Protein S testing in patients with protein S deficiency, factor V Leiden, and rivaroxaban by North American Specialized Coagulation Laboratories

Inherited Thrombophilia in the Era of Direct Oral Anticoagulants

Severe inherited thrombophilia includes rare deficiencies of natural anticoagulants (antithrombin and proteins C and S) and homozygous or combined factor V Leiden and FII G20210A variants. They are associated with a high thrombosis risk and can impact the duration of anticoagulation therapy for patients with a venous thromboembolism (VTE) event. Therefore, it is important to diagnose thrombophilia and to use adapted anticoagulant therapy. The widespread use of direct anticoagulants (DOACs) for VTE has raised new issues concerning inherited thrombophilia. Concerning inherited thrombophilia diagnosis, DOACs are directed toward either FIIa or FXa and can therefore interfere with coagulation assays. This paper reports DOAC interference in several thrombophilia tests, including the assessment of antithrombin, protein S, and protein C activities. Antithrombin activity and clot-based assays used for proteins C and S can be overestimated, with a risk of missing a deficiency. The use of a device to remove DOACs should be considered to minimize the risk of false-negative results. The place of DOACs in the treatment of VTE in thrombophilia patients is also discussed. Available data are encouraging, but given the variability in thrombosis risk within natural anticoagulant deficiencies, evidence in patients with well-characterized thrombophilia would be useful.

Direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) interference in hemostasis assays

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are a group of direct coagulation factor inhibitors including both direct thrombin inhibitors and direct factor Xa inhibitors. These medications may cause hemostasis assay interference by falsely increasing or decreasing measured values, depending on the analyte. Considering the potential for DOAC interference in a variety of hemostasis assays is essential to avoid erroneous interpretation of results. Preanalytic strategies to avoid DOAC interference include selecting alternatives to clot-based hemostasis assays in patients taking DOACs when possible and sample collection timed when the patient is off anticoagulant therapy or at the expected drug trough. Clinical laboratories may also provide educational materials that clearly describe possible interferences from DOAC, develop testing algorithms to aid in detection of DOAC in submitted samples, use DOAC-neutralizing agents to remove DOACs before continuing with testing, and write interpretive comments that explain the effects of DOAC interference in hemostasis tests. Using a combination of the described strategies will aid physicians and laboratorians in correctly interpreting hemostasis and thrombosis laboratory tests in the presence of DOACs.

Three-factorial Genetic Thrombophilia with Recurrent Thrombotic Events in a Saudi Patient: A Case Report

Thrombophilia is caused by several genetic and acquired factors. Existence of more than one genetic factor may increase the risk of developing recurrent thrombotic events. Here, we present a case of a 48-year-old male with a known history of deep venous thrombosis and a known mutation in factor V Leiden combined with mild protein S deficiency, who presented with a painful swelling in the left leg. Moreover, the patient had a history of diabetes, dyslipidemia and obesity. Prothrombin time and platelet count were within the normal range. The international normalized ratio and activated partial thromboplastin time were 3.21 and 36.7 s, respectively. The Doppler study showed a thrombus in the saphenous vein, and complementary genetic screening investigations revealed heterozygous mutation for prothrombin (G20210A). A diagnosis of multifactorial genetic thrombophilia was established. The patient was treated with warfarin, which resulted in significant improvement in the follow-ups, and at the time of reporting this case, there were no clinical or biological signs of thrombosis. The presence of multiple hereditary and acquired thrombophilic factors is a rare clinical presentation that requires close monitoring, for which a lifelong anticoagulation therapy should be discussed based on the clinical response of the patient.

Plasma phenotypes of protein S Lys196Glu and protein C Lys193del variants prevalent among young Japanese women

Protein S Tokushima (p.Lys196Glu) and two protein C gene variants (p.Arg189Trp, p.Lys193del) are hereditary thrombophilia in Japanese and Chinese populations, respectively; however, their diagnosis by plasma analyses is difficult because of the type II deficiency phenotype. Three gene variant genotypes were examined in young Japanese women (n = 231). Plasma total protein S activity and total protein S antigen levels were measured using a total protein S assay system, protein C and protein S activities by clot-based methods, and protein C and free protein S antigen levels by latex agglutination methods. protein S Tokushima (p.Lys196Glu) and protein C p.Lys193del variants were prevalent among participants with allele frequencies of 1.08 and 0.86%, respectively, whereas any carrier of protein C p.Arg189Trp variant was not identified. The plasma phenotype of the type II deficiency of protein S Tokushima heterozygotes was demonstrated by decreased total protein S activity with a normal total protein S antigen level; however, the protein C activities of protein C p.Lys193del heterozygotes were within reference intervals, whereas their protein C antigen levels were elevated. We compared the diagnostic accuracy of the total protein S activity/total protein S antigen ratio for identifying protein S Tokushima heterozygotes with that of the clot-based protein S activity/free protein S antigen ratio and found that sensitivity and specificity of 100% each was only achieved by the former. Protein S Tokushima and protein C p.Lys193del are prevalent among young Japanese women, and a plasma analysis using the total protein S assay system is more accurate than the clot-based protein S activity/free protein S antigen ratio for diagnosing protein S Tokushima carriers.

Towards harmonization of external quality assessment/proficiency testing in hemostasis

Quality in diagnostic testing represents a key target of laboratory medicine, for which an assurance around the quality of testing is expected from all involved in the process. Laboratories attempt to assure the quality of their testing by various processes, but especially by performance of internal quality control and external quality assessment (EQA). This is especially true for tests of hemostasis and coagulation. EQA in general provides information on test accuracy and on evaluation of long-term laboratory performance. EQA providers support laboratory performance by various means, including distribution of material for testing of analytes (“proficiency testing”), educational support through expert advice, distribution of publications or case series. Participation in EQA is often a laboratory accreditation requirement. This review aims to identify some of the strengths and weaknesses of EQA, and targets attempts towards harmonization of EQA practice, in order to achieve the best outcome for participant laboratories and, thus, for patients and their clinical care providers.

Testing for dabigatran and rivaroxaban by clinical laboratories

Rivaroxaban and dabigatran are among the newest anticoagulants, and measuring their concentration in patients is a new challenge for clinical laboratories. We analyzed data from the ECAT proficiency program to determine how well the assays are performing in clinical laboratories internationally. Most laboratories received a passing grade (Z score <3) for the results of their dabigatran and rivaroxaban testing. Failing Z scores were not associated with any particular method. With dabigatran, some homemade calibrators gave higher results than the commercially available calibrators. There were no significant differences among the instruments or the 5 reagents in use, but results showed inter-laboratory variability that could have clinical significance. The 3 reagents with the lowest number of users had poor inter-laboratory precision. Ten different anti-Xa reagents were in use for rivaroxaban testing. One reagent gave lower results than other reagents at 100 ng/mL but not at 300 ng/mL. There were no significant differences among the different rivaroxaban calibrators or instruments. In conclusion, inter-laboratory precision could be improved for both dabigatran and rivaroxaban assays. Homemade dabigatran calibrators differed from commercially available calibrators, and there was a statistically significant difference between some of the rivaroxaban reagents. About 10% of results received failing Z scores or passed but fell in a range that require the laboratory to investigate for bias or other inaccuracy in their method. Am. J. Hematol. 91:E464-E467, 2016. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.