Laboratory Testing for von Willebrand’s Disease: An Assessment of Current Diagnostic Practice and Efficacy by Means of a Multi-laboratory Survey

Summary

We report an evaluation of current laboratory practice for the diagnosis of von Willebrand’s disease (VWD) by means of a multilaboratory survey. This assessment was undertaken with the RCPA Quality Assurance Program (QAP) in Haematology, which covers a wide geographic area encompassing Australia, New Zealand and Asia. A total of 25 laboratories actively involved in testing for VWD were selected to participate in a sample testing assessment exercise. Samples comprised 10 plasmas: (i) a normal plasma pool (in duplicate), (ii) this pool diluted to 50% (in duplicate), (iii) a normal individual (×1), (iv) severe Type 1 VWD (×1), (v) Type 2B VWD (×2 unrelated donors), (vi) Type 3 VWD (×1), (vii) Type 2A VWD (×1). Laboratories were asked to perform all tests available to them in order to establish a laboratory diagnosis of VWD, and then to comment on the possibility or otherwise of VWD. Overall findings indicated a wide variation in test practice, in the effectiveness of various test procedures in detecting VWD, and in the ability of various composite test panels to identify type 2 VWD subtypes. Firstly, while all laboratories (n = 25) performed tests for FVIII:C activity, von Willebrand factor ‘antigen’ (VWF:Ag) and a functional VWF assay [using the ristocetin cofactor assay (VWF:RCo; n = 23) and/or the collagen binding assay (VWF:CBA; n = 12)], only three laboratories carried out VWF:Multimer analysis. Secondly, for the three quantitative VWF assays, 10/25 (40%) laboratories performed all three, whereas 15/25 (60%) performed only two [VWF:Ag and VWF:RCo (n = 13); VWF:Ag and VWF:CBA (n = 2)]. Thirdly, a variety of assay methodologies were evident for VWF:Ag [ELISA, electro-immuno diffusion (EID), latex immuno-assay (LIA), and VIDAS assay] and VWF:RCo (platelet agglutination/‘aggregometry’ and a ‘functional VWF:RCo-alternative’ ELISA assay). Between method analysis for the quantitative VWF assays showed that the VWF:RCo yielded the greatest degree of inter-laboratory assay variation, and had the poorest overall performance with respect to sensitivity to low levels of VWF. The VWF:CBA also performed better than the VWF:RCo in terms of ability to detect functional VWF ‘discordance’ (i.e. Type 2 VWD). Within VWF:Ag method analysis showed that the EID assay procedure was associated with the greatest variation in assay

• References

• 1 Sadler JE, Gralnick HR. Commentary: A new classification for von Willebrand Disease. Blood 1994; 84: 676-9.
• 2 Sadler JE. Review: Von Willebrand Factor. J Biol Chem 1991; 266: 22777-80.
• 3 Moroose R, Hoyer LW. von Willebrand factor and platelet function. Ann Rev Med 1986; 37: 157-63.
• 4 Giddings JC, Peake IR. The investigation of factor VIII deficiency. In: Thompson JM. ed. Blood Coagulation and Haemostasis. New York: Churchill Livingstone; 1985: 135-207.
• 5 Girma J-P, Meyer D, Verweij CL. et al. Structure-function relationship of human von Willebrand factor. Blood 1987; 70: 605-11.
• 6 Sadler JE. A revised classification of von Willebrand Disease. For the Subcommittee on von Willebrand Factor of the Scientific and Standardisation Committee of the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis. Thromb Haemost 1994; 71: 520-5.
• 7 Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of von Willebrand Disease. Prepared by the Von Willebrand Working Party of the United Kingdom Haemophilia Centre Directors’ Organisation. 1995
• 8 Sadler JE, Foster PA, George JN. Haemostasis/Platelets. In: Haematology 1996. The Education Program of the American Society of Hematology. McArthur JR. (ed) 79-94.
• 9 Favaloro EJ, Koutts J. Laboratory assays for von Willebrand Factor: Relative contribution to the diagnosis of von Willebrand’s disease. Pathology 1997; 29: 385-391.
• 10 Brown RA, Rodgers GM. von Willebrand’s Disease. Check Sample. Clinical Haematology No. CH 96-4 (CH-14). American Society of Clinical Pathologists 1996. 45-62.
• 11 Fleming TGM. von Willebrand factor: its function and its measurement in the laboratory. Br J Biomed Sci 1995; 52: 50-7.
• 12 Favaloro EJ, Grispo L, Dinale A, Berndt M, Koutts J. von Willebrand’s Disease: Laboratory investigation using an improved functional assay for von Willebrand factor. Pathology 1993; 25: 152-8.
• 13 Favaloro EJ, Facey D, Grispo L. Laboratory assessment of von Willebrand factor: Use of different assays can influence the diagnosis of von Willebrand’s disease, dependent on differing sensitivity to sample preparation and differential recognition of high molecular weight VWF forms. Am J Clin Pathol 1995; 104: 264-71.
• 14 Goodall AH, Jarvis J, Chand S, Rawlings E, O’Brien DP, McCraw A, Hutton R, Tuddenham EGD. An immunoradiometric assay for human factor VIII von Willebrand factor (VIII:VWF) using a monoclonal antibody based that defines a functional epitope. Br J Haem 1985; 59: 565-77.
• 15 Chand S, McCraw A, Hutton R, Tuddenham EGD, Goodall AH. A two-site, monoclonal antibody based immunoassay for von Willebrand factor – Demonstration that VWF function resides in a conformational epitope. Thromb Haemost 1986; 55: 318-24.
• 16 Murdock PJ, Woodhams BJ, Mathews KB, Pasi KJ, Goodall AH. von Willebrand factor activity detected in a monoclonal antibody-based ELISA: an alternative to the Ristocetin cofactor platelet agglutination assay for diagnostic use. Thromb Haemost 1997; 78: 1272-7.
• 17 Fischer BE, Thomas KB, Dorner F. von Willebrand factor: measuring its antigen of function? Correlation between the level of antigen, activity, and multimer size using various detection systems. Thromb Res 1998; 91: 39-43.
• 18 Casonato A, Pontara E, Bertomoro A, Zucchetto S, Zerbinati P, Girlami A. Abnormal collagen binding activity of 2A von Willebrand factor: evidence that the defect depends only on the lack of large multimers. J Lab Clin Med 1997; 129: 251-9.
• 19 Preston FE. Assays for von Willebrand Factor Functional Activity: A UK NEQAS Survey. Thromb Haemost 1998; 80: 863.