Prothrombotic antiphospholipid antibodies in COVID-19

Yu Zuo, Shanea K. Estes, Alex A. Gandhi, Srilakshmi Yalavarthi, Ramadan A. Ali, Hui Shi, Gautam Sule, Kelsey Gockman, Jacqueline A. Madison, Melanie Zuo, Wrenn Woodward, Sean P. Lezak, Njira L. Lugogo, Yogendra Kanthi, Jason S. Knight
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.06.15.20131607

ABSTRACT

Patients with coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) are at high risk for thrombotic arterial and venous occlusions. At the same time, lung histopathology often reveals fibrin-based occlusion of small vessels in patients who succumb to the disease. Antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) is an acquired and potentially life-threatening thrombophilia in which patients develop pathogenic autoantibodies (aPL) targeting phospholipids and phospholipid-binding proteins. Small case series have recently detected aPL in patients with COVID-19. Here, we measured eight types of aPL (anticardiolipin IgG/IgM/IgA, anti-beta-2 glycoprotein I IgG/IgM/IgA, and anti-phosphatidylserine/prothrombin (PS/PT) IgG/IgM) in the sera of 172 patients hospitalized with COVID-19. We detected anticardiolipin IgM antibodies in 23%, anti-PS/PT IgG in 24%, and anti-PS/PT IgM in 18%. Any aPL was present in 52% of patients using the manufacturer’s threshold and in 30% using a more stringent cutoff (≥40 units). Higher levels of aPL were associated with neutrophil hyperactivity (including the release of neutrophil extracellular traps/NETs), higher platelet count, more severe respiratory disease, and lower glomerular filtration rates. Similar to patients with known and longstanding APS, IgG fractions isolated from patients with COVID-19 promoted NET release from control neutrophils. Furthermore, injection of these COVID-19 IgG fractions into mice accelerated venous thrombosis. Taken together, these studies suggest that a significant percentage of patients with COVID-19 become at least transiently positive for aPL and that these aPL are potentially pathogenic.

INTRODUCTION

Abnormal coagulation parameters such as elevations in D-dimer and fibrin(ogen) degradation products correlate with COVID-19 severity1,2. D-dimer, in particular, is an independent risk factor for death1,3-5. Early descriptions of the COVID-19 coagulopathy identified it as disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC). However, most patients maintain normal levels of coagulation factors, fibrinogen, and platelets suggesting that COVID-19 induces a unique prothrombotic coagulopathy distinct from traditional descriptions of sepsis-induced coagulopathy6,7. There are now increasing reports of VTE in patients with COVID-198,9. This observation is despite concerns regarding under-diagnosis given baseline elevations in the sensitive biomarker D-dimer, as well as pragmatic challenges in obtaining diagnostic imaging while patients are in isolation. Arterial thrombosis including strokes and myocardial infarctions have also been described9,10. Histopathology of lung specimens from patients with severe disease show not only characteristic findings of ARDS but also evidence of fibrin-based occlusion of small vessels11-13. There are several (possibly synergistic) mechanisms by which SARS-CoV-2 infection may results in microvascular and macrovascular thrombosis including a cytokine storm that activates leukocytes, endothelium, and platelets; hypoxic vaso-occlusion; and direct activation of cells by viral transduction. Furthermore, many patients hospitalized with COVID-19 have high levels of neutrophil extracellular traps (NETs) in their blood14, and these inflammatory cell remnants may also contribute to the prothrombotic milieu15.

Antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) is an acquired thrombophilia, affecting at least 1-in-2000 individuals16. Patients form autoantibodies to phospholipids and phospholipid-binding proteins such as prothrombin and beta-2-glycoprotein I (β2GPI). These autoantibodies engage cell surfaces, where they activate endothelial cells, platelets, and neutrophils17,18, thereby tipping the blood-endothelium interface toward thrombosis. A defining feature of APS is its ability to promote thrombosis in vascular beds of all sizes, including both arterial and venous circuits. The catastrophic variant of APS is frequently fatal, and bears some similarities to the diffuse coagulopathy seen in patients with COVID-1919. Classification criteria for APS (last updated in 2006) seek persistently positive testing for anticardiolipin or anti-β2GPI antibodies20. Lupus anticoagulant testing (a functional assay that screens for aPL based on their paradoxical ability to prolong in vitro clotting assays) is also included in the criteria and detects a variety of species of aPL including anti-phosphatidylserine/prothrombin (anti-PS/PT)21.

Reports of antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL) in COVID-19 and their possible relationship to thrombosis have begun to emerge in small case reports and series22-25. While viral infections are well-known triggers of transient aPL26-29, the extent to which these antibodies are pathogenic has never been well defined. Human immunodeficiency virus, hepatitis C virus, and parvovirus B19 have all been associated with aPL28 (typically positive anticardiolipin IgG or IgM) with molecular mimicry suggested as a potential mechanism30,31. Interestingly, a recent systematic review suggested that one-third of individuals who develop a thrombotic event and aPL in association with a viral infection will have durable positivity of these aPL over at least several months and thereby meet classification criteria for APS28.

