Pooling saliva samples as an excellent option to increase the surveillance for SARS-CoV-2 when re-opening community settings

PLoS One. 2022 Jan 25;17(1):e0263114. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0263114. eCollection 2022.

Abstract

In many countries a second wave of infections caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has occurred, triggering a shortage of reagents needed for diagnosis and compromising the capacity of laboratory testing. There is an urgent need to develop methods to accelerate the diagnostic procedures. Pooling samples represents a strategy to overcome the shortage of reagents, since several samples can be tested using one reaction, significantly increasing the number and speed with which tests can be carried out. We have reported the feasibility to use a direct lysis procedure of saliva as source for RNA to SARS-CoV-2 genome detection by reverse transcription quantitative-PCR (RT-qPCR). Here, we show that the direct lysis of saliva pools, of either five or ten samples, does not compromise the detection of viral RNA. In addition, it is a sensitive, fast, and inexpensive method that can be used for massive screening, especially considering the proximity of the reincorporation of activities in universities, offices, and schools.

Publication types

  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • COVID-19 / diagnosis*
  • COVID-19 / epidemiology
  • COVID-19 / prevention & control
  • COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing / methods*
  • COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing / standards
  • Humans
  • Mass Screening / methods
  • Mass Screening / standards
  • Quarantine / standards
  • SARS-CoV-2 / genetics
  • SARS-CoV-2 / isolation & purification
  • SARS-CoV-2 / pathogenicity
  • Saliva / virology*
  • Sensitivity and Specificity

Grants and funding

Part of the reagents used in this study were provided by the Instituto Nacional de Diagnóstico y Referencia Epidemiológica, supported by INSABI. This work was supported by grant 314343 from CONACyT to SL. JMC was a recipient of a scholarship from CONACyT. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.