
==== Front
Sci Rep
Sci Rep
Scientific Reports
2045-2322
Nature Publishing Group UK London

39294156
67504
10.1038/s41598-024-67504-w
Article
Oral SARS-CoV-2 host responses predict the early COVID-19 disease course
Seaman William T. 12
Keener Olive 23
Nanayakkara Dinelka 4
Mollan Katie R. 56
Premkumar Lakshmanane 7
Cuadra Edwing Centeno 7
Jones Corbin D. 58
Pettifor Audrey 56
Bowman Natalie M. 5
UNC OBSc Working GroupBowman Natalie M. 5
Wohl David 11
Wolfgang Matt 12
Markmann Alena 11
Hoffman Erin 13
Kronk Catherine 13
Mitchem Olivia 14
O′Reilly Camille 5
de Silva Aravinda 12
Lovell Will 12
Phillips S. T. 15
Ramsey Kathy 15
Blake Jo-Ann 15
Maile Rob 16

Wang Frank 9
Webster-Cyriaque Jennifer Jennifer.Webster-cyriaque@nih.gov

12510
1 grid.94365.3d 0000 0001 2297 5165 National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD USA
2 https://ror.org/0130frc33 grid.10698.36 0000 0001 2248 3208 Division of Oral and Craniofacial Health Sciences, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC USA
3 https://ror.org/03zbydc22 grid.422778.c 0000 0001 0021 6803 North Carolina School of Math and Science, Durham, NC USA
4 https://ror.org/0130frc33 grid.10698.36 0000 0001 2248 3208 Department of Biostatistics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC USA
5 grid.10698.36 0000000122483208 UNC School of Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 111 Mason Farm Rd, Medical Biomolecular Research Building, Room 2341b, Chapel Hill, NC 27599 USA
6 https://ror.org/0130frc33 grid.10698.36 0000 0001 2248 3208 Department of Epidemiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC USA
7 https://ror.org/0130frc33 grid.10698.36 0000 0001 2248 3208 Department of Microbiology and Immunology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC USA
8 https://ror.org/0130frc33 grid.10698.36 0000 0001 2248 3208 Department of Biology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC USA
9 grid.423394.b Biomedomics Inc, Morrisville, NC USA
10 grid.94365.3d 0000 0001 2297 5165 National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD USA
11 grid.10698.36 0000000122483208 UNC School of Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases, Institute for Global Health and Infectious Diseases, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, USA
12 https://ror.org/0130frc33 grid.10698.36 0000 0001 2248 3208 Microbiology and Immunology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, USA
13 https://ror.org/0130frc33 grid.10698.36 0000 0001 2248 3208 Institute for Global Health and Infectious Diseases, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, USA
14 grid.10698.36 0000000122483208 Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, USA
15 https://ror.org/0130frc33 grid.10698.36 0000 0001 2248 3208 Adams School of Dentistry, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, USA
16 https://ror.org/0130frc33 grid.10698.36 0000 0001 2248 3208 Department of Surgery, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, USA
18 9 2024
18 9 2024
2024
14 217889 7 2023
11 7 2024
© This is a U.S. Government work and not under copyright protection in the US; foreign copyright protection may apply 2024
2024
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Oral fluids provide ready detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and host responses. This study sought to evaluate relationships between oral virus, oral and systemic anti-SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies, and symptoms. Oral fluids (saliva/throat wash (saliva/TW)) and serum were collected from asymptomatic and symptomatic, nasopharyngeal (NP) SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR+ human participants (n = 45). SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR and N-antigen detection by immunoblot and lateral flow assay (LFA) were performed. RT-qPCR for subgenomic RNA (sgRNA) was sequence confirmed. SARS-CoV-2-anti-S protein RBD LFA and ELISA assessed IgM and IgG responses. Structural analysis identified host salivary molecules analogous to SARS-CoV-2-N-antigen. At time of enrollment (baseline, BL), LFA-detected N-antigen in 86% of TW and was immunoblot-confirmed. However, only 3/17 were saliva/TW qPCR+ . Sixty percent of saliva and 83% of TW demonstrated persistent N-antigen at 4 weeks. N-antigen LFA signal in three anti-spike sero-negative participants suggested potential cross-detection of 4 structurally analogous salivary RNA binding proteins (alignment 19–29aa, RMSD 1–1.5 Angstroms). At enrollment, symptomatic participants demonstrated replication-associated sgRNA junctions, were IgG+ (94%/100% in saliva/TW), and IgM+ (63%/54%). At 4 weeks, SARS-CoV-2 IgG (100%/83%) and IgM (80%/67%) persisted. Oral and serum IgG correlated 100% with NP+ PCR status. Cough and fatigue severity (p = 0.010 and 0.018 respectively), and presence of weakness, nausea, and composite upper respiratory symptoms (p = 0.037, 0.005, and 0.017, respectively) were negatively associated with saliva IgM but not TW or serum IgM. Throat wash IgM levels were higher in women compared to men, although the association did not reach statistical significance (median: 290 (female) versus 0.697, p = 0.056). Important to transmission and disease course, oral viral replication and persistence showed clear relationships with select symptoms and early oral IgM responses during early infection. N-antigen cross-reactivity may reflect mimicry of structurally analogous host proteins.

Subject terms

Immunology
Microbiology
Diseases
Pathogenesis
Risk factors
Signs and symptoms
http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100000002 National Institutes of Health NCI U54CA260543-01 http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100019480 North Carolina General Assembly subdivision (23) of Section 3.3 of Session Law 2020-4 National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID)Open access funding provided by the National Institutes of Health

issue-copyright-statement© Springer Nature Limited 2024
==== Body
pmcIntroduction

SARS-CoV-2 emergence became the source of the largest coronavirus-driven pandemic. This positive-strand RNA virus, and COVID-19 etiologic agent, infects and replicates in the upper respiratory tract, respiratory mucosa, oral mucosa and salivary glands1. The presence of Ace2 receptor+ oral cells, SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection, and detection of virus capable of inducing cytoplasmic effect suggests that oral viral replication and production occur1. SARS-CoV-2 was consistently detected in unstimulated whole mouth fluid (WMF), oropharyngeal WMF, and gingival crevicular fluid 2–6. The CDC and the European Center for Disease Prevention and Control recommend nasal/oral swabs or saliva testing7. Nasopharyngeal swab reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (NP-RT-qPCR) is the gold standard for SARS-CoV-2 detection; however, adequacy of harvested material and collection time relative to disease onset can result in low methodologic sensitivity8,9. Meta-analysis demonstrated high concordance, 92.5% (95%CI: 89.5–94.7), between saliva and nasopharyngeal/oropharyngeal swabs (NPS/OPS) with lower sensitivities in saliva than nasopharyngeal/oropharyngeal swabs, 86.5% (95%CI: 83.4–89.1) and 92.0% (95%CI: 89.1–94.2), respectively7.

Cochrane assessment of SARS-CoV2 antigen tests (n = 48), including lateral flow assays (LFA), demonstrated varied sensitivity between symptomatic and asymptomatic participants with highest sensitivity closest to symptom onset10. While LFA-assessed oral SARS-CoV-2-targeted immune responses can reflect systemic responses11, oral biomarkers as prognostic COVID-19 indicators have not been significantly explored. Here, RT-qPCR, LFA, and immunoblot were used for oral (saliva/TW) SARS-CoV-2 detection. Longitudinal assessment of symptomatic participants suggested oral viral persistence. Disease severity and symptoms were associated with oral SARS-CoV-2 host responses and viral presence. Collectively, these findings provide novel insights to oral markers of prognosis, persistence, and transmission.

