Immunoadsorbent plasmapheresis for a patient with antiphospholipid syndrome during pregnancy

16th International Congress on Antiphospholipid Antibodies Task Force Report on Obstetric Antiphospholipid Syndrome

Obstetric antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) remains a clinical challenge for practitioners, with several controversial points that have not been answered so far. This Obstetric APS Task Force met on the 16th International Congress on Antiphospholipid Antibodies in Manchester, England, to discuss about treatment, diagnostic and clinical aspects of the disease. This report will address evidence-based medicine related to obstetric APS, including limitations on our current management, the relationship between antibodies against domain 1 of β2GPI and obstetric morbidity, hydroxychloroquine use in patients with obstetric APS and factors associated with thrombosis after obstetric APS. Finally, future directions for better understanding this complex condition are also reported by the Task Force coordinators.

Recommendations of the Spanish Rheumatology Society for Primary Antiphospholipid Syndrome. Part II: Obstetric Antiphospholipid Syndrome and Special Situations

OBJECTIVE

The difficulty in diagnosis and the spectrum of clinical manifestations that can determine the choice of treatment for antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) has fostered the development of recommendations by the Spanish Society of Rheumatology (SER), based on the best possible evidence. These recommendations can serve as a reference for rheumatologists and other specialists involved in the management of APS.

METHODS

A panel of 4rheumatologists, a gynaecologist and a haematologist with expertise in APS was created, previously selected by the SER through an open call or based on professional merits. The stages of the work were: identification of the key areas for the document elaboration, analysis and synthesis of the scientific evidence (using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network, SIGN levels of evidence) and formulation of recommendations based on this evidence and formal assessment or reasoned judgement techniques (consensus techniques).

RESULTS

Forty-six recommendations were drawn up, addressing 5main areas: diagnosis and evaluation, measurement of primary thromboprophylaxis, treatment for APS or secondary thromboprophylaxis, treatment for obstetric APS and special situations. These recommendations also include the role of novel oral anticoagulants, the problem of recurrences or the key risk factors identified in these subjects. This document reflects the last 25, referring to the areas of: obstetric APS and special situations. The document provides a table of recommendations and treatment algorithms.

CONCLUSIONS

Update of SER recommendations on APS is presented. This document corresponds to part II, related to obstetric SAF and special situations. These recommendations are considered tools for decision-making for clinicians, taking into consideration both the decision of the physician experienced in APS and the patient. A part I has also been prepared, which addresses aspects related to diagnosis, evaluation and treatment.

What's new in obstetric antiphospholipid syndrome

Antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) is a rare systemic autoimmune disease, the obstetric features of which include recurrent early miscarriage, fetal death at or beyond 10 weeks of gestation, and early delivery for severe preeclampsia or placental insufficiency. Controversies regarding the specificity of these obstetric clinical features, as well as the laboratory diagnostic criteria, are the subject of current debate and reanalysis. Clinical and laboratory features can be used to stratify women with APS in terms of risk of adverse second and third trimester pregnancy outcomes. Numerous "treatments" have been used in high-risk and refractory patients, but rigorously designed clinical trials are needed. APS is a rare disease that requires innovative investigative approaches to provide credible results.

Additional Treatments for High-Risk Obstetric Antiphospholipid Syndrome: a Comprehensive Review

Most investigators currently advocate prophylactic-dose heparin plus low-dose aspirin as the preferred treatment of otherwise healthy women with obstetric antiphospholipid syndrome, whilst women with a history of vascular thrombosis alone or associated with pregnancy morbidity are usually treated with therapeutic heparin doses in association with low-dose aspirin in an attempt to prevent both thrombosis and pregnancy morbidity. However, the protocols outlined above fail in about 20 % of pregnant women with antiphospholipid syndrome. Identifying risk factors associated with pregnancy failure when conventional therapies are utilized is an important step in establishing guidelines to manage these high-risk patients. Some clinical and laboratory risk factors have been found to be related to maternal-foetal complications in pregnant women on conventional therapy. However, the most efficacious treatments to administer to high-risk antiphospholipid syndrome women in addition to conventional therapy in order to avoid pregnancy complications are as yet unestablished. This is a comprehensive review on this topic and an invitation to participate in a multicentre study in order to identify the best additional treatments to be used in this subset of antiphospholipid syndrome patients.

