Mucosal Gene Expression in Response to SARS-CoV-2 Is Associated with Viral Load.

Little is known about the relationships between symptomatic early severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) viral load and upper airway mucosal gene expression and immune response. To examine the association of symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 early viral load with upper airway mucosal gene expression, we profiled the host mucosal transcriptome from nasopharyngeal swab samples from 68 adults with symptomatic, mild-to-moderate coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19). We measured SARS-CoV-2 viral load using reverse transcription-quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR). We then examined the association of SARS-CoV-2 viral load with upper airway mucosal immune response. We detected SARS-CoV-2 in all samples and recovered >80% of the genome from 95% of the samples from symptomatic COVID-19 adults. The respiratory virome was dominated by SARS-CoV-2, with limited codetection of other respiratory viruses, with the human Rhinovirus C being identified in 4 (6%) samples. This limited codetection of other respiratory viral pathogens may be due to the implementation of public health measures, like social distancing and masking practices. We observed a significant positive correlation between SARS-CoV-2 viral load and interferon signaling (OAS2, OAS3, IFIT1, UPS18, ISG15, ISG20, IFITM1, and OASL), chemokine signaling (CXCL10 and CXCL11), and adaptive immune system (IFITM1, CD300E, and SIGLEC1) genes in symptomatic, mild-to-moderate COVID-19 adults, when adjusting for age, sex, and race. Interestingly, the expression levels of most of these genes plateaued at a cycle threshold (CT) value of ~25. Overall, our data show that the early nasal mucosal immune response to SARS-CoV-2 infection is viral load dependent, potentially modifying COVID-19 outcomes. IMPORTANCE Several prior studies have shown that SARS-CoV-2 viral load can predict the likelihood of disease spread and severity. A higher detectable SARS-CoV-2 plasma viral load was associated with worse respiratory disease severity. However, the relationship between SARS-CoV-2 viral load, airway mucosal gene expression, and immune response remains elusive. We profiled the nasal mucosal transcriptome from nasal samples collected from adults infected with SARS-CoV-2 during spring 2020 with mild-to-moderate symptoms using a comprehensive metatranscriptomics method. We observed a positive correlation between SARS-CoV-2 viral load, interferon signaling, chemokine signaling, and adaptive immune system in adults with COVID-19. Our data suggest that early nasal mucosal immune response to SARS-CoV-2 infection was viral load dependent and may modify COVID-19 outcomes.

Viral load in hospitalized infants with respiratory syncytial virus bronchiolitis: a three-way comparative analysis.

Viral load measurement of Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) in acute bronchiolitis depends on specimen collection, viral load quantification, and transport media. The aim of this study was to investigate viral load in three-way-comparative analyses; nasal swab versus nasal wash, quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) versus cell tissue culture, and various transport media. A prospective cohort study of infants aged < 12 months, admitted to the Soroka Medical Center, due to acute bronchiolitis, was conducted. Two nasal swabs and two nasal wash samples (in UTM and VCM) were collected from each infant upon admission and after 48 h. Samples were immediately stored at -80 °C and tested at Viroclinics DDL (Rotterdam, Netherlands). Quantitative RT-PCR and quantitative virus culture were performed using tissue culture infective dose (TCID50). Spearman's correlation coefficient test assessed the correlation between the different methods, viral load, and clinical severity score. One hundred samples were collected from 13 infants (mean age 5.7 ± 3.8 months, 46% males). Twelve patients were RSV-A positive, and one was RSV-B positive. A high correlation was found between transport media- UTM and VCM (0.92, P < 0.001) and between nasal swabs and nasal wash samples (0.62, P = 0.02). RSV signals were higher in nasal wash than in swabs. PCR signals were lower in the second collection compared to the first. No correlation was found between viral load and clinical severity.    Conclusion: RSV viral load is comparable across nasal wash, nasal swabs, and various transport media. However, it did not correlate with clinical severity, probably due to the limited sample size. Broader analyses are warranted. What is Known: • Viral load measurement in Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV) bronchiolitis depends on specimen collection, viral load quantification, and transport media. • The COVID-19 pandemic underscored the paramount significance of proper specimen collection, notably through nasal swabs. What is New: • RSV viral load was investigated in three-way-comparative analyses. • RSV viral load correlated well across PCR and tissue culture, nasal wash and swabs, and various transport media. RSV viral load did not correlate with clinical severity.

