Anti-β2-glycoprotein I and anti-phosphatidylserine/prothrombin antibodies exert similar pro-thrombotic effects in peripheral blood monocytes and endothelial cells

Non-Criteria Obstetric Antiphospholipid Syndrome: Myth or Reality?

Women with adverse pregnancy outcomes suggestive of obstetric antiphospholipid syndrome (OAPS), but not fulfilling clinical and/or laboratory international classification criteria, are increasingly recognized both in clinical practice and in the literature. This entity is termed non-criteria OAPS (NC-OAPS). It includes clinical scenarios such as two unexplained pregnancy losses, three non-consecutive pregnancy losses, late pre-eclampsia/eclampsia/signs of placental insufficiency, or recurrent implantation failure, as well as positive low-titers of antiphospholipid antibodies (aPLs) and non-classical aPLs. To address the NC-OAPS heterogeneity, a nomenclature proposal was developed. In recent years, retrospective and prospective cohort studies have been designed to clarify the characteristics and outcomes of the different subsets of NC-OAPS. In general, the studies support that NC-OAPS may benefit from treatment with antithrombotic, anticoagulant and/or immunomodulator agents, but several considerations must be made on the robustness and nuances of the scientific evidence. The objective of this review is to critically analyze the available evidence supporting the diagnosis of NC-OAPS, categorize its subsets, and evaluate the impact of treatment strategies on its outcome. We also remark on questions that are still unanswered, such as the lack of consensus on diagnostic criteria or treatment protocols.

Rethinking antiphospholipid syndrome to guide future management and research

Antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) consists of thrombotic, non-thrombotic and obstetric clinical manifestations developing in individuals with persistent antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL). Although researchers have made progress in characterizing different clinical phenotypes of aPL-positive people, the current approach to clinical management is still mostly based on a 'one size fits all' strategy, which is derived from the results of a limited number of prospective, controlled studies. With the 2023 publication of the ACR-EULAR APS classification criteria, it is now possible to rethink APS, to lay the groundwork for subphenotyping through novel pathophysiology-informed approaches, and to set a future APS research agenda guided by unmet needs in clinical management.

[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.

From Co-Infections to Autoimmune Disease via Hyperactivated Innate Immunity: COVID-19 Autoimmune Coagulopathies, Autoimmune Myocarditis and Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome in Children

Neutrophilia and the production of neutrophil extracellular traps (NETs) are two of many measures of increased inflammation in severe COVID-19 that also accompany its autoimmune complications, including coagulopathies, myocarditis and multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C). This paper integrates currently disparate measures of innate hyperactivation in severe COVID-19 and its autoimmune complications, and relates these to SARS-CoV-2 activation of innate immunity. Aggregated data include activation of Toll-like receptors (TLRs), nucleotide-binding oligomerization domain (NOD) receptors, NOD leucine-rich repeat and pyrin-domain-containing receptors (NLRPs), retinoic acid-inducible gene I (RIG-I) and melanoma-differentiation-associated gene 5 (MDA-5). SARS-CoV-2 mainly activates the virus-associated innate receptors TLR3, TLR7, TLR8, NLRP3, RIG-1 and MDA-5. Severe COVID-19, however, is characterized by additional activation of TLR1, TLR2, TLR4, TLR5, TLR6, NOD1 and NOD2, which are primarily responsive to bacterial antigens. The innate activation patterns in autoimmune coagulopathies, myocarditis and Kawasaki disease, or MIS-C, mimic those of severe COVID-19 rather than SARS-CoV-2 alone suggesting that autoimmunity follows combined SARS-CoV-2-bacterial infections. Viral and bacterial receptors are known to synergize to produce the increased inflammation required to support autoimmune disease pathology. Additional studies demonstrate that anti-bacterial antibodies are also required to account for known autoantigen targets in COVID-19 autoimmune complications.

