Effect of Ezetimibe Monotherapy on Plasma Lipoprotein(a) Concentrations in Patients with Primary Hypercholesterolemia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Are We Using Ezetimibe As Much As We Should?

Lipid-lowering therapies, particularly non-statin regimens, are underutilized as ~2/3 of patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular (CV) disease (CVD) are not optimally managed, and do not attain target low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) concentrations, despite statin treatment. Statins have been the mainstay of hypolipidemic therapies; however, they are plagued by adverse effects, which have partly hindered their more widespread use. Ezetimibe is often the first added mode of treatment to attain LDL-C goals as it is efficacious and also allows the use of a smaller dose of statin, while the need for more expensive therapies is obviated. We herein provide a comprehensive review of the effects of ezetimibe in lipid lowering and reducing CV events and improving outcomes. Of the hypolipidemic therapies, oral ezetimibe, in contrast to newer agents, is the most convenient and/or affordable regimen to be utilized as mono- or combined therapy supported by data from CV outcomes studies attesting to its efficacy in reducing CVD risk and events. When combined with a statin, the statin dose could be lower, thus curtailing side-effects, while the hypolipidemic effect is enhanced (by ~20%) as the percentage of patients with target level LDL-C (<70 mg/dL) is higher with combined treatment versus a high-intensity statin. Ezetimibe could also serve as an alternative treatment in cases of statin intolerance. In conclusion, ezetimibe has an excellent safety/tolerability profile; it is the first added treatment to a statin that can attain LDL-C targets. In the combined therapy, the hypolipidemic effect is enhanced while the dose of statin could be lower, thus limiting the occurrence of side-effects. Ezetimibe could also serve as an alternative mode of treatment in cases of statin intolerance.

Consensus on lipoprotein(a) of the Spanish Society of Arteriosclerosis. Literature review and recommendations for clinical practice

The irruption of lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) in the study of cardiovascular risk factors is perhaps, together with the discovery and use of proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (iPCSK9) inhibitor drugs, the greatest novelty in the field for decades. Lp(a) concentration (especially very high levels) has an undeniable association with certain cardiovascular complications, such as atherosclerotic vascular disease (AVD) and aortic stenosis. However, there are several current limitations to both establishing epidemiological associations and specific pharmacological treatment. Firstly, the measurement of Lp(a) is highly dependent on the test used, mainly because of the characteristics of the molecule. Secondly, Lp(a) concentration is more than 80% genetically determined, so that, unlike other cardiovascular risk factors, it cannot be regulated by lifestyle changes. Finally, although there are many promising clinical trials with specific drugs to reduce Lp(a), currently only iPCSK9 (limited for use because of its cost) significantly reduces Lp(a). However, and in line with other scientific societies, the SEA considers that, with the aim of increasing knowledge about the contribution of Lp(a) to cardiovascular risk, it is relevant to produce a document containing the current status of the subject, recommendations for the control of global cardiovascular risk in people with elevated Lp(a) and recommendations on the therapeutic approach to patients with elevated Lp(a).

A focused update to the 2019 NLA scientific statement on use of lipoprotein(a) in clinical practice

Since the 2019 National Lipid Association (NLA) Scientific Statement on Use of Lipoprotein(a) in Clinical Practice was issued, accumulating epidemiological data have clarified the relationship between lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] level and cardiovascular disease risk and risk reduction. Therefore, the NLA developed this focused update to guide clinicians in applying this emerging evidence in clinical practice. We now have sufficient evidence to support the recommendation to measure Lp(a) levels at least once in every adult for risk stratification. Individuals with Lp(a) levels <75 nmol/L (30 mg/dL) are considered low risk, individuals with Lp(a) levels ≥125 nmol/L (50 mg/dL) are considered high risk, and individuals with Lp(a) levels between 75 and 125 nmol/L (30-50 mg/dL) are at intermediate risk. Cascade screening of first-degree relatives of patients with elevated Lp(a) can identify additional individuals at risk who require intervention. Patients with elevated Lp(a) should receive early, more-intensive risk factor management, including lifestyle modification and lipid-lowering drug therapy in high-risk individuals, primarily to reduce low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved an indication for lipoprotein apheresis (which reduces both Lp(a) and LDL-C) in high-risk patients with familial hypercholesterolemia and documented coronary or peripheral artery disease whose Lp(a) level remains ≥60 mg/dL [∼150 nmol/L)] and LDL-C ≥ 100 mg/dL on maximally tolerated lipid-lowering therapy. Although Lp(a) is an established independent causal risk factor for cardiovascular disease, and despite the high prevalence of Lp(a) elevation (∼1 of 5 individuals), measurement rates are low, warranting improved screening strategies for cardiovascular disease prevention.

