Evaluation of phosphatidylserine-dependent antiprothrombin antibody testing for the diagnosis of antiphospholipid syndrome: results of an international multicentre study

Objective A task force of scientists at the International Congress on Antiphospholipid Antibodies recognized that phosphatidylserine-dependent antiprothrombin antibodies (aPS/PT) might contribute to a better identification of antiphospholipid syndrome (APS). Accordingly, initial and replication retrospective, cross-sectional multicentre studies were conducted to ascertain the value of aPS/PT for APS diagnosis. Methods In the initial study (eight centres, seven countries), clinical/laboratory data were retrospectively collected. Serum/plasma samples were tested for IgG aPS/PT at Inova Diagnostics (Inova) using two ELISA kits. A replication study (five centres, five countries) was carried out afterwards. Results In the initial study ( n = 247), a moderate agreement between the IgG aPS/PT Inova and MBL ELISA kits was observed ( k = 0.598). IgG aPS/PT were more prevalent in APS patients (51%) than in those without (9%), OR 10.8, 95% CI (4.0-29.3), p < 0.0001. Sensitivity, specificity, positive (LR+) and negative (LR-) likelihood ratio of IgG aPS/PT for APS diagnosis were 51%, 91%, 5.9 and 0.5, respectively. In the replication study ( n = 214), a moderate/substantial agreement between the IgG aPS/PT results obtained with both ELISA kits was observed ( k = 0.630). IgG aPS/PT were more prevalent in APS patients (47%) than in those without (12%), OR 6.4, 95% CI (2.6-16), p < 0.0001. Sensitivity, specificity, LR + and LR- for APS diagnosis were 47%, 88%, 3.9 and 0.6, respectively. Conclusions IgG aPS/PT detection is an easily performed laboratory parameter that might contribute to a better and more complete identification of patients with APS.

Antibodies to phosphatidylserine/prothrombin complex as an additional diagnostic marker of APS?

Antiprothrombin antibodies can be measured by ELISA using either a prothrombin/phosphatidylserine complex (aPS/PT) or prothrombin alone (aPT) as antigen. We aimed to compare the clinical features of autoimmune patients with avidity of aPS/PT and determine the diagnostic efficiency of aPS/PT and aPT for assessing antiphospholipid syndrome (APS). aPS/PT were of low ( n = 9), heterogeneous ( n = 31) and high ( n = 8) avidity out of 48 cases. None of the samples with low avidity were positive in aPT ELISA. Among patients with heterogeneous or high avidity aPS/PT, there was a significantly greater number of patients with APS as compared to patients with low avidity (38/39 vs. 7/9; p < 0.05). No SLE patients had high avidity antiprothrombin antibodies.

Autoimmune response following influenza vaccination in patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic disease

Vaccines have undoubtedly brought overwhelming benefits to mankind and are considered safe and effective. Nevertheless, they can occasionally stimulate autoantibody production or even a recently defined syndrome known as autoimmune/inflammatory syndrome induced by adjuvants (ASIA). There is scarce data regarding autoimmune response after seasonal/influenza A (H1N1) vaccine in patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic disease (AIRD). The objective of our study was therefore to determine autoimmune response in a large group of AIRD patients vaccinated against seasonal and/or H1N1 influenza. We conducted a prospective cohort study with a 6-month follow-up. Two-hundred and eighteen patients with AIRD (50 vaccinated against seasonal influenza, six against H1N1, 104 against both, 58 non-vaccinated controls) and 41 apparently healthy controls (nine vaccinated against seasonal influenza, three against H1N1, 18 against both, 11 non-vaccinated controls) were included. Blood samples were taken and screened for autoantibodies [antinuclear antibody (ANA), anti-extractable nuclear antigen (anti-ENA), anticardiolipin (aCL) IgG/IgM antibodies, anti-beta 2-glycoprotein I (anti-β2GPI)] at inclusion in the study, before each vaccination, 1 month after the last vaccination and 6 months after inclusion. For non-vaccinated participants (patients and healthy controls) blood samples were taken at the time of inclusion in the study and 6 months later. We report that after the administration of seasonal/H1N1 vaccine there were mostly transient changes in autoantibody production in AIRD patients and in healthy participants. However, a small subset of patients, especially ANA-positive patients, had a tendency towards anti-ENA development. Although no convincing differences between the seasonal and H1N1 vaccines were observed, our results imply that there might be a slight tendency of the H1N1 vaccine towards aCL induction. Although seasonal and H1N1 vaccines are safe and effective, they also have the potential to induce autoantibodies in selected AIRD patients and healthy adults. Follow-up of such individuals is proposed and further research is needed.