Validation of a new panel of automated chemiluminescence assays for von Willebrand factor antigen and activity in the screening for von Willebrand disease

Verfaillie, Charlotte; Witte, Evy De; Devreese, Katrien

doi:10.1111/ijlh.12087

Cited by 30 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This patient had increased ristocetin-induced platelet agglutination at 0.3 mg mL À1 , and a type 2B mutation, and has been referred to in a previous publication [14]. Results of our comparison of VWF:RCo[Acu] with VWF:RCo [Agg] are in agreement with the findings reported by others [16,23], although Carbera et al [16] used a Behring Coagulation Timer rather than aggregometry for their reference VWF:RCo, and Verfaillie et al [23] did not assess samples from type 2 VWD. In contrast, Costa-Pinto et al [24], found higher results by AcuStar chemiluminescence assay compared with aggregometry, but also found low activity levels by AcuStar in 80 of their 81 patients with type 2 VWD, with only one type 2M patient detected by aggregometry and not by AcuStar.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparison of von Willebrand factor (VWF) activity levels determined by HemosIL AcuStar assay and HemosIL LIA assay with ristocetin cofactor assay by aggregometry

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

“… used a Behring Coagulation Timer rather than aggregometry for their reference VWF:RCo, and Verfaillie et al . did not assess samples from type 2 VWD. In contrast, Costa‐Pinto et al .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of von Willebrand factor (VWF) activity levels determined by HemosIL AcuStar assay and HemosIL LIA assay with ristocetin cofactor assay by aggregometry

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As expected, and also reported by others, all of the new assays (i.e. VWF:GPIbR by the HemosIL latex agglutination assay and the HemosIL AcuStar assay , the VWF:GPIbM Siemens assay and the VWF:Ab assay ) performed well and yielded results close to the old reference standard VWF:RCo. Although statistically significant and consistent in all participating laboratories, the slightly steeper regression lines for the VWF:Ab and VWF:GPIbM were clinically insignificant.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

An international collaborative study to compare different von Willebrand factor glycoprotein Ib binding activity assays: the COMPASS‐VWF study

Szederjesi

Baronciani

Budde³

et al. 2018

Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Several new assays have become available to measure von Willebrand factor (VWF) activity. The new assays appear to have improved performance characteristics compared with the old reference standard, ristocetin cofactor activity (VWF:RCo), but information is limited about how they compare with VWF:RCo and each other. Methods The von Willebrand factor Subcommittee of the International Society for Thrombosis and Haemostasis (ISTH) Scientific and Standardization Committee (SSC) designed a collaborative study involving expert laboratories from several countries to compare available tests with each other and with VWF:RCo. Eight laboratories from five countries were provided with blinded samples from normal healthy individuals and well-characterized clinical cases. Laboratories measured VWF activity using all tests available to them; data from six laboratories, not affected by thawing during transportation, are included in this study. Results All tests correlated well with VWF:RCo activity (r-values ranged from 0.963 to 0.989). Slightly steeper regression lines for VWF:Ab and VWF:GPIbM were clinically insignificant. The new assays showed improved performance characteristics. Of the commercially available assays, the VWF:GPIbR using the AcuStar system was the most sensitive and could reliably detect VWF activity below 1 IU dL . The lower limit of the measuring interval for the VWF:GPIbM and the VWF:GPIbR assays was in the 3-4 and 3-6 IU dL range, respectively. Inter-laboratory variation was also improved for most new assays. Conclusion All VWF activity assays correlated well with each other and the VWF:RCo assay. The slight differences in characteristics found in the COMPASS-VWF study will assist the VWF community in interpreting and comparing activity results.

show abstract

“…The ACL AcuStar™ analyzer (Instrumentation Laboratory Company, Bedford, MA, USA) is the first instrumentation introducing chemiluminescence technology to perform quantitative [HemosIL AcuStar VWF:Ag (VWF:Ag‐IL)] and qualitative immunoassays [HemosIL AcuStar VWF:RCo (VWF:RCo‐IL)] of VWF. Recent studies showed that this methods good performance and high sensitivity at low concentration of VWF makes it suitable for the diagnosis of VWD .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diagnosis of inherited von Willebrand disease: comparison of two methodologies and analysis of the discrepancies

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Diagnostics of von Willebrand disease (VWD) includes assessment of factor VIII (FVIII) coagulant activity, von Willebrand factor (VWF) antigen (VWF:Ag) and VWF ristocetin cofactor activity (VWF:RCo), and more specific tests as multimeric and genetic analyses are necessary for the correct VWD classification. The ACL AcuStar analyzer introduces chemiluminescence (CL) technology in detection of VWD with automated VWF:Ag and VWF:RCo assays. Compare VWF:Ag-ELISA and VWF:RCo by aggregometry conventional assays with new CL VWF:Ag-IL and VWF:RCo-IL assays, investigate the ability to make accurate VWD diagnosis and concordance with multimeric and genetic analyses. 146 patients with congenital VWD (51 Type 1; 34 Type 2A; 16 Type 2B; 31 Type 2M; 5 Type 2N; 9 Type 3) and 30 healthy normal subjects were included. A comparison was made between CL and conventional methods. Diagnostic evaluation included: VWF:RCo/VWF:Ag ratio, multimeric distribution (sodium dodecyl sulfate [SDS]-agarose gel) of VWF and genetic analysis in 110 of 146 patients. CL and conventional methods revealed good correlation. Kappa test agreement diagnosis was >0.8. CL diagnostic sensitivity was 100% and specificity 97%. Multimeric and genetic analysis were of help in clarifying 13 discrepancies of diagnosis between methods, of which six discrepancies were explained by lack of conventional methods′ sensibility. CL methodology can detect VWD and discriminate between type 1, 3 and variant forms and offers an automated, faster, sensitive and less cumbersome method when compared to conventional assays, in particular VWF:RCo by aggregometry. In some cases, even with all phenotype and genetic analyses, discrepancies exist in the classification of VWD.

show abstract

Validation of a new panel of automated chemiluminescence assays for von Willebrand factor antigen and activity in the screening for von Willebrand disease

Abstract: This new VWD test panel has adequate laboratory characteristics and allows fully automated and simultaneous analysis of the VWF:Ag and VWF:RCo.

Cited by 30 publications

References 37 publications

Comparison of von Willebrand factor (VWF) activity levels determined by HemosIL AcuStar assay and HemosIL LIA assay with ristocetin cofactor assay by aggregometry

Comparison of von Willebrand factor (VWF) activity levels determined by HemosIL AcuStar assay and HemosIL LIA assay with ristocetin cofactor assay by aggregometry

An international collaborative study to compare different von Willebrand factor glycoprotein Ib binding activity assays: the COMPASS‐VWF study

Diagnosis of inherited von Willebrand disease: comparison of two methodologies and analysis of the discrepancies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About