Rapid discrimination of the phenotypic variants of von Willebrand disease

Von Willebrand Factor (VWF) multiplex activity assay differentiation of type 1 von Willebrand Disease (VWD) and variant VWD

INTRODUCTION

VWD diagnosis is challenging requiring multiple VWF activity tests using many individual assays. We have developed an ELISA-based VWF Multiplex Activity Assay (VWF-MAA) to address this concern; however, the ability of the VWF-MAA to discriminate between type 1 VWD, variant VWD, and normal subjects has not been evaluated.

AIM

To evaluate the VWF-MAA and its ability to differentiate between type 1 VWD, variant VWD and normal subjects in individuals undergoing an initial laboratory evaluation for bleeding.

METHODS

A total of 177 plasma samples from the Zimmerman Program: Comparative Effectiveness in the Diagnosis of VWD were evaluated from 11 centres across the US and Canada. The VWF-MAA was compared to Versiti Blood Research Institute (VBRI) and Local Center (LC) assigned VWD diagnosis.

RESULTS

Overall, 129/177 (72.9%) were correctly assigned as normal (non-VWD), type 1, or variant VWD compared to the VBRI assigned diagnosis. VWF-MAA assigned non-VWD accurately in 29/57 (50.9%) samples, and type 1 VWD accurately in 93/110 (84.6%) samples. Considering LC diagnosis where there was agreement with VWF-MAA and not VBRI diagnosis, type 1 VWD was accurate in 105/110 (95.5%) samples. Bland-Altman analysis demonstrated good correlation between laboratory methods. VWD, types 2A, 2B, 1C VWD were also assigned by the VWF-MAA.

CONCLUSIONS

We demonstrate that the VWF-MAA has utility in differentiating type 1 VWD, variant VWD and normal subjects in individuals undergoing an initial laboratory evaluation for bleeding.

Shear-induced acquired von Willebrand syndrome: an accomplice of bleeding events in adults on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is an increasingly acceptable life-saving mechanical assistance system that provides cardiac and/or respiratory support for several reversible or treatable diseases. Despite important advances in technology and clinical management, bleeding remains a significant and common complication associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Some studies suggest that acquired von Willebrand syndrome (AVWS) is one of the etiologies of bleeding. It is caused by shear-induced deficiency of von Willebrand factor (VWF). VWF is an important glycoprotein for hemostasis that acts as a linker at sites of vascular injury for platelet adhesion and aggregation under high shear stress. AVWS can usually be diagnosed within 24 h after initiation of ECMO and is always reversible after explantation. Nonetheless, the main mechanism for the defect in the VWF multimers under ECMO support and the association between AVWS and bleeding complications remains unknown. In this review, we specifically discuss the loss of VWF caused by shear induction in the context of ECMO support as well as the current diagnostic and management strategies for AVWS.

Sixth Åland Island Conference on von Willebrand disease

Introduction

The sixth Åland Islands Conference on von Willebrand disease (VWD) on the Åland Islands, Finland, was held from 20 to 22 September 2018.

Aim

The meeting brought together experts in the field of VWD from around the world to share the latest advances and knowledge in VWD.

Results and discussion

The topics covered both clinical aspects of disease management, and biochemical and laboratory insights into the disease. The clinical topics discussed included epidemiology, diagnosis and treatment of VWD in different countries, management of children with VWD, bleeding control during surgery, specific considerations for the management of type 3 VWD and bleeding control in women with VWD. Current approaches to the management of acquired von Willebrand syndrome were also discussed. Despite significant advances in the understanding and therapeutic options for VWD, there remain many challenges to be overcome in order to optimise patient care. In comparison with haemophilia A, there are very few registries of VWD patients, which would be a valuable source of data on the condition and its management. VWD is still underdiagnosed, and many patients suffer recurrent or severe bleeding that could be prevented. Awareness of VWD among healthcare practitioners, including non‐haematologists, should be improved to allow timely diagnosis and intervention. Diagnosis remains challenging, and the development of fast, simple assays may help to facilitate accurate and rapid diagnosis of VWD.

Bleeding patterns in patients before and after diagnosis of von Willebrand disease: Analysis of a US medical claims database

Introduction

Von Willebrand disease (VWD) is the most common inherited bleeding disorder. The bleeding phenotype is variable, and some individuals have persistent symptoms post‐diagnosis.

Aim

To characterize bleeding patterns in patients with VWD before and after diagnosis.

