Explore the vast range of titles available.

ObjectiveTo develop new antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) classification criteria with high specificity for use in observational studies and trials, jointly supported by the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and EULAR.MethodsThis international multidisciplinary initiative included four phases: (1) Phase I, criteria generation by surveys and literature review; (2) Phase II, criteria reduction by modified Delphi and nominal group technique exercises; (3) Phase III, criteria definition, further reduction with the guidance of real-world patient scenarios, and weighting via consensus-based multicriteria decision analysis, and threshold identification; and (4) Phase IV, validation using independent adjudicators’ consensus as the gold standard.ResultsThe 2023 ACR/EULAR APS classification criteria include an entry criterion of at least one positive antiphospholipid antibody (aPL) test within 3 years of identification of an aPL-associated clinical criterion, followed by additive weighted criteria (score range 1–7 points each) clustered into six clinical domains (macrovascular venous thromboembolism, macrovascular arterial thrombosis, microvascular, obstetric, cardiac valve, and hematologic) and two laboratory domains (lupus anticoagulant functional coagulation assays, and solid-phase enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays for IgG/IgM anticardiolipin and/or IgG/IgM anti–β2-glycoprotein I antibodies). Patients accumulating at least three points each from the clinical and laboratory domains are classified as having APS. In the validation cohort, the new APS criteria vs the 2006 revised Sapporo classification criteria had a specificity of 99% vs 86%, and a sensitivity of 84% vs 99%.ConclusionThese new ACR/EULAR APS classification criteria were developed using rigorous methodology with multidisciplinary international input. Hierarchically clustered, weighted, and risk-stratified criteria reflect the current thinking about APS, providing high specificity and a strong foundation for future APS research.

BackgroundReports of severe COVID-19 being associated with thrombosis, antiphospholipid antibodies (APLA), and antiphospholipid syndrome have yielded disparate conclusions. Studies comparing patients with COVID-19 with contemporaneous controls of similar severity are lacking.Methods22 COVID-19+ and 20 COVID-19– patients with respiratory failure admitted to intensive care were studied longitudinally. Demographic and clinical data were obtained from the day of admission. APLA testing included anticardiolipin (aCL), anti-β2glycoprotien 1 (β2GP1), antidomain 1 β2GP1 and antiphosphatidyl serine/prothrombin complex. Antinuclear antibodies (ANAs) were detected by immunofluorescence and antibodies to cytokines by a commercially available multiplexed array. Analysis of variance was used for continuous variables and Fisher’s exact test was used for categorical variables with α=0.05 and the false discovery rate at q=0.05.ResultsAPLAs were predominantly IgG aCL (48%), followed by IgM (21%) in all patients, with a tendency towards higher frequency among the COVID-19+. aCL was not associated with surrogate markers of thrombosis but IgG aCL was strongly associated with worse disease severity and higher ANA titres regardless of COVID-19 status. An association between aCL and anticytokine autoantibodies tended to be higher among the COVID-19+.ConclusionsPositive APLA serology was associated with more severe disease regardless of COVID-19 status.Trial registration number NCT04747782

The authors describe a 69-year-old man with Covid-19 diagnosed in January 2020 in Wuhan, China, along with two other critically ill patients with Covid-19 who were also seen in the same intensive care unit. Coagulopathy and antiphospholipid antibodies were seen in all three patients.

The objective was to develop evidence-based recommendations for the management of antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) in adults. Based on evidence from a systematic literature review and expert opinion, overarching principles and recommendations were formulated and voted. High-risk antiphospholipid antibody (aPL) profile is associated with greater risk for thrombotic and obstetric APS. Risk modification includes screening for and management of cardiovascular and venous thrombosis risk factors, patient education about treatment adherence, and lifestyle counselling. Low-dose aspirin (LDA) is recommended for asymptomatic aPL carriers, patients with systemic lupus erythematosus without prior thrombotic or obstetric APS, and non-pregnant women with a history of obstetric APS only, all with high-risk aPL profiles. Patients with APS and first unprovoked venous thrombosis should receive long-term treatment with vitamin K antagonists (VKA) with a target international normalised ratio (INR) of 2–3. In patients with APS with first arterial thrombosis, treatment with VKA with INR 2–3 or INR 3–4 is recommended, considering the individual’s bleeding/thrombosis risk. Rivaroxaban should not be used in patients with APS with triple aPL positivity. For patients with recurrent arterial or venous thrombosis despite adequate treatment, addition of LDA, increase of INR target to 3–4 or switch to low molecular weight heparin may be considered. In women with prior obstetric APS, combination treatment with LDA and prophylactic dosage heparin during pregnancy is recommended. In patients with recurrent pregnancy complications, increase of heparin to therapeutic dose, addition of hydroxychloroquine or addition of low-dose prednisolone in the first trimester may be considered. These recommendations aim to guide treatment in adults with APS. High-quality evidence is limited, indicating a need for more research.

