C J Verfaillie1, E De Witte, K M J Devreese. 1. Coagulation Laboratory, Department of Clinical Chemistry, Microbiology and Immunology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The diagnosis of von Willebrand disease (VWD) largely depends on the results of von Willebrand factor (VWF) antigen and activity. Recently, a new automated VWF:RCo assay on Acustar was developed. This assay panel for VWD also contains a new antigen (VWF:Ag) test. In this study, both chemiluminescence tests (HemosIL VWF:Ag and VWF:RCo) were evaluated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Imprecision, limit of detection (LOD), and linearity were evaluated. Method comparison (with VWF:Ag latex assay and VWF:RCo by aggregometry) was performed and diagnostic performance of the new test panel was examined. RESULTS: The imprecision was 7%, and the LOD was 0.2 IU/dL for both assays. Dilution series showed a large linearity for both HemosIL VWF:Ag (0-300 IU/dL) and VWF:RCo (0-200 IU/dL) and method comparison studies revealed good agreement with the currently used VWD panel. The new panel showed adequate diagnostic performance: diagnostic sensitivity was 100% and diagnostic specificity 82% compared with the VWF:Ag latex assay and VWF:RCo by aggregometry. In addition, the new HemosIL Acustar VWF:Ag and HemosIL Acustar VWF:RCo are more sensitive for VWD than the currently used assays. CONCLUSIONS: This new VWD test panel has adequate laboratory characteristics and allows fully automated and simultaneous analysis of the VWF:Ag and VWF:RCo.
INTRODUCTION: The diagnosis of von Willebrand disease (VWD) largely depends on the results of von Willebrand factor (VWF) antigen and activity. Recently, a new automated VWF:RCo assay on Acustar was developed. This assay panel for VWD also contains a new antigen (VWF:Ag) test. In this study, both chemiluminescence tests (HemosIL VWF:Ag and VWF:RCo) were evaluated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Imprecision, limit of detection (LOD), and linearity were evaluated. Method comparison (with VWF:Ag latex assay and VWF:RCo by aggregometry) was performed and diagnostic performance of the new test panel was examined. RESULTS: The imprecision was 7%, and the LOD was 0.2 IU/dL for both assays. Dilution series showed a large linearity for both HemosIL VWF:Ag (0-300 IU/dL) and VWF:RCo (0-200 IU/dL) and method comparison studies revealed good agreement with the currently used VWD panel. The new panel showed adequate diagnostic performance: diagnostic sensitivity was 100% and diagnostic specificity 82% compared with the VWF:Ag latex assay and VWF:RCo by aggregometry. In addition, the new HemosIL Acustar VWF:Ag and HemosIL Acustar VWF:RCo are more sensitive for VWD than the currently used assays. CONCLUSIONS: This new VWD test panel has adequate laboratory characteristics and allows fully automated and simultaneous analysis of the VWF:Ag and VWF:RCo.
Authors: Jonathan C Roberts; Patti A Morateck; Pamela A Christopherson; Ke Yan; Raymond G Hoffmann; Joan Cox Gill; Robert R Montgomery Journal: Blood Date: 2016-02-25 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: A Szederjesi; L Baronciani; U Budde; G Castaman; A S Lawrie; Y Liu; R Montgomery; F Peyvandi; R Schneppenheim; A Várkonyi; J Patzke; I Bodó Journal: J Thromb Haemost Date: 2018-06-13 Impact factor: 5.824
Authors: Alberto Zanetto; Henry M Rinder; Elena Campello; Graziella Saggiorato; Yanhong Deng; Maria Ciarleglio; Francis P Wilson; Marco Senzolo; Sabrina Gavasso; Cristiana Bulato; Paolo Simioni; Guadalupe Garcia-Tsao Journal: Hepatology Date: 2020-10 Impact factor: 17.425