Download PDF
Thromb Haemost 2021; 121(09): 1220-1227
DOI: 10.1055/a-1344-4271
New Technologies, Diagnostic Tools and Drugs

Clinical Relevance of Isolated Lupus Anticoagulant Positivity in Patients with Thrombotic Antiphospholipid Syndrome

Dongmei Yin
1   Department of Biochemistry, Cardiovascular Research Institute Maastricht, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands
2   Department of Functional Coagulation, Synapse Research Institute, Maastricht, The Netherlands
,
Philip G. de Groot
2   Department of Functional Coagulation, Synapse Research Institute, Maastricht, The Netherlands
,
Marisa Ninivaggi
2   Department of Functional Coagulation, Synapse Research Institute, Maastricht, The Netherlands
,
Katrien M. J. Devreese
3   Coagulation Laboratory, Department of Laboratory Medicine, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
4   Department of Diagnostic Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
,
Bas de Laat
1   Department of Biochemistry, Cardiovascular Research Institute Maastricht, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands
2   Department of Functional Coagulation, Synapse Research Institute, Maastricht, The Netherlands
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background Patients positive for all three types of antiphospholipid antibodies (aPLs; triple positivity) have been identified for having a high risk for thrombotic events. However, the clinical significance of isolated lupus anticoagulant (LAC) positivity is debated.

Objectives To investigate the clinical relevance of isolated LAC.

Methods A total of 456 patients were enrolled in this study; 66 antiphospholipid syndrome patients and 390 control patients. The control group consisted of autoimmune patients (n = 91), patients with thrombosis but without aPLs (n = 127), and normal controls (n = 172). LAC, anticardiolipin (anti-CL), and anti-β2 glycoprotein I (anti-β2GPI) immunoglobulin G (IgG) and immunoglobulin M (IgM) were determined according to the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis (ISTH) guidelines. Anti-CL and anti-β2GPI were measured by four different solid-phase platforms to overcome variability between test systems. The noncriteria IgA anti-CL and anti-β2GPI, antidomain I of β2GPI IgG, and antiphosphatidylserine/prothrombin antibodies (anti-PS/PT) IgG and IgM were detected according to the ISTH guidelines for solid-phase assays.

Results In total, 70 patients were positive for LAC, of which 44 were negative for both anti-β2GPI and anti-CL antibodies. We found that isolated LAC proved to be strongly associated with vascular thrombosis (odds ratio [OR]: 7.3; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.3–16.1), even better than triple-positive samples (OR: 4.3; 95% CI: 1.6–12.2). The titers of the anti-PS/PT IgG and IgM were significantly higher in triple-positivity samples compared with samples with isolated LAC positivity. The majority of single LAC positives were anti-PS/PT-negative. We observed that LAC positivity was weaker in isolated LAC-positive patients compared with LAC activity in triple-positive patients.

Conclusion Isolated LAC was highly associated with thrombosis. The presence of anti-PS/PT antibodies could not explain LAC positivity in isolated LAC. Isolated LAC showed a weaker LAC activity compared with triple-positive patients.

Keywords

antiphospholipid antibodies - β2 glycoprotein I - lupus anticoagulant - prothrombin - thrombosis

Authors' Contributions

K. M. J. Devreese and B. de Laat designed the study. K. M. J. Devreese collected samples and identified sample characteristics. Samples were analyzed under the supervision of K. M. J. Devreese. D. Yin interpreted the data, performed statistical analysis, and wrote the first version of the manuscript. P. G. de Groot, B. de Laat, K. M. J. Devreese, and Marisa Ninivaggi critically reviewed the manuscript.




