Search

People often confuse smell loss with taste loss, so it is unclear how much gustatory function is reduced in patients self-reporting taste loss. Our pre-registered cross-sectional study design included an online survey in 12 languages with instructions for self-administering chemosensory tests with 10 household items. Between June 2020 and March 2021, 10,953 individuals participated. Of these, 5,225 self-reported a respiratory illness and were grouped based on their reported COVID test results: COVID-positive (COVID+, N = 3,356), COVID-negative (COVID−, N = 602), and COVID unknown for those waiting for a test result (COVID?, N = 1,267). The participants who reported no respiratory illness were grouped by symptoms: sudden smell/taste changes (STC, N = 4,445), other symptoms excluding smell or taste changes (OthS, N = 832), and no symptoms (NoS, N = 416). Taste, smell, and oral irritation intensities and self-assessed abilities were rated on visual analog scales. Compared to the NoS group, COVID+ was associated with a 21% reduction in taste (95% confidence interval (CI): 15–28%), 47% in smell (95% CI: 37–56%), and 17% in oral irritation (95% CI: 10–25%) intensity. There were medium to strong correlations between perceived intensities and self-reported abilities (r = 0.84 for smell, r = 0.68 for taste, and r = 0.37 for oral irritation). Our study demonstrates that COVID-19-positive individuals report taste dysfunction when self-tested with stimuli that have little to none olfactory components. Assessing the smell and taste intensity of household items is a promising, cost-effective screening tool that complements self-reports and may help to disentangle taste loss from smell loss. However, it does not replace standardized validated psychophysical tests. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Functional connectivity approaches have long been used in cognitive neuroscience to establish pathways of communication between and among brain regions. However, the use of these analyses to better understand how the brain processes chemosensory information remains nascent. In this review, we conduct a literature search of all functional connectivity papers of olfaction, gustation, and chemesthesis, with 103 articles discovered in total. These publications largely use approaches of seed-based functional connectivity and psychophysiological interactions, as well as effective connectivity approaches such as Granger Causality, Dynamic Causal Modeling, and Structural Equation Modeling. Regardless of modality, studies largely focus on elucidating neural correlates of stimulus qualities such as identity, pleasantness, and intensity, with task-based paradigms most frequently implemented. We call for further "model free" or data-driven approaches in predictive modeling to craft brain-behavior relationships that are free from a priori hypotheses and not solely based on potentially irreproducible literature. Moreover, we note a relative dearth of resting-state literature, which could be used to better understand chemosensory networks with less influence from motion artifacts induced via gustatory or olfactory paradigms. Finally, we note a lack of genomics data, which could clarify individual and heritable differences in chemosensory perception. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ecological chemosensory stimuli almost always evoke responses in more than one sensory system. Moreover, any sensory processing takes place along a hierarchy of brain regions. So far, the field of chemosensory neuroimaging is dominated by studies that examine the role of brain regions in isolation. However, to completely understand neural processing of chemosensation, we must also examine interactions between regions. In general, the use of connectivity methods has increased in the neuroimaging field, providing important insights to physical sensory processing, such as vision, audition, and touch. A similar trend has been observed in chemosensory neuroimaging, however, these established techniques have largely not been rigorously applied to imaging studies on the chemical senses, leaving network insights overlooked. In this article, we first highlight some recent work in chemosensory connectomics and we summarize different connectomics techniques. Then, we outline specific challenges for chemosensory connectome neuroimaging studies. Finally, we review best practices from the general connectomics and neuroimaging fields. We recommend future studies to develop or use the following methods we perceive as key to improve chemosensory connectomics: (1) optimized study designs, (2) reporting guidelines, (3) consensus on brain parcellations, (4) consortium research, and (5) data sharing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Chemosensory impairments have been established as a specific indicator of COVID-19. They affect most patients and may persist long past the resolution of respiratory symptoms, representing an unprecedented medical challenge. Since the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic started, we now know much more about smell, taste, and chemesthesis loss associated with COVID-19. However, the temporal dynamics and characteristics of recovery are still unknown. Here, capitalizing on data from the Global Consortium for Chemosensory Research (GCCR) crowdsourced survey, we assessed chemosensory abilities after the resolution of respiratory symptoms in participants diagnosed with COVID-19 during the first wave of the pandemic in Italy. This analysis led to the identification of two patterns of chemosensory recovery, partial and substantial, which were found to be associated with differential age, degrees of chemosensory loss, and regional patterns. Uncovering the self-reported phenomenology of recovery from smell, taste, and chemesthetic disorders is the first, yet essential step, to provide healthcare professionals with the tools to take purposeful and targeted action to address chemosensory disorders and their severe discomfort. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Olfactory impairment after a traumatic impact to the head is associated with changes in olfactory cortex, including decreased gray matter density and decreased BOLD response to odors. Much less is known about the role of other cortical areas in olfactory impairment. We used fMRI in a sample of 63 participants, consisting of 25 with post-traumatic functional anosmia, 16 with post-traumatic hyposmia, and 22 healthy controls with normosmia to investigate whole brain response to odors. Similar neural responses were observed across the groups to odor versus odorless stimuli in the primary olfactory areas in piriform cortex, whereas response in the frontal operculum and anterior insula (fO/aI) increased with olfactory function (normosmia > hyposmia > functional anosmia). Unexpectedly, a negative association was observed between response and olfactory perceptual function in the mediodorsal thalamus (mdT), ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC) and posterior cingulate cortex (pCC). Finally, connectivity within a network consisting of vmPFC, fO, and pCC could be used to successfully classify participants as having functional anosmia or normosmia. We conclude that, at the neural level, olfactory impairment due to head trauma is best characterized by heightened responses and differential connectivity in higher-order areas beyond olfactory cortex. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In a preregistered, cross-sectional study, we investigated whether olfactory loss is a reliable predictor of COVID-19 using a crowdsourced questionnaire in 23 languages to assess symptoms in individuals self-reporting recent respiratory illness. We quantified changes in chemosensory abilities during the course of the respiratory illness using 0–100 visual analog scales (VAS) for participants reporting a positive (C19+; n = 4148) or negative (C19−; n = 546) COVID-19 laboratory test outcome. Logistic regression models identified univariate and multivariate predictors of COVID-19 status and post-COVID-19 olfactory recovery. Both C19+ and C19− groups exhibited smell loss, but it was significantly larger in C19+ participants (mean ± SD, C19+: −82.5 ± 27.2 points; C19−: −59.8 ± 37.7). Smell loss during illness was the best predictor of COVID-19 in both univariate and multivariate models (ROC AUC = 0.72). Additional variables provide negligible model improvement. VAS ratings of smell loss were more predictive than binary chemosensory yes/no-questions or other cardinal symptoms (e.g. fever). Olfactory recovery within 40 days of respiratory symptom onset was reported for ~50% of participants and was best predicted by time since respiratory symptom onset. We find that quantified smell loss is the best predictor of COVID-19 amongst those with symptoms of respiratory illness. To aid clinicians and contact tracers in identifying individuals with a high likelihood of having COVID-19, we propose a novel 0–10 scale to screen for recent olfactory loss, the ODoR-19. We find that numeric ratings ≤2 indicate high odds of symptomatic COVID-19 (4 < OR < 10). Once independently validated, this tool could be deployed when viral lab tests are impractical or unavailable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, many governments have taken drastic measures to avoid an overflow of intensive care units. Accurate metrics of disease spread are critical for the reopening strategies. Here, we show that self-reports of smell/taste changes are more closely associated with hospital overload and are earlier markers of the spread of infection of SARS-CoV-2 than current governmental indicators. We also report a decrease in self-reports of new onset smell/taste changes as early as 5 days after lockdown enforcement. Cross-country comparisons demonstrate that countries that adopted the most stringent lockdown measures had faster declines in new reports of smell/taste changes following lockdown than a country that adopted less stringent lockdown measures. We propose that an increase in the incidence of sudden smell and taste change in the general population may be used as an indicator of COVID-19 spread in the population. Syndromic surveillance for COVID-19 could help to identify areas with increasing transmission. Here, the authors show that increased reports of changes in smell and taste measured at the population level are correlated with the increased COVID-19-related hospital admissions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent anecdotal and scientific reports have provided evidence of a link between COVID-19 and chemosensory impairments, such as anosmia. However, these reports have downplayed or failed to distinguish potential effects on taste, ignored chemesthesis, and generally lacked quantitative measurements. Here, we report the development, implementation, and initial results of a multilingual, international questionnaire to assess self-reported quantity and quality of perception in 3 distinct chemosensory modalities (smell, taste, and chemesthesis) before and during COVID-19. In the first 11 days after questionnaire launch, 4039 participants (2913 women, 1118 men, and 8 others, aged 19–79) reported a COVID-19 diagnosis either via laboratory tests or clinical assessment. Importantly, smell, taste, and chemesthetic function were each significantly reduced compared to their status before the disease. Difference scores (maximum possible change ±100) revealed a mean reduction of smell (−79.7 ± 28.7, mean ± standard deviation), taste (−69.0 ± 32.6), and chemesthetic (−37.3 ± 36.2) function during COVID-19. Qualitative changes in olfactory ability (parosmia and phantosmia) were relatively rare and correlated with smell loss. Importantly, perceived nasal obstruction did not account for smell loss. Furthermore, chemosensory impairments were similar between participants in the laboratory test and clinical assessment groups. These results show that COVID-19-associated chemosensory impairment is not limited to smell but also affects taste and chemesthesis. The multimodal impact of COVID-19 and the lack of perceived nasal obstruction suggest that severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus strain 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection may disrupt sensory-neural mechanisms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Peripheral sources of individual variation in taste intensity perception have been well described. The existence of a central source has been proposed but remains unexplored. Here we used functional magnetic resonance imaging in healthy human participants (20 women, 8 men) to evaluate the hypothesis that the amygdala exerts an inhibitory influence that affects the "gain" of the gustatory system during tasting. Consistent with the existence of a central gain mechanism (CGM), we found that central amygdala response was correlated with mean intensity ratings across multiple tastants. In addition, psychophysiological and dynamic causal modeling analyses revealed that the connection strength between inhibitory outputs from amygdala to medial dorsal and ventral posterior medial thalamus predicted individual differences in responsiveness to taste stimulation. These results imply that inhibitory inputs from the amygdala to the thalamus act as a CGM that influences taste intensity perception. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Participants in cluster 2 (orange,N= 1724; bottom center) are generally characterized by ratings that reflect smell/taste loss with preserved chemesthesis. Based on the centroid of each cluster, participants in cluster 1 (blue,N= 1767; top left) are generally characterized by significant smell, taste and chemesthesis loss. Loadings for participants in cluster 3 (green,N= 548; right side) are generally characterized by reduced smell and taste loss, and preserved chemesthesis. [Extracted from the article]