Pregnancy Outcome in Women with Obstetric and Thrombotic Antiphospholipid Syndrome-A Retrospective Analysis and a Review of Additional Treatment in Pregnancy

Antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) is associated with pregnancy complications such as recurrent early fetal loss (RFL), fetal death, preeclampsia (PE), and intrauterine growth restriction (obstetric APS/OAPS). Other clinical manifestations are venous and/or arterial thromboses (thrombotic APS/TAPS). The data of 37 pregnancies with OAPS and 37 pregnancies with TAPS were analyzed and compared. Overall, the most frequent APS antibodies (aPl) were LA as well as "triple-positivity"; LA antibodies were significantly more frequent in women with TAPS (67.6 % TAPS vs. 29.7 % OAPS, p < 0.010), whereas "triple-positivity" was significantly more seen in women with OAPS (40.5 % OAPS vs. 13.5 % TAPS, p < 0.010). Adequate therapy has been administered in nearly all pregnancies with TAPS, whereas in 18.9 % of pregnancies with OPS, no therapy has been given at all. One woman in OAPS and four women in TAPS were treated with plasmapheresis and immunoadsorption. There was no significant association between adverse obstetric outcome and therapy. The most frequent pregnancy complications were RFL in the OAPS group (32.4 vs. 13.5 % in TAPS) and PE in the TAPS group (18.9 % in OAPS and TAPS, respectively). The data of our study showed that pregnancies with OAPS and TAPS have a similar rate of pregnancy complications. However, pregnancies with OAPS tend to have rather RFL. Although we were not able to reveal a significant association with adverse obstetric outcome, it seems that the current adequate therapy for APS in pregnancy, consisting of LDA and LMWH, might rather prevent the development of RFL. Additionally, it might be considered to divide the obstetric APS into obstetric APS with early pregnancy complications and obstetric APS with late pregnancy complications. The division into two groups of obstetric APS might facilitate the choice of additional therapy in these women.

The treatment of anti-phospholipid syndrome: A comprehensive clinical approach

Anti-phospholipid syndrome (APS) is an acquired pro-thrombotic autoimmune disease that predisposes to thrombotic events and/or obstetric complications, in the persistent presence of anti-phospholipid antibodies (aPL). Life long moderate-intensity anticoagulation is the option of choice for aPL-positive patients with a previous thrombosis; critical issues concern the management of those with a history of arterial event due to the high rate of recurrence. Alternatives comprise anti-platelet agents and high-intensity anticoagulation. Low dose aspirin (LDASA) and low molecular weight heparin provide the mainstay of the treatment of obstetric APS, allowing a birth rate in 70% of cases. The management of refractory APS, thrombotic as well as obstetric, is highly debated, but an increasing burden of evidence points towards the beneficial effects of multiple treatments. Similarly, a management envisaging multiple drugs (anticoagulation, steroids, plasma exchange and/or intravenous immunoglobulins) is the most effective approach in catastrophic APS. Asymptomatic aPL carriers are at higher risk of thrombotic and obstetric complications compared to the general population, thus potentially benefitting of a pharmacological intervention. LDASA and hydroxychloroquine can be considered as options, in particular in case of high risk aPL profile, concomitant cardiovascular risk factors or associated autoimmune disease. APS is apparently a simple condition, but its multifaceted nature requires a complex and tailored treatment.

Response to Plasmapheresis Measured by Angiogenic Factors in a Woman with Antiphospholipid Syndrome in Pregnancy

An imbalance of angiogenic and antiangiogenic placental factors such as endoglin and soluble fms-like tyrosine kinase 1 has been implicated in the pathophysiology of preeclampsia. Extraction of these substances by plasmapheresis might be a therapeutical approach in cases of severe early-onset preeclampsia. Case Report. A 21-year-old primigravida with antiphospholipid syndrome developed early-onset preeclampsia at 18 weeks' gestation. She was treated successfully with plasmapheresis in order to prolong pregnancy. Endoglin and sflt-1-levels were measured by ELISA before and after treatment. Endoglin levels decreased significantly after treatment (p < 0.05) and showed a significant decrease throughout pregnancy. A rerise of endoglin and sflt-1 preceded placental abruption 4 weeks before onset of incident. Conclusion. Due to the limited long-term therapeutical possibilities for pregnancies complicated by PE, plasmapheresis seems to be a therapeutical option. This consideration refers especially to pregnancies with early-onset preeclampsia, in which, after first conventional treatment of PE, prolongation of pregnancy should be above all.