Here, we endeavored to test several types of aPL in a large cohort of patients hospitalized with COVID-19. We also asked whether purified IgG fractions from these patients had prothrombotic properties in vitro and in vivo.

RESULTS

Prevalence of aPL in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

Sera from 172 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 (Supplementary Table 1) were evaluated for eight different types of aPL. Of the 172 patients, 19% have died and 8% remain in the hospital at the time of this writing. Eighty-nine patients tested positive for at least one type of aPL based on the manufacturer’s cut-off, representing 52% of the entire cohort (Table 1). Lupus anticoagulant testing was not performed given lack of access to fresh plasma samples. Among the various aPL tested, anti-PS/PT IgG had the highest prevalence (24%), followed by anticardiolipin IgM (23%) and anti-PS/PT IgM (18%). Forty-one patients (24%) were positive for more than one type of aPL and 13 (8%) were positive for more than two. Fifty-two patients (30%) had at least one moderate-to high-titer aPL (Table 1). Thirty-five patients had sera from multiple time points tested for aPL and those results are presented in Supplementary Figure 1. In summary, any positive aPL was detected in 52% of patients hospitalized for COVID-19, with approximately two-thirds of those being detected at moderate-to-high titers. The majority of positives were associated with three antibodies: anti-PS/PT IgG, anticardiolipin IgM, and anti-PS/PT IgM.

View this table:
Supplementary Table 1:

Demographic and clinical characteristics of COVID-19 patients

Supplementary Figure 1:
Supplementary Figure 1: Testing for various aPL presented by day of hospitalization.

Repeat testings for the same patient are indicated by solid lines.

View this table:
Table 1:

Prevalence of antiphospholipid antibodies in COVID-19 patients (n=172)

Clinical correlations of COVID-19-associated aPL

We next asked whether the presence of aPL associated with various clinical parameters. Specifically, we assessed potential correlations with SpO2/FiO2 ratio (i.e., oxygenation efficiency), C-reactive protein, D-dimer, platelet count, absolute neutrophil count, calprotectin (a marker of neutrophil activation), and myeloperoxidase-DNA complexes (a marker of NETs) (Table 2). Levels of anticardiolipin IgM were significantly correlated with all clinical markers tested (Table 2). Of the clinical markers tested, neutrophil activation (calprotectin) most consistently associated with various different aPL (Table 2). We also assessed a previously devised scoring tool (aPL-S), which integrates and prioritizes data from the various aPL types tested (see Methods)32. aPL-S demonstrated a positive correlation with platelet counts, neutrophil activation, and NETs (Table 2). We then examined various clinical parameters as they related to positive/negative aPL cutoffs. Positive testing for any aPL was associated with higher levels of calprotectin and lower estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) (Figure 1A-C). These differences were also observed when comparing patients with positive anti-PS/PT to the remainder of the cohort (Figure 1D-F). Average peak troponin and peak D-dimer were both higher in patients with aPL, although group comparisons did not reach statistical significance (Figure 1). Taken together, it appears that COVID-19-associated aPL track with various clinical parameters, especially neutrophil activation and impaired renal function.

View this table:
Table 2:

Correlation of antiphospholipid antibodies with clinical and laboratory variables in COVID-19 patients

Figure 1:
Figure 1: Positive testing for aPL is associated with more neutrophil activation and worse kidney function.

A-C, N=172 COVID-19 patients were divided into groups based on positivity (manufacturer’s cutoff) for any aPL. D-F, COVID-19 patients were grouped based on positive testing for anti-PS/PT (IgG and IgM grouped together). Manufacturer’s cutoffs were used. Groups were analyzed by unpaired t-test; *p<0.05, **p<0.01, and ***p<0.001. eGFR=estimated glomerular filtration rate.

IgG isolated from COVID-19 patients triggers NET release

Work by our group and others has revealed that one prothrombotic function of aPL in patients with APS is to trigger NET release17,33. Given that we recently detected elevated levels of NETs in COVID-19 patients14, we reasoned that IgG fractions purified from patients with COVID-19 might be able to trigger NET release. We selected two COVID-19 patients with high anti-β2GPI IgG, two with high anti-PS/PT IgG, and two without any positive aPL. From these patients, we purified total IgG and tested alongside IgG pooled from two patients with active catastrophic antiphospholipid syndrome (CAPS), as well as a separate pool from five patients with longstanding triple-positive APS (positive testing for anticardiolipin, anti-β2GPI, and lupus anticoagulant). As compared with unstimulated neutrophils, COVID-19 IgG samples positive for aPL doubled NET release, similar to CAPS and APS samples (Figure 2A). Representative COVID-19 IgG-induced NETs are shown in Figure 2B. In summary, it appears that purified IgG fractions from aPL-positive COVID-19 patients promote NET release similarly to IgG isolated from individuals with established APS.

Figure 2:
Figure 2: APS and COVID IgG promote the release of neutrophil extracellular traps from control neutrophils.

