ABSTRACT
Background Current recommendations for the diagnosis of mpox rely on lesion-swabs as the gold-standard specimen type even though many patients experience symptoms prior to lesion-onset. Earlier detection could bolster the mpox response by mitigating transmission and facilitating access to antiviral treatments.
Methods We first compared five PCR assays for their detection of mpox DNA extracted from 30 saliva specimens in collection devices with a stabilizing buffer. Next, we investigated the stability of mpox detection in five raw, unsupplemented saliva samples diluted 1:10 in mpox-negative saliva, after storage at 4°C, room temperature (∼19°C), 30°C, and 40°C for 72 hours. We also investigated the stability of virus detection through simulated shipping conditions. Lastly, we performed amplicon sequencing on seven saliva samples and assessed concordance of the PCR assays against mpox virus sequences.
Results Despite identifying three different substitutions in the CDC’s Monkeypox Virus Generic Real-Time PCR Test’s forward and reverse primers, we observed no difference in the mean cycle threshold values generated between assays. However, one gene target for one assay performed better for overall detection when validated. Detection following storage at 4°C, ∼19°C, and 30°C remained relatively stable for 24-48 hours but this declined by 72 hours. At 40°C, detection was stable at 24 hours but declined by 48 hours. Detection following simulated summer and winter shipping temperature profiles also remained stable.
Conclusions Findings of this pilot investigation support a flexible, saliva-based, extraction-free PCR test as a promising approach for the low-cost detection of mpox virus. With stability observed for 24-48 hours as well as over simulated shipping temperatures, saliva-based sampling and simplified testing could reduce mpox diagnostic costs, increase access to testing and address hurdles in low- and middle-income countries. Future studies should build upon this and assess the temporal dynamics of mpox virus in saliva.
Competing Interest Statement
ALW has received consulting and/or advisory board fees from Pfizer, Diasorin, PPS Health, Co-Diagnostics, and Global Diagnostic Systems for work unrelated to this project, and and is Principal Investigator on research grants from Pfizer, Merck and Flambeau Diagnostics to Yale University. All other co-authors declare no potential conflict of interest.
Funding Statement
This work was supported by Yale University's Fund for Lesbian and Gay Studies (FLAGS).
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:
This study was conducted with Institutional Review Board approval from Yale Human Research Protection Program (Protocol ID. 2000033293), which allowed for the use of remnant clinical samples and was considered as non-human subjects research. No personal identifiable information was used for this study.
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, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors.
