MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

The Association Between Anti-beta2 Glycoprotein 1 Antibodies and Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes.

2009· article· en· W2586394078 on OpenAlexaff
Karim Abou-Nassar, Mark Walker, Shi Wu Wen, Marisa Freedman, Steve Doucette, Julie Lafleche, Marc Rodger

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSystemic Lupus Erythematosus Research
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlacental abruptionMedicinePregnancyObstetricsPreeclampsiaOdds ratioIntrauterine growth restrictionGestationPopulationHELLP syndromeProspective cohort studyAntiphospholipid syndromeAntibodyImmunologyInternal medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Abstract 4003 Poster Board III-939 BACKGROUND The Sapporo criteria include anti-β2 glycoprotein1 (anti-B2GP1) antibodies among antiphospholipid antibodies used to diagnose the antiphospholipid syndrome (APS). Although pre-eclampsia, intra-uterine growth restriction (IUGR), late fetal loss and placental abruption, collectively termed “placenta mediated complications”, are recognized as clinical criteria for the APS, strong evidence to support their association with anti-B2GP1 antibodies is lacking. OBJECTIVE This study aims to assess the association between anti-B2GP1 antibodies and placenta mediated complications. METHODS We performed a nested case-control study from a prospective cohort of 7000 mother baby pairs whereby women and their fetuses were recruited between 12-20 weeks gestation. Five hundred cases were randomly selected amongst women who experienced one of the following adjudicated adverse pregnancy outcomes: pre-eclampsia (BP ≥140/90 with proteinuria), placental abruption (antepartum bleeding with objective evidence of placental thrombus), late pregnancy loss (≥ 12 weeks gestation) and IUGR (birth weight less than the 10th percentile of normal population). Random selection of 500 controls was performed amongst women who did not experience the above mentioned adverse pregnancy outcomes. Stored blood samples were analyzed for the presence of anti-B2GP1 IgG and IgM antibodies by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Titers ≥ than 20 G or M units were considered positive. This study has an 80% power to detect an odds ratio of 2.25 at the 5% level of significance based on an estimated 4 % prevalence of anti-B2GP1 IgG and/or IgM antibodies in titers ≥ 20 G/M units in our cohort of pregnant women. RESULTS Anti-B2GP1 IgG and/or IgM antibodies in titers ≥ 20 G/M units were present in 24/497 (4.8%) controls and 33/503 (6.6%) cases. The presence of anti-B2GP1 IgG and/or IgM in titers ' 20 G/M units was not significantly associated with a composite outcome of pre-eclampsia, IUGR, late fetal loss and placental abruption (OR 1.38; 95%CI 0.8-2.37 p=0.18). This combination of antibodies and titers only demonstrated a weak association with IUGR (OR 1.86; 95%CI 1.09-3.18 p=0.02). The presence of anti-B2GP1 IgG and/or IgM antibodies in titers ≥ 40 G/M units also failed to show an association with a composite outcome of pre-eclampsia, IUGR, late fetal loss and placental abruption (OR 2.65; 95%CI 0.7-10.04 p=0.15). However, stronger associations were observed with placental abruption (OR 4.87; 95%CI 1.02-23.25 p=0.047) and IUGR (OR 3.53; 95%CI 1.03-12.15 p=0.045). CONCLUSION The presence of anti-B2GP1 IgG and/or IgM antibodies in titers 20 ≥ G/M units during pregnancy is only associated with an increased risk of IUGR. Anti-B2GP1 antibodies in titers ' 40 G/M units, as suggested in the Sapporo diagnostic criteria for the APS, are associated with IUGR and placental abruption and possibly other placenta mediated complications. Larger adequately powered studies will be required to provide definitive answers. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.275 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood→Same topicSystemic Lupus Erythematosus Research→French-language works237,207→