A, Neutrophils were isolated from healthy controls and cultured in the presence of human IgG (10 µg/ml) for 3 hours. NET release was measured by the enzymatic activity of myeloperoxidase (MPO) after solubilization of NETs with Micrococcal nuclease. Data are presented for four independent experiments. Comparisons were by one-way ANOVA with correction for multiple comparisons by Dunnett’s method. B, Representative microscopy with DNA stained blue and neutrophil elastase green. Some examples of NETs are indicated with yellow arrowheads. Scale bars=100 microns.

aPL-positive COVID-19 IgG potentiates thrombosis in vivo

We have previously reported that IgG isolated from patients with either CAPS or triple-positive APS accelerates large-vein thrombosis in various mouse models of inferior vena cava thrombosis33-35. Here, we asked whether COVID-19 IgG might behave similarly to enhance thrombosis under such conditions. In a model that activates the endothelium by local electrolysis-mediated free radicals (Figure 3A), IgG isolated from patients with high levels of anti-PS/PT IgG increased thrombus extension (Figure 3B) and overall accretion (Figure 3C-D). At the same time, the high anti-PS/PT samples significantly increased circulating NET remnants, similar to CAPS IgG (Figure 3E). To confirm these findings, we turned our attention to an independent model in which the IVC is narrowed just distal to the renal veins by a fixed suture (Figure 3F). In this stenosis model, a high anti-PS/PT COVID-19 IgG preparation again increased thrombus extension (Figure 3G), thrombus accretion (Figure 3H-I), and circulating NET remnants (Figure 3J). Taken together, these data indicate that IgG fractions from some patients with acute COVID-19 are able to accelerate thrombosis in vivo.

Figure 3:
Figure 3: COVID-19 IgG potentiates thrombosis in vivo.

A, Model of thrombus initiation in the inferior vena cava (IVC) by local electrolysis. B-C, Mice were treated with control, CAPS, or COVID-19 IgG as indicated and thrombus size was determined 24 hours after local electrolysis; each point represents an individual mouse. D, Representative thrombi from B-C. E, Sera from some mice included in B-C were tested for NET remnants as measured by myeloperoxidase-DNA ELISA. F, Model of thrombus initiation in the IVC by fixed stenosis. G-H, Mice were treated with COVID-19 IgG as indicated and thrombus size was determined 24 hours after stenosis. I, Representative thrombi from G-H. J, Sera from some mice included in G-H were tested for NET remnants. Comparisons were by either one-way ANOVA with correction for multiple comparisons by Dunnett’s method (B, C, E) or unpaired t test (G, H, J); *p<0.05, **p<0.01, ***p<0.001, and ****p<0.0001.

DISCUSSION

aPL are a heterogeneous group of autoantibodies that play an important role in the pathogenesis of APS via their interactions with plasma protein such as β2GPI, prothrombin, thrombomodulin, plasminogen, antithrombin III, protein C, protein S, annexin II, annexin V, and likely others10-15. The association between viral infection and the development of aPL has long been suggested27,28, with anticardiolipin IgG and IgM (lacking anti-β2GPI activity) most commonly reported36. While the clinical significance of these antibodies remains to be fully defined, a recent review of 163 published cases of virus-associated aPL found thrombotic events in 11628. While acknowledging the possibility of sampling and publication bias, these data suggest that even if the antibodies are transient, they may still have prothrombotic potential—including in the patients described here with severe cases of COVID-19. Whether similar findings would extend to patients with less symptomatic COVID-19 presentations—some of whom may experience thrombotic events—awaits further study.

The most severe presentation of APS is its catastrophic variant known as CAPS, which fortunately impacts only a minority of APS patients, typically at times of stress such as infection, surgery, or anticoagulation withdrawal37. CAPS involves derangements of both inflammatory and thrombotic pathways and impacts multiple organs in the body simultaneously37. In the largest series of CAPS patients assembled, the most commonly affected organs were kidneys (73%), lungs (60%), brain (56%), heart (50%), and skin (47%)38. While multi-organ failure may certainly complicate severe cases of COVID-19, the lungs are almost always the most severely affected. We speculate that local immune stimulation from viral infection (including potentially the infection of endothelial cells) could synergize with circulating aPL and thereby lead to a particularly severe thromboinflammatory insult to the lungs of COVID-19 patients.

