Clinical Features of Heparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia Diagnosed By Lumi-Aggregometry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is associated with anti-platelet factor-4 (PF4)/heparin antibodies that activate platelets, resulting in thrombocytopenia and a pro-thrombotic state. At our institution antibody-mediated platelet activation is demonstrated by lumi-aggregometry, which is a method previously validated against the gold standard serotonin-release assay (SRA). Lumi-aggregometry does not involve radioactive isotopes, which is its major advantage over the SRA. The clinical course of HIT diagnosed via SRA and ELISA has been previously described, and clinical prediction tools such as the 4-T score were validated using these diagnostic tests. However, the clinical picture of HIT diagnosed by lumi-aggregometry has not been previously described. Aims: The objective of this study is to describe the clinical and laboratory presentation of patients diagnosed with HIT by lumi-aggregometry. Methods: Patients with clinically suspected HIT and quantitative anti-PF4 IgG-specific ELISA OD ≥0.400 (Gen-Probe, San Diego) received confirmatory HIT testing by lumi-aggregometry. Briefly, HIT antibody-induced activation of washed healthy donor platelets was tested at therapeutic (0.1U/mL and 0.5U/mL) and high (100U/mL) porcine heparin concentration. The degree of platelet activation was quantitated luminographically based on the light flash reaction of ATP (released from platelet dense-granules) with luciferin luciferase reagent. A ratio of therapeutic to high heparin luminescence amplitude of >5.0 and platelet aggregation at therapeutic, but not high, concentrations was considered a positive result. The results of assays performed by our regional HIT testing referral laboratory from June 2009 to July 2012 were reviewed to identify patients with positive HIT testing by lumi-aggregometry. Patient records were retrospectively reviewed to obtain predefined data on baseline patient characteristics, heparin exposure, platelet counts, and thrombotic events occurring in the 5 days preceding or the 30 days following the date of positive HIT testing. Results: We identified 43 patients diagnosed with HIT by lumi-aggregometry (median age 68.0, 49% male) while under the care of local academic (46%) or urban community hospitals (37.2% medical; 53.5% surgical; 9.3% intensive care). Median baseline platelet count was 187 (14-349). Median date of platelet drop post-heparin exposure was 6 days (range 3-14) in patients without prior heparin exposure or platelet transfusions (Figure 1). Platelet drop >50% and platelet nadir ≥20x109/L were present in the majority of patients (Table 1). Thrombocytopenia occurred prior to (70.5%) or the same day (23.5%) as thrombosis in 16/17 patients with serial platelet counts who developed HIT-associated thromboembolism. Conclusion: Patients diagnosed with HIT by lumi-aggregometry present with similar findings to those described in SRA-confirmed HIT. These findings lend support to the use of lumi-aggregometry as an accurate diagnostic assay for the clinico-pathologic syndrome of HIT. Figure 1 Figure 1. Table 1. Percentage platelet drop from baseline and platelet nadir Percent platelet drop Platelet nadir >50% 30-50% <30% ≥20 x 109/L 28 3 2 10-19 x 109/L 5 1 0 <10 x 109/L 1 1 0 Disclosures Szkotak: Alexion Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Sandhu:Celgene: Honoraria; Jansen: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".