14th International Congress on Antiphospholipid Antibodies Task Force. Report on antiphospholipid syndrome laboratory diagnostics and trends

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Current classification criteria for definite Antiphospholipid Syndrome (APS) require the use of three laboratory assays to detect antiphospholipid antibodies (aCL, anti-β2GPI and LA) in the presence of at least one of the two major clinical manifestations (i.e. thrombosis or pregnancy morbidity) of the syndrome. However, several other autoantibodies shown to be directed to other proteins or their complex with phospholipids have been proposed to be relevant to APS but their clinical utility and their diagnostic value remains elusive. This report summarizes the findings, conclusions and recommendations of the "APS Task Force 3-Laboratory Diagnostics and Trends" meeting that took place during the 14th International Congress on Antiphospholipid Antibodies (APLA 2013, September 18-21, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil).

Related collections

Most cited references 139

Record: found
Abstract: not found
Article: not found

GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations.

Gordon Guyatt, Andrew D Oxman, Gunn E. Vist … (2008)

0 comments Cited 3647 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence.

Howard Balshem, Mark Helfand, Holger Schünemann … (2011)

This article introduces the approach of GRADE to rating quality of evidence. GRADE specifies four categories-high, moderate, low, and very low-that are applied to a body of evidence, not to individual studies. In the context of a systematic review, quality reflects our confidence that the estimates of the effect are correct. In the context of recommendations, quality reflects our confidence that the effect estimates are adequate to support a particular recommendation. Randomized trials begin as high-quality evidence, observational studies as low quality. "Quality" as used in GRADE means more than risk of bias and so may also be compromised by imprecision, inconsistency, indirectness of study results, and publication bias. In addition, several factors can increase our confidence in an estimate of effect. GRADE provides a systematic approach for considering and reporting each of these factors. GRADE separates the process of assessing quality of evidence from the process of making recommendations. Judgments about the strength of a recommendation depend on more than just the quality of evidence. Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

0 comments Cited 1516 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

International consensus statement on an update of the classification criteria for definite antiphospholipid syndrome (APS).

S Miyakis, M Lockshin, T Atsumi … (2006)

New clinical, laboratory and experimental insights, since the 1999 publication of the Sapporo preliminary classification criteria for antiphospholipid syndrome (APS), had been addressed at a workshop in Sydney, Australia, before the Eleventh International Congress on antiphospholipid antibodies. In this document, we appraise the existing evidence on clinical and laboratory features of APS addressed during the forum. Based on this, we propose amendments to the Sapporo criteria. We also provide definitions on features of APS that were not included in the updated criteria.