Download PDF
Semin Thromb Hemost
DOI: 10.1055/s-0044-1791699
Review Article

Thrombosis in Antiphospholipid Syndrome: Current Perspectives and Challenges in Laboratory Testing for Antiphospholipid Antibodies

Katrien M.J. Devreese
1   Department of Diagnostic Sciences, Coagulation Laboratory, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) diagnosis hinges on identifying antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL). Currently, laboratory testing encompasses lupus anticoagulant (LA), anticardiolipin (aCL), and anti-β2-glycoprotein I antibodies (aβ2GPI) IgG or IgM, which are included in the APS classification criteria. All the assays needed to detect aPL antibodies have methodological concerns. LA testing remains challenging due to its complexity and susceptibility to interference from anticoagulant therapy. Solid phase assays for aCL and aβ2GPI exhibit discrepancies between different assays. Antibody profiles aid in identifying the patients at risk for thrombosis through integrated interpretation of all positive aPL tests. Antibodies targeting domain I of β2-glycoprotein and antiphosphatidylserine–prothrombin antibodies have been evaluated for their role in thrombotic APS but are not yet included in the APS criteria. Detecting these antibodies may help patients with incomplete antibody profiles and stratify the risk of APS patients. The added diagnostic value of other methodologies and measurements of other APS-associated antibodies are inconsistent. This manuscript describes laboratory parameters useful in the diagnosis of thrombotic APS and will concentrate on the laboratory aspects, clinical significance of assays, and interpretation of aPL results in the diagnosis of thrombotic APS.

Keywords

antiphospholipid syndrome - thrombosis - anticardiolipin antibodies - anti-β2 glycoprotein I antibodies - lupus anticoagulant - non-criteria aPL


Publication History

Article published online:
07 October 2024

© 2024. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Schreiber K, Sciascia S, de Groot PG. et al. Antiphospholipid syndrome. Nat Rev Dis Primers 2018; 4: 18005
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Tumian NR, Hunt BJ. Clinical management of thrombotic antiphospholipid syndrome. J Clin Med 2022; 11 (03) 735
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Knight JS, Branch DW, Ortel TL. Antiphospholipid syndrome: advances in diagnosis, pathogenesis, and management. BMJ 2023; 380: e069717
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Devreese KMJ, Zuily S, Meroni PL. Role of antiphospholipid antibodies in the diagnosis of antiphospholipid syndrome. J Transl Autoimmun 2021; 4: 100134
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Gandhi AA, Estes SK, Rysenga CE, Knight JS. Understanding the pathophysiology of thrombotic APS through animal models. Int J Mol Sci 2021; 22 (05) 2588
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Devreese KMJ. Solid phase assays for antiphospholipid antibodies. Semin Thromb Hemost 2022; 48 (06) 661-671
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Barbhaiya M, Zuily S, Naden R. et al; ACR/EULAR APS Classification Criteria Collaborators. 2023 ACR/EULAR antiphospholipid syndrome classification criteria. Ann Rheum Dis 2023; 82 (10) 1258-1270
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Miyakis S, Lockshin MD, Atsumi T. et al. International consensus statement on an update of the classification criteria for definite antiphospholipid syndrome (APS). J Thromb Haemost 2006; 4 (02) 295-306
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Devreese KMJ, Ortel TL, Pengo V, de Laat B. Subcommittee on Lupus Anticoagulant/Antiphospholipid Antibodies. Laboratory criteria for antiphospholipid syndrome: communication from the SSC of the ISTH. J Thromb Haemost 2018; 16 (04) 809-813
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Favaloro EJ, Pasalic L, Lippi G. Classification criteria for the antiphospholipid syndrome: not the same as diagnostic criteria for antiphospholipid syndrome. Semin Thromb Hemost 2024; 50 (04) 605-608
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Devreese KMJ. Noncriteria antiphospholipid antibodies in antiphospholipid syndrome. Int J Lab Hematol 2024; 46 (Suppl. 01) 34-42
