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
Comparative Study
. 2021 Sep;93(9):5333-5338.
doi: 10.1002/jmv.27026. Epub 2021 May 3.

Comparison of saliva with oral and nasopharyngeal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 detection on various commercial and laboratory-developed assays

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Comparison of saliva with oral and nasopharyngeal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 detection on various commercial and laboratory-developed assays

Annie-Claude Labbé et al. J Med Virol. 2021 Sep.

Abstract

The accurate laboratory detection of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a crucial element in the fight against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction testing on combined oral and nasopharyngeal swab (ONPS) suffers from several limitations, including the need for qualified personnel, the discomfort caused by invasive nasopharyngeal sample collection, and the possibility of swab and transport media shortage. Testing on saliva would represent an advancement. The aim of this study was to compare the concordance between saliva samples and ONPS for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 on various commercial and laboratory-developed tests (LDT). Individuals were recruited from eight institutions in Quebec, Canada, if they had SARS-CoV-2 RNA detected on a recently collected ONPS, and accepted to provide another ONPS, paired with saliva. Assays available in the different laboratories (Abbott RealTime SARS-CoV-2, Cobas® SARS-CoV-2, Simplexa™ COVID-19 Direct, Allplex™ 2019-nCoV, RIDA®GENE SARS-CoV-2, and an LDT preceded by three different extraction methods) were used to determine the concordance between saliva and ONPS results. Overall, 320 tests were run from a total of 125 saliva and ONPS sample pairs. All assays yielded similar sensitivity when saliva was compared to ONPS, with the exception of one LDT (67% vs. 93%). The mean difference in cycle threshold (∆C t ) was generally (but not significantly) in favor of the ONPS for all nucleic acid amplification tests. The maximum mean ∆​​​​​C t was 2.0, while individual ∆C t varied importantly from -17.5 to 12.4. Saliva seems to be associated with sensitivity similar to ONPS for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 by various assays.

Keywords: RNA extraction; SARS coronavirus; epidemiology; pandemics; research and analysis methods; virus classification.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that there are no conflict of interests.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Chen JH, Yip CC, Poon RW, et al. Evaluating the use of posterior oropharyngeal saliva in a point‐of‐care assay for the detection of SARS‐CoV‐2. Emerg Microbes Infect. 2020;9(1):1356‐1359. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Azzi L, Carcano G, Gianfagna F, et al. Saliva is a reliable tool to detect SARS‐CoV‐2. J Infect. 2020;81(1):e45‐e50. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Xu R, Cui B, Duan X, Zhang P, Zhou X, Yuan Q. Saliva: potential diagnostic value and transmission of 2019‐nCoV. Int J Oral Sci. 2020;12:11. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Butler‐Laporte G, Lawandi A, Schiller I, et al. Comparison of saliva and nasopharyngeal swab nucleic acid amplification testing for detection of SARS‐CoV‐2: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. JAMA Intern Med. 2021;181:353‐360. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Boutin CA, Grandjean‐Lapierre S, Gagnon S, et al. Comparison of SARS‐CoV‐2 detection from combined nasopharyngeal/oropharyngeal swab samples by a laboratory‐developed real‐time RT‐PCR test and the Roche SARS‐CoV‐2 assay on a cobas 8800 instrument. J Clin Virol. 2020;132:104615. - PMC - PubMed

MeSH terms