Update on laboratory practice for the diagnosis of lupus anticoagulant and the antiphospholipid syndrome

Abstract

Antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) is defined as an autoimmune and prothrombotic disorder in patients with the persistent presence of antiphospholipid antibodies (aPLs). In the classification criteria, aPL expresses lupus anticoagulant (LA) activity, which is detected by prolongation of coagulation assays. The LA detection algorithm is a sequential flow including screening tests, mixing tests, and confirmatory tests to differentiate between LA-positive and other anticoagulant abnormalities. Two types of assays are used, like dilute Russell’s viper venom time (dRVVT) and activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT) because no single test is sensitive to all LAs. The anticoagulant drugs prescribed for the prevention and treatment of thrombosis disorders can interfere with the assays, and it is important to know the effects of these drugs in the assays. Especially, new generation anticoagulant drugs, called direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), affect the results. In this review, the following points are discussed: i) LA detection flow and data interpretation, ii) the principles of coagulation assays proposed and their characteristics, and iii) the effects of anticoagulant drugs in LA detection.

Keywords

Lupus anticoagulant / thrombosis / antiphospholipid syndrome / antiphospholipid antibodies / activated partial thromboplastin time / dilute Russell’s viper venom time

References

[1] Lim W. Antiphospholipid syndrome. Hematology Am Soc Hematol Educ Program. 2013; 2013: 675-80.

[2] Devreese KMJ. Antiphospholipid antibodies: evaluation of the thrombotic risk. Thromb Res. 2012; 130: S37-40.

[3] Vreede AP, Bockenstedt PL, Knight JS. Antiphospholipid syndrome: an update for clinicians and scientists. Curr Opin Rheumatol. 2017; 29: 458-66.

[4] Derksen RH, de Groot PG, Kater L, Nieuwenhuis HK. Patients with antiphospholipid antibodies and venous thrombosis should receive long term anticoagulant treatment. Ann Rheum Dis. 1993; 52: 689-92.

[5] Miyakis S, Lockshin MD, Atsumi T, Branch DW, Brey RL, Cervera R, et al. International consensus statement on an update of the classification criteria for definite antiphospholipid syndrome (APS). J Thromb Haemost. 2006; 4: 295-306.

[6] Gutensohn K, Vossen D, Strate A, Kersten JF, Hofbauer M, Krieger T. Automated, semi-automated, and manual analyses of anti-cardiolipin and anti-β2-glycoprotein I antibodies in women with a history of miscarriage. Int J Lab Hematol. 2013; 35: 150-62.

[7] Van Hoecke F, Persijn L, Decavele AS, Devreese K. Performance of two new, automated chemiluminescence assay panels for anticardiolipin and anti-beta2-glycoprotein I antibodies in the laboratory diagnosis of the antiphospholipid syndrome. Int J Lab Hematol. 2012; 34: 630-40.

[8] Devreese KMJ, de Groot PG, de Laat B, Erkan D, Favaloro EJ, Mackie I, et al. Guidance from the Scientific and Standardization Committee for lupus anticoagulant/antiphospholipid antibodies of the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis: update of the guidelines for lupus anticoagulant detection and interpretation. J Thromb Haemost. 2020; 18: 2828-39.

[9] Pengo V, Tripodi A, Reber G, Rand JH, Ortel TL, Galli M, et al. ; Subcommittee on Lupus Anticoagulant/Antiphospholipid Antibody of the Scientific and Standardisation Committee of the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis. Update of the guidelines for lupus anticoagulant detection. J Thromb Haemost. 2009; 7: 1737-40.

[10] Keeling D, Mackie I, Moore GW, Greer IA, Greaves M ; British Committee for Standards in Haematology. Guidelines on the investigation and management of antiphospholipid syndrome. Br J Haematol. 2012; 157: 47-58.

[11] Ledford-Kraemer M, Moore GW, Bottenus R, Brandt JT, Castellone DD, Daniele C, et al. Laboratory testing for the lupus anticoagulant; approved guideline. CLSI. 2014; 34: 1-94.

[12] Tripodi A, Cohen H, Devreese KMJ. Lupus anticoagulant detection in anticoagulated patients. Guidance from the Scientific and Standardization Committee for lupus anticoagulant/antiphospholipid antibodies of the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis. J Thromb Haemost. 2020; 18: 1569-75.

[13] Moore GW. Recent guidelines and recommendations for laboratory detection of lupus anticoagulants. Semin Thromb Hemost. 2014; 40: 163-71.