Many studies from the general thrombosis literature have revealed that activated neutrophils, and in particular NET formation, contribute to the propagation of thrombi affecting arterial, venous, and microscopic vascular beds39,40. NETs have also been recently implicated in the pathogenesis of APS. In 2015, our group reported that sera from APS patients, as well as purified aPL, trigger neutrophils to release NETs17. The potential in vivo relevance of this observation has been confirmed in mouse models of aPL-mediated large-vein thrombosis in which either depletion of neutrophils or digestion of NETs is protective33. Neutrophils from APS patients also appear to have increased adhesive potential, which is dependent upon the activated form of integrin Mac-1. This pro-adhesive phenotype amplifies neutrophil-endothelium interactions, potentiates NET formation, and potentially lowers the threshold for thrombosis33. Therapies that target NET formation have the potential to treat thrombotic diseases30. For example, selective agonism of the adenosine A2A receptor suppresses aPL-mediated NETosis in protein kinase A-dependent fashion 39. A2A agonism also reduces thrombosis in the inferior vena cava of both control mice and mice treated with aPL. Dipyridamole, which is known to potentiate adenosine receptor signaling by increasing extracellular concentrations of adenosine and interfering with the breakdown of cAMP, also suppresses aPL-mediated NETosis and mitigates venous thrombosis in mice41. Interestingly, a small study from China showed that dipyridamole significantly suppressed D-dimer elevation and improved platelet counts in patients with COVID-19; however, prospective, randomized clinical trials are needed to evaluate clinical outcomes42.

“Criteria” aPL are defined based on their inclusion in the updated Sapporo classification criteria: namely, anticardiolipin IgG and IgM, anti-β2GPI IgG and IgM, and lupus anticoagulant20; however, there are certainly reports of patients with “seronegative APS,” who have classic features of APS but with negative testing for criteria aPL43. Some non-criteria aPL discovered in the past 20 years have shown promising clinical utility in identifying APS. Among those are anti-PS/PT IgG and IgM as well as the IgA isotypes of anticardiolipin and anti-β2GPI. Retrospective studies have suggested that anti-β2GPI IgA antibodies are significantly associated with thrombosis in lupus patients (OR 2.8, 95% CI 1.3-6.2)44. At the same time, a recent review of 10 retrospective studies (1775 patients with lupus or primary APS and 628 healthy controls) detected a strong association between anti-PS/PT and thrombotic events (OR 5.11; 95% CI 4.2-6.3)45. While the clinical significance of non-criteria aPL such as anti-PS/PT during viral infection remains to be fully defined, we demonstrate here that IgG fractions containing high levels of these antibodies trigger NET release in vitro and accelerate thrombosis in vivo. To our knowledge, these are among the first mechanistic studies ever attempted with anti-PS/PT.

There are several potential clinical implications of these findings. Patients with CAPS are regularly treated with heparin, corticosteroids, and plamapheresis—with the addition of the third leading to a demonstrable improvement in outcomes46. While corticosteroids have shown little promise to date in treatment of COVID-19, plasmapheresis has not been systematically explored. One wonders if this could provide benefit in the subgroup of COVID-19 patients with high titers of aPL. At the same time, convalescent plasma is receiving increasing attention as an approach to treating severe cases of COVID-19. Defining the extent to which these samples may contain aPL or other autoantibodies, in addition to protective anti-COVID-19 antibodies, is another potential area for future investigation.

This study has several limitations. We did not have access to the fresh plasma that would be required for lupus anticoagulant testing (which would have provided additional context and risk stratification to the aPL profiling). We speculate that many of the patients with positive anti-PS/PT would have displayed a lupus anticoagulant phenotype—as reported recently21—but proving that will require further study and prospective access to samples. We were also not able to define a clear link between circulating aPL and large artery/vein thrombosis. Eleven patients in our cohort had thrombotic events and 55% of those were positive for aPL. It should be noted that aggressive anticoagulation has been regularly employed at our institution including many patients treated prophylactically with therapeutic doses of anticoagulation prophylactically. It should also be noted that aPL were not tested on a defined hospital day, but rather when a sample became available to the research laboratory. Future studies should endeavor to systematically track aPL over the full course of a hospitalization, and perhaps especially at and after the time of discharge. In the meantime, and as we await definitive antiviral and immunologic solutions to the current pandemic, we posit that testing aPL, including anti-PS/PT, may lead to improved risk stratification and personalization of treatment.

METHODS

Human samples

Serum samples from 172 hospitalized COVID-19 patients were used in this study (Supplementary Table 1). Blood was collected into serum separator tubes containing clot activator and serum separator gel by a trained hospital phlebotomist. After completion of biochemical testing ordered by the clinician, the remaining serum was stored for clinical testing at 4°C for up to 48 hours before release to the research laboratory. Serum samples were immediately divided into small aliquots and stored at −80°C until the time of testing. All 172 patients had a confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis based on FDA-approved RNA testing. This study complied with all relevant ethical regulations, and was approved by the University of Michigan Institutional Review Board (HUM00179409), which waived the requirement for informed consent given the discarded nature of the samples.

