English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This issue of Seminars in Thrombosis & Hemostasis is devoted to antiphospholipid (aPL) antibodies and the antiphospholipid syndrome (APS). aPL antibodies are well-recognized acquired risk factors for thrombosis and pregnancy-associated morbidity. They are the most common cause of acquired thrombophilia and are detected in up to 10% of patients with arterial or venous thrombosis.1 Patients with thrombosis or adverse pregnancy outcome in whom serological analysis has indicated the persistent presence of aPL are diagnosed with APS. This autoimmune disorder affects more women than men and is mostly diagnosed in patients younger than 50 years.2 Although the incidence of thrombosis in the young is low,3–5 and APS should therefore be considered a rare disorder, aPL represents a significant health burden for society. Patients with APS are considered at increased risk for a recurrent thrombotic event. To prevent recurrence, they often receive life-long anticoagulant treatment, which is associatedwith a concomitant life-long riskof bleeding and requires frequent hospital visits. The first description of a patient with aPL dates back almost seven decades.6 Since then, workers in the field have defined APS based on the collection of symptoms often found in patients with these antibodies, identified several aPL as serological markers of thrombotic disease, and have developed a means to classify patients with these antibodies into different categories as an aid in scientific research.7 Despite the progress that has been made, there is still much to learn about the pathophysiology of APS, the optimal treatment of patients with aPL, and the correct way to identify those patients at risk for a thrombotic event. Being a rare disorder, not many clinical trials have been performed to systemically investigate treatment strategies in APS. Hence, there is limited available evidence to support the currently used treatment strategies for affected patients. Chighizola et al therefore provide, in this issue of Seminars in Thrombosis & Hemostasis the latest insights in the management of thrombotic APS.8 Most patients with thrombotic APS will receive vitamin K antagonists for secondary thromboprophylaxis. Thesebroad spectrumanticoagulant drugs target the majorityof the coagulation factors involved inhemostasis, and have been the drug of choice for decades, despite their associationwith clinically relevant bleeds and the need to frequently monitor drug efficacy using blood from treated patients. Nonvitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs), also called direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), are small molecules that directly inhibit either active coagulation factor X or thrombin. NOACS are rapidly becoming the new standard for prevention of recurrent thrombosis due to their improved safety profile and lack of monitoring requirements. Whether or not NOACs are safe to use in APS, however, remains to be determined, and clinical trials that address this issue are currently under way. Cohen et al therefore report on the latest insights with respect to the use of NOACs in APS.9 ManydifferentaPLhavebeendescribed inpatientswithAPS, but not all have been included in the official classification criteria7 due to insufficient data that supported their inclusion. Nevertheless, laboratory diagnostics of APS include measurement of several serological markers, including anticardiolipin antibodies, anti-β2-glycoprotein I antibodies, and lupus anticoagulant, leading to a complex laboratory array that should be performed on every eligible sample. Recent evidence suggests that the number of positive aPL in a patient determines the risk of a future event. Pengo et al address the diagnostic value of the aPL, as listed in the classification criteria, and discuss the added value of the presence of more than one of these antibodies in a single patient.10 Of the “criteria” aPL, we know the least about those antibodies that interfere with coagulation, the so-called lupus anticoagulants. Nevertheless, these antibodies correlate best with thrombosis and pregnancy morbidity in APS. Molhoek et al discuss the relevant paradoxical association between these in vitro coagulation inhibitors and thrombosis, and summarize what is known about their mode of action.11 Most physicians treating patients with APS will have encountered patients who do not fulfill the classification

Recent Developments in Antiphospholipid Antibodies and the Antiphospholipid Syndrome