[14] Moore GW. Testing for lupus anticoagulants. Semin Thromb Hemost. 2022; 48: 643-60.

[15] Okuda M, Yamamoto Y. Usefulness of synthetic phospholipid in measurement of activated partial thromboplastin time: a new preparation procedure to reduce batch difference. Clin Lab Haematol. 2004; 26: 215-23.

[16] Kelsey PR, Stevenson KJ, Poller L. The diagnosis of lupus anticoagulants by the activated partial thromboplastin time - the central role of phosphatidyl serine. Thromb Haemost. 1984; 52: 172-5.

[17] Stevenson KJ, Seddon JM. The role of lipids in the detection of lupus anticoagulant by the dilute Russell viper venom test: are platelets or reagents containing hexagonal H_II phases necessary? Br J Haematol. 1994; 86: 583-9.

[18] Moore GW. Current controversies in lupus anticoagulant detection. Antibodies (Basel). 2016; 5: 22.

[19] Moore GW, Culhane AP, Daw CR, Noronha CP, Kumano O. Mixing test specific cut-off is more sensitive at detecting lupus anticoagulants than index of circulating anticoagulant. Thromb Res. 2016; 139: 98-101.

[20] Kumano O, Moore GW. Lupus anticoagulant mixing tests for multiple reagents are more sensitive if interpreted with a mixing test-specific cut-off than index of circulating anticoagulant. Res Pract Thromb Haemost. 2017; 2: 105-13.

[21] Kumano O, Amiral J, Dunois C, Peyrafitte M, Moore GW. Applying index of circulating anticoagulant to mixing tests with lupus anticoagulant screen and confirm reagents can distinguish with high specificity between lupus anticoagulants and direct factor Xa inhibitors. Int J Lab Hematol. 2021; 43: 771-8.

[22] Exner T, Low J. Detection of procoagulant phospholipid interfering in tests for lupus anticoagulant. Thromb Res. 2004; 114: 547-52.

[23] Jennings I, Kitchen S, Kitchen DP, Woods TAL, Walker ID. ISTH/SSC lupus anticoagulant testing guidelines: how far have these been adopted by laboratories? J Thromb Haemost. 2011; 9: 2117- 9.

[24] Moffat KA, Ledford-Kraemer MR, Plumhoff EA, McKay H, Nichols WL, Meijer P, et al. Are laboratories following published recommendations for lupus anticoagulant testing? An international evaluation of practices. Thromb Haemost. 2009; 101: 178-84.

[25] Favaloro EJ, Kershaw G, Mohammed S, Lippi G. How to optimize activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT) testing: solutions to establishing and verifying normal reference intervals and assessing APTT reagents for sensitivity to heparin, lupus anticoagulant, and clotting factors. Semin Thromb Hemost. 2019; 45: 22-35.

[26] Moore GW. Snake venoms in diagnostic hemostasis and thrombosis. Semin Thromb Hemost. 2022; 48: 145-60.

[27] Favaloro EJ. The Russell viper venom time (RVVT) test for investigation of lupus anticoagulant (LA). Am J Hematol. 2019; 94: 1290-6.

[28] McGlasson DL, Fristma GA. Comparison of six dilute Russell viper venom time lupus anticoagulant screen/confirm assay kits. Semin Thromb Hemost. 2013; 39: 315-9.

[29] Bowyer A, Kitchen S, Makris M. The responsiveness of different APTT reagents to mild factor VIII, IX and XI deficiencies. Int J Lab Hematol. 2011; 33: 154-8.

[30] Lawrie AS, Kitchen S, Efthymiou M, Mackie IJ, Machin SJ. Determination of APTT factor sensitivity - the misguiding guideline. Int J Lab Hematol. 2013; 35: 652-7.

[31] Jennings I, Kitchen DP, Kitchen S, Woods TAL, Walker ID. Investigation of a prolonged APTT. Different approaches taken by laboratories to achieve the same diagnosis. Int J Lab Hematol. 2013; 35: 177-82.

[32] Bowyer A, Smith J, Woolley AM, Kitchen S, Hampton KK, Maclean RM, et al. The investigation of a prolonged APTT with specific clotting factor assays is unnecessary if an APTT with Actin FS is normal. Int J Lab Hematol. 2011; 33: 212-8.