Determination of Thrombogenicity Levels of Various Antiphospholipid Antibodies by a Modified Thrombin Generation Assay in Patients with Suspected Antiphospholipid Syndrome

Antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) is a hypercoagulable state accompanied by the presence of heterogeneous antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL), which nonspecifically affect hemostasis by the presence of lupus anticoagulans (LA), anticardiolipin antibodies (aCL), antibodies against β2-glycoprotein-I (anti-β2GPI), but also non-criteria antibodies such as antibodies against β2-glycoprotein-I domain I (anti-DI), anti-phosphatidylserine/prothrombin (anti-PS/PT), anti-annexin V, and many others. The main target of the antibodies is the activated protein C (APC) system, the elimination of which can manifest itself as a thrombotic complication. The aim of this study was to determine the thrombogenicity of antibodies using a modified protein C-activated thrombin generation assay (TGA) on a group of 175 samples suspected of APS. TGA was measured with/without APC and the ratio of both measurements was evaluated (as for APC resistance), where a cut-off was calculated ≤4.5 (90th percentile) using 21 patients with heterozygous factor V Leiden mutation (FV Leiden heterozygous). Our study demonstrates the well-known fact that multiple positivity of different aPLs is a more severe risk for thrombosis than single positivity. Of the single antibody positivity, LA antibodies are the most serious (p value < 0.01), followed by aCL and their subgroup anti-DI (p value < 0.05). Non-criteria antibodies anti-annexin V and anti-PT/PS has a similar frequency occurrence of thrombogenicity as LA antibodies but without statistical significance or anti-β2GPI1 positivity. The modified TGA test can help us identify patients in all groups who are also at risk for recurrent thrombotic and pregnancy complications; thus, long-term prophylactic treatment is appropriate. For this reason, it is proving increasingly beneficial to include the determination antibodies in combination with modified TGA test.

Managing Antiphospholipid Syndrome in Children and Adolescents: Current and Future Prospects

Pediatric antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) is a rare acquired multisystem autoimmune thromboinflammatory condition characterized by thrombotic and non-thrombotic clinical manifestations. APS in children and adolescents typically presents with large-vessel thrombosis, thrombotic microangiopathy, and, rarely, obstetric morbidity. Non-thrombotic clinical manifestations are frequently seen in pediatric APS and may be present even before the vascular thrombotic events occur. We review insights into the pathogenesis of APS and discuss potential targets for therapy. The identification of multiple immunologic abnormalities in patients with APS reveals molecular targets for current or future treatment. Management strategies, especially for APS in adolescents, require screening for additional prothrombotic risk factors and consideration of counseling regarding contraceptive strategies, lifestyle recommendations, treatment adherence, and mental health issues associated with this autoimmune thrombophilia. The main goal of therapy in pediatric APS is the prevention of thrombosis. The management of acute thrombosis events in children and adolescents is the same as for primary APS, which involves isolated occurrences, and secondary APS, which is seen in association with another autoimmune disease, e.g., systemic lupus erythematosus. A pediatric hematologist should be consulted so other differential thrombophilic conditions can be eliminated. Therapy includes unfractionated heparin or low-molecular-weight heparin followed by vitamin K antagonists. Treatment of catastrophic APS involves triple therapy (anticoagulation, intravenous corticosteroid pulse therapy, and plasma exchange) and may include intravenous immunoglobulin for children and adolescents with this condition. New drugs such as eculizumab and sirolimus seem to be promising drugs for APS.

Cerebrovascular events in patients with isolated anti-phosphatidyl-serine/prothrombin antibodies

The interest of extra-criteria antiphospholipid antibodies is growing, especially in patients negative for conventional antibodies. In this study we aimed to assess the clinical utility of anti-phosphatidyl-serine/prothrombin antibodies (aPS/PT) testing in patients negative for Beta2-Glycoprotein 1(β2GPI)-dependent tests, for identifying antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) patients that developed cerebrovascular events (CVE). When screening APS patients attending our center, out of 119 aPS/PT IgG/IgM-positive patients, thus patients negative for aβ2GPI and aCL, 42 patients (35%) tested negative for β2GPI-dependent tests and were tested with thrombin generation assay (TGA). Ten patients (24%), with isolated aPS/PT IgG/IgM, had a history of CVE. Lupus anticoagulant (LA)-positive test was more frequently observed in patients with CVE (8/22 vs. 2/20; p = 0.045). Out of the 10 patients who experienced CVE, 3 patients were aPS/PT IgG positive (all LA positive), and 8 patients were aPS/PT IgM positive (6/8 LA positive). One patient was positive for both aPS/PT IgG and IgM. LA-positive patients had only high titers of aPS/PT IgG/IgM, all of them being ≥ 80 U/ml, while the 2 LA-negative patients were aPS/PT IgM positive with medium titers [40-60 U/ml]. LA-positive patients had significantly altered TGA profile when compared to those who were LA negative, considering all TGA parameters. LA-positive patients had significantly higher tLag (8.4 ± 3.3 min vs. 6.6 ± 1.8 min; p = 0.046), higher tPeak (14 ± 4.3 min vs. 11 ± 2.7 min; p = 0.015) and lower Peak (207 ± 152 nM vs. 356.3 ± 104.7 nM; p < 0.001) and lower AUC (2109.7 ± 1006.9 nM vs. 2772.5 ± 776.8 nM; p = 0.033). The use of aPS/PT might be of help in identifying patients with CVE and APS, as also confirmed by TGA testing.

