Recent anecdotal and scientific reports have provided evidence of a link between COVID-19 and chemosensory impairments such as anosmia. However, these reports have downplayed or failed to distinguish potential effects on taste, ignored chemesthesis, and generally lacked quantitative measurements. Here, we report the development, implementation and initial results of a multi-lingual, international questionnaire to assess self-reported quantity and quality of perception in three distinct chemosensory modalities (smell, taste, and chemesthesis) before and during COVID-19. In the first 11 days after questionnaire launch, 4039 participants (2913 women, 1118 men, 8 other, ages 19-79) reported a COVID-19 diagnosis either via laboratory tests or clinical assessment. Importantly, smell, taste and chemesthetic function were each significantly reduced compared to their status before the disease. Difference scores (maximum possible change ±100) revealed a mean reduction of smell (-79.7 ± 28.7, mean ± SD), taste (-69.0 ± 32.6), and chemesthetic (-37.3 ± 36.2) function during COVID-19. Qualitative changes in olfactory ability (parosmia and phantosmia) were relatively rare and correlated with smell loss. Importantly, perceived nasal obstruction did not account for smell loss. Furthermore, chemosensory impairments were similar between participants in the laboratory test and clinical assessment groups. These results show that COVID-19-associated chemosensory impairment is not limited to smell, but also affects taste and chemesthesis. The multimodal impact of COVID-19 and lack of perceived nasal obstruction suggest that SARS-CoV-2 infection may disrupt sensory-neural mechanisms.

In a preregistered, cross-sectional study we investigated whether olfactory loss is a reliable predictor of COVID-19 using a crowdsourced questionnaire in 23 languages to assess symptoms in individuals self-reporting recent respiratory illness. We quantified changes in chemosensory abilities during the course of the respiratory illness using 0-100 visual analog scales (VAS) for participants reporting a positive (C19+; n=4148) or negative (C19-; n=546) COVID-19 laboratory test outcome. Logistic regression models identified univariate and multivariate predictors of COVID-19 status and post-COVID-19 olfactory recovery. Both C19+ and C19- groups exhibited smell loss, but it was significantly larger in C19+ participants (mean±SD, C19+: -82.5±27.2 points; C19-: -59.8±37.7). Smell loss during illness was the best predictor of COVID-19 in both univariate and multivariate models (ROC AUC=0.72). Additional variables provide negligible model improvement. VAS ratings of smell loss were more predictive than binary chemosensory yes/no-questions or other cardinal symptoms (e.g., fever). Olfactory recovery within 40 days of respiratory symptom onset was reported for ~50% of participants and was best predicted by time since respiratory symptom onset. We find that quantified smell loss is the best predictor of COVID-19 amongst those with symptoms of respiratory illness. To aid clinicians and contact tracers in identifying individuals with a high likelihood of having COVID-19, we propose a novel 0-10 scale to screen for recent olfactory loss, the ODoR-19. We find that numeric ratings ≤2 indicate high odds of symptomatic COVID-19 (4<OR<10). Once independently validated, this tool could be deployed when viral lab tests are impractical or unavailable.

Chemosensory function, burning sensations in the tongue (BST), halitosis, saliva secretion, and oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) were investigated in patients with primary Sjögren's syndrome (pSS). In 31 patients with pSS and 33 controls, olfactory and gustatory functions were evaluated. Self-reported complaints of dysgeusia, BST, and halitosis were recorded. Saliva secretion rates were measured and OHRQoL was assessed using the short-form Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-14). Patients had significantly lower olfactory (8.8 ± 3.5 vs. 10.7 ± 1.2) and gustatory (18.9 ± 7.1 vs. 25.4 ± 4.3) scores than controls, and significantly more patients complained of dysgeusia (58.1% vs. 0%), BST (54.8% vs. 6.1%), and halitosis (41.9% vs. 0%). A significantly greater proportion of patients with pSS had ageusia (19% vs. 0%), hypogeusia (32% vs. 12%), anosmia (13% vs. 0%), or hyposmia (29% vs. 9%). Significantly lower saliva secretion rates (ml min ) were observed in patients with pSS for stimulated (0.62 ± 0.40 vs. 1.57 ± 0.71) and unstimulated (0.08 ± 0.07 vs. 0.29 ± 0.17) saliva. The mean OHIP-14 score was significantly higher in patients with pSS (16.2 ± 10.8 vs. 2.7 ± 3.1) and was positively correlated with dysgeusia, BST, and halitosis. In conclusion, patients with pSS reported higher occurrence of dysgeusia, BST, and halitosis, and demonstrated relatively impaired chemosensory and salivary functions. The patients' poorer OHRQoL was associated with dysgeusia, BST, and halitosis.

Investigating cytokines in tear fluid and saliva may offer valuable information for understanding the pathogenesis of primary Sjögren’s syndrome (pSS). Cytokine profiles in both tear fluid and saliva of pSS patients, non-Sjögren’s syndrome (non-SS) subjects with sicca symptoms, and healthy controls without sicca complaints were analysed. Furthermore, relationships associating the severity of clinical ocular and oral manifestations with the upregulated cytokines were assessed. In tear fluid, pSS patients showed elevated levels of IL-1ra, IL-2, IL-4, IL-8, IL-12p70, IL-17A, IFN-γ, IP-10, MIP-1b, and Rantes compared to non-SS subjects and healthy controls. The increased cytokine levels (except IP-10) correlated significantly with reduced tear production, less stable tear film, and greater ocular surface damage. In saliva, pSS patients had a higher IP-10 level, which correlated with higher candida score; and an elevated MIP-1a level, which correlated significantly with lower unstimulated and stimulated whole saliva secretion rates. The upregulated cytokines identified in tear fluid and saliva of pSS patients show a clear interplay between innate and adaptive immune responses that may contribute to disease pathogenesis. The increase of IP-10 and MIP in both tears and saliva further emphasises the essential role of macrophages and innate immunity in pSS.

Background: COVID-19 has heterogeneous manifestations, though one of the most common symptoms is a sudden loss of smell (anosmia or hyposmia). We investigated whether olfactory loss is a reliable predictor of COVID-19. Methods: This preregistered, cross-sectional study used a crowdsourced questionnaire in 23 languages to assess symptoms in individuals self-reporting recent respiratory illness. We quantified changes in chemosensory abilities during the course of the respiratory illness using 0-100 visual analog scales (VAS) for participants reporting a positive (C19+; n=4148) or negative (C19-; n=546) COVID-19 laboratory test outcome. Logistic regression models identified singular and cumulative predictors of COVID-19 status and post-COVID-19 olfactory recovery. Results: Both C19+ and C19- groups exhibited smell loss, but it was significantly larger in C19+ participants (mean±SD, C19+: -82.5±27.2 points; C19-: -59.8±37.7). Smell loss during illness was the best predictor of COVID-19 in both single and cumulative feature models (ROC AUC=0.72), with additional features providing no significant model improvement. VAS ratings of smell loss were more predictive than binary chemosensory yes/no-questions or other cardinal symptoms, such as fever or cough. Olfactory recovery within 40 days was reported for ~50% of participants and was best predicted by time since illness onset. Conclusions: As smell loss is the best predictor of COVID-19, we developed the ODoR-19 tool, a 0-10 scale to screen for recent olfactory loss. Numeric ratings ≤2 indicate high odds of symptomatic COVID-19 (10<OR<4), especially when viral lab tests are impractical or unavailable.