[33] Rozen L, Copette F, Noubouossie DF, Demulder A. Evaluation of three APTT reagents in a routine laboratory: toward a compromise. Clin Lab. 2013; 59: 921-4.

[34] van den Besselaar AM, Neuteboom J, Bertina RM. Effect of synthetic phospholipids on the response of the activated partial thromboplastin time to heparin. Blood Coagul Fibrinolysis. 1993; 4: 895-903.

[35] Kitchen S, Cartwright I, Woods TA, Jennings I, Preston FE. Lipid composition of seven APTT reagents in relation to heparin sensitivity. Br J Haematol. 1999; 106: 801-8.

[36] Stevenson KJ, Easton AC, Curry A, Thomson JM, Poller L. The reliability of activated partial thromboplastin time methods and the relationship to lipid composition and ultrastructure. Thromb Haemost. 1986; 55: 250-8.

[37] Li R, Swaelens C, Vandermijnsbrugge F, Cantinieaux B. Applying a direct aPTT ratio (PlatelinLS/ActinFS) permits to identify rapidly and reliably a bleeding-related factor deficiency or a lupus anticoagulant sequential to an isolated prolongation of aPTT in paediatric pre-operative screening. Eur J Haematol. 2016; 96: 578-85.

[38] Tripodi A, Biasiolo A, Chantarangkul V, Pengo V. Lupus anticoagulant (LA) testing: performance of clinical laboratories assessed by a national survey using lyophilized affinity-purified immunoglobulin with LA activity. Clin Chem. 2003; 49: 1608-14.

[39] Moore GW, Kumano O. Lupus anticoagulant assay cut-offs vary between reagents even when derived from a common set of normal donor plasmas. J Thromb Haemost. 2020; 18: 439-44.

[40] Kumano O, Ieko M, Naito S, Yoshida M, Takahashi N. APTT reagent with ellagic acid as activator shows adequate lupus anticoagulant sensitivity in comparison to silica-based reagent. J Thromb Haemost. 2012; 10: 2338-43.

[41] Triplett DA, Brandt JT, Kaczor D, Schaeffer J. Laboratory diagnosis of lupus inhibitors: a comparison of the tissue thromboplastin inhibition procedure with a new platelet neutralization procedure. Am J Clin Pathol. 1983; 79: 678-82.

[42] Kumano O, Amiral J, Dunois J, Peyrafitte M, Moore GW. Paired APTTs of low and high lupus anticoagulant sensitivity permit distinction from other abnormalities and achieve good lupus anticoagulant detection rates in conjunction with dRVVT. Int J Lab Hematol. 2019; 41: 60-8.

[43] Averina M, Johannesen S, Brox J. Diagnostic accuracy of silica clotting time method for lupus anticoagulant in a clinical population with various symptoms of antiphospholipid syndrome. Lupus. 2016; 25: 418-22.

[44] Grypiotis P, Ruffatti A, Pengo V, Tonello M, Biasiolo A, Zamboni D, et al. Use of a new silica clotting time for diagnosing lupus anticoagulant in patients who meet the clinical criteria for antiphospholipid syndrome. J Clin Lab Anal. 2006; 20: 15-8.

[45] Devreese KMJ. Evaluation of a new silica clotting time in the diagnosis of lupus anticoagulants. Thromb Res. 2007; 120: 427-38.

[46] Harris EN, Gharavi AE, Patel SP, Hughes GR. Evaluation of the anti-cardiolipin antibody test: report of an international workshop held 4 April 1986. Clin Exp Immunol. 1987; 68: 215-22.

[47] Harris EN, Pierangeli SS. Revisiting the anticardiolipin test and its standardization. Lupus. 2002; 11: 269-75.

[48] Tincani A, Allegri F, Balestrieri G, Reber G, Sanmarco M, Meroni P, et al. Minimal requirements for antiphospholipid antibodies ELISAs proposed by the European Forum on antiphospholipid antibodies. Thromb Res. 2004; 114: 553-8.

[49] Loizou S, McCrea JD, Rudge AC, Reynolds R, Boyle CC, Harris EN. Measurement of anti-cardiolipin antibodies by an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA): standardization and quantitation of results. Clin Exp Immunol. 1985; 62: 738-45.

[50] Ichikawa K, Khamashta MA, Koike T, Matsuura E, Hughes GR. β₂-Glycoprotein i reactivity of monoclonal anticardiolipin antibodies from patients with the antiphospholipid syndrome . Arthritis Rheum. 1994; 37: 1453-61.

[51] Ichikawa K, Tsutsumi A, Atsumi T, Matsuura E, Kobayashi S, Hughes GR, et al. A chimeric antibody with the human γ1 constant region as a putative standard for assays to detect IgG β₂-glycoprotein I-dependent anticardiolipin and anti-β₂-glycoprotein I antibodies . Arthritis Rheum. 1999; 42: 2461-70.

[52] WHO reference panel 1st international reference panel for lupus anticoagulant NIBSC code: 13/172 instructions for use (version 1.0, dated 23/02/2015) [Internet]. NIBSC; [cited 2015 Feb 23]. Available from: https://www.nibsc.org/documents/ifu/13-172.pdf

[53] Non WHO reference material 1st British reference plasma panel for lupus anticoagulant NIBSC code: 96/522; 96/554 & 96/560 instructions for use (version 6.0, dated 08/08/2013) [Internet]. NIBSC; [cited 2013 Aug 8]. Available from: https://www.nibsc.org/documents/ifu/96-522.pdf

[54] Rosenberg RD, Lam L. Correlation between structure and function of heparin. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1979; 76: 1218-22.

[55] Turpie AG, Gallus AS, Hoek JA ; Pentasaccharide Investigators. A synthetic pentasaccharide for the prevention of deep-vein thrombosis after total hip replacement. N Engl J Med. 2001; 344: 619-25.

[56] Herbert JM, Hérault JP, Bernat A, van Amsterdam RG, Lormeau JC, Petitou M, et al. Biochemical and pharmacological properties of SANORG 34006, a potent and long-acting synthetic pentasaccharide. Blood. 1998; 91: 4197-205.

[57] Eriksson BI, Bauer KA, Lassen MR, Turpie AG ; Steering Committee of the Pentasaccharide in Hip-Fracture Surgery Study. Fondaparinux compared with enoxaparin for the prevention of venous thromboembolism after hip-fracture surgery. N Engl J Med. 2001; 345: 1298-304.

[58] Hirsh J, Raschke R. Heparin and low-molecular-weight heparin: the seventh ACCP Conference on Antithrombotic and Thrombolytic Therapy. Chest. 2004; 126: 188S-203S.

[59] De Kesel PMM, Devreese KMJ. The effect of unfractionated heparin, enoxaparin, and danaparoid on lupus anticoagulant testing: can activated carbon eliminate false-positive results? Res Pract Thromb Haemost. 2019; 4: 161-8.

[60] Martinuzzo ME, Barrera LH, D’adamo MA, Otaso JC, Gimenez MI, Oyhamburu J. Frequent false-positive results of lupus anticoagulant tests in plasmas of patients receiving the new oral anticoagulants and enoxaparin. Int J Lab Hematol. 2014; 36: 144-50.

[61] Newman DJ, Cragg GM. Natural products as sources of new drugs over the 30 years from 1981 to 2010. J Nat Prod. 2012; 75: 311-35.

[62] Leite PM, Martins MAP, Castilho RO. Review on mechanisms and interactions in concomitant use of herbs and warfarin therapy. Biomed Pharmacother. 2016; 83: 14-21.

[63] Donaldson CJ, Harrington DJ. Therapeutic warfarin use and the extrahepatic functions of vitamin K-dependent proteins. Br J Biomed Sci. 2017; 74: 163-9.

[64] Kanouchi K, Narimatsu H, Ohnuma O, Morikane K, Fukao A. Clinical usefulness of the dilute Russell viper venom time test for patients taking warfarin. Int J Hematol. 2017; 106: 206-11.

[65] Jouhikainen T. Detection of lupus anticoagulant by means of dilute Russell’s viper venom time is affected by oral anticoagulant therapy. Blood Coagul Fibrinolysis. 1990; 1: 627-32.

[66] Olteanu H, Downes KA, Patel J, Praprotnik D, Sarode R. Warfarin does not interfere with lupus anticoagulant detection by dilute Russell’s viper venom time. Clin Lab. 2009; 55: 138-42.

[67] Chandler JB, Torres R, Rinder HM, Tormey CA. Lupus anticoagulant testing and anticoagulation do not mix: quantitation of discrepant results and potential approaches to reduce false positives. Br J Haematol. 2014; 167: 704-7.

[68] Pennings MTT, De Groot PG, Meijers JCM, Huisman A, Derksen RHWM, Urbanus RT. Optimisation of lupus anticoagulant tests: should test samples always be mixed with normal plasma? Thromb Haemost. 2014; 112: 736-42.