Treatment strategies and pregnancy outcomes in antiphospholipid syndrome patients with thrombosis and triple antiphospholipid positivity. A European multicentre retrospective study

Previous thrombosis, diagnosis of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and triple antiphospholipid (aPL) antibody positivity have recently been found to be independent factors associated to pregnancy failure during conventional therapy in women with antiphospholipid syndrome (APS). This study aimed to assess the effect of various treatment strategies on pregnancy outcomes in women with APS and the risk factors for pregnancy failure. One hundred ninety-six pregnancies of 156 patients diagnosed with APS were analysed: 118 (60.2%) of these had previous thrombosis, 81 (41.3%) were diagnosed with SLE, and 107 (54.6%) had triple aPL positivity. One hundred seventy-five (89.3%) were treated with conventional therapies (low-dose aspirin [LDA] or prophylactic doses of heparin + LDA or therapeutic doses of heparin + LDA), while 21 (10.7%) were prescribed other treatments in addition to conventional therapy. The pregnancies were classified into seven risk profiles depending on the patients' risk factors - thrombosis, SLE, and triple aPL positivity - and their single, double or triple combinations. It was possible to find significant difference in outcomes correlated to treatments only in the thrombosis plus triple aPL positivity subset, and logistic regression analysis showed that additional treatments were the only independent factor associated to a favourable pregnancy outcome (odds ratio=9.7, 95% confidence interval=1.1-88.9, p-value<0.05). On the basis of this retrospective study, we found that APS pregnant patients with thrombosis and triple aPL positivity treated with additional therapy had a significant higher live-birth rate with respect to those receiving conventional therapy alone.

Plasmapheresis and pregnancy outcome in patients with antiphospholipid syndrome

OBJECTIVE

To assess plasmapheresis with low dose prednisone on obstetric and neonatal outcomes among unsuccessfully treated pregnant women with documented antiphospholipid syndrome (APS).

METHODS

Eighteen pregnant women received prednisone (10 mg/day) and plasmapheresis at 7.08+/-0.6 weeks of gestation, for 3 sessions per week, until lupus anticoagulant activity suppressed and IgG anticardiolipin lowered. Serial pulsatility indexes (PI) of umbilical and uterine arteries were performed.

RESULTS

The live birth rate was 100%; mild pre-eclampsia 5.5%; preterm deliveries 22.22%; intrauterine growth restriction 11.11%; thrombocytopenia 5.5%; oligohydramnios and fetal distress 16.6%. There were no perinatal deaths, thrombotic events or lupus flare. Uterine artery PI was reduced and umbilical artery PI was >95th percentile.

CONCLUSION

Plasmapheresis and low dose prednisone were associated with a low rate of obstetric and neonatal complications. Plasmapheresis may be used to treat pregnant women with documented APS when first lines (aspirin and/or heparin) fail to prevent pregnancy loss.

[Catastrophic antiphospholipid syndrome: CAPS]

Antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) is well known as an autoimmune thrombotic syndrome with recurrent thromboses. In APS, thromboses occurs both artery and vein, and from large to micro vessels. In contrast, so called catastrophic antiphospholipid syndrome, CAPS, develops multiple thromboses at microvessels mainly within a few weeks and induces to poor prognosis. CAPS often occurs in patients with SLE or primary APS after a change of antithrombotic therapy, infection, and operation. Treatments for CAPS have not established although plasma exchange is carried out usually as well as intensive anticoagulation and immunosuppressive therapy. We treated with immunoadsorption plasmapheresis (IAPP) for 5 CAPS patients and they improved their clinical symptoms and ameliorated their titers of antiphospholipid antibodies. IAPP could be an useful treatment skill for CAPS and we have started prospective study.

