Clinical evaluation of a functional prothrombin time-based assay for identification of factor V Leiden carriers in a group of Italian patients with venous thrombosis

Laboratory Diagnosis of Activated Protein C Resistance and Factor V Leiden

The factor V Leiden (FVL) polymorphism is known as the most common inherited risk factor for venous thrombosis. In turn, FVL is the leading cause of an activated protein C resistance (APCR) phenotype, in which the addition of exogenous activated protein C to plasma does not result in the expected anticoagulant effect. In the routine laboratory approach to the formal diagnosis of FVL, an initial positive screening plasma-based method for APCR is often performed, and only if needed, this is followed by a confirmatory DNA-based assay for FVL. Multiple methods with accepted sensitivity and specificity for determining an APCR/FVL phenotype are commonly categorized into two separate groups: (1) screening plasma-based assays, including qualitative functional clot-based assays, for APCR, and (2) confirmatory DNA-based molecular assays, entailing several tests and platforms, including polymerase chain reaction-based and non-PCR-based techniques, for FVL. This review will describe the methodological aspects of each laboratory test and prepare suggestions on the indication of APCR and FVL testing and method selection.

Laboratory Testing for the Evaluation of Phenotypic Activated Protein C Resistance

Activated protein C (APC) resistance (APCR) is considered a risk factor of venous thromboembolism (VTE). The most common genetic disorder conferring APCR is a factor (F) V Leiden mutation, but many other factors are also implicated, such as other F5 mutations (e.g., FV Hong-Kong and FV Cambridge), protein S deficiency, elevated factor VIII, exogenous hormone use, pregnancy and postpartum, depending on how APCR is defined. Considering the large population affected, the detection of this phenotype is crucial. Two types of tests are currently available: clotting time-based assays (with several versions) and thrombin generation-based assays with the endogenous thrombin potential (ETP)-based assay. The purpose of this review is therefore to discuss the performances of these tests and the cases in which it would be appropriate to use one over the other. Initially, as APCR was thought to be solely related to the FV Leiden mutation, the objective was to obtain a 100% specific assay. Clotting-time based assays were thus specifically designed to detect this inherited condition. Later on, an APCR condition without a FV Leiden mutation was identified and highlighted as an independent risk factor of VTE. Therefore, the development of a less specific assay was needed and a global coagulation test was proposed, known as the ETP-based APCR assay. In light of the above, these tests should not be used for the same purpose. Clotting time-based assays should only be recommended as a screening test for the detection of FV mutations prior to confirmation by genetic testing. On the other hand, the ETP-based APC resistance assay, in addition to being able to detect any type of APCR, could be proposed as a global screening test as it assesses the entire coagulation process.

Laboratory Testing for the Evaluation of Phenotypic Activated Protein C Resistance

Activated protein C (APC) resistance (APCR) is considered a risk factor of venous thromboembolism (VTE). The most common genetic disorder conferring APCR is a factor (F) V Leiden mutation, but many other factors are also implicated, such as other F5 mutations (e.g., FV Hong-Kong and FV Cambridge), protein S deficiency, elevated factor VIII, exogenous hormone use, pregnancy and postpartum, depending on how APCR is defined. Considering the large population affected, the detection of this phenotype is crucial. Two types of tests are currently available: clotting time-based assays (with several versions) and thrombin generation-based assays with the endogenous thrombin potential (ETP)-based assay. The purpose of this review is therefore to discuss the performances of these tests and the cases in which it would be appropriate to use one over the other. Initially, as APCR was thought to be solely related to the FV Leiden mutation, the objective was to obtain a 100% specific assay. Clotting-time based assays were thus specifically designed to detect this inherited condition. Later on, an APCR condition without a FV Leiden mutation was identified and highlighted as an independent risk factor of VTE. Therefore, the development of a less specific assay was needed and a global coagulation test was proposed, known as the ETP-based APCR assay. In light of the above, these tests should not be used for the same purpose. Clotting time-based assays should only be recommended as a screening test for the detection of FV mutations prior to confirmation by genetic testing. On the other hand, the ETP-based APC resistance assay, in addition to being able to detect any type of APCR, could be proposed as a global screening test as it assesses the entire coagulation process.

Laboratory Testing for the Evaluation of Phenotypic Activated Protein C Resistance

Activated protein C (APC) resistance (APCR) is considered a risk factor of venous thromboembolism (VTE). The most common genetic disorder conferring APCR is a factor (F) V Leiden mutation, but many other factors are also implicated, such as other F5 mutations (e.g., FV Hong-Kong and FV Cambridge), protein S deficiency, elevated factor VIII, exogenous hormone use, pregnancy and postpartum, depending on how APCR is defined. Considering the large population affected, the detection of this phenotype is crucial. Two types of tests are currently available: clotting time-based assays (with several versions) and thrombin generation-based assays with the endogenous thrombin potential (ETP)-based assay. The purpose of this review is therefore to discuss the performances of these tests and the cases in which it would be appropriate to use one over the other. Initially, as APCR was thought to be solely related to the FV Leiden mutation, the objective was to obtain a 100% specific assay. Clotting-time based assays were thus specifically designed to detect this inherited condition. Later on, an APCR condition without a FV Leiden mutation was identified and highlighted as an independent risk factor of VTE. Therefore, the development of a less specific assay was needed and a global coagulation test was proposed, known as the ETP-based APCR assay. In light of the above, these tests should not be used for the same purpose. Clotting time-based assays should only be recommended as a screening test for the detection of FV mutations prior to confirmation by genetic testing. On the other hand, the ETP-based APC resistance assay, in addition to being able to detect any type of APCR, could be proposed as a global screening test as it assesses the entire coagulation process.