The effect of rosuvastatin alone or in combination with fenofibrate or omega-3 fatty acids on lipoprotein(a) levels in patients with mixed hyperlipidemia

Introduction

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a strong, genetically determined, pathogenetic factor of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). The aim of this post-hoc analysis was to compare the effect of hypolipidemic treatment on Lp(a) levels of patients with mixed hyperlipidemia.

Material and methods

We previously randomized patients with mixed hyperlipidemia (low-density lipoprotein [LDL-C] > 160 mg/dl and triglycerides > 200 mg/dl) to rosuvastatin monotherapy 40 mg/day (R group, n = 30) or rosuvastatin 10 mg/day combined with fenofibrate 200 mg/day (RF group, n = 30) or omega-3 fatty acids 2 g/day (RΩ group, n = 30). In the present post-hoc analysis, we included only the patients whose Lp(a) levels were assessed (16, 16 and 15 in the R, RF and RΩ groups, respectively). Lipid profile and Lp(a) were measured at baseline and after 3 months of treatment.

Results

Significant reductions in total cholesterol, LDL-C, non-high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (non-HDL-C) and triglyceride levels were observed in all groups. A significant increase in Lp(a) levels was noted in the R (p = 0.017) and RF (p = 0.029) groups, while no significant difference was seen in the RΩ group (p = NS). Regarding Lp(a) elevations, no differences were found between groups. In the R group, a strong negative correlation between the changes in Lp(a) and LDL-C (r = -0.500, p = 0.049) was observed, while a significant negative correlation between the changes in Lp(a) and triglycerides (r = -0.531, p = 0.034) was noted in the RF group.

Conclusions

Rosuvastatin and/or fenofibrate treatment increases Lp(a) levels in patients with mixed hyperlipidemia. Novel therapies should target Lp(a) level reduction to decrease the residual ASCVD risk in patients with mixed hyperlipidemia.

Lipoprotein (a) as a predictor of diabetic retinopathy in patients with type 2 diabetes: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Lipoprotein a (LP(a)), an LDL-like lipoprotein, known as a risk factor for cardiovascular diseases, has a controversial association with diabetic retinopathy in patients with type 2 diabetes-the current systematic review aimed to critically assess the association between LP(a) and diabetic retinopathy.

METHODS

A systematic review of relevant studies was conducted after a thorough search in PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar electronic databases. We used English observational, case-control, and prospective cohort studies published up to August 2022, including type 2 diabetic patients as the population, diabetic retinopathy as the outcome, and LP(a) as the intervention.

RESULT

17 relevant studies, including 4688 patients with diabetes, were included in this systematic review. While in 13 studies, Lipoprotein(a) was recognized as a risk factor for diabetic retinopathy, only three studies reported no evidence of a relationship between the two. Also, another study showed a mixed outcome of the relationship between LP(a) and diabetic retinopathy.

CONCLUSION

High serum lipoprotein(a) in patients with type 2 diabetes is considered a risk factor for diabetic retinopathy. However, further large-scaled cohort studies are still required to validate this finding.

Role of lipoprotein(a) in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: A review of current and emerging therapies

