RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Comparable specimen collection from both ends of at-home mid-turbinate swabs
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2020.12.05.20244632
DO 10.1101/2020.12.05.20244632
A1 Melissa Truong
A1 Brian Pfau
A1 Evan McDermot
A1 Peter D. Han
A1 Elisabeth Brandstetter
A1 Matthew Richardson
A1 Ashley E. Kim
A1 Mark J. Rieder
A1 Helen Y. Chu
A1 Janet A. Englund
A1 Deborah A. Nickerson
A1 Jay Shendure
A1 Christina M. Lockwood
A1 Eric Q. Konnick
A1 Lea M. Starita
A1 on behalf of Seattle Flu Study investigators
YR 2020
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/12/08/2020.12.05.20244632.abstract
AB Unsupervised upper respiratory specimen collection is a key factor in the ability to massively scale SARS-CoV-2 testing. But there is concern that unsupervised specimen collection may produce inferior samples. Across two studies that included unsupervised at-home mid-turbinate specimen collection, ∼1% of participants used the wrong end of the swab. We found that molecular detection of respiratory pathogens and a human biomarker were comparable between specimens collected from the handle of the swab and those collected correctly. Older participants were more likely to use the swab backwards. Our results suggest that errors made during home-collection of nasal specimens do not preclude molecular detection of pathogens and specialized swabs may be an unnecessary luxury during a pandemic.Competing Interest StatementHelen Chu is a consultant for Merck and GlaxoSmithKline, and receives research funding from Ellume, Cepheid and Sanofi-Pasteur. Jay Shendure is a consultant with Guardant Health, Maze Therapeutics, Camp4 Therapeutics, Nanostring, Phase Genomics, Adaptive Biotechnologies, and Stratos Genomics, and has a research collaboration with Illumina. Janet Englund is a consultant with Sanofi Pasteur and Meissa Vaccines.Funding StatementThis work was funded by Gates Ventures. The funders did not have any influence on this study design.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:The Seattle Flu Study received approval by the University of Washington Institutional Review Board at the (UW IRB STUDY00006181) and informed consent was obtained prior to study enrollment. Participants participated in SCAN as part of public health surveillance. All 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 data is available, as is the code for data analysis and figure regeneration