An ELISA Assay for the Detection of Factor VIII Antibodies-Comparison with the Conventional Bethesda Assay in a Large Cohort of Haemophilia Samples
Abstract
An enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) has been developed to measure factor VIII antibodies in haemophilia patients. The assay utilizes binding of the antibodies in the plasma to solid phase antigen, i.e. recombinant factor VIII which was subsequently detected by a human polyclonal IgG labelled with the alkaline phosphatase-p-nitrophenyl phosphate substrate system. Comparisons were made with the Bethesda assay for the quantitation of factor VIIII inhibitors. Dose response curves for the reference standards were consistently linear and reproducible. The assay was specific for factor VIII antibodies, showing a negative reaction for antibodies to other coagulation factors, antinuclear factors and antiphospholipid antibodies. Using this method, 312 samples from haemophilia A patients and 31 samples from healthy controls were screened for the presence of inhibitors and compared with the conventional Bethesda assay. Twenty-four cases were found to be positive for inhibitors in both the ELISA and Bethesda assay. Five additional cases were also found to be positive in the ELISA assay, which, however, were negative in Bethesda assay. One patient who was initially positive for factor VIII inhibitors both by the Bethesda assay and ELISA eventually became negative for the Bethesda assay (<0.5 BU/ml) but was still positive for the ELISA assay. The ELISA thus described had a specificity of 97.8% and a sensitivity of 100% when tested against a large cohort of haemophilia A samples.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Other coagulation assays that use aPTT-based methods may show interference due to LA presence, resulting in falsely low factor activity.
“Other coagulation assays that use aPTT-based methods, as one stage measurement (OSA) [90] for factors VIII, IX, XI, and XII, may show interference due to LA presence, resulting in falsely low factor activity [91,92,93,94,95,96,97,98].”
From Lupus Anticoagulant Detection under the Magnifying Glass (2023) · cites this paper as [94]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Lupus Anticoagulant Detection under the Magnifying Glass
Molinari, A. C., Martini, T., Banov, L., Ierardi, A., Leotta, M., Strangio, A., & Santoro, R. C. (2023) · Journal of Clinical Medicine · doi:10.3390/jcm12206654 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
Patil, R., S., C., Parihar, A., Mohite, A., & Shetty, S. (2018) · Thrombosis Research · doi:10.1016/j.thromres.2018.10.015 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
- Authors
- Shetty, S., Ghosh, K., & Mohanty, D.
- Affiliations
- Indian Council of Medical Research (IN)
- Venue
- Acta Haematologica
- Publisher
- S. Karger AG
- Published
- 2002-12-23
- Volume
- 109
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 18-22
- ISSN
- 0001-5792 (ISSN-L)
- 1421-9662
- OpenAlex
- W2018955424
- Cited by
- 30
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 3 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 0.61
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Acta Haematologica (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Hematology › Hemophilia Treatment and Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Hematology › Platelet Disorders and Treatments
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Genetics › Coagulation, Bradykinin, Polyphosphates, and Angioedema
- Keywords
- factor VIII inhibitors, hemophilia A, ELISA assay, Bethesda assay, assay sensitivity and specificity, inhibitor detection
- MeSH terms
- Cross Reactions, Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay, Factor VIII, Hemophilia A, Humans, Isoantibodies, Reference Standards, Sensitivity and Specificity, Reproducibility of Results, Case-Control Studies
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