Detection of a Parkinson's Disease-Specific MicroRNA Signature in Nasal and Oral Swabs.

BACKGROUND: Biomaterials from oral and nasal swabs provide, in theory, a potential resource for biomarker development. However, their diagnostic value has not yet been investigated in the context of Parkinson's disease (PD) and associated conditions. OBJECTIVE: We have previously identified a PD-specific microRNA (miRNA) signature in gut biopsies. In this work, we aimed to investigate the expression of miRNAs in routine buccal (oral) and nasal swabs obtained from cases with idiopathic PD and isolated rapid eye movement sleep behavior disorder (iRBD), a prodromal symptom that often precedes α-synucleinopathies. We aimed to address their value as a diagnostic biomarker for PD and their mechanistic contribution to PD onset and progression. METHODS: Healthy control cases (n = 28), cases with PD (n = 29), and cases with iRBD (n = 8) were prospectively recruited to undergo routine buccal and nasal swabs. Total RNA was extracted from the swab material, and the expression of a predefined set of miRNAs was quantified by quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction. RESULTS: Statistical analysis revealed a significantly increased expression of hsa-miR-1260a in cases who had PD. Interestingly, hsa-miR-1260a expression levels correlated with diseases severity, as well as olfactory function, in the PD and iRBD cohorts. Mechanistically, hsa-miR-1260a segregated to Golgi-associated cellular processes with a potential role in mucosal plasma cells. Predicted hsa-miR-1260a target gene expression was reduced in iRBD and PD groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our work demonstrates oral and nasal swabs as a valuable biomarker pool in PD and associated neurodegenerative conditions. © 2023 The Authors. Movement Disorders published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.

Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Nasal Swab Is Insufficient to Withhold Empiric Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Pneumonia Coverage in a Trauma Population.

INTRODUCTION: Methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) nasal colonization is a predictor of MRSA pneumonia in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. Negative nasal swabs have shown up to a 97% negative predictive value for MRSA pneumonia in nontrauma populations, though little investigation has been pursued in trauma patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All trauma patients admitted to the ICU from April 2018 to February 2019 were screened for MRSA colonization by nasal swab. Patients with suspicion for pneumonia underwent bronchoalveolar lavage or quantitative sputum culture and were started on empiric antibiotic therapy based on the swab result. Swab-positive patients were started on empiric MRSA coverage and swab-negative patients were not. RESULTS: MRSA nasal swab screening was performed in 601 trauma ICU patients. Ninety-six patients subsequently underwent pneumonia workup and were started on an empiric antibiotic regimen based on nasal swab results. Seventeen (17.7%) patients were MRSA nasal swab positive on screening, and 22 (22.9%) patients subsequently had significant growth of MRSA on quantitative respiratory culture. The sensitivity of nasal swab was 50.0% and the specificity was 91.9%. Eleven patients had a negative MRSA nasal swab but a positive MRSA pneumonia (11.5%). Patients with inadequate antibiotic coverage had statistically longer hospital length of stay, ICU length of stay, ventilator days, and rates of unplanned intubation compared to patients with adequate antibiotic coverage. CONCLUSIONS: Nasal swab screening was not sensitive enough in a trauma population with a high endemic incidence of MRSA colonization to warrant withholding empiric antibiotic MRSA coverage in patients with suspected pneumonia.

Clinical evaluation of anterior nasal cavity swab specimens by a rapid antigen test using a GLINE-2019-nCoV Ag Kit to diagnose COVID-19.