Key Points Antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) classification criteria, designed to categorize patient cohorts for clinical research, are commonly used in clinical practice; however, their use might not be appropriate for routine diagnosis Patients with APS can have antiphospholipid antibody (aPL)-related clinical features other than thrombosis and pregnancy morbidity, such as livedo reticularis , thrombocytopenia, nephropathy, valvular heart disease, haemolytic anaemia, chorea and myelitis aPL profiling represents the most accurate risk stratification tool for clinical manifestations such as thrombosis in the context of APS New extra-criteria autoantibodies could improve the accuracy of diagnosis for patients suspected of having APS The range of clinical manifestations and autoantibodies that are recognized as important in antiphosphlipid syndrome (APS) is constantly increasing. How can disease manifestations and autoantibodies that fall outside of the classic APS criteria be incorporated into diagnosis in the future? First described in the early 1980s, antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) is a unique form of acquired autoimmune thrombophilia in which patients present with clinical features of recurrent thrombosis and pregnancy morbidity and persistently test positive for the presence of antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL). At least one clinical (vascular thrombosis or pregnancy morbidity) and one lab-based (positive test result for lupus anticoagulant, anticardiolipin antibodies and/or anti-β2-glycoprotein 1 antibodies) criterion have to be met for a patient to be classified as having APS. However, the clinical spectrum of APS encompasses additional manifestations that can affect many organs and cannot be explained exclusively by patients being in a prothrombotic state; clinical manifestations not listed in the classification criteria (known as extra-criteria manifestations) include neurologic manifestations (chorea, myelitis and migraine), haematologic manifestations (thrombocytopenia and haemolytic anaemia), livedo reticularis , nephropathy and valvular heart disease. Increasingly, research interest has focused on the development of novel assays that might be more specific for APS than the current aPL tests. This Review focuses on the current classification criteria for APS, presenting the role of extra-criteria manifestations and lab-based tests. Diagnostic approaches to difficult cases, including so-called seronegative APS, are also discussed.

IntroductionSystemic lupus erythematosus with antiphospholipid syndrome (SLE-APS) represents a challenging SLE endotype whose molecular basis remains unknown.MethodsWe analysed whole-blood RNA-sequencing data from 299 patients with SLE (108 SLE-antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL)-positive, including 67 SLE-APS; 191 SLE-aPL-negative) and 72 matched healthy controls (HC). Pathway enrichment analysis, unsupervised weighted gene coexpression network analysis and machine learning were applied to distinguish disease endotypes.ResultsPatients with SLE-APS demonstrated upregulated type I and II interferon (IFN) pathways compared with HC. Using a 100-gene random forests model, we achieved a cross-validated accuracy of 75.6% in distinguishing these two states. Additionally, the comparison between SLE-APS and SLE-aPL-negative revealed 227 differentially expressed genes, indicating downregulation of IFN-α and IFN-γ signatures, coupled with dysregulation of the complement cascade, B-cell activation and neutrophil degranulation. Unsupervised analysis of SLE transcriptome identified 21 gene modules, with SLE-APS strongly linked to upregulation of the ‘neutrophilic/myeloid’ module. Within SLE-APS, venous thromboses positively correlated with ‘neutrophilic/myeloid’ and ‘B cell’ modules, while arterial thromboses were associated with dysregulation of ‘DNA damage response (DDR)’ and ‘metabolism’ modules. Anticardiolipin and anti-β2GPI positivity—irrespective of APS status—were associated with the ‘neutrophilic/myeloid’ and ‘protein-binding’ module, respectively.ConclusionsThere is a hierarchical upregulation and—likely—dependence on IFN in SLE with the highest IFN signature observed in SLE-aPL-negative patients. Venous thrombotic events are associated with neutrophils and B cells while arterial events with DDR and impaired metabolism. This may account for their differential requirements for anticoagulation and provide rationale for the potential use of mTOR inhibitors such as sirolimus and the direct fIIa inhibitor dabigatran in SLE-APS.

Antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) is an autoimmune thrombophilia propelled by circulating antiphospholipid antibodies that herald vascular thrombosis and obstetrical complications. Antiphospholipid antibodies recognize phospholipids and phospholipid-binding proteins and are not only markers of disease but also key drivers of APS pathophysiology. Thrombotic events in APS can be attributed to various conspirators including activated endothelial cells, platelets, and myeloid-lineage cells, as well as derangements in coagulation and fibrinolytic systems. Furthermore, recent work has especially highlighted the role of neutrophil extracellular traps (NETs) and the complement system in APS thrombosis. Beyond acute thrombosis, patients with APS can also develop an occlusive vasculopathy, a long-term consequence of APS characterized by cell proliferation and infiltration that progressively expands the intima and leads to organ damage. This review will highlight known pathogenic factors in APS and will also briefly discuss similarities between APS and the thrombophilic coagulopathy of COVID-19.

