Highly sensitive scent-detection of COVID-19 patients in vivo by trained dogs

The science behind the nose: correlating volatile organic compound characterisation with canine biodetection of COVID-19

Background

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic stimulated the advancement and research in the field of canine scent detection of COVID-19 and volatile organic compound (VOC) breath sampling. It remains unclear which VOCs are associated with positive canine alerts. This study aimed to confirm that the training aids used for COVID-19 canine scent detection were indeed releasing discriminant COVID-19 VOCs detectable and identifiable by gas chromatography (GC-MS).

Methods

Inexperienced dogs (two Labradors and one English Springer Spaniel) were trained over 19 weeks to discriminate between COVID-19 infected and uninfected individuals and then independently validated. Getxent tubes, impregnated with the odours from clinical gargle samples, used during the canines' maintenance training process were also analysed using GC-MS.

Results

Three dogs were successfully trained to detect COVID-19. A principal components analysis model was created and confirmed the ability to discriminate between VOCs from positive and negative COVID-19 Getxent tubes with a sensitivity of 78% and a specificity of 77%. Two VOCs were found to be very predictive of positive COVID-19 cases. When comparing the dogs with GC-MS, F1 and Matthew's correlation coefficient, correlation scores of 0.69 and 0.37 were observed, respectively, demonstrating good concordance between the two methods.

Interpretation

This study provides analytical confirmation that canine training aids can be safely and reliably produced with good discrimination between positive samples and negative controls. It is also a further step towards better understanding of canine odour discrimination of COVID-19 as the scent of interest and defining what VOC elements the canines interpret as "essential".

COVID-19 scent dog research highlights and synthesis during the pandemic of December 2019-April 2023

CONTEXT

This review was undertaken to provide information concerning the advancement of research in the area of COVID-19 screening and testing during the worldwide pandemic from December 2019 through April 2023. In this review, we have examined the safety, effectiveness, and practicality of utilizing trained scent dogs in clinical and public situations for COVID-19 screening. Specifically, results of 29 trained scent dog screening peer-reviewed studies were compared with results of real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and rapid antigen (RAG) COVID-19 testing methods.

OBJECTIVES

The review aims to systematically evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of utilizing trained scent dogs in COVID-19 screening.

METHODS

At the time of submission of our earlier review paper in August 2021, we found only four peer-reviewed COVID-19 scent dog papers: three clinical research studies and one preprint perspective paper. In March and April 2023, the first author conducted new literature searches of the MEDLINE/PubMed, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Library websites. Again, the keyword phrases utilized for the searches included "COVID detection dogs," "COVID scent dogs," and "COVID sniffer dogs." The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 Checklist was followed to ensure that our review adhered to evidence-based guidelines for reporting. Utilizing the results of the reviewed papers, we compiled statistics to intercompare and summarize basic information concerning the scent dogs and their training, the populations of the study participants, the types of sampling methods, the comparative tests utilized, and the effectiveness of the scent dog screening.

RESULTS

A total of 8,043 references were identified through our literature search. After removal of duplicates, there were 7,843 references that were screened. Of these, 100 were considered for full-text eligibility, 43 were included for qualitative synthesis, and 29 were utilized for quantitative analysis. The most relevant peer-reviewed COVID-19 scent dog references were identified and categorized. Utilizing all of the scent dog results provided for this review, we found that 92.3 % of the studies reached sensitivities exceeding 80 and 32.0 % of the studies exceeding specificities of 97 %. However, 84.0 % of the studies reported specificities above 90 %. Highlights demonstrating the effectiveness of the scent dogs include: (1) samples of breath, saliva, trachea-bronchial secretions and urine as well as face masks and articles of clothing can be utilized; (2) trained COVID-19 scent dogs can detect presymptomatic and asymptomatic patients; (3) scent dogs can detect new SARS-CoV-2 variants and Long COVID-19; and (4) scent dogs can differentiate SARS-CoV-2 infections from infections with other novel respiratory viruses.

CONCLUSIONS

The effectiveness of the trained scent dog method is comparable to or in some cases superior to the real-time RT-PCR test and the RAG test. Trained scent dogs can be effectively utilized to provide quick (seconds to minutes), nonintrusive, and accurate results in public settings and thus reduce the spread of the COVID-19 virus or other viruses. Finally, scent dog research as described in this paper can serve to increase the medical community's and public's knowledge and acceptance of medical scent dogs as major contributors to global efforts to fight diseases.