Methods

De‐identified claims data for commercially insured patients in the IQVIA PharMetrics® Plus US database (Jan‐2006 to Jun‐2015) were extracted. Eligible patients had ≥2 claims for VWD (ICD‐9 code 286.4), and continuous health‐plan enrolment for ≥2 years before and after diagnosis. Bleeding event, treatment and treating‐physician type were analysed for 18 months before and 7‐24 months after diagnosis, according to pre‐diagnosis bleeding phenotype (claims from one vs multiple bleed sites) and post‐diagnosis bleeding status (resolved [no post‐diagnosis bleed claims] vs continued [≥1 claim]).

Results

Data for 3756 eligible patients (72.6% female; 71.0% aged ≥18 years at diagnosis) were analysed. Overall, 642 (17.1%) and 805 (21.4%) patients had single‐ and multiple‐site bleed claims pre‐diagnosis, respectively, and 1263 (33.6%) patients (38.5% of women, 20.8% of men) continued to bleed post‐diagnosis. Multiple‐site bleeding was associated with pre‐diagnosis heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB), oral contraceptive (OC) use and nasal cauterization. Continued bleeding post‐diagnosis was associated with pre‐diagnosis gastrointestinal bleeding, HMB and epistaxis; pre‐diagnosis use of OCs, aminocaproic acid and nasal cauterization; and younger age at diagnosis. Few patients consulted a haematologist for bleed management.

Conclusion

Many patients with VWD have persistent bleeding from multiple sites and continue to bleed post‐diagnosis. Our findings suggest a need to optimize management to reduce the symptomatic burden of VWD following diagnosis.

How we diagnose 2M von Willebrand disease (VWD): Use of a strategic algorithmic approach to distinguish 2M VWD from other VWD types

INTRODUCTION

von Willebrand disease (VWD) is the most common inherited bleeding disorder and caused by an absence, deficiency or defect in von Willebrand factor (VWF). VWD is currently classified into six different types: 1, 2A, 2B, 2N, 2M, 3. Notably, 2M VWD is more often misdiagnosed as 2A or type 1 VWD than properly identified as 2M VWD.

AIM

To describe an algorithmic approach to better ensure appropriate identification of 2M VWD, and reduce its misdiagnosis, as supported by sequential laboratory testing.

METHODS

Comparative assessment of types 1, 2A, 2B and 2M VWD using various laboratory tests, including VWF antigen and several VWF activity assays, plus DDAVP challenge data, ristocetin-induced platelet agglutination (RIPA) data, multimer analysis and genetic testing.

RESULTS

Types 1, 2A, 2B and 2M VWD give characteristic test patterns that can provisionally classify patients into particular VWD types. Notably, type 1 VWD shows low levels of VWF, but VWF functional concordance (VWF activity/Ag ratios >0.6), with both baseline assessment and post-DDAVP. Types 2A, 2B and 2M VWD show VWF functional discordance (low VWF activity/Ag ratio(s)) dependent on the defect, but type 2M separates from 2A/2B VWD based on specific test patterns, especially with collagen binding vs glycoprotein Ib binding assays. RIPA identifies 2B VWD. Multimers separate 2M from 2A/2B.

CONCLUSION

We provide strategies to improve correct diagnosis of VWD, especially focussed on 2M VWD, and which can be used by most diagnostic haemostasis laboratories, reserving genetic analysis (if required) for confirmation.

Diagnosis of von Willebrand disease in Western Mexico

INTRODUCTION

Von Willebrand disease (VWD) is the most common inherited bleeding disorder with a prevalence of 0.1%, characterised by quantitative or functional deficiency of von Willebrand factor (VWF). VWD diagnosis is based on symptomology, biochemical and genetic tests, but limited laboratory resources and VWD heterogeneity still generate an important subdiagnosis gap worldwide and in our country.

AIM

To identify the type and subtype of VWD in a cohort of patients with a history of excessive bleeding in Western Mexico.

METHODS

This prospective cohort study from 2012 to 2019 included patients with mucocutaneous bleeding or abnormal laboratory tests. A standardised questionnaire and confirmatory tests were applied: FVIII:C, VWF activity, VWF antigen, and VWF multimeric analysis.

RESULTS

Of the 297 patients recruited, 207 (69.7%) were excluded because their values exceeded 50% in VWF activity and VWF antigen. Of those 90 remaining, 54 (18.2%) had low VWF, and only 36 patients (12.1%) were diagnosed with VWD. Among them, 17 (47.2%) had quantitative deficiencies, of whom 14 were assigned as type 1 and 3 as type 3.The remaining 19 cases were diagnosed as type 2 (52.8%): type 2A and 2B were the most frequent with 6 and 7 cases respectively; 4 cases were possible type 2M and two suggestive of 2N, however, this was not confirmed.

