The helical domains of the stem region of dengue virus envelope protein are involved in both virus assembly and entry.

The envelope (E) of dengue virus (DENV) is a determinant of tropism and virulence. At the C terminus of E protein, there is a stem region containing two amphipathic α-helical domains (EH1 and EH2) and a stretch of conserved sequences in between. The crystal structure of E protein at the postfusion state suggested the involvement of the stem during the fusion; however, the critical domains or residues involved remain unknown. Site-directed mutagenesis was carried out to replace each of the stem residues at the hydrophobic face with an alanine or proline in a DENV serotype 4 (DENV4) precursor membrane (prM)/E expression construct. Most of the 15 proline mutations at either EH1 or EH2 severely affected the assembly of virus-like particles (VLPs). Radioimmunoprecipitation and membrane flotation assays revealed that EH1 mutations primarily affect prM-E heterodimerization and EH2 mutations affect the membrane binding of the stem. Introducing four proline mutations at either EH1 or EH2 into a DENV2 replicon packaging system greatly affects assembly and entry. Moreover, introducing these mutations into a DENV2 infectious clone confirmed the impairment in assembly and infectivity. Sequencing analysis of adaptive mutations in passage 5 viruses revealed a change to a leucine or wild-type residue at the original site, suggesting the importance of maintaining the helical structure. Collectively, these findings suggest that the EH1 and EH2 domains are involved in both assembly and entry steps of the DENV replication cycle; this feature, together with the high degree of sequence conservation, suggests that the stem region is a potential target of antiviral strategies.

Validation of the GeneXpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 PCR assay using saliva as biological specimen.

In the pandemic, rapid and accurate detection of SARS-CoV-2 is crucial in controlling the outbreak. Recent studies have shown a high detection rate using saliva/oral fluids as specimens for laboratory detection of the virus. We intended to evaluate the test performance of the Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 cartridge assay in comparison to a conventional qRT-PCR testing, using saliva as biological specimen. Forty saliva samples from symptomatic participants were collected. Conventional qRT-PCR was performed for amplification of E and RdRp genes and the Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 assay amplified E and N2 genes. In the conventional assay, the median cycle threshold value of the E gene was 34.9, and of the RdRp gene was 38.3. In the Xpert Xpress assay, the median cycle threshold value of the E gene was 29.7, and of the N2 gene was 31.6. These results can allow a broaden use of molecular tests for management of COVID-19 pandemic, especially in resources-limited settings.

Saliva is a reliable, non-invasive specimen for SARS-CoV-2 detection.

BACKGROUND: Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the cause of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). Although Real Time Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (qRT-PCR) of respiratory specimens is the gold standard test for detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection, collecting nasopharyngeal swabs causes discomfort to patients and may represent considerable risk for healthcare workers. The use of saliva as a diagnostic sample has several advantages. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to validate the use of saliva as a biological sample for diagnosis of COVID-19. METHODS: This study was conducted at Infectious Diseases Research Laboratory (LAPI), in Salvador, Brazil. Participants presenting with signs/symptoms suggesting SARS-CoV-2 infection underwent a nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) and/or oropharyngeal swab (OPS), and saliva collection. Saliva samples were diluted in PBS, followed by RNA isolation and RT-Real Time PCR for SARS-CoV-2. Results of conventional vs saliva samples testing were compared. Statistical analyses were performed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences software (SPSS) version 18.0. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-five participants were recruited and samples pairs of NPS/OPS and saliva were collected. The sensitivity and specificity of RT-PCR using saliva samples were 94.4% (95% CI 86.4-97.8) and 97.62% (95% CI 91.7-99.3), respectively. There was an overall high agreement (96.1%) between the two tests. CONCLUSIONS: Use of self-collected saliva samples is an easy, convenient, and low-cost alternative to conventional NP swab-based molecular tests. These results may allow a broader use of molecular tests for management of COVID19 pandemic, especially in resources-limited settings.

Validation of the GeneXpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 PCR assay using saliva as biological specimen

ABSTRACT In the pandemic, rapid and accurate detection of SARS-CoV-2 is crucial in controlling the outbreak. Recent studies have shown a high detection rate using saliva/oral fluids as specimens for laboratory detection of the virus. We intended to evaluate the test performance of the Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 cartridge assay in comparison to a conventional qRT-PCR testing, using saliva as biological specimen. Forty saliva samples from symptomatic participants were collected. Conventional qRT-PCR was performed for amplification of E and RdRp genes and the Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 assay amplified E and N2 genes. In the conventional assay, the median cycle threshold value of the E gene was 34.9, and of the RdRp gene was 38.3. In the Xpert Xpress assay, the median cycle threshold value of the E gene was 29.7, and of the N2 gene was 31.6. These results can allow a broaden use of molecular tests for management of COVID-19 pandemic, especially in resources-limited settings.

Saliva is a reliable, non-invasive specimen for SARS-CoV-2 detection

Abstract Background Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the cause of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). Although Real Time Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (qRT-PCR) of respiratory specimens is the gold standard test for detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection, collecting nasopharyngeal swabs causes discomfort to patients and may represent considerable risk for healthcare workers. The use of saliva as a diagnostic sample has several advantages. Objectives The aim of this study was to validate the use of saliva as a biological sample for diagnosis of COVID-19. Methods This study was conducted at Infectious Diseases Research Laboratory (LAPI), in Salvador, Brazil. Participants presenting with signs/symptoms suggesting SARS-CoV-2 infection underwent a nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) and/or oropharyngeal swab (OPS), and saliva collection. Saliva samples were diluted in PBS, followed by RNA isolation and RT-Real Time PCR for SARS-CoV-2. Results of conventional vs saliva samples testing were compared. Statistical analyses were performed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences software (SPSS) version 18.0. Results One hundred fifty-five participants were recruited and samples pairs of NPS/OPS and saliva were collected. The sensitivity and specificity of RT-PCR using saliva samples were 94.4% (95% CI 86.4-97.8) and 97.62% (95% CI 91.7-99.3), respectively. There was an overall high agreement (96.1%) between the two tests. Conclusions Use of self-collected saliva samples is an easy, convenient, and low-cost alternative to conventional NP swab-based molecular tests. These results may allow a broader use of molecular tests for management of COVID19 pandemic, especially in resources-limited settings.

Detection of SARS-associated coronavirus in throat wash and saliva in early diagnosis.

The severe acute respiratory syndrome-associated coronavirus (SARS-CoV) is thought to be transmitted primarily through dispersal of droplets, but little is known about the load of SARS-CoV in oral droplets. We examined oral specimens, including throat wash and saliva, and found large amounts of SARS-CoV RNA in both throat wash (9.58 x 10(2) to 5.93 x 10(6) copies/mL) and saliva (7.08 x 10(3) to 6.38 x 10(8) copies/mL) from all specimens of 17 consecutive probable SARS case-patients, supporting the possibility of transmission through oral droplets. Immunofluorescence study showed replication of SARS-CoV in the cells derived from throat wash, demonstrating the possibility of developing a convenient antigen detection assay. This finding, with the high detection rate a median of 4 days after disease onset and before the development of lung lesions in four patients, suggests that throat wash and saliva should be included in sample collection guidelines for SARS diagnosis.