Lipoprotein(a), or Lp(a), is structurally like low-density lipoprotein (LDL) but differs in that it contains glycoprotein apolipoprotein(a) [apo(a)]. Due to its prothrombotic and proinflammatory properties, Lp(a) is an independent risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and aortic valve stenosis. Lp(a) levels are genetically determined, and it is estimated that 20%-25% of the global population has an Lp(a) level ≥50 mg/dL (or ≥125 nmol/L). Diet and lifestyle interventions have little to no effect on Lp(a) levels. Lipoprotein apheresis is the only approved treatment for elevated Lp(a) but is time-intensive for the patient and only modestly effective. Pharmacological approaches to reduce Lp(a) levels and its associated risks are of significant interest; however, currently available lipid-lowering therapies have limited effectiveness in reducing Lp(a) levels. Although statins are first-line agents to reduce LDL cholesterol levels, they modestly increase Lp(a) levels and have not been shown to change Lp(a)-mediated ASCVD risk. Alirocumab, evolocumab, and inclisiran reduce Lp(a) levels by 20-25%, yet the clinical implications of this reduction for Lp(a)-mediated ASCVD risk are uncertain. Niacin also lowers Lp(a) levels; however, its effectiveness in mitigating Lp(a)-mediated ASCVD risk remains unclear, and its side effects have limited its utilization. Recommendations for when to screen and how to manage individuals with elevated Lp(a) vary widely between national and international guidelines and scientific statements. Three investigational compounds targeting Lp(a), including small interfering RNA (siRNA) agents (olpasiran, SLN360) and an antisense oligonucleotide (pelacarsen), are in various stages of development. These compounds block the translation of messenger RNA (mRNA) into apo(a), a key structural component of Lp(a), thereby substantially reducing Lp(a) synthesis in the liver. The purpose of this review is to describe current recommendations for screening and managing elevated Lp(a), describe the effects of currently available lipid-lowering therapies on Lp(a) levels, and provide insight into emerging therapies targeting Lp(a).

Treatment of Lp(a): Is It the Future or Are We Ready Today?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The goal of this review is to present the pharmacodynamic effectiveness as well as the clinical efficacy and safety of investigational antisense oligonucleotides (ASOs) and small interference RNAs (siRNAs) drugs that specifically target lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)). The review will discuss whether the existing lipid-lowering therapies are adequate to treat high Lp(a) levels or whether it is necessary to use the emerging new therapeutic approaches which are based on the current RNA technologies.

RECENT FINDINGS

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is a causal risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), independent of other conventional risk factors. High Lp(a) levels are also independently associated with an increased risk of aortic stenosis progression rate. Plasma Lp(a) levels are primarily genetically determined by variation in the LPA gene coding for apo(a). All secondary prevention trials have demonstrated that the existing hypolipidemic therapies are not adequate to reduce Lp(a) levels to such an extent that could lead to a substantial reduction of ASCVD risk. This has led to the development of new drugs that target the mRNA transcript of LPA and efficiently inhibit Lp(a) synthesis leading to potent Lp(a) reduction. These new drugs are the ASO pelacarsen and the siRNAs olpasiran and SLN360. Recent pharmacodynamic studies showed that all these drugs potently reduce Lp(a) up to 98%, in a dose-dependent manner. Ongoing clinical trials will determine the Lp(a)-lowering efficacy, tolerability, and safety of these drugs as well as their potential effectiveness in reducing the ASCVD risk attributed to high plasma Lp(a) levels. We are not ready today to significantly reduce plasma Lp(a). Emerging therapies potently decrease Lp(a) and ongoing clinical trials will determine their effectiveness in reducing ASCVD risk in subjects with high Lp(a) levels.

Consensus document on Lipoprotein(a) from the Italian Society for the Study of Atherosclerosis (SISA)

AIMS

In view of the consolidating evidence on the causal role of Lp(a) in cardiovascular disease, the Italian Society for the Study of Atherosclerosis (SISA) has assembled a consensus on Lp(a) genetics and epidemiology, together with recommendations for its measurement and current and emerging therapeutic approaches to reduce its plasma levels. Data on the Italian population are also provided.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Lp(a) is constituted by one apo(a) molecule and a lipoprotein closely resembling to a low-density lipoprotein (LDL). Its similarity with an LDL, together with its ability to carry oxidized phospholipids are considered the two main features making Lp(a) harmful for cardiovascular health. Plasma Lp(a) concentrations vary over about 1000 folds in humans and are genetically determined, thus they are quite stable in any individual. Mendelian Randomization studies have suggested a causal role of Lp(a) in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and aortic valve stenosis and observational studies indicate a linear direct correlation between cardiovascular disease and Lp(a) plasma levels. Lp(a) measurement is strongly recommended once in a patient's lifetime, particularly in FH subjects, but also as part of the initial lipid screening to assess cardiovascular risk. The apo(a) size polymorphism represents a challenge for Lp(a) measurement in plasma, but new strategies are overcoming these difficulties. A reduction of Lp(a) levels can be currently attained only by plasma apheresis and, moderately, with PCSK9 inhibitor treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Awaiting the approval of selective Lp(a)-lowering drugs, an intensive management of the other risk factors for individuals with elevated Lp(a) levels is strongly recommended.

