These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Detection of von Willebrand disorder and identification of qualitative von Willebrand factor defects. Direct comparison of commercial ELISA-based von Willebrand factor activity options.
    Author: Favaloro EJ.
    Journal: Am J Clin Pathol; 2000 Oct; 114(4):608-18. PubMed ID: 11026108.
    Abstract:
    Two von Willebrand factor (vWF):collagen binding (activity) assay (CBA) kit methods are commercially available. A monoclonal antibody (MAB)-based enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) system reported to correlate with a standard vWF:ristocetin cofactor (RCof) assay is also commercially available. It is marketed as a vWF:Activity assay and is available in 2 assay version formats. In the present study, these 4 vWF-activity options were compared directly with in-house vWF:CBA ELISAs for their ability to detect von Willebrand disease (vWD) and identify qualitative vWF defects. The 2 MAB-based systems detected vWD but could not specifically identify qualitative vWF defects, although the recently modified Mark II kit was more effective for the latter compared with the original Mark I kit. All vWF:CBA methods, including in-house and commercial, also effectively detected vWD but differed in their ability to identify qualitative vWF defects. Effectiveness was highest using the in-house reference vWF:CBA (using a type I/III collagen mix product from equine tendon), the Gradipore vWF:CBA (also uses equine tendon-derived collagen), or the in-house vWF:CBA methods using type III human collagen at a relatively low concentration (1 or 3 micrograms/mL, without covalent linkage). The IMMUNO vWF:CBA seemed to be the least effective among the vWF:CBA methods for detection of qualitative vWF defects.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]