Key Points• This study is the first to assess prognostic factors in patients with AHA treated according to a uniform immunosuppressive regimen.• Residual factor VIII activity and inhibitor concentration at baseline are potentially useful predictors of remission.Acquired hemophilia A (AHA) is caused by autoantibodies against factor VIII (FVIII).Immunosuppressive treatment (IST) results in remission of disease in 60% to 80% of patients over a period of days to months. IST is associated with frequent adverse events, including infections as a leading cause of death. Predictors of time to remission could help guide IST intensity but have not been established. We analyzed prognostic factors in 102 prospectively enrolled patients treated with a uniform IST protocol. Partial remission (PR; defined as no active bleeding, FVIII restored >50 IU/dL, hemostatic treatment stopped >24 hours) was achieved by 83% of patients after a median of 31 days (range 7-362).Patients with baseline FVIII <1 IU/dL achieved PR less often and later (77%, 43 days) than patients with ‡1 IU/dL (89%, 24 days). After adjustment for other baseline characteristics, low FVIII remained associated with a lower rate of PR (hazard ratio 0.52, 95% confidence interval 0.33-0.81, P < .01). In contrast, PR achieved on steroids alone within £21 days was more common in patients with FVIII ‡1 IU/dL and inhibitor concentration <20 BU/mL (odds ratio 11.2, P < .0001). Low FVIII was also associated with a lower rate of complete remission and decreased survival. In conclusion, presenting FVIII and inhibitor concentration are potentially useful to tailor IST in AHA. (Blood. 2015;125(7):1091-1097

Thrombin generation was investigated in platelet-rich plasma (PRP) from 11 healthy controls, 17 patients with severe haemophilia A and 7 patients with severe haemophilia B. Mean endogenous thrombin potential (ETP) in arbitrary fluorescence units (FU) was 226.9 +/- 44.6, 186.4 +/- 22.5, 154.2 +/- 41.3 in controls, haemophilia A and B, respectively, all at a platelet count of 200 x 10(9)/l (p = 0.004 for controls vs. haemophilia A, p = 0.003 for controls vs. haemophilia B, no significant difference between haemophilia A and B). The contribution of FVIII to thrombin generation in haemophilia A was 1.31 +/- 0.16 FU/% of FVIII:C activity, while for FIX in haemophilia B this was 0.80 +/- 0.21 FU/% of FIX activity. There was an almost linear relationship between increasing platelet count and thrombin generation up to a mean platelet count of 100 x 10(9)/l. Further increase in platelet count has only a marginal influence on thrombin generation. Platelets increase ETP in haemophilia A by 0.184 +/- 0.022 FU/10(9) platelets/l and in haemophilia B by 0.319 +/- 0.085 FU/10(9) platelets/l, and this was significantly different between the two groups (p = 0.0002). This influence of plate-lets diminishes with increasing concentration of either FVIII or FIX. In conclusion, there is a difference in thrombin generation between haemophilia A and B, and this may be attributed to the role of platelets in the assembly of the tenase complex on their surface.

EssentialsFactor VIII (FVIII) binding IgG detected by ELISA could be an alternative to the Bethesda assay. We studied the performance of anti-FVIII IgG ELISA in patients with acquired hemophilia and controls. Anti-FVIII IgG > 99th percentile of controls was highly sensitive and specific. Patients with high anti-FVIII IgG have a lower chance of achieving remission.Summary. Background: Acquired hemophilia A is a severe bleeding disorder that requires fast and accurate diagnosis as it occurs often unexpectedly in previously healthy men and women of every age. The Nijmegen-modified Bethesda assay is the diagnostic reference standard for detecting neutralizing autoantibodies against factor VIII (FVIII), but is not widely available, not ideal for quantifying the complex type 2 inhibitors seen in acquired hemophilia, and suffers from high inter-laboratory variability. Objectives: To assess the diagnostic and prognostic value of FVIII-binding antibodies as detected by ELISA compared with the Nijmegen Bethesda assay. Methods: Samples from the time of first diagnosis and clinical data were available from 102 patients with acquired hemophilia enrolled in the prospective GTH-AH 01/2010 study. Controls (n = 102) were matched for gender and age. Diagnostic cut-offs were determined by receiver-operator curve analysis. The prognostic value was assessed in 92 of the 102 patients by Cox regression analysis of time to partial remission. Results: Anti-FVIII IgG above the 99th percentile (> 15 arbitrary units per mL) revealed high sensitivity and specificity (both 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.95-1.0) for diagnosing acquired hemophilia. The likelihood of achieving partial remission was related to anti-FVIII IgG concentration (< 300 arbitrary units, 1.0; 300-1050, 0.65; > 1050, 0.39). The Bethesda titer was only associated with the likelihood of partial remission when analyzed in the central laboratory, but not when data from local GTH study sites were used. Conclusion: Although the Nijmegen-modified Bethesda assay is the reference standard for demonstrating neutralizing antibodies, the detection of FVIIIbinding antibodies by ELISA is similarly sensitive and specific for diagnosing acquired hemophilia. In addition, anti-FVIII IgG may provide prognostic information.