The Olfaction Ability of Medical Detection Canine to Detect Prostate Cancer From Urine Samples: Progress Captured in Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

To date, early cancer detection is considered vital to reduce the global cancer burden through low-cost, but accurate screening modalities. The anatomical positioning of prostate cancer (PCa) created a potentially distinctive diagnostic method through the identification of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in urine, which might be detectable not by humans but by canine species. This review aimed to capture the potential of the medical detection canine (MDC) to detect PCa by providing its diagnostic accuracy estimation on urine odor testing.

Methods

Databases, e.g., MEDLINE, Cochrane, ScienceDirect, and ProQuest, were searched to identify the studies. We focused on accessible original research, comparing the diagnostic utility of trained female MDC and histopathology examination as the gold standard for PCa diagnosis. The statistical analysis was performed in Meta-DiSc 1.4 and presented in diagnostic values, i.e., sensitivity (Sn), specificity (Sp), positive or negative likelihood ratio (LR+ or LR-), diagnostic odd ratio (DOR), and area under the curve (AUC) value, to conclude the Sn-Sp in a single outcome.

Results

Female German Shepherds were the most commonly utilized MDC from the five studies included in the final analysis. We estimate the pooled diagnostic value of eight different MDCs, with the findings as follows: Sn (0.95 (0.94 - 0.97)), Sp (0.92 (0.90 - 0.93)), LR+ (4.48 (1.90 - 10.58)), LR- (0.12 (0.01 - 1.42)), DOR (35.39 (2.90 - 432.53)), and an AUC value of 0.9232.

Conclusions

MDC's olfaction ability holds considerable potential on its diagnostic accuracies to distinguish the urine of PCa individuals by identifying its volatilome property.

Sniffing out safety: canine detection and identification of SARS-CoV-2 infection from armpit sweat

Detection dogs were trained to detect SARS-CoV-2 infection based on armpit sweat odor. Sweat samples were collected using cotton pads under the armpits of negative and positive human patients, confirmed by qPCR, for periods of 15-30 min. Multiple hospitals and organizations throughout Belgium participated in this study. The sweat samples were stored at -20°C prior to being used for training purposes. Six dogs were trained under controlled atmosphere conditions for 2-3 months. After training, a 7-day validation period was conducted to assess the dogs' performances. The detection dogs exhibited an overall sensitivity of 81%, specificity of 98%, and an accuracy of 95%. After validation, training continued for 3 months, during which the dogs' performances remained the same. Gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS) analysis revealed a unique sweat scent associated with SARS-CoV-2 positive sweat samples. This scent consisted of a wide variety of volatiles, including breakdown compounds of antiviral fatty acids, skin proteins and neurotransmitters/hormones. An acceptability survey conducted in Belgium demonstrated an overall high acceptability and enthusiasm toward the use of detection dogs for SARS-CoV-2 detection. Compared to qPCR and previous canine studies, the detection dogs have good performances in detecting SARS-CoV-2 infection in humans, using frozen sweat samples from the armpits. As a result, they can be used as an accurate pre-screening tool in various field settings alongside the PCR test.

Canine olfactory detection of SARS-CoV-2-infected humans-a systematic review

PURPOSE

To complement conventional testing methods for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 infections, dogs' olfactory capability for true real-time detection has been investigated worldwide. Diseases produce specific scents in affected individuals via volatile organic compounds. This systematic review evaluates the current evidence for canine olfaction as a reliable coronavirus disease 2019 screening tool.

METHODS

Two independent study quality assessment tools were used: the QUADAS-2 tool for the evaluation of laboratory tests' diagnostic accuracy, designed for systematic reviews, and a general evaluation tool for canine detection studies, adapted to medical detection. Various study design, sample, dog, and olfactory training features were considered as potential confounding factors.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven studies from 15 countries were evaluated. Respectively, four and six studies had a low risk of bias and high quality: the four QUADAS-2 nonbiased studies resulted in ranges of 81%-97% sensitivity and 91%-100% specificity. The six high-quality studies, according to the general evaluation system, revealed ranges of 82%-97% sensitivity and 83%-100% specificity. The other studies contained high bias risks and applicability and/or quality concerns.

CONCLUSIONS

Standardization and certification procedures as used for canine explosives detection are needed for medical detection dogs for the optimal and structured usage of their undoubtful potential.

Sensitivity and specificity of in vivo COVID-19 screening by detection dogs: Results of the C19-Screendog multicenter study

Trained dogs can recognize the volatile organic compounds contained in biological samples of patients with COVID-19 infection. We assessed the sensitivity and specificity of in vivo SARS-CoV-2 screening by trained dogs. We recruited five dog-handler dyads. In the operant conditioning phase, the dogs were taught to distinguish between positive and negative sweat samples collected from volunteers' underarms in polymeric tubes. The conditioning was validated by tests involving 16 positive and 48 negative samples held or worn in such a way that the samples were invisible to the dog and handler. In the screening phase the dogs were led by their handlers to a drive-through facility for in vivo screening of volunteers who had just received a nasopharyngeal swab from nursing staff. Each volunteer who had already swabbed was subsequently tested by two dogs, whose responses were recorded as positive, negative, or inconclusive. The dogs' behavior was constantly monitored for attentiveness and wellbeing. All the dogs passed the conditioning phase, their responses showing a sensitivity of 83-100% and a specificity of 94-100%. The in vivo screening phase involved 1251 subjects, of whom 205 had a COVID-19 positive swab and two dogs per each subject to be screened. Screening sensitivity and specificity were respectively 91.6-97.6% and 96.3-100% when only one dog was involved, whereas combined screening by two dogs provided a higher sensitivity. Dog wellbeing was also analyzed: monitoring of stress and fatigue suggested that the screening activity did not adversely impact the dogs' wellbeing. This work, by screening a large number of subjects, strengthen recent findings that trained dogs can discriminate between COVID-19 infected and healthy human subjects and introduce two novel research aspects: i) assessement of signs of fatigue and stress in dogs during training and testing, and ii) combining screening by two dogs to improve detection sensitivity and specificity. Using some precautions to reduce the risk of infection and spillover, in vivo COVID-19 screening by a dog-handler dyad can be suitable to quickly screen large numbers of people: it is rapid, non-invasive and economical, since it does not involve actual sampling, lab resources or waste management, and is suitable to screen large numbers of people.

Potential for Early Noninvasive COVID-19 Detection Using Electronic-Nose Technologies and Disease-Specific VOC Metabolic Biomarkers

The established efficacy of electronic volatile organic compound (VOC) detection technologies as diagnostic tools for noninvasive early detection of COVID-19 and related coronaviruses has been demonstrated from multiple studies using a variety of experimental and commercial electronic devices capable of detecting precise mixtures of VOC emissions in human breath. The activities of numerous global research teams, developing novel electronic-nose (e-nose) devices and diagnostic methods, have generated empirical laboratory and clinical trial test results based on the detection of different types of host VOC-biomarker metabolites from specific chemical classes. COVID-19-specific volatile biomarkers are derived from disease-induced changes in host metabolic pathways by SARS-CoV-2 viral pathogenesis. The unique mechanisms proposed from recent researchers to explain how COVID-19 causes damage to multiple organ systems throughout the body are associated with unique symptom combinations, cytokine storms and physiological cascades that disrupt normal biochemical processes through gene dysregulation to generate disease-specific VOC metabolites targeted for e-nose detection. This paper reviewed recent methods and applications of e-nose and related VOC-detection devices for early, noninvasive diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infections. In addition, metabolomic (quantitative) COVID-19 disease-specific chemical biomarkers, consisting of host-derived VOCs identified from exhaled breath of patients, were summarized as possible sources of volatile metabolic biomarkers useful for confirming and supporting e-nose diagnoses.

Sniffer dogs performance is stable over time in detecting COVID-19 positive samples and agrees with the rapid antigen test in the field

