14th International Congress on antiphospholipid antibodies Task Force report on catastrophic antiphospholipid syndrome
Abstract
The 'Task Force on Catastrophic Antiphospholipid Syndrome (CAPS)' was developed on the occasion of the 14th International Congress on Antiphospholipid Antibodies. The objectives of this Task Force were to assess the current knowledge on pathogenesis, clinical and laboratory features, diagnosis and classification, precipitating factors and treatment of this condition in order to address recommendations for future research. This article summarizes the studies analyzed by the Task Force, its recommendations and the future research agenda.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
The most common precipitating factors for CAPS are anticoagulation discontinuation in patients with prior APS diagnosis, infections, and surgical procedures.
“The most common precipitating factors for the development of CAPS are anticoagulation discontinuation among patients with prior diagnosis of APS, infections and surgical procedures.67”
From EULAR recommendations for the management of antiphospholipid syndrome in adults (2019) · cites this paper as [67]
Cites
The immunopathogenesis of sepsis
Cohen, J. (2002) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature01326 · Cited by 2,742 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
EULAR recommendations for the management of antiphospholipid syndrome in adults
Tektonidou, M. G., Andreoli, L., Limper, M., Amoura, Z., Cervera, R., Costedoat-Chalumeau, N., Cuadrado, M. J., Dörner, T., Ferrer-Oliveras, R., Hambly, K., et al. (2019) · Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases · doi:10.1136/annrheumdis-2019-215213 · Cited by 1,261 · see citing works
“67 Early diagnosis and management of infections and minimisation of discontinuation or low-intensity anticoagulation, especially perioperatively, are recommended.”
Self-citation
- Authors
- Cervera, R., Rodríguez-Pintó, I., Colafrancesco, S., Conti, F., Valesini, G., Rosário, C., Agmon-Levin, N., Shoenfeld, Y., Ferrão, C., Faria, R., Vasconcelos, C., Signorelli, F., & Espinosa, G.
- Affiliations
- Hospital Clínic de Barcelona (ES)
- Sapienza University of Rome (IT)
- Hospital Pedro Hispano (PT)
- Tel Aviv University (IL)
- Universidade do Porto (PT)
- Corresponding author
- Cervera, Ricard
- ORCID
- Venue
- Autoimmunity Reviews
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2014-07
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 699-707
- ISSN
- 1568-9972 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2621426447
- Cited by
- 213
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 29 · 2018: 26 · 2017: 27 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 21 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 1
- FWCI
- 21.01
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Autoimmunity Reviews (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- IRIS Research product catalog (Sapienza University of Rome) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Rheumatology › Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Vasculitis and related conditions
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Systemic Sclerosis and Related Diseases
- Keywords
- catastrophic antiphospholipid syndrome, antiphospholipid antibodies, pathogenesis, clinical features, laboratory features, diagnosis, classification, precipitating factors, treatment, research recommendations
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Humans, Antiphospholipid Syndrome, Antibodies, Antiphospholipid, Advisory Committees
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