Materials and methods

Enrollment

A total of 47 participants were assessed May through August of 2020. Inclusion criteria for the symptomatic longitudinal observational cohort (n = 15) required participants to be NP SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR positive. NP+ status was recorded by testing at UNC McClendon Hospital labs. COVID-19+ patients were enrolled within 7 days of their positive NP test after written informed consent and were stratified with mild, moderate or severe symptoms at the time of presentation based on the NIH criteria (NIH COVID-19 treatment guidelines). For the asymptomatic cohort (n = 30), participants were either asymptomatic, anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike seronegative (n = 15) or asymptomatic, SARS-CoV-2 spike seropositive (n = 15). These participants were UNC-affiliated students, staff and faculty who provided written informed consent. Archived, pre-COVID pandemic saliva (n = 5) and throat wash samples (n = 2) from 2014 (UNC IRB study #20-0792) were used as SARS-CoV-2 negative controls. All samples were obtained and stored under IRB approval (Symptomatic participants, UNC IRB study #20-0792; Asymptomatic participants, UNC IRB study #20–1771; Archived, PreCOVID participants, UNC IRB study #07-1431). All experimental protocols used to assess specimens were performed in accordance with approval by the University of North Carolina IRB (Symptomatic participants, UNC IRB study #20-0792; Asymptomatic participants, UNC IRB study #20–1771; Archived, PreCOVID participants, UNC IRB study #07-1431). All methods used to assess specimens were performed in accordance with the relevant guidelines put forth by the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

Biospecimens

For RT-qPCR, saliva and throat wash samples were collected concurrently. The NPS samples were collected in 3 ml of viral transport medium (VTM). Unstimulated whole mouth fluid (WMF) samples (saliva) and throat wash gargle with 10 ml of normal saline (throat wash) were each collected in sterile 50 mL wide-mouthed screw-capped containers. Whole blood samples were collected by venipuncture or finger prick in standard EDTA tubes. The whole blood samples were centrifuged within 24 h of collection at 1600 g for 30 min to separate plasma. Prior to serological testing, all plasma specimens were heat-inactivated at 56 °C for 30 min, mixing the sample by inverting the tube every 5 min. The inactivated samples were centrifuged at 1500 g for 10 min, and the supernatant was aliquoted and stored at − 80 °C until further testing. Samples were collected in the following order: NP, then throat wash, saliva, and blood. Samples were immediately transported for processing where the saliva, throat wash, and blood samples were stored at 4ºC and processed within 24 h. For oral samples, processing include centrifugation at 1000xG for 10 min, supernatant was removed and pellets were stored separately. After processing 1 ml aliquots of samples were stored at -80 °C. Similarly, 1 ml aliquots of archived, preCOVID-19 saliva and throat wash samples have been stored at − 80 °C for > 5 years.

Nucleic acid extraction and RT-qPCR

Saliva and throat wash from COVID-19 patients were used as a source for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA. Trizol (Life Technologies, Carlsbad, CA) was used to inactivate virus and RNA was extracted according to the manufacturer’s instructions. Briefly, 750 µl of Trizol were added to 250 µl of oral fluid (saliva or throat wash). Following chloroform addition and phase separation, the aqueous phase was collected. Glycogen (2 µg) was added to the aqueous phase and RNA was precipitated with isopropanol. RNA pellets were dried and resuspended in water.

RNA was reverse transcribed using Superscript III (Life Technologies) according to the manufacturer’s instructions. First strand synthesis was primed with random hexamers (Life Technologies). First strand synthesis reactions were used in SybrGreen-based qPCR. Three regions of the SARS-CoV-2 genome were targeted using virus-specific primers: WTSorf1F/WTSorf1R, E_Sarbeco_F/E_Sarbeco_R12 and 2019-nCoV_N1-F/2019-nCoV_N1-R13. A standard curve was generated using SARS-CoV-2 reference RNA (ATCC VR-3276SD) for absolute copy number quantitation.

Subgenomic RNA (sgRNA) detection was performed using the forward primer, CoV25UTR (nucleotides 1–25; GenBank:MN908947) with the reverse primers, SRTqPCRR, orf3aRTqPCRR or 2019-nCoV_N1-R . Percent sgRNA was calculated using the equation: 2− (sgRNA Ct − N Ct) × 100 where sgRNA Ct values were signal obtained using the 5’UTR/specific sgRNA primer pair and the N Ct value was signal obtained using the 2019-nCoV_N1-F/2019-nCoV_N1-R primer pair. Following qPCR, reactions from positive wells were removed, treated with ExoSapIt according to the manufacturer’s instructions (USB, Cleveland, Ohio) and Sanger sequencing was performed (Eton Bioscience, Research Triangle Park, NC) using gene-specific primers: SRTqPCRR for SsgRNA , orf3aRTqPCRR for orf3asgRNA or 2019-nCoV_N1-R for NsgRNA.

Ectopic expression of SARS-CoV-2 proteins in transfected oral keratinocytes

Total RNA was isolated from the saliva of SARS-CoV-2 -infected individuals. RT-qPCR was used to amplify cDNA encoding SARS-CoV-2 Spike (S), Envelope (E) or N-antigen. The generated cDNAs were digested with SfiI and SalI and cloned into SfiI/SalI sites of pCMV-myc eukaryotic expression plasmid. Expression in eukaryotic cells would result in the production of viral proteins with an amino-terminal c-myc tag. Immortalized human oral keratinocytes (NOK) were grown in keratinocyte serum-free media (Life Technologies, Carlsbad, CA). Cells were transfected with expression vectors using Fugene-6 (Promega, Madison, WI). Forty-eight hours post transfection, media was removed and subjected to SDS-PAGE and immunoblot analysis to detect myc-tagged proteins.

To obtain lysates from whole saliva, TW or transfected NOK, protein was isolated from the organic phase obtained using Trizol (Life Technologies, Carlsbad, CA) according to the manufacturer’s instructions. Protein was precipitated from half of the organic phase after the addition of 750ul isopropanol and centrifugation at 12,000 X G. Pellets were washed twice with 95% ethanol/0.3 M guanidine-HCl followed by a final wash with 100% ethanol. Each wash was performed for 20 min. Final protein pellets were dried and resuspended in 1X sample buffer (250 mM Tris, 8.0, 2% SDS, 20% glycerol, 50 mM DTT, 0.1% bromophenol blue). Pellets in buffer were incubated at 65° C until dissolved.

Immunoblot analysis of NOK cell lysates and media

Twenty-five micrograms of whole lysate or 10 µl of transfected cell culture media were loaded onto precast NuPage 4–12% Bis–Tris gels (Life Technologies, Carlsbad, CA). Proteins were electroblotted to PVDF membrane using western blot transfer buffer (25 mM Tris, 192 mM glycine, 20% methanol) for 2 h at 200 mamps, constant current. Following transfer, blots were blocked by incubation with 5% nonfat dry milk in 1X PBS containing 0.1% Tween-20 (1X PBS-T) at room temperature. Following blocking, blots were incubated with primary antibody overnight at 4° C. Blots were washed twice with 1X PBS-T followed by incubation with HRP-conjugated secondary antibody (Promega) diluted 1:10,000 in PBS-T, 5% milk for 1 h at room temperature. Blots were washed twice with PBS-T and protein bands were detected by ECL after incubation with ECL Prime (GE Healthcare, Chicago, Il) according to the manufacturer’s instructions. Blots were imaged using a GE ImageQuant LAS4000 system. The following primary antibodies were used to detect proteins on western blots: rabbit anti SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid (PA5-114,448, Life Technologies), mouse anti-c-myc (sc-40, Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Dallas, TX), anti-amylase (A8273, Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO).

