Search

Despite emerging evidence indicating that molecular SARS-CoV-2 tests performed on saliva have diagnostic sensitivity and specificity comparable to those observed with nasopharyngeal swabs (NPSs), most in vivo follow-up studies on the efficacy of drugs against SARS-CoV-2 have been performed on NPSs, not considering saliva as a possible alternative matrix. For this reason, in this study, we used, in parallel, saliva and NPS samples for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 by real-time RT-PCR in patients receiving Tixagevimab/Cilgavimab, Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir, or Sotrovimab as a treatment against SARS-CoV-2. Our results showed a good correlation between the NPS and saliva samples for each drug; moreover, comparable changes in the cycle threshold (Ct) levels in saliva and NPSs were observed both 7 days and 30 days after treatment, thus confirming that the saliva represents a good matrix for in vivo follow-up studies verifying the effectiveness of treatments against SARS-CoV-2., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Objectives: To describe the trend of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in saliva samples from children attending nine schools in Rome in the local surveillance unit RM3 during the period of September 2021-March 2022, in parallel with the trend of SARS-CoV-2 RNA observed in nasopharyngeal swabs (NPSs) from the population in the same catchment area that was routinely tested at our laboratory in the same period., Methods: Saliva samples were collected using the Copan LolliSponge TM device and analyzed by Aptima® SARS-CoV-2 Assay on the Panther® System. NPSs were tested using either Aptima® SARS-CoV-2 Assay or Alinity m SARS-CoV-2 Assay., Results: The percentage of positivity in the two populations was different; of the 2222 saliva samples from students, 0.99% had positive results, whereas the percentage was higher (33.43%) in the 8994 NPSs representing the population from local surveillance unit RM3. Interestingly, the trend of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in saliva samples from students was consistent with that observed in NPSs from the population in same catchment area, although with peaks slightly anticipated., Conclusion: Overall, screening of saliva in the schools represents a good system to monitor SARS-CoV-2 circulation in the population, allowing early detection and quick isolation of students who are asymptomatic with positive test results and thus prevention of virus transmission., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interests The authors have no competing interests to declare., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Pediatric saliva specimen demonstrated high sensitivity (93%) and specificity (96.2%) compared to paired nasopharyngeal swabs (NPS) by Aptima SARS-CoV-2 Assay (Aptima). Viral loads were comparable in both specimen types. Saliva is a safe, noninvasive, and acceptable alternative specimen for SARS-CoV-2 detection in children., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Journal of the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has circulated throughout the world causing the worst pandemic since 1918. All efforts have been marshalled towards testing different treatment approaches, obtaining clinical and epidemiological information, developing suitable diagnostic tests, and developing new vaccines. New ribonucleic acid (RNA)-based and viral vector-based vaccines have been developed and licensed under emergency use in many countries; however, there is a huge demand for vaccines, and it will take some time before a sufficient number of people are vaccinated to stop the circulation of the virus. Therefore, the proper diagnosis and identification of infected individuals are crucial for the isolation and treatment of these patients and tracing of their contacts. Many diagnostic tests and diag-nostic kits have been developed in a relatively short time. This review summarizes the principles of the available laboratory assays that are in use for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA, antigens, or antibodies., Competing Interests: The author declares that he has no competing interests., (Copyright © 2021 Alkharsah.)

The increasing COVID-19 widespread has created the necessity to assess the diagnostic accuracy of newly introduced (RT-PCR based) assays for SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection in respiratory tract samples. We compared the results of the Allplex™ 2019-nCoV assay with those of the Simplexa™ COVID-19 Direct assay and the Quanty COVID-19 assay, respectively, all performed on 125 nasal/oropharyngeal swab samples of patients with COVID-19 suspicion. Fifty-four samples were positive, and 71 were negative with the Allplex™ assay, whereas 47 of 54 samples were also positive with the Simplexa™ assay. The Quanty assay detected 55 positive samples, including the 54 positive samples with the Allplex™ assay and 1 sample that was Allplex™ negative but Simplexa™ positive. Using a consensus result criterion as the reference standard allowed to resolve the eight samples with discordant results (one Allplex™ negative and seven Simplexa™ negative) as truly false negative. Interestingly, a Spearman's negative association was found between the viral RNA loads quantified by the Quanty assay and the C T values of RT PCRs performed with either the Allplex™ assay or the Simplexa™ assay. However, the strength of this association was higher for the Allplex™ assay (N gene, ρ = - 0.92; RdRP gene, ρ = - 0.91) than for the Simplexa™ assay (ORF1ab gene, ρ = - 0.65; S gene, ρ = - 0.80). The Allplex™ 2019-nCoV, the Simplexa™ COVID-19 Direct, and the Quanty COVID-19 assays yielded comparable results. However, the role these assays might play in future clinical practice warrants larger comparison studies.

