The role of the laboratory in diagnosis and management of inhibitory antibodies in haemophilia

Diagnosis and laboratory monitoring of hemophilia A

Acquired hemophilia A (AHA) is a rare disorder in which autoantibodies against factor VIII (FVIII) lead to a bleeding phenotype that varies from life-threatening to no bleeding at all. Prolonged activated partial thromboplastin times (APTT) in patients with a bleeding phenotype should be investigated to rule out AHA and should never be ignored in a preprocedure patient. Most inhibitors in AHA are heat and time dependent, so mixing studies performed only on an immediate mix are not useful: both lupus anticoagulants and treatment with direct oral anticoagulants can coexist with AHA and confound the diagnosis. Assays for intrinsic coagulation factors and von Willebrand factor should always be performed, regardless of the results of mixing studies. A Bethesda or modified Bethesda assay should be performed to quantify any inhibitor, and if susoctocog alfa (rpFVIII) is available, then an assay for cross-reacting antibodies should also be performed. At diagnosis and until complete remission, if the FVIII in the patient sample is >5 IU/dL, heat inactivation should be performed before the inhibitor assays are performed. While there are no conventional tests available to measure the effects of FVIII bypassing therapies, newer therapies may require monitoring, or their effects may need to be considered when choosing appropriate assays. Measurement of rpFVIII requires a 1-stage clotting assay, and measurement of patient FVIII while on emicizumab requires a chromogenic assay that does not contain human FX. Close communication is required between the treating clinicians and the laboratory to ensure that the correct tests are performed while patients are receiving treatments.

Cross-reacting recombinant porcine FVIII inhibitors in patients with acquired haemophilia A

INTRODUCTION

Acquired haemophilia A (AHA) is a rare bleeding disorder caused by the development of autoantibodies to endogenous human factor VIII (hFVIII). If treatment of bleeding is required, one option is recombinant porcine FVIII (rpFVIII). Cross-reactivity between factor VIII inhibitors and rpFVIII has previously been described.

AIM

The aim of this study was to retrospectively assess the incidence of cross-reacting anti-porcine inhibitors in patients diagnosed with AHA in two UK centres.

METHODS

The plasma of fifty-one patients diagnosed with AHA via reduced FVIII:C and positive FVIII inhibitor titre as detected with a Nijmegen-Bethesda assay (NBA) was also tested by a porcine Bethesda assay (PBA). The NBA was modified by replacement of human FVIII with rpFVIII in the PBA, with determination of residual FVIII by one-stage clotting assay.

RESULTS

The median FVIII inhibitor titre by NBA was 22.8 BU/mL (range: 0.8-1000 BU/mL). 37% of samples exhibited linear, type 1 kinetics in the NBA. Negative PBA was observed in 26 patients, and 25 were positive (median PBA: 3.5 BU/mL; range: 0.8-120 BU/mL). Type 1 kinetics were observed in 40% of PBA-positive patients. At NBA tires of greater than 100 BU/mL, the positive predictive value for the presence of porcine cross-reactivity was 100%. At NBA below 5 BU/mL, the negative predictive value for the presence of porcine cross-reactivity was 71%.

CONCLUSION

Cross-reactivity between FVIII inhibitors and rpFVIII was observed in 49% of patients. The presence of inhibitors to rpFVIII may influence the treatment choice for patients with acquired haemophilia A.