ACR Meeting Abstracts

ACR Meeting Abstracts

  • Meetings
    • ACR Convergence 2024
    • ACR Convergence 2023
    • 2023 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • ACR Convergence 2022
    • ACR Convergence 2021
    • ACR Convergence 2020
    • 2020 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting
    • 2018-2009 Meetings
    • Download Abstracts
  • Keyword Index
  • Advanced Search
  • Your Favorites
    • Favorites
    • Login
    • View and print all favorites
    • Clear all your favorites
  • ACR Meetings

Abstract Number: 637

How Often Should SLE Patients Be Tested for Lupus Anticoagulant?

Laurence Magder1 and Michelle Petri 2, 1University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, 2Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD

Meeting: 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting

Keywords: longitudinal studies and diagnostic criteria, lupus anticoagulant, Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), Thrombosis

  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Print
Session Information

Date: Sunday, November 10, 2019

Title: SLE – Clinical Poster I: Epidemiology & Pathogenesis

Session Type: Poster Session (Sunday)

Session Time: 9:00AM-11:00AM

Background/Purpose: SLE patients with persistent lupus anticoagulant (LAC) have been observed to be at significantly higher risk of thrombosis.  A common clinical definition of persistent  LAC is to have two confirmed tests for LAC separated in time by at least 12 weeks.  The likelihood of identifying a patient with LAC based on this definition depends on the frequency with which it is assessed. The purpose of this analysis is to determine the impact of frequent repeated testing of LAC on patient identification and clinical outcomes.

Methods: LAC was measured repeatedly in patients in a large American clinical cohort of prevalent and incident SLE patients. (51% Caucasian-American, 40% African American) . Patients were defined as LAC positive at a clinic visit if they had a dRVVT of 45 or more seconds, a mixing study, and then a positive confirmatory test.  For 20% of the patients, the confirmatory test was missing and these values were imputed using multiple imputation based largely on the value of dRVVT.  Persistent lupus anticoagulant was defined as having two consecutive visits with confirmed lupus anticoagulant separated by at least 12 weeks. We determined the number of patients who would be identified as having persistent LAC under two scenarios: 1) if only 5 LAC assessments were made, or 2) if multiple repeated assessments were made.  In addition, we determined whether those identified with persistent LAC based on multiple repeat assessments but who were not identified based on only 5 assessments were at increased risk of thrombosis.  This was based on discrete survival analysis including followup that occurred after at least 5 LAC assessments was included.

Results: The analysis was based on 36,218 clinical tests of LAC from 1457 different patients who had at least 5 LAC tests.  The number of tests per patient ranged from 5 to 74 with a mean of 25.  Based on only the first 5 tests per patient, the prevalence  of persistent LAC was 11.7%.  Based on all the LAC tests, the prevalence of persistent LAC was found to be 15.8%.  Table 1 shows the rates of thrombosis in months defined by LAC classification based on all prior tests.  In those months that were not preceded by persistent LAC the rate of thrombosis was 1.3 per 1000 person-months.  In those months that were preceded by a diagnosis of LAC based on the patient’s first 5 LAC tests, the rate of thrombosis was 2.5 per 1000 person-months (p=0.018 relative to months without LAC).  In those months that were not classified as having prior persistent LAC based on the patient’s first 5 LAC tests, but were classified as having persistent LAC based on all prior LAC tests, the rate of thrombosis was 1.8 per 1000 person months (p=0.46 relative to months without LAC).

Conclusion: 26% of those with persistent LAC are missed if LAC assessment is based only on the first 5 LAC tests. However, those classified as having LAC based on their first 5 tests are at highest risk of thrombosis.  This information can inform decision-making related to frequency of LAC testing.


Table 1


Disclosure: L. Magder, None; M. Petri, Eli Lilly and Company, 5, Exagen, 2, 5.

To cite this abstract in AMA style:

Magder L, Petri M. How Often Should SLE Patients Be Tested for Lupus Anticoagulant? [abstract]. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2019; 71 (suppl 10). https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/how-often-should-sle-patients-be-tested-for-lupus-anticoagulant/. Accessed .
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Print

« Back to 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/how-often-should-sle-patients-be-tested-for-lupus-anticoagulant/

Advanced Search

Your Favorites

You can save and print a list of your favorite abstracts during your browser session by clicking the “Favorite” button at the bottom of any abstract. View your favorites »

All abstracts accepted to ACR Convergence are under media embargo once the ACR has notified presenters of their abstract’s acceptance. They may be presented at other meetings or published as manuscripts after this time but should not be discussed in non-scholarly venues or outlets. The following embargo policies are strictly enforced by the ACR.

Accepted abstracts are made available to the public online in advance of the meeting and are published in a special online supplement of our scientific journal, Arthritis & Rheumatology. Information contained in those abstracts may not be released until the abstracts appear online. In an exception to the media embargo, academic institutions, private organizations, and companies with products whose value may be influenced by information contained in an abstract may issue a press release to coincide with the availability of an ACR abstract on the ACR website. However, the ACR continues to require that information that goes beyond that contained in the abstract (e.g., discussion of the abstract done as part of editorial news coverage) is under media embargo until 10:00 AM ET on November 14, 2024. Journalists with access to embargoed information cannot release articles or editorial news coverage before this time. Editorial news coverage is considered original articles/videos developed by employed journalists to report facts, commentary, and subject matter expert quotes in a narrative form using a variety of sources (e.g., research, announcements, press releases, events, etc.).

Violation of this policy may result in the abstract being withdrawn from the meeting and other measures deemed appropriate. Authors are responsible for notifying colleagues, institutions, communications firms, and all other stakeholders related to the development or promotion of the abstract about this policy. If you have questions about the ACR abstract embargo policy, please contact ACR abstracts staff at [email protected].

Wiley

  • Online Journal
  • Privacy Policy
  • Permissions Policies
  • Cookie Preferences

© Copyright 2025 American College of Rheumatology