Quality control and factor VIII assays

Performing and interpreting individual pharmacokinetic profiles in patients with Hemophilia A or B: Rationale and general considerations

OBJECTIVES

In a separate document, we have provided specific guidance on performing individual pharmacokinetic (PK) studies using limited samples in persons with hemophilia with the goal to optimize prophylaxis with clotting factor concentrates. This paper, intended for clinicians, aims to describe how to interpret and apply PK properties obtained in persons with hemophilia.

METHODS

The members of the Working Party on population PK (PopPK) of the ISTH SSC Subcommittee on Factor VIII and IX and rare bleeding disorders, together with additional hemophilia and PK experts, completed a survey and ranking exercise whereby key areas of interest in the field were identified. The group had regular web conferences to refine the manuscript's scope and structure, taking into account comments from the external feedback to the earlier document.

RESULTS

Many clinical decisions in hemophilia are based on some form of explicit or implicit PK assessment. Individual patient PK profiles can be analyzed through traditional or PopPK methods, with the latter providing the advantage of fewer samples needing to be collected on any prophylaxis regimen, and without the need the for a washout period. The most useful presentation of PK results for clinical decision making are a curve of the factor activity level over time, the time to achieve a certain activity level, or related parameters like half-life or exposure (AUC). Software platforms have been developed to deliver this information to clinicians at the point of care. Key characteristics of studies measuring average PK parameters were reviewed, outlining what makes a credible head-to-head comparison among different concentrates. Large data collections of PK and treatment outcomes currently ongoing will advance care in the future.

CONCLUSIONS

Traditionally used to compare different concentrates, PK can support tailoring of hemophilia treatment by individual profiling, which is greatly simplified by adopting a PopPK/Bayesian method and limited sampling protocol.

Laboratory monitoring of replacement therapy for major surgery in von Willebrand disease

Von Willebrand disease (VWD) is an inherited haemorrhagic disorder caused by a quantitative or qualitative defect of von Willebrand factor (VWF), a multimeric plasma glycoprotein that plays a key role in platelet adhesion to the subendothelium and acts as a carrier of factor VIII (FVIII) in blood. Patients with VWD experience bleeding symptoms that are mainly localized in mucous membranes and soft tissues, and their severity depends on the degree of the primary reduction in VWF and the secondary deficiency of FVIII in plasma. Because VWD patients are also at increased risk of perioperative bleeding, a prophylactic treatment aimed to correct the dual haemostatic defect (i.e. VWF and FVIII) is warranted. This review summarizes knowledge on the current management of patients undergoing major surgery, focusing on the peri-surgical laboratory monitoring of replacement therapy with VWF/FVIII concentrates. We suggest to monitor plasma levels of FVIII coagulant activity in the postoperative period rather than a surrogate maker of platelet-binding VWF activity as the ristocetin cofactor assay and its recent modifications.

Achieving and maintaining quality in the laboratory

In order to ensure the delivery of a service of the highest possible quality, it is an essential requirement that laboratories undertake strict internal quality control (QC) measures as well as participate in external quality assessment (EQA) schemes. For any given test, a critical part of the internal QC process involves the establishment of reference intervals using samples taken from normal individuals, and then calculating limits representing the 95% range. This forms the basis for assessment of abnormal test results, which will in turn impact on laboratory performance in proficiency testing exercises in EQA programmes. Whereas for plasma-based assay systems, variability in performance in EQA exercises is usually determined by measurement of a coefficient of variation (CV), results of genetic testing is usually measured in absolute terms. Despite this, results of genetic EQA programmes confirm that errors in testing do occur, as much because of inadvertent sample switching and transcription errors as to analytical mistakes. EQA programmes involving identification of mutations by DNA sequencing, such as haemophilia, is made difficult by the high information content of sequence data. Nevertheless, results show that errors are usually made in the naming of the mutations, indicating that this is an evolving and poorly standardized area. Developing countries face particular challenges in the encouragement of laboratories to participate in local EQA programmes, as well as in relation to the logistical issues of sample provision, distribution and result collation in an effective and affordable manner.

Accuracy of FVIII: C assay by one-stage method can be improved using hemophilic plasma as diluent

BACKGROUND

the basic prerequisite of Factor VIII clotting assay (FVIII:C) by One-Stage Method is that all other than FVIII clotting factors are present in constant concentration in each dilution of both standard reference and patient's plasma curves. On the contrary, the plasma content of each dilution is decreasing as the dilution factor increases.

OBJECTIVES AND METHODS

to keep exactly constant the plasma content in each mixture, we performed all dilutions of both standard reference and patient's plasma with FVIII deficient plasma and further with a fixed amount of buffer (method B). To show the discrepancies between this method and regular method A, using buffer to make dilutions, a comparative study was conducted on FVIII: C assay on samples at known FVIII concentration and in patients' plasma. Imidazole or Owren's buffers and five different aPTT reagents were employed, both in method A and B.

