Introduction
Antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) is an autoimmune systemic disease characterized by a hypercoagulable state secondary to the presence of antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL), a cluster of autoantibodies directed against plasma proteins that bound membranes phospholipids.1 In particular, the most frequently found types of aPL are lupus anticoagulant (LA), anticardiolipin antibodies (aCL, immunoglobulin G [IgG] and immunoglobulin M [IgM]), and anti–β2-glycoprotein I antibodies (anti-β2GPI, IgG and IgM).2,3 APS is clinically associated with vascular thromboses (venous, arterial, or small vessel) and / or pregnancy complications (recurrent embryonic or fetal loss, premature birth).2
The prevalence of APS is estimated at about 50/100 000 population,3 and can occur both in patients with underlying autoimmune disease,4 infections, malignancies, drugs5 (secondary APS) and in those without any concomitant clinical condition (primary APS).6
Diagnostic criteria for APS were firstly published in 1999 after a workshop in Sapporo, Japan,7 and updated in 2006 during an international consensus in Sydney, Australia (Table 1).8
Type | Description |
---|---|
Clinical criteria | |
Vascular thrombosis | ≥1 clinical episodes of venous, arterial or small vessel thrombosis, in any tissue or organ |
Pregnancy morbidity |
|
Laboratory criteria | |
Lupus anticoagulant | Present in plasma, on 2 or more occasions at least 12 weeks apart, detected according to the guidelines of the International Society on Thrombosis and Hemostasis8 |
Anticardiolipin antibody | IgG and / or IgM isotype in serum or plasma, present in medium or high titer (ie, 40 or more GPL or MPL, or greater than the 99th percentile), on 2 or more occasions, at least 12 weeks apart, measured by a standardized ELISA |
Anti–β2-glycoprotein-I antibody | IgG and / or IgM isotype in serum or plasma (in titer greater than the 99th percentile) present on 2 or more occasions, at least 12 weeks apart, measured by a standardized ELISA |
Abbreviations: ELISA, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay; GLP, IgG phospholipid; Ig, immunoglobulin; MPL, IgM phospholipid |
The diagnosis of APS is confirmed by the presence of at least 1 clinical criterion (thrombotic event or pregnancy complication) and at least 1 laboratory criterion (persistently medium / high titer IgG / IgM aCL, medium / high titer IgG / IgM anit-β2GPI, and / or a positive LA test, confirmed at least 12 weeks apart). Medium-titer aCL is defined as an antibody titer of 40 U/l or greater, and high-titer aCL, as greater than the 99th percentile.9,10
Epidemiological data clearly suggest that approximately 60% of thrombotic APS manifestations is represented by venous thrombosis. However, it is well established that also cardiovascular manifestations can occur in patients with APS, including acute coronary syndrome, stroke, transient ischemic attack (TIA), peripheral artery disease (PAD).11 Interestingly, an increasing number of studies shows an association between APS and atherosclerosis development, suggesting other potential underlying mechanisms besides the prothrombotic status.12,13
Furthermore, the aPL positivity found in asymptomatic “carriers” without clinical manifestations (thrombotic events or pregnancy complications) seems to predispose to thrombotic events as well as to subclinical and overt atherosclerosis development.12,13
In the present review, we will summarize literature data on cardiovascular manifestation, cardiovascular risk stratification and therapeutic approach in patients with APS.
Clinical manifestation in antiphospholipid syndrome: a look into cardiovascular disease and events
Although venous thromboembolism is the most frequent clinical manifestation in patients with APS, a non-negligible percentage of patients report arterial thrombotic events (acute coronary syndrome, stroke, TIA). Arterial thrombosis represents the presenting manifestation in 27% of patients, with the cerebral district being the most commonly involved. Indeed, as showed by data from “Euro-Phospholipid cohort” (including 1000 patients with APS), stroke has been reported by 13% of patients and TIA by 7% (Figure 1).11,12
More precisely, APS is recognized as a major cause of stroke and it has been estimated that up to 20% of all juvenile stroke events (before 45 years of age) are associated with APS.14,15 The clinical spectrum of cerebrovascular manifestation in APS varies considerably and ranges from TIA and focal lesions (amaurosis fugax, towed spread cerebral infarction, ataxia, bladder and gait disturbance) to multi-infarct dementia (Figure 1).11 Besides cerebrovascular manifestations, also cardiac events represent an important cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with APS. These comprise a wide spectrum of clinical manifestations and can include coronary and / or noncoronary complications. The most common presentation is represented by acute myocardial infarction (AMI), reported in 2.8% of APS patients (Figure 1).11,12 It is widely recognized that several autoimmune diseases, also including APS, are often associated with accelerated coronary atherosclerosis because of chronic inflammation.16 Interestingly, besides classical atherothrombotic mechanisms, also coronary embolism should be considered in AMI etiology in APS patients. Indeed, AMI often occurs in juvenile APS in the absence of significant epicardial coronary artery stenosis.17 Moreover, AMI in APS is often accompanied by a high percentage of postprocedural complications (coronary bypass rethrombosis and stent restenosis). This suggests that the follow-up of these patients should be very tight due to the persistence of a residual risk.12 In the context of extracoronary manifestations, ventricular dysfunction is also reported in APS patients. Left ventricular (LV) diastolic dysfunction is more common in primary APS, while systolic dysfunction is more frequent in APS associated with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE).12,18 The underlying mechanisms of ventricular dysfunction are still unclear but data from histological studies show the presence of microvascular thrombosis, intra-myocardial arteriolar immune deposits, disseminated thrombosis, with diffused micro-infarcts, and endomyocardial fibrosis. Furthermore, myocardial fibrosis seems to have a key role in LV diastolic dysfunction and could be related to the presence of concomitant cardiovascular risk factors.12,18 Overall, cardiac manifestations of APS are extremely variable and further examinations are needed to clarify their pathophysiological mechanisms.