Novel Pharmacological Therapies for the Management of Hyperlipoproteinemia(a)

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a well-established risk factor for cardiovascular disease, predisposing to major cardiovascular events, including coronary heart disease, stroke, aortic valve calcification and abdominal aortic aneurysm. Lp(a) is differentiated from other lipoprotein molecules through apolipoprotein(a), which possesses atherogenic and antithrombolytic properties attributed to its structure. Lp(a) levels are mostly genetically predetermined and influenced by the size of LPA gene variants, with smaller isoforms resulting in a greater synthesis rate of apo(a) and, ultimately, elevated Lp(a) levels. As a result, serum Lp(a) levels may highly vary from extremely low to extremely high. Hyperlipoproteinemia(a) is defined as Lp(a) levels > 30 mg/dL in the US and >50 mg/dL in Europe. Because of its association with CVD, Lp(a) levels should be measured at least once a lifetime in adults. The ultimate goal is to identify individuals with increased risk of CVD and intervene accordingly. Traditional pharmacological interventions like niacin, statins, ezetimibe, aspirin, PCSK-9 inhibitors, mipomersen, estrogens and CETP inhibitors have not yet yielded satisfactory results. The mean Lp(a) reduction, if any, is barely 50% for all agents, with statins increasing Lp(a) levels, whereas a reduction of 80-90% appears to be required to achieve a significant decrease in major cardiovascular events. Novel RNA-interfering agents that specifically target hepatocytes are aimed in this direction. Pelacarsen is an antisense oligonucleotide, while olpasiran, LY3819469 and SLN360 are small interfering RNAs, all conjugated with a N-acetylgalactosamine molecule. Their ultimate objective is to genetically silence LPA, reduce apo(a) production and lower serum Lp(a) levels. Evidence thus so far demonstrates that monthly subcutaneous administration of a single dose yields optimal results with persisting substantial reductions in Lp(a) levels, potentially enhancing CVD risk reduction. The Lp(a) reduction achieved with novel RNA agents may exceed 95%. The results of ongoing and future clinical trials are eagerly anticipated, and it is hoped that guidelines for the tailored management of Lp(a) levels with these novel agents may not be far off.

Lipoprotein(a): a Case for Universal Screening in Youth

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Lipoprotein(a) has emerged as a strong independent risk factor for cardiovascular disease. Targeted screening recommendations for Lp(a) measurement exist for adults and youth known to be at high-risk. However, Lp(a) measurements are not included in universal screening guidelines in the US; hence, most families in the US with high Lp(a) levels who are at risk of future atherosclerotic heart disease, stroke, or aortic stenosis are not recognized. Lp(a) measurement included as part of routine universal lipid screening in youth would identify those children at risk of ASCVD and enable family cascade screening with identification and early intervention for affected family members.

RECENT FINDINGS

Lp(a) levels can be reliably measured in children as young as two years of age. Lp(a) levels are genetically determined. The Lp(a) gene is inherited in a co-dominant fashion. Serum Lp(a) attains adult levels by two years of age and is stable for the lifetime of the individual. Novel therapies that aim to specifically target Lp(a) are in the pipeline, including nucleic acid-based molecules such as antisense oligonucleotides and siRNAs. Inclusion of a single Lp(a) measurement performed as part of routine universal lipid screening in youth (ages 9-11; or at ages 17-21) is feasible and cost effective. Lp(a) screening would identify youth at-risk of ASCVD and enable family cascade screening with identification and early intervention for affected family members.

Evidence and Uncertainties on Lipoprotein(a) as a Marker of Cardiovascular Health Risk in Children and Adolescents

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is made up of apoprotein(a) (apo(a)) and an LDL-like particle. The LPA gene encodes apo(a) and thus determines the characteristics and amount of apo(a) and Lp(a). The proportion of Lp(a) in each individual is genetically determined and is only minimally modifiable by the environment or diet. Lp(a) has important pro-atherosclerotic and pro-inflammatory effects. It has been hypothesized that Lp(a) also has pro-coagulant and antifibrinolytic actions. For these reasons, high Lp(a) values are an important independent risk factor for cardiovascular disease and calcific aortic valve stenosis. Numerous studies have been performed in adults about the pathophysiology and epidemiology of Lp(a) and research is under way for the development of drugs capable of reducing Lp(a) plasma values. Much less information is available regarding Lp(a) in children and adolescents. The present article reviews the evidence on this topic. The review addresses the issues of Lp(a) changes during growth, the correlation between Lp(a) values in children and those in their parents, and between Lp(a) levels in children, and the presence of cardiovascular disease in the family. Gaining information on these points is particularly important for deciding whether Lp(a) assay may be useful for defining the cardiovascular risk in children, in order to plan a prevention program early.