The promising diagnostic performance of rapid antigen tests (RATs) using non-invasive anterior nasal (AN) swab specimens to diagnose COVID-19 has been reported. A large number of RATs are commercially available; however, the careful assessment of RATs is essential prior to their implementation in clinical practice. We evaluated the clinical performance of the GLINE-2019-nCoV Ag Kit as a RAT using AN swabs in a prospective, blinded study. Adult patients who visited outpatient departments and received SARS-CoV-2 tests between August 16 and September 8, 2022, were eligible for this study. Patients who were aged under 18 years and patients without appropriate specimens were excluded. Two sets of AN and nasopharyngeal (NP) swabs were collected from all patients. Each set of specimens was tested by the RAT and quantitative reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR). Of the 138 recruited patients, 84 were positive and 54 were negative by RT-qPCR using NP swabs. The positive agreement rate between RT-qPCR using NP swabs and RAT using AN swabs was 78.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 68.3%-86.8%), the negative agreement rate was 98.1% (95% CI, 90.1%-99.9%), and the overall agreement rate was 86.2% (95% CI, 79.3%-91.5%), with a κ coefficient of 0.73. The positive agreement rate in the early phase (≤3 days from symptom onset) was >80%, but this fell to 50% in the late phase (≥4 days). This study demonstrates that the GLINE-2019-nCoV Ag Kit using AN swabs has good clinical performance and might be a reliable alternative method for diagnosing COVID-19.

Prospective Evaluation of the BD MAX StaphSR Assay for the Screening of Methicillin-Susceptible and -Resistant Staphylococcus aureus from Nasal Swabs Taken in Intensive Care Unit Patients.

Screening patients for S. aureus nasal carriage has proved effective in preventing cross-contamination and endogenous infection with this bacterium. The aim of this study was to assess the performance of the BD MAX StaphSR assay with liquid Amies elution swabs, taken during routine care of intensive care unit patients. Direct and pre-enriched cultures were used as reference methods to screen for S. aureus and methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA). Discrepant results between the BD MAX StaphSR assay and cultures were resolved by using the Xpert SA Nasal Complete assay. A total of 607 nasal swabs taken from 409 patients were included in this study. Compared to culture methods, the sensitivity and specificity of the BD MAX StaphSR assay were 92.5% and 91.7% for S. aureus screening, and 94.7% and 98.3% for MRSA screening, respectively. In 52 (8.6%) specimens, there was a discrepancy between the results of cultures and the BD MAX StaphSR assay, including 13 (25%) where the results of the BD MAX StaphSR assay were confirmed by the Xpert SA Nasal Complete test. This prospective study showed that the BD MAX StaphSR assay is reliable for S. aureus and MRSA detection from nasal samples taken with liquid Amies elution swabs.

Quantitative SARS-CoV-2 Viral-Load Curves in Paired Saliva Samples and Nasal Swabs Inform Appropriate Respiratory Sampling Site and Analytical Test Sensitivity Required for Earliest Viral Detection.

Early detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection is critical to reduce asymptomatic and presymptomatic transmission, curb the spread of variants, and maximize treatment efficacy. Low-analytical-sensitivity nasal-swab testing is commonly used for surveillance and symptomatic testing, but the ability of these tests to detect the earliest stages of infection has not been established. In this study, conducted between September 2020 and June 2021 in the greater Los Angeles County, California, area, initially SARS-CoV-2-negative household contacts of individuals diagnosed with COVID-19 prospectively self-collected paired anterior-nares nasal-swab and saliva samples twice daily for viral-load quantification by high-sensitivity reverse-transcription quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR) and digital-RT-PCR assays. We captured viral-load profiles from the incidence of infection for seven individuals and compared diagnostic sensitivities between respiratory sites. Among unvaccinated persons, testing saliva with a high-analytical-sensitivity assay detected infection up to 4.5 days before viral loads in nasal swabs reached concentrations detectable by low-analytical-sensitivity nasal-swab tests. For most participants, nasal swabs reached higher peak viral loads than saliva but were undetectable or at lower loads during the first few days of infection. High-analytical-sensitivity saliva testing was most reliable for earliest detection. Our study illustrates the value of acquiring early (within hours after a negative high-sensitivity test) viral-load profiles to guide the appropriate analytical sensitivity and respiratory site for detecting earliest infections. Such data are challenging to acquire but critical to designing optimal testing strategies with emerging variants in the current pandemic and to respond to future viral pandemics.

