[Obstetric Antiphospholipid Syndrome: Insights on the Diagnosis, Treatment, and Hot Issues]

Obstetric antiphospholipid syndrome (OAPS) is an autoimmune disorder associated with various pathological pregnancies, such as recurrent miscarriage, stillbirth, severe pre-eclampsia and severe placental insufficiency. The persistent presence of antiphospholipid antibodies (aPLs) is the most important laboratory characteristic of OAPS. OAPS severely affects the reproductive health of women of childbearing age in China. Reports indicate that approximately 9.6% stillbirths, 11.5% severe pre-eclampsia, and 54% recurrent miscarriages are associated with OAPS or aPLs. However, the pathogenesis of OAPS remains unclear. Previously, thrombosis at the maternal-fetal interface (MFI) was considered the main mechanism of OAPS-related pathological pregnancies. Consequently, the use of low molecular weight heparin and aspirin throughout pregnancy was recommended to improve outcomes in OAPS patient. In recent years, many studies have found that thrombosis in MFI is uncommon, but various inflammatory factors are significantly increased in the MFI of OAPS patients. Based on these findings, some clinicians have started using anti-inflammatory treatments for OAPS, which have preliminarily improved the pregnancy outcomes. Nevertheless, there is no consensus on these second-line treatments of OAPS. Another troubling issue is the clinical diagnosis of OAPS. Similar to other autoimmune diseases, there are only classification criteria for OAPS, and clinical diagnosis of OAPS depends on the clinicians' experience. The present classification criteria of OAPS were established for clinical and basic research purposes, not for patient clinical management. In clinical practice, many patients with both positive aPLs and pathological pregnancy histories do not meet the strict OAPS criteria. This has led to widespread issues of incorrect diagnosis and treatment. Timely and accurate diagnosis of OAPS is crucial for effective treatment. In this article, we reviewed the epidemiological research progress on OAPS and summarized its classification principles, including: 1) the persistent presence of aPLs in circulation; 2) manifestations of OAPS, excluding other possible causes. For the first point, accurate assessment of aPLs is crucial; for the latter, previous studies regarded only placenta-related pregnancy complications as characteristic manifestations of OAPS. However, recent studies have indicated that adverse pregnancy outcomes related to trophoblast damage, such as recurrent miscarriage and stillbirth, also need to be considered in OAPS. We also discussed several key issues in the diagnosis and treatment of OAPS. First, we addressed the definition of non-standard OAPS and offered our opinion on defining non-standard OAPS within the framework of the 2023 American College of Rheumatology (ACR)/European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) APS criteria. Then, we discussed the advantages and disadvantages of different aPL testing methods, emphasizing that harmonizing results across platforms and establishing specific reference values are keys to resolving controversies in aPL testing results. We also introduced the application of non-criteria aPLs, especially anti-phosphatidylserine/prothrombin antibody (aPS/PT) and anti-β2 glycoprotein Ⅰ domain Ⅰ antibody (aβ2GPⅠDⅠ). Additionally, we discussed aPL-based OAPS risk classification strategies. Finally, we proposed potential treatment methods for refractory OAPS. The goal is to provide a reference for the clinical management of OAPS.

Added value of antiphosphatidylserine/prothrombin antibodies in the workup of thrombotic antiphospholipid syndrome: Communication from the ISTH SSC Subcommittee on Lupus Anticoagulant/Antiphospholipid Antibodies

BACKGROUND

Diagnosis of antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) requires persistent presence of lupus anticoagulant (LAC), anticardiolipin (aCL) IgG/IgM, or anti-β2 glycoprotein I (aβ2GPI) IgG/IgM antibodies. Other antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL) such as antiphosphatidylserine/prothrombin antibodies (aPS/PT) are promising in assessment of thrombotic APS (TAPS).

AIM

To evaluate the added value of aPS/PT IgG and IgM in TAPS.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

aPS/PT IgG/IgM, aCL IgG/IgM, aβ2GPI IgG/IgM, and LAC were determined in 757 patients (TAPS and controls). aPS/PT cut-off values were calculated, and aPS/PT titers and positivity were compared between TAPS and controls, type of thrombosis, and antibody profiles. Likelihood ratios (LR), odds ratios (OR), and aPL score were determined.

RESULTS

aPS/PT IgG and IgM were associated with TAPS and triple positivity. In-house calculated cut-offs were higher for IgM (43 units), compared to manufacturer's cut-off (30 units). Thresholds of 90 (IgG) and 200 (IgM) units were determined as high-titer cut-off. Higher aPS/PT titers were observed in triple positive patients and showed higher LR and OR for TAPS. aPS/PT was independently associated with TAPS when adjusted for aCL/aβ2GPI, but not when adjusted for LAC. In isolated LAC positive patients, aPS/PT was positive in 27.1% TAPS patients and in 77.3% patients with autoimmune disease. Diagnostic value of aPL score did not differ with and without including aPS/PT.

CONCLUSION

aPS/PT positivity, especially with high antibody titer, is associated with TAPS diagnosis. Analysis on top of current laboratory criteria is not essential in TAPS diagnosis, but aPS/PT could be useful in patients with thrombosis and a double positive aPL profile (aCL+/aβ2GPI+).