Lack of rivaroxaban influence on a prothrombinase-based assay for the detection of activated C protein resistance: an Italian ex vivo and in vitro study in normal subjects and factor V Leiden carriers

INTRODUCTION

Activated protein C resistance (APCr) leads to hypercoagulability and is due, often but not exclusively, to Factor V Leiden (FVL). The aim of this study was to assess the ex vivo and in vitro interference of the direct factor Xa inhibitor rivaroxaban (RIV) on a prothrombinase-based assay for APCr detection.

METHODS

An ex vivo study was performed on fresh plasma samples obtained from 44 subjects with FV wild-type and seven with FVL heterozygous, all treated with RIV. An in vitro study was performed on 15 plasma samples (six from normal subjects, six from heterozygous, and three from homozygous FVL carriers, all frozen specimens) spiked with RIV. RIV concentration was evaluated using a chromogenic assay, and APCr was evaluated by a prothrombinase-based assay.

RESULTS

No significant interference of RIV on APCr results obtained by a prothrombinase-based assay was observed for drug concentrations up to 400 ng/mL in FV wild-type and FVL carriers (homozygous and heterozygous). These results were confirmed both ex vivo and in vitro.

CONCLUSIONS

RIV did not significantly interfere with the prothrombinase-based assay used for the assessment of APCr, and this was observed to occur independently of FV status. However, only concentrations up to 400 ng/mL were tested and, therefore, what occurs in the presence of higher doses remains to be investigated.

Effect of dabigatran on a prothrombinase-based assay for detecting activated protein C resistance: an ex vivo and in vitro study in normal subjects and factor V Leiden carriers

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate ex vivo and in vitro interference of a direct factor IIa inhibitor, dabigatran, on a prothrombinase-based assay to detect activated protein C resistance.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An ex vivo study was performed in six heterozygous factor V Leiden carriers and 12 normal subjects without the factor V Leiden mutation who were treated with dabigatran. An in vitro study was also performed considering 12 plasma samples (six from normal subjects and six from heterozygous factor V Leiden carriers) spiked with dabigatran. The dabigatran concentration was evaluated using a diluted thrombin time assay, activated protein C resistance was evaluated using a prothrombinase-based assay.

RESULTS

In both the ex vivo and in vitro studies dabigatran interfered significantly with activated protein C resistance ratios observed in normal subjects and in factor V Leiden heterozygous carriers.

DISCUSSION

The results reported in this paper seem to confirm that dabigatran is able to interfere with the Penthafarm prothrombinase-based assay used to study activated protein C resistance, significantly increasing observed ratios. This effect appears to be present already at low concentrations of dabigatran (6 ng/mL) and affects both normal subjects and heterozygous carriers of factor V Leiden. In this group of patients, dabigatran, at concentrations in the therapeutic range (100-200 ng/mL), could markedly increase the activated protein C resistance ratio, bringing it up to within the reference range for normal subjects, thus potentially leading to misclassification of patients.

Evaluation of the GeneXpert assay in the detection of Factor V Leiden and prothrombin 20210 in stored, previously classified samples

BACKGROUND

In this study, we evaluated the GeneXpert HemosIL Factor II and Factor V assay, an innovative assay for the detection of Factor V Leiden (FVL) and prothrombin G20210A mutation (GPRO).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We evaluated 132 patients that were previously classified (with a concordant result) using two commercial real-time PCR assays supplied, by Applied Biosystems and Roche Molecular Biochemicals. The cohort comprised 75 normal subjects, 10 FVL homozygous, 35 FVL heterozygous, 7 GPRO heterozygous, 2 GPRO homozygous and 3 double heterozygous FVL and GPRO subjects. All of the samples were evaluated using the GeneXpert HemosIL Factor II and Factor V assay.

RESULTS

All of the samples were correctly identified using the GeneXpert HemosIL Factor II and Factor V assay; therefore, in this patient series, the specificity and sensitivity of the test under evaluation was 1.00.

DISCUSSION

We have shown that the GeneXpert HemosIL Factor II and Factor V assay, a rapid fully automated assay, can accurately characterise the presence of FV G1691A and FII G20210A polymorphisms with specificity and sensitivity that are comparable to other current real-time PCR-based methods. The theoretical advantages of such an assay include improved standardisation across varying healthcare environments, more thorough sample manipulation and reduced human error.