The reasons for the different prevalence of cerebral and noncerebral APS manifestations are not fully understood and difficult to be identified. However, some potential pathophysiological mechanisms should be considered. First, coagulation homeostasis of the central nervous system differs from that of other organs. The brain endothelium expresses less thrombomodulin, known for binding thrombin in a 1:1 stoichiometric ratio and leading to subsequent activation of protein C (a natural anticoagulant). This implies an imbalance in the hemostatic homeostasis leading to a prothrombotic state. Moreover, some experimental data suggested that aPL may have specific antineuronal ties, determining a further potential damage.14
Overall, these data suggest that although venous thrombosis is the most frequently reported vascular manifestation in APS subjects, the burden of arterial thrombosis is not negligible and accurate primary and secondary cardiovascular prevention strategies are useful to avoid potentially disabling vascular events. Whereas indications for thrombophilia testing are better defined for venous thromboembolism, very limited evidence-based recommendations are available for arterial thrombotic events.19 However, considering that aPL positivity would have an impact on therapeutic regimen choice, we should consider to perform aPL screening in: 1) patients with arterial events and rheumatic / autoimmune comorbidity20; 2) young patients (<50 years) with arterial events in absence of documented risk factors21,22; 3) patients with cryptogenic stroke and myocardial infarction with nonobstructive coronary arteries.23
Atherosclerosis in patients with antiphospholipid syndrome
The assessment of atherosclerosis development and progression could be useful to stratify cardiovascular risk in patients with APS and mainly in aPL carriers.24-26
Several studies consistently showed a greater intima-media thickness (IMT) with an increased prevalence of carotid plaques in APS patients than in non-APS controls13 also accompanied by a 7-fold higher prevalence of symptomatic peripheral artery disease (20.5% vs 4.4%; see Figure 2).13 More precisely, patients with arterial APS exhibited a more severe atherosclerosis than those with venous thrombosis or recurrent miscarriage.27 In contrast, no difference in carotid atherosclerosis was documented in women with APS and recurrent miscarriage as compared with those without APS.28
Besides the IMT impairment, patients with APS consistently exhibit lower flow-mediated dilation, nitrate-mediated dilation, and higher pulse-wave velocity and augmentation index, suggesting the presence of endothelial dysfunction and arterial stiffness in this clinical setting.13,25,29,30
The next relevant manifestation of atherosclerosis in patients with APS is renal artery stenosis observed in about 26% of APS patients and frequently associated with hypertension, a well-known cardiovascular risk factor closely related with stroke and coronary events.31 Indeed, a recent study using ultrasonography for the diagnosis of renal stenosis showed elevated intrarenal vascular resistance in 14% of APS patients as compared with none of the aPL carriers.32,33
Extending these findings, a more recent case-control study showed that, besides APS patients, also aPL carriers without a history of thrombotic events have a greater common carotid artery IMT, bulb-IMT and prevalence of carotid plaques as compared with controls controls negative for aPL.34 This information strongly suggests that the pro-atherogenic effect of aPL is independent from the presence of a concomitant thrombotic event.
In addition, more severe atherosclerosis is observed in patients with high-titer antibodies or with multiple antibodies positivity.34 This is in line with the evidence of a higher thrombotic risk exhibited by patients with triple-aPL positivity and in those with high-titer aPL.35,36
Overall, this evidence from the literature strongly supports the hypothesis of a close association between aPL positivity and systemic atherosclerosis, also suggesting different underlying pathophysiological mechanisms. Several studies suggested an important role of β2GPI both in blood coagulation and in atherogenesis. Indeed, besides its role in primary and in secondary hemostasis,37 this protein can bind lipoprotein fractions, in particular products of lipid peroxidation, oxidized low-density lipoprotein (LDL) and lipoprotein a and some aPLs can bind complexes of β2GPI with either oxidated LDL or lipoprotein a.38
This is the key point of a complex interaction between oxidative modification of native LDL and chronic inflammation (proinflammatory and chemotactic cytokines) that leads to modification of arterial wall resulting in early-onset and faster progression of atherosclerosis.16 Further supporting this evidence, some recent data suggested that patients with anti-β2GPI antibodies show a greater IMT.27 Furthermore, the presence of anti-β2-GPI Ab specifically directed against domain I has lupus anticoagulant activity and is strongly associated with thrombosis, suggesting that carriers of this antibody subgroup represent a high-risk clinical setting.39 Thus, the identification of different antibody subclasses could be useful to better stratify thrombotic risk. Finally, recent data indicate that β2-GPI drives the inflammatory response of the T helper 1 cell and T helper 17 cell in atherosclerotic plaques of patients with primary APS and SLE-related APS.40,41
A longitudinal screening of atherosclerosis progression, accompanied by assessment of the presence of cardiometabolic risk factors, could represent an appropriate system to stratify cardiovascular risk in aPL carriers.
Thrombotic risk stratification in patients with antiphospholipid syndrome
Considering the relevant burden of cardiovascular events, atherosclerosis development and progression in APS patients and aPL carriers, it is necessary to stratify cardiovascular risk in these clinical settings.
To address this issue, a recent study investigated the ability of the adjusted Global Antiphospholipid Syndrome Score (aGAPSS), designed for the estimation of overall thrombotic complications in aPL carriers,42 to specifically predict cardiovascular disease.