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Vandevelde A, Devreese KMJ. Laboratory diagnosis of antiphospholipid syndrome: insights and hindrances. J Clin Med 2022; 11 (08) 2164
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Pengo V, Ruffatti A, Legnani C. et al. Clinical course of high-risk patients diagnosed with antiphospholipid syndrome. J Thromb Haemost 2010; 8 (02) 237-242
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Devreese KMJ, de Groot PG, de Laat B. et al. 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. J Thromb Haemost 2020; 18 (11) 2828-2839
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 15 Tektonidou MG, Andreoli L, Limper M. et al. EULAR recommendations for the management of antiphospholipid syndrome in adults. Ann Rheum Dis 2019; 78 (10) 1296-1304
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Zuily S, Cohen H, Isenberg D. et al. Use of direct oral anticoagulants in patients with thrombotic antiphospholipid syndrome: Guidance from the Scientific and Standardization Committee of the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis. J Thromb Haemost 2020; 18 (09) 2126-2137
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Legault K, Schunemann H, Hillis C. et al. McMaster RARE-Bestpractices clinical practice guideline on diagnosis and management of the catastrophic antiphospholipid syndrome. J Thromb Haemost 2018; 16 (08) 1656-1664
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Cohen H, Mackie IJ, Devreese KMJ. International Society for Thrombosis and Haemostasis Scientific and Standardization Committee for Lupus Anticoagulant/Antiphospholipid Antibodies. Clinical and laboratory practice for lupus anticoagulant testing: An International Society of Thrombosis and Haemostasis Scientific and Standardization Committee survey. J Thromb Haemost 2019; 17 (10) 1715-1732
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Petri M. Improvements in diagnosis and risk assessment of primary and secondary antiphospholipid syndrome. Hematology Am Soc Hematol Educ Program 2019; 2019 (01) 415-420
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Chighizola CB, Pregnolato F, Andrade D. et al; Antiphospholipid Syndrome Alliance for Clinical Trials and International Networking (APS ACTION). Fluctuation of anti-domain 1 and anti-β2-glycoprotein I antibody titers over time in patients with persistently positive antiphospholipid antibodies. Arthritis Rheumatol 2023; 75 (06) 984-995
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 McDonnell T, Wincup C, Buchholz I. et al. The role of beta-2-glycoprotein I in health and disease associating structure with function: more than just APS. Blood Rev 2020; 39: 100610
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Dienava-Verdoold I, Boon-Spijker MG, de Groot PG. et al. Patient-derived monoclonal antibodies directed towards beta2 glycoprotein-1 display lupus anticoagulant activity. J Thromb Haemost 2011; 9 (04) 738-747
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Pengo V, Zardo L, Cattini MG. et al. Prothrombin is responsible for the lupus cofactor phenomenon in a patient with lupus anticoagulant/hypoprothrombinemia syndrome. TH Open 2020; 4 (01) e40-e44
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 24 Chinnaraj M, Planer W, Pengo V, Pozzi N. Discovery and characterization of 2 novel subpopulations of aPS/PT antibodies in patients at high risk of thrombosis. Blood Adv 2019; 3 (11) 1738-1749
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 25 Devreese KM. Antiphospholipid antibodies: evaluation of the thrombotic risk. Thromb Res 2012; 130 (Suppl. 01) S37-S40
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 26 Yin D, de Groot PG, Ninivaggi M, Devreese KMJ, de Laat B. Clinical relevance of isolated lupus anticoagulant positivity in patients with thrombotic antiphospholipid syndrome. Thromb Haemost 2021; 121 (09) 1220-1227
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 27 Qi W, Zhao J, Huang C. et al. Clinical characteristics and prognosis of patients with antiphospholipid antibodies based on cluster analysis: an 8-year cohort study. Arthritis Res Ther 2022; 24 (01) 140
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 28 Vandevelde A, Chayoua W, de Laat B. et al. Added value of antiphosphatidylserine/prothrombin antibodies in the workup of thrombotic antiphospholipid syndrome: communication from the ISTH SSC Subcommittee on Lupus Anticoagulant/Antiphospholipid Antibodies. J Thromb Haemost 2022; 20 (09) 2136-2150
