Semiquantitative interpretation of anticardiolipin and antiβ2glycoprotein I antibodies measured with various analytical platforms: communication from the ISTH SSC subcommittee on Lupus Anticoagulant/Antiphospholipid antibodies

Background Antiβ2glycoprotein I (aβ2GPI) and anticardiolipin (aCL) IgG/IgM show differences in positive/negative agreement and titers between solid phase platforms. Method specific semiquantitative categorization of titers could improve and harmonize the interpretation across platforms. Aim To evaluate the traditionally 40/80 units thresholds used for aCL and aβ2GPI for categorization into moderate/high positivity with different analytical systems, and to compare with alternative thresholds. Material and methods aCL and aβ2GPI thresholds were calculated for two automated systems (chemiluminescent immunoassay (CLIA) and multiplex flow immunoassay (MFI)) by ROC-curve analysis on 1108 patient samples, including patients with and without APS, and confirmed on a second population (n=279). Alternatively, regression analysis on diluted standard material was applied to identify thresholds. Thresholds were compared to 40/80 threshold measured by an enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Additionally, likelihood ratios (LR) were calculated. Results Threshold levels of 40/80 units show poor agreement between ELISA and automated platforms for classification into low/moderate/high positivity, especially for aCL/aβ2GPI IgG. Agreement for semiquantitative interpretation of aPL IgG between ELISA and CLIA/MFI improves with alternative thresholds. LR for aPL IgG increase for thrombotic and obstetric APS based on 40/80 thresholds for ELISA and adapted thresholds for the other systems, but not for IgM. Conclusion Use of 40/80 units as medium/high thresholds is acceptable for aCL/aβ2GPI IgG ELISA, but not for CLIA and MFI. Alternative semiquantitative thresholds for non-ELISA platforms can be determined by a clinical approach or by using monoclonal antibodies. Semiquantitative reporting of aPL IgM has less impact on increasing probability for APS

Detection of anti-cardiolipin and anti-β2glycoprotein I antibodies differs between platforms without influence on association with clinical symptoms

Background: The anti-phospholipid syndrome (APS) is characterized by thrombosis and/or pregnancy morbidity with persistent presence of anti-phospholipid antibodies (aPL). Laboratory criteria include aPL detection by coagulation tests for lupus anticoagulant (LAC) or solid phase assays measuring anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I (a beta 2GPI) or anticardiolipin (aCL) immunoglobulin (Ig) G/IgM antibodies. External quality control programs illustrate that commercially available aPL assays produce variable results. Objective: We aimed to investigate the agreement and diagnostic accuracy of solid phase assays. Materials and Methods: In thismulti-centre study, 1,168 patient samples were tested on one site for aCL and a beta 2GPI IgG/IgM antibodies by four solid phase test systems. Samples included APS patients, controls and monoclonal antibodies (MoAB) against different epitopes of beta 2GPI. LAC was determined by the local centre. Results: aCL IgM assays resulted in the most discrepancies (60%), while aCL IgG and a beta 2GPI IgM assays resulted in lower discrepancies (36%), suggesting better agreement. Discrepant samples displayed lower median aPL titers. Dependent on the solid phase test system, odds ratios (ORs) for thrombosis and pregnancy morbidity ranged from 1.98 to 2.56 and 3.42 to 4.78, respectively. Three platforms showed lower sensitivity for MoAB directed against the glycine (Gly) 40-arginine (Arg) 43 epitope of domain I of beta 2GPI. Conclusion: Poor agreement was observed between different commercially available aCL and a beta 2GPI IgG/IgM assays, hampering uniformity in the identification of aPL-positive patients. Clinical association was globally concordant between solid phase test systems considering results of the four aPL together. An assay sensitive in detecting the MoAB against Gly40-Arg43 of domain I of beta 2GPI reached the highest OR for thrombosis

Added value of antiphosphatidylserine/prothrombin antibodies in the workup of thrombotic antiphospholipid syndrome: Communication from the ISTH SSC Subcommittee on Lupus Anticoagulant/Antiphospholipid Antibodies

