RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 From Delta to Omicron SARS-CoV-2 variant: switch to saliva sampling for higher detection rate
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2022.03.17.22272538
DO 10.1101/2022.03.17.22272538
A1 Cornette, Margot
A1 Decaesteker, Bieke
A1 Martens, Geert Antoine
A1 Vandecandelaere, Patricia
A1 Jonckheere, Stijn
YR 2022
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/03/18/2022.03.17.22272538.abstract
AB Background Real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing on a nasopharyngeal swab is the current standard for SARS-CoV-2 virus detection. Since collection of this sample type is experienced uncomfortable by patients, saliva- and oropharyngeal swab collections should be considered as alternative specimens.Objectives Evaluation of the relative performance of oropharyngeal swab, nasopharyngeal swab and saliva for the RT-PCR based SARS-CoV-2 Delta (B.1.617.2) and Omicron (B.1.1.529) variant detection.Study design Nasopharyngeal swab, oropharyngeal swab and saliva were collected from 246 adult patients who presented for SARS-CoV-2 testing at the screening centre in Ypres (Belgium). RT-PCR SARS-CoV-2 detection was performed on all three sample types separately. Variant type was determined for each positive patient using whole genome sequencing or Allplex SARS-CoV-2 variants I and II Assay.Results and conclusions Saliva is superior compared to nasopharyngeal swab for the detection of the Omicron variant. For the detection of the Delta variant, nasopharyngeal swab and saliva can be considered equivalent specimens. Oropharyngeal swab is the least sensitive sample type and shows little added value when collected in addition to a single nasopharyngeal swab.HighlightsSaliva is the preferred sample type for Omicron variant (B.1.1.529) detectionNasopharyngeal swab and saliva are equivalent for Delta variant (B.1.617.2) detectionOropharyngeal swab is the least preferred sample type for SARS-CoV-2 detectionCompeting Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis study did not receive any fundingAuthor 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:Ethics committee of AZ Delta gave ethical approval for this work B1172022000004I 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.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 produced in the present work are contained in the manuscript