Abstract
Study design Saliva has been proposed as valid alternative for nasopharyngeal swab for RT-qPCR detection of SARS-CoV-2. The sensitivity is generally equivalent, and it comes with much less discomfort for the patient. While there is an overall good performance in the literature for adults, there is much less information on the use of saliva in children or in the general practitioner’s setting.
Methods We tested a novel commercially available saliva collection kit with a virus inactivating and RNA stabilizing buffer (InActiv Blue®) in matched saliva and swab samples from 245 individuals, including 216 children, collected by general practitioners.
Results Blind RT-qPCR testing of the saliva samples confirmed all 23 positives identified by swab testing (100% concordance), irrespective of age, presence of symptoms, or high-risk status. One child’s saliva sample was found low positive while negative on the nasopharyngeal swab, resulting in an overall relative sensitivity of RT-qPCR saliva testing of 104.3%.
Conclusion Saliva collected in InActiv Blue® can be a valid alternative for SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR testing in the general practitioner’s setting, including children.
Competing Interest Statement
Ilse Jonckheere, Liesbeth Faes and Jo Vandesompele own stock in InActiv Blue.
Funding Statement
The study was sponsored by FertiPro, who also provided input in the experiment design.
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 Ghent University Hospital ethics committee (B6702021000459) for parallel collection of saliva from children aged 5-16 and adults during a visit at the general practitioner (GP) during which a swab is collected for diagnostic purposes.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.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
Data Availability
All relevant data is provided in the Tables.