Quantification of aPL

aPL were quantified in sera using Quanta Lite® ACA IgG, ACA IgM, ACA IgA, β2GPI IgG, β2GPI IgM, β2GPI IgA, aPS/PT IgG, and aPS/PT IgM kits (Inova Diagnostics) according to the manufacturer’s instructions. A previously described Antiphospholipid Score (aPL-S) was used to integrate summarize aPL profiles, with some adaptations32. Here, aPL-S was calculated for each patient by adding points corresponding to the different type and titers of aPL, weighted as below: high-titer anticardiolipin IgG (≥40 GPL) = 20 points; low-titer anticardiolipin IgG (≥20 GPL) = 4 points; anticardiolipin IgM (≥20 MPL) = 2 points; high-titer anti-β2PGI IgG (≥40 GPL) = 20 points; low-titer anti-β2PGI IgG (≥20 GPL) = 6 points; anti-β2PGI IgM (≥20 MPL) = 1 point; high-titer anti-PS/PT IgG (≥40 units) = 20 points; low-titer anti-PS/PT IgG (≥30 units) = 13 points; anti-PS/PT IgM (≥30 units) = 8 points.

Quantification of S100A8/A9 (calprotectin)

Calprotectin levels were measured with the Human S100A8/S100A9 Heterodimer DuoSet ELISA (DY8226-05, R&D Systems) according to the manufacturer’s instructions.

Quantification of myeloperoxidase-DNA complexes

Myeloperoxidase-DNA complexes were quantified similarly to what has been previously described47. This protocol used several reagents from the Cell Death Detection ELISA kit (Roche). First, a high-binding EIA/RIA 96-well plate (Costar) was coated overnight at 4° C with anti-human myeloperoxidase antibody (Bio-Rad 0400-0002), diluted to a concentration of 1 µg/ml in coating buffer (Cell Death kit). The plate was washed two times with wash buffer (0.05% Tween 20 in PBS), and then blocked with 4% bovine serum albumin in PBS (supplemented with 0.05% Tween 20) for 2 hours at room temperature. The plate was again washed five times, before incubating for 90 minutes at room temperature with 10% serum or plasma in the aforementioned blocking buffer (without Tween 20). The plate was washed five times, and then incubated for 90 minutes at room temperature with 10x anti-DNA antibody (HRP-conjugated; from the Cell Death kit) diluted 1:100 in blocking buffer. After five more washes, the plate was developed with 3,3’,5,5’-Tetramethylbenzidine (TMB) substrate (Invitrogen) followed by a 2N sulfuric acid stop solution. Absorbance was measured at a wavelength of 450 nm using a Cytation 5 Cell Imaging Multi-Mode Reader (BioTek). Data were normalized to in vitro-prepared NET standards included on every plate, which were quantified based on their DNA content.

Purification of human IgG

IgG was purified from COVID-19, APS, or control sera with a Protein G Agarose Kit following the manufacturer’s instructions (Pierce). Briefly, serum was diluted in IgG binding buffer and passed through a Protein G Agarose column at least 5 times. IgG was then eluted with 0.1 M glycine and then neutralized with 1 M Tris. This was followed by overnight dialysis against PBS at 4° C. IgG purity was verified with Coomassie staining, and concentrations were determined by BCA protein assay (Pierce) according to manufacturer’s instructions. All IgG samples were determined to be free of detectable endotoxin by the Pierce LAL Chromogenic Endotoxin Quantitation Kit (88282) according to manufacturer’s instructions.

Human neutrophil purification and NETosis assays

Collection of healthy human blood was approved by the University of Michigan IRB (HUM00044257). For neutrophil preparation, blood from healthy volunteers was collected into heparin tubes by standard phlebotomy techniques. The anticoagulated blood was then fractionated by density-gradient centrifugation using Ficoll-Paque Plus (GE Healthcare). Neutrophils were further purified by dextran sedimentation of the red blood cell layer, before lysing residual red blood cells with 0.2% sodium chloride. Neutrophil preparations were at least 95% pure as confirmed by both flow cytometry and nuclear morphology. To assess NETosis, complementary approaches were utilized. For the NET-associated MPO assay, neutrophils were resuspended in RPMI media (Gibco) supplemented with 0.5% bovine serum albumin (BSA, Sigma) and 0.5% fetal bovine serum (Gibco), which had been heat-inactivated at 56°C. Neutrophils (1×105/well) were then incubated in 96-well plates with 10 µg/ml human IgG for 3 hours. To collect NET-associated MPO, the culture media was discarded (to remove any soluble MPO) and replaced with 100 µL of RPMI supplemented with 5 U/ml Micrococcal nuclease (Thermo Fischer Scientific). After 10 minutes at 37° C, digestion of NETs was stopped with 10 mM EDTA. Supernatants were transferred to a v-shaped 96 well plate, and centrifuged at 350xg for 5 minutes to remove debris. Supernatants were then transferred into a new plate. To measure MPO activity, an equal volume of 3,3’,5,5’-Tetramethylbenzidine (TMB) substrate (1 mg ml-1, Thermo Fischer Scientific) was added to each well. After 10 minutes of incubation in the dark, the reaction was stopped by the addition of 50 µL of 1 mM sulfuric acid. Absorbance was measured at 450 nm using a Cytation 5 Cell Imaging Multi-Mode Reader. For immunofluorescence microscopy, 1.5 x 105 neutrophils were seeded onto coverslips coated with 0.001% poly-L-lysine (Sigma) and fixed with 4% paraformaldehyde. In some experiments, cells were then permeabilized with 0.1% Triton-X for 15 minutes at room temperature. Blocking was with 1% bovine serum albumin. The primary antibody was against neutrophil elastase (Abcam 21595, diluted 1:100), and the FITC-conjugated secondary antibody was from SouthernBiotech (4052-02, diluted 1:250). DNA was stained with Hoechst 33342 (Invitrogen). Images were collected with a Cytation 5 Cell Imaging Multi-Mode Reader.

