Search

Steroid hormone imbalance is associated with the pathogenesis of preeclampsia. However, affected enzymes of steroid metabolism and gene and protein expression in serum and placenta have not been elucidated yet. We aimed to investigate steroid hormone profiles and precursor-to-product ratios in preeclamptic women compared to women with healthy pregnancy (controls) to identify potentially affected steroid hormones and their metabolizing enzymes. Also, we aimed to investigate whether the mRNA expression of these enzymes is different between the study groups and whether levels of serum mRNA expression reflect postnatal placental protein expression. Serum levels of 14 steroid hormones were measured at eight time points throughout pregnancy in nine preeclamptic women and 36 controls. Serum mRNA expression of selected steroid-metabolizing enzymes was assessed, and their protein expression was analyzed in additional nine preeclamptic women. Mean levels of sex steroid and corticosteroid hormones were significantly altered in preeclamptic women. Precursor-to-product ratios of 5α-reductase, aromatase and 11β-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase 1 were significantly increased, those of steroid 17α-hydroxylase, 17β-hydroxysteroid-dehydrogenase, steroid 11β-hydroxylase and 11β-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase 2 were significantly decreased. Serum mRNA expression and placenta protein expression were comparable between the groups. Results contribute to understanding the heterogeneity of preeclampsia and can thus promote future research in personalized medicine. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Preeclampsia is characterised by an increased platelet consumption with consecutive reduction of overall platelet count and a consecutive rise in mean platelet volume (MPV). MPV has therefore been suggested as a predictive marker for preeclampsia. We aimed to investigate MPV longitudinally in women with preeclampsia compared to healthy controls during pregnancy for potential early detection of preeclampsia and to compare potential MPV changes against the sFlt-1/PlGF ratio.Study Design: This longitudinal study included 38 women with preeclampsia and 84 women with normal pregnancies, where MPV and sFlt-1 and PLGF levels were determined every 4 weeks, starting in early pregnancy.Results: MPV was significantly higher in women who developed preeclampsia compared to women with normal pregnancies at 12, (p = .029), 24 (p = .011), 28 (p = .037), 32 (p = .002), and 36 weeks of gestation, respectively (p = .015). Further analysis revealed a cut-off point of 10.85 fl (sensitivity 65.6%, specificity 26.2%) for the prediction of preeclampsia. The sFlt-1/PlGF ratio was significantly higher in women who developed preeclampsia compared to women with normal pregnancies at the same time points (p = .001). The cut-off point for predicting preeclampsia was 10.3 (sensitivity 87.5%, specificity 11.9%). ROC curve analysis showed that MPV has a high predictive value for early-onset preeclampsia (p < .05) but not for late-onset preeclampsia.Conclusion: MPV is significantly elevated even in early pregnancy in women who develop preeclampsia and seems, therefore, a valuable predictor for preeclampsia even at early gestation. However, according to our results, MPV seems reliable in predicting early onset preeclampsia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We analyzed outcome of women screened for preeclampsia with two different multifactorial risk algorithms (Predictor®Software by PerkinElmer, PerkinElmer, Waltham, MA; PERK-group:n = 214 and Viewpoint®by GE Healthcare, Dornstadt, Germany; VIEW-group:n = 209) in first trimester. Women at high risk for developing preeclampsia were advised to take low-dose acetylsalicylic acid (LDA). Screening positive rates for early onset preeclampsia differed significantly between the two groups (7.9% versus 26.3%;p = 0.000). According the clinical use of screening test criteria, LDA was prescribed in 63 (29.4%) women in the PE-group and 55 (26.3%) in the VP-group (p = 0.516). There were no differences in onset of preeclampsia [4 (1.9%) versus 6 (2.9%);p = 0.540]. No early or severe preeclampsia occurred in the whole population. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Objective: To develop new antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) classification criteria with high specificity for use in observational studies and trials, jointly supported by the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and EULAR., Methods: This international multidisciplinary initiative included 4 phases: 1) Phase I, criteria generation by surveys and literature review; 2) Phase II, criteria reduction by modified Delphi and nominal group technique exercises; 3) Phase III, criteria definition, further reduction with the guidance of real-world patient scenarios, and weighting via consensus-based multicriteria decision analysis, and threshold identification; and 4) Phase IV, validation using independent adjudicators' consensus as the gold standard., Results: The 2023 ACR/EULAR APS classification criteria include an entry criterion of at least one positive antiphospholipid antibody (aPL) test within 3 years of identification of an aPL-associated clinical criterion, followed by additive weighted criteria (score range 1-7 points each) clustered into 6 clinical domains (macrovascular venous thromboembolism, macrovascular arterial thrombosis, microvascular, obstetric, cardiac valve, and hematologic) and 2 laboratory domains (lupus anticoagulant functional coagulation assays, and solid-phase enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays for IgG/IgM anticardiolipin and/or IgG/IgM anti-β 2 -glycoprotein I antibodies). Patients accumulating at least 3 points each from the clinical and laboratory domains are classified as having APS. In the validation cohort, the new APS criteria versus the 2006 revised Sapporo classification criteria had a specificity of 99% versus 86%, and a sensitivity of 84% versus 99%., Conclusion: These new ACR/EULAR APS classification criteria were developed using rigorous methodology with multidisciplinary international input. Hierarchically clustered, weighted, and risk-stratified criteria reflect the current thinking about APS, providing high specificity and a strong foundation for future APS research., (© 2023 American College of Rheumatology.)

