Type 2M/2A von Willebrand disease: a shared phenotype between type 2M and 2A.

ABSTRACT: Four variants have been continuously subjected to debate and received different von Willebrand disease (VWD) classifications: p.R1315L, p.R1315C, p.R1374H, and p.R1374C. We chose to comprehensively investigate these variants with full set of VWD tests, protein-modeling predictions and applying structural biology. Patients with p.R1315L, p.R1315C, p.R1374H, and p.R1374C were included. A group with type 2A and 2M was included to better understand similarities and differences. Patients were investigated for phenotypic assays and underlying disease mechanisms. We applied deep protein modeling predictions and structural biology to elucidate the causative effects of variants. Forty-three patients with these variants and 70 with 2A (n = 35) or 2M (n = 35) were studied. Patients with p.R1315L, p.R1374H, or p.R1374C showed a common phenotype between 2M and 2A using von Willebrand factor (VWF):GPIbR/VWF:Ag and VWF:CB/VWF:Ag ratios and VWF multimeric profile, whereas p.R1315C represented a type 2M phenotype. There was an overall reduced VWF synthesis or secretion in 2M and cases with p.R1315L, p.R1374H, and p.R1374C, but not in 2A. Reduced VWF survival was observed in most 2A (77%), 2M (80%), and all 40 cases with p.R1315L, p.R1374H, and p.R1374C. These were the only variants that fall at the interface between the A1-A2 domains. p.R1315L/C mutants induce more compactness and internal mobility, whereas p.R1374H/C display a more extended overall geometry. We propose a new classification of type 2M/2A for p.R1315L, p.R1374H, and p.R1374C because they share a common phenotype with 2M and 2A. Our structural analysis shows the unique location of these variants on the A1-A2 domains and their distinctive effect on VWF.

Clinical and Laboratory Presentation and Underlying Mechanism in Patients with Low VWF.

BACKGROUND: Low von Willebrand factor (VWF) refers to subjects with plasma levels of 30 to 50 IU/dL. The mechanism of low VWF is poorly understood. We chose to determine the clinical presentation, laboratory phenotype, and underlying mechanisms of low VWF. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We included 250 patients characterized with low VWF. The International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis Bleeding Assessment Tool (ISTH-BAT) was used to assess clinical symptoms. To determine the underlying mechanisms of low VWF, we used as markers the VWF propeptide (VWFpp) assay and FVIII:C/VWF:Ag ratio for VWF synthesis and the VWFpp/VWF:Ag ratio for VWF clearance. Results were compared with those of 120 healthy controls. Cases with abnormal screening tests were further evaluated for coagulation factor levels and platelet disorders. RESULTS: The median age of the cohort was 35 years (range 3-85), 21% were children (n = 53), 34% were adult males (n = 85), and 45% (n = 112) were adult females. According to the ISTH-BAT, abnormal bleeding was found in 35% of children, 47% of males, and 49% of females. No association was found between VWF activity levels and ISTH-BAT. Patients showed an overall decreased VWF synthesis/secretion and an enhanced VWF clearance was identified in 33% of them. In 89 patients (36%), there were other hemostasis-related defects, but there was no difference in the ISTH-BAT between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate that reduced VWF synthesis/secretion and enhanced VWF clearance are major mechanisms of low VWF levels. Patients with low VWF have significant bleeding manifestations. While other hemostasis defects occurred together with low VWF, this combination did not exacerbate clinical symptoms.

Erratum to 'A comparative study in type 2 von Willebrand disease patients using four different platelet-dependent von Willebrand factor assays.' [Research and Practice in Thrombosis and Haemostasis Volume 7, Issue 3, March 2023, 100139].

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.rpth.2023.100139.].

A comparative study in patients with type 2 von Willebrand disease using 4 different platelet-dependent von Willebrand factor assays.

