Complement activation in patients with isolated antiphospholipid antibodies or primary antiphospholipid syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) is the association of thrombosis and recurrent pregnancy loss and/or pregnancy morbidity with persistent antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL). Increased complement activation has been implicated in the pathogenesis of APS in animal models. It was our objective to evaluate complement activation in patients with aPL or primary antiphospholipid syndrome (PAPS). We measured complement activation products, fragments Bb and C3a-desArg by ELISA in 186 aPL/PAPS patients and 30 healthy controls. All patients with aPL had significantly increased levels of complement activation products. Fragment Bb levels (mean, 95% CI); (thrombotic APS 0.54 units/ml, 0.31-0.83, obstetric APS 0.60 units/ml,0.39-1.02, isolated aPL 0.48 units/ml, 0.29-0.85, overall 0.39 units/ml, 0.33-0.47) and C3a-desArg levels (mean, 95% CI): (thrombotic APS 261 ng/ml, 219-311, obstetric APS 308 ng/ml, 243-391, isolated aPL 258 ng/ml, 193-337, overall 225 ng/ml, 202-251) were significantly higher compared to controls (fragment Bb 0.06 units/ml, 0.03-0.11, C3a-desArg 69 ng/ml, 50-92). There were correlations between Fragment Bb and C3a-desArg levels in all patients with aPL. Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) analysis showed increased fragment Bb and C3a-desArg levels had strong associations with the presence of persistent lupus anticoagulant (area under ROC: Bb 0.89, and C3a-desArg 0.90), dual and triple aPL positivity (Bb 0.71-0.82, C3a-desArg 0.71-0.80) but not with high titre anti-cardiolipin antibodies (Bb 0.62, C3a-desArg 0.65), or anti β2-glycoprotein 1 antibodies (Bb 0.66, C3a-desArg 0.67). Complement activation is present in all patient groups within this large cohort of patients aPL. This suggests it may have a major role in the pathogenesis of APS and merits further study.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".