[69] Isert M, Miesbach W, Stoever G, Lindhoff-Last E, Linnemann B. Screening for lupus anticoagulants in patients treated with vitamin K antagonists. Int J Lab Hematol. 2015; 37: 758-65.

[70] Kumano O, Ieko M, Naito S, Yoshida M, Takahashi N, Suzuki T, et al. Verification of the guidelines for lupus anticoagulant detection: usefulness of index for circulating anticoagulant in APTT mixing test. Thromb Res. 2014; 134: 503-9.

[71] Kumano O, Moore GW. Ruling out lupus anticoagulants with mixing test-specific cutoff assessment and the index of circulating anticoagulant. Res Pract Thromb Haemost. 2019; 3: 695-703.

[72] Moore GW, Culhane AP, Maloney JC, Archer RA, Breen KA, Hunt BJ. Taipan snake venom time coupled with ecarin time enhances lupus anticoagulant detection in nonanticoagulated patients. Blood Coagul Fibrinolysis. 2016; 27: 477-80.

[73] Moore GW. Combining Taipan snake venom time/ecarin time screening with the mixing studies of conventional assays increases detection rates of lupus anticoagulants in orally anticoagulated patients. Thromb J. 2007; 5: 12.

[74] Moore GW, Peyrafitte M, Dunois C, Amiral J. Newly developed dilute Russell’s viper venom reagents for lupus anticoagulant detection with improved specificity. Lupus. 2018; 27: 95-104.

[75] Stangier J. Clinical pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the oral direct thrombin inhibitor dabigatran etexilate. Clin Pharmacokinet. 2008; 47: 285-95.

[76] Perzborn E, Strassburger J, Wilmen A, Pohlmann J, Roehrig S, Schlemmer KH, et al. In vitro and in vivo studies of the novel antithrombotic agent BAY 59-7939-an oral, direct Factor Xa inhibitor . J Thromb Haemost. 2005; 3: 514-21.

[77] Dale BJ, Chan NC, Eikelboom JW. Laboratory measurement of the direct oral anticoagulants. Br J Haematol. 2016; 172: 315-36.

[78] Ogata K, Mendell-Harary J, Tachibana M, Masumoto H, Oguma T, Kojima M, et al. Clinical safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of the novel factor Xa inhibitor edoxaban in healthy volunteers. J Clin Pharmacol. 2010; 50: 743-53.

[79] Kim YA, Gosselin R, Van Cott EM. The effects of dabigatran on lupus anticoagulant, diluted plasma thrombin time, and other specialized coagulation assays. Int J Lab Hematol. 2015; 37: e81-4.

[80] Gosselin R, Grant RP, Adcock DM. Comparison of the effect of the anti-Xa direct oral anticoagulants apixaban, edoxaban, and rivaroxaban on coagulation assays. Int J Lab Hematol. 2016; 38: 505-13.

[81] Siriez R, Evrard J, Dogné JM, Pochet L, Gheldof D, Chatelain B, et al. Betrixaban: impact on routine and specific coagulation assays-a practical laboratory guide. Thromb Haemost. 2018; 118: 1203-14.

[82] Baker SA, Jin J, Pfaffroth C, Vu T, Zehnder JL. DOAC-Stop in lupus anticoagulant testing: direct oral anticoagulant interference removed in most samples. Res Pract Thromb Haemost. 2021; 5: 314-25.

[83] Ząbczyk M, Kopytek M, Natorska J, Undas A. The effect of DOAC-Stop on lupus anticoagulant testing in plasma samples of venous thromboembolism patients receiving direct oral anticoagulants. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2019; 57: 1374-81.

[84] Exner T, Ahuja M, Ellwood L. Effect of an activated charcoal product (DOAC Stop™) intended for extracting DOACs on various other APTT-prolonging anticoagulants. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2019; 57: 690-6.

[85] van Os GM, de Laat B, Kamphuisen PW, Meijers JC, de Groot PG. Detection of lupus anticoagulant in the presence of rivaroxaban using Taipan snake venom time. J Thromb Haemost. 2011; 9: 1657- 9.

[86] Pouplard C, Vayne C, Berthomet C, Guery EA, Delahousse B, Gruel Y. The Taipan snake venom time can be used to detect lupus anticoagulant in patients treated by rivaroxaban. Int J Lab Hematol. 2017; 39: e60-3.