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 29 Brandt JT, Triplett DA, Alving B, Scharrer I. Criteria for the diagnosis of lupus anticoagulants: an update. On behalf of the Subcommittee on Lupus Anticoagulant/Antiphospholipid Antibody of the Scientific and Standardisation Committee of the ISTH. Thromb Haemost 1995; 74 (04) 1185-1190
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 30 Mustonen P, Lehtonen KV, Javela K, Puurunen M. Persistent antiphospholipid antibody (aPL) in asymptomatic carriers as a risk factor for future thrombotic events: a nationwide prospective study. Lupus 2014; 23 (14) 1468-1476
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 31 Aringer M, Costenbader K, Daikh D. et al. 2019 European League Against Rheumatism/American College of Rheumatology classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus. Ann Rheum Dis 2019; 78 (09) 1151-1159
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 32 Bala MM, Paszek E, Lesniak W, Wloch-Kopec D, Jasinska K, Undas A. Antiplatelet and anticoagulant agents for primary prevention of thrombosis in individuals with antiphospholipid antibodies. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2018; 7 (07) CD012534
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 33 Manning JE, Arachchillage DJ. Dilemmas in the diagnosis and management of antiphospholipid syndrome. J Thromb Haemost 2024; 22 (08) 2156-2170
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 34 Foret T, Dufrost V, Salomon Du Mont L. et al. Systematic review of antiphospholipid antibodies in COVID-19 patients: culprits or bystanders?. Curr Rheumatol Rep 2021; 23 (08) 65
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 35 Devreese KMJ, Linskens EA, Benoit D, Peperstraete H. Antiphospholipid antibodies in patients with COVID-19: a relevant observation?. J Thromb Haemost 2020; 18 (09) 2191-2201
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 36 Moore GW, Foxton E, Platton S, Yartey N, White D, MacDonald SG. Triple-positive antiphospholipid syndrome does not guarantee positivity in each lupus anticoagulant assay. J Thromb Haemost 2023; 21 (12) 3539-3546
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 37 Bertin D, Camoin-Jau L, Veit V. et al. Single or triple positivity for antiphospholipid antibodies in “carriers” or symptomatic patients: Untangling the knot. J Thromb Haemost 2021; 19 (12) 3018-3030
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 38 Favaloro EJ, Dean E, Arunachalam S. Variable performance of lupus anticoagulant testing: The Australasian/Asia-Pacific Experience. Semin Thromb Hemost 2023; (e-pub ahead of print).
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 39 Favaloro EJ, Kershaw G, Mohammed S, Lippi G. How to optimize activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT) testing: solutions to establishing and verifying normal reference intervals and assessing APTT reagents for sensitivity to heparin, lupus anticoagulant, and clotting factors. Semin Thromb Hemost 2019; 45 (01) 22-35
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 40 Wilmot H, Gray E. Collaborative Study on the 1st International Reference Panel (PLASMA) for Lupus Anticoagulant Expert Committee on Biological Standardization,. Geneva, October 13 to 17, 2014 . World Health Organization. Accessed September 20, 2024 at: https://iris.who.int/bitstream/handle/10665/137474/WHO_BS_2014.2244_eng.pdf;jsessionid=FA1C09EC729C9E522FC775B60C3C6E63?sequence=1
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 41 Moore GW, Jones PO, Platton S. et al. International multicenter, multiplatform study to validate Taipan snake venom time as a lupus anticoagulant screening test with Ecarin time as the confirmatory test: communication from the ISTH SSC Subcommittee on Lupus Anticoagulant/Antiphospholipid Antibodies. J Thromb Haemost 2021; 19 (12) 3177-3192
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 42 Tripodi A, Cohen H, Devreese KMJ. Lupus anticoagulant detection in anticoagulated patients. Guidance from the Scientific and Standardization Committee for lupus anticoagulant/antiphospholipid antibodies of the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis. J Thromb Haemost 2020; 18 (07) 1569-1575