Overexpression of His-tagged SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid in E.coli

The NcoI/SalI fragent from pCMV-mycN containing the entire coding region of N was removed and inserted into the NcoI/SalI sites of pET30a. The resulting plasmid, containing the SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid (N) coding region in frame with the 6X histidine tagged coding region of pET30, was used to transform E. coli BL21 (DE3) bacteria. Bacteria with pET30a empty vector were used as a source of negative control his-tagged protein. Bacteria containing pET30a will produce an ~ 9 kD his-tagged protein after induction with IPTG. Single colonies were grown in LB medium containing kanamycin (50 µg/ml) to an OD A600 of 1.0. To induce gene expression, IPTG (1 mM final concentration) was added and cultures were incubated at 30° C for 2 h. Following centrifugation of cultures, bacterial pellets were resuspended in 1 ml NPI-10 (300 mM NaCl, 50 mM sodium phosphate, pH8.0, 10 mM imidazole, 1 mg/ml lysozyme). Lysates were incubated with NTA-Ni agarose beads (Life Technologies) to purify his-tagged proteins. Beads were washed with NPI-20 (300 mM NaCl, 50 mM sodium phosphate, pH8.0, 20 mM imidazole). Protein was eluted by resuspending beads in 250 µl NPI-500 (300 mM NaCl, 50 mM sodium phosphate, pH8.0, 500 mM imidazole). Eluates were subjected to SDS-PAGE followed by Coomassie staining to assess retrieval and protein purity. Protein concentration was determined by Bradford assay.

Lateral flow assay

Detection of SARS-CoV-2 N-antigen or anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein IgG and IgM was accomplished using lateral flow chambers (BioMedomics, Research Triangle Park, NC). For N-antigen 50 µl of sample (saliva or throat wash) was diluted with 50 µl of lysis buffer (supplied by the manufacturer). Samples in lysis buffer were incubated at room temperature. Following incubation, 80 µl of sample was applied to the lateral flow chamber. Bands were visualized and quantitated using ImageJ software. The control band for each detection cartridge was used to normalize antigen-specific band. For detection of anti-spike IgG/IgM, 50 µl of sample (saliva or throat wash) was added directly to the lateral flow chamber. Two drops of COVID-19 IgG/IgM rapid test buffer (supplied by manufacturer) were added and bands were allowed to develop. Control bands were used normalize IgG and IgM intensity. Quantitation was determined relative to signal produced by pre-COVID-19 archived saliva and throat wash samples.

Serology

Serum anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein IgG and IgM were detected by ELISA as previously described 14.

NCBI Structural analysis

The crystal structure of the N-terminal RNA binding domain of SARS-CoV-2 N antigen (PDB ID: 6M3M) was compared to other publicly available crystal structures in the Molecular Modeling Database (MMDB) using Vector Alignment Search Tool (Vast+) within the Domains and Structures module on the National Center for Biotechnology Information website (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov). Vast+ makes geometric structural comparisons between macromolecules in the absence of sequence similarity. The 3D structures of superimposed biological assemblies were visualized using the web-based 3D viewer iCn3D version 4.3.1 to support the visualization style15.

Statistical methods

Throughout, we applied two-sided non-parametric exact tests, each with a 0.05 type I error rate and no adjustment for multiplicity. Associations between ordinal symptom severity and quantitative variables (either N-antigen or antibody level) were evaluated using an exact Kendall rank correlation test. Quantitative variables were compared between two independent groups using an exact Mann–Whitney U test. Within-participant changes in a quantitative variable (N-antigen or antibody level) across two timepoints (baseline vs. day 28) were evaluated using an exact Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Baseline (date of enrollment) measurements were conducted within 7 days of study enrollment (i.e., within one week of the positive NP SARS-CoV-2 test).

Results

Assessment of the SARS-CoV-2 N-antigen lateral flow assay

N-antigen LFA was validated using lysates from immortalized normal oral keratinocytes (NOK) transfected with a myc-tagged SARS-CoV-2 N-antigen expression vector. N-antigen was detected by anti-myc antibody immunoblot (Fig. 1A) or LFA (Fig. 1B). Bacteria-produced, his-tagged N-antigen was purified (Fig. 1C), used for N-LFA quantification, and migrated at 55 KD, matching the predicted molecular weight of SARS-CoV-2 N-antigen, while pET30 vector negative control ran at ~ 9 KD (Fig. 1C). LFA limit of detection was determined using two-fold serial dilutions of preCOVID-19 saliva containing recombinant his-tagged N-antigen at levels ranging from 43 to 680 picograms (pg). A faint band at 85 pg and robust detection > 170 pg demonstrates LFA’s semi-quantitative nature (Fig. 1D). No band was detected in saliva spiked with pET30 recombinant protein, indicating signal specificity. LFA allowed longitudinal detection of N-antigen in saliva from a representative NP-RT-qPCR+ participant at symptom onset 14, and 28 days, suggesting active persistent infection, while signal was undetected in two PreCOVID-19 saliva samples (Fig. 1E).Figure 1 Assessment of Lateral flow assays for detection of SARS-CoV-2 N-antigen and anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike RBD domain targeted antibodies (A) Expression of myc-tagged N-antigen in NOK cells by immunoblot. Vector lane indictates cells transfected with the empty plasmid, pCMV-myc. N-antigen detected with anti-myc antibody is indicated by the arrow. (B) LFA detected N-antigen in the lysates of NOKs transfected with myc-tagged N expression plasmid. Both, control and N-antigen bands, are indicated. Only the control band is detected in lysates from cells transfected with empty vector. (C) Expression and purification of His-tagged SARS-CoV-2 N-antigen in E.coli. A band consistent with the size of N-antigen (55 kD) can be seen in crude lysates from cells transformed with His-tagged, N-antigen expression plasmid. This band is eluted from Ni-beads during purification. His-tagged protein expressed in bacteria transformed with empty vector (pET30) served as a negative control. (D) Dilution series of His-tagged N-antigen in preCOVID-19 saliva and detection using Biomedomics N-antigen LFA. (E) Detection of N-antigen in saliva of preCOVID-19 and symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 NP+ participants at baseline and post baseline 14D and 28D by LFA. The detection of N-antigen band is indicated. (F) Two-fold dilution series of anti-SARS-CoV-2 Spike RBD (S-RBD) domain IgG/IgM antibodies in pre COVID-19 saliva and detection using Biomedomics IgG/IgM lateral flow assay cartridges. Control, anti-S-RBD IgM and S-RBD IgG are indicated. The 0 lane indicates unspiked, preCOVID-19 saliva only. (G) Detection of anti-SARS-CoV-2 Spike RBD (S-RBD) domain IgG/IgM antibodies in pre COVID-19 or a symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 NP+ subject at baseline and post baseline 14D saliva using Biomedomics IgG/IgM lateral flow assay cartridges.

Assessment of the SARS-CoV-2 Anti-Spike RBD IgM/IgG lateral flow assay

Recombinant anti-Spike RBD IgG/IgM in LFA assays detected anti-SARS-CoV-2 Spike-specific IgM and IgG oral immune responses. Two-fold dilution allowed immunoglobulin LFA validation. Mixtures of Spike RBD-specific recombinant human IgM/IgG in preCOVID-19 saliva detected analytical sensitivity down to 0.63 µl for IgM, however, IgG was undetected after a single twofold dilution (Fig. 1F). Archived saliva, spiked with anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody demonstrated IgM signal but not IgG, perhaps reflecting IgM detection of a pre-2019 human coronavirus. Unspiked demonstrated no signal (Fig. 1G). A symptomatic participant demonstrated IgG at baseline and at 14 days but not IgM (Fig. 1G).

