No abstract

Rivaroxaban is an effective and safe alternative to warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation and venous thromboembolism. We tested the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin in high-risk patients with thrombotic antiphospholipid syndrome. This is a randomized open-label multicenter noninferiority study with blinded end point adjudication. Rivaroxaban, 20 mg once daily (15 mg once daily based on kidney function) was compared with warfarin (international normalized ratio target 2.5) for the prevention of thromboembolic events, major bleeding, and vascular death in patients with antiphospholipid syndrome. Only high-risk patients triple positive for lupus anticoagulant, anti-cardiolipin, and anti-β2-glycoprotein I antibodies of the same isotype (triple positivity) were included in the study. The trial was terminated prematurely after the enrollment of 120 patients (59 randomized to rivaroxaban and 61 to warfarin) because of an excess of events among patients in the rivaroxaban arm. Mean follow-up was 569 days. There were 11 (19%) events in the rivaroxaban group, and 2 (3%) events in the warfarin group. Thromboembolic events occurred in 7 (12%) patients randomized to rivaroxaban (4 ischemic stroke and 3 myocardial infarction), whereas no event was recorded in those randomized to warfarin. Major bleeding occurred in 6 patients: 4 (7%) in the rivaroxaban group and 2 (3%) in the warfarin group. No death was reported. The use of rivaroxaban in high-risk patients with antiphospholipid syndrome was associated with an increased rate of events compared with warfarin, thus showing no benefit and excess risk. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02157272.

No abstract

CEC is impaired in RA and SLE, with a specific mechanism pattern in each disease not depending on serum HDL levels. These findings provide a new mechanism for the increased atherosclerotic risk in RA and SLE patients.

Objective. It has been suggested that only antibodies against domain 1 (D1) of b 2 -glycoprotein I (b 2 GPI) are pathogenic and diagnostic. The role of antibodies against other b 2 GPI domains is still debated. This study was undertaken to evaluate the clinical relevance of domain specificity profiling of anti-b 2 GPI IgG antibodies in antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) patients and in control groups of patients with systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases and in asymptomatic antiphospholipid antibody (aPL) carriers.Methods. We evaluated 159 subjects with persistently positive, medium or high-titer anti-b 2 GPI IgG, including 56 patients with thrombotic (obstetric or nonobstetric) primary APS, 31 women with obstetric primary APS, 42 aPL-positive patients with systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases, and 30 asymptomatic aPL carriers. One hundred healthy donors were included. Anti-b 2 GPI D1 and D4/5 IgG were tested on research enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays containing recombinant b 2 GPI domains.Results. As compared to other groups, aPL carriers displayed higher frequency/titer of anti-D4/5 IgG. Unlike anti-D4/5, anti-D1 IgG antibodies were more frequent and at higher titer in triple than in single or double aPL-positive subjects. An anti-D1 to anti-D4/5 ratio of ‡1.5 was predictive of systemic autoimmunity (odds ratio 3.25 [95% confidence interval 1.45-7.49], P 5 0.005). Neither anti-D1 nor anti-D4/5 antibodies were associated with APS clinical criteria.Conclusion. Anti-D1 IgG is the preferential specificity not only in vascular and obstetric primary APS, but also in patients with systemic autoimmune rheumatic disease with no clinical features of APS. Conversely, aPL carriers do not have a polarized profile toward D1. Combined testing for anti-b 2 GPI IgG with different domain specificity allows a more accurate aPL profiling, with polarization toward anti-D1 IgG as a possible fingerprint of systemic autoimmunity.

Objectives To compare clinical features, laboratory data and fetal-maternal outcomes between 1000 women with obstetric APS (OAPS) and 640 with aPL-related obstetric complications not fulfilling Sydney criteria (non-criteria OAPS, NC-OAPS). Methods This was a retrospective and prospective multicentre study from the European Registry on Obstetric Antiphospholipid Syndrome. Results A total of 1650 women with 5251 episodes, 3601 of which were historical and 1650 latest episodes, were included. Altogether, 1000 cases (OAPS group) fulfilled the Sydney classification criteria and 650 (NC-OAPS group) did not. Ten NC-OAPS cases were excluded for presenting thrombosis during follow-up. All cases were classified as category I (triple positivity or double positivity for aPL) or category II (simple positivity). Overall, aPL laboratory categories showed significant differences: 29.20% in OAPS vs 17.96% in NC-OAPS (P < 0.0001) for category I, and 70.8% in OAPS vs 82% in NC-OAPS (P < 0.0001) for category II. Significant differences were observed when current obstetric complications were compared (P < 0.001). However, major differences between groups were not observed in treatment rates, livebirths and thrombotic complications. In the NC-OAPS group, 176/640 (27.5%) did not fulfil Sydney clinical criteria (subgroup A), 175/640 (27.34%) had a low titre and/or non-persistent aPL positivity but did meet the clinical criteria (subgroup B) and 289/640 (45.15%) had a high aPL titre but did not fulfil Sydney clinical criteria (subgroup C). Conclusion Significant clinical and laboratory differences were found between groups. Fetal-maternal outcomes were similar in both groups when treated. These results suggest that we could improve our clinical practice with better understanding of NC-OAPS patients.

No abstract

The clinical spectrum of the anti-phospholipid syndrome (APS) is not limited to vascular thrombosis or miscarriages but includes additional manifestations that cannot be explained solely by a thrombophilic state. Anti-cardiolipin, anti-beta2 glycoprotein I (anti-β2GPI) and lupus anticoagulant (LA) assays are not only the formal diagnostic and classification laboratory tools but also parameters to stratify the risk to develop the clinical manifestations of the syndrome. In particular, anti-β2GPI antibodies reacting with an immunodominant epitope on domain I of the molecule were reported as the prevalent specificity in APS patients, correlating with a more aggressive clinical picture. Several laboratory assays to improve the diagnostic and predictive power of the standard tests have been proposed. Plates coated with the phosphatidylserine-prothrombin complex for detecting antibodies represent a promising laboratory tool correlating with LA and with clinical manifestations. Anti-phospholipid antibodies can be found in patients with full-blown APS, in those with thrombotic events or obstetric complications only or in asymptomatic carriers. An inflammatory second hit is required to increase the presence of β2GPI in vascular tissues, eventually triggering thrombosis. Post-transcriptional modifications of circulating β2GPI, different epitope specificities or diverse anti-β2GPI antibody-induced cell signaling have all been suggested to affect the clinical manifestations and/or to modulate their occurrence.