SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern Alpha and Delta show increased viral load in saliva

  1. Kylie L. King
  2. Stevin Wilson
  3. Justin M. Napolitano
  4. Keegan J. Sell
  5. Lior Rennert
  6. Christopher L. Parkinson
  7. Delphine Dean

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Higher viral loads in SARS-CoV-2 infections may be linked to more rapid spread of emerging variants of concern (VOC). Rapid detection and isolation of cases with highest viral loads, even in pre- or asymptomatic individuals, is essential for the mitigation of community outbreaks.

Methods and findings

In this study, we analyze Ct values from 1297 SARS-CoV-2 positive patient saliva samples collected at the Clemson University testing lab in upstate South Carolina. Samples were identified as positive using RT-qPCR, and clade information was determined via whole genome sequencing at nearby commercial labs. We also obtained patient-reported information on symptoms and exposures at the time of testing. The lowest Ct values were observed among those infected with Delta (median: 22.61, IQR: 16.72–28.51), followed by Alpha (23.93, 18.36–28.49), Gamma (24.74, 18.84–30.64), and the more historic clade 20G (25.21, 20.50–29.916). There was a statistically significant difference in Ct value between Delta and all other clades (all p.adj<0.01), as well as between Alpha and 20G (p.adj<0.05). Additionally, pre- or asymptomatic patients (n = 1093) showed the same statistical differences between Delta and all other clades (all p.adj<0.01); however, symptomatic patients (n = 167) did not show any significant differences between clades. Our weekly testing strategy ensures that cases are caught earlier in the infection cycle, often before symptoms are present, reducing this sample size in our population.

Conclusions

COVID-19 variants Alpha and Delta have substantially higher viral loads in saliva compared to more historic clades. This trend is especially observed in individuals who are pre- or asymptomatic, which provides evidence supporting higher transmissibility and more rapid spread of emerging variants. Understanding the viral load of variants spreading within a community can inform public policy and clinical decision making.

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1371/journal.pone.0267750
  2. Version published to 10.1101/2022.02.10.22270797v2 on medRxiv
  3. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2022.02.10.22270797: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    EthicsIRB: Ethical review for this study was obtained by the Institutional Review Board of Clemson University.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.

    Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your code and data.

    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.

    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.

  4. Version published to 10.1101/2022.02.10.22270797v1 on medRxiv