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 43 De Kesel PM, Devreese KMJ. Direct oral anticoagulant adsorption: Impact on lupus anticoagulant testing-Review of the literature and evaluation on spiked and patient samples. J Thromb Haemost 2020; 18 (08) 2003-2017
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 44 Favaloro EJ, Pasalic L. Lupus anticoagulant testing during anticoagulation, including direct oral anticoagulants. Res Pract Thromb Haemost 2022; 6 (02) e12676
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 45 Frans G, Meeus P, Bailleul E. Resolving DOAC interference on aPTT, PT, and lupus anticoagulant testing by the use of activated carbon. J Thromb Haemost 2019; 17 (08) 1354-1362
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 46 De Kesel PMM, Devreese KMJ. The effect of unfractionated heparin, enoxaparin, and danaparoid on lupus anticoagulant testing: Can activated carbon eliminate false-positive results?. Res Pract Thromb Haemost 2019; 4 (01) 161-168
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 47 Tripodi A, Chantarangkul V, Cini M. et al. Variability of cut-off values for the detection of lupus anticoagulants: results of an international multicenter multiplatform study. J Thromb Haemost 2017; 15 (06) 1180-1190
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 48 Favaloro EJ, Mohammed S, Vong R. et al. A multi-laboratory assessment of lupus anticoagulant assays performed on the ACL TOP 50 family for harmonized testing in a large laboratory network. Int J Lab Hematol 2022; 44 (03) 654-665
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 49 Devreese K, Peerlinck K, Hoylaerts MF. Thrombotic risk assessment in the antiphospholipid syndrome requires more than the quantification of lupus anticoagulants. Blood 2010; 115 (04) 870-878
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 50 Hughes GR. Thrombosis, abortion, cerebral disease, and the lupus anticoagulant. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1983; 287 (6399) 1088-1089
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 51 Galli M, Comfurius P, Maassen C. et al. Anticardiolipin antibodies (ACA) directed not to cardiolipin but to a plasma protein cofactor. Lancet 1990; 335 (8705) 1544-1547
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 52 Müller-Calleja N, Ruf W, Lackner KJ. Lipid-binding antiphospholipid antibodies: significance for pathophysiology and diagnosis of the antiphospholipid syndrome. Crit Rev Clin Lab Sci 2024; 61 (05) 370-387
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 53 Devreese KMJ, Ortel TL, Pengo V, de Laat B. Laboratory criteria for antiphospholipid syndrome: reply. J Thromb Haemost 2018; 16 (10) 2117-2119
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 54 Ambrosino P, Lupoli R, Tarantino P, Di Minno A, Tarantino L, Di Minno MN. Viral hepatitis and anti-phospholipid antibodies positivity: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Dig Liver Dis 2015; 47 (06) 478-487
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 55 Abdel-Wahab N, Lopez-Olivo MA, Pinto-Patarroyo GP, Suarez-Almazor ME. Systematic review of case reports of antiphospholipid syndrome following infection. Lupus 2016; 25 (14) 1520-1531
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 56 Chayoua W, Kelchtermans H, Moore GW. et al. Detection of anti-cardiolipin and anti-β2 glycoprotein I antibodies differs between platforms without influence on association with clinical symptoms. Thromb Haemost 2019; 119 (05) 797-806
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 57 Devignes J, Smaïl-Tabbone M, Hervé A. et al. Extended persistence of antiphospholipid antibodies beyond the 12-week time interval: association with baseline antiphospholipid antibodies titres. Int J Lab Hematol 2019; 41 (06) 726-730
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 58 Galli M, Luciani D, Bertolini G, Barbui T. Lupus anticoagulants are stronger risk factors for thrombosis than anticardiolipin antibodies in the antiphospholipid syndrome: a systematic review of the literature. Blood 2003; 101 (05) 1827-1832
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 59 Reynaud Q, Lega JC, Mismetti P. et al. Risk of venous and arterial thrombosis according to type of antiphospholipid antibodies in adults without systemic lupus erythematosus: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Autoimmun Rev 2014; 13 (06) 595-608
