Developed by Shray Alag, The Harker School
Sections: Correlations,
Clinical Trials, and HPO
Navigate: Clinical Trials and HPO
| Name (Synonyms) | Correlation | |
|---|---|---|
| drug1719 | Hesperidin and Diosmin mixture Wiki | 1.00 |
| Name (Synonyms) | Correlation | |
|---|---|---|
| D045169 | Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome NIH | 0.04 |
| D018352 | Coronavirus Infections NIH | 0.04 |
| Name (Synonyms) | Correlation |
|---|
Navigate: Correlations HPO
There is one clinical trial.
Recent literature shows that the sensitivity of the PCR tests for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 using saliva samples is close to that using nasopharyngeal swabs. This type of sampling represents a practical advantage since it can be performed by the patient herself/himself and would thus allow to speed up the collection process. It is also less painful and could prevent the rare lesions to the nasal mucosa that can occur when using nasopharyngeal swabs. Rapid Diagnostic Tests for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 antigens have been developed using nasophayngeal swabs and have shown very high sensitivity against PCR, ranging from 93% to 98% when based on laboratory validation, 80% when based on clinical validation.This method offers the considerable advantage to inform the patient of the test result on site, and allow the provision of appropriate recommendations on the spot of testing. The studies performed so far have been conducted using nasopharyngeal samples only. There are no data with saliva yet. It is expected that the RDT would also work on the saliva. Even if slightly less sensitive due to the fact that it detects antigens and not multiplied RNA as PCR does, RDT on saliva could better serve the public health goal to test widely and quickly and have ultimately more COVID cases detected and isolated, and hence reduced transmission. To investigate the case detection rates of both PCR on saliva and nasopharynx and RDT on nasopharynx and saliva, the patient will be taken four samples, two swabs on saliva, one for RDT and one for PCR, and two swabs on nasopharynx, one for RDT and one for PCR. Patients who have at least one of the common symptoms and who consent to such a procedure will be recruited to compare the four results. The primary objective is to compare the case detection rates for SARS-CoV-2 of the four testing methods (two sampling types and two test types).
Description: Number of SARS-CoV-2 positive patients by sampling type (saliva and nasopharyngeal swab) and analytical method (RDT and PCR)
Measure: Proportion of SARS-CoV-2 positive patients for the two different sampling types (saliva vs nasopharyngeal) and two methods (RDT vs PCR) . Time: 48 hoursDescription: Ct values by PCR in saliva and nasopharyngeal swab
Measure: Viral loads of SARS-CoV-2 by PCR on saliva and nasopharyngeal swabs Time: 48 hoursAlphabetical listing of all HPO terms. Navigate: Correlations Clinical Trials
Data processed on September 26, 2020.
An HTML report was created for each of the unique drugs, MeSH, and HPO terms associated with COVID-19 clinical trials. Each report contains a list of either the drug, the MeSH terms, or the HPO terms. All of the terms in a category are displayed on the left-hand side of the report to enable easy navigation, and the reports contain a list of correlated drugs, MeSH, and HPO terms. Further, all reports contain the details of the clinical trials in which the term is referenced. Every clinical trial report shows the mapped HPO and MeSH terms, which are also hyperlinked. Related HPO terms, with their associated genes, protein mutations, and SNPs are also referenced in the report.
Drug Reports MeSH Reports HPO Reports