Symptomatic and asymptomatic assessment

Ambulatory groups who participated in survey and biospecimen collection were: (1) deidentified-symptomatic, NP-RT-qPCR+ , (2) blinded-asymptomatic seropositive or (3) blinded-asymptomatic seronegative (Fig. 2A). Symptomatic participants (n = 15) were assessed at baseline, 14 and 28 days. The mean age was 40 years with equivalent sex distribution. The cohort was 46.6% White, Non-Hispanic/Latino, 20% Hispanic/Latino, and 6.7% each of Black and Asian participants and 20% missing/unknown (Fig. 2B). RT-qPCR targeted three SARS-CoV-2 genomic regions (orf1, E and N) in saliva/TW. Known amounts of N viral RNA were detected by standard curve, allowing absolute copy number quantification, that was more sensitive than relative quantitation of E/orf1 (Fig. 3F). All full-length and subgenomic (sgRNA) viral RNAs are amplified by 2019-nCoV_N1-F/2019-nCoV_N1-R allowing relative quantitation (Fig. 3A). Reactions containing > 10 copies were consistently reproducible (Fig. 3B, F). PreCOVID-19 saliva/TW RT-qPCR, did not produce signal > 10 copies/reaction. Oral samples containing > 10 copies/reaction were considered SARS-CoV-2 RNA positive. Using these criteria, 59% of saliva samples (10/17) and 64% (9/14) of TW samples from the symptomatic group were SARS-CoV-2 RNA+ (Fig. 3F, G).Figure 2 Study schema and asymptomatic/symptomatic participant demographics. (A) Enrollment inclusion criteria for participants who were COVID-19 negative (n = 15), had asymptomatic COVID-19 (n = 15), or had symptomatic COVID-19 infection (n = 17) are listed within the figure. Subsequent to enrollment, participants answered surveys and provided biospecimens (saliva, TW, serum) that were assessed for SARS-CoV-2 detection and antibody responses. (B) Symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 NP+ and asymptomatic participant demographics are indicated.

Figure 3 Oral virologic characterization of study participants at baseline. All participants were assayed by qPCR for detection of viral RNA in the nasopharynx. Saliva/TW was assayed by qPCR for viral RNA and for LFA-based detection of N-antigen, anti–spike IgG and anti-spike IgM. (A) Oligonucleotide sequences for primers used for RT-qPCR and production of cDNA for construction of expression plasmids. E_Sarbeco_F and E_Sarbeco_R have been described. The sequences of 2019-nCoV_N1-F and 2019-nCoV_N1-R, were obtained from the CDC. The SARS-CoV-2 reference sequence GenBank:MN908947 was used to determine oligonucleotide sequences and map coordinates. SfiI (ggccatggaggcc) and SalI (gtcgac) restriction enzyme sites used for cloning into the expression vector, pCMV-myc, are underlined in expression primers. The start codon and stop codons in expression primers are in bold. (B) Standard curves were generated by RT-qPCR using know copy numbers of SARS-CoV-2 RNA and primers targeting the nucleocapsid (N) coding region to quantitate viral RNA isolated from patient saliva and TW. (C) Immunoblot was used to detect SARS-CoV-2 structural proteins in cell culture media obtained from NOKs transfected with individual expression vectors encoding myc-tagged, SARS-CoV-2 structural proteins (S, E, M and N) or cotranfected with all myc-tagged expression vectors. Medium from cells transfected with empty vector (pCMV-myc) was used as a negative control. Proteins were detected using myc-specific antibody (mouse anti-myc, sc-40, Santa Cruz Biotechnology). (D, E). Protein from subset of saliva and TW samples (respectively) was used for the detection of viral proteins. Immunoblot detection of SARS-CoV-2 N-antigen was assessed in a subset of symptomatic individuals (n = 10) at baseline (top panel) using N-specific antibody (PA5-114,448, LifeTechnologies, Inc). Detection of salivary alpha-amylase (anti-amylase, A8273, Sigma-Aldrich) served as a loading control (bottom panel). Saliva or TW from archived preCOVID-19 patients A and B were included as negative controls. Cell culture medium from NOK cells transfected with myc-tagged SARS-CoV-2 N-antigen expression construct was used as a positive control. Cell culture medium from NOKs transfected with empty vector was included as a negative control. N-antigen was detected at 55 KD and alpha amylase, the loading control, was detected at 58.4 KD. (F, G) Table and graph of symptomatic participants (n = 17) who were all nasopharynx RT-qPCR positive. RT-qPCR and LFA was also performed on saliva and TW of these participants, only RNA was available for participant 0517. Spike ELISA was performed on serum (SER). Viral RNA copy number (molecules of virus RNA) in 25 µl of saliva or TW was determined using N-specific primers. Green highlight indicates a positive result. Red highlight indicates a negative result. ND indicates not determined. (H) Asymptomatic participants (n = 15) were all anti spike IgG positive in their serum. (I) COVID-19 negative participants (n = 15) were anti-spike negative and nasopharynx negative.

Oral N-antigen was assessed by immunoblot. Media from NOKs, transfected with myc-tagged SARS-CoV-2 structural protein expression vectors, was subject to myc-specific immunoblot, demonstrating readily detectable N-antigen. Detection of myc-tagged spike (S) and matrix (M) proteins in the medium depended on N expression suggesting virus-like particle (VLP) production (Fig. 3C). Immunoblot analysis, using a commercially available SARS-CoV-2 N-antigen antibody, detected salivary N-antigen at the expected migration of 55 KD in 10/10 participants assayed, similar to myc-tagged recombinant N-antigen. pCMV-myc transfected cell medium and preCOVID-19 saliva samples, A and B, were negative controls (Fig. 3D). TW immunoblot detected N-antigen in 7/10 participants with 2/7 displaying faint bands (Fig. 3E). The salivary protein, alpha-amylase served as a loading control. The IgG concordance with NP-RT-qPCR+ status was 94% (15/16) in saliva, 92% (12/13) in TW 92% and 100% (15/15) in serum (Fig. 3F,G) while IgM concordance with NP-RT-qPCR+ status was 62.5% (10/16) in saliva, 53.8% (7/13) in TW and 86.7% (13/15) in serum. Mean viral copy number was 4581and 831 in saliva and TW, respectively.

