Immunology and clinical importance of antiphospholipid antibodies
Abstract
Having reviewed the literature on the association of aPL antibodies with clinical manifestations, it is clear that this group of autoantibodies are of considerable importance. The presence of aPL antibodies in some but not all individuals confers a risk of a clinical syndrome characterized by recurrent arterial or venous thrombosis, thrombocytopenia, hemolytic anemia, or positive Coombs' test, and in females, recurrent idiopathic fetal loss. In SLE, the risk is approximately 40%, compared with a risk of 15% in the absence of aPL antibodies. However, only one half of persons possessing these antibodies have SLE, and overall the risk is around 30%. In some circumstances, such as in chlorpromazine or infection-associated aPL antibodies, there appears to be no increased risk. At the other end of the spectrum are seen patients whose only clinical manifestations comprise features of this clinical syndrome, and this entity has been designated the primary antiphospholipid syndrome (PAPS). aPL antibodies are also important because they are not uncommon. They have been found frequently in women with idiopathic recurrent fetal loss (30%), in non-autoimmune patients with ischemic heart disease (20%), or venous thrombosis (up to 30%), or stroke (4-47%), and in chronic immune thrombocytopenia (30%). These autoantibodies can be detected using sensitive solid-phase immunoassays employing the CL antigen, or in appropriate coagulation tests to detect LA activity. These assays are simple to perform but require care in selection of the best test and in interpretation of results. Current tests do not distinguish between those persons at risk of the clinical events and those not at risk. Detection of specific isotypes (especially IgG) and antibody level may aid in such a designation. Treatment of aPL antibody-associated syndromes remains a controversial subject. Since thromboses are associated with significant morbidity and potential mortality, there is a good argument for long-term preventive antithrombotic therapy, at least for as long as the antibodies are detectable, in those patients in whom clinical complications have previously occurred. It is not generally recommended that this treatment be offered to individuals in whom aPL antibodies are detected but who have not suffered previous thromboses, since the risk of such events does not appear to be equal within a group of aPL antibody-positive persons. This particularly applies to pregnant women, since live births and uncomplicated pregnancies are observed regularly in the presence of aPL antibodies without specific treatment. A previous history of at least one unexplained, late fetal loss is considered a prerequisite before intervention in subsequent pregnancies.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)
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?
Additional antibodies, most notably aCL and aβ2GPI, were later identified and associated with thrombosis and recurrent spontaneous abortions.
“Additional antibodies, most notably anticardiolipin antibodies (aCL) and anti–glycoprotein-I antibodies (aβ2GPI), were later identified and associated with thrombosis and recurrent spontaneous abortions.2-4”
From Lupus anticoagulant test persistence over time and its associations with future thrombotic events (2022) · cites this paper as [2]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 363 · Cited by 481
- Authors
- McNeil, H. P., Chesterman, C. N., & Krilis, S. A.
- Affiliations
- UNSW Sydney (AU)
- Prince of Wales Hospital (AU)
- Venue
- Advances in immunology
- Publisher
- Elsevier
- Published
- 1991
- Volume
- 49
- Pages
- 193-280
- ISSN
- 0065-2776 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2209800418
- Cited by
- 481
- References
- 363
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 8
- FWCI
- 74.47
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Advances in immunology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Rheumatology › Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Hematology › Blood Coagulation and Thrombosis Mechanisms
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Vasculitis and related conditions
- Keywords
- antiphospholipid antibodies, antiphospholipid syndrome, primary antiphospholipid syndrome, systemic lupus erythematosus, recurrent thrombosis, venous thrombosis, arterial thrombosis, thrombocytopenia, hemolytic anemia, recurrent pregnancy loss, anticardiolipin antibodies, lupus anticoagulant, thromboprophylaxis, pregnancy outcomes, autoantibodies, isotype-specific antibodies, antibody levels, stroke, ischemic heart disease
- MeSH terms
- Anemia, Hemolytic, Autoantibodies, Autoimmune Diseases, Blood Platelets, Cardiolipins, Humans, Infections, Phosphatidylethanolamines, Phospholipids, Thrombocytopenia, Thrombosis
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