King's College London

Research portal

Clinical and laboratory characteristics of Brazilian versus non-Brazilian primary antiphospholipid syndrome patients in AntiPhospholipid Syndrome Alliance for Clinical Trials and InternatiOnal Networking (APS ACTION) clinical database and repository

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


Original languageEnglish
Article number64
JournalAdvances in Rheumatology
Issue number1
Early online date28 Oct 2021
E-pub ahead of print28 Oct 2021
PublishedDec 2021

Bibliographical note

Funding Information: The APS ACTION Registry was created using REDCAP provided by the Clinical and Translational Science Center at Weill Cornell Medical College (CTSC grant UL1 TR000457). Publisher Copyright: © 2021, The Author(s).

King's Authors


Background: Antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) is characterized by episodes of thrombosis, obstetric morbidity or both, associated with persistently positive antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL). Studying the profile of a rare disease in an admixed population is important as it can provide new insights for understanding an autoimmune disease. In this sense of miscegenation, Brazil is characterized by one of the most heterogeneous populations in the world, which is the result of five centuries of interethnic crosses of people from three continents. The objective of this study was to compare the clinical and laboratory characteristics of Brazilian vs. non-Brazilian primary antiphospholipid syndrome (PAPS) patients. Methods: We classified PAPS patients into 2 groups: Brazilian PAPS patients (BPAPS) and PAPS patients from other countries (non-BPAPS). They were compared regarding demographic characteristics, criteria and non-criteria APS manifestations, antiphospholipid antibody (aPL) profile, and the adjusted Global Antiphospholipid Syndrome Score (aGAPSS). Results: We included 415 PAPS patients (88 [21%] BPAPS and 327 [79%] non-BPAPS). Brazilian patients were significantly younger, more frequently female, sedentary, obese, non-white, and had a higher frequency of livedo (25% vs. 10%, p < 0.001), cognitive dysfunction (21% vs. 8%, p = 0.001) and seizures (16% vs. 7%, p = 0.007), and a lower frequency of thrombocytopenia (9% vs. 18%, p = 0.037). Additionally, they were more frequently positive for lupus anticoagulant (87.5% vs. 74.6%, p = 0.01), and less frequently positive to anticardiolipin (46.6% vs. 73.7%, p < 0.001) and anti-ß2-glycoprotein-I (13.6% vs. 62.7%, p < 0.001) antibodies. Triple aPL positivity was also less frequent (8% vs. 41.6%, p < 0.001) in Brazilian patients. Median aGAPSS was lower in the Brazilian group (8 vs. 10, p < 0.0001). In the multivariate analysis, BPAPS patients still presented more frequently with livedo, cognitive dysfunction and sedentary lifestyle, and less frequently with thrombocytopenia and triple positivity to aPL. They were also less often white. Conclusions: Our study suggests a specific profile of PAPS in Brazil with higher frequency of selected non-criteria manifestations and lupus anticoagulant positivity. Lupus anticoagulant (not triple positivity) was the major aPL predictor of a classification criteria event.

View graph of relations

© 2020 King's College London | Strand | London WC2R 2LS | England | United Kingdom | Tel +44 (0)20 7836 5454