Laboratory testing for activated protein C resistance: rivaroxaban induced interference and a comparative evaluation of andexanet alfa and DOAC Stop to neutralise interference

Evolution of Hemostasis Testing: A Personal Reflection Covering over 40 Years of History

There is no certainty in change, other than change is certain. As Seminars in Thrombosis and Hemostasis celebrates 50 years of publication, I felt it appropriate to reflect on my own 40-year plus scientific career. My career in the thrombosis and hemostasis field did not start until 1987, but the subsequent 35 years reflected a period of significant change in associated disease diagnostics. I started in the Westmead Hospital "coagulation laboratory" when staff were still performing manual clotting tests, using stopwatches, pipettes, test tubes, and a water bath, which we transported to the hospital outpatient department to run our weekly warfarin clinic. Several hemostasis instruments have come and gone, including the Coag-A-Mate X2, the ACL-300R, the MDA-180, the BCS XP, and several StaR Evolution analyzers. Some instruments remain, including the PFA-100, PFA-200, the AggRAM, the CS-5100, an AcuStar, a Hydrasys gel system, and two ACL-TOP 750s. We still have a water bath, but this is primarily used to defrost frozen samples, and manual clotting tests are only used to teach visiting medical students. We have migrated across several methodologies in the 45-year history of the local laboratory. Laurel gel rockets, used for several assays in the 1980s, were replaced with enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay assays and most assays were eventually placed on automated instruments. Radio-isotopic assays, used in the 1980s, were replaced by an alternate safer method or else abandoned. Test numbers have increased markedly over time. The approximately 31,000 hemostasis assays performed at the Westmead-based laboratory in 1983 had become approximately 200,000 in 2022, a sixfold increase. Some 90,000 prothrombin times and activated partial thromboplastic times are now performed at this laboratory per year. Thrombophilia assays were added to the test repertoires over time, as were the tests to measure several anticoagulant drugs, most recently the direct oral anticoagulants. I hope my personal history, reflecting on the changes in hemostasis testing over my career to date in the field, is found to be of interest to the readership, and I hope they forgive any inaccuracies I have introduced in this reflection of the past.

Removing direct oral factor Xa inhibitor interferences from routine and specialised coagulation assays using a raw activated charcoal product

BACKGROUND

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are increasingly prescribed for the prevention and treatment of thrombosis. However, DOACs are associated with extensive interference in coagulation assays. Herein, we evaluate raw activated charcoal (AC) as an adsorbent material, to minimise DOAC-associated interferences in routine and specialised coagulation parameters on CS-series analysers (Sysmex, Kobe, Japan).

METHODS

Commercial human-derived non-anticoagulated plasma materials, with or without increasing concentrations of anticoagulant, were assayed for routine and specialised coagulation parameters before and after treatment with AC.

RESULTS

Treatment of non-anticoagulated plasma with raw AC had minimal impact on routine and specialised coagulation parameters available on the CS-series; however, clinically relevant prolongations of certain activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT)-based assays were observed after treatment. Furthermore, in apixaban- and rivaroxaban-containing plasma material, AC efficiently adsorbed therapeutic and supratherapeutic DOAC concentrations; and, treatment with raw AC resolved DOAC-associated interferences on all affected routine and specialised coagulation parameters.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, raw AC efficiently adsorbed apixaban and rivaroxaban from human-derived plasma, without significantly affecting the majority of underlying routine and specialised coagulation parameters available on CS-series analysers.

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.

Hemostasis and Thrombosis: An Overview Focusing on Associated Laboratory Testing to Diagnose and Help Manage Related Disorders

Hemostasis is a complex but balanced process that permit normal blood flow, without adverse events. Disruption of the balance may lead to bleeding or thrombotic events, and clinical interventions may be required. Hemostasis laboratories typically offer an array of tests, including routine coagulation and specialized hemostasis assays used to guide clinicians for diagnosing and managing patients. Routine assays may be used to screen patients for hemostasis-related disturbances but may also be used for drug monitoring, measuring efficacy of replacement or adjunctive therapy, and other indications, which may then be used to guide further patient management. Similarly, "specialized" assays are used for diagnostic purposes or may be used to monitor or measure efficacy of a given therapy. This chapter provides an overview of hemostasis and thrombosis, with a focus on laboratory testing that may be used to diagnose and help manage patients suspected of hemostasis- and thrombosis-related disorders.