Nutrition, Nutraceuticals and Bioactive Compounds in the Prevention and Fight against Inflammation

Chronic low-grade systemic inflammation is a key factor involved in the pathogenesis of many diseases and their complications (Figure 1) [...].

Lipoprotein(a) in Atherosclerotic Diseases: From Pathophysiology to Diagnosis and Treatment

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is a low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol-like particle bound to apolipoprotein(a). Increased Lp(a) levels are an independent, heritable causal risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) as they are largely determined by variations in the Lp(a) gene (LPA) locus encoding apo(a). Lp(a) is the preferential lipoprotein carrier for oxidized phospholipids (OxPL), and its role adversely affects vascular inflammation, atherosclerotic lesions, endothelial function and thrombogenicity, which pathophysiologically leads to cardiovascular (CV) events. Despite this crucial role of Lp(a), its measurement lacks a globally unified method, and, between different laboratories, results need standardization. Standard antilipidemic therapies, such as statins, fibrates and ezetimibe, have a mediocre effect on Lp(a) levels, although it is not yet clear whether such treatments can affect CV events and prognosis. This narrative review aims to summarize knowledge regarding the mechanisms mediating the effect of Lp(a) on inflammation, atherosclerosis and thrombosis and discuss current diagnostic and therapeutic potentials.

Coffee or tea: Anti-inflammatory properties in the context of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease prevention

Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) is the leading cause of premature death worldwide. Inflammation and its biomarkers, like C-reactive protein (CRP), among the risk factors, such as hypertension, lipid disorders, and diabetes, may be also responsible for the residual cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. Modern lipid-lowering treatment with statins, ezetimibe, PCSK9 inhibitors, or bempedoic acid does not fully protect against inflammation. The recommendations of the International Lipid Expert Panel (ILEP) indicate selected nutraceuticals with anti-inflammatory properties. Diet may have a significant impact on inflammation. Especially interesting in the context of inflammation is the consumption of coffee and tea. These drinks in many observational studies significantly reduced cardiovascular risk and mortality. The question is whether the anti-inflammatory effects of these drinks contribute significantly to the observed clinical effects. Thus, in this narrative review, we primarily discuss the anti-inflammatory properties of consuming tea and coffee. Based on a comprehensive analysis of the studies and their meta-analyses, inconsistent results were obtained, which makes it impossible to conclusively state how clinically significant the potential anti-inflammatory properties of black and green tea and coffee are. A number of confounding factors can cause the inconsistency of the available results. Consumption of tea and coffee appears to increase adiponectin concentrations, decrease reactive oxygen species, decrease low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol concentrations (effect of green tea, etc.). Despite the still uncertain anti-inflammatory effect of tea and coffee, we recommend their consumption as a part of the healthy diet.

Lipoprotein(a) and Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease, the Impact of Available Lipid-Lowering Medications on Lipoprotein(a): An Update on New Therapies

OBJECTIVE

To review evidence of existing and new pharmacological therapies for lowering lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]) concentrations and their impact on clinically relevant outcomes.

METHODS

We searched for literature pertaining to Lp(a) and pharmacological treatments in PubMed. We reviewed articles published between 1963 and 2020.

RESULTS

We found that statins significantly increased Lp(a) concentrations. Therapies that demonstrated varying degrees of Lp(a) reduction included ezetimibe, niacin, proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitors, lipoprotein apheresis, fibrates, aspirin, hormone replacement therapy, antisense oligonucleotide therapy, and small interfering RNA therapy. There was limited data from large observational studies and post hoc analyses showing the potential benefits of these therapies in improving cardiovascular outcomes.

