Cited by 40Systemic Lupus Erythematosus ResearchClinical Laboratory Practices and Quality ControlBlood Coagulation and Thrombosis Mechanisms

Direct Oral Anticoagulant Adsorption: Impact on Lupus Anticoagulant Testing—Review of the Literature and Evaluation on Spiked and Patient Samples

Open access
De Kesel, Pieter M., Devreese, Katrien M.J.·2020·Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis

Abstract

Background Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) interfere with lupus anticoagulant (LAC) testing. DOAC-Stop (D-S) represents a preanalytical strategy to cope with this issue. Objectives To assess D-S's ability to remove DOACs from plasma and overcome DOAC interference in LAC assays and to evaluate D-S's applicability in a representative patient cohort with routine LAC request. Methods Apixaban (30-933 ng/mL), edoxaban (31-1060 ng/mL), rivaroxaban (35-1020 ng/mL), and dabigatran (20-360 ng/mL) were spiked to normal plasma. Aliquots were treated with D-S or untreated before DOAC and LAC testing. Patient samples containing DOAC (n = 43), vitamin K antagonists (n = 25), heparins (n = 21), or no anticoagulants (n = 63) were tested for LAC before and after D-S. Results Spiking experiments revealed false-positive LAC from low concentrations of DOACs except for apixaban. Following D-S, DOAC levels were below lower limits of quantification, except for apixaban at the highest concentration, and no false-positive LAC was obtained. DOAC levels were below lower limits of quantification after D-S in 39/43 DOAC-containing patient samples. For 23/29 LAC-positive DOAC-containing samples, LAC tests became negative after D-S, whereas 3/6 samples remaining positive were from patients with (high probability for) antiphospholipid syndrome. In the non-DOAC-treated groups, LAC changed from positive to negative in 10 and vice versa in 2 cases. Conclusions D-S limits DOAC interference in LAC assays. DOAC concentration measurement should be performed in D-S treated samples because incomplete removal may occur. Applying D-S to vitamin K antagonist-containing, heparin-containing, or not-anticoagulated samples may lead to erroneous LAC results. Therefore, D-S should only be used in plasma from DOAC-treated patients.

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.14894

Cites

6 of 6 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?

  • Both DOAC removal strategies (absorbents and filtration) can provide incomplete drug removal or influence the clotting times, resulting in possible false positives and false negatives in LA testing.

    “Both removal strategies can provide an incomplete drug removal or influence the clotting times, resulting in possible false positives and false negatives in LA testing [81,82,85,86].”

    From Lupus Anticoagulant Detection under the Magnifying Glass (2023) · cites this paper as [82]

    The Essentials and Conclusion report that DOAC-Stop adsorption can leave residual drug and produce erroneous lupus anticoagulant results; section 3.2.3 also reports changes in clotting times after treatment. The paper does not establish the claim for the other named strategy, filtration. Its discussion of false-negative results concerns DOAC interference, not a demonstrated effect of filtration or adsorption. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Research works printed but not linked: 36