The adjusted Global Antiphospholipid Syndrome (APS) Score (aGAPSS) is a tool proposed to quantify the risk for antiphospholipid antibody (aPL)-related clinical manifestations. However, aGAPSS has been validated mainly for thrombotic events and studies on APS-related obstetric manifestations are scarce. Furthermore, the majority of them included patients with positive aPL and different autoimmune diseases. Here, we assess the utility of aGAPSS to predict the response to treatment in aPL carriers without other autoimmune disorders. One-hundred and thirty-seven women with aPL ever pregnant were included. Sixty-five meet the APS classification criteria, 61 had APS-related obstetric manifestations, and 11 were asymptomatic carriers. The patients’ aGAPSS risk was grouped as low (< 6, N = 73), medium (6–11, N = 40), and high risk (≥ 12, N = 24). Since vascular risk factors included in the aGAPSS were infrequent in this population (< 10%), the aGAPSS score was mainly determined by the aPL profile. Overall, the live birth rate was 75%, and 37.2% of the patients had at least one adverse pregnancy outcome (APO). When considering patients according to the aGAPSS (high, medium, and low risk), no significant differences were found for pregnancy loss (29.2%, 25%, and 21.9%) or APO (33.3%, 47.5%, and 32.9%). In the present study, including aPL carriers without other autoimmune diseases, aGAPSS is not a valuable tool to identify patients at risk for obstetric complications despite treatment. In these patients with gestational desire, in addition to the aPL profile, other pregnancy-specific factors, such as age or previous obstetric history, should be considered.

Antiphospholipid antibody (aPL)-induced activation of the mTOR (mammalian target of rapamycin) signaling pathway in endothelial cells plays a role in the pathogenesis of vascular lesions in antiphospholipid syndrome (APS). However, there are no data on whether this mechanism also contributes to the development of skin ulcers commonly observed in APS. We investigated the activation of mTOR in skin specimens from aPL-positive and aPL-negative patients with leg ulcers. Patients with leg ulcers who had primary or secondary APS or no detectable aPLs were included in the study. Biopsies were taken from the ulcer edges and the adjacent non-ulcerated skin areas. Activation of mTORC1 (mTOR Complex1) and mTORC2 (mTOR Complex2) in endothelial cells was determined by immunohistochemical analysis of phosphorylated ribosomal S6 protein (pS6RP) and phosphorylated protein kinase B (pAKT), respectively. In all aPL-positive patients, regardless of whether they had primary or secondary APS, we found a positive immunohistochemical reaction to pS6RP (mTORC1 activation) in the endothelial cells of the ulcer samples. On the other hand, pS6RP could not be detected in samples from aPL-negative chronic venous ulcers. Furthermore, pS6RP was not present in samples taken from the unaffected skin adjacent to the ulcers in aPL-positive patients. The pAKT reaction (mTORC2) was negative in both aPL-positive and aPL-negative patients, both in the ulcers and in the periulcer skin. Activation of the mTOR pathway may contribute to ulcer development in APS. The mTORC1 may be a target for therapeutic modification in APS-associated skin ulcers.

Antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) is an autoimmune disease characterized by the presence of antiphospholipid antibodies, such as lupus anticoagulant, anticardiolipin antibodies and anti-β2-glycoprotein 1 antibodies. APS can present with a variety of clinical phenotypes, including thrombosis in the veins, arteries and microvasculature as well as obstetrical complications. The pathophysiological hallmark is thrombosis, but other factors such as complement activation might be important. Prevention of thrombotic manifestations associated with APS includes lifestyle changes and, in individuals at high risk, low-dose aspirin. Prevention and treatment of thrombotic events are dependent mainly on the use of vitamin K antagonists. Immunosuppression and anticomplement therapy have been used anecdotally but have not been adequately tested. Pregnancy morbidity includes unexplained recurrent early miscarriage, fetal death and late obstetrical manifestation such as pre-eclampsia, premature birth or fetal growth restriction associated with placental insufficiency. Current treatment to prevent obstetrical morbidity is based on low-dose aspirin and/or low-molecular-weight heparin and has improved pregnancy outcomes to achieve successful live birth in >70% of pregnancies. Although hydroxychloroquine and pravastatin might further improve pregnancy outcomes, prospective clinical trials are required to confirm these findings. Antiphospholipid syndrome is an autoimmune disease associated with a variety of symptoms, including thrombosis and obstetrical complications. This Primer provides an update on the epidemiology, pathogenesis, diagnosis and therapeutic aspects and offers an outlook on future research topics.