The role of therapeutic plasma exchange in the catastrophic antiphospholipid syndrome

The catastrophic antiphospholipid syndrome (CAPS) is a life-threatening sub-entity of the antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) resulting in multiorgan failure and a mortality rate that may reach 50%. The optimal treatment regimen for CAPS is unknown. To evaluate the benefit of therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) therapy in CAPS, we undertook a computer-assisted (MEDLINE, National Library of Medicine, Bethesda, MD) search of the literature to locate all cases of CAPS (case reports and reviews) treated with TPE. In view of the published literature so far, TPE has shown reasonable therapeutic benefits and improved survival for patients with CAPS. The use of this technique, along with anticoagulation and if needed pharmacological immunosuppression, should be considered for the acute management of patients who present with this life-threatening condition.

Increased Ethyl Mercury Load in Protein A Immunoadsorption

Immunoadsorption is an adsorption technique for extracorporeal removal of circulating autoantibodies in autoimmune diseases. To prevent microbial growth during storage, the protein A columns are primed with thiomersal, which contains toxic ethyl mercury, which may be released during the procedure and potentially begin to accumulate and become toxic. To reduce the thiomersal-related mercury release during immunoadsorption treatment, we introduced a modified rinsing solution containing N-acetylcysteine, which is an avid mercury scavenger. Thirteen patients received 17 protein A immunoadsorption treatments and their venous blood samples were collected immediately before and after each session. The total blood mercury levels were measured by atomic absorption spectrometry, and the ethyl mercury levels by atomic fluorescence spectrometry. Following the manufacturer's recommendations, we used 600 mg of N-acetylcysteine to rinse the mercury from protein-loaded columns before each immunoadsorption treatment. After immunoadsorption, the ethyl mercury levels increased from 0.148 +/- 0.402 ng/g to 2.026 +/- 1.944 ng/g (P < 0.001), and the total blood mercury levels increased from 2.447 +/- 3.065 ng/g to 20.437 +/- 28.603 ng/g (P = 0.02). The post-treatment values of total blood mercury exceeded the upper safety level of 5 ng/g in all 17 immunoadsorption treatments, but no patient developed clinical signs of mercury toxicity. The results of our study showed an increase in total blood mercury and ethyl mercury levels during the immunoadsorption treatments, suggesting mercury release from thiomersal-primed columns despite the addition of N-acetylcysteine to the rinsing solution.

Prevention of recurrent miscarriage for women with antiphospholipid antibody or lupus anticoagulant

BACKGROUND

A range of treatments have been proposed to improve pregnancy outcome in recurrent pregnancy loss associated with antiphospholipid antibody (APL). Small studies have not resolved uncertainty about benefits and risks.

OBJECTIVES

To examine outcomes of all treatments given to maintain pregnancy in women with prior miscarriage and APL.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (30 May 2004), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library, Issue 2, 2003), MEDLINE (1966 to June 2003), EMBASE (1988 to June 2003), Lupus (volume one to eight, 1991 to 1999) and conference proceedings from the International Symposium on APL up to 1999.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised, controlled trials of interventions in pregnant women with a history of pregnancy loss and APL.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed quality and extracted data for studies up to December 1999. One review author performed this for studies after 1999.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirteen studies were found (849 participants). The quality was not high; 50% had clear evidence of allocation concealment. Participant characteristics varied between trials. Unfractionated heparin combined with aspirin (two trials; n = 140) significantly reduced pregnancy loss compared to aspirin alone (relative risk (RR) 0.46, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.29 to 0.71). Low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) combined with aspirin compared to aspirin (one trial; n = 98) did not significantly reduce pregnancy loss (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.57). There was no advantage in high-dose, over low-dose, unfractionated heparin (one trial; n = 50). Three trials of aspirin alone (n = 135) showed no significant reduction in pregnancy loss (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.68). Prednisone and aspirin (three trials; n = 286) resulted in a significant increase in prematurity when compared to placebo, aspirin, and heparin combined with aspirin, and an increase in gestational diabetes, but no significant benefit. Intravenous immunoglobulin +/- unfractionated heparin and aspirin (two trials; n = 58) was associated with an increased risk of pregnancy loss or premature birth when compared to unfractionated heparin or LMWH combined with aspirin (RR 2.51, 95% CI 1.27 to 4.95). When compared to prednisone and aspirin, intravenous immunoglobulin (one trial; n = 82) was not significantly different in outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Combined unfractionated heparin and aspirin may reduce pregnancy loss by 54%. Large, randomised controlled trials with adequate allocation concealment are needed to explore potential differences between unfractionated heparin and LMWH.

