Validation of the adjusted global antiphospholipid syndrome score in a single centre cohort of APS patients from Turkey

A young woman with acute coronary syndrome and antiphospholipid syndrome. Is it the antiphospholipid syndrome or COVID-19 vaccination or classical risk as the risk factor? a case report

BACKGROUND

Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in young women is poorly understood due to underdiagnosis and undertreatment. One of the possible risk factors for ACS in young women is antiphospholipid syndrome (APS). Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination also emerged as one of the possible risk factors for ACS during the COVID-19 pandemic.

CASE PRESENTATION

Our patient, a 39-year-old Batak woman with dyslipidemia and family history of cardiovascular disease, experienced chest pain slightly improved at rest accompanied by autonomic symptoms. She was diagnosed with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) based on her clinical features, dynamic electrocardiogram changes, troponin elevation, and multislice computed tomography angiography confirmed with diagnostic catheterization. The patient was managed by percutaneous coronary intervention with implantation of drug-eluting stents. On follow-up, the patient was diagnosed with APS based on history of preeclampsia with severe features in the first and third pregnancy, spontaneous abortion in the second pregnancy, history of transient ischemic attack, moderately positive lupus anticoagulant on two occasions with an interval of 12 weeks, and ACS. Further investigation revealed a history of COVID-19 vaccination with Sinovac four and six weeks before presentation. The patient was recommended for lifelong warfarin and short-term dual antiplatelet (aspirin and ticagrelor).

CONCLUSIONS

Young women are not completely immune to ACS as evident in this case of ACS in a young woman with classical risk factors (dyslipidemia and family history of cardiovascular disease) and APS. Further studies are required to fill the knowledge gap on whether COVID-19 vaccination had any contribution to the ACS in the young woman.

Development and external validation of a prediction model for venous thromboembolism in systemic lupus erythematosus

OBJECTIVE

Patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) have an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). We conducted this study to develop a risk score algorithm for VTE in patients with SLE that provides individualised risk estimates.

METHODS

We developed a clinical prediction model of VTE in 4502 patients with SLE based on the Chinese SLE Treatment and Research group cohort (CSTAR) from January 2009 to January 2020 and externally validated in 3780 patients with SLE in CSTAR from January 2020 to January 2022. Baseline data were obtained and VTE events were recorded during the follow-up. The prediction model was developed to predict VTE risk within 6 months in patients with SLE, using multivariate logistic regression and least absolute shrinkage and selection operator. SLE-VTE score and nomogram were established according to the model.

RESULTS

A total of 4502 patients included in the development cohort, 135 had VTE events. The final prediction model (SLE-VTE score) included 11 variables: gender, age, body mass index, hyperlipidaemia, hypoalbuminaemia, C reactive protein, anti-β2GPI antibodies, lupus anticoagulant, renal involvement, nervous system involvement and hydroxychloroquine, with area under the curve of 0.947 and 0.808 in the development (n=4502) and external validation cohort (n=3780), respectively. According to the net benefit and predicted probability thresholds, we recommend annual screening of VTE in high risk (≥1.03%) patients with SLE.

CONCLUSION

Various factors are related to the occurrence of VTE in patients with SLE. The proposed SLE-VTE risk score can accurately predict the risk of VTE and help identify patients with SLE with a high risk of VTE who may benefit from thromboprophylaxis.

Thrombotic risk assessment in antiphospholipid syndrome: do noncriteria antibodies contribute?

Background/aim

In this cross-sectional study, it was aimed to test the predictive value of noncriteria antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL) in addition to the global antiphospholipid syndrome score (GAPSS) in predicting vascular thrombosis (VT) in a cohort of patients with APS and aPL (+) systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE).