Background Diagnosis of antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) requires persistent presence of lupus anticoagulant (LAC), anticardiolipin (aCL) IgG/IgM, or anti-β2 glycoprotein I (aβ2GPI) IgG/IgM antibodies. Other antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL) such as antiphosphatidylserine/prothrombin antibodies (aPS/PT) are promising in assessment of thrombotic APS (TAPS). Aim To evaluate the added value of aPS/PT IgG and IgM in TAPS. Material and methods aPS/PT IgG/IgM, aCL IgG/IgM, aβ2GPI IgG/IgM, and LAC were determined in 757 patients (TAPS and controls). aPS/PT cut-off values were calculated, aPS/PT titers and positivity were compared between TAPS and controls, type of thrombosis, and antibody profiles. Likelihood ratios (LR), odds ratios (OR) and aPL-score were determined. Results aPS/PT IgG and IgM were associated with TAPS and triple positivity. In-house calculated cut-offs were higher for IgM (43 units), compared to manufacturer’s cut-off (30 units). Thresholds of 90 (IgG)/200 (IgM) units were determined as high-titer cut-off. Higher aPS/PT titers were observed in triple positive patients and showed higher LR and OR for TAPS. aPS/PT was independently associated with TAPS when adjusted for aCL/aβ2GPI, but not when adjusted for LAC. In isolated LAC positive patients, aPS/PT was positive in 27.1% TAPS patients and in 77.3% patients with autoimmune disease. Diagnostic value of aPL-score did not differ with and without including aPS/PT. Conclusion aPS/PT positivity, especially with high antibody titer, is associated with TAPS diagnosis. Analysis on top of current laboratory criteria is not essential in TAPS diagnosis, but aPS/PT could be useful in patients with thrombosis and a double positive aPL profile (aCL+/aβ2GPI+)

Identification of high thrombotic risk triple-positive antiphospholipid syndrome patients is dependent on anti-cardiolipin and anti-Β2glycoprotein I antibody detection assays

Background: The antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) is characterized by thrombosis and/or pregnancy morbidity with the persistent presence of antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL). Triple-positivity (i.e. positivity for lupus anticoagulant [LAC], anti-cardiolipin [aCL] and anti-2glycoprotein I [a2GPI] antibodies) is associated with a high thrombotic risk. Objectives: We investigated the variability in triple-positivity detection by measuring the same samples with four commercially available solid phase assays. In addition, the added clinical value of aPL in LAC-positive patients was investigated, as well as the association of IgM triple-positivity and thrombosis. Patients/Methods: We included 851 patients from seven European medical centers. Anti-CL and a2GPI IgG/IgM antibodies were determined by four platforms: BioPlex((R))2200, ImmunoCap((R))EliA, ACL AcuStar((R)) and QUANTA Lite ELISA((R)). Results: Triple-positivity detection by solid phase assays varied, ranging from 89 up to 118 in thrombotic APS patients (n = 258), of which 86 were detected independent of the platform. Lupus anticoagulant positivity resulted in an odds ratio (OR) for thrombosis of 3.4; triple-positivity (irrespective of the isotype) increased the OR from 4.3 up to 5.2, dependent on the platform. Triple-positivity solely for the IgM isotype did not increase the OR for thrombosis compared with LAC positivity. The highest OR for thrombosis was reached for positivity for IgG and IgM a2GPI and aCL (8.6 up to 28.9). Conclusions: Triple-positivity proved to be highly associated with thrombosis, but identification is assay dependent. Within triple-positivity, IgM antibodies only have an added clinical value in patients positive for IgG antibodies

Added value of antiphosphatidylserine/prothrombin antibodies in the workup of thrombotic antiphospholipid syndrome: Communication from the ISTH SSC Subcommittee on Lupus Anticoagulant/Antiphospholipid Antibodies