Objective: To compare characteristics, pregnancies and treatments during pregnancies of seronegative and seropositive antiphospholipid syndrome (APS), to analyse factors associated with obstetrical outcome., Patients and Methods: Inclusion criteria were: (1) thrombotic and/or obstetrical APS (Sydney criteria); (2) absence of conventional antiphospholipid antibodies (APL); (3) at least one persistent non-conventional APL among IgA anticardiolipin antibodies, IgA anti-B2GPI, anti-vimentin G/M, anti-annexin V G/M, anti-phosphatidylethanolamine G/M and anti-phosphatidylserine/prothrombin G/M antibodies. The exclusion criteria were: (1) systemic lupus erythematosus ( SLE) or SLE-like disease; and (2) other connective tissue disease., Results: A total of 187 women (mean 33±5 years) with seronegative APS were included from 14 centres in Austria, Spain, Italy, Slovenia and France and compared with 285 patients with seropositive APS. Seronegative APS has more obstetrical rather than thrombotic phenotypes, with only 6% of venous thrombosis in comparison to seropositive APS. Cumulative incidence of adverse obstetrical events was similar in seronegative and seropositive APS patients, although higher rates of intrauterine deaths (15% vs 5%; p=0.03), of preeclampsia (7% vs 16%, p=0.048) and lower live birth term (36±3 vs 38±3 weeks of gestation; p=0.04) were noted in seropositive APS. The cumulative incidence of adverse obstetrical events was significantly improved in treated versus untreated seronegative APS (log rank<0.05), whereas there was no difference between patients who received aspirin or aspirin-low-molecular weighted heparin combination., Conclusion: Several non-criteria APL can be detected in patients with clinical APS features without any conventional APL, with various rates. The detection of non-criteria APL and thus the diagnosis of seronegative APS could discuss the therapeutic management similar to seropositive APS, but well-designed controlled studies are necessary., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: To compare clinical features, laboratory data and fetal-maternal outcomes between 1000 women with obstetric APS (OAPS) and 640 with aPL-related obstetric complications not fulfilling Sydney criteria (non-criteria OAPS, NC-OAPS)., Methods: This was a retrospective and prospective multicentre study from the European Registry on Obstetric Antiphospholipid Syndrome., Results: A total of 1650 women with 5251 episodes, 3601 of which were historical and 1650 latest episodes, were included. Altogether, 1000 cases (OAPS group) fulfilled the Sydney classification criteria and 650 (NC-OAPS group) did not. Ten NC-OAPS cases were excluded for presenting thrombosis during follow-up. All cases were classified as category I (triple positivity or double positivity for aPL) or category II (simple positivity). Overall, aPL laboratory categories showed significant differences: 29.20% in OAPS vs 17.96% in NC-OAPS (P < 0.0001) for category I, and 70.8% in OAPS vs 82% in NC-OAPS (P < 0.0001) for category II. Significant differences were observed when current obstetric complications were compared (P < 0.001). However, major differences between groups were not observed in treatment rates, livebirths and thrombotic complications. In the NC-OAPS group, 176/640 (27.5%) did not fulfil Sydney clinical criteria (subgroup A), 175/640 (27.34%) had a low titre and/or non-persistent aPL positivity but did meet the clinical criteria (subgroup B) and 289/640 (45.15%) had a high aPL titre but did not fulfil Sydney clinical criteria (subgroup C)., Conclusion: Significant clinical and laboratory differences were found between groups. Fetal-maternal outcomes were similar in both groups when treated. These results suggest that we could improve our clinical practice with better understanding of NC-OAPS patients., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)