The asymptomatic group (n = 30) was composed of seropositive (n = 15) and seronegative/uninfected (n = 15) participants. The mean age was 44, with 14 males and 16 females and was 72.4% White, 13.8% Asian, 7.0% Hispanic and 3.4% Black and 3.4% Other/multi-racial. Of 15 seropositive participants, only one, subject 8A, was NP-RT-qPCR+ , IgG positive, and IgM positive in the saliva (Fig. 3H). Two others (1A and 4A) within the seropositive-asymptomatic group were LFA positive (Fig. 3H). Among seronegative participants, salivary IgG and IgM were not detected however, 3/7 participants demonstrated N-antigen by LFA (Fig. 3I). To determine potential targets capable of cross-reactive binding, host salivary proteins structurally analogous to N were assessed (Fig. 4). The vector alignment search tool, VAST+ , localized macromolecular structures similar in 3D shape to SARS-CoV-2 N-antigen16. VAST+ detected N-antigen complete or partial matches, that included SARS-CoV-1 and human RNA binding proteins Line1Orf1p, hnRNP H, RBM7, and 17S U2 snRNP. Salivary proteome members RBM7 and 17S U2 snRNP, demonstrated 29aa structural alignment at 1.47 angstroms and 27aa structural alignment at 1.52 angstroms, respectively. Line1ORF1p (19aa at 1.00 angstroms) and hnRNP H (28aa at 1.50 angstroms) have salivary proteome isoforms17. SARS-CoV-1 served as a reference control demonstrating structural alignment of 95aa at 0.58 angstroms (Fig. 4).Figure 4 The SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid mimics host RNA binding proteins that are expressed within the salivary proteome and may be responsible for cross reactivity in LFA assays. VAST+ was used to generate RNA binding protein structures demonstrating 3D similarity to the SARS-CoV-2 N-antigen. Simultaneous alignment generated molecular protein pairs between N-antigen (first column) and host RNA binding proteins (second column). Non-aligned N-antigen amino acids are rendered in green, conserved aligned amino acids are rendered in red and aligned, non-conserved amino acids are rendered in blue. Non-aligned host protein amino acids proteins are rendered in olive green, conserved aligned amino acids are rendered in pink and aligned, non-conserved amino acids are rendered in light blue. The spatial arrangement of overlapping amino acids can be seen in the merged sequence alignment (third column). The number of structurally aligned amino acids (conserved and non-conserved) is shown. The root mean square deviation (RMSD) is used as a measurement between atoms in the backbone of the molecular structures and is listed in angstroms above each merged image and detection of the host protein within the salivary proteome is displayed as yes in the fourth column while detection of a related isoform within the salivary proteome is displayed as ISO.

Detection of sgRNAs, arguably only produced during active viral replication, confirmed TW LFA positivity (Fig. 3, 5F). Detection of overlapping junction sequences between the end of the 5’ UTR and the beginning of the S, orf3a, or N coding regions in oral fluids (schematic, Fig. 5A) was confirmed by direct sequencing of qPCR products shown as qPCR+ /number assayed—20% (n = 2 /10), 82% (n = 9/11), and 27% (n = 3/11) participants, respectively (Figs. 5B-D). No RT-qPCR signal for sgRNAs were detected in preCOVID-19 RNA samples/water negative control. Overall, 90–100%, of those who were RNA+ in oral fluids (saliva/TW) demonstrated orf3a sgRNA (n = 9/10), were LFA N-antigen positive (n = 10/10), immunoblot confirmed, and IgG positive (n = 10/10) (Fig. 3F,G).Figure 5 SARS-CoV-2 subgenomic RNAs (sgRNA) are detected the saliva of symptomatic COCID patients. (A) Schematic diagram showing the RNA genome of SARS-CoV-2 (~ 30 kb) and the subgenomic RNAs encoding major viral structural proteins (S, E, M and N) as well as orf3a. Detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA by RT-qPCR was performed using primer pairs corresponding to orf1 (blue arrows), E (peach arrows) and N (red arrows) coding regions. SgRNA was detected using a forward primer corresponding to the 5’UTR (black arrow) and either S-specific (yellow), orf3a-specific (green) or N-specific (red arrow) reverse primers. The RT-qPCR signal generated with N1 primers (red arrows) were used to calibrate levels of sgRNA. (B, C, D) The percent levels of S, orf3a or N sgRNA determined using the 5’UTR primer and the specific sgRNA reverse primer are shown. Percent sgRNA levels relative to total viral RNA levels are determined as follows: 2^-(sgRNA Ct/N Ct) × 100. Direct sequencing of RT-qPCR amplified products was performed to determine the junction sequence of the 5’UTR and the coding region of each sgRNA. Sequencing information obtained from samples is indicated with an asterisk. The overlap sequence between the 5’UTR and each specific sgRNA is indicated.

Viral metrics in the oral fluids over time and between sexes

LFA test and control band intensity was measured by ImageJ to provide relative measures of N-antigen and immunoglobulin presence in oral fluids and by ELISA for serum (Fig. 6A). While less N-antigen was detected in symptomatic TW at 28 days compared to baseline (relative band intensity (RBI), median difference (28D—Baseline): − 44.604 RBI), this decrease was not statistically significant (Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test, p = 0.875). In the symptomatic group, differences in TW N-antigen were not detected between preCOVID-19 archived saliva vs baseline, (Wilcoxon Rank Sum Test, p = 0.103). (Fig. 6B, 6B supplement). At baseline, 56% of the symptomatic were N-antigen positive in saliva and 91% were N-antigen positive in TW by LFA. Using concurrently collected NP and oral samples NP-RT-qPCR served as the gold standard. LFA assay sensitivity was 0.533 (95% CI, 0.266, 0.787) in saliva and 0.909 (CI, 0.587,0.998) in TW (Fig. 6C). Salivary IgG levels were different between baseline and preCOVID-19 archived samples (Mann–Whitney U test, p = 0.002). Changes over time were not detected in salivary IgM, serum IgG, or serum IgM. (Fig. 6A, 6A Supplement). While sex differences were not detected in oral N-antigen or TW IgG, women appeared to have higher levels of TW IgM than men (median: 290 (female) vs. 0.697 (male), Mann–Whitney U test, p = 0.056) (Fig. 6D).Figure 6 Longitudinal analysis of SARS-CoV-2 N-antigen and anti-SARS-CoV-2 specific IgG/IgM antibodies in oral fluids of infected individuals demonstrates persistence and sex differences (A) Detection of N-antigen in Saliva (Sal), anti-Spike IgG and anti-Spike IgM in Saliva (Sal) and Serum of symptomatic participants, at baseline (BL), 14 days (14D), and 28 days (28D) post baseline compared to preCOVID-19, archived (Pre) TW. (B) LFA detection of N-antigen in TW of symptomatic participants at baseline (BL) and 28 days (28D) post baseline compared to preCOVID-19, archived (Pre) TW. The Mann–Whitney U test assessed difference between preCOVID-19 and baseline and the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test assessed differences between paired baseline and 28-day samples. (C) Saliva and TW N-antigen, anti-Spike IgG and anti-Spike IgM LFA assay sensitivity was determined relative to NP-RT-qPCR+ results in symptomatic participants. (D) Detection of N-antigen in TW, anti-Spike IgG and anti-Spike IgM in TW and Serum of female vs male symptomatic participants at baseline.

SARS-CoV-2 oral outcomes, COVID-19 symptoms and symptom severity, and oral persistence

Self-reported COVID-19 symptom severity at baseline (absent, mild, moderate, or severe) and presence of SARS-CoV-2 oral N-antigen in saliva/TW and antibodies in saliva/TW/serum were assessed. COVID-19 symptom (weakness, muscle ache, nausea, loss of taste/smell and upper respiratory tract symptoms which encompassed cough, shortness of breath, sore throat, nasal obstruction, nasal discharge) presence or absence at baseline was reported by participants as yes/no. Associations between severity of cough (p = 0.010) and fatigue (p = 0.018) with salivary IgM were observed. (Kendall Rank Correlation) (Fig. 7A, B). At baseline, lower levels of salivary IgM were associated with weakness (median: 0 (yes) vs 359 (no) , p = 0.037), nausea (median: 0 (yes) vs 333 (no) , p = 0.005) and upper respiratory symptoms (median: 231 (yes) vs 413 (no), p = 0.017); a clear association was not detected for muscle aches (median: 0 (yes) vs 307 (no), p = 0.084) or loss of taste/smell (median: 0 (yes) vs 299 (no), p = 0.459) (Mann–Whitney U test). Oral N-antigen, oral IgG detection and serum IgG/IgM detection were not associated with COVID-19 symptoms (Mann–Whitney U test) (Fig. 8A). While longitudinal assessment of oral antigen and immunoglobin responses detected no clear directional trends, there was consistent detection of oral IgM, IgG, and oral N-antigen at baseline and over time (n = 15) with increasing serum IgG and static levels of IgM (Fig. 8B).Figure 7 Salivary IgM predicted a more favorable disease course. The relationship between cough and fatigue symptom severity and SARS-CoV-2 protein and anti-spike antibody levels in saliva (Sal) and TW of symptomatic infected individuals was assessed at baseline using LFA. The Kendall Rank Correlation test detected a decreasing relationship between salivary IgM levels and the severity of fatigue and cough.

