In vitro assessment of the virucidal activity of four mouthwashes containing Cetylpyridinium Chloride, ethanol, zinc and a mix of enzyme and proteins against a human coronavirus

  1. A. Green
  2. G. Roberts
  3. T. Tobery
  4. C. Vincent
  5. M. Barili
  6. C. Jones

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Background

saliva is established to contain high counts SARS-CoV-2 virus and contact with saliva droplets, contaminated surfaces or airborne particles are sources of viral transmission. The generation of infective aerosols during clinical procedures is of particular concern. Therefore, a fuller understanding of the potential of mouthwash to reduce viral counts and modulate the risk of transmission in medical professional and public context is an important research topic.

Method

we determined the virucidal activity of four anti-bacterial mouthwashes against a surrogate for SARS-CoV-2, Human CoV-SARS 229E, using a standard ASTM suspension test, with dilution and contact times applicable to recommended mouthwash use.

Results

the mouthwash formulated with 0.07% Cetylpyridinium Chloride exhibited virucidal effects providing a ≥3.0 log reduction HCoV-229E viral count. Mouthwashes containing 15.7% ethanol, 0.2% zinc sulphate heptahydrate and a mix of enzymes and proteins did not demonstrate substantive virucidal activity in this test.

Conclusion

mouthwash containing 0.07% Cetylpyridinium Chloride warrants further laboratory and clinical assessment to determine their potential benefit in reducing the risk of SARS-CoV-2.

Highlights

SARS-CoV-2 can be transmitted through contact with infective saliva.

Studies are needed to understand if mouthwash can lower SARS-CoV-2 transmission risk.

0.07% Cetylpyridinium Chloride (CPC) mouthwash exhibited virucidal effects against HCoV-SARS 229E.

Further studies on potential of 0.07% CPC mouthwash against SARS-CoV-2 are warranted.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.10.28.359257: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board Statementnot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    Cell Line Authenticationnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Experimental Models: Cell Lines
    SentencesResources
    The host cell line, MRC-5 was obtained from ATCC (#CRL-171) and was maintained as monolayers in growth media containing 4% serum (FBS) at 35 +/- 2°C and 5% CO2 using disposable cell culture labware.
    MRC-5
    suggested: None

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  2. Version published to 10.1101/2020.10.28.359257 on bioRxiv