AB0088 QUALITY OF LIFE IN PATIENTS WITH ANTIPHOSPHOLIPID ANTIBODIES DIFFERS ACCORDING TO ANTIPHOSPHOLIPID SYNDROME DAMAGE INDEX (DIAPS)

Background: Antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) is a rare autoimmune disorder that mainly affects young individuals. Due to the potentially devasting effects of some its clinical manifestations, such as ischemic stroke and thrombotic microangiopathy, APS can have deep negative impact on quality life (QoL) affected patients due damage accrual (2). To capture full consequences disease, including both extra-criteria specific features, antiphospholipid index (DIAPS), 37-item score, was conceived. Objectives: The aim this study validate DIAPS in cohort antibodies (aPL) positive subjects, comparing it risk stratification score for development manifestations (Global Score -GAPSS) QoL questionnaires filled out by patients. Methods: This retrospective included total 84 consecutive persistent aPL who attended San Giovanni Bosco Hospital (Turin, Italy). Patients were then divided based their diagnosis 3 groups: primary (PAPS), secondary (SAPS) without APS, according Miyakis criteria (1). Demographic, laboratory characteristics, retrieved from electronic medical records are summarized Table 1. calculated previously reported adding together all points corresponding (3). Results: A enrolled study: 39 28 17 APS-related manifestations. had significantly higher levels when compared asymptomatic (mean 2.6 ±1.8 vs. 1.5 ±1.9, respectively; p<0.05). Moreover, SAPS PAPS 3.1 ±1.9 2.2 ±1.7, When GAPSS patients, we found correlation between these two scores 11.9 ±5.2 mean 2.4 ±1.9; Pearson 0.241; Finally, applying SF-12 our cohort, physical component mental lower than average population (39.3 ±11.3 42.3 ±8, respectively) observed trend PCS MCS (Pearson -0.133 -0.183). Conclusion: might be valid system assessment QoL. References: [1]Miyakis S, Lockshin MD, et al. International consensus statement an update classification definite (APS). J Thromb Haemost 2006;4:295–306. [2]Grika EP, Ziakas PD, Morbidity, mortality, organ with syndrome. Rheumatol 2012;39:516–523. [3]Amigo MC, Goycochea-Robles M V. Development initial validation (DIAPS) Lupus 2015;24:927–934. Clinical characteristics (n=39 ) (n=28 (n=17 Anagraphic Mean age (S.D.) at data collection 50.6±13.7 47.4±12.1 48.6±11.3 Sex (females), n 29 (74.4%) Secondary diagnosis, N/A SLE 24 (85.7%) SSJ 1 (3.6%) UCTD MCTD 2 (7.1%) 8 (45.1%) Thrombosis, 30 (76.9%) 26 (92.9%) Arterial thrombosis, 20 (51.3%) 14 (50%) Venous (43.6%) 15 (53.6%) Pregnancy morbidity, 11 (28.2%) 4 (14.3%) profile LA, 31 (79.5%) 23 (82.1%) 12 (70.6%) aCL (IgG/M), 22 (56.4%) 18 (64.3%) 10 (58.9%) Anti-β2GPI (46.2.%) 16 (57.1%) (17.6%) aPS/PT (59%) 21 (75%) (47.1%) Figure Relative involvement domains Disclosure Interests: None declared