Internal Quality Control and External Quality Assurance in Testing for Antiphospholipid Antibodies: Part II—Lupus Anticoagulant

Abstract

In addition to the presence of appropriate clinical features, the diagnosis of the antiphospholipid antibody syndrome (APS) fundamentally requires the finding of positive antiphospholipid antibody (aPL) test result(s), with these comprising clot-based assays for the identification of lupus anticoagulant (LA) and immunologic (“solid-phase”) assays such as anticardiolipin antibodies (aCL) and anti-β₂-glycoprotein I antibodies (aβ₂GPI). This article is the second of two that review the process for, and provide recommendations to improve, internal quality control (IQC) and external quality assurance (EQA; or proficiency testing) for aPL assays. These processes are critical for ensuring the quality of laboratory test results, and thence the appropriate clinical diagnosis and management of APS. This article covers LA testing. We provide some updated findings from the Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia Haematology Quality Assurance Program, and cover testing results for the past 3 years (2009 to 2011 inclusive). In brief: (1) essentially all laboratories currently perform LA testing using activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT) and dilute Russell viper venom time (dRVVT) methods, and about one-third also employ the kaolin clotting time (KCT); (2) KCT usage has dropped slightly, from around 50% of laboratories in 2009, to around 35% in 2011, presumably reflecting take up of the latest consensus recommendations; (3) other methodologies such as silica clotting time (SCT) and the platelet neutralization procedure (PNP) are only used by <5% of laboratories; (4) interlaboratory coefficients of variation (CVs) are in general moderate, and substantially better than those reported for solid-phase assays such as aCL and aβ₂GPI, with median (range) values being 11.6% (9.2 to 25.5%) for APTT ratios, 16.7% (10.1 to 19.2%) for KCT ratios, and 11.7% (5.7 to 17.4%) for dRVVT ratios; (5) CVs increase slightly with increasing LA positivity; (6) most laboratories correctly interpreted test findings for LA, reporting normal samples as normal, and LA-positive samples as positive (albeit with varying gradings of positivity); and (7) however, some laboratories found interpretation to be challenging for some samples, namely a weak LA sample (which was reported as normal by around 50% of laboratories) and a very strong LA sample (which was reported as normal by around 10% of laboratories, primarily those that did not perform mixing studies).

Keywords

lupus anticoagulant - antiphospholipid antibodies - antiphospholipid syndrome - internal quality control - external quality assurance - proficiency testing