Laboratory Testing for Activated Protein C Resistance (APCR): An Update

Activated protein C resistance (APCR) reflects a hemostatic state defined by a reduced ability of activated protein C (APC) to affect an anticoagulant response. This state of hemostatic imbalance is characterized by a heightened risk of venous thromboembolism. Protein C is an endogenous anticoagulant that is produced by the hepatocytes and undergoes proteolysis-mediated activation to APC. APC in turn degrades activated Factors V and VIII. APCR describes a state of resistance by activated Factors V and VIII to APC-mediated cleavage of these factors, thereby promoting amplified thrombin production and a potentially procoagulant state. This resistance of APC may be inherited or acquired. Mutations in Factor V are responsible for the most frequent form hereditary APCR. The predominant mutation, a G1691A missense mutation at Arginine 506, the so-called Factor V Leiden [FVL], causes a deletion of an APC-targeted cleavage site in Factor Va, thereby rendering it resistant to inactivation by APC. There are a variety of laboratory assays for APCR, but this chapter focuses on a procedure using a commercially available clotting assay that utilizes a snake venom and ACL TOP analyzers.

Rapid Detection of Apixaban by a ROTEM-Based Approach and Reversibility with Andexanet Alfa or DOAC-Stop

Background  A rapid test to detect apixaban treatment would be useful in acute situations such as major bleeding, urgent surgery, or in acute thrombosis.

Objective  This article aims to study if the viscoelastic test rotational thromboelastometry (ROTEM) can rapidly detect apixaban in whole blood using modified triggers based on factor Xa (FXa) or Russell viper venom (RVV).

Method  ROTEM clotting time (CT) was measured in samples from 40 patients on apixaban treatment, and in vitro in samples spiked with apixaban (20–500 ng/mL). Commercially available trigger Ex-tem was compared with modified triggers based on FXa or RVV. Reversibility of apixaban in the samples was studied; CT was measured with and without addition of DOAC-Stop or andexanet alfa, respectively, and the difference in CT was calculated (CT _diff ).

Results  Using FXa as trigger, we detected apixaban concentrations at 20 ng/mL and above with 100% sensitivity and 100% specificity in patient samples and in vitro. Corresponding data for Ex-tem were 92% sensitivity and 100% specificity in patients, and 94% sensitivity and 100% specificity in vitro, and for RVV 97% sensitivity and 94% specificity in patients, and 97% sensitivity and 100% specificity in vitro, respectively. CT _diff data were similar. Patient sample data were obtained within 20 minutes from sampling.

Conclusion  Apixaban at low therapeutic concentrations was detected within 20 minutes, and with high sensitivity and specificity. A trigger based on FXa outperformed the commercial trigger Ex-tem and a trigger based on RVV. ROTEM with a FXa-based trigger is a promising method to detect apixaban bedside in acute settings.

Lupus anticoagulant testing during anticoagulation, including direct oral anticoagulants

Background

Lupus anticoagulants (LA) are one laboratory criterion for classification of antiphospholipid syndrome, with presence of vascular thrombosis and/or pregnancy/fetal morbidity being clinical criteria. The presence of LA is detected (or excluded) by laboratory testing, with the activated partial thromboplastin time and dilute Russell's viper venom time the most commonly used tests. Given the association of thrombosis with LA, it is no surprise that anticoagulants are used to treat or manage such patients.

Objectives

To review and discuss interferences from anticoagulants on LA testing, and strategies to mitigate these.

Methods

This narrative review assessed interference from commonly used anticoagulants, focusing on LA testing while on direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), including use of DOAC neutralizers.

Results

The classical anticoagulants comprise vitamin K antagonists such as warfarin, and heparins, predominantly unfractionated heparin and low molecular weight heparin (LMWH). DOACs have emerged with favorable efficacy and safety. These comprise two classes: direct anti-thrombin (anti-IIa; dabigatran) or direct anti-Xa (rivaroxaban, apixaban, edoxaban) agents. All anticoagulants affect clotting assays, although there are differences in effects according to anticoagulant and assay. Nevertheless, because of such interferences, anticoagulants can lead to false-negative or false-positive LA findings. Several strategies can mitigate such interferences, including avoidance of testing while patients are on such anticoagulants, temporarily switching to an anticoagulant (i.e., LMWH) with less assay interference, testing for LA at nadir levels of anticoagulants, and/or use of anticoagulant neutralizers.

Conclusion

Whilst the best approach is to avoid LA testing on patients taking anticoagulants; if unavoidable, testing may be facilitated by various mitigating strategies.

