May viral load detected in saliva in the early stages of infection be a prognostic indicator in COVID-19 patients?

Aydın, Şükrü; Benk, Isilay Gokce; Geçkil, Ayşegül Altıntop

doi:10.1016/j.jviromet.2021.114198

Cited by 15 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Controversy exists regarding the prognostic importance of RT-PCR Ct values. Our results, in accordance with previous reports 21,22,[28][29][30] , suggest that a low Ct value (particularly ≤ 24), which may reflect a higher viral load in swab samples, is associated with a worse prognosis. Contrary results have been published, but it has been proposed that symptom onset could have acted as a confounder 31 .…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

Predictors of poor outcomes in young non-comorbid patients with COVID-19

Martinez-Guerra¹,

Medrano-Borromeo²,

González-Lara³

et al. 2022

RIC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Prognostic factors in previously healthy young patients with COVID-19 remained understudied. Objective: The objective of the study was to identify factors associated with in-hospital death or need for invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) in young (aged ≤ 65 years) and previously healthy patients with COVID-19. Methods: We conducted a prospective cohort study that included patients admitted with COVID-19. The primary outcome was in-hospital death/need for IMV. Secondary outcomes included need for IMV during follow-up, days on IMV, length of stay (LOS), hospital-acquired pneumonia/ventilator-associated pneumonia (HAP/VAP), and pulmonary embolism (PE). Bivariate and multivariate analyses were performed. Results: Among 92 patients, primary outcome occurred in 16 (17%), death in 12 (13%), need for IMV in 16 (17%), HAP/VAP in 7 (8%), and PE in 2 (2%). Median LOS and IMV duration were 7 and 12 days, respectively. Independent associations were found between the primary outcome and male sex (Adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 7.1, 95%CI 1.1-46.0, p < 0.05), D-dimer levels > 1000ng/mL (aOR 9.0, 95%CI 1.6-49.1, p < 0.05), and RT-PCR Ct-value ≤ 24 on initial swab samples (aOR 14.3, 95%CI 2.0-101.5, p < 0.01). Conclusions:In young and non-comorbid COVID-19 patients, male sex, higher levels of D-dimer, and low SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR Ct-value on an initial nasopharyngeal swab were independently associated with increased in-hospital mortality or need for IMV.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

Predictors of poor outcomes in young non-comorbid patients with COVID-19

Martinez-Guerra¹,

Medrano-Borromeo²,

González-Lara³

et al. 2022

RIC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Better detection in later stages was also suggested, as dual testing in both positive and recovering patients may limit the spread from such patients by ensuring an appropriate isolation period (Iwasaki et al, 2020 ; Sahajpal et al, 2021 ). There is a positive correlation between saliva and NPS samples (Aydin et al, 2021 ; Matic et al, 2021 ) with positive percent agreement (PPA) ranging from 66.7% (Ku et al, 2021 ; Senok et al, 2020 ) to 100% (Cassinari et al, 2021 ; Mendoza et al, 2021 ). More concordance was seen for negative results with negative percent agreement (NPA) values at 91.7% (Ku et al, 2021 ), 98% (Paliksa et al, 2021 ; Senok et al, 2020 ), and 100% (Potter et al, 2021 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Saliva as a diagnostic specimen for SARS‐CoV‐2 detection: A scoping review

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives This scoping review aims to summarize the diagnostic value of saliva assessed from current studies that (1) compare its performance in reverse transcriptase‐polymerase chain reaction testing to nasopharyngeal swabs, (2) evaluate its performance in rapid and point‐of‐care COVID‐19 diagnostic tests, and (3) explore its use as a specimen for detecting anti‐SARS‐CoV‐2 antibodies. Materials and Methods A systematic search was performed on the following databases: Medline and Embase (Ovid), World Health Organization, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and Global Health (Ovid) from January 2019 to September 2021. Of the 657 publications identified from the searches, n = 146 articles were included in the final scoping review. Results Our findings showcase that salivary samples exceed nasopharyngeal swabs in detecting SARS‐CoV‐2 using reverse transcriptase‐polymerase chain reaction testing in several studies. A select number of rapid antigen and point‐of‐care tests from the literature were also identified capable of high detection rates using saliva. Moreover, anti‐SARS‐CoV‐2 antibodies have been shown to be detectable in saliva through biochemical assays. Conclusion We highlight the potential of saliva as an all‐rounded specimen in detecting SARS‐CoV‐2. However, future large‐scale clinical studies will be needed to support its widespread use as a non‐invasive clinical specimen for COVID‐19 testing.

show abstract

“…Since its emergence in Wuhan in December 2019, the virus responsible for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has spread globally and become a world-threatening disease ( 1 ). According to the World Health Organization (WHO) report of 7 December 2022, the pandemic has exceeded 640 million cases and 6.6 million deaths worldwide ( 2 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Relevance of TMPRSS2, CD163/CD206, and CD33 in clinical severity stratification of COVID-19

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundApproximately 13.8% and 6.1% of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients require hospitalization and sometimes intensive care unit (ICU) admission, respectively. There is no biomarker to predict which of these patients will develop an aggressive stage that we could improve their quality of life and healthcare management. Our main goal is to include new markers for the classification of COVID-19 patients.MethodsTwo tubes of peripheral blood were collected from a total of 66 (n = 34 mild and n = 32 severe) samples (mean age 52 years). Cytometry analysis was performed using a 15-parameter panel included in the Maxpar® Human Monocyte/Macrophage Phenotyping Panel Kit. Cytometry by time-of-flight mass spectrometry (CyTOF) panel was performed in combination with genetic analysis using TaqMan® probes for ACE2 (rs2285666), MX1 (rs469390), and TMPRSS2 (rs2070788) variants. GemStone™ and OMIQ software were used for cytometry analysis.ResultsThe frequency of CD163+/CD206- population of transitional monocytes (T-Mo) was decreased in the mild group compared to that of the severe one, while T-Mo CD163-/CD206- were increased in the mild group compared to that of the severe one. In addition, we also found differences in CD11b expression in CD14dim monocytes in the severe group, with decreased levels in the female group (p = 0.0412). When comparing mild and severe disease, we also found that CD45- [p = 0.014; odds ratio (OR) = 0.286, 95% CI 0.104–0.787] and CD14dim/CD33+ (p = 0.014; OR = 0.286, 95% CI 0.104–0.787) monocytes were the best options as biomarkers to discriminate between these patient groups. CD33 was also indicated as a good biomarker for patient stratification by the analysis of GemStone™ software. Among genetic markers, we found that G carriers of TMPRSS2 (rs2070788) have an increased risk (p = 0.02; OR = 3.37, 95% CI 1.18–9.60) of severe COVID-19 compared to those with A/A genotype. This strength is further increased when combined with CD45-, T-Mo CD163+/CD206-, and C14dim/CD33+.ConclusionsHere, we report the interesting role of TMPRSS2, CD45-, CD163/CD206, and CD33 in COVID-19 aggressiveness. This strength is reinforced for aggressiveness biomarkers when TMPRSS2 and CD45-, TMPRSS2 and CD163/CD206, and TMPRSS2 and CD14dim/CD33+ are combined.

show abstract

May viral load detected in saliva in the early stages of infection be a prognostic indicator in COVID-19 patients?

Cited by 15 publications

References 33 publications

Predictors of poor outcomes in young non-comorbid patients with COVID-19

Predictors of poor outcomes in young non-comorbid patients with COVID-19

Saliva as a diagnostic specimen for SARS‐CoV‐2 detection: A scoping review

Relevance of TMPRSS2, CD163/CD206, and CD33 in clinical severity stratification of COVID-19

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About