• References

• 1 Asherson RA. The primary, secondary, catastrophic, and seronegative variants of the antiphospholipid syndrome: a personal history long in the making. Semin Thromb Hemost 2008; 34 (3) 227-235
• 2 Harris EN, Pierangeli SS. Primary, secondary, and catastrophic antiphospholipid syndrome: what's in a name?. Semin Thromb Hemost 2008; 34 (3) 219-226
• 3 Favaloro EJ, Wong RCW. The antiphospholipid syndrome: a large elephant with many parts or an elusive chameleon disguised by many colours?. Autoimmunity Highlights 2010; 1: 5-14
• 4 Favaloro EJ, Wong RC. Laboratory testing for the antiphospholipid syndrome: making sense of antiphospholipid antibody assays. Clin Chem Lab Med 2011; 49 (3) 447-461
• 5 Miyakis S, Lockshin MD, Atsumi T , et al. International consensus statement on an update of the classification criteria for definite antiphospholipid syndrome (APS). J Thromb Haemost 2006; 4 (2) 295-306
• 6 Pengo V, Tripodi A, Reber G , et al; Subcommittee on Lupus Anticoagulant/Antiphospholipid Antibody of the Scientific and Standardisation Committee of the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis. Update of the guidelines for lupus anticoagulant detection. J Thromb Haemost 2009; 7 (10) 1737-1740
• 7 Galli M, Luciani D, Bertolini G, Barbui T. Lupus anticoagulants are stronger risk factors for thrombosis than anticardiolipin antibodies in the antiphospholipid syndrome: a systematic review of the literature. Blood 2003; 101 (5) 1827-1832
• 8 Galli M, Luciani D, Bertolini G, Barbui T. Anti-beta 2-glycoprotein I, antiprothrombin antibodies, and the risk of thrombosis in the antiphospholipid syndrome. Blood 2003; 102 (8) 2717-2723
• 9 Pengo V, Banzato A, Bison E, Bracco A, Denas G, Ruffatti A. What have we learned about antiphospholipid syndrome from patients and antiphospholipid carrier cohorts?. Semin Thromb Hemost 2012; 38 (4) 322-327
• 10 Galli M. Interpretation and recommended testing for antiphospholipid antibodies. Semin Thromb Hemost 2012; 38 (4) 348-352
• 11 Bonar R, Favaloro EJ, Adcock D. Quality in coagulation and haemostasis testing. Biochem Med 2010; 20 (2) 184-199
• 12 Favaloro EJ, Wheatland L, Jovanovich S, Roberts-Thomson P, Wong RCW. Internal quality control and external quality assurance in testing for antiphospholipid antibodies: part I—anticardiolipin and anti-β₂-glycoprotein I antibodies. Semin Thromb Hemost 2012; 38 (4) 390-403
• 13 Favaloro EJ, Wong RCW. Current clinical and laboratory practice for the investigation of the antiphospholipid syndrome: findings from the 2008 Australasian antiphospholipid antibody survey. Pathology 2009; 41 (7) 666-675
• 14 Wong RCW, Gillis D, Adelstein S , et al. Consensus guidelines on anti-cardiolipin antibody testing and reporting. Pathology 2004; 36 (1) 63-68
• 15 Wong RC, Favaloro EJ, Adelstein S , et al. Consensus guidelines on anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I testing and reporting. Pathology 2008; 40 (1) 58-63
• 16 Wong R, Adelstein S, Gillis D, Favaloro EJ. Development of consensus guidelines for anticardiolipin and lupus anticoagulant testing. Semin Thromb Hemost 2005; 31 (1) 39-48
• 17 Lakos G, Favaloro EJ, Harris EN , et al. International consensus guidelines on anticardiolipin and anti-β(2) glycoprotein I testing: report from the 13(th) international congress on antiphospholipid antibodies. Arthritis Rheum 2012; 64 (1) 1-10
• 18 Favaloro EJ, Bonar R, Zebeljan D, Kershaw G, Marsden K. Laboratory investigation of lupus anticoagulants: mixing studies are sometimes required. J Thromb Haemost 2010; 8 (12) 2828-2831
• 19 Bonar R, Favaloro EJ, Zebeljan D , et al. Evaluating laboratory approaches to the identification of lupus anticoagulants: a diagnostic challenge from the RCPA Haematology QAP. Pathology 2012; 44 (3) 240-247
• 20 Favaloro EJ, Bonar R, Sioufi J , et al; RCPA QAP in Haematology. Multilaboratory testing of thrombophilia: current and past practice in Australasia as assessed through the Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia Quality Assurance Program for Hematology. Semin Thromb Hemost 2005; 31 (1) 49-58
• 21 Favaloro EJ, Silvestrini R, Mohammed A. Clinical utility of anticardiolipin antibody assays: high inter-laboratory variation and limited consensus by participants of external quality assurance programs signals a cautious approach. Pathology 1999; 31 (2) 142-147
• 22 Favaloro EJ, Silvestrini R. Assessing the usefulness of anticardiolipin antibody assays: a cautious approach is suggested by high variation and limited consensus in multilaboratory testing. Am J Clin Pathol 2002; 118 (4) 548-557
• 23 Favaloro EJ, Wong RC, Silvestrini R, McEvoy R, Jovanovich S, Roberts-Thomson P. A multilaboratory peer assessment quality assurance program-based evaluation of anticardiolipin antibody, and beta2-glycoprotein I antibody testing. Semin Thromb Hemost 2005; 31 (1) 73-84
• 24 Favaloro EJ, Wong RCW, Jovanovich S, Roberts-Thomson P. A review of beta2 -glycoprotein-l antibody testing results from a peer-driven multilaboratory quality assurance program. Am J Clin Pathol 2007; 127 (3) 441-448
• 25 Kershaw G, Suresh S, Orellana D, Nguy Y-M. Laboratory identification of lupus anticoagulants. Semin Thromb Hemost 2012; 38 (4) 375-384
• 26 Tripodi A. To mix or not to mix in lupus anticoagulant testing? That is the question. Semin Thromb Hemost 2012; 38 (4) 385-389