Cited by 154Blood Coagulation and Thrombosis MechanismsVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and ManagementBlood properties and coagulation

High levels of coagulation factors and venous thrombosis risk: strongest association for factor VIII and von Willebrand factor

Open access
Rietveld, I.M., Lijfering, W.M., le Cessie, S., Bos, M. H.A., Rosendaal, F.R., Reitsma, P.H., Cannegieter, S.C.·2019·Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis

Abstract

Essentials Elevated procoagulant levels are associated with an increased risk of venous thrombosis (VT). The dependency on concurrent increased factor levels and VT was analyzed in a large study. Factor VIII (FVIII) and von Willebrand factor (VWF) were associated with the highest VT risk. The risks for other procoagulant factor levels were largely explained by FVIII and VWF. SUMMARY: Background Coagulation factors are essential for robust clot formation. However, elevated levels of procoagulant factors are associated with an increased risk of venous thrombosis (VT). The precise contribution of these factors to the development of VT is not yet understood. Objectives We determined the thrombosis risk for the highest levels of eight selected coagulation factors. Furthermore, we analyzed which of these coagulation factors had the strongest impact on the supposed association. Methods We used data of 2377 patients with a first VT and 2940 control subjects in whom fibrinogen, von Willebrand factor (VWF), factor II, FVII, FVIII, FIX, FX and FXI levels were measured. Results The odds ratios (ORs) for the various coagulation factor levels (> 99th percentile versus ≤ 25th percentile) varied between 1.8 and 4, except for FVIII (OR 23.0; 95% confidence interval [CI] 14.7-36.0) and VWF (OR 24.0; 95% CI 15.3-37.3). Adjustment for FVIII and VWF in a mediation analysis reduced the risks of the other factors to unity, with the exception of FIX and FXI (remaining ORs between 1.7 and 1.9). Conversely, the ORs for FVIII and VWF levels remained high after adjustment for all other procoagulant factors (FVIII: 16.0; 95% CI 9.7-26.3; VWF: 17.6; 95% CI 10.7-28.8). Conclusions Our results imply that the observed relationship between VT and coagulation factor levels can be largely explained by FVIII and VWF. FVIII and VWF levels were also associated with the highest VT risk.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/jth.14343

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Epidemiological studies show supraphysiologic FIX:C is a modest independent risk factor for venous thrombosis (OR 1.8-4.0) relative to supraphysiologic FVIII (OR 8.8-21.3).

    “Epidemiological studies have outlined that supraphysiologic FIX:C is a modest independent risk-factor venous thrombosis (odds ratio [OR] 1.8−4.0) relative to supraphysiologic FVIII (OR 8.8−21.3).206, 207, 208”
  • Targeting FVIII/FIX:C >10%-150% of normal postgene transfer is supported by prothrombotic risks of supraphysiologic FVIII/FIX:C and natural history data that FVIII:C ≥12% of normal by OSA prevents spontaneous joint bleeding.

    “Potentially targeting FVIII/FIX:C, >10%–150% of normal postgene transfer is supported by both the aforementioned prothrombotic risks associated with supraphysiologic FVIII/FIX:C206, 207, 208 and available HA natural history data that demonstrate that FVIII:C of ≥12% of normal (by OSA) is adequate to prevent spontaneous joint bleeding.210”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rietveld, I. M., Lijfering, W. M., le Cessie, S., Bos, M. H. A., Rosendaal, F. R., Reitsma, P. H., & Cannegieter, S. C.
Affiliations
Leiden University Medical Center (NL)
Corresponding author
Cannegieter, S.C.
Venue
Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-01
Volume
17
Issue
1
Pages
99-109
ISSN
1538-7836 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2901197207
Cited by
154
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 20 · 2025: 28 · 2024: 33 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 4
FWCI
7.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
  • Leiden Repository (Leiden University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Stichting voor de Technische Wetenschappen (project: E‐coagulation)
  • Center for Translational Molecular Medicine (Innovative Coagulation Diagnostics [INCOAG])
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Hematology › Blood Coagulation and Thrombosis Mechanisms
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Internal Medicine › Venous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Blood properties and coagulation
Keywords
venous thrombosis, coagulation factors, factor VIII, von Willebrand factor, procoagulant factors, fibrinogen, factor IX, factor XI, thrombosis risk, mediation analysis, hypercoagulability
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Blood Coagulation, Factor VIII, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Netherlands, Risk Factors, von Willebrand Factor, Biomarkers, Up-Regulation, Case-Control Studies, Risk Assessment, Venous Thrombosis, Young Adult

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