Cited by 5Systemic Lupus Erythematosus ResearchClinical Laboratory Practices and Quality ControlBlood Coagulation and Thrombosis Mechanisms

Interpretation of clot‐based lupus anticoagulant assays—Normalizing clotting time against different denominators

Ling, Li‐Qin, Liu, Chao‐Nan, Huang, Xun‐Bei, Liao, Juan, Jia, Jin, Zhou, Jing·2022·International Journal of Laboratory Hematology

Abstract

Objectives The endpoint for all lupus anticoagulant (LA) assays is a clotting time in seconds. This study aimed to clarify the use of normalizing clotting time to ratio and how the use of different denominators is relevant. Methods Whether normalization could reduce reagent variability and possess better diagnostic performances was assessed; denominators included reference interval (RI) mean, local-obtained pooled plasma clotting time, standard plasma clotting time, and control plasma clotting time (CNPPct). Moreover, whether day-to-day variation in CNPPct would impact its application was studied. Results If not normalized, significant difference existed among different reagent batches; if normalized (against any denominators), no statistically significant difference existed anymore. The validation of in-house RIs achieved a 100% success rate. Normalization against different denominators had different RIs, but the same diagnostic efficacies (when a prolonged LA1 is used to suggest further LA-related testings, normalized LA1 demonstrated a better sensitivity: 1.0 vs. 0.95). Normalization against a "daily" CNPPct (obtained alongside test plasmas day to day) demonstrated low inter-day variations (LA1: ~1%, LA2: ~1%), and it could employ the RI for normalization against a "fixed" CNPPct (obtained alongside normal plasmas when the RI was established). Conclusions Normalizing clotting time reduces reagent-batch variability and promotes the adoption of common RIs, and therefore redu…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/ijlh.13830

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The NSCR is recommended by the existing guidelines as a parameter for interpreting phospholipid-dependent assays because it can reduce both interlaboratory and interreagent variations.

    “The NSCR is recommended by the existing guidelines as a parameter for interpreting phospholipid-dependent assays [[11], [12], [13],20] because it can reduce both interlaboratory and interreagent variations [25].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ling, L., Liu, C., Huang, X., Liao, J., Jia, J., & Zhou, J.
Affiliations
  • Department of Laboratory Medicine West China Hospital Sichuan University Chengdu China
  • Sichuan University (CN)
Corresponding author
Zhou, Jing
Venue
International Journal of Laboratory Hematology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2022-03-16
Volume
44
Issue
4
Pages
777-784
ISSN
  • 1751-5521 (ISSN-L)
  • 1751-553X
OpenAlex
W4220672137
Cited by
5
References
7
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1
FWCI
0.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International Journal of Laboratory Hematology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (81371878, 81902126)
  • Sichuan Province Science and Technology Support Program (2020YFS0254)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rheumatology › Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Clinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Hematology › Blood Coagulation and Thrombosis Mechanisms
Keywords
lupus anticoagulant, reference values, day-to-day variability, diagnostic sensitivity, anticoagulant screening
MeSH terms
Blood Coagulation, Blood Coagulation Tests, Humans, Partial Thromboplastin Time, Plasma, Reference Values, Lupus Coagulation Inhibitor

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review