  1. Adcock DM, Gosselin R. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in the laboratory: 2015 review. Thromb Res. 2015;136:7-12.
  2. Douxfils J, Ageno W, Samama CM, et al. Laboratory testing in pa- tients treated with direct oral anticoagulants: a practical guide for clinicians. J Thromb Haemost. 2018;16:209-219.
  3. Gosselin RC, Adcock DM, Douxfils J. An update on laboratory as- sessment for direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). Int J Lab Hematol. 2019;41:33-39.
  4. Gómez-Outes A, Suárez-Gea ML, Lecumberri R, Terleira-Fernández AI, Vargas-Castrillón E. Direct-acting oral anticoagulants: pharma- cology, indications, management, and future perspectives. Eur J Haematol. 2015;95:389-404.
  5. Hoxha A, Banzato A, Ruffatti A, Pengo V. Detection of lupus anti- coagulant in the era of direct oral anticoagulants. Autoimmun Rev. 2017;16:173-178.
  6. Seheult JN, Meyer MP, Bontempo FA, Chibisov I. The effects of indirect-and direct-acting anticoagulants on lupus anticoagulant assays: a large, retrospective study at a coagulation reference labo- ratory. Am J Clin Pathol. 2017;147:632-640.
  7. Favaloro EJ, Mohammed S, Curnow J, Pasalic L. Laboratory test- ing for lupus anticoagulant (LA) in patients taking direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs): potential for false positives and false neg- atives. Pathology. 2019;51:292-300.
  8. Bonar R, Favaloro EJ, Mohammed S, et al. The effect of the direct factor Xa inhibitors apixaban and rivaroxaban on haemostasis tests: a comprehensive assessment using in vitro and ex vivo samples. Pathology. 2016;48:60-71.
  9. Makam RCP, Hoaglin DC, McManus DD, et al. Efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants approved for cardiovascular indications: systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2018;13:e0197583.
  10. Loo SY, Dell'Aniello S, Huiart L, Renoux C. Trends in the prescription of novel oral anticoagulants in UK primary care. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2017;83:2096-2106.
  11. Favaloro EJ, Pasalic L, Lippi G. Replacing warfarin therapy with the newer direct oral anticoagulants, or simply a growth in antico- agulation therapy? Implications for pathology testing. Pathology. 2017;49:639-643.
  12. Garcia D, Erkan D. Diagnosis and management of the antiphospho- lipid syndrome. N Engl J Med. 2018;378:2010-2021.
  13. Pengo V, Biasiolo A, Pegoraro C, Cucchini U, Noventa F, Iliceto S. Antibody profiles for the diagnosis of antiphospholipid syndrome. Thromb Haemost. 2005;93:1147-1152.
  14. Pengo V, Denas G, Zoppellaro G, et al. Rivaroxaban vs warfa- rin in high-risk patients with antiphospholipid syndrome. Blood. 2018;132:1365-1371.
  15. Keeling D, Mackie I, Moore GW, Greer IA, Greaves M. Guidelines on the investigation and management of antiphospholipid syndrome. Br J Haematology. 2012;157:47-58.
  16. Testa S, Tripodi A, Legnani C, et al. Plasma levels of direct oral antico- agulants in real life patients with atrial fibrillation: results observed in four anticoagulation clinics. Thromb Res. 2016;137:178-183.
  17. Gay J, Duchemin J, Imarazene M, Fontenay M, Jourdi G. Lupus anti- coagulant diagnosis in patients receiving direct oral FXa inhibitors at trough levels: a real-life study. Int J Lab Hematol. 2019;41:738-744.
  18. De Kesel PM, Devreese KMJ. The effect of unfractionated heparin, enoxaparin and danaparoid on lupus anticoagulant testing. Can ac- tivated carbon eliminate false positive results? Res Pract. Thromb Haemost. 2019;4:161-168.
  19. van Os GM, de Laat B, Kamphuisen PW, Meijers JC, de Groot PG. Detection of lupus anticoagulant in the presence of rivar- oxaban using Taipan snake venom time. J Thromb Haemost. 2011;9:1657-1659.
  20. Pollack CV, Reilly PA, van Ryn J, et al. Idarucizumab for dabigatran reversal -full cohort analysis. N Engl J Med. 2017;377:431-441.
  21. Jacquemin M, Toelen J, Schoeters J, et al. The addition of idaruci- zumab to plasma samples containing dabigatran allows the use of routine coagulation assays for the diagnosis of hemostasis disor- ders. J Thromb Haemost. 2015;13:2087-2092.
  22. Favaloro EJ, Gilmore G, Arunachalam S, Mohammed S, Baker R. Neutralising rivaroxaban induced interference in laboratory testing for lupus anticoagulant (LA): a comparative study using DOAC Stop and andexanet alfa. Thromb Res. 2019;180:10-19.
  23. Exner T, Michalopoulos N, Pearce J, Xavier R, Ahuja M. Simple method for removing DOACs from plasma samples. Thromb Res. 2018;163:117-122.
  24. Exner T, Ahuja M, Ellwood L. Effect of an activated charcoal product (DOAC Stop™) intended for extracting DOACs on var- ious other APTT-prolonging anticoagulants. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2019;57:690-696.
  25. Jacquemin M, Toelen J, Feyen L, et al. The adsorption of dabigatran is as efficient as addition of idarucizumab to neutralize the drug in routine coagulation assays. Int J Lab Hematol. 2018;40:442-447.
  26. Favresse J, Lardinois B, Sabor L, et al. Evaluation of the DOAC- Stop® procedure to overcome the effect of DOACs on several thrombophilia screening tests. TH Open. 2018;2:e202-e209.
  27. Platton S, Hunt C. Influence of DOAC Stop on coagulation assays in samples from patients on rivaroxaban or apixaban. Int J Lab Hematol. 2019;41:227-233.
  28. 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(9):1374-1381.
  29. Cox-Morton S, MacDonald S, Thomas W. A diagnostic solution for haemostasis laboratories for patients taking direct oral anticoagu- lants using DOAC-Remove. Br J Haematol. 2019;187:377-385.
  30. Jourdi G, Delrue M, Stepanian A, et al. Potential usefulness of ac- tivated charcoal (DOAC remove®) for dRVVT testing in patients receiving direct oral anticoagulants. Thromb Res. 2019;184:86-91.
  31. Frans G, Meeus P, Bailleul E. Resolving DOAC interference on aPTT, PT, and lupus anticoagulant testing by the use of activated carbon. J Thromb Haemost. 2019;17:1354-1362.
  32. Florin L, Desloovere M, Devreese KM. Evaluation of an automated algorithm for interpretation of lupus anticoagulant testing. Int J Lab Hematol. 2019;41(3):412-417.
  33. Connors JM. Thrombophilia testing and venous thrombosis. N Engl J Med. 2017;377:1177-1187.
  34. Miyakis S, Lockshin MD, Atsumi T, et al. International consensus statement on an update of the classification criteria for definite anti- phospholipid syndrome (APS). J Thromb Haemost. 2006;4:295-306.
  35. Kopatz WF, Brinkman HJM, Meijers JCM. Use of DOAC Stop for elimination of anticoagulants in the thrombin generation assay. Thromb Res. 2018;170:97-101.
  36. Samuelson BT, Cuker A, Siegal DM, Crowther M, Garcia DA. Laboratory assessment of the anticoagulant activity of direct oral anticoagulants: a systematic review. Chest. 2017;151:127-138.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
De Kesel, P. M., & Devreese, K. M. J.
Affiliations
Ghent University Hospital (BE)
Corresponding author
Devreese, Katrien M.J.
Venue
Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-08
Volume
18
Issue
8
Pages
2003-2017
ISSN
1538-7836 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3024580285
Cited by
40
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 12
FWCI
0.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) (submittedVersion)
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
direct oral anticoagulants, lupus anticoagulant, anticoagulant interference, apixaban, edoxaban, rivaroxaban, dabigatran, plasma adsorption, antiphospholipid syndrome, vitamin K antagonists, heparin
MeSH terms
Rivaroxaban, Dabigatran, Administration, Oral, Adsorption, Anticoagulants, Humans, Pyridones, Lupus Coagulation Inhibitor, Antiphospholipid Syndrome

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