Publication History

Received: 22 September 2020

Accepted: 28 December 2020

Accepted Manuscript online:
31 December 2020

Article published online:
03 March 2021

© 2020. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • References

  • 1 Pengo V, Tripodi A, Reber G. et al; Subcommittee on Lupus Anticoagulant/Antiphospholipid Antibody of the Scientific and Standardisation Committee of the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis. Update of the guidelines for lupus anticoagulant detection. J Thromb Haemost 2009; 7 (10) 1737-1740
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Devreese KM. Standardization of antiphospholipid antibody assays. Where do we stand?. Lupus 2012; 21 (07) 718-721
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Moore GW. Recent guidelines and recommendations for laboratory detection of lupus anticoagulants. Semin Thromb Hemost 2014 2014; 40 (02) 163-171
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Devreese KM. Antiphospholipid antibody testing and standardization. Int J Lab Hematol 2014; 36 (03) 352-363
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 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
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 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
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Bertolaccini ML, Amengual O, Andreoli L. et al. 14th International Congress on Antiphospholipid Antibodies Task Force. Report on antiphospholipid syndrome laboratory diagnostics and trends. Autoimmun Rev 2014; 13 (09) 917-930
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 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
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Pengo V, Ruffatti A, Legnani C. et al. Incidence of a first thromboembolic event in asymptomatic carriers of high-risk antiphospholipid antibody profile: a multicenter prospective study. Blood 2011; 118 (17) 4714-4718
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 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
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Reynaud Q, Lega J-C, 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
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Pengo V, Testa S, Martinelli I. et al. Incidence of a first thromboembolic event in carriers of isolated lupus anticoagulant. Thromb Res 2015; 135 (01) 46-49
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 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
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Urbanus RT, Siegerink B, Roest M, Rosendaal FR, de Groot PG, Algra A. Antiphospholipid antibodies and risk of myocardial infarction and ischaemic stroke in young women in the RATIO study: a case-control study. Lancet Neurol 2009; 8 (11) 998-1005
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Gebhart J, Posch F, Koder S. et al. Increased mortality in patients with the lupus anticoagulant: the Vienna Lupus Anticoagulant and Thrombosis Study (LATS). Blood 2015; 125 (22) 3477-3483
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 de Mast Q, Molhoek JE, van der Ven AJ. et al. Antiphospholipid antibodies and the risk of stroke in urban and rural tanzania: a community-based case-control study. Stroke 2016; 47 (10) 2589-2595
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 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
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Chayoua W, Kelchtermans H, Moore GW. et al. Detection of anti-cardiolipin and anti-β2glycoprotein I antibodies differs between platforms without influence on association with clinical symptoms. Thromb Haemost 2019; 119 (05) 797-806
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Chayoua W, Kelchtermans H, Moore GW. et al. Identification of high thrombotic risk triple-positive antiphospholipid syndrome patients is dependent on anti-cardiolipin and anti-β2glycoprotein I antibody detection assays. J Thromb Haemost 2018; 16 (10) 2016-2023
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Devreese KM. Antiphospholipid antibodies: evaluation of the thrombotic risk. Thromb Res 2012; 130 (Suppl. 01) S37-S40
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Pengo V, Ruffatti A, Del Ross T. et al. Confirmation of initial antiphospholipid antibody positivity depends on the antiphospholipid antibody profile. J Thromb Haemost 2013; 11 (08) 1527-1531
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 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
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Pengo V, Banzato A, Denas G. et al. Correct laboratory approach to APS diagnosis and monitoring. Autoimmun Rev 2013; 12 (08) 832-834
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Rampazzo P, Biasiolo A, Garin J. et al. Some patients with antiphospholipid syndrome express hitherto undescribed antibodies to cardiolipin-binding proteins. Thromb Haemost 2001; 85 (01) 57-62
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Yin D, de Laat B. Commentary on: circulating plasmablasts contribute to antiphospholipid antibody production, associated with type I interferon upregulation. J Thromb Haemost 2019; 17 (07) 1030-1032
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 de Laat B, Eckmann CM, van Schagen M, Meijer AB, Mertens K, van Mourik JA. Correlation between the potency of a beta2-glycoprotein I-dependent lupus anticoagulant and the level of resistance to activated protein C. Blood Coagul Fibrinolysis 2008; 19 (08) 757-764
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 de Laat B, Wu XX, van Lummel M, Derksen RH, de Groot PG, Rand JH. Correlation between antiphospholipid antibodies that recognize domain I of beta2-glycoprotein I and a reduction in the anticoagulant activity of annexin A5. Blood 2007; 109 (04) 1490-1494
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Pengo V, Denas G. Diagnostics and treatment of thrombotic antiphospholipid syndrome (APS): a personal perspective. Thromb Res 2018; 169: 35-40
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Devreese KMJ, Ortel TL, Pengo V, de Laat B. Laboratory criteria for antiphospholipid syndrome: reply. J Thromb Haemost 2018; 16 (10) 2117-2119
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 de Groot PG, de Laat B, Rand J. et al. Natural proteins involved in antiphospholipid syndrome. In: Erkan D, Lockshin M. eds. Antiphospholipid Syndrome. Cham: Springer; 2017: 15-17
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Schouwers SM, Delanghe JR, Devreese KM. Lupus anticoagulant (LAC) testing in patients with inflammatory status: does C-reactive protein interfere with LAC test results?. Thromb Res 2010; 125 (01) 102-104
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Devreese KMJ, Verfaillie CJ, De Bisschop F, Delanghe JR. Interference of C-reactive protein with clotting times. Clin Chem Lab Med 2015; 53 (05) e141-e145
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Pengo V, Biasiolo A, Rampazzo P, Brocco T. dRVVT is more sensitive than KCT or TTI for detecting lupus anticoagulant activity of anti-β2-glycoprotein I autoantibodies. Thromb Haemost 1999; 81 (02) 256-258
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Devreese KMJ, de Groot PG, de Laat B. et al. Update of the guidelines for lupus anticoagulant detection and interpretation. 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 (11) 2828-2839
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Pengo V, Del Ross T, Ruffatti A. et al. Lupus anticoagulant identifies two distinct groups of patients with different antibody patterns. Thromb Res 2018; 172: 172-178
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar