Prevalence and clinical associations of Anelloviruses and Redondoviruses in respiratory samples from individuals screened for SARS-CoV-2


Abstract

Background: The human virome encompasses both pathogenic and commensal viruses, with small circular DNA viruses such as Anelloviruses and Redondoviruses (ReDoVs) increasingly recognized as stable constituents of the respiratory tract. The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence of Anelloviruses (TTV, TTMV, TTMDV) and ReDoVs in nasopharyngeal samples of individuals screened for SARS-CoV-2, and to evaluate their potential clinical and oral health associations.

Methods: A total of 412 samples were collected from patients referred to health centers affiliated with Iran University of Medical Sciences (IUMS) between March and August 2023. Demographic, clinical, and oral health data were obtained through structured interviews and institutional records. Viral DNA was extracted using the High Pure Viral Nucleic Acid Kit and quantified by NanoDrop spectrophotometry. ReDoVs were amplified by PCR targeting a conserved capsid/Rep intergenic region with specific primers, while Anelloviruses were detected through a two-stage PCR assay with universal and species-specific primers (TTV, TTMV, TTMDV). Amplicons were confirmed by agarose gel electrophoresis, and PCR efficiency was validated by serial dilutions and quantitative assays. Statistical analyses included chi-square, Fisher’s exact test, logistic regression, and ROC curve modeling to assess associations between viral positivity, clinical symptoms, and oral health indicators.

Results: Anelloviruses were prevalent. TTV was detected in 81.6%, TTMV in 47.8%, and TTMDV in 43.9% of samples. ReDoVs were present in 22.1% of individuals, whereas SARS-CoV-2 was detected in 26.5%. No significant associations were found between SARS-CoV-2 positivity and Anellovirus or ReDoV infections. Instead, ReDoV positivity showed a strong correlation with gum problems (p < 0.0001, Cramér’s V = 0.467), and TTMV was similarly associated with gum problems (p = 0.015). Intra-family correlations were notable, with co-detection patterns observed among TTV, TTMV, and TTMDV, as well as between ReDoVs and TTMV/TTMDV. Logistic regression identified fever as a strong predictor of SARS-CoV-2 infection and gum problems as a predictor of ReDoV detection. Models for Anelloviruses lacked predictive power.

Conclusion: These findings highlight the ubiquity of Anelloviruses and the distinct clinical association of ReDoVs with oral health indicators. The results underscore the complexity of the respiratory virome and its potential as a biomarker of host–microbe interactions.

Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.

  • PeerJ does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].