CONCLUSION

This study highlights the challenges of VWD diagnosis using a comprehensive panel of diagnostic tests which should extend to supplemental tests of VWF:CB, VWF:FVIIIB, and sequencing the VWD gene to confirm the results from the panel assays.

Population Pharmacokinetic Modeling of von Willebrand Factor Activity in von Willebrand Disease Patients after Desmopressin Administration

OBJECTIVE

 Most von Willebrand disease (VWD) patients can be treated with desmopressin during bleeding or surgery. Large interpatient variability is observed in von Willebrand factor (VWF) activity levels after desmopressin administration. The aim of this study was to develop a pharmacokinetic (PK) model to describe, quantify, and explain this variability.

METHODS

 Patients with either VWD or low VWF, receiving an intravenous desmopressin test dose of 0.3 µg kg^-1, were included. A PK model was derived on the basis of the individual time profiles of VWF activity. Since no VWF was administered, the VWF dose was arbitrarily set to unity. Interpatient variability in bioavailability (F), volume of distribution (V), and clearance (Cl) was estimated.

RESULTS

 The PK model was developed using 951 VWF activity level measurements from 207 patients diagnosed with a VWD type. Median age was 28 years (range: 5-76), median predose VWF activity was 0.37 IU/mL (range: 0.06-1.13), and median VWF activity response at peak level was 0.64 IU/mL (range: 0.04-4.04). The observed PK profiles were best described using a one-compartment model with allometric scaling. While F increased with age, Cl was dependent on VWD type and sex. Inclusion resulted in a drop in interpatient variability in F and Cl of 81.7 to 60.5% and 92.8 to 76.5%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

 A PK model was developed, describing VWF activity versus time profile after desmopressin administration in patients with VWD or low VWF. Interpatient variability in response was quantified and partially explained. This model is a starting point toward more accurate prediction of desmopressin dosing effects in VWD.

Evaluation of a fully automated von Willebrand factor assay panel for the diagnosis of von Willebrand disease

INTRODUCTION

von Willebrand disease (VWD) diagnosis starts with first level tests: factor VIII coagulant activity, VWF antigen (VWF:Ag) and platelet-dependent VWF activity (VWF:RCo, VWF:Ab, VWF:GPIbR or VWF:GPIbM). The VWF collagen binding (VWF:CB) assay measures the binding capacity of von Willebrand factor (VWF) to collagen.

AIM

To assess, in previously diagnosed VWD patients, the performance of a fully automated chemiluminescent test panel including VWF:Ag, VWF:GPIbR and VWF:CB assays.

METHODS

The patients, historically evaluated using in-house VWF:Ag and VWF:CB assays and an automated latex enhanced immunoassay VWF:GPIbR method, were re-evaluated using the VWF test panel HemosIL AcuStar.

RESULTS

The VWF:GPIbR/VWF:Ag and VWF:CB/VWF:Ag obtained by means of AcuStar showed an overall good concordance with the corresponding data obtained at the time of the historical diagnosis. When discrepancies occurred, these were generally due to the lower VWF:CB/VWF:Ag obtained with AcuStar as compared with that obtained with the historical methods and this affected particularly the diagnosis of VWD type 2M. Together, the AcuStar VWF:GPIbR/VWF:Ag and VWF:CB/VWF:Ag were able to distinguish type 1 from types 2A, 2B and 2M, whereas no distinction was possible between type 2A and 2B.

CONCLUSION

The AcuStar panel offers a good performance in the differential diagnosis between VWD type 1 and 2A/2B patients. A high rate of coincidence with historical diagnosis was obtained for VWD types 3, 2A/2B and 1. Even though in some cases more tests (eg, RIPA/multimeric analysis) are needed to complete an accurate VWD classification, the AcuStar panel is considered a sensitive, rapid and reliable tool to diagnose VWD patients.

One piece of the puzzle: Population pharmacokinetics of FVIII during perioperative Haemate P® /Humate P® treatment in von Willebrand disease patients

INTRODUCTION

Many patients with von Willebrand disease (VWD) are treated on demand with von Willebrand factor and factor VIII (FVIII) containing concentrates present with VWF and/or FVIII plasma levels outside set target levels. This carries a risk for bleeding and potentially for thrombosis. Development of a population pharmacokinetic (PK) model based on FVIII levels is a first step to more accurate on-demand perioperative dosing of this concentrate.

METHODS

Patients with VWD undergoing surgery in Academic Haemophilia Treatment Centers in the Netherlands between 2000 and 2018 treated with a FVIII/VWF plasma-derived concentrate (Haemate® P/Humate P®) were included in this study. Population PK modeling was based on measured FVIII levels using nonlinear mixed-effects modeling (NONMEM).