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 60 Jiang D, Lim W, Crowther M, Garcia D. A systematic review of the association between anti-β-2 glycoprotein I antibodies and APS manifestations. Blood Adv 2021; 5 (20) 3931-3936
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 61 Pengo V, Biasiolo A, Pegoraro C, Cucchini U, Noventa F, Iliceto S. Antibody profiles for the diagnosis of antiphospholipid syndrome. Thromb Haemost 2005; 93 (06) 1147-1152
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 62 Chayoua W, Kelchtermans H, Gris JC. et al. The (non-)sense of detecting anti-cardiolipin and anti-β2 glycoprotein I IgM antibodies in the antiphospholipid syndrome. J Thromb Haemost 2020; 18 (01) 169-179
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 63 Devreese KM, Pierangeli SS, de Laat B, Tripodi A, Atsumi T, Ortel TL. Subcommittee on Lupus Anticoagulant/Phospholipid/Dependent Antibodies. Testing for antiphospholipid antibodies with solid phase assays: guidance from the SSC of the ISTH. J Thromb Haemost 2014; 12 (05) 792-795
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 64 Favaloro EJ, Wheatland L, Jovanovich S, Roberts-Thomson P, Wong RC. Internal quality control and external quality assurance in testing for antiphospholipid antibodies: Part I–anticardiolipin and anti-β2-glycoprotein I antibodies. Semin Thromb Hemost 2012; 38 (04) 390-403
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 65 Pengo V, Biasiolo A, Gresele P. et al; Participating Centres of Italian Federation of Thrombosis Centres (FCSA). Survey of lupus anticoagulant diagnosis by central evaluation of positive plasma samples. J Thromb Haemost 2007; 5 (05) 925-930
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 66 Vandevelde A, Chayoua W, de Laat B. et al. Semiquantitative interpretation of anticardiolipin and antiβ2glycoprotein I antibodies measured with various analytical platforms: Communication from the ISTH SSC Subcommittee on Lupus Anticoagulant/Antiphospholipid Antibodies. J Thromb Haemost 2022; 20 (02) 508-524
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 67 Lakos G, Bentow C, Mahler M. A clinical approach for defining the threshold between low and medium anti-cardiolipin antibody levels for QUANTA Flash Assays. Antibodies (Basel) 2016; 5 (02) 14
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 68 Van Hoovels L, Vander Cruyssen B, Sieghart D. et al. Multicentre study to improve clinical interpretation of rheumatoid factor and anti-citrullinated protein/peptide antibodies test results. RMD Open 2022; 8 (01) e002099
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 69 Sciascia S, Sanna G, Murru V, Roccatello D, Khamashta MA, Bertolaccini ML. Anti-prothrombin (aPT) and anti-phosphatidylserine/prothrombin (aPS/PT) antibodies and the risk of thrombosis in the antiphospholipid syndrome. A systematic review. Thromb Haemost 2014; 111 (02) 354-364
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 70 Zhu R, Cheng CY, Yang Y, Denas G, Pengo V. Prevalence of aPhosphatidylserine/prothrombin antibodies and association with antiphospholipid antibody profiles in patients with antiphospholipid syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Thromb Res 2022; 214: 106-114
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 71 Bertolaccini ML, Sciascia S, Murru V, Garcia-Fernandez C, Sanna G, Khamashta MA. Prevalence of antibodies to prothrombin in solid phase (aPT) and to phosphatidylserine-prothrombin complex (aPS/PT) in patients with and without lupus anticoagulant. Thromb Haemost 2013; 109 (02) 207-213
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 72 de Laat B, Pengo V, Pabinger I. et al. The association between circulating antibodies against domain I of beta2-glycoprotein I and thrombosis: an international multicenter study. J Thromb Haemost 2009; 7 (11) 1767-1773
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 73 Yin D, de Laat B, Devreese KMJ, Kelchtermans H. The clinical value of assays detecting antibodies against domain I of β2-glycoprotein I in the antiphospholipid syndrome. Autoimmun Rev 2018; 17 (12) 1210-1218
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 74 Yin D, Chayoua W, Kelchtermans H. et al. Detection of anti-domain I antibodies by chemiluminescence enables the identification of high-risk antiphospholipid syndrome patients: A multicenter multiplatform study. J Thromb Haemost 2020; 18 (02) 463-478