Background: Several assays are now available to evaluate platelet-dependent von Willebrand factor (VWF) activity. Objective: To report the results obtained using 4 different assays in patients with von Willebrand disease (VWD) carrying variants mainly in the A1 domain, which is critical for VWF binding to glycoprotein Ib (GPIb) and ristocetin. Methods: We evaluated 4 different assays, 2 gain-of-function mutant GPIb binding (VWF:GPIbM) and 2 ristocetin cofactor (VWF:RCo) assays, in 76 patients with type 2 VWD. Patients and healthy controls were tested using VWF:GPIbM enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), VWF:GPIbM automated, VWF:RCo aggregometric, and VWF:RCo automated assays. Results: There was a good correlation (Pearson's r>0.82) and agreement (Bland-Altman plots assessment) between the 4 assays, although several outliers existed among the type 2B without high-molecular-weight multimers (HMWM). The VWF activity/VWF:antigen ratios, calculated for each assay, were used to establish the percentage of a correct diagnosis of type 2 (ratio<0.60) in these patients: VWF:RCo aggregometric, 2A(100%), 2M(78%), 2M/2A(100%), 2B(68%); VWF:RCo automated, 2A(88%), 2M(89%), 2M/2A(100%), 2B(63%); VWF:GPIbM ELISA, 2A(96%), 2M(67%), 2M/2A(67%), 2B(0%); VWF:GPIbM automated, 2A(73%), 2M(44%), 2M/2A(75%), 2B(84%). In type 2B patients with HMWM, all assays gave a ratio ≥0.60. Conclusion: The VWF:GPIbM-automated assay is the most effective to diagnose as type 2 the 2B variants, whereas the VWF:RCo assays are the most effective in detecting 2M and 2M/2A variants. The VWF:GPIbM ELISA greatly overestimates the activity of the type 2B patients lacking HMWM. In this study, the use of a VWF activity/VWF:antigen ratio cut-off of 0.70 halved the number of misdiagnosed patients.

Genetic determinants of enhanced von Willebrand factor clearance from plasma.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced von Willebrand factor (VWF) clearance from plasma is associated with von Willebrand disease (VWD). However, the genetic background of this disease mechanism is not well defined. OBJECTIVE: To determine VWF variants that are associated with reduced VWF survival. METHODS: Two hundred fifty-four patients with VWD (type 1 = 50 and type 2 = 204) were investigated, and the results were compared with 120 healthy controls. The patients were comprehensively characterized for phenotypic and genetic features. The ratio of VWF propeptide (VWFpp)/VWF antigen (VWFpp ratio) was used to establish in each patient the VWF clearance state. RESULTS: Out of 92 variants associated with type 1 (7 were novel) and type 2 VWD, 19 had a VWFpp ratio ranging from 1.7 to 2.2, 24 had a VWFpp ratio between 2.3 and 2.9, and 24 variants had a ratio of ≥3. The VWFpp median ratio in healthy controls was 0.98 (0.55-1.6) so that a cut-off value of >1.6 was considered an indicator of accelerated VWF clearance from plasma. An enhanced VWF clearance was observed in 34% of type 1 cases, 100% of type 1 Vicenza cases, 81% of 2A cases, 77% of 2B cases, 88% of 2M cases, and 36% of 2N cases. CONCLUSIONS: An accelerated VWF clearance was found in most patients with type 2A, 2B, and 2M VWD, with a lower proportion of type 1 and 2N. Sixty-seven different variants alone or in combination with other variants were associated with an increased VWFpp ratio. The variants with the highest VWFpp ratio were mostly located in the D3-A1 VWF domains.

Phenotypic and genetic characterizations of the Milan cohort of von Willebrand disease type 2.

von Willebrand disease (VWD) type 2 is caused by qualitative abnormalities of von Willebrand factor (VWF). This study aimed to determine the genotypic and phenotypic characterizations of a large VWD type 2 cohort from Milan. We included 321 patients (54% female) within 148 unrelated families from 1995 to 2021. Patients were fully characterized using laboratory phenotypic tests, and the genotypic diagnosis was confirmed by target genetic analysis using Sanger sequencing. Patients were diagnosed with type 2A (n = 98; 48 families), 2B (n = 85; 38 families), 2M (n = 112; 50 families), or 2N (n = 26; 12 families). Eighty-two unique VWF variants, including 8 novel variants, were found. The potential pathogenic effect of novel variants was assessed by in silico analysis. Most patients were heterozygous for a single variant (n = 259; 81%), whereas 37 cases (11%) had 2 variants (4 homozygous, 9 in trans, and 24 in cis). Twenty-five patients (8%) had ≥3 variants, mainly as a result of gene conversions. Among the 82 distinct variants identified, 5 different types, including missense (n = 64), gene conversion (n = 10), synonymous (n = 1), deletion (n = 4), and splice (n = 3), were observed. The results from this large cohort showed that VWD type 2 is invariably due to variants that do not prevent the synthesis of the protein, and a vast majority of patients (88%) had missense variants. Given the complexity of type 2 diagnosis and the necessity of performing several phenotypic tests, genetic analysis for patients suspected of having type 2 is beneficial to establish the correct diagnosis.