The study, enrolling 83 consecutive young APS patients (≤50 years old) with arterial or venous thromboembolic events, showed significantly higher aGAPSS values in APS patients with AMI when compared with those with a history of other thrombotic events. Applying a further stratification, patients with acute coronary syndrome showed significantly higher aGAPSS values as compared with those with a history of peripheral or cerebrovascular arterial thrombotic events. Overall, these data suggest that aGAPSS might be a useful tool for AMI risk stratification in young patients with APS.43 Confirming and extending these results, a more recent study including 192 aPL carriers showed that an aGAPSS score greater than 10 was associated with an approximately 3-fold higher cardiovascular risk and predicted 63% of cardiovascular events. Moreover, when a modified scoring system was implemented, also including obesity, diabetes, and smoking habit (aGAPSSCVD), the cardiovascular event prediction power reached 71.4%. Although a validation of this tool is still needed, these findings underline the importance of the concomitant assessment of aPL positivity / profile along with cardiovascular risk factors for a more accurate cardiovascular risk stratification in aPL carriers.44 Such an approach could guide physicians to implement primary and secondary cardiovascular prevention strategies in aPL carriers including lifestyle changes (smoking cessation, physical activity), management of hypertension, dyslipidemia, and diabetes, particularly in high-risk aPL profile subjects.45
Regarding risk stratification of patients with APS, a further factor to consider is the evaluation of antibody isotypes. IgG and IgM isotypes of aPL could be associated with different subsets of events. In particular, IgG are mainly prevalent in subjects with venous thrombosis, whereas IgM are primarily found among patients with arterial events.46 However, this finding has been challenged by a recent study showing that 83% of patients with arterial events were positive for IgG aCL and 63% were positive for IgG anti-β2GPI antibodies.47 It is therefore clear that further ad hoc designed studies are needed to address this issue. Furthermore, patients positive for multiple antibodies exhibit a higher event rate than patients with single positivity.48
According to the recommendations of the 13th International Congress on Antiphospholipid Antibodies, patients should be classified as high risk and low risk. The high-risk group includes patients with multiple aPL positivity, or LAC positivity, or persistent aCL positivity with medium-high titer.20 In addition, the concomitant presence of autoimmune disease (ie, SLE or rheumatoid arthritis) always defines a high-risk profile.20 Besides confirming these criteria, the latest recommendations of the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) also included history of thrombotic events and the presence of traditional cardiovascular risk factors in the definition of high-risk profile.45
Antithrombotic therapy in patients with antiphospholipid syndrome and arterial events
After a thrombotic event, in the absence of an adequate antithrombotic treatment, the recurrence risk in APS patients is reported to be approximately 50% over a 5-year follow-up. Vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) still remain the mainstay treatment to prevent recurrent event in patients with APS.49-51 However, whereas there is an overall agreement on the indication to long-term moderate-intensity anticoagulation (international normalized ratio [INR] target, 2–3) for APS patients with venous thrombosis (1B recommendation),20,52 the therapeutic management of patients with a history of arterial events is more debated, still representing an open issue. Indeed, widely heterogeneous therapeutic options are suggested to manage APS patients with a history of arterial thrombosis: moderate or high-intensity anticoagulation, low-dose aspirin (LDA), other antiplatelet drug strategies, or combined treatments (Table 2).53
Drug | Therapy | Prophylaxis | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Pros | Cons | Pros | Cons | |
VKA (INR target, 2–3) | Efficacy proved in RCTs | Residual risk of recurrence especially in high-risk patients | No indication | |
Few data on arterial APS | ||||
VKA (INR target, 3–4) | ↑ protection from recurrence | ↑ INR fluctuations | No indication | |
Few data on arterial APS | ||||
LDA (75–100 mg) | LDA alone is not indicated as therapeutic option; ↓ efficacy than VKA; preliminary data on aspirin 325 mg | Indicated in high-risk patients; valuable in low-risk + cardiovascular risk factors | More evidence needed | |
LDA + VKA (INR target, 2–3) | ↑ efficacy than LDA; valuable in recurrent events despite adequate treatment | More evidence are needed | No indication; ↑ bleeding risk; efficacy = LDA alone | |
Data available mainly on stroke | ||||
DAPT | High efficacy | Only 1 study available | No indication | |
Abbreviations: APS, antiphospholipid syndrome; DAPT, dual antiplatelet treatment; ↓, decreased; ↑, increased; INR, international normalized ratio; LDA, low-dose aspirin; RCT, randomized clinical trial; SLE, systemic lupus erythematosus; VKA, vitamin K antagonist |
The latest EULAR recommendations for the management of APS, elaborated by a multidisciplinary task force, suggested treatment with moderate-intensity VKAs (INR target, 2–3) over treatment with LDA in patients with APS experiencing the first arterial thrombosis.45 However, the residual thrombotic recurrence risk seems to be not negligible, especially in high-risk settings.54,55 Thus, patients with recurrent thrombotic events despite adequate treatment, as well as those with a high-risk profile, could be treated with high-intensity VKA (INR target, 3–4) or with a moderate-intensity VKA+LDA combined therapy.20,45
However, high-intensity anticoagulation did not show significant difference in the rate of thrombotic events (risk ratio, 2.22; 95% CI, 0.79–6.23) as compared with moderate / standard intensity anticoagulation in patients with APS, stroke, and other arterial thrombosis.56 Furthermore, high-intensity anticoagulation regimen often leads to wider INR fluctuations, potentially leading to a higher bleeding risk.53 This suggests that this therapeutic option should be used cautiously in highly selected settings.
As to the use of LDA in APS-related stroke, a RCT comparing LDA to LDA plus moderate-intensity anticoagulation showed a higher rate of stroke recurrence in patients treated with LDA alone as compared with patients receiving the combination therapy. The incidence of hemorrhagic complications was similar in the 2 treatment arms, suggesting that the combination therapy might provide the best risk / benefit profile in the prevention of APS-related ischemic stroke recurrence.57
Although providing a good protection from thrombotic recurrence, the combination therapy should be limited to patients with clinically significant cardiovascular risk factors or to those reporting a failure of a single antithrombotic agent in preventing recurrence.58
A further attempt was made using high-dose aspirin in APS-related stroke in the Antiphospholipid Antibodies and Stroke Study (APASS). In this randomized clinical trial (RCT), aspirin in a dose of 325 mg was as effective as anticoagulation in the secondary prevention of APS-related stroke.59 However, since the patients included in the study had a low thrombotic risk profile, results of this trial should be interpreted with great caution and are only partly generalizable.
Data from a retrospective cohort study on 90 APS patients evaluating the efficacy of different therapeutic regimens for the prevention of recurrent arterial thrombosis showed that patients receiving anticoagulation alone experienced a thrombotic recurrence in 11.6% of cases. Interestingly, recurrence rate was 5.5% in LDA, 3.7% in LDA plus anticoagulation, and 1.8% among subjects receiving dual antiplatelet therapy. These results suggest that also dual antiplatelet therapy may be an effective approach for prevention of recurrent arterial thrombosis in high-risk patients with arterial APS.60
Overall, although other studies are needed to evaluate safety and efficacy of different anti-thrombotic therapies, currently available evidence suggests that standard-intensity anticoagulation alone could be considered a therapeutic option for long-term treatment of arterial thrombosis in low / moderate-risk patients with APS, whereas LDA plus moderate-intensity anticoagulation or dual antiplatelet therapy could be taken into account in high-risk patients or in those reporting failure of standard-intensity treatment.
