Laboratory identification of factor VIII inhibitors in the real world: the experience from Australasia

Measurement of recombinant porcine factor VIII in patients with congenital haemophilia A and inhibitors in the presence of emicizumab

INTRODUCTION

Recombinant porcine factor VIII (rpFVIII) is a treatment option for break-through bleeds in patients with congenital haemophilia A with inhibitors (CHAwI) on emicizumab. However, there are limited data about the measurement of rpFVIII in the presence of emicizumab.

AIM

To analyse whether rpFVIII can be measured with a chromogenic assay with bovine component (bCSA) in plasma from CHAwI on emicizumab treatment.

METHODS

In the first part of the study, FVIII deficient plasma was spiked with rpFVIII, in the second part, commercial plasma from CHAwI was spiked with emicizumab and rpFVIII, and in the third part, plasma from CHAwI on emicizumab treatment was spiked with rpFVIII. FVIII was then measured with bCSA and a chromogenic assay with human component (hCSA). Thrombin generation (TG) and clot-waveform analysis (CWA) were also carried out.

RESULTS

The recovery of rpFVIII measured with bCSA is approximately 80% and is further influenced by the presence of an anti-porcine inhibitor. rpFVIII assessed with hCSA was influenced by emicizumab. CWA and TG showed a weak correlation with baseline emicizumab concentration, but peak thrombin and CWA correlated well with increasing emicizumab concentrations and rpFVIII activities.

CONCLUSION

This study indicates that rpFVIII can be measured in the presence of emicizumab with a bCSA. A calibration curve for the measurement of rpFVIII with bCSA should be established.

International Council for Standardization in Haematology recommendations for laboratory measurement of factor VIII and FIX type I inhibitors

This guidance document has been prepared on behalf of the International Council for Standardisation in Hematology. The aim of the document is to provide guidance and recommendations on the measurement of factor VIII (FVIII) and factor IX (FIX) inhibitors. After an introduction on the clinical background and relevance of factor VIII and factor IX inhibitor testing, the following aspects of laboratory testing are included: screening for inhibitors, assay principle, sample requirements, testing requirements and interpretation, quality assurance, interferences and recent developments. This guidance document focusses on recommendations for a standardised procedure for the laboratory measurement of FVIII and FIX type I inhibitors. The recommendations are based on published data in peer-reviewed literature and expert opinion.

Measurement of coagulation factor antibody levels is useful for diagnosis and determining therapeutic efficacy in hemorrhagic patients with autoantibodies to coagulation factor VIII and factor V: results from a single center in Japan

Coagulation factor inhibitors (CFIs) sometimes cause fatal bleeding conditions. Determination of an inhibitor titer (INH-titer) using the Bethesda method is essential for diagnosing diseases associated with CFIs and examining the effects of immunosuppressive therapy. We reviewed 17 cases with CFIs (acquired hemophilia A, n = 11; FV inhibitor, n = 6) to examine the usefulness of determining quantities of an autoantibody to a coagulation factor (CF-IgG) by ELISA for diagnosis and therapeutic efficacy, as compared with INH-titer. One patient with an INH-titer and no evidence of CF-IgG was lupus anticoagulant (LA)-positive, and thus the positive INH-titer may have been a false positive caused by LA. Although INH-titer alone was insufficient to correctly identify patients with CFI, determination of CF-IgG appeared to be useful. In addition, even after INH-titer disappearance, hemorrhagic conditions recurred when CF-IgG was detected. These findings suggest that the presence of a clearance antibody against the coagulation factor might reduce the activity of that coagulation factor even after disappearance of the corresponding neutralizing antibody. Although the diagnosis and therapeutic efficacy can also be determined by INH-titer disappearance and improvement of corresponding coagulation factor activity, determination of CF-IgG by ELISA can improve the accuracy of these assessments.

Factor VIII/IX inhibitor testing practices in the United Kingdom: Results of a UKHCDO and UKNEQAS national survey

INTRODUCTION

Inhibitor formation is the greatest challenge facing persons with haemophilia treated with factor concentrates. The gold standard testing methodologies are the Nijmegen-Bethesda assay (NBA) for FVIII and Bethesda assay (BA) for FIX inhibitors, which are affected by pre-analytical and inter-laboratory variability.

AIMS

To evaluate inhibitor testing methodology and assess correlation between self-reported and actual methodology.

METHODS

Methodology was evaluated using a survey distributed alongside a UK National External Quality Assessment Service Blood Coagulation external quality assurance (EQA) exercise for FVIII and FIX inhibitor testing.

RESULTS

Seventy four survey and EQA exercise responses were received (response rate 63.2%), with 50 paired survey/EQA results. 47.1% (33/70) reported using the NBA and 42.9% (30/70) the BA for FVIII inhibitor testing. Review of FVIII inhibitor assay methodology demonstrated discrepancy (self-reported to actual) in 64.3% (BA reporting) and 27.6% (NBA reporting). Pre-analytical heat treatment was used by 32.4%, most commonly 56°C for 30 minutes. Assay cut-offs of 0.1-1.0 BU/mL were reported. EQA samples (acquired FVIII and congenital FIX) demonstrated titres and coefficients of variation (CV) of 3.1 BU/mL (0.7-15.4 BU/mL; CV = 43%) and 18.0 BU/mL (0-117 BU/mL; CV = 33%), respectively. No significant assay or laboratory factors were found to explain this variance, which could have resulted in change in management for 6 patients (5 misclassified high-titre FVIII inhibitors and 1 false negative for a FIX inhibitor).

CONCLUSIONS

Heterogeneity was seen at each stage of assay methodology. No assay-related factors were found to explain variation in inhibitor titres. Further standardization is required to improve inhibitor quantification to guide patient care.

Variability between laboratories performing coagulation tests with identical platforms: a nationwide evaluation study

Background

While the assessment of analytical precision within medical laboratories has received much attention in scientific enquiry, the degree of as well as the sources causing variation between them remains incompletely understood. In this study, we quantified the variance components when performing coagulation tests with identical analytical platforms in different laboratories and computed intraclass correlations coefficients (ICC) for each coagulation test.

Methods

Data from eight laboratories measuring fibrinogen twice in twenty healthy subjects with one out of 3 different platforms and single measurements of prothrombin time (PT), and coagulation factors II, V, VII, VIII, IX, X, XI and XIII were analysed. By platform, the variance components of (i) the subjects, (ii) the laboratory and the technician and (iii) the total variance were obtained for fibrinogen as well as (i) and (iii) for the remaining factors using ANOVA.

Results

The variability for fibrinogen measurements within a laboratory ranged from 0.02 to 0.04, the variability between laboratories ranged from 0.006 to 0.097. The ICC for fibrinogen ranged from 0.37 to 0.66 and from 0.19 to 0.80 for PT between the platforms. For the remaining factors the ICC’s ranged from 0.04 (FII) to 0.93 (FVIII).

Conclusions

Variance components that could be attributed to technicians or laboratory procedures were substantial, led to disappointingly low intraclass correlation coefficients for several factors and were pronounced for some of the platforms. Our findings call for sustained efforts to raise the level of standardization of structures and procedures involved in the quantification of coagulation factors.