The dominant p.Thr274Pro mutation in the von Willebrand factor propeptide causes the von Willebrand disease type 1 phenotype in two unrelated patients.

BACKGROUND: von Willebrand factor propeptide (VWFpp) plays an important role in VWF multimerization and storage. VWFpp mutations have been previously associated with types 1, 3 and 2A/IIC von Willebrand disease (VWD). AIMS: To characterize the novel p.Thr274Pro variant identified in two unrelated type 1 VWD patients. METHODS: Phenotype tests were performed to evaluate patients' plasma and platelets following the current ISTH-SSC guidelines. Molecular analysis was performed using next-generation sequencing. The pcDNA3.1-VWF-WT and mutant pcDNA3.1-VWF-Thr274Pro expression vectors were transiently transfected into HEK293 cells to evaluate recombinant (r)VWF constitutive and regulated secretion. For the latter, the transfected cells were stimulated with phorbol-12-myristate-13-acetate. Immunofluorescence staining was performed to assess the localization of WT-rVWF and Thr274Pro-rVWF in endoplasmic reticulum, lysosomes, cis-/trans-Golgi and pseudo-Weibel Palade bodies. RESULTS: Biochemical characterization of patients' plasma samples indicated a type 1 VWD diagnosis. Both patients were heterozygous for the p.Thr274Pro variant. Hybrid Thr274Pro/WT-rVWF showed a secretion reduction of 36±4% according to patients' plasma VWF:Ag levels, whereas Thr274Pro-rVWF secretion was strongly impaired (21±2%). The amount of rVWF in cell lysates was nearly normal for both Thr274P (62±17%) and Thr274Pro/WT-rVWF (72±23%). The regulated secretion was impaired for Thr274Pro/WT-rVWF, whereas Thr274Pro-rVWF was not released at all. Immunofluorescence staining revealed no particular differences between WT and Thr274Pro-rVWF, although Thr274Pro-rVWF showed less pseudo-Weibel Palade bodies with a rounder shape than WT-rVWF. CONCLUSIONS: The novel p.Thr274Pro mutation has a dominant effect and it is responsible of patients' type 1 VWD phenotype through a combined mechanism of reduced synthesis, impaired secretion and multimerization.

The ADAMTS13-von Willebrand factor axis in COVID-19 patients.

BACKGROUND: Severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is characterized by an increased risk of thromboembolic events, with evidence of microthrombosis in the lungs of deceased patients. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the mechanism of microthrombosis in COVID-19 progression. PATIENTS/METHODS: We assessed von Willebrand factor (VWF) antigen (VWF:Ag), VWF ristocetin-cofactor (VWF:RCo), VWF multimers, VWF propeptide (VWFpp), and ADAMTS13 activity in a cross-sectional study of 50 patients stratified according to their admission to three different intensity of care units: low (requiring high-flow nasal cannula oxygenation, n = 14), intermediate (requiring continuous positive airway pressure devices, n = 17), and high (requiring mechanical ventilation, n = 19). RESULTS: Median VWF:Ag, VWF:RCo, and VWFpp levels were markedly elevated in COVID-19 patients and increased with intensity of care, with VWF:Ag being 268, 386, and 476 IU/dL; VWF:RCo 216, 334, and 388 IU/dL; and VWFpp 156, 172, and 192 IU/dL in patients at low, intermediate, and high intensity of care, respectively. Conversely, the high-to-low molecular-weight VWF multimers ratios progressively decreased with increasing intensity of care, as well as median ADAMTS13 activity levels, which ranged from 82 IU/dL for patients at low intensity of care to 62 and 55 IU/dL for those at intermediate and high intensity of care. CONCLUSIONS: We found a significant alteration of the VWF-ADAMTS13 axis in COVID-19 patients, with an elevated VWF:Ag to ADAMTS13 activity ratio that was strongly associated with disease severity. Such an imbalance enhances the hypercoagulable state of COVID-19 patients and their risk of microthrombosis.

