Food for thought: Eating before saliva collection and interference with SARS‐CoV‐2 detection
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
Saliva is a promising specimen for the detection of viruses that cause upper respiratory infections including severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) due to its cost‐effectiveness and noninvasive collection. However, together with intrinsic enzymes and oral microbiota, children's unique dietary habits may introduce substances that interfere with diagnostic testing. To determine whether children's dietary choices impact SARS‐CoV‐2 molecular detection in saliva, we performed a diagnostic study that simulates testing of real‐life specimens provided from healthy children ( n = 5) who self‐collected saliva at home before and at 0, 20, and 60 min after eating 20 foods they selected. Each of 72 specimens was split into two volumes and spiked with SARS‐CoV‐2‐negative or SARS‐CoV‐2‐positive clinical standards before side‐by‐side testing by reverse‐transcription polymerase chain reaction matrix‐assisted laser desorption ionization time‐of‐flight (RT‐PCR/MALDI‐TOF) assay. Detection of internal extraction control and SARS‐CoV‐2 nucleic acids was reduced in replicates of saliva collected at 0 min after eating 11 of 20 foods. Interference resolved at 20 and 60 min after eating all foods except hot dogs in one participant. This represented a significant improvement in the detection of nucleic acids compared to saliva collected at 0 min after eating ( p = 0.0005). We demonstrate successful detection of viral nucleic acids in saliva self‐collected by children before and after eating a variety of foods. Fasting is not required before saliva collection for SARS‐CoV‐2 testing by RT‐PCR/MALDI‐TOF, but waiting for 20 min after eating is sufficient for accurate testing. These findings should be considered for SARS‐CoV‐2 testing and broader viral diagnostics in saliva specimens.
Article activity feed
-
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2021.12.09.21267539: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics IRB: Ethics statement: This study was reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board of the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai (HS#21-00670).
Consent: Consent was obtained from at least one parent of each child participant.
Field Sample Permit: Children self-collected specimens in sterile collection devices that have received emergency use authorization (EUA) by the US FDA for at-home saliva collection for SARS-CoV-2 testing.Sex as a biological variable not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Cell Line Authentication Authentication: This method has been validated for clinical testing and has received EUA by the US FDA. Table 2: …
SciScore for 10.1101/2021.12.09.21267539: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics IRB: Ethics statement: This study was reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board of the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai (HS#21-00670).
Consent: Consent was obtained from at least one parent of each child participant.
Field Sample Permit: Children self-collected specimens in sterile collection devices that have received emergency use authorization (EUA) by the US FDA for at-home saliva collection for SARS-CoV-2 testing.Sex as a biological variable not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Cell Line Authentication Authentication: This method has been validated for clinical testing and has received EUA by the US FDA. Table 2: Resources
Software and Algorithms Sentences Resources Statistical analyses and display items: To compare detection frequency results at different timepoints of all saliva specimens tested, normality was assessed by D’Agostino and Pearson test and Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed rank test was performed (GraphPad Prism 9.0.2). GraphPad Prismsuggested: (GraphPad Prism, RRID:SCR_002798)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.
Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.
-