RESULTS

a discrepancy between FVIII: C assays obtained by method A and B was observed, mainly when Pathrontin SL and Imidazole buffer were used. The assays derived from method B always better fit with the expected, calculated, values of FVIII:C concentrations. Furthermore, FVIII: C was assayed in 60 patients: the outcome of method A was always higher than values of method B. The discrepancy between the two methods was higher at FVIII concentrations below 50 U/dL but null at 100 U/dL. The A slope was steeper than B slope and the difference was statistically significant starting from the 1/10 dilution. Accordingly, FVIII: C of patients' plasma obtained by method A was always higher that those obtained by method B, even 2 or 3 times for FVIII level < or = 10 U/dL or 1.4-1.6 times for FVIII levels between 10 and 25 U/dL.

CONCLUSIONS

only method B is able to give FVIII: C assays in agreement with the expected values. The dilution of reference standards and samples with FVIII deficient plasma is crucial to accurately evaluate the post-infusion FVIII concentrations in pharmacokinetic studies or the trough level during prophylactic therapy and to investigate the discrepancy among different FVIII: C assays. In addition, the assessment of severity and classification of hemophilia should be reviewed.

Harmonisation of factor VIII:C assay results: study within the framework of the Dutch project 'Calibration 2000'

In a Dutch project for harmonisation of factor VIII coagulant activity (FVIII:C) assays, the commutability of potential calibrators for FVIII:C was assessed by means of a 'twin-study design', which is in essence a multi-centre, split-patient sample, between-field-methods protocol. Commutability was defined as the degree to which a material yielded the same numerical relationships between results of measurements by a given set of measurement procedures as those between the expectations of the relationships for the same procedures applied to those types of material for which the procedures were intended. The study consisted of the simultaneous analysis of fresh frozen patient plasmas and three potential calibrators for FVIII:C by 16 Dutch laboratories forming eight couples. The state-of-the-art intra-laboratory standard deviation was used to assess the commutability of the potential calibrators. One potential calibrator was used to harmonise FVIII:C assay results in a Dutch field study. The inter-laboratory coefficient of variation of two test samples could be reduced significantly, but no significant effect was observed with three other test samples. We recommend that at least three different sample dilutions be used in each FVIII:C assay, in agreement with previous recommendations.

SSC/ISTH classification of hemophilia A: can hemophilia center laboratories achieve the new criteria?

To assess the practicality of the recent Scientific and Standardization committee (SSC) of the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis (ISTH) recommendations in respect of the classification of hemophilia we distributed samples from three untreated subjects with hemophilia A to 91 UK hemophilia centers (HCs), comprising 20 comprehensive care centers (CCCs) and 71 HCs. Laboratories were requested to perform their routine factor (F)VIII:C assays and to classify the severity of hemophilia. Median values of < 1 U dL-1 were obtained on two samples. However, for each of the two, approximately 30% of laboratories obtained results in the range 1-29 U dL-1 and 1-33 U dL-1 respectively. For one of these samples 17 laboratories diagnosed severe hemophilia despite obtaining FVIII:C levels in the range 1-5 U dL-1. The median FVIII:C for the third sample was 5.8 U dL-1 with a range of 1.5-36 U dL-1. For this sample eight centers diagnosed severe hemophilia. Fifty-four laboratories obtained a result > 5 U dL-1; 21 of these diagnosed mild hemophilia, 31 moderate hemophilia and two severe hemophilia. Results from CCCs were more accurate and more precise than those from HCs. Our results indicate a need for improved standardization of FVIII assays. In the UK there remains a lack of consensus in respect of the laboratory diagnostic criteria for the classification of hemophilia A.

The long-term within- and between-laboratory variability for assay of antithrombin, and proteins C and S: results derived from the external quality assessment program for thrombophilia screening of the ECAT Foundation

A stable laboratory performance is important for comparability and transferability of laboratory data both within and between laboratories. The lack of a reference system within hemostasis hampers laboratories in establishing their laboratory performance over a prolonged period of time. Therefore, based on data from an external quality assessment program, we evaluated the between laboratory variation (CVBETWEEN) and the long-term within-laboratory variation (LCVa) for antithrombin, and proteins C and S. We evaluated the CVBETWEEN for the period 1996-2001, including the results of 64-240 laboratories from 23 different surveys (protein S activity 15 surveys). We observed a quite high CVBETWEEN and a broad range for each analyte. The CVBETWEEN was significantly higher for antithrombin and protein S for samples with low levels similar to heterozygous deficiencies. We also evaluated the LCVa, including the results of 136 laboratories. The lowest LCVa[median and 95% content interval (CI)] was observed for antithrombin (7.6%; 3.6-35.5%), intermediate values for protein C activity and antigen (8.6%; 3.5-25.3% and 10.8%; 4.8-33.1%, respectively) and highest values for the protein S variables (13.4%; 6.4-50.6% for total protein S antigen, 14.1%; 6.5-79.1% for free protein S antigen and 17.2%; 7.2-84.3% for protein S activity). We concluded that the main reason for the high CVBETWEEN is the long-term within-laboratory variability. Application of linear regression on data of an external quality assessment program is a useful model to demonstrate per analyte per laboratory the long-term variability (LCVa). It is concluded that improvement of the long-term within-laboratory test performance is the first priority in hemostasis to yield important improvements in the comparability and transferability of laboratory data.