A systematic review of the association between anti-β-2 glycoprotein I antibodies and APS manifestations

Anti-β-2 glycoprotein I antibodies (anti-B2GPI) are often cited as the major pathogenically relevant antibody in antiphospholipid syndrome (APS), but it is unclear if there is clinical evidence to support this theory. We performed a systematic review to determine if immunoglobulin G anti-B2GPI positivity was independently associated with thrombotic and/or obstetric manifestations of APS. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, and clinicaltrials.gov electronic databases through April 2020 for prospective studies that met prespecified design criteria. Of 4758 articles identified through computer-assisted search, 4 studies examining obstetric outcomes and 2 studies examining thrombotic outcomes were included for qualitative assessment. The presence of anti-B2GPI had only a weak independent association with thrombosis and was, at best, inconsistently associated with obstetric complications. A quantitative assessment could not be performed because of study heterogeneity. The overall quality of the evidence was very low. Although anti-B2GPI are commonly thought to mediate APS manifestations, clinical evidence is lacking with very low-quality data to support a weak association with thrombosis.

Coexistence of anti-β2-glycoprotein I domain I and anti-phosphatidylserine/prothrombin antibodies suggests strong thrombotic risk

BACKGROUND

Highly specific assays for measuring antiphospholipid antibodies (aPLs) are required for accurate assessment of thrombotic risk. aPLs against β2-glycoprotein I domain I (anti-β2GPIdI) and against prothrombin complexed with phosphatidylserine (anti-PS/PT) have been recently identified as being associated with a hypercoagulable state. This study evaluated the synergism between anti-β2GPIdI and anti-PS/PT for predicting thrombotic events.

METHODS

A total of 180 patients with clinical suspicion of hypercoagulability were evaluated. The plasma levels of lupus anticoagulant (LA) and antibodies against anticardiolipin (anti-CL) (IgG and IgM), β2GPI (IgG and IgM), PS/PT (IgG and IgM), and β2GPI dI (IgG) were measured.

RESULTS

IgG anti-β2GPIdI and LA were highly associated with thrombosis. Mean values and positivity rates of IgG anti-β2GPI dI and IgG anti-PS/PT were significantly higher in the triple-positive group (LA+, IgG anti-CL+, IgG anti-β2GPI+) than in the other groups. Interestingly, the thrombotic risk [odds ratio (OR) 24.400, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.976-63.273, p<0.001] of the newly defined triple positive group (LA+, IgG anti-CL+, IgG anti-β2GPIdI+; OR 11.182, 95% CI 1.976-63.273, p=0.006) was more than twice that of the triple-positive group (LA+, IgG anti-CL+, IgG anti-β2GPI+). Double positivity for IgG anti-PS/PT and IgG anti-β2GPI also indicated significant thrombotic risk (OR 7.467, 95% CI 2.350-23.729, p=0.001). Furthermore, the thrombotic risk associated with double positivity for IgG anti-PS/PT and IgG anti-β2GPIdI was markedly elevated (OR 33.654, 95% CI 6.322-179.141, p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest that simultaneous measurement of IgG anti-β2GPIdI and IgG anti-PS/PT may improve clinical decision-making for aPL-positive patients.

IgG/IgM antiphospholipid antibodies present in the classification criteria for the antiphospholipid syndrome: a critical review of their association with thrombosis

Essentials The clinical value of IgM antibodies in thrombotic antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) is debated. By review of literature, we reconsidered the clinical value of IgM antibodies in thrombotic APS. More significant correlations with thrombosis were found for the IgG compared to IgM isotype. Unavailability of paired IgG/IgM results hampers evaluating the added value of IgM positivity. Click to hear Dr de Groot's perspective on antiphospholipid syndrome

SUMMARY

Background Despite the update of the classification criteria for the antiphospholipid syndrome (APS), difficulties persist in the identification of patients at risk for thrombosis. Current guidelines include assays detecting IgG/IgM anti-β2 -glycoprotein I and anti-cardiolipin antibodies, although the relevance of IgM antibodies has been debated. Objectives Through a review of the literature from 2001 to 2014, we aimed to formally establish the thrombotic risk stratification potential of IgM as compared with IgG anti-phospholipid antibodies (aPLs). Patients/methods One thousand two hundred and twenty-eight articles were selected by a computer-assisted search of the literature. Of the 177 studies that met our inclusion criteria, the clinical value of IgG/IgM aPLs was established through analysis of odds ratios for thrombosis or percentage of positives in the thrombotic population. Results/conclusions We clearly found more significant correlations with thrombosis for the IgG than for the IgM isotype. Nonetheless, in a minority of studies, significant associations with thrombosis were found for IgM but not IgG antibodies. The unavailability of paired results of IgG and IgM for each separate patient hampers evaluation of the added value of isolated IgM positivity. To fully take advantage of results obtained by future studies, we strongly encourage scientists to provide all studied information per patient. We planned a large multicenter study to investigate clinical associations of isolated/combined positivity for criteria/non-criteria aPLs. Importantly, because of the presence of non-pathogenic aPLs, quantitative assays are characterized by a high false-positivity rate. Optimization of functional assays, such as thrombin generation measuring the whole scheme of coagulation, may help to reduce APS-related morbidity and mortality.