Evaluation of a laboratory-based high-throughput SARS-CoV-2 antigen assay.

OBJECTIVES: Antigen tests are an essential part of SARS-CoV-2 testing strategies. Rapid antigen tests are easy to use but less sensitive compared to nucleic acid amplification tests (NAT) and less suitable for large-scale testing. In contrast, laboratory-based antigen tests are suitable for high-throughput immunoanalyzers. Here we evaluated the diagnostic performance of the laboratory-based Siemens Healthineers SARS-CoV-2 Antigen (CoV2Ag) assay. METHODS: In a public test center, from 447 individuals anterior nasal swab specimens as well as nasopharyngeal swab specimens were collected. The nasal swab specimens were collected in sample inactivation medium and measured using the CoV2Ag assay. The nasopharyngeal swab specimens were measured by RT-PCR. Additionally, 9,046 swab specimens obtained for screening purposes in a tertiary care hospital were analyzed and positive CoV2Ag results confirmed by NAT. RESULTS: In total, 234/447 (52.3%) participants of the public test center were positive for SARS-CoV-2-RNA. Viral lineage B1.1.529 was dominant during the study. Sensitivity and specificity of the CoV2Ag assay were 88.5% (95%CI: 83.7-91.9%) and 99.5% (97.4-99.9%), respectively. Sensitivity increased to 93.7% (97.4-99.9%) and 98.7% (97.4-99.9%) for swab specimens with cycle threshold values <30 and <25, respectively. Out of 9,046 CoV2Ag screening tests from hospitalized patients, 21 (0.2%) swab specimens were determined as false-positive by confirmatory NAT. CONCLUSIONS: Using sample tubes containing inactivation medium the laboratory-based high-throughput CoV2Ag assay is a very specific and highly sensitive assay for detection of SARS-CoV-2 antigen in nasal swab specimens including the B1.1.529 variant. In low prevalence settings confirmation of positive CoV2Ag results by SARS-CoV-2-RNA testing is recommended.

MRSA nasal swab PCR to de-escalate antibiotics in the emergency department.

BACKGROUND: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) nasal swab polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay has a 96.1-99.2% negative predictive value (NPV) in pneumonia and may be used for early de-escalation of MRSA-active antibiotic agents. Xu (2018), File (2010) [1,2]. OBJECTIVE: The objective of our study was to determine if a negative MRSA PCR nasal swab collected in the emergency department (ED) improves early MRSA-active antibiotic de-escalation. METHODS: A single center observational cohort study used ICD-10 codes to identify records for adults admitted to the ED with a hospital discharge diagnosis of pneumonia. The primary outcome was proportion of patients with early de-escalation on an MRSA-active agent (≤ 1 dose). Secondary outcomes included rate of acute kidney injury (AKI), positive MRSA cultures (blood culture, respiratory sputum, tracheal aspirate), hospital length of stay (LOS), in-hospital mortality, and 30-day readmission rates. RESULTS: A total of 341 patients were included in the study. Of the patients with an MRSA PCR swab, 35.2% of patients with a negative swab received >1 dose of MRSA-active agent compared to 52% of patients without an MRSA nasal swab (p < 0.01). There were no significant differences in secondary outcomes except readmission rate of 1.6% of patients that did not have an MRSA swab in the ED vs 6.6% of patients that received an MRSA swab in the ED. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: MRSA PCR nasal swabs in the ED may serve as a useful tool for early MRSA-active antibiotic de-escalation when treating pneumonia.

Airway inflammatory profile among cleaning workers from different workplaces.

BACKGROUND: Cleaning workers represent a significant proportion of the active population worldwide, with poor remuneration, particularly in developing countries. Despite this, they remain a relatively poorly studied occupational group. They are constantly exposed to agents that can cause symptoms and respiratory problems. This study aimed to evaluate upper airway inflammation in professional cleaning workers in three different occupational settings by comparing nasal cytology inflammation and clinical profiles. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional study on the prevalence of upper airway inflammation and symptoms of asthma/rhinitis related to cleaning work, according to workplace. A total of 167 participants were divided into four groups: hospital, university, housekeeper and control. A nasal swab was collected for upper airway inflammation evaluation. Clinical profiles and respiratory symptom employee evaluations were performed using specific questionnaires (European Community Respiratory Health Survey-ECRS and the International Study of Asthma and Allergies in Childhood-ISAAC). RESULTS: Cleaning workers showed increased neutrophils and lymphocytes; the hospital and university groups showed increased macrophages compared to the housekeeper and control groups. The hospital and housekeeper groups showed increased eosinophils when they performed cleaning services for up to one year and reported having more asthma symptoms than the control group. Cleaning workers showed increased rhinitis symptoms. The university group showed increased rhinitis symptoms aggravated by the workplace compared with the hospital and housekeeper groups. Cleaning workers showed an increased affirmative response when directly asked about rhinitis symptoms compared to the control group. CONCLUSIONS: Cleaning workers showed airway inflammation, asthma symptoms and rhinitis, regardless of the occupational environment to which they were exposed, as well as showed increased rhinitis and asthma symptoms. Hospital cleaning workers showed increased macrophages, lymphocytes and eosinophils compared to the others. The length of time spent performing cleaning work was not related to nasal inflammation or respiratory symptoms in this population. However, there were differences in workplaces. Registered on ClinicalTrials.gov. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03311048. Registration date: 10.16.2017. Retrospectively registered.

Deep learning and machine learning-based voice analysis for the detection of COVID-19: A proposal and comparison of architectures.

Alongside the currently used nasal swab testing, the COVID-19 pandemic situation would gain noticeable advantages from low-cost tests that are available at any-time, anywhere, at a large-scale, and with real time answers. A novel approach for COVID-19 assessment is adopted here, discriminating negative subjects versus positive or recovered subjects. The scope is to identify potential discriminating features, highlight mid and short-term effects of COVID on the voice and compare two custom algorithms. A pool of 310 subjects took part in the study; recordings were collected in a low-noise, controlled setting employing three different vocal tasks. Binary classifications followed, using two different custom algorithms. The first was based on the coupling of boosting and bagging, with an AdaBoost classifier using Random Forest learners. A feature selection process was employed for the training, identifying a subset of features acting as clinically relevant biomarkers. The other approach was centered on two custom CNN architectures applied to mel-Spectrograms, with a custom knowledge-based data augmentation. Performances, evaluated on an independent test set, were comparable: Adaboost and CNN differentiated COVID-19 positive from negative with accuracies of 100% and 95% respectively, and recovered from negative individuals with accuracies of 86.1% and 75% respectively. This study highlights the possibility to identify COVID-19 positive subjects, foreseeing a tool for on-site screening, while also considering recovered subjects and the effects of COVID-19 on the voice. The two proposed novel architectures allow for the identification of biomarkers and demonstrate the ongoing relevance of traditional ML versus deep learning in speech analysis.

Feasibility and Performance of Self-Collected Nasal Swabs for Detection of Influenza Virus, Respiratory Syncytial Virus, and Human Metapneumovirus.

