Cited by 74Hemophilia Treatment and ResearchPlatelet Disorders and TreatmentsClinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control

Comparison of Three Methods for Measuring Factor VIII Levels in Plasma

Chandler, Wayne L., Ferrell, Chris, Lee, Joo, Tun, Theingi, Kha, Hien·2003·American Journal of Clinical Pathology

Abstract

We compared 1-stage clot-based, chromogenic, and immunoassay methods for measuring factor VIII in plasma with a focus on the measurement of elevated levels of factor VIII. The chromogenic assay showed the best interassay imprecision for factor VIII levels near 150 IU/dL. The best correlation was between the 1-stage clot-based and chromogenic factor VIII assays (r2 = 0.934), and the lowest correlation was between the 1-stage clot-based and antigenic factor VIII assays (r2 = 0.821). The presence of heparin, low-molecular-weight heparin, lepirudin, or lupus inhibitors in the sample resulted in major interference in the 1-stage clot-based assay but not the chromogenic or antigenic factor VIII assays. Overall, the chromogenic factor VIII activity assay was the optimal method, showing good precision, the best overall correlation with other assays, and no interference from heparin, low-molecular-weight heparin, lepirudin, or lupus inhibitors.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1309/c8t8ynb4g3w45prf

Cites

15 of 15 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?

  • 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 [96]

  • Chromogenic factor assays (CSA) do not suffer from these interferences, showing normal clotting factor activities.

    “A fundamental aid in these circumstances comes from performing chromogenic factor assays (CSA) [90], which do not suffer from these interferences, showing normal clotting factor activities [92,96,97].”

    From Lupus Anticoagulant Detection under the Magnifying Glass (2023) · cites this paper as [96]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 16 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chandler, W. L., Ferrell, C., Lee, J., Tun, T., & Kha, H.
Affiliations
University of Washington (US)
Venue
American Journal of Clinical Pathology
Published
2003-07
Volume
120
Issue
1
Pages
34-39
ISSN
  • 0002-9173 (ISSN-L)
  • 1943-7722
OpenAlex
W4247774385
Cited by
74
References
16
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 2
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • American Journal of Clinical Pathology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Hematology › Hemophilia Treatment and Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Hematology › Platelet Disorders and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Clinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control
Keywords
factor VIII, chromogenic assay, immunoassay, assay comparison, assay interference, heparin, low molecular weight heparin, lepirudin, lupus anticoagulant, assay precision
MeSH terms
Blood Coagulation, Blood Coagulation Tests, Chromogenic Compounds, Factor VII, Humans, Immunoassay, Reagent Kits, Diagnostic, Reproducibility of Results

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