RESULTS

The population PK model was developed using 684 plasma FVIII measurements of 97 VWD patients undergoing 141 surgeries. Subsequently, the model was externally validated and reestimated with independent clinical data from 20 additional patients undergoing 31 surgeries and 208 plasma measurements of FVIII. The observed PK profiles were best described using a one-compartment model. Typical values for volume of distribution and clearance were 3.28 L/70 kg and 0.037 L/h/70 kg. Increased VWF activity, decreased physical status according to American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification (ASA class >2), and increased duration of surgery were associated with decreased FVIII clearance.

CONCLUSION

This population PK model derived from real world data adequately describes FVIII levels following perioperative administration of the FVIII/VWF plasma-derived concentrate (Haemate® P/Humate P® ) and will help to facilitate future dosing in VWD patients.

Evaluation of Abnormal Bleeding in Children

Abnormal bleeding or bruising is a relatively common clinical concern, frequently causing parents to seek care from their children's primary care provider. Although ecchymosis from playful trauma, occasional epistaxis, and heavy menstrual bleeding around the time of menarche and beyond are common occurrences, it can be difficult for pediatricians and other primary care providers to determine if their patient has age-appropriate symptoms versus abnormal or excessive bleeding. This review discusses considerations for abnormal bleeding in pediatrics and discusses an initial approach for evaluation of hemostasis in a child with bleeding symptoms. [Pediatr Ann. 2020;49(1):e36-e42.].

How I treat type 2B von Willebrand disease

Type 2B von Willebrand disease (VWD) is an inherited bleeding disorder caused by changes in von Willebrand factor (VWF) that enhance binding of VWF to GPIb on platelets. Although this disorder is seemingly well defined because of this single molecular defect, in reality type 2B VWD is a clinically heterogeneous disorder that can be difficult to identify and manage. Diagnostic criteria include a history of mucocutaneous bleeding, laboratory studies showing enhanced VWF binding of platelets and/or a 2B VWD genetic variant, and a family history consistent with autosomal dominant inheritance. Thrombocytopenia, although not always present, is common and can be exacerbated by physiologic stressors such as pregnancy. The mainstay of therapy for type 2B VWD is VWF replacement therapy. Adjunct therapies useful in other types of VWD, such as antifibrinolytics, are also used in type 2B VWD. 1-Desamino-8-d-arginine vasopressin (DDAVP) is controversial because of exacerbation of thrombocytopenia, but is, in practice, sometimes used for minor bleeding. Here we review the available evidence and provide 3 clinical cases to illustrate the intricacies of diagnosing type 2B VWD to describe the response to DDAVP and to review complexities and management during pregnancy.

What have we learned from large population studies of von Willebrand disease?

Von Willebrand factor (VWF) is a critical regulator of hemostatic processes, including collagen binding, platelet adhesion, and platelet aggregation. It also serves as a carrier protein to normalize plasma factor VIII synthesis, release, and survival. While VWF protein measurements by immunoassay are reasonably comparable between institutions, the measurement of VWF ristocetin cofactor activity (VWF:RCo) has significant variability. Other tests of VWF function, including collagen binding or platelet glycoprotein IIb-IIIa binding, are not universally available, yet these functional defects may cause major bleeding even with normal VWF antigen (VWF:Ag) and VWF:RCo assays. This results in both the overdiagnosis and underdiagnosis of VWD. Newer assays of VWF function (using recombinant glycoprotein Ib rather than whole platelets) have been developed that may improve interlaboratory variability. Some of these tests are not uniformly available and may not be licensed in the United States. Large longitudinal studies of VWF in von Willebrand disease (VWD) patients are not available. Patients are sometimes diagnosed with a single diagnostic VWF panel. Plasma VWF levels increase with age, but it is not clear if this results in less bleeding or whether different normal ranges should be used to identify age-related decreases in VWF. In order to quantitatively compare bleeding symptoms in VWD patients and normal individuals, recent studies in the European Union, Canada, United Kingdom, Holland, and the United States have used semiquantitative bleeding assessment tools (BATs). Even with careful centralized testing, including functional assays of VWF, addition of a BAT does not solve all of the problems with VWD diagnosis. No matter where the line is drawn for diagnosis of VWD, VWF is still a continuous variable. Thus, VWD can be a severe hemorrhagic disease requiring frequent treatment or a mild condition that may not be clinically relevant. As will be discussed by Dr. Goodeve in her presentation, genetics has helped us to diagnose type 2 functional variants of VWD but has not been helpful for the many patients who are at the interface of normal and low VWF and carry the possible diagnosis of type 1 VWD. The hematologist's management of patients with reduced levels of VWF still requires both the art and science of clinical medicine.