Rapid antigen diagnostic (RAD) tests have been developed for the identification of the SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, they require nasopharyngeal or nasal swab, which is invasive, uncomfortable, and aerosolising. The use of saliva test was also proposed but has not yet been validated. Trained dogs may efficiently smell the presence of SARS-CoV-2 in biological samples of infected people, but further validation is needed both in laboratory and in field. The present study aimed to (1) assess and validate the stability over a specific time period of COVID-19 detection in humans' armpit sweat by trained dogs thanks to a double-blind laboratory test-retest design, and (2) assess this ability when sniffing people directly. Dogs were not trained to discriminate against other infections. For all dogs (n. 3), the laboratory test on 360 samples yielded 93% sensitivity and 99% specificity, an 88% agreement with the Rt-PCR, and a moderate to strong test-retest correlation. When sniffing people directly (n. 97), dogs' (n. 5) overall sensitivity (89%) and specificity (95%) were significantly above chance level. An almost perfect agreement with RAD results was found (kappa 0.83, SE 0.05, p = 0.001). Therefore, sniffer dogs met appropriate criteria (e.g., repeatability) and WHO's target product profiles for COVID-19 diagnostics and produced very promising results in laboratory and field settings, respectively. These findings support the idea that biodetection dogs could help reduce the spread of the virus in high-risk environments, including airports, schools, and public transport.

In search of COVID-19: The ability of biodetection canines to detect COVID-19 odours from clinical samples

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 continues to be a public health concern and the demand for fast and reliable screening tests remains. SARS-CoV-2 infection in humans generates a specific volatile organic compound signature; this 'volatilome' could be used to deploy highly trained canine scent detection teams if they could reliably detect odours from infected individuals.

METHODS

Two dogs were trained over 19 weeks to discriminate between the odours produced by breath, sweat, and gargle specimens collected from SARS-CoV-2 infected and uninfected individuals. Third party validation was conducted in a randomized double-blinded controlled manner using fresh odours obtained from different patients within 10 days of their first positive SARS-CoV-2 molecular result.

RESULTS

Cumulatively, the dogs completed 299 training sessions on odours from 108 unique participants. Validation was conducted over 2 days with 120 new odours. Twenty-four were odours collected from SARS-CoV-2 positive individuals (8 gargle, 8 sweat, and 8 breath); 21 were from SARS-CoV-2 negative individuals (5 gargle, 8 sweat, and 8 breath) and the remaining 75 were odours that the dogs could have associated with the target odour during training. The dogs were able to identify odours from positive specimens with an overall sensitivity of 100% and a specificity of 87.5%. Considering a community prevalence of 10%, the combined negative predictive value of the dogs was 100% and the positive predictive value was 47.1%.

CONCLUSIONS

Multiple dogs can be trained to accurately detect SARS-CoV-2 positive individuals. Future research is required to determine how and when canine scent detection teams should be deployed.

Canine real-time detection of SARS-CoV-2 infections in the context of a mass screening event

Introduction

Previous research demonstrated that medical scent detection dogs have the ability to distinguish SARS-CoV-2 positive from negative samples with high diagnostic accuracy. To deploy these dogs as a reliable screening method, it is mandatory to examine if canines maintain their high diagnostic accuracy in real-life screening settings. We conducted a study to evaluate the performance of medical scent detection dogs under real-life circumstances.

Methods

Eight dogs were trained to detect SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR-positive samples. Four concerts with a total of 2802 participants were held to evaluate canines’ performance in screening individuals for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Sweat samples were taken from all participants and presented in a line-up setting. In addition, every participant had been tested with a SARS-CoV-2 specific rapid antigen test and a RT-qPCR and they provided information regarding age, sex, vaccination status and medical disease history. The participants’ infection status was unknown at the time of canine testing. Safety measures such as mask wearing and distance keeping were ensured.

Results

The SARS-CoV-2 detection dogs achieved a diagnostic specificity of 99.93% (95% CI 99.74% to 99.99%) and a sensitivity of 81.58% (95% CI 66.58% to 90.78%), respectively. The overall rate of concordant results was 99.68%. The majority of the study population was vaccinated with varying vaccines and vaccination schemes, while several participants had chronic diseases and were under chronic medication. This did not influence dogs’ decisions.

Conclusion

Our results demonstrate that SARS-CoV-2 scent detection dogs achieved high diagnostic accuracy in a real-life scenario. The vaccination status, previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, chronic disease and medication of the participants did not influence the performance of the dogs in detecting the acute infection. This indicates that dogs provide a fast and reliable screening option for public events in which high-throughput screening is required.

The Use and Potential of Biomedical Detection Dogs During a Disease Outbreak

Biomedical detection dogs offer incredible advantages during disease outbreaks that are presently unmatched by current technologies, however, dogs still face hurdles of implementation due to lack of inter-governmental cooperation and acceptance by the public health community. Here, we refine the definition of a biomedical detection dog, discuss the potential applications, capabilities, and limitations of biomedical detection dogs in disease outbreak scenarios, and the safety measures that must be considered before and during deployment. Finally, we provide recommendations on how to address and overcome the barriers to acceptance of biomedical detection dogs through a dedicated research and development investment in olfactory sciences.

