Cited by 69Systemic Lupus Erythematosus ResearchBlood Coagulation and Thrombosis MechanismsVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management

Primary thrombosis prophylaxis in antiphospholipid antibody-positive patients: where do we stand?

Barbhaiya, Medha, Erkan, Doruk·2011·Current Rheumatology Reports

Abstract

Persistently positive antiphospholipid antibodies (aPLs) with thrombosis and/or pregnancy morbidity are the hallmark of the antiphospholipid syndrome. However, aPL-positive patients with no prior history of thrombosis exist. On the basis of a limited number of studies that predominantly included systemic lupus erythematosus patients, aPL-positive patients without previous thrombosis have a 0% to 3.8% annual incident thrombosis risk. Given that every positive aPL test is not clinically significant and every aPL-positive patient does not have the same thrombosis risk, risk stratification (based on aPL profile, age, systemic autoimmune diseases, and traditional cardiovascular disease or venous thrombosis risk factors) is crucial to determine the first thrombosis risk in aPL-positive patients. The optimal primary thrombosis prevention strategy in patients with clinically significant aPL profiles should include 1) regular monitoring and elimination of non-aPL thrombosis risk factors, 2) aggressive management of clinical and subclinical systemic autoimmune disease activity, and 3) patient counseling and education. The protective effect of low-dose aspirin against incident thrombosis in patients with clinically significant aPL profiles is not supported by randomized controlled data; general population cardiovascular disease risk prediction tools and prevention guidelines formulated based on risk-benefit calculations should play a role in the decision whether to recommend low-dose aspirin. The effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine, statins, or their combination remains to be determined by well-designed randomized controlled trials.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11926-010-0149-3

Cites

74 of 74 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Barbhaiya, M., & Erkan, D.
Affiliations
  • Cornell University (US)
  • Hospital for Special Surgery (US)
Corresponding author
Erkan, Doruk
Venue
Current Rheumatology Reports
Published
2010-11-23
Volume
13
Issue
1
Pages
59-69
ISSN
  • 1523-3774 (ISSN-L)
  • 1534-6307
OpenAlex
W2025054431
Cited by
69
References
74
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 8
FWCI
0.89
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Current Rheumatology Reports (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rheumatology › Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Hematology › Blood Coagulation and Thrombosis Mechanisms
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Internal Medicine › Venous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
Keywords
antiphospholipid antibodies, antiphospholipid syndrome, thrombosis risk stratification, low-dose aspirin, hydroxychloroquine, statins, systemic lupus erythematosus, cardiovascular risk prediction, thrombosis risk factors, patient counseling
MeSH terms
Anticoagulants, Aspirin, Female, Humans, Male, Pregnancy, Thrombosis, Antiphospholipid Syndrome, Antibodies, Antiphospholipid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review