BackgroundRegulatory bodies recommend the use of an assay based on the assessment of the endogenous thrombin potential (ETP) for the investigation of the activated protein C resistance (APCr) in the development of steroid contraceptives in women. However, the assays described in the literature are home-made and not standardized regarding the method, the reagents, the reference plasma and the quality controls. In the absence of any commercially available method, we aimed at validating the ETP-based APCr assay.MethodsThe validation was performed according to regulatory standards. The method targets a 90% inhibition of the ETP in healthy donors in the presence of APC compared to the same condition in the absence of APC. As a large-scale production of a pool of plasma from well-selected healthy donors is impossible, algorithms were applied to a commercial reference plasma to correlate with the selected pool.ResultsRepeatability and intermediate precision passed the acceptance criteria. The assay demonstrated a curvilinear dose response to protein S and APC concentrations (R2 > 0.99). Analysis of plasma samples from 47 healthy individuals (22 women not taking combined hormonal contraceptives [CHC], and 25 men not Factor V Leiden carriers) confirmed the validity of the test, with a mean inhibition percentage of 90%. Investigations in 15 women taking different contraceptives and in two subjects with Factor V Leiden confirmed the good sensitivity and performance of the assay.ConclusionsThis validation provides the pharmaceutical industry, the regulatory bodies and physicians with a reproducible, sensitive and validated gold-standard ETP-based APCr assay.

Background The evaluation of the activated protein C resistance (APCr) based on the endogenous thrombin potential (ETP) is recommended during the development of steroid contraceptives. Results are usually expressed as “normalized APC sensitivity ratio” (nAPCsr) using a reference plasma that should achieve an ETP ratio of 0.1 in presence of exogenous APC. Because of the interassay variability, achieving exactly an ETP ratio of 0.1 in each run is almost impossible, which significantly affects the theoretical 0‐10 scale of nAPCsr. Objectives To compare the nAPCsr to the nAPCsr10, a newly proposed method to express the degree of APC resistance. Methods Individual plasma samples (n = 854) were analyzed to compare nAPCsr and nAPCsr10. These values were obtained using the validated ETP‐based APCr assay. Results The Spearman correlation between nAPCsr and nAPCsr10 had a coefficient of 0.99. Linear regression showed the following equation y = 0.9315*x + 0.03942 (r2 = .97). When differences (nAPCsr10 – nAPCsr) were plotted against nAPCsr10, the mean difference equaled 0.16% or 4.95%. The correction obtained with the use of the nAPCsr10 showed that the results of the nAPCsr were statistically different (P < .0001). Conclusions This new scale provides a harmonization and normalization of the nAPCsr. Results show a better reproducibility with the nAPCsr10. It avoids the additional variability and the unharmonized scale introduced by the use of a reference plasma. This adapted method for the calculation of the APC resistance could provide the regulatory and scientific bodies with more reproducible and harmonized evaluations.