Dogs Detecting COVID-19 From Sweat and Saliva of Positive People: A Field Experience in Mexico

Context

Molecular tests are useful in detecting COVID-19, but they are expensive in developing countries. COVID-19-sniffing dogs are an alternative due to their reported sensitivity (>80%) and specificity (>90%). However, most of the published evidence is experimental, and there is a need to determine the performance of the dogs in field conditions. Hence, we aimed to test the sensitivity and specificity of COVID-19-sniffing dogs in the field.

Methods

We trained four dogs with sweat and three dogs with saliva of COVID-19-positive patients, respectively, for 4.5 months. The samples were obtained from a health center in Hermosillo, Sonora, with the restriction to spend 5 min per patient. We calculated sensitivity, specificity, and their 95% confidence intervals (CI).

Results

Two sweat-sniffing dogs reached 76 and 80% sensitivity, with the 95% CI not overlapping the random value of 50%, and 75 and 88% specificity, with the 95% CI not overlapping the 50% value. The 95% CI of the sensitivity and specificity of the other two sweat dogs overlapped the 50% value. Two saliva-sniffing dogs had 70 and 78% sensitivity, and the 95% CI of their sensitivity and specificity did not overlap the 50% value. The 95% CI of the third dog's sensitivity and specificity overlapped the 50% value.

Conclusion

Four of the six dogs were able to detect positive samples of patients with COVID-19, with sensitivity and specificity values significantly different from random in the field. We considered the performance of the dogs promising because it is reasonable to expect that with gauze exposed for a longer time to sweat and saliva of people with COVID-19, their detection capacity would improve. The target is to reach the sensitivity range requested by the World Health Organization for the performance of an antigen test (≥80% sensitivity, ≥97% specificity). If so, dogs could become important allies for the control of the COVID-19 pandemic, especially in developing countries.

Biomedical detection dogs for the identification of SARS-CoV-2 Infections from axillary sweat and breath samples

A PCR test of a nasal swab is still the "gold standard" for detecting a SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, PCR testing could be usefully complemented by non-invasive, fast, reliable, cheap methods for detecting infected individuals in busy areas (e.g. airports and railway stations) or remote areas. Detection of the volatile, semivolatile and non-volatile compound signature of SARS-CoV-2 infection by trained sniffer dogs might meet these requirements. Previous studies have shown that well-trained dogs can detect SARS-CoV-2 in sweat, saliva and urine samples. The objective of the present study was to assess the performance of dogs trained to detect the presence of SARS-CoV-2 in axillary-sweat-stained gauzes and on expired breath trapped in surgical masks. The samples were provided by individuals suffering from mild-to-severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), asymptomatic individuals, and individuals vaccinated against COVID-19. Results: Seven trained dogs tested on 886 presentations of sweat samples from 241 subjects and detected SARS-CoV-2 with a diagnostic sensitivity (relative to the PCR test result) of 89.6% (95% confidence interval (CI): 86.4-92.2%) and a specificity of 83.9% (95% CI: 80.3-87.0%) - even when people with a low viral load were included in the analysis. When considering the 207 presentations of sweat samples from vaccinated individuals, the sensitivity and specificity were respectively 85.7% (95% CI: 68.5-94.3) and 86.0% (95% CI: 80.2-90.3%). The likelihood of a false-positive result was greater in the two weeks immediately after COVID-19 vaccination. Four of the seven dogs also tested on 262 presentations of mask samples from 98 subjects; the diagnostic sensitivity was 83.1% (95% CI: 73.2-89.9) and the specificity was 88.6% (95% CI: 83.3-92.4%). There was no difference (McNemar's test P=0.999) in the dogs' abilities to detect the presence of SARS-CoV-2 in paired samples of sweat-stained gauzes vs. surgical masks worn for only 10 minutes. Conclusion: Our findings confirm the promise of SARS-CoV-2 screening by detection dogs and broaden the method's scope to vaccinated individuals and easy-to-obtain face masks, and suggest that a "dogs + confirmatory rapid antigen detection tests" screening strategy might be worth investigating.

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

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.