Antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) is a hypercoagulation condition associated with the incidence of heterogenic antiphospholipid antibodies (aPLs), which non-specifically affect hemostasis processes. APS is clinically manifested by recurrent arterial and venous thromboses and reproduction losses. The aPL antibodies, which may induce clinical manifestations of APS, include criteria antibodies anti-cardiolipin, anti-β2-glycoprotein-I, and lupus anticoagulant, but also non-criteria antibodies, for example anti-β2-glycoprotein-I domain I, anti-phosphatidylserine/prothrombin, anti-annexin V, and many others. APS occurs mostly in patients of younger and middle age, most frequently in females. Laboratory diagnostics of APS are quite difficult, as they include a wide spectrum of examining methods, which are based on various principles of detection and are performed using various laboratory techniques. The objective of the review is to describe the current state of potentially examined biomarkers and methods in APS diagnostics. The aforementioned biomarkers are lupus anticoagulant, anti-β2-glycoprotein-I, anti-cardiolipin, anti-β2-glycoprotein-I domain I, anti-phosphatidylserine/prothrombin, anti-β2-glycoprotein-I IgA, anti-cardiolipin IgA, anti-annexin V and II, anti-prothrombin, anti-cardiolipin/vimentin, anti-protein S/protein C, and antibodies against phospholipid antigens for whose diagnostics we may use some of the methods established for a long time and some of the modern methods—the coagulation method for the determination of lupus anticoagulant (LA), enzyme-linked imunosorbent assay (ELISA), chemiluminescence analysis (CLIA), multiplex fluorescence flow immunoassay (MFFIA), fluorescence enzyme immunoassay (EliA), line immunoassay (LIA), multiline dot assay (MLDA), and thin-layer chromatography (TLC). Conclusion: Antibodies against phosphatidylethanolamine, phosphatidic acid, phosphatidylserine, phosphatidylinositol, cardiolipin/vimentin complex, and annexin V are currently the most studied new markers. However, these assays have not been standardized until now, both from the laboratory and clinical point of view. In this review we summarize the evidence of the most studied aPL markers and their potential clinical significance in seronegative APS (SN-APS).

No abstract

Background: The effect of direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) on laboratory tests dependent on the production of their targets, factor IIa and factor Xa, is a well-known problem and can cause both false positive and negative results. In particular, the situation in patients who develop lupus anticoagulant (LA) antibodies is highly complex. To evaluate the effectiveness of DOAC therapy in lupus-positive patients, 31 samples were enrolled in this retrospective study. All patient samples were spiked with three types of DOAC (dabigatran, DABI; rivaroxaban, RIVA; and apixaban, API) in a concentration that significantly influenced the screening test for LA and thus can mask the presence of LA. Subsequently, the DOAC was always unbound by the DOAC-Stop procedure. DOAC levels before and after binding were determined by functional assays, followed by liquid chromatography coupled with mass spectrometry (LC-MS) analysis. Methods: The determination of DOAC levels was performed by direct thrombin assay and determination of anti-Xa activity with specific calibration as functional tests for DABI and xabans (API and RIVA). To determine concentration levels of API, DABI, and RIVA, our in-house LC-MS method was used. Results: The results of LA-positive samples show significant differences between functional tests and the LC-MS method both before and after DOAC binding. Conclusions: The acute findings of the presence of LA-type antibodies fundamentally affects the determination of DOAC by functional tests, and in this case, it is necessary to use LC-MS analysis to determine the true value. If patients treated with DOAC develop LA of medium and higher titers, we do not recommend checking DOAC levels with functional tests.