Primary prevention strategies in carriers of antiphospholipid antibodies
Prophylactic therapies in aPL carriers without previous thrombotic events represent a clinical challenge because of the absence of strong evidence-based data. Thus, recommendations are mainly based on low-quality studies and expert opinions.45,61
Efficacy of antiplatelet drugs in primary prevention of aPL carriers is not consistently confirmed by available evidence. In the APLASA study, a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial evaluating 98 aPL carriers treated in primary prevention with LDA or placebo, no significant difference in the rate of thrombotic events was found between the 2 groups.62 In contrast, a meta-analysis of 11 studies (1208 aPL carriers) suggested that the risk of the first thrombotic event was significantly decreased by LDA. However, these results were no longer significant when only prospective studies or high-quality ones were considered.63
To clarify contrasting results, a patient-level meta-analysis including 5 clinical trials on a total of 497 patients was performed and showed 2 important findings: 1) no significant benefit of LDA as prevention strategy on the first thrombotic event in the overall aPL carriers population; 2) significant protective effect of LDA in aPL carriers with concomitant SLE.64
To investigate a potential role for combined therapy, the ALIWAPAS trial, a prospective, multicenter, randomized, open, controlled study compared LDA and LDA with a low-intensity VKA (INR target, 1.5) for primary prevention in aPL carriers and showed no difference in the number of thrombotic events between the 2 treatment arms. In contrast, a higher number of bleeding episodes was reported in the LDA with a low-intensity VKA group, suggesting that this treatment option was significantly less safe, without any efficacy advantage over LDA alone in primary prevention settings.65 Similar results were also confirmed by a recent Cochrane review, showing that LDA was associated with a similar thrombosis risk as compared with VKA with or without LDA. However, minor bleeding risk (nasal bleeding, menorrhagia) was higher in subjects receiving VKA + LDA.66
Accordingly, the recommendation from the 13th International Congress on Antiphospholipid Antibodies, in line with the latest EULAR recommendations, suggested prophylaxis with LDA (75–100 mg daily) in asymptomatic aPL carriers with a high-risk profile and in aPL subjects with concomitant SLE, regardless the presence of traditional cardiovascular risk factors (grade 2B recommendation).20,45
In addition, EULAR recommendations suggested that prophylaxis with LDA can be considered in aPL carriers without cardiovascular symptoms with low-risk profile, especially in the presence of traditional cardiovascular risk factors (grade 2C recommendation).45
Potential therapeutic approaches in antiphospholipid syndrome treatment
Non–vitamin K oral antagonists
The introduction of non–vitamin K oral antagonists (NOACs) in clinical practice changed therapeutic management of several thrombotic diseases. The use of NOACs to treat patients with APS is still controversial. Post hoc analyses from RCTs comparing dabigatran and VKA in patients with thrombophilia or APS showed similar rates of recurrent thrombosis and major bleeding.67,68 On the other hand, 3 RCTs failed to demonstrate the noninferiority of rivaroxaban as compared with VKA in prevention of thrombotic events recurrence.69-71 A relevant clinical message can be derived from the TRAPS trial comparing rivaroxaban with VKA in high-risk triple-positive patients with APS.70 Although no episode of venous thromboembolism was recorded in rivaroxaban and VKA arms, the trial was prematurely stopped due to an excessive number of arterial events in the rivaroxaban arm. Indeed, ischemic stroke occurred in 7% and myocardial infarction in 5% of subjects receiving rivaroxaban, whereas no arterial thrombotic events were reported in the VKA arm (Table 3).70
Study | Year | Study design | Events | Conclusions |
---|---|---|---|---|
Ordi-Ros et al69 | 2019 | Rivaroxaban 20 mg vs VKA (INR, 2–3); noninferiority | Rivaroxaban, 11.6%; VKA, 6% | Rivaroxaban did not reach noninferiority criteria to dose-adjusted VKAs for thrombotic APS |
Pengo et al70 | 2018 | Rivaroxaban 20 mg vs VKA in high-risk APS (TRAPS) | Rivaroxaban, 7% (IS), 5% (MI); VKA, 0 | The trial was stopped due to an excessive number of arterial events in the rivaroxaban arm |
Cohen et al71 | 2017 | Rivaroxaban 20 mg vs VKA (INR 2–3) to treat patients with APS, with or without SLE (RAPS) | Rivaroxaban, 0; VKA, 0; ETP was higher in the rivaroxaban than in the VKA group | ETP for rivaroxaban did not reach the noninferiority threshold. No increase in thrombotic risk compared with a standard-intensity VKA |
Goldhaber et al68 | 2016 | Dabigatran 150 mg twice daily vs VKA (INR, 2–3); post hoc analyses of RE-COVER I, RE-COVER II, and RE-MEDY | Dabigatran, 4.2%; VKA, 5% | Efficacy and safety of dabigatran were not significantly affected by the presence of thrombophilia or APS |
Abbreviations: ETP, endogenous thrombin potential; IS, ischemic stroke; MI, myocardial infarction; VTE, venous thromboembolism; others, see Tables 1 and 2 |
In line with these data, a patient-level meta-analysis including 47 studies with a total of 447 APS patients treated with NOACs (apixaban, rivaroxaban, dabigatran) showed that patients treated with anti-Xa inhibitors (apixaban and rivaroxaban), a history of arterial thrombosis, and triple aPL positivity were associated with an increased risk of recurrent thrombosis.72
However, further data specifically focused on the use of NOACs in arterial APS subjects, considering that different risk profiles could be useful to identify a specific APS patient subset who could potentially benefit from this therapeutic option.
Based on these data, in May 2019, the European Medicines Agency recommended that NOACs should not be used for secondary prevention in patients with APS.73 Consistent recommendations are provided by the EULAR guidelines suggesting that NOACs should not be used in patients with APS and arterial events.45 However, NOACs could be considered in patients not able to achieve an adequate INR target despite good adherence to VKAs or in those with contraindications to VKAs (eg, allergy or intolerance to VKAs).45 In these cases, a cautious selection of patients, a stratification of thrombotic risk profile, and a strict clinical follow-up should be planned.
