TY - JOUR T1 - Saliva, a relevant alternative sample for SARS-CoV2 detection JF - medRxiv DO - 10.1101/2020.11.27.20239608 SP - 2020.11.27.20239608 AU - Monique Melo Costa AU - Nicolas Benoit AU - Jerome Dormoi AU - Remy Amalvict AU - Nicolas Gomez AU - Hervé Tissot-Dupont AU - Matthieu Million AU - Bruno Pradines AU - Samuel Granjeaud AU - Lionel Almeras Y1 - 2020/01/01 UR - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/11/30/2020.11.27.20239608.abstract N2 - Background Currently, COVID-19 diagnosis relies on quantitative reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) from nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) specimens, but NPSs present several limitations. The simplicity, low invasive and possibility of self-collection of saliva imposed this specimen as a relevant alternative for SARS-CoV-2 detection. However, the discrepancy of saliva test results compared to NPSs made of its use controversial. Here, we proposed to assess Salivettes®, as a standardized saliva collection device, and to compare SARS-CoV-2 positivity on paired NPS and saliva specimens.Methods A total of 303 individuals randomly selected among those investigated for SARS-CoV-2 were enrolled, including 30 (9.9%) patients previously positively tested using NPS (follow-up group), 90 (29.7%) mildly symptomatic and 183 (60.4%) asymptomatic.Results The RT-qPCR revealed a positive rate of 11.6% (n=35) and 17.2% (n=52) for NPSs and saliva samples, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of saliva samples were 82.9% and 91.4%, respectively, using NPS as reference. The highest proportion of discordant results concerned the follow-up group (33.3%). Although in the symptomatic and asymptomatic groups the agreement exceeded 90.0%, 17 individuals were detected positive only in saliva samples, with consistent medical arguments.Conclusion Saliva collected with Salivette® demonstrated more sensitive for detecting symptomatic and pre-symptomatic infections.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Clinical TrialN2020-A01249-30 protocol, 06/08/2020Funding StatementThis work has been supported by the Agence Innovation Defense (AID, CoviDiagMS Project, Grant n2020-COVID19-15) and the Delegation Generale pour Armement (DGA, MoSIS project, Grant no PDH-2-NRBC-2-B-2113).Author 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:Ile de France 1 ethical committeeAll 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.YesAll the data were included in the manuscriptNPSnasopharyngeal swabPCRPolymerase Chain ReactionCtCycle thresholdRT-qPCRReverse transcription quantitative real-time PCRSARS-CoV-2Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2COVID-19Coronavirus Disease 2019PPApositive percent agreement ER -