Figure 8 Salivary IgM was associated with the absence of most symptoms. (A) The relationship between symptom presence (weakness, muscle ache, nausea, loss of taste and smell and upper respiratory symptoms [including cough, shortness of breath, sore throat, nasal obstruction (stuffy nose), nasal discharge [runny nose]) and semi-quantitative SARS-CoV-2 N-antigen in saliva (abbreviated Sal) and TW, and anti-spike antibody levels in saliva (abbreviated Sal), TW, and Serum of symptomatic infected individuals was assessed at baseline as determined by LFA. The Mann–Whitney U test detected a relationship between the absence of symptoms and higher oral IgM levels in saliva. (B) Longitudinal oral virologic characterization of symptomatic participants detects viral persistence with concurrent antibody responses suggesting presentation post-acute infection. Saliva (triangle), TW (square), and Serum (circle) were assayed by LFA for detection of N-antigen (brown), anti –spike IgG (green) and anti-spike IgM (blue) at baseline, 14d and 28d (n = 15).

Discussion

In this study, we consistently detect SARS-CoV-2 antigen and antibody in oral fluids during symptomatic COVID-19. N-antigen detection was immunoblot- and sgRNA-confirmed in NP-RT-qPCR+ participants providing significant implications for oral transmission. SARS-CoV-2-targeted oral IgG responses were highly correlated with nasopharynx positivity and oral N-antigen detection. Salivary IgM levels indicated both symptom presence and severity.

This study, and others, detected salivary SARS-CoV-2 RNA with distinct viral shedding dynamics compared to NP1,18. Prior assessments detected a threefold lower positive detection rate in saliva than NPS18, leading some to question the role of oral virus. Here, cumulative data suggest oropharyngeal viral replication. SARS-CoV-2 was detected in oral fluids from NP-RT-qPCR+ participants using several RT-qPCR-based viral detection methods, (1) three distinct primer pairs targeting 3 regions of the viral genome, (2) absolute RNA copy number determination using a standard curve, and (3) sgRNA, shown to be a marker of active replication during early symptomatic infection19,20. Orf3A sgRNA was detected in 82% of those tested by sgRTqPCR, (fast, sensitive, economically feasible, and reliable) and is a viable marker of viral replication based on its contribution to viral titer and disease in hACE+ mice21. SARS-CoV-2 protein was consistently detected by two distinct methods, LFA and immunoblot. We are unaware of other studies demonstrating immunoblot confirmed viral antigen detection in oral fluids. Importantly, persistent N-antigen detection provides significant implications for continued potential oral transmission (Figs. 3F, 8B).

One critique of rapid LFA was false positives. Here, we detect positive LFA results in two seropositive (1A,4A), and three uninfected participants (16A,17A,18A). During asymptomatic infection it is impossible to determine where participants are in their infection cycle. Seropositive/NP- participants could demonstrate oral infection (1A,4A) or oral infection may subside in seropositive/NP+ (8A). Alternatively, cross-reactive host proteins might be detected. Analysis determined potential cross-reactivity with structurally analogous host RNA binding proteins (Fig. 5). 17S U2 snRNP and RBM7, are salivary proteome members and two others, LINE1 Orf1p and hnRNP H, have salivary proteome isoforms (LINE1 Orfp1 and hnRNP A2/B1, hnRNP M, hnRNPK)22. This raises the possibility that N-antigen-specific LFA can detect conformationally-similar proteins, perhaps reflecting the potential for N-antigen mimicry through RNA binding domains. An example implication is SARS-CoV-2 host genome integration. The LINE1 ORF1p analogue mediates retrotranposable element genome integration23. RNA virus sequences have been detected across vertebrate genomes, with several integration signals consistent with LINE retrotransposon germline integration of viral cDNA copies24. Recently, subgenomic sequences, derived from SARS-CoV-2’s 3’ end, were shown to be integrated into host cell DNA25. Hence, host interactions with N-antigen or similar actions by N-antigen might facilitate SARS-CoV-2 genome integration.

Anti-spike RBD-specific antibodies during natural infection and vaccination were detected in saliva26,27 with temporal kinetics that reflect systemic immune responses. While anti-spike-RBD IgG levels were negatively correlated with salivary viral load in the Silva study28, here in 15/15 symptomatic and 1/1 asymptomatic participants, anti-spike-RBD IgG was 100% positively correlated with SARS-CoV-2 NP-RT-qPCR+ status, and symptomatic individuals consistently demonstrated salivary N-antigen by immunoblot. The NP+ status and saliva IgG relationship was also shown by Pisanic et,al. with IgG positive responses in 24/24 RT-qPCR-confirmed COVID-19 cases11. Together, this suggests that salivary IgG detection indicates concurrent nasopharynx positivity. Detection of simultaneous oral virus and oral host immune responses at baseline suggests a highly infectious pre-symptomatic state followed by concurrent symptoms, persistent oral infection, and virus-targeted host responses.

Oral fluids hold promise as SARS-CoV-2 prognostic indicators. Huang et al. suggested a correlation between salivary viral RNA burden and COVID-19 symptoms, including taste loss1. Others showed positive associations between salivary viral load (VL) and COVID-19-related pro-inflammatory markers; IL-6, IL-18, IL-10, and CXCL1028. Here, oral viral RNA detection did not correlate with COVID-19 symptoms. Relationships between IgG, VL, and disease course were not detected18,29. However, we detected associations between salivary IgM and multiple symptoms including weakness, nausea, and upper respiratory symptoms. Of interest, these trends were not detected in serum IgM in the same participants. Relative IgM levels in saliva were associated with degree of fatigue and cough severity suggesting that oral IgM signifies an active early immune response associated with milder disease course.

Sex differences are detected in COVID-19-related morbidity and mortality 30. Here, sex differences in serological response were detected, with women having numerically higher oral IgM levels than men. Systematic review of sex differences determined that women were less likely to present with severe disease and be admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) than men (OR 0.75 [0.60–0.93] p < 0.001 and OR 0.45 [0.40–0.52] p < 0.001, respectively31. While higher smoking rates and reluctance to seek health care may contribute to male disease, the well-described evolution of greater humoral immunity in females could contribute to these differences32,33. Here, women tended to have higher IgM levels, and individuals with higher IgM demonstrated fewer symptoms, and milder symptom severity. Differences in IgM production may provide biologic underpinning, contributing to the COVID-19-related morbidity and mortality sex gap.

These findings provide novel insights to oral SARS-CoV-2 infection. Oral IgM detection predicted milder disease in terms of symptoms and severity. The potential for cross-detection of N-antigen and structurally similar host RNA binding factors, suggests viral mimicry. Oral persistence has significant implications for viral transmission.

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Information 1.

Supplementary Information 2.

Supplementary Information 3.

Supplementary Information 4.

Supplementary Information 5.

Supplementary Information 6.

Supplementary Information 7.

Supplementary Information 8.

Supplementary Information 9.

Supplementary Information 10.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1038/s41598-024-67504-w.