CONCLUSION

There are multiple lipid-lowering agents currently being used to treat hyperlipidemia that also have a Lp(a)-lowering effect. Two RNA therapies specifically targeted to lower Lp(a) are being investigated in phase 3 clinical trials and, thus far, have shown promising results. However, evidence is lacking to determine the clinical relevance of reducing Lp(a). At present, there is a need for large-scale, randomized, controlled trials to evaluate cardiovascular outcomes associated with lowering Lp(a).

Targeted Treatment against Lipoprotein (a): The Coming Breakthrough in Lipid Lowering Therapy

Atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases (ASCVD) are a very important cause of premature death. The most important risk factor for ASCVD is lipid disorders. The incidence of lipid disorders and ASCVD is constantly increasing, which means that new methods of prevention and treatment of these diseases are still being searched for. In the management of patients with lipid disorders, the primary goal of therapy is to lower the serum LDL-C concentration. Despite the available effective lipid-lowering therapies, the risk of ASCVD is still increased in some patients. A high level of serum lipoprotein (a) (Lp(a)) is a risk factor for ASCVD independent of serum LDL-C concentration. About 20% of Europeans have elevated serum Lp(a) levels, requiring treatment to reduce serum Lp(a) concentrations in addition to LDL-C. Currently available lipid lowering drugs do not sufficiently reduce serum Lp(a) levels. Hence, drugs based on RNA technology, such as pelacarsen, olpasiran, SLN360 and LY3819469, are undergoing clinical trials. These drugs are very effective in lowering the serum Lp(a) concentration and have a satisfactory safety profile, which means that in the near future they will fill an important gap in the armamentarium of lipid-lowering drugs.

Effect of an increase in Lp(a) following statin therapy on cardiovascular prognosis in secondary prevention population of coronary artery disease

BACKGROUND

Lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] is an independent risk factor for coronary artery disease (CAD). Recent studies have indicated that statins tend to increase Lp(a) levels by 10-20%. However, the association of statin-mediated increases in Lp(a) levels with CAD has not been determined.  METHODS: This study included 488 patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Lp(a) levels were measured at baseline and 1 month after statin therapy. The study endpoints were major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Hazard ratios for the MACE were adjusted for potential confounder using Cox regression.

RESULTS

After statin therapy, the mean level of Lp(a) increased by 19.3% from baseline. Lp(a) levels increased in 307 patients (62.9%) with a median elevation of 4.1 mg/dL. Patients with an increase in Lp(a) were at higher risk for MACE than those without an increase in Lp(a) (p = 0.044). Subgroup analyses revealed that a mild-to-moderate increase in Lp(a) was not associated with MACE, whereas there was a strong correlation between the highest quartile increase in Lp(a) (≥ 10.1 mg/dL) and MACE (HR = 2.29, 95%CI = 1.36-3.84, p = 0.002). This correlation was independent of baseline Lp(a) levels but not independent of on-statin Lp(a) levels.

CONCLUSIONS

Severe increases in Lp(a) following statin therapy raise the risk of MACE, but a mild-to-moderate increase in Lp(a) may not affect the cardiovascular prognosis of CAD patients. Even if the baseline Lp(a) levels are low, it is necessary to continue testing for Lp(a) concentration at least once after statin.

Atherogenic Lipoproteins for the Statin Residual Cardiovascular Disease Risk

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) show that decreases in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) by the use of statins cause a significant reduction in the development of cardiovascular disease (CVD). However, one of our previous studies showed that, among eight RCTs that investigated the effect of statins vs. a placebo on CVD development, 56–79% of patients had residual CVD risk after the trials. In three RCTs that investigated the effect of a high dose vs. a usual dose of statins on CVD development, 78–87% of patients in the high-dose statin arms still had residual CVD risk. The risk of CVD development remains even when statins are used to strongly reduce LDL-C, and this type of risk is now regarded as statin residual CVD risk. Our study shows that elevated triglyceride (TG) levels, reduced high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), and the existence of obesity/insulin resistance and diabetes may be important metabolic factors that determine statin residual CVD risk. Here, we discuss atherogenic lipoproteins that were not investigated in such RCTs, such as lipoprotein (a) (Lp(a)), remnant lipoproteins, malondialdehyde-modified LDL (MDA-LDL), and small-dense LDL (Sd-LDL). Lp(a) is under strong genetic control by apolipoprotein (a), which is an LPA gene locus. Variations in the LPA gene account for 91% of the variability in the plasma concentration of Lp(a). A meta-analysis showed that genetic variations at the LPA locus are associated with CVD events during statin therapy, independent of the extent of LDL lowering, providing support for exploring strategies targeting circulating concentrations of Lp(a) to reduce CVD events in patients receiving statins. Remnant lipoproteins and small-dense LDL are highly associated with high TG levels, low HDL-C, and obesity/insulin resistance. MDA-LDL is a representative form of oxidized LDL and plays important roles in the formation and development of the primary lesions of atherosclerosis. MDA-LDL levels were higher in CVD patients and diabetic patients than in the control subjects. Furthermore, we demonstrated the atherogenic properties of such lipoproteins and their association with CVD as well as therapeutic approaches.