Introduction: Haemophilia treatment varies significantly between individuals, countries and regions and details of bleed rates, factor consumption and injection frequency are often not available. Aim: To provide an overview of the FVIII/FIX treatment practice and outcome for patients with haemophilia A (HA) or haemophilia B (HB) across Europe. Methods: Non-interventional, 12-month retrospective study where anonymized data were retrieved from haemophilia centres/registers in Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom. Male patients (all ages) receiving coagulation factor treatment 24 months prior to the study, with basal FVIII/FIX levels ≤5 IU dL À1 , without inhibitors, were included. Data were summarized descriptively. Results: In total, 1346 patients with HA and 312 with HB were included in the analysis; 75% and 57% had severe disease (FVIII/ FIX < 1 IU dL À1 ) respectively. Prophylaxis was most common for severe haemophilia, especially for children, whereas on-demand treatment was more common for moderate haemophilia in most countries. The mean (SD) prescribed prophylactic treatment ranged from 67.9 (30.4) to 108.4 (78.1) (HA) and 32.3 (10.2) to 97.7 (32.1) (HB) IU kg À1 per week, across countries. Most patients on prophylaxis were treated ≥3 times/week (HA) or two times/week (HB). The median annual bleeding rate (ABR) for patients on prophylaxis ranged from 1.0 to 4.0 for severe HA, and from 1.0 to 6.0 for severe HB, while those with moderate haemophilia generally had slightly higher ABRs. Median ABRs for on-demand-treated severe HA ranged from 4.5 to 18.0, and for HB, 1.5 to 14.0. Conclusion: Treatment practice varied greatly between centres and countries and patients treated on-demand and prophylactically both experienced bleeds, emphasizing the need for further optimization of care.

Summary: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a major cause of maternal morbidity during pregnancy and the postpartum period. However, because there is a lack of adequate study data, management strategies for pregnancy-associated VTE must be deduced from observational studies and extrapolated from recommendations for non-pregnant patients. In this review, the members of the Working Group in Women's Health of the Society of Thrombosis and Haemostasis (GTH) have summarised the evidence that is currently available in the literature to provide a practical approach for treating pregnancy-associated VTE. Because heparins do not cross the placenta, weight-adjusted therapeutic-dose low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) is the anticoagulant treatment of choice in cases of acute VTE during pregnancy. No differences between once and twice daily LMWH dosing regimens have been reported, but twice daily dosing seems to be advisable, at least peripartally. It remains unclear whether determining dose adjustments according to factor Xa activities during pregnancy provides any benefi t. Management of delivery deserves attention and mainly depends on the time interval between the diagnosis of VTE and the expected delivery date. In particular, if VTE manifests at term, delivery should be attended by an experienced multidisciplinary team. In lactating women, an overlapping switch from LMWH to warfarin is possible. Anticoagulation should be continued for at least 6 weeks postpartum or for a minimum period of 3 months. Although recommendations are provided for the treatment of pregnancy-associated VTE, there is an urgent need for well-designed prospective studies that compare different management strategies and defi ne the optimal duration and intensity of anticoagulant treatment. Anticoagulant therapy during pregnancyLow-molecular-weight heparins (LMWH) are considered the anticoagulants of choice in pregnancy-associated VTE because LMWH do not cross the placenta and do not appear at signifi cant levels in breast milk. Although a Cochrane Review stated that there was no evidence from randomised controlled trials regarding the effi cacy of anticoagulant therapy for DVT in pregnancy [2], two systemic reviews of LMWH use in pregnant women have confi rmed their efficacy and safety, which were consistent with those in nonpregnant women [3,4]. Compared to unfractionated heparin (UFH), LMWH were associated with a substantially lower risk of adverse side eff ects, such as heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT), haemorrhage, and osteoporosis [3 -7]. However, UFH may be considered an alternative if LMWH cannot be used or if UFH seems to be advantageous over LMWH, e.g., in women at high risk of bleeding complications or in women with severe renal impairment. Women with confi rmed PE and haemodynamic compromise who are candidates for subsequent thrombolysis should also receive UFH during the initial phase until defi nitive treatment decisions are reached [1]. Data obtained from non-pregnant patients have confi rmed that LMWH are at least as eff ective...

