Abstract:The objective of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of the TaqPath reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT‐PCR) COVID‐19 kit in paired nasopharyngeal, saliva, and urine samples, as well as a loop‐mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) SARS‐CoV‐2 laboratory developed test (LDT) in nasopharyngeal samples. Our findings suggest that utilizing saliva samples for RT‐PCR TaqPath and LifeGene‐Biomarks SARS‐CoV‐2 rapid colorimetric LAMP LDT holds promise as an effective alternative method for diagnosing COVID‐19. As the SARS‐CoV‐2 virus spread throughout the world, millions of positive cases of COVID‐19 were registered and, even though there are millions of people already vaccinated against SARS‐CoV‐2, a large part of the global population remains vulnerable to contracting the virus. Massive nasopharyngeal sample collection in Puerto Rico at the beginning of the pandemic was limited by the scarcity of trained personnel and testing sites. To increase SARS‐CoV‐2 molecular testing availability, we evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of self‐collected nasal, saliva, and urine samples using the TaqPath reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT‐PCR) COVID‐19 kit to detect SARS‐CoV‐2. We also created a colorimetric loop‐mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) laboratory developed test (LDT) to detect SARS‐CoV‐2, as another strategy to increase the availability of molecular testing in community‐based laboratories. Automated RNA extraction was performed in the KingFisher Flex instrument, followed by PCR quantification of SARS‐CoV‐2 on the 7500 Fast Dx RT‐PCR using the TaqPath RT‐PCR COVID‐19 molecular test. Data was interpreted by the COVID‐19 Interpretive Software from Applied Biosystems and statistically analyzed with Cohen's kappa coefficient (k). Cohen's kappa coefficient (k) for paired nasal and saliva samples showed moderate agreement (0.52). Saliva samples exhibited a higher viral load. We also observed 90% concordance between LifeGene‐Biomarks' SARS‐CoV‐2 Rapid Colorimetric LAMP LDT and the TaqPath RT‐PCR COVID‐19 test. Our results suggest that self‐collected saliva is superior to nasal and urine samples for COVID‐19 testing. The results also suggest that the colorimetric LAMP LDT is a rapid alternative to RT‐PCR tests for the detection of SARS‐CoV‐2. This test can be easily implemented in clinics, hospitals, the workplace, and at home; optimizing the surveillance and collection process, which helps mitigate global public health and socioeconomic upheaval caused by airborne pandemics.

RT-PCR detection of SARS-CoV-2 in nasopharyngeal and salivary specimens: contribution of alternative collection systems and extraction processes to cope with mass screening. Interpretation of low viral loads

Evaluation of Transport Media and Specimen Transport Conditions for the Detection of SARS-CoV-2 by Use of Real-Time Reverse Transcription-PCR

Evaluation of Self-collected Saliva Samples Without Viral Transport Media for SARS-CoV-2 Testing via RT-PCR and Comparison of Amplicon Sequences Against Commonly Used Primers in Diagnostic Assays

Value of Swab Types and Collection Time on SARS-COV-2 Detection Using RT-PCR Assay.

Analytical and Clinical Validation for RT-qPCR Detection of SARS-CoV-2 Without RNA Extraction

Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in saliva: implications for specimen transport and storage

Evaluation of a saliva molecular point of care for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in ambulatory care

Extraction-Free Testing for SARS-CoV-2 in Nasal Swab and Saliva Samples on a Single High-Throughput Platform

SARS-CoV-2 RNA Testing Using Different Assays-Impact on Testing Strategies in a Clinical Setting

Optimization of SARS-CoV-2 detection by RT-QPCR without RNA extraction

Pre-analytical properties of different respiratory viruses for PCR-based detection: Comparative analysis of sampling devices and sample stabilization solutions

Multicenter comparison of the Cobas 6800 system with the RealStar RT-PCR kit for the detection of SARS-CoV-2

Evaluating and optimizing Acid-pH and Direct Lysis RNA extraction for SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection in whole saliva

Comparison of saliva with oral and nasopharyngeal swabs for SARS‐CoV‐2 detection on various commercial and laboratory‐developed assays

Detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA by direct RT-qPCR on nasopharyngeal specimens without extraction of viral RNA

Quality and composition of archived nucleic acids after use in SARS-CoV-2 molecular testing

Evaluation of Three Automated Extraction Systems for the Detection of SARS-CoV-2 from Clinical Respiratory Specimens

Evaluation of self‐collected nasal, urine, and saliva samples for molecular detection of SARS‐CoV‐2 using an EUA approved RT‐PCR assay and a laboratory developed LAMP SARS‐CoV‐2 test

Optimized qRT-PCR approach for the detection of intra- and extra-cellular SARS-CoV-2 RNAs

The Matrix Effect in the RT-PCR Detection of SARS-CoV-2 Using Saliva without RNA Extraction

Analytical sensitivity and efficiency comparisons of SARS-COV-2 qRT-PCR primer-probe sets