BACKGROUND: We assessed performance of participant-collected midturbinate nasal swabs compared to study staff-collected midturbinate nasal swabs for the detection of respiratory viruses among pregnant women in Bangkok, Thailand. METHODS: We enrolled pregnant women aged ≥18 years and followed them throughout the 2018 influenza season. Women with acute respiratory illness self-collected midturbinate nasal swabs at home for influenza viruses, respiratory syncytial viruses (RSV), and human metapneumoviruses (hMPV) real-time RT-PCR testing and the study nurse collected a second midturbinate nasal swab during home visits. Paired specimens were processed and tested on the same day. RESULTS: The majority (109, 60%) of 182 participants were 20-30 years old. All 200 paired swabs had optimal specimen quality. The median time from symptom onsets to participant-collected swabs was 2 days and to staff-collected swabs was also 2 days. The median time interval between the 2 swabs was 2 hours. Compared to staff-collected swabs, the participant-collected swabs were 93% sensitive and 99% specific for influenza virus detection, 94% sensitive and 99% specific for RSV detection, and 100% sensitive and 100% specific for hMPV detection. CONCLUSIONS: Participant-collected midturbinate nasal swabs were a valid alternative approach for laboratory confirmation of influenza-, RSV-, and hMPV-associated illnesses among pregnant women in a community setting.

Performance of Saliva, Oropharyngeal Swabs, and Nasal Swabs for SARS-CoV-2 Molecular Detection: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Nasopharyngeal (NP) swabs are considered the highest-yield sample for diagnostic testing for respiratory viruses, including SARS-CoV-2. The need to increase capacity for SARS-CoV-2 testing in a variety of settings, combined with shortages of sample collection supplies, have motivated a search for alternative sample types with high sensitivity. We systematically reviewed the literature to understand the performance of alternative sample types compared to NP swabs. We systematically searched PubMed, Google Scholar, medRxiv, and bioRxiv (last retrieval 1 October 2020) for comparative studies of alternative specimen types (saliva, oropharyngeal [OP], and nasal [NS] swabs) versus NP swabs for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis using nucleic acid amplification testing (NAAT). A logistic-normal random-effects meta-analysis was performed to calculate % positive alternative-specimen, % positive NP, and % dual positives overall and in subgroups. The QUADAS 2 tool was used to assess bias. From 1,253 unique citations, we identified 25 saliva, 11 NS, 6 OP, and 4 OP/NS studies meeting inclusion criteria. Three specimen types captured lower % positives (NS [82%, 95% CI: 73 to 90%], OP [84%, 95% CI: 57 to 100%], and saliva [88%, 95% CI: 81 to 93%]) than NP swabs, while combined OP/NS matched NP performance (97%, 95% CI: 90 to 100%). Absence of RNA extraction (saliva) and utilization of a more sensitive NAAT (NS) substantially decreased alternative-specimen yield of positive samples. NP swabs remain the gold standard for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2, although alternative specimens are promising. Much remains unknown about the impact of variations in specimen collection, processing protocols, and population (pediatric versus adult, late versus early in disease course), such that head-to head studies of sampling strategies are urgently needed.

Evaluating Specimen Quality and Results from a Community-Wide, Home-Based Respiratory Surveillance Study.

While influenza and other respiratory pathogens cause significant morbidity and mortality, the community-based burden of these infections remains incompletely understood. The development of novel methods to detect respiratory infections is essential for mitigating epidemics and developing pandemic-preparedness infrastructure. From October 2019 to March 2020, we conducted a home-based cross-sectional study in the greater Seattle, WA, area, utilizing electronic consent and data collection instruments. Participants received nasal swab collection kits via rapid delivery within 24 hours of self-reporting respiratory symptoms. Samples were returned to the laboratory and were screened for 26 respiratory pathogens and a housekeeping gene. Participant data were recorded via online survey at the time of sample collection and 1 week later. Of the 4,572 consented participants, 4,359 (95.3%) received a home swab kit and 3,648 (83.7%) returned a nasal specimen for respiratory pathogen screening. The 3,638 testable samples had a mean RNase P relative cycle threshold (Crt ) value of 19.0 (SD, 3.4), and 1,232 (33.9%) samples had positive results for one or more pathogens, including 645 (17.7%) influenza-positive specimens. Among the testable samples, the median time between shipment of the home swab kit and completion of laboratory testing was 8.0 days (interquartile range [IQR], 7.0 to 14.0). A single adverse event occurred and did not cause long-term effects or require medical attention. Home-based surveillance using online participant enrollment and specimen self-collection is a safe and feasible method for community-level monitoring of influenza and other respiratory pathogens, which can readily be adapted for use during pandemics.