Statins
Since oxidated LDL is involved in the pathophysiological mechanism of atherosclerosis and hyperlipidemia is one of the factors considered for cardiovascular risk stratification, a potential role for statins in the primary prevention of arterial events in patient with APS should be considered. Apart from the lipid lowering effect of statins, other potential pleiotropic effects, with particular regard to the anti-inflammatory and antithrombotic ones, are supported by in vitro and ex vivo studies.15,53
Data from in vitro studies showed that statins inhibit the synthesis of tissue factor in endothelial cells (ECs), suppress endothelial adhesiveness induced by anti-β2GPI antibodies, reduce the adhesion of monocytes to the vascular endothelium and prevent aPL-induced vascular cell adhesion molecule up-regulation. Moreover, the use of fluvastatin in patients with APS seems to block IgG-mediated reactivation of factor Xa involved in the calcium flux in endothelial cells and related signaling pathways.74
In line with these pathophysiological data, a trial on 42 patients with APS showed that a 30-day therapy with fluvastatin decreased monocyte expression of several thrombogenic and inflammatory mediators.75 Moreover, a significant reduction of proinflammatory and procoagulant parameters was reported after a 3-month treatment with fluvastatin in 41 aPL asymptomatic carriers.75
Hydroxychloroquine and other immunomodulatory treatments
Hydroxychloroquine is a disease-modifying antirheumatic drug with not only anti-inflammatory but also cardioprotective features.76 A retrospective, propensity score-matched cohort study, showed a significant reduction in aPL titer associated with a reduction in the incidence of arterial thrombotic events in patients with APS.77 Moreover, a recent prospective study confirmed the ability of hydroxychloroquine in reducing aPL levels and showed a significant effect on thrombosis prevention.78
While there are conflicting data on the effect of the anti-CD20 rituximab in terms of aPL reduction and thrombosis prevention,79,80 a potential role of the B-lymphocyte stimulator, belimumab, in APS has recently been proposed.81 Indeed, data on small case series82,83 and a post hoc analysis of a large RCT84 suggested that belimumab reduces aPL levels in patients with SLE. However, prospective ad hoc studies are needed to confirm these preliminary data.
More recently, the involvement of the mammalian target of rapamycin pathway in APS-related vascular lesions has been suggested by in vitro and in vivo studies.85,86 This could represent a further molecular target to prevent thrombotic events in patients with APS.
Conclusions and take-home messages
Cardiovascular disease and atherosclerosis are important clinical manifestation in APS. Although cerebrovascular events are the most commonly reported arterial manifestation in patients with APS, cardiac manifestations are reported in a non-negligible percentage of cases. Patients with APS and aPL carriers have an enhanced atherosclerosis burden and it is crucial to stratify cardiovascular risk as high-risk or low-risk profile, considering both immunological features and traditional cardiovascular risk factors. The lack of consensus on treatment strategies still represents an open issue, mainly in primary prevention settings.
Primary and secondary cardiovascular prevention strategies should include lifestyle changes and specific treatment of cardiovascular risk factors. In addition, primary prophylaxis with LDA is indicated in asymptomatic aPL carriers with a high-risk profile or with concomitant SLE. LDA could be also considered case-by-case in low-risk profile aPL carriers with concomitant traditional cardiovascular risk factors.
The secondary prevention approach in APS patients experiencing the first arterial thrombotic event is based on VKA treatment (INR target, 2–3). In case of recurrent events despite adequate treatment, high-intensity VKA (INR target, 3–4) or combined VKA + LDA therapy should be considered. The use of NOACs is not recommended in patients with arterial APS due to the high risk of recurrent thrombosis.
Some promising results are derived by studies on hydroxychloroquine, rituximab, belimumab, inhibitors of the mammalian target of rapamycin pathway, and statins in recurrent arterial thrombotic events prevention in aPL carriers and APS patients.
Overall, high quality clinical trials are needed to identify and validate therapeutic options effective and safe in reducing arterial thrombotic events in aPL carriers and APS subjects.
Matteo N. D. Di Minno, MD, PhD, Department of Translational Medical Sciences, Federico II University, Via S. Pansini 5, 80 131 Naples, Italy, phone: +39 0817464323, email: dario.diminno@hotmail.it
April 29, 2020.
May 21, 2020.
June 3, 2020.
None declared.
Calcaterra I, Tufano A, Lupoli R, et al. Cardiovascular disease and antiphospholipid syndrome: how to predict and how to treat? Pol Arch Intern Med. 2021: 131: 161-170. doi:10.20452/pamw.15415
- 1.
- Arachchillage DRJ, Laffan M. Pathogenesis and management of antiphospholipid syndrome. Br J Haematol. 2017; 178: 181-195.Crossref
- 2.
- George D, Erkan D. Antiphospholipid syndrome. Prog Cardiovasc Dis. 2009; 52: 115-125.Crossref
- 3.
- Duarte-Garcia A, Pham MM, Crowson CS, et al. The epidemiology of antiphospholipid syndrome: a population-based study. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2019; 71: 1545-1552.Crossref
- 4.
- Giron-Gonzalez JA, Garcia del Rio E, Rodriguez C, et al. Antiphospholipid syndrome and asymptomatic carriers of antiphospholipid antibody: prospective analysis of 404 individuals. J Rheumatol. 2004; 31: 1560-1567.
- 5.
- Gomez-Puerta JA, Cervera R. Diagnosis and classification of the antiphospholipid syndrome. J Autoimmun. 2014; 48-49: 20-25.Crossref
- 6.
- Belizna CC, Richard V, Primard E, et al. Early atheroma in primary and secondary antiphospholipid syndrome: an intrinsic finding. Semin Arthritis Rheum. 2008; 37: 373-380.Crossref
- 7.
- Wilson WA, Gharavi AE, Koike T, et al. International consensus statement on preliminary classification criteria for definite antiphospholipid syndrome: report of an international workshop. Arthritis Rheum. 1999; 42: 1309-1311.Crossref
- 8.
- Miyakis S, Lockshin MD, Atsumi T, et al. International consensus statement on an update of the classification criteria for definite antiphospholipid syndrome (APS). J Thromb Haemost. 2006; 4: 295-306.Crossref
- 9.
- Pengo V, Bison E, Denas G, et al. Laboratory diagnostics of antiphospholipid syndrome. Semin Thromb Hemost. 2018; 44: 439-444.Crossref
- 10.
- Devreese KM, Pierangeli SS, de Laat B, et al. Testing for antiphospholipid antibodies with solid phase assays: guidance from the SSC of the ISTH. J Thromb Haemost. 2014; 12: 792-795.Crossref
- 11.