Plasmapheresis for rheumatic diseases in the twenty-first century: take it or leave it?

As is often the case, one cannot give a simple answer to the question: plasmapheresis-take it or leave it? A thorough review of the current data on the possible mechanisms of action, the efficacy, and the safety of plasmapheresis in rheumatic diseases demonstrates that the answer depends on the disease and the patients involved.

The use of apheresis in immune renal disorders

Rapidly progressive glomerulonephritis (RPGN) is often associated with the presence of autoantibodies. Included in this group are the glomerulonephritides associated with anti-GBM antibody (Goodpasture's syndrome). IgA mesangial deposition (the renal component of Henoch-Schönlein purpura), lupus erythematosus, cryoglobulinemia and the antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA)-associated pauci-immune group. In each of these cases, apheresis may provide a therapeutically useful option. Apheresis has also been found useful in certain types of antibody-mediated transplant rejection and in lowering the levels of preformed cytotoxic antibodies which may preclude transplantation. Finally, there are renal diseases in which the immune component is less clearly involved with pathogenesis but for which apheresis may offer a clear benefit, such as in the renal failure associated with 'cast nephropathy' (multiple myeloma) or the recurrence of FSGS (focal segmental glomerulosclerosis) in transplanted kidneys. It is the purpose of this paper to review the evidence supporting the use of apheresis in immune-related diseases.

Catastrophic antiphospholipid syndrome in the intensive care unit

CAPS is characterized by development of widespread microvascular thrombosis. Patients at risk are those with positive aCL or LA factor. Precipitating events, such as infection, trauma, surgical procedures, or reduction in anticoagulation therapy, may contribute to the development of CAPS. Presentation to the ICU can be dramatic, with progressive multiorgan failure and need for rapid institution of life-supporting measures. Cardiopulmonary failure has been the major contributor to mortality. A variety of therapeutic modalities have been used in an attempt to offset the widespread thrombosis and organ damage from high aCL levels. Anticoagulation therapy and high dosages of steroids seem to have a positive effect on survival.

Treatment options for juvenile-onset systemic lupus erythematosus

Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is an inflammatory chronic disease characterized by the presence of activated helper T-cells that induce a B-cell response, resulting in the secretion of pathogenic autoantibodies and the formation of immune complexes. SLE in children is a disease of low prevalence with a wide range of clinical manifestations, which means that the number of randomized controlled studies are few and usually involve a small number of patients. In recent years, new therapeutic agents have appeared and the role of older treatments has been clarified. Many of these treatments are designed to reduce inflammation. The spectrum is broad and ranges from traditional nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) to cytotoxic agents that have anti-inflammatory effects. The current treatment of children or adults depends on the clinical expression of the disease. Minor manifestations usually respond to the administration of NSAIDs, low doses of corticosteroids, hydroxychloroquine, or methotrexate. Thalidomide could be used for refractory skin lesions. Major manifestations can endanger the patient's life and require early, aggressive treatment. Kidney disease and other manifestations have been related to the formation or deposit of tissular immune complexes. Therefore, for years the main aim of treatment has been to suppress the immune response. The immunosuppressant treatments used in children with SLE include high doses of corticosteroids, azathioprine, methotrexate, cyclosporine, and cyclophosphamide. Several combinations of medications have been used to obtain a rapid remission or to reduce the risk of toxicity of prolonged administration of cytotoxic agents. Intravenous gamma-globulin has been successfully used in the treatment of lupus nephritis, vasculitis, and acute thrombocytopenia. In spite of numerous published studies, the use of these drugs is still controversial. The immunosuppression achieved with these treatments is nonspecific, not always effective, and associated with significant toxicities; the most significant being growth retardation, accelerated atherosclerosis and severe infectious complications. The purpose of new biological therapies is to achieve specific immunosuppression, which makes it possible to design more effective and less toxic therapeutic strategies. Mycophenolate mofetil is a promising alternative in patients who do not respond to high doses of cyclophosphamide or azathioprine. Some recently developed monoclonal antibodies such as anti-CD40L or anti-IL-10, or other molecules such as LJP394 may prove useful in the near future. Finally, stem cell transplantation may be proposed in patients with severe juvenile-onset SLE who do not respond to any treatment.

Plasma adsorption in critical care

Plasmapheresis therapies such as plasma exchange (PE), double filtration plasmapheresis (DFPP), or immunoadsorption plasmapheresis (IAPP) have become therapeutic tools in critical care. PE or DFPP are limited by their non- or semiselective removal of all plasma components. Replacement fluids such as fresh frozen plasma and albumin are necessary during PE or DFPP. There is the risk of infection and allergic reactions whenever such fluids are used. On the other hand, IAPP is superior to PE and DFPP because it does not require any replacement fluid. There has been development of many adsorbent columns used for removing specific pathogenic substances, and patients with various kinds of critical illness have been treated with IAPP. However, IAPP can be applied only for certain diseases because of the limitations of the commercially available columns. It is concluded that the development of new adsorption therapy may improve the high mortality and morbidity rate in critically ill patients.

Apheresis for lupus erythematosus: state of the art

PP is a safe, expensive, labor-intensive procedure. Its absolute SLE indications include hyperviscosity, cryoglobulinemia, pulmonary hemorrhage and TTP. PP may be useful in cyclophosphamide-resistant, serious, organ-threatening disease. It may be potentially useful in the antiphospholipid syndrome or mothers or children at risk for congenital heart block. Refinements in apheresis technology may expand the indications for PP.

Adsorption of anti-annexin V using dextran sulfate bound cellulose beads

Anti-annexin V (Anx V) antibodies are detected in SLE patients and patients with habitual fetal loss or preeclampsia. Several case reports have indicated that recurrent abortion based on antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) could be successfully treated with immunoadsorption by using dextran sulfate (DS) columns. The purpose of this study is to clarify whether or not anti-Anx V is also adsorbed by DS-bound cellulose beads. Sera from anti-Anx V-positive patients were mixed with DS-bound cellulose beads in vitro, and the titers of anti-Anx V were measured both before and after incubation. The anti-Anx V titers significantly decreased after incubation. The Anx V also bound to bovine serum albumin-conjugated DS immobilized on microtiter plates. The results of the present study lend support to the basic rationale for immunoadsorption therapy using DS columns in the treatment of habitual abortion closely associated with anti-Anx V antibodies.

The role of immunoadsorption using dextran-sulfate cellulose columns in the treatment of systemic lupus erythematosus

Immunoadsorption using dextran sulfate (DS)-cellulose columns is reviewed. An extracorporeal selective adsorption system using such columns has been developed and clinically used to remove anti-DNA from the circulating blood of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) patients. These columns can adsorb pathogenic anti-DNA subgroups of high avidity and/or cationic antibodies, anticardiolipin, anti-CLbeta2GPI, and anaphylatoxins. An open clinical study on 19 SLE cases (the mean number of apheresis sessions totaled 3.7 times; the mean dose of prednisolone, 38 mg/day) revealed that the mean SLE disease activity index (SLEDAI) score significantly decreased from the pretreatment level of 10.2 to 4.5 after treatment. Several case reports have indicated that this modality might also be useful for treating patients with antiphospholipid syndrome. Compartment model analyses showed the one-compartment model to be the most suitable for the kinetics of anti-DNA during and following the apheresis procedure. The indications for immunoadsorption in the treatment of SLE remain controversial. A steroid-sparing effect might be one of them, but further controlled studies are necessary to verify this hypothesis.

Therapeutic plasma exchange for the acute management of the catastrophic antiphospholipid syndrome: beta(2)-glycoprotein I antibodies as a marker of response to therapy

We describe two patients with the catastrophic antiphospholipid syndrome associated with elevation of beta(2)-glycoprotein I antibodies and fulminant thrombotic diatheses. Both patients were treated with therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE), which resulted in a marked decrease in antibody titer accompanied by an improved clinical outcome in one patient (IgG antibody). In the second patient, the outcome was poor despite TPE (IgA antibody). There were no significant complications of TPE in either case. Because of the fulminant nature of the catastrophic antiphospholipid syndrome, we conclude that a trial of TPE is warranted for the acute management. Further studies are needed to clarify which patients may benefit from this treatment.

Apheresis for lupus erythematosus

Indications for the use of apheresis technologies in managing lupus erythematosus have undergone numerous conceptual changes since the procedure was automated in the 1960s and first attempted for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) in 1974. Once thought to be a promising treatment for a variety of aspects of SLE, apheresis has been relegated to occupying a few important niches as an adjunct in managing the disorder. This article will review the history, physiology and rationale of apheresis pertaining to SLE. A focused critical review of pertinent literature is presented, along with specific recommendations relating to the place of apheresis in the lupus therapeutic spectrum.

Immunoadsorption plasmapheresis as a treatment for pregnancy complicated by systemic lupus erythematosus with positive antiphospholipid antibodies

PROBLEM

Our purpose was to study the effect of maternal immunoadsorption plasmapheresis (IA) on the outcome of pregnancies complicated by systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) with positive antiphospholipid antibodies, which were known to have a strong correlation with abortion or stillbirth.

METHOD OF STUDY

Eight pregnancies in 7 patients with SLE were treated according to our protocol. They were all positive for the lupus anticoagulant. The treatments provided in these cases were as follows: an oral low-dose steroid; oral low-dose aspirin; and IA. The outcomes of the pregnancies were then studied.

RESULTS

Of eight pregnancies, seven resulted in preterm deliveries, and cesarean sections were performed at 26-36 weeks of gestation. In one case, intrauterine fetal death occurred at 24 weeks of gestation. The other seven pregnancies resulted in live births (survival rate of 87.5%).

CONCLUSION

IA improves the outcome of pregnancy complicated by SLE with positive antiphospholipid antibodies, without increasing steroid dosage.

Graft loss and the antiphospholipid syndrome following liver transplantation

BACKGROUND/AIMS

The antiphospholipid syndrome is characterised by arterial and venous thromboses affecting small and large vessels, together with the presence of lupus anticoagulant and anticardiolipin antibodies.

METHODS

We report two cases of the antiphospholipid syndrome following liver transplantation which resulted in hepatic vessel thrombosis and subsequent graft loss, and we discuss the value of anticoagulation in prevention of further thrombotic episodes. Identification of these cases prompted a retrospective analysis for the presence of IgG anticardiolipin antibody, the most useful laboratory marker of vascular thrombosis in the antiphospholipid syndrome. Serum taken at 2 to 4 weeks following transplantation (when thrombotic events might be anticipated) was analysed further in 132 patients undergoing liver transplantation.

RESULTS

Hepatic vessel thrombosis occurred in 21/132 (16%) post transplantation. Anticardiolipin IgG was present in 2/21 (8.8%) recipients who developed a hepatic vessel thrombosis following liver transplantation, compared to 7/111 (6.3%) (p=0.59) in whom transplantation was not complicated by hepatic vessel thrombosis.

CONCLUSIONS

The presence of IgG anticardiolipin antibody was uncommon in recipients following liver transplantation and was not associated with an increased risk of hepatic vessel thrombosis. In contrast, the antiphospholipid syndrome which is rare may result in hepatic artery occlusion and graft loss, and so prompt recognition of the clinical syndrome is critical. Although screening for the antibody is not warranted in liver transplant recipients, it is important to be aware of the syndrome as optimal management of such cases may prevent graft loss.

Antiphospholipid antibodies and the antiphospholipid antibody syndrome

The antiphospholipid antibody syndrome is a multiple-system disorder characterized by persistently elevated antiphospholipid antibodies and/or arterial or venous thrombosis, thrombocytopenia, or recurrent spontaneous abortion. Anticardiolipin antibodies and the lupus anticoagulant are different classes of antiphospholipid antibodies associated with this disorder. Cutaneous manifestations are common and may be the presenting sign of the underlying disease. This article reviews the clinical manifestations, laboratory assays, histopathologic features, and treatment of the antiphospholipid antibody syndrome.

Case report: the anticardiolipin (antibody) syndrome

The anticardiolipin antibody syndrome is relatively uncommon. It should be suspected mostly in young people with unexplained embolic or thrombotic events. A young patient with an abnormal prothrombin time, partial thromboplastin time, or venereal disease research lab test with one of the above noted vascular events would be a suspect for this disorder. Though an antibody test that will qualitatively and quantitatively measure antiphospholipid antibodies is available, its clinical application is not entirely clear. The presence of the antibody will support a diagnosis but cannot be used alone for diagnosis or treatment.