Thrombosis and haemostasis · 2023
Clinical Implications of Discrepancy between One-Stage Clotting and Chromogenic Factor IX Activity in Hemophilia B.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Schmidt David E, Truedsson Åsa, Strålfors Annelie, Hojbjerg Johanne Andersen, Soutari Nida, Holmström Margareta, Ranta Susanna, Letelier Anna, Bowyer Annette, Ljung Rolf, Antovic Jovan, Bruzelius Maria
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Discrepancy in factor IX activity (FIX:C) between one-stage assay (OSA) and chromogenic substrate assay (CSA) in patients with hemophilia B (PwHB) introduces challenges for clinical management.
AIM: To study the differences in FIX:C using OSA and CSA in moderate and mild hemophilia B (HB), their impact on classification of severity, and correlation with genotype.
METHODS: Single-center study including 21 genotyped and clinically characterized PwHB. FIX:C by OSA was measured using ActinFSL (Siemens) and CSA by Biophen (Hyphen). In addition, in vitro experiments with wild-type FIX were performed. Reproducibility of CSA was assessed between three European coagulation laboratories.
RESULTS: FIX:C by CSA was consistently lower than by OSA, with 10/17 PwHB having a more severe hemophilia type by CSA. OSA displayed a more accurate description of the clinical bleeding severity, compared with CSA. A twofold difference between OSA:CSA FIX:C was present in 12/17 PwHB; all patients had genetic missense variants in the FIX serine protease domain. Discrepancy was also observed with diluted normal plasma, most significant for values below 0.10 IU/mL. Assessment of samples with low FIX:C showed excellent reproducibility of the CSA results between the laboratories.
CONCLUSION: FIX:C was consistently higher by OSA compared with the CSA. Assessing FIX:C by CSA alone would have led to diagnosis of a more severe hemophilia type in a significant proportion of patients. Our study suggests using both OSA and CSA FIX:C together with genotyping to classify HB severity and provide essential information for clinical management.
AIM: To study the differences in FIX:C using OSA and CSA in moderate and mild hemophilia B (HB), their impact on classification of severity, and correlation with genotype.
METHODS: Single-center study including 21 genotyped and clinically characterized PwHB. FIX:C by OSA was measured using ActinFSL (Siemens) and CSA by Biophen (Hyphen). In addition, in vitro experiments with wild-type FIX were performed. Reproducibility of CSA was assessed between three European coagulation laboratories.
RESULTS: FIX:C by CSA was consistently lower than by OSA, with 10/17 PwHB having a more severe hemophilia type by CSA. OSA displayed a more accurate description of the clinical bleeding severity, compared with CSA. A twofold difference between OSA:CSA FIX:C was present in 12/17 PwHB; all patients had genetic missense variants in the FIX serine protease domain. Discrepancy was also observed with diluted normal plasma, most significant for values below 0.10 IU/mL. Assessment of samples with low FIX:C showed excellent reproducibility of the CSA results between the laboratories.
CONCLUSION: FIX:C was consistently higher by OSA compared with the CSA. Assessing FIX:C by CSA alone would have led to diagnosis of a more severe hemophilia type in a significant proportion of patients. Our study suggests using both OSA and CSA FIX:C together with genotyping to classify HB severity and provide essential information for clinical management.