Animals and housing

Mice were housed in a specific pathogen-free barrier facility, and fed standard chow. Experimental protocols were approved by the University of Michigan Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (PRO00008113), and all relevant ethical regulations were followed. Male C57BL/6 mice were purchased from The Jackson Laboratory and used for experiments at 10-12 weeks of age.

In vivo venous thrombosis

To model large-vein thrombosis, we employed procedures that we have utilized previously33,35,48. For the stenosis model, a laparotomy was performed under anesthesia. After exposure of the IVC, any lateral branches were ligated using 7-0 Prolene suture (back branches remained patent). A ligature was then fastened around the IVC over a blunted 30-gauge needle (which served as a spacer). After removal of the spacer, the abdomen was closed. Before recovery from anesthesia, mice received a single intravenous injection of human IgG (500 µg). 24 hours later, mice were humanely euthanized, blood was collected, and thrombus characteristics were measured. The electrolytic model was performed as described49. Briefly, after exposure of the IVC, any lateral branches were ligated using 7-0 Prolene suture (back branches remained patent). A 30-gauge silver-coated copper wire (KY-30-1-GRN, Electrospec) with exposed copper wire at the end was placed inside a 25-gauge needle, which was inserted into the IVC and positioned against the anterior wall (where it functioned as the anode). Another needle was implanted subcutaneously, completing the circuit (cathode). A constant current of 250 μA was applied for 15 minutes. The current was supplied by the voltage-to-current converter that is described in detail in the reference49. After removal of the needle, the abdomen was closed. Before recovery from anesthesia, mice received a single intravenous injection of human IgG (500 µg). 24 hours later, mice were humanely euthanized, blood was collected, and thrombus characteristics were measured.

Statistical analysis

Normally-distributed data were analyzed by two-sided t test and skewed data were analyzed by Mann-Whitney test. Comparisons of more than two groups were analyzed by one-way ANOVA with correction for multiple comparisons by Dunnett’s method. Data analysis was with GraphPad Prism software version 8. Correlations were tested by Spearman’s correlation coefficient. Statistical significance was defined as p<0.05 unless stated otherwise.

Data Availability

There are no large datasets to deposit. Other data will be made available via correspondence with the authors.

AUTHORSHIP

YZ, SKE, AAG SY, RAA, HS, GS, KG, JAM, MZ, WW, and SPL conducted experiments and analyzed data. YZ, NLL, YK, and JSK conceived the study and analyzed data. All authors participated in writing the manuscript and gave approval before submission.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The work was supported by a grant from the Burroughs Wellcome Fund to JSK and grants from the Michigan Medicine Frankel Cardiovascular Center and A. Alfred Taubman Medical Research Institute to YK and JSK. YZ was supported by career development grants from the Rheumatology Research Foundation and APS ACTION. JAM was partially supported by the VA Healthcare System. YK was supported by the NIH (K08HL131993, R01HL150392), Falk Medical Research Trust Catalyst Award, and the JOBST-American Venous Forum Award. JSK was supported by grants from the NIH (R01HL115138) and Lupus Research Alliance.

