Cargando…

Comparison of Acquired Activated Protein C Resistance, Using the CAT and ST-Genesia(®) Analysers and Three Thrombin Generation Methods, in APS and SLE Patients

Background: Acquired activated protein C resistance (APCr) has been identified in antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) and systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Objective: To assess agreement between the ST-Genesia(®) and CAT analysers in identifying APCr prevalence in APS/SLE patients, using three thrombi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Efthymiou, Maria, Lane, Philip J., Isenberg, David, Cohen, Hannah, Mackie, Ian J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8745056/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35011808
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm11010069
_version_ 1784630252988792832
author Efthymiou, Maria
Lane, Philip J.
Isenberg, David
Cohen, Hannah
Mackie, Ian J.
author_facet Efthymiou, Maria
Lane, Philip J.
Isenberg, David
Cohen, Hannah
Mackie, Ian J.
author_sort Efthymiou, Maria
collection PubMed
description Background: Acquired activated protein C resistance (APCr) has been identified in antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) and systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Objective: To assess agreement between the ST-Genesia(®) and CAT analysers in identifying APCr prevalence in APS/SLE patients, using three thrombin generation (TG) methods. Methods: APCr was assessed with the ST-Genesia using STG-ThromboScreen and with the CAT using recombinant human activated protein C and Protac(®) in 105 APS, 53 SLE patients and 36 thrombotic controls. Agreement was expressed in % and by Cohen’s kappa coefficient. Results: APCr values were consistently lower with the ST-Genesia(®) compared to the CAT, using either method, in both APS and SLE patients. Agreement between the two analysers in identifying APS and SLE patients with APCr was poor (≤65.9%, ≤0.20) or fair (≤68.5%, ≥0.29), regardless of TG method, respectively; no agreement was observed in thrombotic controls. APCr with both the ST Genesia and the CAT using Protac(®), but not the CAT using rhAPC, was significantly greater in triple antiphospholipid antibody (aPL) APS patients compared to double/single aPL patients (p < 0.04) and in thrombotic SLE patients compared to non-thrombotic SLE patients (p < 0.05). Notably, the ST-Genesia(®), unlike the CAT, with either method, identified significantly greater APCr in pregnancy morbidity (median, confidence intervals; 36.9%, 21.9–49.0%) compared to thrombotic (45.7%, 39.6–55.5%) APS patients (p = 0.03). Conclusion: Despite the broadly similar methodology used by CAT and ST-Genesia(®), agreement in APCr was poor/fair, with results not being interchangeable. This may reflect differences in the TG method, use of different reagents, and analyser data handling.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8745056
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-87450562022-01-11 Comparison of Acquired Activated Protein C Resistance, Using the CAT and ST-Genesia(®) Analysers and Three Thrombin Generation Methods, in APS and SLE Patients Efthymiou, Maria Lane, Philip J. Isenberg, David Cohen, Hannah Mackie, Ian J. J Clin Med Article Background: Acquired activated protein C resistance (APCr) has been identified in antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) and systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Objective: To assess agreement between the ST-Genesia(®) and CAT analysers in identifying APCr prevalence in APS/SLE patients, using three thrombin generation (TG) methods. Methods: APCr was assessed with the ST-Genesia using STG-ThromboScreen and with the CAT using recombinant human activated protein C and Protac(®) in 105 APS, 53 SLE patients and 36 thrombotic controls. Agreement was expressed in % and by Cohen’s kappa coefficient. Results: APCr values were consistently lower with the ST-Genesia(®) compared to the CAT, using either method, in both APS and SLE patients. Agreement between the two analysers in identifying APS and SLE patients with APCr was poor (≤65.9%, ≤0.20) or fair (≤68.5%, ≥0.29), regardless of TG method, respectively; no agreement was observed in thrombotic controls. APCr with both the ST Genesia and the CAT using Protac(®), but not the CAT using rhAPC, was significantly greater in triple antiphospholipid antibody (aPL) APS patients compared to double/single aPL patients (p < 0.04) and in thrombotic SLE patients compared to non-thrombotic SLE patients (p < 0.05). Notably, the ST-Genesia(®), unlike the CAT, with either method, identified significantly greater APCr in pregnancy morbidity (median, confidence intervals; 36.9%, 21.9–49.0%) compared to thrombotic (45.7%, 39.6–55.5%) APS patients (p = 0.03). Conclusion: Despite the broadly similar methodology used by CAT and ST-Genesia(®), agreement in APCr was poor/fair, with results not being interchangeable. This may reflect differences in the TG method, use of different reagents, and analyser data handling. MDPI 2021-12-23 /pmc/articles/PMC8745056/ /pubmed/35011808 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm11010069 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Efthymiou, Maria
Lane, Philip J.
Isenberg, David
Cohen, Hannah
Mackie, Ian J.
Comparison of Acquired Activated Protein C Resistance, Using the CAT and ST-Genesia(®) Analysers and Three Thrombin Generation Methods, in APS and SLE Patients
title Comparison of Acquired Activated Protein C Resistance, Using the CAT and ST-Genesia(®) Analysers and Three Thrombin Generation Methods, in APS and SLE Patients
title_full Comparison of Acquired Activated Protein C Resistance, Using the CAT and ST-Genesia(®) Analysers and Three Thrombin Generation Methods, in APS and SLE Patients
title_fullStr Comparison of Acquired Activated Protein C Resistance, Using the CAT and ST-Genesia(®) Analysers and Three Thrombin Generation Methods, in APS and SLE Patients
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Acquired Activated Protein C Resistance, Using the CAT and ST-Genesia(®) Analysers and Three Thrombin Generation Methods, in APS and SLE Patients
title_short Comparison of Acquired Activated Protein C Resistance, Using the CAT and ST-Genesia(®) Analysers and Three Thrombin Generation Methods, in APS and SLE Patients
title_sort comparison of acquired activated protein c resistance, using the cat and st-genesia(®) analysers and three thrombin generation methods, in aps and sle patients
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8745056/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35011808
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm11010069
work_keys_str_mv AT efthymioumaria comparisonofacquiredactivatedproteincresistanceusingthecatandstgenesiaanalysersandthreethrombingenerationmethodsinapsandslepatients
AT lanephilipj comparisonofacquiredactivatedproteincresistanceusingthecatandstgenesiaanalysersandthreethrombingenerationmethodsinapsandslepatients
AT isenbergdavid comparisonofacquiredactivatedproteincresistanceusingthecatandstgenesiaanalysersandthreethrombingenerationmethodsinapsandslepatients
AT cohenhannah comparisonofacquiredactivatedproteincresistanceusingthecatandstgenesiaanalysersandthreethrombingenerationmethodsinapsandslepatients
AT mackieianj comparisonofacquiredactivatedproteincresistanceusingthecatandstgenesiaanalysersandthreethrombingenerationmethodsinapsandslepatients