140 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32272277)
1. Effect of different methods for outlier detection and rejection when calculating cut off values for diagnosis of lupus anticoagulants.
Chantarangkul V; Peyvandi F; Tripodi A;
Thromb Res; 2020 Jun; 190():20-25. PubMed ID: 32272277
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Variability of cut-off values for the detection of lupus anticoagulants: results of an international multicenter multiplatform study.
Tripodi A; Chantarangkul V; Cini M; Devreese K; Dlott JS; Giacomello R; Gray E; Legnani C; Martinuzzo ME; Pradella P; Siegemund A; Subramanian S; Suchon P; Testa S
J Thromb Haemost; 2017 Jun; 15(6):1180-1190. PubMed ID: 28316135
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Laboratory diagnosis of lupus anticoagulants for patients on oral anticoagulant treatment. Performance of dilute Russell viper venom test and silica clotting time in comparison with Staclot LA.
Tripodi A; Chantarangkul V; Clerici M; Mannucci PM
Thromb Haemost; 2002 Oct; 88(4):583-6. PubMed ID: 12362227
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Variability among commercial batches of normal pooled plasma in lupus anticoagulant testing.
Cabo J; Morimont L; Baudar J; Guldenpfennig M; Jacqmin H; Soleimani R; Lecompte T; Douxfils J; Mullier F
Int J Lab Hematol; 2023 Feb; 45(1):126-136. PubMed ID: 36222181
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Lupus anticoagulant assay cut-offs vary between reagents even when derived from a common set of normal donor plasmas.
Moore GW; Kumano O
J Thromb Haemost; 2020 Feb; 18(2):439-444. PubMed ID: 31663664
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. New guidelines for lupus anticoagulant: sensitivity and specificity of cut-off values calculated with plasmas from healthy controls in mixing and confirmatory tests.
Martinuzzo ME; Cerrato GS; Varela ML; Adamczuk YP; Forastiero RR
Int J Lab Hematol; 2012 Apr; 34(2):208-13. PubMed ID: 22032515
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Lupus anticoagulant laboratory diagnosis by applying the 2020 ISTH-SSC guidelines.
Talon L; Fourneyron V; Senectaire S; Tardieu M; Tillier M; Trapani A; Trayaud A; Vaissade A; Sapin AF; Lebreton A; Sinegre T
Thromb Res; 2023 Apr; 224():38-45. PubMed ID: 36827954
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Mixing test specific cut-off is more sensitive at detecting lupus anticoagulants than index of circulating anticoagulant.
Moore GW; Culhane AP; Daw CR; Noronha CP; Kumano O
Thromb Res; 2016 Mar; 139():98-101. PubMed ID: 26916303
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The effect of DOAC-Stop on lupus anticoagulant testing in plasma samples of venous thromboembolism patients receiving direct oral anticoagulants.
Ząbczyk M; Kopytek M; Natorska J; Undas A
Clin Chem Lab Med; 2019 Aug; 57(9):1374-1381. PubMed ID: 30763261
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Testing for Lupus Anticoagulants.
Moore GW
Semin Thromb Hemost; 2022 Sep; 48(6):643-660. PubMed ID: 35649428
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Lupus Anticoagulant Testing: Dilute Prothrombin Time (dPT).
Moore GW
Methods Mol Biol; 2023; 2663():275-288. PubMed ID: 37204717
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Laboratory testing for lupus anticoagulant (LA) in patients taking direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs): potential for false positives and false negatives.
Favaloro EJ; Mohammed S; Curnow J; Pasalic L
Pathology; 2019 Apr; 51(3):292-300. PubMed ID: 30665674
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Paired APTTs of low and high lupus anticoagulant sensitivity permit distinction from other abnormalities and achieve good lupus anticoagulant detection rates in conjunction with dRVVT.
Kumano O; Amiral J; Dunois C; Peyrafitte M; Moore GW
Int J Lab Hematol; 2019 Feb; 41(1):60-68. PubMed ID: 30248243
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Alternative assays to dRVVT and aPTT for lupus anticoagulant detection.
Moore GW
Am J Hematol; 2020 Aug; 95(8):992-998. PubMed ID: 32311119
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Guidance from the Scientific and Standardization Committee for lupus anticoagulant/antiphospholipid antibodies of the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis: Update of the guidelines for lupus anticoagulant detection and interpretation.
Devreese KMJ; de Groot PG; de Laat B; Erkan D; Favaloro EJ; Mackie I; Martinuzzo M; Ortel TL; Pengo V; Rand JH; Tripodi A; Wahl D; Cohen H
J Thromb Haemost; 2020 Nov; 18(11):2828-2839. PubMed ID: 33462974
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. The activated seven lupus anticoagulant assay detects clinically significant antibodies.
Moore GW; Rangarajan S; Savidge GF
Clin Appl Thromb Hemost; 2008 Jul; 14(3):332-7. PubMed ID: 17895508
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Potentially clinically important inaccuracies in testing for the lupus anticoagulant: an analysis of results from three surveys of the UK National External Quality Assessment Scheme (NEQAS) for Blood Coagulation.
Jennings I; Kitchen S; Woods TA; Preston FE; Greaves M
Thromb Haemost; 1997 May; 77(5):934-7. PubMed ID: 9184405
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Newly developed dilute Russell's viper venom reagents for lupus anticoagulant detection with improved specificity.
Moore GW; Peyrafitte M; Dunois C; Amiral J
Lupus; 2018 Jan; 27(1):95-104. PubMed ID: 28549386
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Kaolin clotting time and dilute Russell's viper venom time distinguish between prothrombin-dependent and beta 2-glycoprotein I-dependent antiphospholipid antibodies.
Galli M; Finazzi G; Bevers EM; Barbui T
Blood; 1995 Jul; 86(2):617-23. PubMed ID: 7605991
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Mixing studies for lupus anticoagulant: mostly yes, sometimes no.
Favaloro E
Clin Chem Lab Med; 2020 Mar; 58(4):487-491. PubMed ID: 31874094
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