Nasal Swab Performance by Collection Timing, Procedure, and Method of Transport for Patients with SARS-CoV-2.

The urgent need for large-scale diagnostic testing for SARS-CoV-2 has prompted interest in sample collection methods of sufficient sensitivity to replace nasopharynx (NP) sampling. Nasal swab samples are an attractive alternative; however, previous studies have disagreed over how nasal sampling performs relative to NP sampling. Here, we compared nasal versus NP specimens collected by health care workers in a cohort of individuals clinically suspected of COVID-19 as well as SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcription (RT)-PCR-positive outpatients undergoing follow-up. We compared subjects being seen for initial evaluation versus follow-up, two different nasal swab collection protocols, and three different transport conditions, including traditional viral transport media (VTM) and dry swabs, on 307 total study participants. We compared categorical results and viral loads to those from standard NP swabs collected at the same time from the same patients. All testing was performed by RT-PCR on the Abbott SARS-CoV-2 RealTime emergency use authorization (EUA) (limit of detection [LoD], 100 copies viral genomic RNA/ml transport medium). We found low concordance overall, with Cohen's kappa (κ) of 0.49, with high concordance only for subjects with very high viral loads. We found medium concordance for testing at initial presentation (κ = 0.68) and very low concordance for follow-up testing (κ = 0.27). Finally, we show that previous reports of high concordance may have resulted from measurement using assays with sensitivity of ≥1,000 copies/ml. These findings suggest nasal-swab testing be used for situations in which viral load is expected to be high, as we demonstrate that nasal swab testing is likely to miss patients with low viral loads.

Evaluation of Specimen Types and Saliva Stabilization Solutions for SARS-CoV-2 Testing.

Identifying SARS-CoV-2 infections through aggressive diagnostic testing remains critical to tracking and curbing the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic. Collection of nasopharyngeal swabs (NPS), the preferred sample type for SARS-CoV-2 detection, has become difficult due to the dramatic increase in testing and consequent supply strain. Therefore, alternative specimen types have been investigated that provide similar detection sensitivity with reduced health care exposure and the potential for self-collection. In this study, the detection sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 in nasal swabs (NS) and saliva was compared to that of NPS using matched specimens from two outpatient cohorts in New York State (total n = 463). The first cohort showed only a 5.4% positivity, but the second cohort (n = 227) had a positivity rate of 41%, with sensitivity in NPS, NS, and saliva of 97.9%, 87.1%, and 87.1%, respectively. Whether the reduced sensitivity of NS or saliva is acceptable must be assessed in the settings where they are used. However, we sought to improve on it by validating a method to mix the two sample types, as the combination of nasal swab and saliva resulted in 94.6% SARS-CoV-2 detection sensitivity. Spiking experiments showed that combining them did not adversely affect the detection sensitivity in either. Virus stability in saliva was also investigated, with and without the addition of commercially available stabilizing solutions. The virus was stable in saliva at both 4°C and room temperature for up to 7 days. The addition of stabilizing solutions did not enhance stability and, in some situations, reduced detectable virus levels.

Combined oropharyngeal/nasal swab is equivalent to nasopharyngeal sampling for SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic PCR.

BACKGROUND: Early 2020, a COVID-19 epidemic became a public health emergency of international concern. To address this pandemic broad testing with an easy, comfortable and reliable testing method is of utmost concern. Nasopharyngeal (NP) swab sampling is the reference method though hampered by international supply shortages. A new oropharyngeal/nasal (OP/N) sampling method was investigated using the more readily available throat swab. RESULTS: 35 patients were diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 by means of either NP or OP/N sampling. The paired swabs were both positive in 31 patients. The one patient who tested negative on both NP and OP/N swab on admission, was ultimately diagnosed on bronchoalveolar lavage fluid. A strong correlation was found between the viral RNA loads of the paired swabs (r = 0.76; P < 0.05). The sensitivity of NP and OP/N analysis in hospitalized patients (n = 28) was 89.3% and 92.7% respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates equivalence of NP and OP/N sampling for detection of SARS-CoV-2 by means of rRT-PCR. Sensitivity of both NP and OP/N sampling is very high in hospitalized patients.