Despite emerging evidence indicating that molecular SARS-CoV-2 tests performed on saliva have diagnostic sensitivity and specificity comparable to those observed with nasopharyngeal swabs (NPSs), most in vivo follow-up studies on the efficacy of drugs against SARS-CoV-2 have been performed on NPSs, not considering saliva as a possible alternative matrix. For this reason, in this study, we used, in parallel, saliva and NPS samples for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 by real-time RT-PCR in patients receiving Tixagevimab/Cilgavimab, Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir, or Sotrovimab as a treatment against SARS-CoV-2. Our results showed a good correlation between the NPS and saliva samples for each drug; moreover, comparable changes in the cycle threshold (Ct) levels in saliva and NPSs were observed both 7 days and 30 days after treatment, thus confirming that the saliva represents a good matrix for in vivo follow-up studies verifying the effectiveness of treatments against SARS-CoV-2.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has caused an ongoing coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak and a rising demand for the development of accurate, timely, and cost-effective diagnostic tests for SARS-CoV-2 as well as other viral infections in general. Currently, traditional virus screening methods such as plate culturing and real-time PCR are considered the gold standard with accurate and sensitive results. However, these methods still require sophisticated equipment, trained personnel, and a long analysis time. Alternatively, with the integration of microfluidic and biosensor technologies, microfluidic-based biosensors offer the ability to perform sample preparation and simultaneous detection of many analyses in one platform. High sensitivity, accuracy, portability, low cost, high throughput, and real-time detection can be achieved using a single platform. This review presents recent advances in microfluidic-based biosensors from many works to demonstrate the advantages of merging the two technologies for sensing viruses. Different platforms for virus detection are classified into two main sections: immunoassays and molecular assays. Moreover, available commercial sensing tests are analyzed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic changed the typical patterns of respiratory infections globally. While SARS-CoV-2 illness exhibited explosive growth since 2020, the activity of other respiratory viruses fell below historical seasonal norms. The objective of this study was to assess the prevalence of seasonal respiratory viruses during the COVID-19 pandemic in Tunisia. Methods: This is a retrospective cross-sectional study including 284 nasopharyngeal samples tested negative for SARS-CoV-2 during the period October 2020–May 2021. All samples were screened for fifteen common respiratory viruses. Either a fast syndromic approach using Biofire FILM ARRAY respiratory 2.1 (RP2.1) Panel, or end-point multiplex RT-PCRs detecting RNA viruses and Real-Time PCR detecting Adenoviruses were used. Results: Overall, 30.6% (87/284) of samples were positive for at least one virus. Mixed infections were detected in 3.4% of positive cases. Enterovirus/Rhinovirus (HEV/HRV) was the most detected virus throughout the study period, especially during December 2020 (33.3% of all HEV/HRV being detected). During the 2020–2021 winter season, neither Respiratory Syncytial Virus nor Influenza Viruses circulation was observed. Metapneumovirus and Parainfluenza Viruses infections were detected during the spring season. The highest rate of respiratory viruses detection was observed in children and adults aged [0–10] years (50%) and [31–40] years (40%). HEV/HRV was the most detected virus regardless of age group. Conclusions: Public health measures used to prevent SARS-CoV-2 spread in Tunisia were also effective to reduce transmission of the other respiratory viruses, especially Influenza. The higher resistance of HEV/HRV in the environment could explain their predominance and continuous circulation during this period.

