Antiphosphatidylserine/prothrombin Antibodies in Antiphospholipid Syndrome with Intrauterine Growth Restriction and Preeclampsia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Antibodies that recognize the phosphatidylserine/prothrombin complex (antiphosphatidylserine/prothrombin antibodies; aPS/PT) might reveal enhanced thrombotic risk in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus. Little is known about their association with pregnancy complications in the antiphospholipid syndrome (APS). METHODS: -glycoprotein I antibodies, lupus-like anticoagulant, and aPS/PT antibodies were assessed, and the patients were prospectively followed for 24 months. RESULTS: There were 65% (36/55) of the APS patients who had aPS/PT antibodies. Forty-seven pregnancies were followed, including 33 of aPS/PT+ patients. Forty-one of the 47 patients (87%) who initiated a pregnancy eventually gave birth to a child. The pregnancy duration and the mean newborn weight at delivery were significantly lower in aPS/PT+ than in aPS/PT- patients (33.1 ± 4.7 vs 36.2 ± 3.4 wks of gestation, respectively, and 2058 ± 964 g vs 2784 ± 746 g, respectively, p < 0.05). Late pregnancy complications, including intrauterine fetal death, preterm delivery, preeclampsia, and intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR), were more frequent in aPS/PT+ patients, independent of the therapy. Titers of aPS/PT IgG were significantly inversely correlated with the neonatal weight at delivery. Vascular injury, as reflected by thrombosis, fibrinoid necrosis, ischemic and hemorrhagic areas, and presence of chorangiomas characterized the IUGR placentas in the presence of aPS/PT. CONCLUSION: The aPS/PT antibodies might represent markers of aPL-related pregnancy complications, IUGR/preeclampsia in particular, and could help identify beforehand patients who may require additional treatment.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".