Laboratory Diagnosis of Antiphospholipid Syndrome: Insights and Hindrances

Diagnosis of antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) requires the presence of a clinical criterion (thrombosis and/or pregnancy morbidity), combined with persistently circulating antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL). Currently, laboratory criteria aPL consist of lupus anticoagulant (LAC), anticardiolipin antibodies (aCL) IgG/IgM, and anti-β2 glycoprotein I antibodies (aβ2GPI) IgG/IgM. Diagnosis and risk stratification of APS are complex and efforts to standardize and optimize laboratory tests have been ongoing since the initial description of the syndrome. LAC detection is based on functional coagulation assays, while aCL and aβ2GPI are measured with immunological solid-phase assays. LAC assays are especially prone to interference by anticoagulation therapy, but strategies to circumvent this interference are promising. Alternative techniques such as thrombin generation for LAC detection and to estimate LAC pathogenicity have been suggested, but are not applicable yet in routine setting. For aCL and aβ2GPI, a lot of different assays and detection techniques such as enzyme-linked immunosorbent and chemiluminescent assays are available. Furthermore, a lack of universal calibrators or standards results in high variability between the different solid-phase assays. Other non-criteria aPL such as anti-domain I β2 glycoprotein I and antiphosphatidylserine/prothrombin antibodies have been suggested for risk stratification purposes in APS, while their added value to diagnostic criteria seems limited. In this review, we will describe laboratory assays for diagnostic and risk evaluation in APS, integrating applicable guidelines and classification criteria. Current insights and hindrances are addressed with respect to both laboratory and clinical implications.

Practical Considerations and Testing Nuances for the Detection of Lupus Anticoagulant: Do Low Phospholipid Screen Results, Assay Type, and Test Ratio Matter?

OBJECTIVES

Lupus anticoagulant (LA) detection requires (1) prolongation of a phospholipid (PL)-dependent clot-based screening assay, (2) noncorrection upon adding normal pooled plasma, and (3) a confirmatory PL dependency test. Paired LA assays run screening and confirmatory tests simultaneously, with their test ratio (TR) or differences used to evaluate test results. We evaluated patients whose paired testing demonstrated PL dependence suggestive of LA, yet the low PL screen was not prolonged.

METHODS

Clinical and laboratory parameters are compared across (1) true positive (screen prolonged, TR positive) vs borderline (screen not prolonged, TR positive); (2) low-, moderate-, and high-TR subgroups; and (3) dilute Russell viper venom time (dRVVT) vs silica clotting time (SCT).

RESULTS

Borderline samples are not statistically different from true positives in their rate of repeat LA positivity or association with other anti-PL antibodies. Compared with true positives, borderline dRVVT is more frequent in pregnancy, women, and younger age. Elevated activated partial thromboplastin time is more frequent in true-positive dRVVT and SCT vs borderline and with an increasing dRVVT TR. LA persistence is more frequent with an increasing SCT TR. In addition, dRVVT true positivity is more frequent with thromboembolic events, while SCT is more frequent with autoimmunity and pregnancy complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Negative low-PL screens may not necessarily lack LA. A reevaluation of the laboratory criteria for LA detection may be needed.

Inflammatory markers in thrombosis associated with primary antiphospholipid syndrome

The role of inflammation in thrombotic complications of primary antiphospholipid syndrome (PAPS) is controversial. The aim of this study was to evaluate levels of inflammation and coagulation markers in patients with thrombotic PAPS (t-PAPS). Patients with t-PAPS and individuals with no history of thrombosis were enrolled. The association of t-PAPS with levels of tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α, C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), interferon (IFN)-α, interleukins (IL)-6, -8, factor VIII (FVIII), von Willebrand factor (VWF) and tissue factor (TF) was evaluated by regression models. The levels of these markers were also compared between controls and subgroups of t-PAPS patients with triple positivity, recently diagnosed thrombosis, recurrent thrombosis and venous thrombosis. Patients with t-PAPS (n = 101) had a 8.6-fold increased levels of TNF-α, 90% increased levels of hs-CRP, 80% increased levels of IL-6, 30% increased levels of FVIIIAg, 50% increased levels of VWF and 66% increased levels of TF as compared to controls (n = 131), and the differences did not change after adjustments for sex, age and cardiovascular risk factors. Inflammatory markers were elevated in t-PAPS regardless of the aPL profile, number of previous thrombosis or time elapsed since diagnosis. TNF-α and IL-8 levels were higher in t-PAPS patients with venous thrombosis, in comparison with those with arterial thrombosis and controls. Patients with t-PAPS presented with increased levels of inflammatory and coagulation markers, which suggests that t-PAPS is associated not only with hypercoagulability but also with a persistent inflammatory state.