Objectives: To describe the trend of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in saliva samples from children attending nine schools in Rome in the local surveillance unit RM3 during the period of September 2021-March 2022, in parallel with the trend of SARS-CoV-2 RNA observed in nasopharyngeal swabs (NPSs) from the population in the same catchment area that was routinely tested at our laboratory in the same period. Methods: Saliva samples were collected using the Copan LolliSpongeTM device and analyzed by Aptima® SARS-CoV-2 Assay on the Panther® System. NPSs were tested using either Aptima® SARS-CoV-2 Assay or Alinity m SARS-CoV-2 Assay. Results: The percentage of positivity in the two populations was different; of the 2222 saliva samples from students, 0.99% had positive results, whereas the percentage was higher (33.43%) in the 8994 NPSs representing the population from local surveillance unit RM3. Interestingly, the trend of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in saliva samples from students was consistent with that observed in NPSs from the population in same catchment area, although with peaks slightly anticipated. Conclusion: Overall, screening of saliva in the schools represents a good system to monitor SARS-CoV-2 circulation in the population, allowing early detection and quick isolation of students who are asymptomatic with positive test results and thus prevention of virus transmission.

The clinical symptoms caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are nonspecific and can be associated with most other respiratory viruses that cause acute respiratory tract infections (ARI). Because the clinical differentiation of COVID-19 patients from those with other respiratory viruses is difficult, the evaluation of automated methods to detect important respiratory viruses together with SARS-CoV-2 seems necessary. Therefore, this study compares two molecular assays for the detection of respiratory viruses, including SARS-CoV-2: the Respiratory Viruses 16-Well Assay (AusDiagnostics, Pty Ltd., Mascot, Australia) and the Allplex™ RV Essential Assay coupled with the Allplex™-nCoV Assay (Seegene Inc., Seoul, Korea). The two methods (AusDiagnostics and AlplexTM-nCoV Assay SARS-CoV-2) had 98.6% agreement with the reference method, cobas 6800, for the detection of SARS-CoV-2. Agreement between the AusDiagnostics assay and the AlplexTM RV Essential Assay for the detection of seven respiratory viruses was 99%. In our experience, the Respiratory Viruses 16-Well Assay proved to be the most valuable and useful medium-throughput method for simultaneous detection of important respiratory viruses and SARS-CoV-2. The main advantages of the method are high specificity for all targets included and their simultaneous detection and medium throughput with the option of having multiple instruments provide a constant run. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The global pandemic coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 has a healthcare, social and economic burden. To limit the spread of the virus, the World Health Organization (WHO) urgently called for extensive screening of suspected individuals; thus, a quick, simple, and sensitive diagnostic assay is always in need. Methods: We applied reverse transcription-loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) for the detection of SARS-CoV-2. The RT-LAMP method was optimized by evaluating two fluorescence amplification mixes and several reaction times, and results were compared to the standard real-time RT-PCR (rtRT-PCR). The assay was validated using 200 nasopharyngeal swabs collected in viral transport media (62 positive for SARS-CoV-2, and 138 negative for SARS-CoV-2 detected by the rtRT-PCR method). The samples were diluted 1:4 in diethylpyrocarbonate (DEPC)-treated water, utilized for RT-LAMP using different singleplex and multiplex sets of LAMP primers (N gene, S gene, and orf1ab gene), and incubated at 65 °C using real-time PCR 7500. Results: Our direct detection with the RT-LAMP protocol showed 100% concordance (sensitivity and specificity) with the standard protocol used for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid. Conclusions: In this study, we set up a rapid, simple, and sensitive RT-LAMP assay for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in clinical samples. The assay is suitable for point of care detection in public hospitals, medical centers in rural areas, and in transportation hubs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Spike protein mutations E484K and N501Y carried by SARS-CoV-2 variants have been associated with concerning changes of the virus, including resistance to neutralizing antibodies and increased transmissibility. While the concerning variants are fast spreading in various geographical areas, identification and monitoring of these variants are lagging far behind, due in large part to the slow speed and insufficient capacity of viral sequencing. In response to the unmet need for a fast and efficient screening tool, we developed a single-tube duplex molecular assay for rapid and simultaneous identification of E484K and N501Y mutations from nasopharyngeal swab (NS) samples within 2.5 h from sample preparation to report. Using this tool, we screened a total of 1135 clinical NS samples collected from COVID patients at 8 hospitals within the Hackensack Meridian Health network in New Jersey between late December 2020 and March 2021. Our data revealed dramatic increases in the frequencies of both E484K and N501Y over time, underscoring the need for continuous epidemiological monitoring.

