Antiprothrombin antibodies detected in two different assay systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We evaluated the clinical significance of aPT and aPS-PT by testing for the presence of these antibodies in 212 SLE patients and in 100 healthy individuals. Results show that anti-prothrombin antibodies were found in 47% of the patients (aPT in 31% and aPS-PT in 31%). Their presence did not correlate with that of aCL, anti-beta2GPI, LA and/or anti-protein S. IgG but not IgM aPT were more frequently found in patients with thrombosis than in those without. IgG and IgM aPS-PT were also more frequent in patients with thrombosis (venous and/or arterial) than in those without. Levels of IgG aPT and IgG and IgM aPS-PT were higher in patients with thrombosis than in those without. Although aPT and aPS-PT were more frequently found in women with adverse obstetric history than in those without, the differences were not statistically significant. More significantly, 48% of the patients with aPL-related clinical features who were negative for standard tests had antiprothrombin antibodies. We can conclude that aPT and aPS-PT are frequently found in SLE. Their presence is associated with thrombosis, making these antibodies potential markers for the APS. Testing for these antibodies could be of clinical benefit in patients who are negative for the routinely used tests.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".