Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
In recent years, there has been greater awareness among hemostasis scientists and clinicians that factor VIII coagulant activity (FVIII:C) measured in certain patients with mild hemophilia A can show different results depending on the assay system. A subgroup of mild hemophilia families have a method-related discrepancy in FVIII:C results, whereby the one-stage clotting assay (FVIII:C-1) is significantly higher than the two-stage clotting assay (FVIII:C-2) or the chromogenic assay (FVIII:C-chr). To identify such patients, the routine laboratory can use automated procedures for the FVIII:C-chr to replace the complex, manual FVIII:C-2 method. Laboratories must employ appropriate quality management to ensure accurate and precise results, especially in the abnormal range. This discrepant phenotype of hemophilia A is seen in up to 40% of mild hemophilia A cases and represents a clinically significant bleeding disorder. A small proportion of these cases have FVIII:C-1 within the normal range and risk a missed diagnosis if the FVIII:C-chr is unavailable. Other patients may be mismanaged if FVIII:C-1 gives an overestimate of FVIII:C and their bleeding risk is consequently underestimated. Affected family members in the discrepant group of patients have a limited range of FVIII (F8) gene missense mutations, causing alterations of the structure of the A1, A2, or A3 domains of FVIII. Therefore, both FVIII:C-chr and F8 gene mutation analysis are recommended to confirm the diagnosis of mild hemophilia A and assist with decisions about the patient's phenotype.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rodgers et al. (2013) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: