Detection of non‐criteria autoantibodies in women without apparent causes for pregnancy loss

Abstract

Background Some of the non‐criteria autoantibodies, especially non‐conventional antiphospholipid (aPL) antibodies, were present with high prevalence in sporadic miscarriages and recurrent pregnant loss. However, whether these autoantibodies are associated with miscarriage patients without apparent causes remain unclear. Methods The subjects were recruited from the female patients visiting the Infertility Center at the Beijing Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital from January 2017 to March 2018. The women who experienced one sporadic miscarriage (n = 89) or recurrent pregnancy loss (n = 125) were enrolled. The control participants (n = 59) were those women with normal pregnancy history and with no miscarriage or thrombosis experience. The collected serum specimens from above patients and controls were subjected to the 13 non‐criteria autoantibody examinations, targeting non‐conventional phospholipids, thyroid, sperm, endometrial, and anti‐nuclear antigens. Results When compared with the controls, the following non‐criteria antibodies stood out in present study with significantly increased frequency and were listed in the order of decreasing positive rates: aPE IgM (40.0%), ANA (15.2%), aEM IgG (13.6%), aPE IgG (12.8%), and aPT IgM (10.4%). Except for ANA, the presence of aPE IgM, aEM IgG, aPE IgG, and aPT IgM was not associated with positivity of LA tests. In receiver operating characteristic analyses, the combined aPE IgG and aEM IgG biomarker panel had the best discriminating power between miscarriage patients and healthy controls. Conclusion Our findings suggested that the non‐criteria could be included as part of the pregnancy loss evaluation when apparent causes are absent, and the conventional aPLs tests failed to provide interpretations.

Obstetrical outcome and treatments in seronegative primary APS: data from European retrospective study

“…anti-β2GPI, anti-phosphatidylethanolamine (anti-PE), anti-phosphatidylserine/prothrombin (anti-PS/PT), antivimentin and anti-annexin V and II antibodies can actually be tested. [3][4][5][6] However, there is a paucity of studies evaluating the link between these autoantibodies and clinical status, in particular for obstetrical outcomes. 7 Studies mostly evaluated the prevalence of these persistent noncriteria APL in thrombotic clinical subsets, showing 10-15% of prevalent among patients with unexplained venous thrombosis.…”

Analysis of blood coagulation indexes, thromboelastogram and autoantibodies in patients with recurrent pregnancy loss

“…This observation suggests that the high positive rates of ACA, EmAb and ATA may be a risk factors leading to multiple abortions in RPL patients, which is consistent with previous literature reports. [23][24][25] EmAb is an organ specific antibody, while ACA and ATA are nonorgan specific antibodies. 24 Studies show that EmAb may react to endometrium as an antigen, and cause a series of immune responses.…”

Evaluation of autoantibodies and immunoglobulin G subclasses in women with suspected macroprolactinemia

“…After the washing step, the conjugate was incubated and washed again before adding the substrate to generate enzymatic colorimetric reactions. The concentration of target antibody was calculated based on its OD (at the wavelength of 450 nm) value compared with the standard curve 30 …”