Background Diagnosis of antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) requires persistent presence of lupus anticoagulant (LAC), anticardiolipin (aCL) IgG/IgM, or anti-β2 glycoprotein I (aβ2GPI) IgG/IgM antibodies. Other antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL) such as antiphosphatidylserine/prothrombin antibodies (aPS/PT) are promising in assessment of thrombotic APS (TAPS). Aim To evaluate the added value of aPS/PT IgG and IgM in TAPS. Material and methods aPS/PT IgG/IgM, aCL IgG/IgM, aβ2GPI IgG/IgM, and LAC were determined in 757 patients (TAPS and controls). aPS/PT cut-off values were calculated, aPS/PT titers and positivity were compared between TAPS and controls, type of thrombosis, and antibody profiles. Likelihood ratios (LR), odds ratios (OR) and aPL-score were determined. Results aPS/PT IgG and IgM were associated with TAPS and triple positivity. In-house calculated cut-offs were higher for IgM (43 units), compared to manufacturer’s cut-off (30 units). Thresholds of 90 (IgG)/200 (IgM) units were determined as high-titer cut-off. Higher aPS/PT titers were observed in triple positive patients and showed higher LR and OR for TAPS. aPS/PT was independently associated with TAPS when adjusted for aCL/aβ2GPI, but not when adjusted for LAC. In isolated LAC positive patients, aPS/PT was positive in 27.1% TAPS patients and in 77.3% patients with autoimmune disease. Diagnostic value of aPL-score did not differ with and without including aPS/PT. Conclusion aPS/PT positivity, especially with high antibody titer, is associated with TAPS diagnosis. Analysis on top of current laboratory criteria is not essential in TAPS diagnosis, but aPS/PT could be useful in patients with thrombosis and a double positive aPL profile (aCL+/aβ2GPI+)

Semiquantitative interpretation of anticardiolipin and antiβ2glycoprotein I antibodies measured with various analytical platforms: communication from the ISTH SSC subcommittee on Lupus Anticoagulant/Antiphospholipid antibodies

Background Antiβ2glycoprotein I (aβ2GPI) and anticardiolipin (aCL) IgG/IgM show differences in positive/negative agreement and titers between solid phase platforms. Method specific semiquantitative categorization of titers could improve and harmonize the interpretation across platforms. Aim To evaluate the traditionally 40/80 units thresholds used for aCL and aβ2GPI for categorization into moderate/high positivity with different analytical systems, and to compare with alternative thresholds. Material and methods aCL and aβ2GPI thresholds were calculated for two automated systems (chemiluminescent immunoassay (CLIA) and multiplex flow immunoassay (MFI)) by ROC-curve analysis on 1108 patient samples, including patients with and without APS, and confirmed on a second population (n=279). Alternatively, regression analysis on diluted standard material was applied to identify thresholds. Thresholds were compared to 40/80 threshold measured by an enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Additionally, likelihood ratios (LR) were calculated. Results Threshold levels of 40/80 units show poor agreement between ELISA and automated platforms for classification into low/moderate/high positivity, especially for aCL/aβ2GPI IgG. Agreement for semiquantitative interpretation of aPL IgG between ELISA and CLIA/MFI improves with alternative thresholds. LR for aPL IgG increase for thrombotic and obstetric APS based on 40/80 thresholds for ELISA and adapted thresholds for the other systems, but not for IgM. Conclusion Use of 40/80 units as medium/high thresholds is acceptable for aCL/aβ2GPI IgG ELISA, but not for CLIA and MFI. Alternative semiquantitative thresholds for non-ELISA platforms can be determined by a clinical approach or by using monoclonal antibodies. Semiquantitative reporting of aPL IgM has less impact on increasing probability for APS

Detection of anti-domain I antibodies by chemiluminescence enables the identification of high-risk antiphospholipid syndrome patients : a multicenter multiplatform study