Laboratory Approaches to Test the Function of Antiphospholipid Antibodies

Antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) is a systemic autoimmune disorder caused by the presence of aPLs (antiphospholipid antibodies, i.e., anti-β₂-glycoprotein I and anti-cardiolipin). Everyday practice in terms of laboratory diagnostics of APS includes determination of aPLs and well-known functional assays assessing for lupus anticoagulant (LA), in turn using various tests. According to recent guidelines, the recommended method for LA identification or exclusion is based on the Russell Viper Venom test and a sensitive activated partial thromboplastin time assay. Despite the fact that LA can be quantified in laboratory practice in this way, LA is still used as a binary parameter that is just one of the risk factors of thrombosis in APS. As of today, there are no other functional assays to routinely assess the risk of thrombosis in APS. It is well-known that APS patients display a wide range of clinical outcomes although they may express very similar laboratory findings. One way to solve this dilemma, could be if antibodies could be further delineated using more advanced functional tests. Therefore, we review the diagnostic approaches to test the function of aPLs. We further discuss how thrombin generation assays, and rotational thromboelastometry tests can be influenced by LA, and how experimental methods, such as flow cytometric platelet activation, surface plasmon resonance, or nano differential scanning fluorimetry can bring us closer to the puzzling interaction of aPLs with platelets as well as with their soluble protein ligand. These novel approaches may eventually enable better characterization of aPL, and also provide a better linkage to APS pathophysiology.

Current Promising Biomarkers and Methods in the Diagnostics of Antiphospholipid Syndrome: A Review

Antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) is a hypercoagulation condition associated with the incidence of heterogenic antiphospholipid antibodies (aPLs), which non-specifically affect hemostasis processes. APS is clinically manifested by recurrent arterial and venous thromboses and reproduction losses. The aPL antibodies, which may induce clinical manifestations of APS, include criteria antibodies anti-cardiolipin, anti-β2-glycoprotein-I, and lupus anticoagulant, but also non-criteria antibodies, for example anti-β2-glycoprotein-I domain I, anti-phosphatidylserine/prothrombin, anti-annexin V, and many others. APS occurs mostly in patients of younger and middle age, most frequently in females. Laboratory diagnostics of APS are quite difficult, as they include a wide spectrum of examining methods, which are based on various principles of detection and are performed using various laboratory techniques. The objective of the review is to describe the current state of potentially examined biomarkers and methods in APS diagnostics. The aforementioned biomarkers are lupus anticoagulant, anti-β2-glycoprotein-I, anti-cardiolipin, anti-β2-glycoprotein-I domain I, anti-phosphatidylserine/prothrombin, anti-β2-glycoprotein-I IgA, anti-cardiolipin IgA, anti-annexin V and II, anti-prothrombin, anti-cardiolipin/vimentin, anti-protein S/protein C, and antibodies against phospholipid antigens for whose diagnostics we may use some of the methods established for a long time and some of the modern methods—the coagulation method for the determination of lupus anticoagulant (LA), enzyme-linked imunosorbent assay (ELISA), chemiluminescence analysis (CLIA), multiplex fluorescence flow immunoassay (MFFIA), fluorescence enzyme immunoassay (EliA), line immunoassay (LIA), multiline dot assay (MLDA), and thin-layer chromatography (TLC). Conclusion: Antibodies against phosphatidylethanolamine, phosphatidic acid, phosphatidylserine, phosphatidylinositol, cardiolipin/vimentin complex, and annexin V are currently the most studied new markers. However, these assays have not been standardized until now, both from the laboratory and clinical point of view. In this review we summarize the evidence of the most studied aPL markers and their potential clinical significance in seronegative APS (SN-APS).