EpidemiologyVTE is a leading cause of maternal morbidity in the developed world and, in the case of PE, of mortality as well [1]. While the relative risk of VTE is greatly increased during pregnancy compared with that in non-pregnant women, the absolute risk remains low: estimates of the incidence of pregnancy-associated VTE have varied from 1:500 to 1:1500 pregnancies [2 -7]. The risk of VTE is approximately 5-fold greater in pregnant women than in non-pregnant women.Approximately 80 % of pregnancy-associated VTEs are isolated DVTs, and approximately 20 % are PEs or both DVTs and PEs [5]. Although a systematic review reported weighted event rates for DVT of 21.9 %, 33.7 % and 47.6 % for the fi rst, second and third trimesters, respectively [6], a recent study suggested that the risk might in fact increase exponentially over the duration of the pregnancy [7], with 12.4 % of VTEs diagnosed in the fi rst trimester, 15.3 % in the second trimester and 72.3 % in the third trimester. This detailed risk assessment for each gestational week demonstrated a 21-fold increased risk for the last two weeks before delivery [7]. Summary: Pregnancy and the postpartum period are associated with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Over the past decade, new diagnostic algorithms have been established, combining clinical probability, laboratory testing and imaging studies for the diagnosis of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE) in the non-pregnant population. However, there is no such generally accepted algorithm for the diagnosis of pregnancy-associated VTE. Studies establishing clinical prediction rules have excluded pregnant women, and prediction scores currently in use have not been prospectively validated in pregnancy or during the postpartum period. D-dimers physiologically increase throughout pregnancy and peak at delivery, so a negative D-dimer test result, based on the reference values of non-pregnant subjects, becomes unlikely in the second and third trimesters. Imaging studies therefore play a major role in confi rming suspected DVT or PE in pregnant women. Major concerns have been raised against radiologic imaging because of foetal radiation exposure, and doubts about the diagnostic value of ultrasound techniques in attempting to exclude isolated iliac vein thrombosis grow stronger as pregnancy progresses. As members of the Working Group in Women's Health of the Society of Thrombosis and Haemostasis (GTH), we summarise evidence from the available literature and aim to establish a more uniform strategy for diagnosing pregnancy-associated VTE. Review Diagnosis of pregnancy-associated

: Severe hereditary factor VII deficiency is a rare bleeding disorder and may be associated with a severe bleeding phenotype. We describe a pregnancy in a 33-year-old woman with compound heterozygous factor VII deficiency and a history of severe menorrhagia and mucocutaneous bleedings. After discontinuation of contraceptives, menstruation was covered with recombinant activated factor VII (rFVIIa), and during pregnancy, rFVIIa had to be administered in first trimester in doses ranging from 15 to 90 μg/kg per day because of recurrent retroplacental hematomas and vaginal bleedings. Thrombin generation was measured in first trimester at different doses of rFVIIa and showed an increase in lag time when doses of less than 30 μg/kg/day were administered, whereas time to thrombin peak and peak thrombin were not influenced. A low-dose rFVIIa prophylactic treatment of 15 μg/kg every other day in the late second and in the third trimester was sufficient to allow a successful childbirth in this patient with severe factor VII deficiency.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a major cause of maternal morbidity during pregnancy and the postpartum period. Because there is a lack of adequate study data, management strategies for the prevention of VTE during pregnancy have mainly been deduced from case–control and observational studies and extrapolated from recommendations for non-pregnant patients. The decision for or against pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis must be made on an individual basis weighing the risk of VTE against the risk of adverse side effects such as severe bleeding complications. A comprehensive, multidisciplinary approach is often essential as the clinical scenario is made more complex by the specific obstetric context, especially in the peripartum period. As members of the Working Group in Women's Health of the Society of Thrombosis and Haemostasis (GTH), we summarize the evidence from the available literature and aim to establish a more uniform strategy for VTE risk assessment and thromboprophylaxis in pregnancy and the puerperium. In this document, we focus on women with hereditary thrombophilia, prior VTE and the use of anticoagulants that can safely be applied during pregnancy and the lactation period.