Background Classification of the antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) relies predominantly on detecting antiphospholipid antibodies (aPLs). Antibodies against a domain I (DI) epitope of anti-beta 2glycoprotein I (beta 2GPI) proved to be pathogenic, but are not included in the current classification criteria. Objectives Investigate the clinical value of detecting anti-DI IgG in APS. Patients/Methods From eight European centers 1005 patients were enrolled. Anti-cardiolipin (CL) and anti-beta 2GPI were detected by four commercially available solid phase assays; anti-DI IgG by the QUANTA Flash (R) beta 2GPI domain I assay. Results Odds ratios (ORs) of anti-DI IgG for thrombosis and pregnancy morbidity proved to be higher than those of the conventional assays. Upon restriction to patients positive for anti-beta 2GPI IgG, anti-DI IgG positivity still resulted in significant ORs. When anti-DI IgG was added to the criteria aPLs or used as a substitute for anti-beta 2GPI IgG/anti-CL IgG, ORs for clinical symptoms hardly improved. Upon removing anti-DI positive patients, lupus anticoagulant remained significantly correlated with clinical complications. Anti-DI IgG are mainly present in high-risk triple positive patients, showing higher levels. Combined anti-DI and triple positivity confers a higher risk for clinical symptoms compared to only triple positivity. Conclusions Detection of anti-DI IgG resulted in higher ORs for clinical manifestations than the current APS classification criteria. Regardless of the platform used to detect anti-beta 2GPI/anti-CL, addition of anti-DI IgG measured by QUANTA Flash (R) did not improve the clinical associations, possibly due to reduced exposure of the pathogenic epitope of DI. Our results demonstrate that anti-DI IgG potentially helps in identifying high-risk patients

Deciphered coagulation profile to diagnose the antiphospholipid syndrome using artificial intelligence

The antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) is diagnosed by the presence of lupus anticoagulant and/or antibodies against cardiolipin or beta 2-glycoprotein-1 and the occurrence of thrombosis or pregnancy morbidity. The assessment of overall coagulation is known to differ in APS patients compared to normal subjects. The accelerated production of key factor thrombin causes a prothrombotic state in APS patients, and the reduced efficacy of the activated protein C pathway promotes this effect. Even though significant differences exist in the coagulation profile between normal controls and APS patients, it is not possible to rely on a single test result to diagnose APS. A neural network is a computing system inspired by the human brain that can be trained to distinguish between healthy subjects and patients based on subject specific data. In a first cohort of patients, we developed a neural networking that diagnoses APS. We clinically validated this neural network in a separate cohort consisting of APS patients, normal controls, controls visiting the hospital for other indications and two diseased control groups (thrombosis patients and auto-immune disease patients). The positive predictive value ranged from 62% in the hospital controls to 91% in normal controls and the negative predictive value of the neural network ranged from 86% in the thrombosis control group to 95% in the hospital controls. The sensitivity of the neural network was higher than 90% in all control groups. In conclusion, we developed a neural network that accurately diagnoses APS in the validation cohort. After further clinical validation in newly diagnosed patients, this neural network could possibly be clinically implemented to diagnose APS based on thrombin generation data

Is There an Additional Value in Detecting Anticardiolipin and Anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I IgA Antibodies in the Antiphospholipid Syndrome?

Background Anticardiolipin (aCL) and anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I (a beta 2GPI) immunoglobulin A (IgA) antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL) have shown to associate with thrombosis and pregnancy morbidity. However, inclusion of IgA aPL in the classification criteria of the antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) has been debated. We investigated the value of aCL and a beta 2GPI IgA aPL in the detection of thrombosis and pregnancy morbidity in addition to the current aPL panel for APS. Methods We included 1,068 patients from eight European medical centers: 259 thrombotic APS patients, 122 obstetric APS patients, 204 non-APS thrombosis patients, 33 non-APS obstetric patients, 60 APS patients with unspecified clinical manifestations, 196 patients with autoimmune diseases, and 194 controls. aCL and a beta 2GPI IgG/M/A were detected with four commercial assays and lupus anticoagulant was determined by the local center. Results Positivity for IgA aPL was found in 17 to 26% of the patients with clinical manifestations of APS and in 6 to 13% of the control population. Both aCL and a beta 2GPI IgA were significantly associated with thrombosis and pregnancy morbidity. Isolated IgA positivity was rare in patients with clinical manifestations of APS (0.3-5%) and not associated with thrombosis and/or pregnancy morbidity. Addition of IgA to the current criterion panel did not increase odds ratios for thrombosis nor pregnancy morbidity. Conclusion aCL and a beta 2GPI IgA are associated with clinical manifestations of APS. However, isolated IgA positivity was rare and not associated with thrombosis or pregnancy morbidity. These data do not support testing for aCL and a beta 2GPI IgA subsequent to conventional aPL assays in identifying patients with thrombosis or pregnancy morbidity