ArticleHaemophilia : the official journal of the World Federation of Hemophilia2024
Von Willebrand Factor (VWF) multiplex activity assay differentiation of type 1 von Willebrand Disease (VWD) and variant VWD.
Article in Haemophilia : the official journal of the World Federation of Hemophilia, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionVWD diagnosis is challenging requiring multiple VWF activity tests using many individual assays. We have developed an ELISA-based VWF Multiplex Activity Assay (VWF-MAA) to address this concern; however, the ability of the VWF-MAA to discriminate between type 1 VWD, variant VWD, and normal subjects has not been evaluated.
aimTo evaluate the VWF-MAA and its ability to differentiate between type 1 VWD, variant VWD and normal subjects in individuals undergoing an initial laboratory evaluation for bleeding.
methodsA total of 177 plasma samples from the Zimmerman Program: Comparative Effectiveness in the Diagnosis of VWD were evaluated from 11 centres across the US and Canada. The VWF-MAA was compared to Versiti Blood Research Institute (VBRI) and Local Center (LC) assigned VWD diagnosis.
resultsOverall, 129/177 (72.9%) were correctly assigned as normal (non-VWD), type 1, or variant VWD compared to the VBRI assigned diagnosis. VWF-MAA assigned non-VWD accurately in 29/57 (50.9%) samples, and type 1 VWD accurately in 93/110 (84.6%) samples. Considering LC diagnosis where there was agreement with VWF-MAA and not VBRI diagnosis, type 1 VWD was accurate in 105/110 (95.5%) samples. Bland-Altman analysis demonstrated good correlation between laboratory methods. VWD, types 2A, 2B, 1C VWD were also assigned by the VWF-MAA.
conclusionsWe demonstrate that the VWF-MAA has utility in differentiating type 1 VWD, variant VWD and normal subjects in individuals undergoing an initial laboratory evaluation for bleeding.
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.