- Cervera R, Piette JC, Font J, et al. Antiphospholipid syndrome: clinical and immunologic manifestations and patterns of disease expression in a cohort of 1,000 patients. Arthritis Rheum. 2002; 46: 1019-1027.Crossref
- 12.
- Tufano A, Di Minno MND, Guida A, et al. Cardiac manifestations of antiphospholipid syndrome: clinical presentation, role of cardiac imaging, and treatment strategies. Semin Thromb Hemost. 2019; 45: 468-477.Crossref
- 13.
- Ambrosino P, Lupoli R, Di Minno A, et al. Markers of cardiovascular risk in patients with antiphospholipid syndrome: a meta-analysis of literature studies. Ann Med. 2014; 46: 693-702.Crossref
- 14.
- Hughes GR. Migraine, memory loss, and “multiple sclerosis”. Neurological features of the antiphospholipid (Hughes’) syndrome. Postgrad Med J. 2003; 79: 81-83.Crossref
- 15.
- Fleetwood T, Cantello R, Comi C. Antiphospholipid syndrome and the neurologist: from pathogenesis to therapy. Front Neurol. 2018; 9: 1001.Crossref
- 16.
- Di Minno MN, Iervolino S, Lupoli R, et al. Cardiovascular risk in rheumatic patients: the link between inflammation and atherothrombosis. Semin Thromb Hemost. 2012; 38: 497-505.Crossref
- 17.
- Popovic B, Agrinier N, Bouchahda N, et al. Coronary Embolism Among ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Patients: Mechanisms and Management. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2018; 11: e005 587.Crossref
- 18.
- Tufano A, Lembo M, Di Minno MN, et al. Left ventricular diastolic abnormalities other than valvular heart disease in antiphospholipid syndrome: an echocardiographic study. Int J Cardiol. 2018; 271: 366-370.Crossref
- 19.
- Stevens SM, Woller SC, Bauer KA, et al. Guidance for the evaluation and treatment of hereditary and acquired thrombophilia. J Thromb Thrombolysis. 2016; 41: 154-164.Crossref
- 20.
- Ruiz-Irastorza G, Cuadrado MJ, Ruiz-Arruza I, et al. Evidence-based recommendations for the prevention and long-term management of thrombosis in antiphospholipid antibody-positive patients: report of a task force at the 13th International Congress on antiphospholipid antibodies. Lupus. 2011; 20: 206-218.Crossref
- 21.
- Dragoni F, Chiarotti F, Rosano G, et al. Thrombophilic screening in young patients (<40 years) with idiopathic ischemic stroke: a controlled study. Thromb Res. 2011; 127: 85-90.Crossref
- 22.
- Tanis B, Algra A, van der Graaf Y, et al. Procoagulant factors and the risk of myocardial infarction in young women. Eur J Haematol. 2006; 77: 67-73.Crossref
- 23.
- Stepien K, Nowak K, Wypasek E, et al. High prevalence of inherited thrombophilia and antiphospholipid syndrome in myocardial infarction with non-obstructive coronary arteries: Comparison with cryptogenic stroke. Int J Cardiol. 2019; 290: 1-6.Crossref
- 24.
- Bots ML, Grobbee DE. Intima media thickness as a surrogate marker for generalised atherosclerosis. Cardiovasc Drugs Ther. 2002; 16: 341-351.Crossref
- 25.
- de Groot E, Hovingh GK, Wiegman A, et al. Measurement of arterial wall thickness as a surrogate marker for atherosclerosis. Circulation. 2004; 109: III33-38.Crossref
- 26.
- Ras RT, Streppel MT, Draijer R, et al. Flow-mediated dilation and cardiovascular risk prediction: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Int J Cardiol. 2013; 168: 344-351.Crossref
- 27.
- Di Minno MND, Emmi G, Ambrosino P, et al. Impact of cardiovascular and immunologic variables on subclinical carotid atherosclerosis in subjects with anti-phospholipid antibodies. Data Brief. 2018; 19: 1799-1803.Crossref
- 28.
- Bettiol A EG, Giacomo E, Finocchi M, et al. Obstetric antiphospholipid syndrome is not associated with an increased risk of subclinical atherosclerosis. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2020; 59: 3709-3716.Crossref
- 29.
- Calabia J, Torguet P, Garcia M, et al. Doppler ultrasound in the measurement of pulse wave velocity: agreement with the Complior method. Cardiovasc Ultrasound. 2011; 9: 13.Crossref
- 30.
- Daiber A, Steven S, Weber A, et al. Targeting vascular (endothelial) dysfunction. Br J Pharmacol. 2017; 174: 1591-1619.Crossref
- 31.
- Sangle SR, D’Cruz DP, Jan W, et al. Renal artery stenosis in the antiphospholipid (Hughes) syndrome and hypertension. Ann Rheum Dis. 2003; 62: 999-1002.Crossref
- 32.
- Conti F, Ceccarelli F, Gigante A, et al. Ultrasonographic evaluation of resistive index and renal artery stenosis in patients with anti-phospholipid syndrome: two distinct mechanisms? Ultrasound Med Biol. 2015; 41: 1814-1820.Crossref
- 33.
- Tektonidou MG. Antiphospholipid syndrome nephropathy: from pathogenesis to treatment. Front Immunol. 2018; 9: 1181.Crossref
- 34.
- Di Minno MND, Emmi G, Ambrosino P, et al. Subclinical atherosclerosis in asymptomatic carriers of persistent antiphospholipid antibodies positivity: a cross-sectional study. Int J Cardiol. 2019; 274: 1-6.Crossref
- 35.
- Pengo V, Biasiolo A, Pegoraro C, et al. Antibody profiles for the diagnosis of antiphospholipid syndrome. Thromb Haemost. 2005; 93: 1147-1152.Crossref
- 36.
- Ruffatti A, Olivieri S, Tonello M, et al. Influence of different IgG anticardiolipin antibody cut-off values on antiphospholipid syndrome classification. J Thromb Haemost. 2008; 6: 1693-1696.Crossref
- 37.
- Matsuura E, Shen L, Matsunami Y, et al. Pathophysiology of beta2-glycoprotein I in antiphospholipid syndrome. Lupus. 2010; 19: 379-384.Crossref
- 38.
