Abstract
Introduction: Monoclonal gammopathy of thrombotic significance (MGTS) is a recently recognized thrombophilia where monoclonal platelet factor 4 (PF4)-specific IgG antibodies initiate a chronic prothrombotic state characterized by recurrent and potentially life-threatening thrombosis. Studies from large data sets demonstrate that patients with monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) have a heightened risk of experiencing thromboembolic events without a precise explanatory mechanism. The prevalence of MGTS in MGUS-related thrombosis is unknown; however, the recent identification of MGTS antibodies as a cause of thrombosis suggests a potentially causative mechanism. Emerging evidence indicates that detecting pathogenic MGTS antibodies presents diagnostic challenges due to the insensitivity of FDA-approved diagnostic assays adopted from HIT (HIT ELISAs) and gold-standard functional tests that use heparin-treated platelets, such as the serotonin release assay (SRA). Only PF4-enhanced functional assays, including the PF4-dependent P-selectin expression assay (PEA) and PF4-SRA, have proven sensitive for detecting MGTS antibodies. In this study, the PEA was utilized to better define the incidence of pathogenic anti-PF4 antibodies among a cohort of MGUS patients with a history of thrombosis.
Methods: A search of the Mayo Clinic Dysproteinemia Bank was conducted to identify two cohorts of IgG MGUS patients, one with venous thromboembolism-associated diagnosis code(s) and the other without. A diagnosis of multiple myeloma was exclusionary. Each serum sample was assessed using the PEA. Mayo Clinic's Institutional Review Board approved the research study.
Results: Among the 134 patients studied in the thrombosis cohort, 17 (13%) stimulated platelet activation in the PEA (positive cut-off ≥19%), some weakly. Of these, four patients (Patients 1-4) were confirmed to have PF4-dependent platelet-activating antibodies inhibitable with high concentrations of heparin and sensitive to blockade of the IgG receptor on platelets, FcGRIIa. The thrombotic complications experienced included recurrent deep venous thrombosis (DVT) over several years (Patient 1), a single DVT (Patient 2), a thrombotic cerebrovascular accident (CVA) (Patient 3), and a series of thrombotic events, including DVTs, left atrial thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, and acute limb ischemia (Patient 4). Notably, longitudinal samples spanning twelve years (Patient 1), six years (Patient 2), three years (Patient 3), and on a single sample date (Patient 4) were confirmed positive by PEA. The prolonged persistence of platelet-activating anti-PF4 antibodies in Patients 1-3 supported a diagnosis of MGTS in these patients. Strikingly, all four patients tested negative in two FDA-approved HIT ELISAs (Immucor PF4 IgG and Zymutest HIA IgG). SRA was negative for Patients 1 and 2, weakly positive for Patient 3 (33%), and positive for Patient 4 (72%).
Of the 166 patients in the MGUS minus thrombosis cohort, one patient demonstrated a non-heparin induced HIT-like antibody that was HIT ELISA (Optical Density >1.0) and PEA-positive, and inhibitable using high concentrations of heparin and FcGRIIa blockade. No follow-up samples were available to assess antibody longevity. The patient had no history of thrombosis, and testing demonstrated that the anti-PF4 antibody was not synonymous with the MGUS antibody.Conclusions: Among a cohort of 134 MGUS patients with thrombosis, the prevalence of MGTS was found to be 2.2% (3 patients with persistent platelet-activating anti-PF4 antibodies). The identification of anti-PF4 antibodies among MGUS patients provides a mechanism contributing to the increased thrombotic risk associated with monoclonal gammopathies. Antibody negativity in HIT ELISA and variable positivity in the SRA highlight the nonclassical serology associated with anti-PF4 antibodies in MGTS and support performing PF4-enhanced functional testing. In addition, some patients appear to produce coincidental (non-monoclonal) platelet-activating anti-PF4 antibodies without evidence of thrombosis, although the longevity of such antibodies could not be examined in the one patient where it was identified. These findings highlight the need for larger, prospective MGUS studies to validate these observations, further define the interplay between monoclonal gammopathies and thrombotic risk, and to better understand the long-term outcomes of patients with MGTS.