Guidance from the Scientific and Standardization Committee for lupus anticoagulant/antiphospholipid antibodies of the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis: Update of the guidelines for lupus anticoagulant detection and interpretation

This guidance focuses on methodological aspects of lupus anticoagulant (LA) testing, as well as interpretation of results for clinicians. The main changes in how to test for LA compared with the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis Scientific and Standardization Committee 2009 guidelines, in the preanalytical phase are more detailed recommendations on how to handle testing in anticoagulated patients, and the timing of testing. Also, routine coagulation tests are advised to obtain more information on the coagulation background of the patient, and when necessary, anti-Xa activity measurement for heparins or specific assays for direct oral anticoagulants should be performed. The three-step procedure with two test systems (diluted Russell's viper venom time and activated partial thromboplastin time [aPTT]) is essentially not changed. Silica remains the preferable activator in the aPTT assays, but ellagic acid is not excluded. We advise simultaneous performance of the mixing and confirmatory step, in each sample with a prolonged screening test. The confirmatory step can also be performed on a mixture of patient plasma and normal pooled plasma. Cutoff values should be established in-house on at least 120 normals, with transference of the manufacturer's cutoffs as an alternative. Reporting of results has not been changed, although more attention is focused on what clinicians should know. Patient selection for LA testing has been expanded.

Current Controversies in Lupus Anticoagulant Detection

Antiphospholipid syndrome is an autoimmune, acquired thrombophilia diagnosed when vascular thrombosis or pregnancy morbidity are accompanied by persistent antiphospholipid antibodies. Lupus anticoagulants (LA) are one of the criteria antibodies but calibration plasmas are unavailable and they are detected by inference based on antibody behaviour in a medley of coagulation-based assays. Elevated screening tests suggest the presence of a LA, which is confirmed with mixing tests to evidence inhibition and confirmatory tests to demonstrate phospholipid-dependence. At least two screening tests of different principle must be used to account for antibody heterogeneity and controversy exists on whether assays, in addition to dilute Russell's viper venom time and activated partial thromboplastin time, should be employed. A variety of approaches to raw data manipulation and interpretation attract debate, as does inclusion or exclusion of mixing studies in circumstances where the presence of a LA is already evident from other results. Therapeutic anticoagulation compromises coagulation-based assays but careful data interpretation and use of alternative reagents can detect or exclude LA in specific circumstances, and this aspect of LA detection continues to evolve. This review focuses on the main areas of debate in LA detection.

Clinical implications of the detection of antibodies directed against domain 1 of β2-glycoprotein 1 in thrombotic antiphospholipid syndrome

INTRODUCTION

Antibodies directed against domain 1 of β2 glycoprotein 1 (aβ2GP1-Dm1) have been involved in the immunopathogenesis of antiphospholipid syndrome (APS). However, the clinical relevance of aβ2GP1-Dm1 in thrombotic APS has not yet been fully explored.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the frequency of aβ2GP1-Dm1 in a cohort of patients with thrombotic APS, and to evaluate whether testing for aβ2GP1-Dm1 could have a clinical impact upon the risk assessment of the disease.

METHODS

Patients were tested for aβ2GP1-Dm1 antibodies by chemiluminescence (BioFlash/AcuStar®, ES). The presence of aβ2GP1-Dm1 was evaluated in different clinical presentations of the disease.

RESULTS

Eight-four patients with a history of venous or arterial thrombosis were included. Forty-five (54%) patients had aβ2GP1 antibodies and 40% of them were positive for aβ2GP1-Dm1. Levels of aβ2GP1-Dm1 were higher in patients with systemic autoimmune disease (AUC=0.665; 95% CI=0.544-0.786; P=0.01), positive antinuclear antibody (AUC=0.654; 95% CI=0.535-0.772; P=0.01), triple antiphospholipid antibody (aPL) positivity (AUC=0.680; 95% CI=0.534-0.825; P=0.02) and positive lupus anticoagulant (AUC=0.639; 95% CI=0.502-0.776; P=0.07). In this cohort, aβ2GP1-Dm1 antibodies were not associated with the site of the first thrombosis (OR=0,62, 95% CI=0.20-1.94, P=0.42), thrombosis recurrence (OR=1.0, 95% CI=0.37-2.71, P=1.0) or pregnancy morbidity (OR=1.5, 95% CI=0.33-7.34, P=0.58). In multivariate analysis, positivity for aβ2GP1-Dm1 antibodies was associated with the diagnosis of systemic autoimmune disease (OR=4.01, 95% CI=1.14-14.2; P=0.03) and triple aPL positivity (OR=3.59, 95% CI=0.87-14.85; P=0.07).

CONCLUSIONS

In the present cohort of thrombotic-APS patients, aβ2GP1-Dm1 antibodies were related to the diagnosis of systemic autoimmunity and complex serological profile of the disease, as triple aPL positivity and positive antinuclear antibody. Thus, our results suggest that testing for aβ2GP1-Dm1 antibodies may be useful for improving APS risk assessment.