Evaluation of the Determination of Dabigatran, Rivaroxaban, and Apixaban in Lupus Anticoagulant-Positive Patients

Background: The effect of direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) on laboratory tests dependent on the production of their targets, factor IIa and factor Xa, is a well-known problem and can cause both false positive and negative results. In particular, the situation in patients who develop lupus anticoagulant (LA) antibodies is highly complex. To evaluate the effectiveness of DOAC therapy in lupus-positive patients, 31 samples were enrolled in this retrospective study. All patient samples were spiked with three types of DOAC (dabigatran, DABI; rivaroxaban, RIVA; and apixaban, API) in a concentration that significantly influenced the screening test for LA and thus can mask the presence of LA. Subsequently, the DOAC was always unbound by the DOAC-Stop procedure. DOAC levels before and after binding were determined by functional assays, followed by liquid chromatography coupled with mass spectrometry (LC-MS) analysis. Methods: The determination of DOAC levels was performed by direct thrombin assay and determination of anti-Xa activity with specific calibration as functional tests for DABI and xabans (API and RIVA). To determine concentration levels of API, DABI, and RIVA, our in-house LC-MS method was used. Results: The results of LA-positive samples show significant differences between functional tests and the LC-MS method both before and after DOAC binding. Conclusions: The acute findings of the presence of LA-type antibodies fundamentally affects the determination of DOAC by functional tests, and in this case, it is necessary to use LC-MS analysis to determine the true value. If patients treated with DOAC develop LA of medium and higher titers, we do not recommend checking DOAC levels with functional tests.

Thrombophilia testing in the era of direct oral anticoagulants

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is increasingly recognised in primary and secondary care practice. The arrival of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) has made the management of VTE easier and more convenient. Some patients established on DOACs may need screening for underlying thrombophilias as certain thrombophilic conditions are known to confer a higher thrombosis risk, although the guidelines for when and how to test for a thrombophilia, especially in a patient taking a DOAC, are unclear. This literature review aims to examine when thrombophilia screening should take place in a patient already taking a DOAC, the effect of DOACs on thrombophilia tests, and analyse whether DOACs are safe and effective in both inherited and acquired thrombophilias.

A multi-laboratory assessment of congenital thrombophilia assays performed on the ACL TOP 50 family for harmonisation of thrombophilia testing in a large laboratory network

OBJECTIVES

Thrombophilia testing is commonly performed within hemostasis laboratories, and the ACL TOP 50 family of instruments represent a new 'single platform' of hemostasis instrumentation. The study objective was to evaluate these instruments and manufacturer reagents for utility of congenital thrombophilia assays.

METHODS

Comparative evaluations of various congenital thrombophilia assays (protein C [PC], protein S [PS], antithrombin [AT], activated protein C resistance [APCR]) using newly installed ACL TOPs 550 and 750 as well as comparative assessments with existing, predominantly STAGO, instrumentation and reagents. Verification of manufacturer assay normal reference ranges (NRRs).

RESULTS

HemosIL PC and free PS assays showed good comparability with existing Stago methods (R>0.9) and could be considered as verified as fit for purpose. HemosIL AT showed high relative bias with samples from patients on direct anti-Xa agents, compromising utility. Manufacturer NRRs for PC, PS and AT were verified with minor variance. Given the interference with direct anti-Xa agents, an alternate assay (Hyphen) was evaluated for AT, and the NRR also verified. The HemosIL Factor V Leiden (APC Resistance V) evidenced relatively poor performance compared to existing assays, and could not be adopted for use in our network.

CONCLUSIONS

This evaluation of HemosIL reagents on ACL TOP 50 family instruments identified overall acceptable performance of only two (PC, free PS) of four thrombophilia assays, requiring use of third-party reagents on ACL instruments for the other two assays (AT, APCR).

Comprehensive review of the impact of direct oral anticoagulants on thrombophilia diagnostic tests: Practical recommendations for the laboratory

There is a laboratory and clinical need to know the impact of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) on diagnostic tests to avoid misinterpretation of results. Although the regulatory labelling documents provide some information about the influences of each DOAC on diagnostic tests, these are usually limited to some of the most common tests and no head to head comparison is available. In this paper, we report the impact of DOACs on several thrombophilia tests, including assessment of antithrombin, protein S and protein C activity assays, detection of activated protein C resistance and assays used for lupus anticoagulant. Results are compared and discussed with data obtained from literature. The final goal of this comprehensive review is to provide practical recommendations for laboratories to avoid misdiagnosis due to oral direct factor Xa (FXa) or IIa (FIIa) inhibitors. Overall, oral direct FXa (apixaban, betrixaban, edoxaban and rivaroxaban) and FIIa (dabigatran) antagonists may affect clot-based thrombophilia diagnostic tests resulting in false-positive or false-negative results. An effect on FIIa-based thrombophilia diagnostic tests is observed with dabigatran but not with anti-FXa DOACs and conversely for FXa-based thrombophilia diagnostic tests. No impact was observed with antigenic/chromogenic methods for the assessment of protein S and C activity. In conclusion, interpretation of thrombophilia diagnostic tests results should be done with caution in patients on DOACs. The use of a device/chemical compound able to remove or antagonize the effect of DOACs or the development of new diagnostic tests insensitive to DOACs should be considered to minimize the risk of false results.