Lp(a): a New Pathway to Target?

Purpose of Review

Over the past decades, genetic and observational evidence has positioned lipoprotein(a) as novel important and independent risk factor for cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and aortic valve stenosis.

Recent Findings

As Lp(a) levels are determined genetically, lifestyle interventions have no effect on Lp(a)-mediated ASCVD risk. While traditional low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) can now be effectively lowered in the vast majority of patients, current lipid lowering therapies have no clinically relevant Lp(a) lowering effect.

Summary

There are multiple Lp(a)-directed therapies in clinical development targeting LPA mRNA that have shown to lower Lp(a) plasma levels for up to 90%: pelacarsen, olpasiran, and SLN360. Pelacarsen is currently investigated in a phase 3 cardiovascular outcome trial expected to finish in 2024, while olpasiran is about to proceed to phase 3 and SLN360’s phase 1 outcomes were recently published. If proven efficacious, Lp(a) will soon become the next pathway to target in ASCVD risk management.

Pharmacotherapy for children with elevated levels of lipoprotein(a): future directions

INTRODUCTION

Elevated lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is an independent risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). With the advent of the antisense oligonucleotides (ASOs) and small interfering RNAs (siRNAs) targeted at LPA, the gene encoding apolipoprotein(a), that are highly effective for lowering Lp(a) levels, this risk factor might be managed in the near future. Given that Lp(a) levels are mostly genetically determined and once elevated, present from early age, we have evaluated future directions for the treatment of children with high Lp(a) levels.

AREAS COVERED

In the current review, we discuss different pharmacological treatments in clinical development and provide an in-depth overview of the effects of ASOs and siRNAs targeted at LPA.

EXPERT OPINION

Since high Lp(a) is an important risk factor for ASCVD and given the promising effects of both ASOs and siRNAs targeted at apo(a), there is an urgent need for well-designed prospective studies to assess the impact of elevated Lp(a) in childhood. If the Lp(a)-hypothesis is confirmed in adults, and also in children, the rationale might arise for treating children with high Lp(a) levels. However, we feel that this should be limited to children with the highest cardiovascular risk including familial hypercholesterolemia and potentially pediatric stroke.

The role of inflammation and the possibilities of inflammation reduction to prevent cardiovascular events

Chronic systemic inflammation is a risk factor for cardiovascular (CV) disease (CVD). Whether this relationship extends to subclinical inflammation, quantified by values of circulating markers associated with inflammation in the high range of the normal interval, remains debatable. This narrative review evaluates evidence exploring this relationship. A review of pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions, including diet and lifestyle strategies, supplements, nutraceuticals, and other natural substances aimed at reducing inflammation was also conducted, since few reviews have synthesized this literature. PubMed and EMBASE were used to search the literature and several well-studied triggers of inflammation [oxidized LDL, Lp(a), as well as C-reactive protein (CRP)/high-sensitivity CRP (hs-CRP)] were included to increase sensitivity and address the lack of existing reviews summarizing their influence in the context of inflammation. All resulting references were assessed. Overall, there is good data supporting associations between circulating hs-CRP and CV outcomes. However, the same was not seen in studies evaluating triggers of inflammation, such as oxidized LDL or Lp(a). There is also insufficient evidence showing treatments to target inflammation and lead to reductions in hs-CRP result in improvements in CV outcomes, particularly in those with normal baseline levels of hs-CRP. Regarding pharmacological interventions, statins, bempedoic acid, and apabetalone significantly reduce circulating hs-CRP, unlike PCSK-9 inhibitors. A variety of natural substances and vitamins were also evaluated and none reduced hs-CRP. Regarding non-pharmacological interventions, weight loss was strongly associated with reductions in circulating hs-CRP, whereas various dietary interventions and exercise regimens were not, unless accompanied by weight loss.

