Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Apr;82(4):84-123.
doi: 10.1016/j.jinf.2020.11.015. Epub 2020 Nov 17.

Comparison of saliva and nasopharyngeal swab SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR testing in a community setting

Monique Torres  1 , Katherine Collins  1 , Mariah Corbit  1 , Maureen Ramirez  1 , Caroline Riley Winters  1 , Lily Katz  1 , Morgan Ross  1 , Norman Relkin  1 , Wenli Zhou  2
Affiliations

Comparison of saliva and nasopharyngeal swab SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR testing in a community setting

Monique Torres et al. J Infect. 2021 Apr.
No abstract available

Keywords: COVID-19; RT-qPCR; SARS-CoV-2; Saliva; nasopharyngeal.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of Competing Interest None.

Figures

Fig 1:
Fig. 1
Bar graph: The relationship between saliva sensitivity (or positive agreement to NPS) and the NPS Ct range. Saliva sensitivity from left to right: 100% (n = 27), 48.0% (n = 25), and 14.6% (n = 48), corresponding to the NPS Ct range of 26 and lower, between 26 and 33, and higher than 33. After excluding individuals infected longer than 14 days, saliva sensitivity was 86.7% when NPS Ct was 33 and lower (n = 45) (the right most bar). Error bar represents the 95% confidence interval. Pie chart: The composition of symptomatic (orange) and asymptomatic (blue) individuals in the corresponding NPS Ct range. Percentage of symptomatic individuals from left to right: 66.7%, 40.0%, 47.9%, and 53.3%. The lowest NPS Ct group (the left most pie) had a significant number of symptomatic individuals (p = 0.04).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Azzi L, Carcano G, Gianfagna F, Grossi P, Gasperina D D, Genoni A. Saliva is a reliable tool to detect SARS-CoV-2. J Infect. 2020:e45–e50. doi: 10.1016/j.jinf.2020.04.005. doi.org/ - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Iwasaki S, Fujisawa S, Nakakubo S, Kamada K, Yamashita Y, Fukumoto T. Comparison of SARS-CoV-2 detection in nasopharyngeal swab and saliva. J Infect. 2020:e145–e147. doi: 10.1016/j.jinf.2020.05.071. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Wyllie A, Fournier J, Casanovas-Massana A, Campbell M, Tokuyama M, Vijayakumar P. Saliva or nasopharyngeal swab specimens for detection of SARS-CoV-2. N Engl J Med. 2020:1283–1286. doi: 10.1056/NEJMc2016359. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Yokota I, Shane P Y, Okada K, Unoki Y, Yang Y, Inao T. Mass screening of asymptomatic persons for SARS-CoV-2 using saliva. Clin Infect Dis. 2020 doi: 10.1093/cid/ciaa1388. ciaa 1388. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Skolimowska K, Rayment M, Jones R, Madona P, Moore L S P, Randell P. Non-invasive saliva specimens for the diagnosis of COVID-19: caution in mild outpatient cohorts with low prevalence. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2020 doi: 10.1016/j.cmi.2020.07.015. In press. - DOI - PMC - PubMed