Material and methods

This study included 50 patients with primary APS, 68 with SLE/APS, and 52 with aPL (+) SLE who were classified according to VT as VT ± pregnancy morbidity (PM), PM only or aPL (+) SLE. Antiphospholipid serology consisting of lupus anticoagulant (LA), anticardiolipin (aCL) immunoglobulin G (IgG)/IgM/IgA, antibeta2 glycoprotein I (aβ2GPI) IgG/IgM/IgA, antiphosphatidylserine/prothrombin (aPS/PT) IgG/IgM and antidomain-I (aDI) IgG was determined for each patient. The GAPSS and adjusted GAPSS (aGAPSS) were calculated for each patient, as previously defined. Logistic regression analysis was carried out with thrombosis as the dependent variable and high GAPSS, aCL IgA, aβ2GPI IgA, and aDI IgG as independent variables.

Results

The mean GAPSS and aGAPSS of the study population were 11.6 ± 4.4 and 9.6 ± 3.8. Both the VT ± PM APS (n = 105) and PM only APS (n = 13) groups had significantly higher GAPSS and aGAPSS values compared to the aPL (+) SLE (n = 52) group. The patients with recurrent thrombosis had higher aGAPSS but not GAPSS than those with a single thrombotic event. The computed area under the receiver operating characteristic curve demonstrated that a GAPSS ≥13 and aGAPSS ≥10 had the best predictive values for thrombosis. Logistic regression analysis including a GAPSS ≥13, aCL IgA, aβ2GPI IgA, and aDI IgG showed that none of the factors other than a GAPSS ≥13 could predict thrombosis.

Conclusion

Both the GAPSS and aGAPSS successfully predict the thrombotic risk in aPL (+) patients and aCL IgA, aβ2GPI IgA, and aDI IgG do not contribute to high a GAPSS or aGAPSS.

Antiphospholipid Syndrome: Thrombotic and Vascular Complications

Antiphospholipid syndrome is a rare, autoimmune thrombophilia defined by vascular thrombosis and pregnancy morbidity, in the setting of documented persistent antiphospholipid antibodies including the lupus anticoagulant, anticardiolipin antibodies, or anti-β2 glycoprotein I antibodies. The presence of antiphospholipid antibodies can be completely asymptomatic, or they can lead to clinical manifestations as severe as catastrophic antiphospholipid syndrome, which involves widespread coagulopathy over a very short period of time. The degree of risk associated with antiphospholipid syndrome depends on the characteristics of the antiphospholipid antibody profile and on the presence of additional thrombotic risk factors. The current standard treatment for unprovoked thrombosis is long-term warfarin. Treatment to prevent recurrent obstetric complications is low-dose aspirin and prophylactic heparin in pregnant patients. The use of direct oral anticoagulants in patients with antiphospholipid syndrome is still being debated. Their use is generally contraindicated, especially in high-risk patients, such as those with all 3 antiphospholipid antibodies present, but they may potentially be of some use in some low-risk patients.

Validation of three prediction models for thrombosis recurrence in antiphospholipid syndrome patients based on a prospective cohort

OBJECTIVES

To validate the performance of the adjusted global antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) score (aGAPSS), Padua score and Caprini score to predict thrombosis recurrence in APS.

METHODS

Consecutive thrombotic-APS patients were included. aGAPSS, Padua and Caprini score at baseline were collected. Harrell c-index and calibration curve were used to validate the prediction models.

RESULTS

362 patients were enrolled. The mean age was 36.30±13.88 years old, and 209 (57.7%) were female. Patients were followed up for a median of 2.32 years, with 32 (8.84%) venous and 21 (5.80%) arterial thrombosis. The 1-year, 3-year and 5-year thrombosis risks were 5.0%, 14.3% and 17.9%, respectively. The Harrell c-indexes of aGAPSS, Padua and Caprini score were 0.54 (95% CI 0.44 to 0.64), 0.54 (95% CI 0.46 to 0.62), and 0.50 (95%CI 0.42 to 0.58), respectively. Padua score had the best discrimination to predict venous thrombosis (Harrell c-index=0.61, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.69). aGAPSS had the best discrimination to predict arterial thrombosis (Harrell c-index=0.61, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.75). The calibrations for predicting thrombosis within 1, 3 and 5 years of the three models were suboptimal.