Footnotes

  • Competing interests: YK has served as a consultant to Surface Oncology and has a pending patent on the use of biogases in cardiovascular disease. The authors have no other financial conflicts to report.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    Wu, C., et al. Risk Factors Associated With Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome and Death in Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pneumonia in Wuhan, China. JAMA Intern Med (2020).
  2. 2.↵
    Tang, N., Li, D., Wang, X. & Sun, Z. Abnormal coagulation parameters are associated with poor prognosis in patients with novel coronavirus pneumonia. J Thromb Haemost 18, 844–847 (2020).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.
    Guan, W.J., et al. Clinical Characteristics of Coronavirus Disease 2019 in China. N Engl J Med (2020).
  4. 4.
    Chen, N., et al. Epidemiological and clinical characteristics of 99 cases of 2019 novel coronavirus pneumonia in Wuhan, China: a descriptive study. Lancet 395, 507–513 (2020).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. 5.
    Zhou, F., et al. Clinical course and risk factors for mortality of adult inpatients with COVID-19 in Wuhan, China: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet 395, 1054–1062 (2020).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. 6.↵
    Iba, T., et al. Diagnosis and management of sepsis-induced coagulopathy and disseminated intravascular coagulation. J Thromb Haemost 17, 1989–1994 (2019).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. 7.↵
    Iba, T., et al. A Proposal of the Modification of Japanese Society on Thrombosis and Hemostasis (JSTH) Disseminated Intravascular Coagulation (DIC) Diagnostic Criteria for Sepsis-Associated DIC. Clin Appl Thromb Hemost 24, 439–445 (2018).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. 8.↵
    Cui, S., Chen, S., Li, X., Liu, S. & Wang, F. Prevalence of venous thromboembolism in patients with severe novel coronavirus pneumonia. J Thromb Haemost (2020).
  9. 9.↵
    Klok, F.A., et al. Incidence of thrombotic complications in critically ill ICU patients with COVID-19. Thromb Res (2020).
  10. 10.↵
    Lodigiani, C., et al. Venous and arterial thromboembolic complications in COVID-19 patients admitted to an academic hospital in Milan, Italy. Thromb Res 191, 9–14 (2020).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. 11.↵
    Tian, S., et al. Pulmonary Pathology of Early-Phase 2019 Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pneumonia in Two Patients With Lung Cancer. J Thorac Oncol (2020).
  12. 12.
    Xu, Z., et al. Pathological findings of COVID-19 associated with acute respiratory distress syndrome. Lancet Respir Med 8, 420–422 (2020).
    OpenUrl
  13. 13.↵
    Fox, S.E., et al. Pulmonary and cardiac pathology in African American patients with COVID-19: an autopsy series from New Orleans. Lancet Respir Med (2020).
  14. 14.↵
    Zuo, Y., et al. Neutrophil extracellular traps in COVID-19. JCI Insight (2020).
  15. 15.↵
    Barnes, B.J., et al. Targeting potential drivers of COVID-19: Neutrophil extracellular traps. J Exp Med 217(2020).
  16. 16.↵
    Madison, J.A., Duarte-Garcia, A., Zuo, Y. & Knight, J.S. Treatment of thrombotic antiphospholipid syndrome in adults and children. Curr Opin Rheumatol 32, 215–227 (2020).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  17. 17.↵
    Yalavarthi, S., et al. Release of neutrophil extracellular traps by neutrophils stimulated with antiphospholipid antibodies: a newly identified mechanism of thrombosis in the antiphospholipid syndrome. Arthritis Rheumatol 67, 2990–3003 (2015).
    OpenUrl
  18. 18.↵
    Zuo, Y., Shi, H., Li, C. & Knight, J.S. Antiphospholipid syndrome: a clinical perspective. Chin Med J (Engl) (2020).
  19. 19.↵
    Kazzaz, N.M., McCune, W.J. & Knight, J.S. Treatment of catastrophic antiphospholipid syndrome. Curr Opin Rheumatol 28, 218–227 (2016).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  20. 20.↵
    Miyakis, S., et al. International consensus statement on an update of the classification criteria for definite antiphospholipid syndrome (APS). J Thromb Haemost 4, 295–306 (2006).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  21. 21.↵
    Shi, H., et al. Antiphosphatidylserine/prothrombin antibodies (aPS/PT) as potential diagnostic markers and risk predictors of venous thrombosis and obstetric complications in antiphospholipid syndrome. Clin Chem Lab Med 56, 614–624 (2018).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  22. 22.↵
    Zhang, Y., et al. Coagulopathy and Antiphospholipid Antibodies in Patients with Covid-19. N Engl J Med 382, e38 (2020).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  23. 23.
    Helms, J., et al. High risk of thrombosis in patients in severe SARS-CoV-2 infection: a multicenter prospective cohort study. Intensive Care Med In press(2020).
  24. 24.
    Escher, R., Breakey, N. & Lammle, B. Severe COVID-19 infection associated with endothelial activation. Thromb Res 190, 62 (2020).
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  25. 25.↵
    Hossri, S., Shadi, M., Hamarsha, Z., Schneider, R. & El-Sayegh, D. Clinically significant anticardiolipin antibodies associated with COVID-19. J Crit Care 59, 32–34 (2020).
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  26. 26.↵
    Abdel-Wahab, N., Talathi, S., Lopez-Olivo, M.A. & Suarez-Almazor, M.E. Risk of developing antiphospholipid antibodies following viral infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lupus 27, 572–583 (2018).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  27. 27.↵