Acknowledgements

The UNC Delta Core Facility performed sample processing. Biomedomics provide the N-antigen and anti-S-CoV-2 Spike RBD protein IgG/IgM LFA cartridges used in this study. Institutional Review Board numbers associated with samples collected and used in this manuscript. UNC IRB study #20-0792—Sample collection from Symptomatic participants. UNC IRB study #20–1771—Sample collection from Asymptomatic particpants. UNC IRB study #07-1431—Sample collection from Archived, PreCOVID participants.

Author contributions

W.T.S.—Conceptualization, experimental design, methodology, writing, editing, analysis O.K.—quantification of LFA results D.N.—statistical analysis K.R.M.—statistical analysis L.P.—serology, ELISA E.C.C. -serology, ELISA C.D.J.—acquisition of asymptomatic oral and blood samples A.P.—acquisition of asymptomatic oral and blood samples N.M.B—acquisition of symptomatic oral and blood samples UNC OBSc Working Group—acquisition of symptomatic oral and blood samples F.W.—development and design of Sars-CoV-2 N-antigen and anti-spike IgG/IgM LFA J.W–C.—conceptualization, experimental design, writing, reviewing, editing and analysis All authors reviewed the manuscript.

Funding

Open access funding provided by the National Institutes of Health. The work here was supported by NCI U54CA260543-01. This work was supported by the North Carolina Policy Collaboratory through appropriation from the North Carolina General Assembly (NCGA) in support of research on treatment, community testing, and prevention of COVID-19 (as mandated by the NCGA in subdivision (23) of Section  3.3 of Session Law 2020–4). This work was also supported by the Division of Intramural Research, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, NIH.

Data availability

The data supporting the results in this manuscript are available in the manuscript and in the supplementary data files.

Sub-genomic sequencing data supporting the results in this manuscript are available in the supplementary data file, OBSc_subgenomic_sequencing_data.xlsx.

The public available crystal structure of the N-terminal RNA binding domain of SARS-CoV-2 N antigen (PDB ID: 6M3M) was compared to other publicly available crystal structures (PDB ID: 2OG3, structure of the rna binding domain of n protein from SARS coronavirus in cubic crystal form; PDB ID: 5IQQ, Crystal structure of the human RBM7 RRM domain; PDB ID: 6DHS, Structure of hnRNP H qRRM1,2; PDB ID: 6Y5Q, human 17S U2 snRNP; PDB ID: 2W7A, Structure Of The Human Line-1 Orf1p Central Domain) in the Molecular Modeling Database (MMDB) on the National Center for Biotechnology Information website (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov).

Competing interests

Potential conflicts of interest: Frank Wang is employed by BioMedomics, Inc, the manufacturer of the N-antigen and anti-SARS-CoV-2 Spike RBD protein IgG/IgM LFA cartridges used in this study. No other authors declare any conflicts of interest.

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

A list of authors and their affiliations appears at the end of the paper.
==== Refs
References