How home anterior self-collected nasal swab simplifies SARS-CoV-2 testing: new surveillance horizons in public health and beyond.

The sample collection procedure for SARS-CoV-2 has a strong impact on diagnostic capability, contact tracing approach, ultimately affecting the infection containment performance. This study demonstrates that self-collected nasal-swab has shown to be a valid and well tolerated procedure to SARS-CoV-2 surveillance in a healthcare system. More significantly, no performance adequacy difference was detected in self-administered swabs between healthcare worker (HCW) and non-HCW which allows to speculate that this procedure could be successfully extended to the entire population for mass screening.

Feasibility of a hybrid clinical trial for respiratory virus detection in toddlers during the influenza season.

BACKGROUND: Traditional clinical trials are conducted at investigator sites. Participants must visit healthcare facilities several times for the trial procedures. Decentralized clinical trials offer an interesting alternative. They use telemedicine and other technological solutions (apps, monitoring devices or web platforms) to decrease the number of visits to study sites, minimise the impact on daily routine, and decrease geographical barriers for participants. Not much information is available on the use of decentralization in randomized clinical trials with vaccines. METHODS: A hybrid clinical trial may be assisted by parental recording of symptoms using electronic log diaries in combination with home collected nasal swabs. During two influenza seasons, children aged 12 to 35 months with a history of recurrent acute respiratory infections were recruited in 12 primary health centers of the Valencia Region in Spain. Parents completed a symptom diary through an ad hoc mobile app that subsequently assessed whether it was an acute respiratory infection and requested collection of a nasal swab. Feasibility was measured using the percentage of returned electronic diaries and the validity of nasal swabs collected during the influenza season. Respiratory viruses were detected by real-time PCR. RESULTS: Ninety-nine toddlers were enrolled. Parents completed 10,476 electronic diaries out of the 10,804 requested (97%). The mobile app detected 188 potential acute respiratory infections (ARIs) and requested a nasal swab. In 173 (92%) ARI episodes a swab was taken. 165 (95.4%) of these swabs were collected at home and 144 (87.3%) of them were considered valid for laboratory testing. Overall, 152 (81%) of the ARIs detected in the study had its corresponding valid sample collected. CONCLUSIONS: Hybrid procedures used in this clinical trial with the influenza vaccine in toddlers were considered adequate, as we diagnosed most of the ARI cases on time, and had a valid swab in 81% of the cases. Hybrid clinical trials improve participant adherence to the study procedures and could improve recruitment and quality of life of the participants and the research team by decreasing the number of visits to the investigator site. This report emphasises that the conduct of hybrid CTs is a valid alternative to traditional CTs with vaccines. This hybrid CT achieved high adherence of participant to the study procedures. TRIAL REGISTRATION: 2019-001186-33 (EudraCT).

Correctly performed nasal swabs.

BACKGROUND: As the incidence of new cases of coronavirus disease increased exponentially, the use of viral swabs to collect nasopharyngeal specimens are increasing drastically. Therefore, healthcare workers military staff and uneducated nonprofessional's were ordered to make this swabs. Subsequently case reports reported about basal skull perforation, cerebrospinal fluid fistula and injury due to an incorrect technique. METHODS: Search of the literature. RESULTS: Only in 44% of the videos (Youtube) nasal swabs were correctly performed. Due to an false technique biological sampling resulted in false-negative COVID-19 tests. CONCLUSION: Although professional societies started to report about this unacceptable situation, no publication reported about this health endangerment. In this time of overwhelming information and diversity of opinions, it is necessary to report about this in the hope, all media and TV reports will follow this article to show correctly performed nasal swabs to reduce false-negative COVID-19 tests and injury.