    Asherson, R.A. & Cervera, R. ‘Primary’, ‘secondary’ and other variants of the antiphospholipid syndrome. Lupus 3, 293–298 (1994).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  28. 28.↵
    Abdel-Wahab, N., Lopez-Olivo, M.A., Pinto-Patarroyo, G.P. & Suarez-Almazor, M.E. Systematic review of case reports of antiphospholipid syndrome following infection. Lupus 25, 1520–1531 (2016).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  29. 29.↵
    Sung, J. & Anjum, S. Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Infection Associated With Antiphospholipid Antibodies and Four-Extremity Deep Vein thrombosis in a Previously Healthy Female. Cureus 12, e8408 (2020).
    OpenUrl
  30. 30.↵
    Blank, M., et al. Bacterial induction of autoantibodies to beta2-glycoprotein-I accounts for the infectious etiology of antiphospholipid syndrome. J Clin Invest 109, 797–804 (2002).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  31. 31.↵
    Ruff, W.E., et al. Pathogenic Autoreactive T and B Cells Cross-React with Mimotopes Expressed by a Common Human Gut Commensal to Trigger Autoimmunity. Cell Host Microbe 26, 100–113 e108 (2019).
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  32. 32.↵
    Otomo, K., et al. Efficacy of the antiphospholipid score for the diagnosis of antiphospholipid syndrome and its predictive value for thrombotic events. Arthritis Rheum 64, 504–512 (2012).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  33. 33.↵
    Meng, H., et al. In Vivo Role of Neutrophil Extracellular Traps in Antiphospholipid Antibody-Mediated Venous Thrombosis. Arthritis Rheumatol 69, 655–667 (2017).
    OpenUrl
  34. 34.
    Ali, R.A., et al. Adenosine receptor agonism protects against NETosis and thrombosis in antiphospholipid syndrome. Nat Commun 10, 1916 (2019).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  35. 35.↵
    Knight, J.S., et al. Activated signature of antiphospholipid syndrome neutrophils reveals potential therapeutic target. JCI Insight 2(2017).
  36. 36.↵
    Hunt, J.E., McNeil, H.P., Morgan, G.J., Crameri, R.M. & Krilis, S.A. A phospholipid-beta 2-glycoprotein I complex is an antigen for anticardiolipin antibodies occurring in autoimmune disease but not with infection. Lupus 1, 75–81 (1992).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  37. 37.↵
    Cervera, R., Rodriguez-Pinto, I. & Espinosa, G. The diagnosis and clinical management of the catastrophic antiphospholipid syndrome: A comprehensive review. J Autoimmun 92, 1–11 (2018).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  38. 38.↵
    Rodriguez-Pinto, I., et al. Catastrophic antiphospholipid syndrome (CAPS): Descriptive analysis of 500 patients from the International CAPS Registry. Autoimmun Rev 15, 1120–1124 (2016).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  39. 39.↵
    Kapoor, S., Opneja, A. & Nayak, L. The role of neutrophils in thrombosis. Thromb Res 170, 87–96 (2018).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  40. 40.↵
    Thalin, C., Hisada, Y., Lundstrom, S., Mackman, N. & Wallen, H. Neutrophil Extracellular Traps: Villains and Targets in Arterial, Venous, and Cancer-Associated Thrombosis. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 39, 1724–1738 (2019).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  41. 41.↵
    Kanthi, Y., Knight, J.S., Zuo, Y. & Pinsky, D.J. New (re)Purpose for an old drug: purinergic receptor blockade may extinguish the COVID-19 thrombo-inflammatory firestorm. JCI Insight (2020).
  42. 42.↵
    Liu, X., et al. Potential therapeutic effects of dipyridamole in the severely ill patients with COVID-19. Acta Pharm Sin B (2020).
  43. 43.↵
    Hughes, G.R. & Khamashta, M.A. Seronegative antiphospholipid syndrome. Ann Rheum Dis 62, 1127 (2003).
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  44. 44.↵
    Sweiss, N.J., et al. IgA anti-beta2-glycoprotein I autoantibodies are associated with an increased risk of thromboembolic events in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus. PLoS One 5, e12280 (2010).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  45. 45.↵
    Sciascia, S., et al. Anti-prothrombin (aPT) and anti-phosphatidylserine/prothrombin (aPS/PT) antibodies and the risk of thrombosis in the antiphospholipid syndrome. A systematic review. Thromb Haemost 111, 354–364 (2014).
    OpenUrl
  46. 46.↵
    Bucciarelli, S., et al. Mortality in the catastrophic antiphospholipid syndrome: causes of death and prognostic factors in a series of 250 patients. Arthritis Rheum 54, 2568–2576 (2006).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  47. 47.↵
    Kessenbrock, K., et al. Netting neutrophils in autoimmune small-vessel vasculitis. Nat Med 15, 623–625 (2009).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  48. 48.↵
    Yadav, V., et al. Ectonucleotidase tri(di)phosphohydrolase-1 (ENTPD-1) disrupts inflammasome/interleukin 1beta-driven venous thrombosis. J Clin Invest 129, 2872–2877 (2019).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  49. 49.↵
    Palmer, O.R., et al. Update on the electrolytic IVC model for pre-clinical studies of venous thrombosis. Res Pract Thromb Haemost 2, 266–273 (2018).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
Back to top
Posted June 17, 2020.
Download PDF
Data/Code
Email
Prothrombotic antiphospholipid antibodies in COVID-19
Yu Zuo, Shanea K. Estes, Alex A. Gandhi, Srilakshmi Yalavarthi, Ramadan A. Ali, Hui Shi, Gautam Sule, Kelsey Gockman, Jacqueline A. Madison, Melanie Zuo, Wrenn Woodward, Sean P. Lezak, Njira L. Lugogo, Yogendra Kanthi, Jason S. Knight
medRxiv 2020.06.15.20131607; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.06.15.20131607
Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools

Subject Area