Unravelling the effect of blood group on FVIII:C levels and response to DDAVP in 20 males with a single genotype (<i>Twillingate</i> Variant) causing Haemophilia A
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction The genetic variant responsible for haemophilia A (HA) significantly impacts endogenous coagulant factor VIII (FVIII:C) level, thus impacting DDAVP responsiveness. Blood group (BG) also impacts FVIII:C levels, but this is difficult to evaluate in a genetically heterogeneous population. Canada has a large cohort of mild‐moderate HA due to a single point variant: c.6104T>C, p.Val2035Ala—the Twillingate variant. Aim To evaluate the impact of BG on endogenous FVIII:C levels and DDAVP responsiveness in a single genotype of mild‐moderate HA. Methods This was a retrospective, single‐centre study. BG and FVIII:C levels were obtained for males with the Twillingate variant. One‐hour absolute and fold increases in FVIII:C post‐DDAVP were calculated. T‐tests and Mann–Whitney U tests were used to compare FVIII:C levels and DDAVP challenge variables between individuals according to BGs (O vs. non‐O). Results Twenty males were included. There were significant differences between BGs (O vs. non‐O) in their lowest FVIII:C level at age <12 years (medians: 0.05 vs. 0.08 IU/mL; P = .05). Fifteen subjects underwent DDAVP challenges. Mean 1‐h FVIII:C were 0.29 (O BG) versus 0.41 IU/mL (non‐O BG); P = .04. There were no significant differences between BGs (O vs. non‐O) in mean absolute FVIII:C increase (0.20 vs. 0.27 IU/mL; P = .10) and FVIII:C fold increase (3.3‐fold vs. 3.8‐fold; P = .51). Conclusion In HA subjects with an identical genotype, BG significantly impacts baseline FVIII:C levels and FVIII:C levels post‐DDAVP, but does not impact absolute and fold increases in FVIII:C with DDAVP.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".