Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the cause of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). Although Real Time Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (qRT-PCR) of respiratory specimens is the gold standard test for detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection, collecting nasopharyngeal swabs causes discomfort to patients and may represent considerable risk for healthcare workers. The use of saliva as a diagnostic sample has several advantages. The aim of this study was to validate the use of saliva as a biological sample for diagnosis of COVID-19. This study was conducted at Infectious Diseases Research Laboratory (LAPI), in Salvador, Brazil. Participants presenting with signs/symptoms suggesting SARS-CoV-2 infection underwent a nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) and/or oropharyngeal swab (OPS), and saliva collection. Saliva samples were diluted in PBS, followed by RNA isolation and RT-Real Time PCR for SARS-CoV-2. Results of conventional vs saliva samples testing were compared. Statistical analyses were performed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences software (SPSS) version 18.0. One hundred fifty-five participants were recruited and samples pairs of NPS/OPS and saliva were collected. The sensitivity and specificity of RT-PCR using saliva samples were 94.4% (95% CI 86.4–97.8) and 97.62% (95% CI 91.7–99.3), respectively. There was an overall high agreement (96.1%) between the two tests. Use of self-collected saliva samples is an easy, convenient, and low-cost alternative to conventional NP swab-based molecular tests. These results may allow a broader use of molecular tests for management of COVID19 pandemic, especially in resources-limited settings.

Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the effect of 0.12% chlorhexidine gluconate on the salivary load of SARS‐CoV‐2.Materials and Methods: A randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trial was performed on 100 participants positive for SARS‐CoV‐2. In the test group (n = 50), volunteers gargled with a mouthwash containing 15 ml of 0.12% chlorhexidine gluconate for 1 min, while the control group (n = 50) used a placebo. Saliva samples were obtained before (baseline) and 5 and 60 min after using the solutions. Real‐time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction assays (qRT‐PCR) were carried out and the cycle threshold (Ct) was computed. The chi‐square test and t‐test were used for group comparison (p ≤ 0.05).Results: The differences in Ct values between the 5‐min evaluation and baseline (test group: 2.19 ± 4.30; control: −0.40 ± 3.87, p = 0.002) and between 60 min and baseline (test group: 2.45 ± 3.88; control: 0.76 ± 4.41, p = 0.05) were significantly greater in the test group, revealing a reduction of viral load. Furthermore, there was a reduction in the load of SARS‐CoV‐2 in 72% of the volunteers using chlorhexidine versus 30% in the control group (p = 0.001).Conclusions: Chlorhexidine gluconate (0.12%) was effective in reducing salivary SARS‐CoV‐2 load for at least 60 min.

In the pandemic, rapid and accurate detection of SARS-CoV-2 is crucial in controlling the outbreak. Recent studies have shown a high detection rate using saliva/oral fluids as specimens for laboratory detection of the virus. We intended to evaluate the test performance of the Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 cartridge assay in comparison to a conventional qRT-PCR testing, using saliva as biological specimen. Forty saliva samples from symptomatic participants were collected. Conventional qRT-PCR was performed for amplification of E and RdRp genes and the Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 assay amplified E and N2 genes. In the conventional assay, the median cycle threshold value of the E gene was 34.9, and of the RdRp gene was 38.3. In the Xpert Xpress assay, the median cycle threshold value of the E gene was 29.7, and of the N2 gene was 31.6. These results can allow a broaden use of molecular tests for management of COVID-19 pandemic, especially in resources-limited settings.

Over-the-counter use of ivermectin amongst other drugs as SARS-CoV-2 treatment has been increasingly common, despite the lack of evidence on its clinical efficacy. To evaluate the effect of ivermectin use on production of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 in health care workers (HCW) diagnosed with COVID-19 and of Th1/Th2 cytokines by stimulated peripheral blood mononuclear cells of the same cohort (PBMCs). This cross-sectional study evaluated seroconversion and neutralizing antibodies production in HCW at Complexo Hospitalar Universitário Professor Edgard Santos (Salvador, Brazil), diagnosed with COVID-19 from May to July, 2020, as well as in vitro production of antibody against SARS-CoV-2 and Th1/Th2 cytokines. Analyses were performed between December 2020 and February 2021. Participants were stratified according to the use of ivermectin (≤ 1 dose vs. multiple doses) for treatment of COVID-19. 45 HCW were included (62% women). Mean age was 39 years, and disease severity was similar across groups. Neutralizing antibodies were detected less frequently in multiple doses (70%) vs. ≤ 1 dose (97%) groups, p = 0.02). PBMCs of patients in multiple doses group also were less likely to produce antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 following in vitro stimulation with purified spike protein in comparison with patients in ≤ 1 dose group (p < 0.001). PBMC´s production of Th1/Th2 cytokines levels was similar across groups. Abdominal pain (15% vs 46%, p = 0.04), diarrhea (21% vs. 55%, p = 0.05) and taste perversion (0% vs. 18%, p = 0.05) were more frequently reported by participants that used multiple doses of ivermectin. Although there was no evidence for differential disease severity upon ivermectin use for treatment of COVID-19 it was associated with more gastro-intestinal side-effects and impairment of anti-SARS-CoV2 antibodies production, in a dose dependent manner. This potentially impacts the effectiveness of immune response and the risk of reinfection and warrants additional studies for clarifying the mechanisms and consequences of such immunomodulatory effects.

Molecular surveillance of the new coronavirus through new genomic sequencing technologies revealed the circulation of important variants of SARS-CoV-2. Sanger sequencing has been useful in identifying important variants of SARS-CoV-2 without the need for whole-genome sequencing. A sequencing protocol was constructed to cover a region of 1000 base pairs, from a 1120 bp product generated after a two-step RT-PCR assay in samples positive for SARS-CoV-2. Consensus sequence construction and mutation identification were performed. Of all 103 samples sequenced, 69 contained relevant variants represented by 20 BA.1, 13 delta, 22 gamma, and 14 zeta, identified between June 2020 and February 2022. All sequences found were aligned with representative sequences of the variants. Using the Sanger sequencing methodology, we were able to develop a more accessible protocol to assist viral surveillance with a more accessible platform.

Omics approaches were extensively applied during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic to understand the disease, identify biomarkers with diagnostic and prognostic value, and discover new molecular targets for medications. COVID-19 continues to challenge the healthcare system as the virus mutates, becoming more transmissible or adept at evading the immune system, causing resurgent epidemic waves over the last few years. In this study, we used saliva from volunteers who were negative and positive for COVID-19 when Omicron and its variants became dominant. We applied a direct solid-phase extraction approach followed by non-target metabolomics analysis to identify potential salivary signatures of hospital-recruited volunteers to establish a model for COVID-19 screening. Our model, which aimed to differentiate COVID-19-positive individuals from controls in a hospital setting, was based on 39 compounds and achieved high sensitivity (85%/100%), specificity (82%/84%), and accuracy (84%/92%) in training and validation sets, respectively. The salivary diagnostic signatures were mainly composed of amino acids and lipids and were related to a heightened innate immune antiviral response and an attenuated inflammatory profile. The higher abundance of thyrotropin-releasing hormone in the COVID-19 positive group highlighted the endocrine imbalance in low-severity disease, as first reported here, underscoring the need for further studies in this area.