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 75 Zuily S, de Laat B, Guillemin F. et al. Anti-domain I β2-glycoprotein I antibodies and activated protein C resistance predict thrombosis in antiphospholipid syndrome: TAC(I)T Study. J Appl Lab Med 2020; 5 (06) 1242-1252
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 76 Iwaniec T, Kaczor MP, Celińska-Löwenhoff M, Polański S, Musiał J. Clinical significance of anti-domain 1 β2-glycoprotein I antibodies in antiphospholipid syndrome. Thromb Res 2017; 153: 90-94
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 77 Pengo V. Additional laboratory tests to improve on the diagnosis of antiphospholipid syndrome. J Thromb Haemost 2020; 18 (08) 1846-1848
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 78 Andreoli L, Nalli C, Motta M. et al. Anti-β2-glycoprotein I IgG antibodies from 1-year-old healthy children born to mothers with systemic autoimmune diseases preferentially target domain 4/5: might it be the reason for their 'innocent' profile?. Ann Rheum Dis 2011; 70 (02) 380-383
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 79 Bradacova P, Slavik L, Ulehlova J. et al. Current promising biomarkers and methods in the diagnostics of antiphospholipid syndrome: a review. Biomedicines 2021; 9 (02) 166
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 80 Pignatelli P, Ettorre E, Menichelli D, Pani A, Violi F, Pastori D. Seronegative antiphospholipid syndrome: refining the value of “non-criteria” antibodies for diagnosis and clinical management. Haematologica 2020; 105 (03) 562-572
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 81 Pires da Rosa G, Bettencourt P, Rodríguez-Pintó I, Cervera R, Espinosa G. “Non-criteria” antiphospholipid syndrome: a nomenclature proposal. Autoimmun Rev 2020; 19 (12) 102689
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 82 Meijide H, Sciascia S, Sanna G, Khamashta MA, Bertolaccini ML. The clinical relevance of IgA anticardiolipin and IgA anti-β2 glycoprotein I antiphospholipid antibodies: a systematic review. Autoimmun Rev 2013; 12 (03) 421-425
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 83 Chayoua W, Yin DM, Kelchtermans H. et al. Is there an additional value in detecting anticardiolipin and anti-β2 glycoprotein I IgA antibodies in the antiphospholipid syndrome?. Thromb Haemost 2020; 120 (11) 1557-1568
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 84 Murthy V, Willis R, Romay-Penabad Z. et al. Value of isolated IgA anti-β2 -glycoprotein I positivity in the diagnosis of the antiphospholipid syndrome. Arthritis Rheum 2013; 65 (12) 3186-3193
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 85 Litvinova E, Darnige L, Kirilovsky A, Burnel Y, de Luna G, Dragon-Durey MA. Prevalence and significance of non-conventional antiphospholipid antibodies in patients with clinical APS criteria. Front Immunol 2018; 9: 2971
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 86 Gehlen R, Vandevelde A, de Laat B, Devreese KMJ. Application of the thrombin generation assay in patients with antiphospholipid syndrome: a systematic review of the literature. Front Cardiovasc Med 2023; 10: 1075121
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 87 Ninivaggi M, de Laat-Kremers R, Tripodi A. et al. Recommendations for the measurement of thrombin generation: communication from the ISTH SSC Subcommittee on Lupus Anticoagulant/Antiphospholipid Antibodies. J Thromb Haemost 2021; 19 (05) 1372-1378
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 88 Vilhena J, Rosário Martins M, Vicente H. et al. An integrated soft computing approach to Hughes Syndrome Risk Assessment. J Med Syst 2017; 41 (03) 40
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 89 de Laat-Kremers RMW, Wahl D, Zuily S. et al. A thrombin-driven neural net diagnoses the antiphospholipid syndrome without the need for interruption of anticoagulation. Blood Adv 2024; 8 (04) 936-946
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 90 de Laat-Kremers RMW, Wahl D, Zuily S. et al. Deciphered coagulation profile to diagnose the antiphospholipid syndrome using artificial intelligence. Thromb Res 2021; 203: 142-151
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar