Discrimination of SARS-CoV-2 Infections From Other Viral Respiratory Infections by Scent Detection Dogs

TY - JOUR

T1 - Discrimination of SARS-CoV-2 Infections From Other Viral Respiratory Infections by Scent Detection Dogs

AU - Ten Hagen, Nele Alexandra

AU - Twele, Friederike

AU - Meller, Sebastian

AU - Jendrny, Paula

AU - Schulz, Claudia

AU - von Köckritz-Blickwede, Maren

AU - Osterhaus, Ab

AU - Ebbers, Hans

AU - Pink, Isabell

AU - Welte, Tobias

AU - Manns, Michael Peter

AU - Illig, Thomas

AU - Fathi, Anahita

AU - Addo, Marylyn Martina

AU - Nitsche, Andreas

AU - Puyskens, Andreas

AU - Michel, Janine

AU - Krause, Eva

AU - Ehmann, Rosina

AU - von Brunn, Albrecht

AU - Ernst, Christiane

AU - Zwirglmaier, Katrin

AU - Wölfel, Roman

AU - Nau, Alexandra

AU - Philipp, Eva

AU - Engels, Michael

AU - Schalke, Esther

AU - Volk, Holger Andreas

N1 - Copyright © 2021 ten Hagen, Twele, Meller, Jendrny, Schulz, von Köckritz-Blickwede, Osterhaus, Ebbers, Pink, Welte, Manns, Illig, Fathi, Addo, Nitsche, Puyskens, Michel, Krause, Ehmann, von Brunn, Ernst, Zwirglmaier, Wölfel, Nau, Philipp, Engels, Schalke and Volk.

PY - 2021

Y1 - 2021

N2 - Background: Testing of possibly infected individuals remains cornerstone of containing the spread of SARS-CoV-2. Detection dogs could contribute to mass screening. Previous research demonstrated canines' ability to detect SARS-CoV-2-infections but has not investigated if dogs can differentiate between COVID-19 and other virus infections. Methods: Twelve dogs were trained to detect SARS-CoV-2 positive samples. Three test scenarios were performed to evaluate their ability to discriminate SARS-CoV-2-infections from viral infections of a different aetiology. Naso- and oropharyngeal swab samples from individuals and samples from cell culture both infected with one of 15 viruses that may cause COVID-19-like symptoms were presented as distractors in a randomised, double-blind study. Dogs were either trained with SARS-CoV-2 positive saliva samples (test scenario I and II) or with supernatant from cell cultures (test scenario III). Results: When using swab samples from individuals infected with viruses other than SARS-CoV-2 as distractors (test scenario I), dogs detected swab samples from SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals with a mean diagnostic sensitivity of 73.8% (95% CI: 66.0-81.7%) and a specificity of 95.1% (95% CI: 92.6-97.7%). In test scenario II and III cell culture supernatant from cells infected with SARS-CoV-2, cells infected with other coronaviruses and non-infected cells were presented. Dogs achieved mean diagnostic sensitivities of 61.2% (95% CI: 50.7-71.6%, test scenario II) and 75.8% (95% CI: 53.0-98.5%, test scenario III), respectively. The diagnostic specificities were 90.9% (95% CI: 87.3-94.6%, test scenario II) and 90.2% (95% CI: 81.1-99.4%, test scenario III), respectively. Conclusion: In all three test scenarios the mean specificities were above 90% which indicates that dogs can distinguish SARS-CoV-2-infections from other viral infections. However, compared to earlier studies our scent dogs achieved lower diagnostic sensitivities. To deploy COVID-19 detection dogs as a reliable screening method it is therefore mandatory to include a variety of samples from different viral respiratory tract infections in dog training to ensure a successful discrimination process.

AB - Background: Testing of possibly infected individuals remains cornerstone of containing the spread of SARS-CoV-2. Detection dogs could contribute to mass screening. Previous research demonstrated canines' ability to detect SARS-CoV-2-infections but has not investigated if dogs can differentiate between COVID-19 and other virus infections. Methods: Twelve dogs were trained to detect SARS-CoV-2 positive samples. Three test scenarios were performed to evaluate their ability to discriminate SARS-CoV-2-infections from viral infections of a different aetiology. Naso- and oropharyngeal swab samples from individuals and samples from cell culture both infected with one of 15 viruses that may cause COVID-19-like symptoms were presented as distractors in a randomised, double-blind study. Dogs were either trained with SARS-CoV-2 positive saliva samples (test scenario I and II) or with supernatant from cell cultures (test scenario III). Results: When using swab samples from individuals infected with viruses other than SARS-CoV-2 as distractors (test scenario I), dogs detected swab samples from SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals with a mean diagnostic sensitivity of 73.8% (95% CI: 66.0-81.7%) and a specificity of 95.1% (95% CI: 92.6-97.7%). In test scenario II and III cell culture supernatant from cells infected with SARS-CoV-2, cells infected with other coronaviruses and non-infected cells were presented. Dogs achieved mean diagnostic sensitivities of 61.2% (95% CI: 50.7-71.6%, test scenario II) and 75.8% (95% CI: 53.0-98.5%, test scenario III), respectively. The diagnostic specificities were 90.9% (95% CI: 87.3-94.6%, test scenario II) and 90.2% (95% CI: 81.1-99.4%, test scenario III), respectively. Conclusion: In all three test scenarios the mean specificities were above 90% which indicates that dogs can distinguish SARS-CoV-2-infections from other viral infections. However, compared to earlier studies our scent dogs achieved lower diagnostic sensitivities. To deploy COVID-19 detection dogs as a reliable screening method it is therefore mandatory to include a variety of samples from different viral respiratory tract infections in dog training to ensure a successful discrimination process.

U2 - 10.3389/fmed.2021.749588

DO - 10.3389/fmed.2021.749588

M3 - SCORING: Journal article

C2 - 34869443

VL - 8

JO - FRONT MED-LAUSANNE

JF - FRONT MED-LAUSANNE

SN - 2296-858X

M1 - 749588

ER -