1. Huang N SARS-CoV-2 infection of the oral cavity and saliva Nat. Med. 2021 27 892 903 10.1038/s41591-021-01296-8 33767405
Huang, N. et al. SARS-CoV-2 infection of the oral cavity and saliva. Nat. Med. 27, 892–903. 10.1038/s41591-021-01296-8 (2021).33767405
2. Kannian, P. et al. in Oral Dis (2021).
3. Chen JH Evaluating the use of posterior oropharyngeal saliva in a point-of-care assay for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 Emerg. Microbes Infect. 2020 9 1356 1359 10.1080/22221751.2020.1775133 32459137
Chen, J. H. et al. Evaluating the use of posterior oropharyngeal saliva in a point-of-care assay for the detection of SARS-CoV-2. Emerg. Microbes Infect. 9, 1356–1359. 10.1080/22221751.2020.1775133 (2020).32459137
4. Azzi L Saliva is a reliable tool to detect SARS-CoV-2 J. Infect. 2020 10.1016/j.jinf.2020.04.005 32579988
Azzi, L. et al. Saliva is a reliable tool to detect SARS-CoV-2. J. Infect.10.1016/j.jinf.2020.04.005 (2020).32579988
5. To KK Temporal profiles of viral load in posterior oropharyngeal saliva samples and serum antibody responses during infection by SARS-CoV-2: An observational cohort study Lancet Infect. Dis. 2020 10.1016/s1473-3099(20)30196-1 32539986
To, K. K. et al. Temporal profiles of viral load in posterior oropharyngeal saliva samples and serum antibody responses during infection by SARS-CoV-2: An observational cohort study. Lancet Infect. Dis.10.1016/s1473-3099(20)30196-1 (2020).32539986
6. Gupta S SARS-CoV-2 detection in gingival crevicular fluid J. Dent. Res. 2021 100 187 193 10.1177/0022034520970536 33138663
Gupta, S. et al. SARS-CoV-2 detection in gingival crevicular fluid. J. Dent. Res. 100, 187–193. 10.1177/0022034520970536 (2021).33138663
7. Ibrahimi N Screening for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR: Saliva or nasopharyngeal swab? Rapid review and meta-analysis PLoS One 2021 16 e0253007 10.1371/journal.pone.0253007 34111196
Ibrahimi, N. et al. Screening for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR: Saliva or nasopharyngeal swab? Rapid review and meta-analysis. PLoS One 16, e0253007. 10.1371/journal.pone.0253007 (2021).34111196
8. Higgins RL Longitudinal SARS-CoV-2 antibody study using the Easy Check COVID-19 IgM/IgG lateral flow assay PLoS One 2021 16 e0247797 10.1371/journal.pone.0247797 33661960
Higgins, R. L. et al. Longitudinal SARS-CoV-2 antibody study using the Easy Check COVID-19 IgM/IgG lateral flow assay. PLoS One 16, e0247797. 10.1371/journal.pone.0247797 (2021).33661960
9. Williams E Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in saliva: implications for specimen transport and storage J. Med. Microbiol. 2021 10.1099/jmm.0.001285 34596013
Williams, E. et al. Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in saliva: implications for specimen transport and storage. J. Med. Microbiol.10.1099/jmm.0.001285 (2021).34596013
10. Dinnes J Rapid, point-of-care antigen and molecular-based tests for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2021 3 CD013705 10.1002/14651858.CD013705.pub2 33760236
Dinnes, J. et al. Rapid, point-of-care antigen and molecular-based tests for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 3, CD013705. 10.1002/14651858.CD013705.pub2 (2021).33760236
11. Pisanic N COVID-19 serology at population scale: SARS-CoV-2-specific antibody responses in Saliva J. Clin. Microbiol. 2020 10.1128/JCM.02204-20 33067270
Pisanic, N. et al. COVID-19 serology at population scale: SARS-CoV-2-specific antibody responses in Saliva. J. Clin. Microbiol.10.1128/JCM.02204-20 (2020).33067270
12. Corman VM Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCR Euro Surveill 2020 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.3.2000045 33243353
Corman, V. M. et al. Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCR. Euro Surveill10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.3.2000045 (2020).33243353
13. CDC. <https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/lab/rt-pcr-panel-primer-probes.html>
14. Premkumar L The receptor binding domain of the viral spike protein is an immunodominant and highly specific target of antibodies in SARS-CoV-2 patients Sci. Immunol. 2020 10.1126/sciimmunol.abc8413 32527802
Premkumar, L. et al. The receptor binding domain of the viral spike protein is an immunodominant and highly specific target of antibodies in SARS-CoV-2 patients. Sci. Immunol.10.1126/sciimmunol.abc8413 (2020).32527802
15. Wang Y Geer LY Chappey C Kans JA Bryant SH Cn3D: sequence and structure views for Entrez Trends Biochem. Sci. 2000 25 300 302 10.1016/s0968-0004(00)01561-9 10838572
Wang, Y., Geer, L. Y., Chappey, C., Kans, J. A. & Bryant, S. H. Cn3D: sequence and structure views for Entrez. Trends Biochem. Sci. 25, 300–302. 10.1016/s0968-0004(00)01561-9 (2000).10838572
16. Madej T Marchler-Bauer A Lanczycki C Zhang D Bryant SH Biological assembly comparison with VAST Methods Mol. Biol. 2020 2112 175 186 10.1007/978-1-0716-0270-6_13 32006286
Madej, T., Marchler-Bauer, A., Lanczycki, C., Zhang, D. & Bryant, S. H. Biological assembly comparison with VAST. Methods Mol. Biol. 2112, 175–186. 10.1007/978-1-0716-0270-6_13 (2020).32006286
17. Lau WW Hardt M Zhang YH Freire M Ruhl S The human salivary proteome wiki: A community-driven research platform J. Dent. Res. 2021 10.1177/00220345211014432 34796774
Lau, W. W., Hardt, M., Zhang, Y. H., Freire, M. & Ruhl, S. The human salivary proteome wiki: A community-driven research platform. J. Dent. Res.10.1177/00220345211014432 (2021).34796774
18. Li L Analysis of viral load in different specimen types and serum antibody levels of COVID-19 patients J. Transl. Med. 2021 19 30 10.1186/s12967-020-02693-2 33413461
Li, L. et al. Analysis of viral load in different specimen types and serum antibody levels of COVID-19 patients. J. Transl. Med. 19, 30. 10.1186/s12967-020-02693-2 (2021).33413461
19. Chen Z Profiling of SARS-CoV-2 subgenomic RNAs in clinical specimens Microbiol. Spectr. 2022 10 e0018222 10.1128/spectrum.00182-22 35311586
Chen, Z. et al. Profiling of SARS-CoV-2 subgenomic RNAs in clinical specimens. Microbiol. Spectr. 10, e0018222. 10.1128/spectrum.00182-22 (2022).35311586
20. Long, S. Correction: Long, S. SARS-CoV-2 Subgenomic RNAs: Characterization, utility, and perspectives. Viruses 2020, 13, 1923. Viruses 14 (2022).10.3390/v14071406
21. Silvas JA Contribution of SARS-CoV-2 accessory proteins to viral pathogenicity in K18 human ACE2 transgenic mice J. Virol. 2021 95 e0040221 10.1128/JVI.00402-21 34133899
Silvas, J. A. et al. Contribution of SARS-CoV-2 accessory proteins to viral pathogenicity in K18 human ACE2 transgenic mice. J. Virol. 95, e0040221. 10.1128/JVI.00402-21 (2021).34133899
22. Lau WW Hardt M Zhang YH Freire M Ruhl S The human salivary proteome wiki: a community-driven research platform J. Dent. Res. 2021 100 1510 1519 10.1177/00220345211014432 34032471
Lau, W. W., Hardt, M., Zhang, Y. H., Freire, M. & Ruhl, S. The human salivary proteome wiki: a community-driven research platform. J. Dent. Res. 100, 1510–1519. 10.1177/00220345211014432 (2021).34032471
23. Huang CR Burns KH Boeke JD Active transposition in genomes Annu. Rev. Genet. 2012 46 651 675 10.1146/annurev-genet-110711-155616 23145912
Huang, C. R., Burns, K. H. & Boeke, J. D. Active transposition in genomes. Annu. Rev. Genet. 46, 651–675. 10.1146/annurev-genet-110711-155616 (2012).23145912
24. Horie M Endogenous non-retroviral RNA virus elements in mammalian genomes Nature 2010 463 84 87 10.1038/nature08695 20054395
Horie, M. et al. Endogenous non-retroviral RNA virus elements in mammalian genomes. Nature 463, 84–87. 10.1038/nature08695 (2010).20054395
25. Zhang L Reverse-transcribed SARS-CoV-2 RNA can integrate into the genome of cultured human cells and can be expressed in patient-derived tissues Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U S A 2021 10.1073/pnas.2105968118 34949638
Zhang, L. et al. Reverse-transcribed SARS-CoV-2 RNA can integrate into the genome of cultured human cells and can be expressed in patient-derived tissues. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U S A10.1073/pnas.2105968118 (2021).34949638
26. Isho B Persistence of serum and saliva antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 spike antigens in COVID-19 patients Sci. Immunol. 2020 10.1126/sciimmunol.abe5511 33033173
Isho, B. et al. Persistence of serum and saliva antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 spike antigens in COVID-19 patients. Sci. Immunol.10.1126/sciimmunol.abe5511 (2020).33033173
27. Ketas TJ Antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines are detectable in Saliva Pathog. Immun. 2021 6 116 134 10.20411/pai.v6i1.441 34136730
Ketas, T. J. et al. Antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines are detectable in Saliva. Pathog. Immun. 6, 116–134. 10.20411/pai.v6i1.441 (2021).34136730
28. Silva J Saliva viral load is a dynamic unifying correlate of COVID-19 severity and mortality medRxiv 2021 10.1101/2021.01.04.21249236 34988559
Silva, J. et al. Saliva viral load is a dynamic unifying correlate of COVID-19 severity and mortality. medRxiv10.1101/2021.01.04.21249236 (2021).34988559
29. Meinberger D Analysis of IgM, IgA, and IgG isotype antibodies Directed against SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein and ORF8 in the course of COVID-19 Sci. Rep. 2021 11 8920 10.1038/s41598-021-88356-8 33903660
Meinberger, D. et al. Analysis of IgM, IgA, and IgG isotype antibodies Directed against SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein and ORF8 in the course of COVID-19. Sci. Rep. 11, 8920. 10.1038/s41598-021-88356-8 (2021).33903660
30. Scully EP Haverfield J Ursin RL Tannenbaum C Klein SL Considering how biological sex impacts immune responses and COVID-19 outcomes Nat. Rev. Immunol. 2020 20 442 447 10.1038/s41577-020-0348-8 32528136
Scully, E. P., Haverfield, J., Ursin, R. L., Tannenbaum, C. & Klein, S. L. Considering how biological sex impacts immune responses and COVID-19 outcomes. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 20, 442–447. 10.1038/s41577-020-0348-8 (2020).32528136
31. Lakbar I Luque-Paz D Mege JL Einav S Leone M COVID-19 gender susceptibility and outcomes: A systematic review PLoS One 2020 15 e0241827 10.1371/journal.pone.0241827 33141872
Lakbar, I., Luque-Paz, D., Mege, J. L., Einav, S. & Leone, M. COVID-19 gender susceptibility and outcomes: A systematic review. PLoS One 15, e0241827. 10.1371/journal.pone.0241827 (2020).33141872
32. Fink AL Klein SL The evolution of greater humoral immunity in females than males: implications for vaccine efficacy Curr. Opin. Physiol. 2018 6 16 20 10.1016/j.cophys.2018.03.010 30320243
Fink, A. L. & Klein, S. L. The evolution of greater humoral immunity in females than males: implications for vaccine efficacy. Curr. Opin. Physiol. 6, 16–20. 10.1016/j.cophys.2018.03.010 (2018).30320243
33. Markle JG Fish EN SeXX matters in immunity Trends Immunol. 2014 35 97 104 10.1016/j.it.2013.10.006 24239225
Markle, J. G. & Fish, E. N. SeXX matters in immunity. Trends Immunol. 35, 97–104. 10.1016/j.it.2013.10.006 (2014).24239225
