Many acquired bleeding and thrombotic complications are provoked by autoantibodies to blood coagulation factors, or to hemostasis inhibitors and regulatory proteins. If occurrence of those antibodies remains rare or ultra-rare, affected patients are not always well-identified and associated pathologies are not always understood. Today, autoantigens tend to be better characterized. New available methods allow investigating structural changes of body components, responsible for auto-immunization. This renders it possible to develop laboratory assays for detecting autoantibodies and estimating their blood concentration. This review analyzes the major autoantibodies reported to be associated with hemorrhagic or thrombotic pathologies and their possible inducing causes when known. Pathogenicity is strongly patient- and context-dependent and is related to autoantibodies’ concentration, avidity, and capacity to bind to autoantigen structures in-vivo, misdirecting the immune system to the own body’s cells or organs. Identification of autoantigens allows for developing laboratory methods for testing autoantibodies and following their evolution kinetics. In-vitro investigations concern functional assays, to evaluate autoantibody’s capacity to inhibit physiological activities, or autoantigen-capture-based assays to detect autoantibodies, like with enzyme-linked immuno-sorbent assay (ELISA) methods. Exploring patients with autoimmune complications remains difficult as few specific assays are available. They mainly concern diseases with the highest incidence, like anti-phospholipid antibodies, lupus anticoagulants, or heparin-dependent antibodies. The present understanding suggests that antibodies to ubiquitous components, like phospholipids or polysaccharides, are actually targeted to proteins with a strong affinity binding to those components: Autoantibodies are not directed to phospholipids, but to phospholipid-binding proteins, and heparin-dependent antibodies are not directed to anticoagulant polysaccharides, but to platelet factor 4. Most pathogenic autoantibodies are of immunoglobulin G (IgG) isotype, but in some cases, IgM or IgA isotypes can be involved. Identification and characterization of autoantibodies associated to hemorrhagic or thrombotic pathologies remains complex at the laboratory level, although they are of high relevance for the right management of concerned patients.

Protein Z (PZ) is a vitamin K-dependent protein that acts as a cofactor for the inhibition of activated factor X by the PZ-dependent protease inhibitor, an anticoagulant protein of the serpin superfamily. The presence of antibodies against PZ (aPZ-Abs) was first described in women with unexplained recurrent embryo loss, pre-eclampsia, or foetal death, independently from habitual antiphospholipid/anti-cofactor antibodies. Other studies suggested that aPZ-Ab could be associated with a small birthweight for the gestational age. The mechanism of action of these antibodies is not yet understood. At this time, even aPZ-Abs are frequently observed in patients with lupus anticoagulant or anticardiolipin antibodies, there is no evidence that aPZ-Abs increase systemic venous or arterial thrombotic risk. The comparison of the various published studies shows that the threshold suggesting an obstetric risk is not clearly defined. At present, it is not known whether one isotype of immunoglobulin (G or M, or both) is particularly involved in certain obstetric manifestations, or these antibodies persist during time, or can be induced by infectious diseases. Consequently, detection of these antibodies is not routinely warranted and should only be performed in randomized clinical trials.

Antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) is defined as an autoimmune and prothrombotic disorder in patients with the persistent presence of antiphospholipid antibodies (aPLs). In the classification criteria, aPL expresses lupus anticoagulant (LA) activity, which is detected by prolongation of coagulation assays. The LA detection algorithm is a sequential flow including screening tests, mixing tests, and confirmatory tests to differentiate between LA-positive and other anticoagulant abnormalities. Two types of assays are used, like dilute Russell’s viper venom time (dRVVT) and activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT) because no single test is sensitive to all LAs. The anticoagulant drugs prescribed for the prevention and treatment of thrombosis disorders can interfere with the assays, and it is important to know the effects of these drugs in the assays. Especially, new generation anticoagulant drugs, called direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), affect the results. In this review, the following points are discussed: i) LA detection flow and data interpretation, ii) the principles of coagulation assays proposed and their characteristics, and iii) the effects of anticoagulant drugs in LA detection.

Accurate lupus anticoagulant (LA) detection is crucial to antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) diagnosis. Detection is based on LA functional behavior in coagulation assays irrespective of epitope specificity. LA screening tests employ dilute phospholipids to accentuate in vitro inhibition by LAs, although they are not LA-specific and can be elevated by other coagulation abnormalities. Elevated screening tests are reflexed to mixing tests to distinguish between factor deficiency and inhibition. Confirmatory tests with high phospholipid concentration swamp LA to generate shorter clotting times than screening tests, whilst prolongation persists with non-phospholipid-dependent inhibitors. LA heterogeneity means that no single screening test detects every LA and the screen/mix/confirm medley must be applied to at least two assay types, usually dilute Russell’s viper venom time (dRVVT) and an LA-sensitive activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT). Most laboratories restrict LA testing to these two assays, yet others, such as dilute prothrombin time (dPT), can perform with equal diagnostic efficacy, and additionally detect LA unreactive with dRVVT and aPTT. Converting clotting times to normalized ratios improves assay performance, and practitioners must choose between normal pooled plasma (NPP) clotting time denominators to reflect on-the-day assay performance, or reference interval (RI) mean clotting times to negate the effects of NPP variation. Cut-offs can be generated parametrically from normally distributed data, or different percentiles applied depending on the preferred balance between sensitivity and specificity. Sourcing sufficient donors for accurate cut-off estimations is problematic and transference exercises can be undertaken on low donor numbers. Analytical limitations of mixing tests have led to the adoption of alternative algorithms to the screen/mix/confirm test order, whilst some continue to rigidly apply the latter despite those limitations. Strategies to reduce or eliminate the effects of therapeutic anticoagulation have limitations, whilst the Taipan snake venom time (TSVT) screening test with an ecarin time (ET) confirmatory test is insensitive to vitamin K antagonist (VKA) and direct activated factor X anticoagulation.

In patients with autoimmune coagulation factor deficiency (AiCFD), the production of autoantibodies that inhibit coagulation factors in the blood reduces the activity of those relevant coagulation factors, resulting in severe bleeding symptoms. Recently, reports of patients with AiCFD have noted the concomitant detection of lupus anticoagulant (LA), a risk factor for thrombosis. LA-positive patients may show bleeding symptoms due to decreased activity of coagulation factor II (FII) caused by autoantibodies against FII, in addition to thrombotic symptoms, a condition termed LA-hypoprothrombinemia syndrome (LAHPS). Anti-FII antibodies in LAHPS cases are frequently cleared antibodies that can be detected using immunological techniques, such as enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Recently, several cases of coagulation FV inhibitors, known as autoimmune FV deficiency, have been reported. Some of these cases may be complicated by LA, which can cause thrombosis. False-positive results for anticoagulant inhibitors are known to occur in LA cases; therefore, immunological confirmation of antibodies against coagulation factors is recommended. Additionally, acquired hemophilia A (AHA), caused by autoantibodies against FVIII, is a typical acquired hemorrhagic diathesis, although affected patients may present with thrombosis associated with LA. Thus, it is important to remember that hemorrhagic diathesis due to autoantibodies against clotting factors can also result in thrombosis, as demonstrated by the co-detection of LA. When clotting factor inhibitors are detected in LA-positive individuals, it is important to confirm the presence of autoantibodies against coagulation factors using immunological methods, such as ELISA, to avoid false-positive results.