- Missala I, Kassner U, Steinhagen-Thiessen E. A systematic literature review of the association of lipoprotein(a) and autoimmune diseases and atherosclerosis. Int J Rheumatol. 2012; 2012: 480784.Crossref
- 39.
- de Laat B, Derksen RH, Urbanus RT, et al. IgG antibodies that recognize epitope Gly40-Arg43 in domain I of beta 2-glycoprotein I cause LAC, and their presence correlates strongly with thrombosis. Blood. 2005; 105: 1540-1545.Crossref
- 40.
- Benagiano M, Gerosa M, Romagnoli J, et al. beta2 Glycoprotein I Recognition Drives Th1 Inflammation in Atherosclerotic Plaques of Patients with Primary Antiphospholipid Syndrome. J Immunol. 2017; 198: 2640-2648.Crossref
- 41.
- Benagiano M, Borghi MO, Romagnoli J, et al. Interleukin-17/Interleukin-21 and Interferon-gamma producing T cells specific for beta2 Glycoprotein I in atherosclerosis inflammation of systemic lupus erythematosus patients with antiphospholipid syndrome. Haematologica. 2019; 104: 2519-2527.Crossref
- 42.
- Sciascia S, Sanna G, Murru V, et al. GAPSS: the Global Anti-Phospholipid Syndrome Score. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2013; 52: 1397-1403.Crossref
- 43.
- Radin M, Schreiber K, Costanzo P, et al. The adjusted Global AntiphosPholipid Syndrome Score (aGAPSS) for risk stratification in young APS patients with acute myocardial infarction. Int J Cardiol. 2017; 240: 72-77.Crossref
- 44.
- Di Minno MND, Scalera A, Tufano A, et al. The association of adjusted Global AntiphosPholipid Syndrome Score (aGAPSS) with cardiovascular disease in subjects with antiphospholipid antibodies. Atherosclerosis. 2018; 278: 60-65.Crossref
- 45.
- Tektonidou MG, Andreoli L, Limper M, et al. EULAR recommendations for the management of antiphospholipid syndrome in adults. Ann Rheum Dis. 2019; 78: 1296-1304.
- 46.
- Locht H, Wiik A. IgG and IgM isotypes of anti-cardiolipin and anti-beta2-glycoprotein i antibodies reflect different forms of recent thrombo-embolic events. Clin Rheumatol. 2006; 25: 246-250.Crossref
- 47.
- Zigon P, Cucnik S, Ambrozic A, et al. Detection of antiphosphatidylserine/prothrombin antibodies and their potential diagnostic value. Clin Dev Immunol. 2013; 2013: 724592.Crossref
- 48.
- Tarr T, Lakos G, Bhattoa HP, et al. Analysis of risk factors for the development of thrombotic complications in antiphospholipid antibody positive lupus patients. Lupus. 2007; 16: 39-45.Crossref
- 49.
- Long AA, Ginsberg JS, Brill-Edwards P, et al. The relationship of antiphospholipid antibodies to thromboembolic disease in systemic lupus erythematosus: a cross-sectional study. Thromb Haemost. 1991; 66: 520-524.Crossref
- 50.
- Rosove MH, Tabsh K, Wasserstrum N, et al. Heparin therapy for pregnant women with lupus anticoagulant or anticardiolipin antibodies. Obstet Gynecol. 1990; 75: 630-634.
- 51.
- Khamashta MA, Cuadrado MJ, Mujic F, et al. The management of thrombosis in the antiphospholipid-antibody syndrome. N Eng J Med. 1995; 332: 993-997.Crossref
- 52.
- Kearon C, Akl EA, Ornelas J, et al. Antithrombotic Therapy for VTE Disease: CHEST Guideline and Expert Panel Report. Chest. 2016; 149: 315-352.Crossref
- 53.
- Chighizola CB, Raimondo MG, Meroni PL. Management of Thrombotic Antiphospholipid Syndrome. Semin Thromb Hemost. 2018; 44: 419-426.Crossref
- 54.
- Pengo V, Ruffatti A, Legnani C, et al. Clinical course of high-risk patients diagnosed with antiphospholipid syndrome. J Thromb Haemost. 2010; 8: 237-242.Crossref
- 55.
- Crowther MA, Ginsberg JS, Julian J, et al. A comparison of two intensities of warfarin for the prevention of recurrent thrombosis in patients with the antiphospholipid antibody syndrome. N Eng J Med. 2003; 349: 1133-1138.Crossref
- 56.
- Bala MM, Celinska-Lowenhoff M, Szot W, et al. Antiplatelet and anticoagulant agents for secondary prevention of stroke and other thromboembolic events in people with antiphospholipid syndrome. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017; 10: CD012169.Crossref
- 57.
- Okuma H, Kitagawa Y, Yasuda T, et al. Comparison between single antiplatelet therapy and combination of antiplatelet and anticoagulation therapy for secondary prevention in ischemic stroke patients with antiphospholipid syndrome. Int J Med Sci. 2009; 7: 15-18.Crossref
- 58.
- Garcia D, Erkan D. Diagnosis and Management of the Antiphospholipid Syndrome. N Eng J Med. 2018; 379: 1290.Crossref
- 59.
- Levine SR, Brey RL, Tilley BC, et al. Antiphospholipid antibodies and subsequent thrombo-occlusive events in patients with ischemic stroke. JAMA. 2004; 291: 576-584.Crossref
- 60.
- Ohnishi N, Fujieda Y, Hisada R, et al. Efficacy of dual antiplatelet therapy for preventing recurrence of arterial thrombosis in patients with antiphospholipid syndrome. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2019; 58: 969-974.Crossref
- 61.
- Galli M. Treatment of the antiphospholipid syndrome. Auto Immun Highlights. 2013; 5: 1-7.Crossref
- 62.
- Erkan D, Harrison MJ, Levy R, et al. Aspirin for primary thrombosis prevention in the antiphospholipid syndrome: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in asymptomatic antiphospholipid antibody-positive individuals. Arthritis Rheum. 2007; 56: 2382-2391.Crossref
- 63.
- Arnaud L, Mathian A, Ruffatti A, et al. Efficacy of aspirin for the primary prevention of thrombosis in patients with antiphospholipid antibodies: an international and collaborative meta-analysis. Autoimmun Rev. 2014; 13: 281-291.Crossref
- 64.
