Relationships between factor VIII:Ag and factor VIII in recombinant and plasma‐derived factor VIII concentrates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A variety of plasma-derived (pd) and recombinant (r) factor VIII (FVIII) concentrates are used to prevent and treat bleeding in severe hemophilia A patients. A significant side effect of FVIII replacement is the development of FVIII neutralizing antibodies (inhibitors) in up to 30% of patients receiving FVIII concentrates. The FVIII protein content (FVIII:Ag) per unit of FVIII:C in FVIII concentrates, and how effectively the FVIII:Ag in FVIII concentrates binds to von Willebrand factor (VWF) may provide information relevant for the survival of FVIII:C in vivo and for estimating the risk for inhibitor development. The FVIII:Ag content of nine r-FVIII and nine pd-FVIII concentrates were quantified in this study using two enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) platforms. The two ELISA platforms were based on the use of a monoclonal anti-(FVIII light chain)-IgG and polyclonal anti-FVIII antibodies as capture antibodies and both ELISAs were equally able to detect > or =0.005 IU of FVIII:Ag. Measured in international units, the r-FVIII concentrates contained significantly higher FVIII:Ag per unit of FVIII:C than the pd-FVIII concentrates. The VWF-binding profiles of the r-FVIII and pd-FVIII concentrates were also determined by gel filtration chromatography. Unlike the plasma-derived products, the r-FVIII concentrates invariably contained a fraction of FVIII:Ag molecules (approximately 20%) which was unable to associate with VWF. Given that VWF regulates both factor VIII proteolysis and survival of FVIII:Ag in vivo, the fraction of FVIII:Ag unable to bind to VWF may have a reduced survival and be more susceptible to proteolytic degradation in vivo. The extent to which the fractions of FVIII:Ag in concentrates able and unable to bind to VWF contribute to inhibitor development in severe FVIII-deficient patients is unknown.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".