Identifying SARS-CoV-2 infections through aggressive diagnostic testing remains critical in tracking and curbing the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic. Collection of nasopharyngeal swabs (NPS), the preferred sample type for SARS-CoV-2 detection, has become difficult due to the dramatic increase in testing and consequential supply strain. Therefore, alternative specimen types have been investigated, that provide similar detection sensitivity with reduced health care exposure and potential for self-collection. In this study, the detection sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 in nasal swabs (NS) and saliva was compared to that of NPS, using matched specimens from two outpatient cohorts in New York State (total n = 463). The first cohort showed only a 5.4% positivity but the second cohort (n=227) had a positivity rate of 41%, with sensitivity in NPS, NS and saliva of 97.9%, 87.1%, and 87.1%, respectively. Whether the reduced sensitivity of NS or saliva is acceptable must be assessed in the settings where they are used. However, we sought to improve on it by validating a method to mix the two sample types, as the combination of nasal swab and saliva resulted in 94.6% SARS-CoV-2 detection sensitivity. Spiking experiments showed that combining them did not adversely affect the detection sensitivity in either. Virus stability in saliva was also investigated, with and without the addition of commercially available stabilizing solutions. The virus was stable in saliva at both 4°C and room temperature for up to 7 days. The addition of stabilizing solutions did not enhance stability and in some situations reduced detectable virus levels.

Identifying SARS-CoV-2 infections through aggressive diagnostic testing remains critical in tracking and curbing the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic. Collection of nasopharyngeal swabs (NPS), the preferred sample type for SARS-CoV-2 detection, has become difficult due to the dramatic increase in testing and consequential supply strain. Therefore, alternative specimen types have been investigated, that provide similar detection sensitivity with reduced health care exposure and potential for self-collection. In this study, the detection sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 in nasal swabs (NS) and saliva was compared to that of NPS, using matched specimens from two outpatient cohorts in New York State (total n = 463). The first cohort showed only a 5.4% positivity but the second cohort (n=227) had a positivity rate of 41%, with sensitivity in NPS, NS and saliva of 97.9%, 87.1%, and 87.1%, respectively. Whether the reduced sensitivity of NS or saliva is acceptable must be assessed in the settings where they are used. However, we sought to improve on it by validating a method to mix the two sample types, as the combination of nasal swab and saliva resulted in 94.6% SARS-CoV-2 detection sensitivity. Spiking experiments showed that combining them did not adversely affect the detection sensitivity in either. Virus stability in saliva was also investigated, with and without the addition of commercially available stabilizing solutions. The virus was stable in saliva at both 4C and room temperature for up to 7 days. The addition of stabilizing solutions did not enhance stability and in some situations reduced detectable virus levels.

Currently, the gold standard method for active botulinum neurotoxin (BoNT) detection is the mouse bioassay (MBA). A Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-developed mass spectrometry (MS)-based assay that detects active BoNT was successfully validated and implemented in a public health laboratory in clinical matrices using the Bruker MALDI-TOF MS (Matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization–time of flight mass spectrometry) Biotyper. For the first time, a direct comparison with the MBA was performed to determine MS-based assay sensitivity using the Bruker MALDI Biotyper. Mice were injected with BoNT/A, /B, /E, and /F at concentrations surrounding the established MS assay limit of detection (LOD) and analyzed simultaneously. For BoNT/B, /E, and /F, MS assay sensitivity was equivalent or better than the MBA at 25, 0.3, and 8.8 mLD50, respectively. BoNT/A was detected by the MBA between 1.8 and 18 mLD50, somewhat more sensitive than the MS method of 18 mLD50. Studies were performed to compare assay performance in clinical specimens. For all tested specimens, the MS method rapidly detected BoNT activity and serotype in agreement with, or in the absence of, results from the MBA. We demonstrate that the MS assay can generate reliable, rapid results while eliminating the need for animal testing.