ArticleInternational journal of laboratory hematology2022
A multi-laboratory assessment of lupus anticoagulant assays performed on the ACL TOP 50 family for harmonized testing in a large laboratory network.
Article in International journal of laboratory hematology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Lupus Anticoagulant Testing for Diagnosis of Antiphospholipid Syndrome: A Perspective Informed by Local Practice.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Testing for the lupus anticoagulant: the good, the bad, and the ugly.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2024Article
- Auto-validation of Routine Coagulation/Hemostasis Assays with Reflex Testing of Abnormal Test Results.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2023Article
- Post-analytical Issues in Hemostasis and Thrombosis Testing: An Update.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2023Article
- An Overview of Laboratory Testing for Antiphospholipid Antibodies.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2023Review
- Hemostasis and Thrombosis: An Overview Focusing on Associated Laboratory Testing to Diagnose and Help Manage Related Disorders.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2023Review
- A multi-laboratory assessment of lupus anticoagulant assays performed on the ACL TOP 50 family for harmonized testing in a large laboratory network.International journal of laboratory hematology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionLupus anticoagulant (LA) testing is commonly performed within hemostasis laboratories, and the ACL TOP 50 family of instruments represent a new "single platform" of hemostasis instrumentation. Our aim was to evaluate these instruments and manufacturer reagents or alternatives for utility in LA testing.
methodsComparative evaluations of LA testing using newly installed ACL TOPs 550 and 750 as well as comparative assessments with existing "reference," predominantly Stago, instrumentation, and reagents. Evaluations comprised both dilute Russell viper venom time (dRVVT) and activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT)-based assays. Establishment of normal reference ranges (NRR).
resultsThe HemosIL dRVVT-based assays showed good comparability with the existing Stago reference method (R > 0.9) and could be considered as verified as fit for purpose. A variety of APTT assays was additionally evaluated for LA utility, and we identified from the assessment good utility of a non-Werfen solution in Hyphen BioMed Cephen reagents. NRR were established based on ≥120 normal individual plasma samples.
conclusionThis evaluation of LA reagents on ACL TOP 50 Family instruments identified overall acceptable performance of both dRVVT (Werfen solution) and APTT (non-Werfen solution) to enable harmonization of LA testing in our large network.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.