CONCLUSION

The performance of aGAPSS, Padua and Caprini score to predict thrombosis recurrence in APS were suboptimal. Arterial and venous thrombosis recurrence predictors were different. New prediction models are required for venous and arterial thrombosis separately.

A novel aGAPSS-based nomogram for the prediction of ischemic stroke in patients with antiphospholipid syndrome

Background

Ischemic stroke (IS) is the most common and life-threatening arterial manifestation of antiphospholipid syndrome (APS). It is related to high mortality and severe permanent disability in survivors. Thus, it is essential to identify patients with APS at high risk of IS and adopt individual-level preventive measures. This study was conducted to identify risk factors for IS in patients with APS and to develop a nomogram specifically for IS prediction in these patients by combining the adjusted Global Anti-Phospholipid Syndrome Score (aGAPSS) with additional clinical and laboratory data.

Methods

A total of 478 consecutive patients with APS were enrolled retrospectively. All patients were randomly assigned to the training and validation cohorts. Univariate and multivariate binary logistic analyses were conducted to identify predictors of IS in the training cohort. Then, a nomogram was developed based on these predictors. The predictive performance of the nomogram for the training and validation cohorts was evaluated by determining areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) and creating calibration plots. A decision curve analysis (DCA) was conducted to compare the potential net benefits of the nomogram with those of the aGAPSS.

Results

During a mean follow-up period of 2.7 years, 26.9% (129/478) of the patients were diagnosed with IS. Binary logistic regression analysis revealed that five risk factors were independent clinical predictors of IS: age (P < 0.001), diabetes (P = 0.030), hyperuricemia (P < 0.001), the platelet count (P = 0.001), and the aGAPSS (P = 0.001). These predictors were incorporated into the nomogram, named the aGAPSS-IS. The nomogram showed satisfactory performance in the training [AUROC = 0.853 (95% CI, 0.802–0.896] and validation [AUROC = 0.793 (95% CI, 0.737–0.843)] cohorts. Calibration curves showed good concordance between observed and nomogram-predicted probability in the training and validation cohorts. The DCA confirmed that the aGAPSS-IS provided more net benefits than the aGAPSS in both cohorts.

Conclusion

Age, diabetes, hyperuricemia, the platelet count, and the aGAPSS were risk factors for IS in patients with APS. The aGAPSS-IS may be a good tool for IS risk stratification for patients with APS based on routinely available data.

Does Adjusted Global Antiphospholipid Syndrome Score (aGAPSS) Predict the Obstetric Outcome in Antiphospholipid Antibody Carriers? A Single-Center Study

The adjusted Global Antiphospholipid Syndrome (APS) Score (aGAPSS) is a tool proposed to quantify the risk for antiphospholipid antibody (aPL)-related clinical manifestations. However, aGAPSS has been validated mainly for thrombotic events and studies on APS-related obstetric manifestations are scarce. Furthermore, the majority of them included patients with positive aPL and different autoimmune diseases. Here, we assess the utility of aGAPSS to predict the response to treatment in aPL carriers without other autoimmune disorders. One-hundred and thirty-seven women with aPL ever pregnant were included. Sixty-five meet the APS classification criteria, 61 had APS-related obstetric manifestations, and 11 were asymptomatic carriers. The patients' aGAPSS risk was grouped as low (< 6, N = 73), medium (6-11, N = 40), and high risk (≥ 12, N = 24). Since vascular risk factors included in the aGAPSS were infrequent in this population (< 10%), the aGAPSS score was mainly determined by the aPL profile. Overall, the live birth rate was 75%, and 37.2% of the patients had at least one adverse pregnancy outcome (APO). When considering patients according to the aGAPSS (high, medium, and low risk), no significant differences were found for pregnancy loss (29.2%, 25%, and 21.9%) or APO (33.3%, 47.5%, and 32.9%). In the present study, including aPL carriers without other autoimmune diseases, aGAPSS is not a valuable tool to identify patients at risk for obstetric complications despite treatment. In these patients with gestational desire, in addition to the aPL profile, other pregnancy-specific factors, such as age or previous obstetric history, should be considered.