Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30159862›Full record

ArticleImmunologic research2018

What is the best time to assess the antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL) profile to better predict the obstetric outcome in antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) patients?

Jose Omar Latino, Sebastián Udry, Silvia Perés Wingeyer, Diego Fernández Romero, Paula Micone, Gabriela de Larrañaga

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Immunologic research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 30% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Positive antiphospholipid antibodies: observation or treatment?Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2023
    Review
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jose Omar LatinoAutoimmune, Thrombophilic Diseases and Pregnancy Section, Acute Hospital "Dr. Carlos G. Durand", Av. Díaz Vélez 5044, C1405AEN, City of Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Sebastián UdryAutoimmune, Thrombophilic Diseases and Pregnancy Section, Acute Hospital "Dr. Carlos G. Durand", Av. Díaz Vélez 5044, C1405AEN, City of Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Silvia Perés WingeyerHemostasis and Thrombosis Laboratory, Hospital of Infectious Diseases "Dr. Francisco J. Muñiz", Uspallata 2272, C1282AEN, City of Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Diego Fernández RomeroAutoimmune, Thrombophilic Diseases and Pregnancy Section, Acute Hospital "Dr. Carlos G. Durand", Av. Díaz Vélez 5044, C1405AEN, City of Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Paula MiconeAutoimmune, Thrombophilic Diseases and Pregnancy Section, Acute Hospital "Dr. Carlos G. Durand", Av. Díaz Vélez 5044, C1405AEN, City of Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Gabriela de LarrañagaHemostasis and Thrombosis Laboratory, Hospital of Infectious Diseases "Dr. Francisco J. Muñiz", Uspallata 2272, C1282AEN, City of Buenos Aires, Argentina. hemostasia@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-2527-7298
El Hospital General de Agudos Carlos G. Durand · ARHospital Muñiz · AR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Serological risk factors are the most important determinant in predicting unsuccessful pregnancy in obstetric antiphospholipid antibodies syndrome (OAPS) despite conventional treatment. It is not clear if changes in the profile of antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL) during pregnancy modify the risk associated with a poor response to conventional treatment. The aim of our study was to compare the value of a serological tag for aPL obtained before and during the first trimester of pregnancy to predict the response to conventional treatment. We carefully selected 97 pregnancies in women who were included in our study only if they were diagnosed with OAPS prior to a new pregnancy (basal serological risk), retested for aPL during the first trimester of pregnancy (serological risk during pregnancy), and treated with conventional therapy. High baseline serological risk was associated with pregnancy failure in 62.1% of cases (18/29) and predicted 82.5% of pregnancy outcomes with conventional treatment: OR = 16.9, CI = 5.5-52.1, p < 0.001. High serological risk during pregnancy was associated with pregnancy failure in 86.3% of cases (19/22) and predicted 91.8% of pregnancy outcomes with conventional treatment: OR = 88.7, CI = 19.4-404.8, p < 0.001. According to these results, we found that risk categorization performed during pregnancy was better in predicting pregnancy outcome (82.5 vs. 91.8%). Moreover, risk categorization during pregnancy had an increased specificity regarding the prediction: 84.9% at baseline and 95.9% during pregnancy (p = 0.024). Our findings suggest that it is important to perform aPL during the first trimester of pregnancy since that is the best time to establish the serological risk factors.

Indexed as

AdultAntibodies, AntiphospholipidAntiphospholipid SyndromeArgentinaBiomarkersFemaleHumansPredictive Value of TestsPregnancyPregnancy ComplicationsPregnancy OutcomePregnancy Trimester, FirstPrognosisRiskSensitivity and SpecificityAntibodies, AntiphospholipidBiomarkersHigh riskObstetric antiphospholipid syndromePregnancyPregnancy failureTriple positivity

Identifiers

PMID30159862
OpenAlexW2888994614

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.