Comparison of von Willebrand factor platelet-binding activity assays: ELISA overreads type 2B with loss of HMW multimers.

BACKGROUND: A number of new assays with different measuring principles are available to measure von Willebrand factor (VWF) glycoprotein Ib (GPIb)-binding activity, but little is known about how these assays might behave differently for subtypes of von Willebrand disease (VWD). OBJECTIVES: The Comparison of Assays to Measure VWF Activity (COMPASS-VWF) study was designed to compare all available VWF GPIb-binding activity assays for VWF. We specifically searched for particular assay behavior differences. PATIENTS/METHODS: To sort out random differences from systematic assay behavior deviations, all assays were performed in different laboratories on the same samples in a blinded fashion. Samples from 53 normal controls and 42 well-characterized VWD patients were reanalyzed in this study to dissect assay-specific discrepancies. RESULTS: No assay behavior differences were found for 53 normal controls. For VWD patients, we found the following systematic assay behavior patterns: (a) All ELISA assays for VWF:GPIbR as well as VWF:GPIbM are insensitive to detect the low VWF activity of VWD type 2B patients with loss of high molecular weight multimers; (b) VWF:Ab assay reports higher activity for the p.V1665E mutation than all other assays; and (c) all ristocetin-based assays (including VWF:RCo using fixed platelets) but the AcuStar assay report discrepantly low VWF activity for the p.P1467S polymorphism. No systematic assay-specific difference was observed for either the particle agglutination VWF:GPIbM assay or the AcuStar assay using magnetic beads. CONCLUSIONS: Different assay principles may lead to discrepant results for certain VWD types or mutations. Therefore, a more extensive study for a large number of patients is needed to better characterize the incidence and relevance of such assay-specific differences.

Evaluation of a fully automated von Willebrand factor assay panel for the diagnosis of von Willebrand disease.

INTRODUCTION: von Willebrand disease (VWD) diagnosis starts with first level tests: factor VIII coagulant activity, VWF antigen (VWF:Ag) and platelet-dependent VWF activity (VWF:RCo, VWF:Ab, VWF:GPIbR or VWF:GPIbM). The VWF collagen binding (VWF:CB) assay measures the binding capacity of von Willebrand factor (VWF) to collagen. AIM: To assess, in previously diagnosed VWD patients, the performance of a fully automated chemiluminescent test panel including VWF:Ag, VWF:GPIbR and VWF:CB assays. METHODS: The patients, historically evaluated using in-house VWF:Ag and VWF:CB assays and an automated latex enhanced immunoassay VWF:GPIbR method, were re-evaluated using the VWF test panel HemosIL AcuStar. RESULTS: The VWF:GPIbR/VWF:Ag and VWF:CB/VWF:Ag obtained by means of AcuStar showed an overall good concordance with the corresponding data obtained at the time of the historical diagnosis. When discrepancies occurred, these were generally due to the lower VWF:CB/VWF:Ag obtained with AcuStar as compared with that obtained with the historical methods and this affected particularly the diagnosis of VWD type 2M. Together, the AcuStar VWF:GPIbR/VWF:Ag and VWF:CB/VWF:Ag were able to distinguish type 1 from types 2A, 2B and 2M, whereas no distinction was possible between type 2A and 2B. CONCLUSION: The AcuStar panel offers a good performance in the differential diagnosis between VWD type 1 and 2A/2B patients. A high rate of coincidence with historical diagnosis was obtained for VWD types 3, 2A/2B and 1. Even though in some cases more tests (eg, RIPA/multimeric analysis) are needed to complete an accurate VWD classification, the AcuStar panel is considered a sensitive, rapid and reliable tool to diagnose VWD patients.