Damage measured by Damage Index for Antiphospholipid Syndrome (DIAPS) in antiphospholipid antibody-positive patients included in the APS ACTION registry

Balbi G. G. M., Ahmadzadeh Y., Tektonidou M. G., Pengo V., Sciascia S., Ugarte A., ...Daha Fazla

RHEUMATOLOGY, 2023 (SCI-Expanded) identifier identifier

  • Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
  • Basım Tarihi: 2023
  • Doi Numarası: 10.1093/rheumatology/kead292
  • Dergi Adı: RHEUMATOLOGY
  • Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus, Academic Search Premier, BIOSIS, CINAHL, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, MEDLINE
  • İstanbul Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet

Özet

Objectives Our primary objective was to quantify damage burden measured by Damage Index for Antiphospholipid Syndrome (DIAPS) in aPL-positive patients with or without a history of thrombosis in an international cohort (the APS ACTION cohort). Secondly, we aimed to identify clinical and laboratory characteristics associated with damage in aPL-positive patients. Methods In this cross-sectional study, we analysed the baseline damage in aPL-positive patients with or without APS classification. We excluded patients with other autoimmune diseases. We analysed the demographic, clinical and laboratory characteristics based on two subgroups: (i) thrombotic APS patients with high vs low damage; and (ii) non-thrombotic aPL-positive patients with vs without damage. Results Of the 826 aPL-positive patients included in the registry as of April 2020, 586 with no other systemic autoimmune diseases were included in the analysis (412 thrombotic and 174 non-thrombotic). In the thrombotic group, hyperlipidaemia (odds ratio [OR] 1.82; 95% CI 1.05, 3.15; adjusted P = 0.032), obesity (OR 2.14; 95% CI 1.23, 3.71; adjusted P = 0.007), a & beta;(2)GPI high titres (OR 2.33; 95% CI 1.36, 4.02; adjusted P = 0.002) and corticosteroid use (ever) (OR 3.73; 95% CI 1.80, 7.75; adjusted P < 0.001) were independently associated with high damage at baseline. In the non-thrombotic group, hypertension (OR 4.55; 95% CI 1.82, 11.35; adjusted P = 0.001) and hyperlipidaemia (OR 4.32; 95% CI 1.37, 13.65; adjusted P = 0.013) were independent predictors of damage at baseline; conversely, single aPL positivity was inversely correlated with damage (OR 0.24; 95% CI 0.075, 0.77; adjusted P = 0.016). Conclusions DIAPS indicates substantial damage in aPL-positive patients in the APS ACTION cohort. Selected traditional cardiovascular risk factors, steroids use and specific aPL profiles may help to identify patients more prone to present with a higher damage burden.