| Title | Does the anti-prothrombin antibodies measurement provide additional information in patients with thrombosis? | | Author(s) | Bardin N, Alessi MC, Dignat-George F, Vague IJ, Sampol J, Harlé JR, Sanmarco M | | Institution | Fédération Autoimmunité et Thrombose, Lab. Immunologie, Hôpital de la Conception, 27 bd jean Moulin 13005, Marseille, France; INSERM U608, UFR de Pharmacie, Université de la Méditerranée, Marseille, France. | | Source | Immunobiology 2007; 212(7):557-65. | | Abstract | The aim of this study is to get new insight into the relevance of IgG anti-prothrombin antibodies in patients with thrombosis and to determine whether human prothrombin alone (aPT) or complexed to phosphatidylserine (aPS/PT) should be preferentially used for measuring these antibodies by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). To this end, prevalence of anti-prothrombin antibodies, their characteristics in terms of avidity and heterogeneity, and their relationship with anti-beta2 glycoprotein I antibodies (abeta(2)GPI) were studied in 152 patients with thrombosis. Patients were divided into two groups according to the presence or absence of antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL), called aPL+ or aPL-, respectively. In the aPL- group (n=90), the prevalence of anti-prothrombin antibodies was substantial (10%) but not significantly different from that of control (5%). In the aPL+ group (n=62), lupus anticoagulant (LA) or anticardiolipin antibodies (aCL) positive, 61% were positive for anti-prothrombin antibodies with no statistical difference between aPT and aPS/PT prevalence (42% vs. 55%, respectively). In the whole thrombotic population, 19% were only aPT and 34% only aPS/PT suggesting the presence of different antibodies. Absorption experiments confirmed the heterogeneity of aPT and aPS/PT. No difference in their avidity was demonstrated. From the aPL+ group, 60 were LA positive. Among them, 18% were negative for abeta(2)GPI and anti-prothrombin antibodies showing that the detection of these antibodies could not substitute for LA determination. In conclusion, our data show that the screening of the different anti-prothrombin antibodies is not warranted in the aPL+ group since these antibodies do not provide additional information compared to aCL, LA and/or abeta2GPI measurement. Nevertheless, the substantial prevalence of anti-prothrombin antibodies in the aPL- group should be further explored in a large prospective study. | | Language | eng | | Pub Type(s) | Journal Article
| | PubMed ID | 17678713 |
|