The emergence of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant in 2021 is associated with a global surge of cases in late 2021 and early 2022. Identifying the introduction of novel SARS-CoV-2 variants to a population is imperative to inform decisions by clinicians and public health officials. Here, we describe a quantitative reverse transcription PCR-based assay (RT-qPCR) targeting unique mutations in the Omicron BA.1/BA1.1 and BA.2 viral genomes. This assay accurately and precisely detect the presence of these Omicron variants in patient samples in less than four hours. Using this assay, we tested 270 clinical samples and detected the introduction of Omicron BA.1/BA1.1 and BA.2 in the Santa Barbara County (SBC) population in December 2021 and February 2022, respectively. Identifying Omicron variants using this RT-qPCR assay showed complete concordance with whole viral genome sequencing; both assays indicated that Omicron was the dominant variant in SB County. Our data substantiate that RT-qPCR-based virus detection assays offer a fast and inexpensive alternative to NGS for virus variant-specific detection approach, which allows streamlining the detection of Omicron variants in patient samples.

The clinical symptoms caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are nonspecific and can be associated with most other respiratory viruses that cause acute respiratory tract infections (ARI). Because the clinical differentiation of COVID-19 patients from those with other respiratory viruses is difficult, the evaluation of automated methods to detect important respiratory viruses together with SARS-CoV-2 seems necessary. Therefore, this study compares two molecular assays for the detection of respiratory viruses, including SARS-CoV-2: the Respiratory Viruses 16-Well Assay (AusDiagnostics, Pty Ltd., Mascot, Australia) and the Allplex™ RV Essential Assay coupled with the Allplex™-nCoV Assay (Seegene Inc., Seoul, Korea). The two methods (AusDiagnostics and AlplexTM-nCoV Assay SARS-CoV-2) had 98.6% agreement with the reference method, cobas 6800, for the detection of SARS-CoV-2. Agreement between the AusDiagnostics assay and the AlplexTM RV Essential Assay for the detection of seven respiratory viruses was 99%. In our experience, the Respiratory Viruses 16-Well Assay proved to be the most valuable and useful medium-throughput method for simultaneous detection of important respiratory viruses and SARS-CoV-2. The main advantages of the method are high specificity for all targets included and their simultaneous detection and medium throughput with the option of having multiple instruments provide a constant run.

Background: The global pandemic coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 has a healthcare, social and economic burden. To limit the spread of the virus, the World Health Organization (WHO) urgently called for extensive screening of suspected individuals; thus, a quick, simple, and sensitive diagnostic assay is always in need. Methods: We applied reverse transcription-loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) for the detection of SARS-CoV-2. The RT-LAMP method was optimized by evaluating two fluorescence amplification mixes and several reaction times, and results were compared to the standard real-time RT-PCR (rtRT-PCR). The assay was validated using 200 nasopharyngeal swabs collected in viral transport media (62 positive for SARS-CoV-2, and 138 negative for SARS-CoV-2 detected by the rtRT-PCR method). The samples were diluted 1:4 in diethylpyrocarbonate (DEPC)-treated water, utilized for RT-LAMP using different singleplex and multiplex sets of LAMP primers (N gene, S gene, and orf1ab gene), and incubated at 65 °C using real-time PCR 7500. Results: Our direct detection with the RT-LAMP protocol showed 100% concordance (sensitivity and specificity) with the standard protocol used for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid. Conclusions: In this study, we set up a rapid, simple, and sensitive RT-LAMP assay for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in clinical samples. The assay is suitable for point of care detection in public hospitals, medical centers in rural areas, and in transportation hubs.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has circulated throughout the world causing the worst pandemic since 1918. All efforts have been marshalled towards testing different treatment approaches, obtaining clinical and epidemiological information, developing suitable diagnostic tests, and developing new vaccines. New ribonucleic acid (RNA)-based and viral vector-based vaccines have been developed and licensed under emergency use in many countries; however, there is a huge demand for vaccines, and it will take some time before a sufficient number of people are vaccinated to stop the circulation of the virus. Therefore, the proper diagnosis and identification of infected individuals are crucial for the isolation and treatment of these patients and tracing of their contacts. Many diagnostic tests and diag-nostic kits have been developed in a relatively short time. This review summarizes the principles of the available laboratory assays that are in use for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA, antigens, or antibodies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]