A Tale of Two Cases: Acquired Hemophilia A and/or Lupus Anticoagulant?

Abstract Distinguishing between acquired hemophilia A (AHA) and lupus anticoagulant (LA) is essential for effective clinical management. This can be challenging due to similarities in laboratory tests and potential interference between their diagnostic tests. Here we present two complex cases. Case 1 is a 69-year-old female with PNH presenting with a subdural hematoma. Prolonged aPTT with no correction on mixing raised clinical suspicion of AHA. Factor VIII activity was low (2%) across three dilutions in the factor assay. A Bethesda assay revealed a low factor VIII inhibitor (1%). LA was negative by DRVVT. Antiphospholipid antibodies (Cardiolipin and Beta-2-Glycoprotein 1) were also negative. Treatment with prednisone and intravenous immunoglobulin was initiated with presumptive diagnosis of AHA. Subsequent samples to check other factor levels uncovered low Factor IX as well. Higher dilutions in factor assays exhibited non-parallelism in Factor IX and VIII, suggesting a non-specific inhibitor. Chromogenic Factor VIII was within the normal range. Another LA test, Staclot-LA was positive. Overall, this case was consistent with LA rather than AHA. The initial ‘positive’ Bethesda assay was attributed to interference by LA. Case 2 is a 20-year-old female with no significant medical history who was admitted elsewhere for a complicated C-section with intraabdominal hemorrhage. She had prolonged aPTT and positive LA by platelet neutralization test there. Upon transfer, the initial assessment confirmed prolonged aPTT and a time-dependent inhibitor pattern in mixing studies. Factor studies revealed significantly diminished factor VIII activity (<1%) using both one-stage clotting and chromogenic assays. A strong factor VIII inhibitor was identified through chromogenic Bethesda assay (126 BU). Non-parallelism was observed in other factors (Factor IX, XI, XII). LA was negative by DRVVT but positive by Staclot-LA. Cardiolipin and beta2-glycoprotein-1 antibodies were negative. The diagnosis of AHA was evident. But is there concurrent LA present? Both Staclot-LA and platelet neutralization tests are PTT-based and susceptible to interference from factor VIII inhibitor. The patient underwent treatment, and factor VIII inhibitor disappeared in 3 months. Staclot-LA also turned negative, suggesting that the initially ‘positive’ LA test was likely a result of interference. In both cases, adopting a holistic approach to differentiate between AHA and LA is beneficial. Relying solely on individual tests may lead to false interpretations, as LA can inhibit FVIII activity assays and produce false positives in the Bethesda assay. It is advisable to include higher dilutions in factor assays and/or chromogenic assays to mitigate interference. The presence of factor VIII inhibitor can also result in false-positive LA results such as Staclot-LA assay. For more reliable results, DRVVT and antibody tests are preferable. If the aPTT-based assay is the sole positive LA test, the presence of LA is suggested when it occurs before and/or after the presence of a factor inhibitor.