MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415301290 · doi:10.3390/hematolrep17050052

Concomitant Acquired Hemophilia A and Acquired Von Willebrand Syndrome from Distinctive Autoantibodies: Case Report

2025· article· en· W4415301290 on OpenAlexaff
Richard Ying Yu, Mackenzie Bowman, Arnaud Bonnefoy, Paula James, Chai W. Phua

Bibliographic record

VenueHematology Reports · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemophilia Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalQueen's UniversityWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVon Willebrand factorConcomitantImmunosuppressionAutoantibodyVon Willebrand diseaseCoagulopathy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background and Clinical Significance: Acquired hemophilia A (AHA) and acquired von Willebrand syndrome (AVWS) are rare bleeding disorders that do not often present concurrently. Here, we report a coexisting AHA and AVWS case due to underlying autoantibodies to factor VIII (FVIII) and von Willebrand factor (VWF). Case Presentation: A patient with gastrointestinal bleeding and prolonged aPTT was diagnosed with AHA and AVWS. The patient was started on immunosuppression with prednisone, cyclophosphamide, and intravenous immunoglobulin, alongside recombinant porcine FVIII replacement, susoctocog alfa. AVWS reduced the half-life of susoctocog alfa, requiring more frequent dosing and laboratory monitoring until AVWS resolved. The patient had two further relapses; the most recent was treated with Rituximab, following which remission has been maintained. Conclusions: Given the potential therapeutic implications, VWF testing should be considered as part of the diagnostic workup for AHA.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0050.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.292 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHematology ReportsSame topicHemophilia Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207