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford University, University of Washington, and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
Subject Area
Reviews and Context
0
Comment
0
TRIP Peer Reviews
0
Community Reviews
0
Automated Services
0
Blogs/Media
Author Videos