- Arnaud L, Mathian A, Devilliers H, et al. Patient-level analysis of five international cohorts further confirms the efficacy of aspirin for the primary prevention of thrombosis in patients with antiphospholipid antibodies. Autoimmun Rev. 2015; 14: 192-200.Crossref
- 65.
- Cuadrado MJ, Bertolaccini ML, Seed PT, et al. Low-dose aspirin vs low-dose aspirin plus low-intensity warfarin in thromboprophylaxis: a prospective, multicentre, randomized, open, controlled trial in patients positive for antiphospholipid antibodies (ALIWAPAS). Rheumatology (Oxford). 2014; 53: 275-284.Crossref
- 66.
- Bala MM, Paszek E, Lesniak W, et al. Antiplatelet and anticoagulant agents for primary prevention of thrombosis in individuals with antiphospholipid antibodies. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018; 7: CD012534.Crossref
- 67.
- Tektonidou MG, Andreoli L, Limper M, et al. Management of thrombotic and obstetric antiphospholipid syndrome: a systematic literature review informing the EULAR recommendations for the management of antiphospholipid syndrome in adults. RMD Open. 2019; 5: e000 924.Crossref
- 68.
- Goldhaber SZ, Eriksson H, Kakkar A, et al. Efficacy of dabigatran versus warfarin in patients with acute venous thromboembolism in the presence of thrombophilia: Findings from RE-COVER(R), RE-COVER II, and RE-MEDY. Vasc Med. 2016; 21: 506-514.Crossref
- 69.
- Ordi-Ros J, Saez-Comet L, Perez-Conesa M, et al. Rivaroxaban versus vitamin K antagonist in antiphospholipid syndrome: a randomized noninferiority trial. Ann Intern Med. 2019; 171: 685-694.Crossref
- 70.
- Pengo V, Denas G, Zoppellaro G, et al. Rivaroxaban vs warfarin in high-risk patients with antiphospholipid syndrome. Blood. 2018; 132: 1365-1371.Crossref
- 71.
- Cohen H, Hunt BJ, Efthymiou M, et al. Rivaroxaban versus warfarin to treat patients with thrombotic antiphospholipid syndrome, with or without systemic lupus erythematosus (RAPS): a randomised, controlled, open-label, phase 2/3, non-inferiority trial. Lancet Haematol. 2016; 3: e426-436.Crossref
- 72.
- Dufrost V, Risse J, Reshetnyak T, et al. Increased risk of thrombosis in antiphospholipid syndrome patients treated with direct oral anticoagulants. Results from an international patient-level data meta-analysis. Autoimmun Rev. 2018; 17: 1011-1021.Crossref
- 73.
- Arachchillage DRJ, Gomez K, Alikhan R, et al. Addendum to British Society for Haematology Guidelines on Investigation and Management of Antiphospholipid syndrome, 2012 (Br. J. Haematol. 2012; 157: 47-58): use of direct acting oral anticoagulants. Br J Haematol. 2020; 189: 212-215.Crossref
- 74.
- Artim-Esen B, Smoktunowicz N, McDonnell T, et al. Factor Xa mediates calcium flux in endothelial cells and is potentiated by Igg from patients with lupus and/or antiphospholipid syndrome. Sci Rep. 2017; 7: 10788.Crossref
- 75.
- Andrade D, Tektonidou M. Emerging Therapies in Antiphospholipid Syndrome. Curr Rheumatol Rep. 2016; 18: 22.Crossref
- 76.
- Liu D, Li X, Zhang Y, et al. Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine are associated with reduced cardiovascular risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Drug Des Devel Ther. 2018; 12: 1685-1695.Crossref
- 77.
- Nuri E, Taraborelli M, Andreoli L, et al. Long-term use of hydroxychloroquine reduces antiphospholipid antibodies levels in patients with primary antiphospholipid syndrome. Immunol Res. 2017; 65: 17-24.Crossref
- 78.
- Kravvariti E, Koutsogianni A, Samoli E, et al. The effect of hydroxychloroquine on thrombosis prevention and antiphospholipid antibody levels in primary antiphospholipid syndrome: a pilot open label randomized prospective study. Autoimmun Rev. 2020; 19: 102491.Crossref
- 79.
- Emmi G, Urban ML, Scalera A, et al. Repeated low-dose courses of rituximab in SLE-associated antiphospholipid syndrome: data from a tertiary dedicated centre. Semin Arthritis Rheum. 2017; 46: e21-e23.Crossref
- 80.
- Wang CR, Liu MF. Rituximab usage in systemic lupus erythematosus-associated antiphospholipid syndrome: A single-center experience. Semin Arthritis Rheum. 2016; 46: 102-108.Crossref
- 81.
- Yazici A, Yazirli B, Erkan D. Belimumab in primary antiphospholipid syndrome. Lupus. 2017; 26: 1123-1124.Crossref
- 82.
- Sciascia S, Rubini E, Radin M, et al. Anticardiolipin and anti-beta 2 glycoprotein-I antibodies disappearance in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus and antiphospholipid syndrome while on belimumab. Ann Rheum Dis. 2018; 77: 1694-1695.Crossref
- 83.
- Emmi G, Bettiol A, Palterer B, et al. Belimumab reduces antiphospholipid antibodies in SLE patients independently of hydroxychloroquine treatment. Autoimmun Rev. 2019; 18: 312-314.Crossref
- 84.
- Chatzidionysiou K, Samoli E, Sfikakis PP, et al. Effect of belimumab treatment on antiphospholipid antibody levels: post-hoc analysis based on two randomised placebo-controlled trials in systemic lupus erythematosus. Ann Rheum Dis. 2020; 79: 304-307.Crossref
- 85.
- Canaud G, Bienaime F, Tabarin F, et al. Inhibition of the mTORC pathway in the antiphospholipid syndrome. N Eng J Med. 2014; 371: 303-312.Crossref
- 86.
- Hollerbach A, Muller-Calleja N, Ritter S, et al. Platelet Activation by Antiphospholipid Antibodies Depends on Epitope Specificity and is Prevented by mTOR Inhibitors. Thromb Haemost. 2019; 119: 1147-1153.Crossref