Step-by-step diagnosis and management of the nocebo/drucebo effect in statin-associated muscle symptoms patients: a position paper from the International Lipid Expert Panel (ILEP)

Statin intolerance is a clinical syndrome whereby adverse effects (AEs) associated with statin therapy [most commonly statin-associated muscle symptoms (SAMS)] result in the discontinuation of therapy and consequently increase the risk of adverse cardiovascular outcomes. However, complete statin intolerance occurs in only a small minority of treated patients (estimated prevalence of only 3-5%). Many perceived AEs are misattributed (e.g. physical musculoskeletal injury and inflammatory myopathies), and subjective symptoms occur as a result of the fact that patients expect them to do so when taking medicines (the nocebo/drucebo effect)-what might be truth even for over 50% of all patients with muscle weakness/pain. Clear guidance is necessary to enable the optimal management of plasma in real-world clinical practice in patients who experience subjective AEs. In this Position Paper of the International Lipid Expert Panel (ILEP), we present a step-by-step patient-centred approach to the identification and management of SAMS with a particular focus on strategies to prevent and manage the nocebo/drucebo effect and to improve long-term compliance with lipid-lowering therapy.

Oxidized phospholipids and lipoprotein(a): An update

Over the past few years, there has been an undiminished interest in lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] and oxidized phospholipids (OxPLs), mainly carried on this lipoprotein. Elevated Lp(a) has been established as an independent causal risk factor for cardiovascular disease. OxPLs play an important role in atherosclerosis. The main questions that remain to be answered, however, is to what extent OxPLs contribute to the atherogenicity of Lp(a), what effect hypolipidaemic medications may have on their levels and the potential clinical benefit of their reduction. This narrative review aimed to summarize currently available data on OxPLs and cardiovascular risk, as well as the effect of established and emerging hypolipidaemic medications on Lp(a)-OxPLs.

Characterization of novel stress degradation products of Bempedoic acid and Ezetimibe using UPLC–MS/MS: development and validation of stability-indicating UPLC method

Background

A receptive and easily comprehended technique was evolved for simultaneous assessment of Bempedoic acid and Ezetimibe and its impurities characterized by UPLC–MS/MS.

Results

This technique involves chromatographic separation with a C18 column of water symmetry (150 mm × 4.6 mm, 3.5 µm). A mobile phase of 0.1% OPA (orthophosphoric acid) and acetonitrile in 50:50 v/v with 1 mL/min flow rate and ambient temperature was used. UV observation was taken at 230 nm. The recoveries, linearity, and quantification limits were found to be within the acceptable limit.

Conclusions

This technique was successfully tested with UPLC–MS to confirm the chemical structures of newly formed degradation products of Bempedoic acid and Ezetimibe and stress studies as per ICH Q2 (R1) guidelines.

PoLA/CFPiP/PCS/PSLD/PSD/PSH guidelines on diagnosis and therapy of lipid disorders in Poland 2021

In Poland there are still nearly 20 million individuals with hypercholesterolaemia, most of them are unaware of their condition; that is also why only ca. 5% of patients with familial hypercholesterolaemia have been diagnosed; that is why other rare cholesterol metabolism disorders are so rarely diagnosed in Poland. Let us hope that these guidelines, being an effect of work of experts representing 6 main scientific societies, as well as the network of PoLA lipid centers being a part of the EAS lipid centers, certification of lipidologists by PoLA, or the growing number of centers for rare diseases, with a network planned by the Ministry of Health, improvements in coordinated care for patients after myocardial infarction (KOS-Zawał), reimbursement of innovative agents, as well as introduction in Poland of an effective primary prevention program, will make improvement in relation to these unmet needs in diagnostics and treatment of lipid disorders possible.

Lipoprotein (a) and Cardiovascular Disease: A Missing Link for Premature Atherosclerotic Heart Disease and/or Residual Risk

ABSTRACT

Lipoprotein(a) or lipoprotein "little a" is an under-recognized causal risk factor for cardiovascular (CV) disease (CVD), including coronary atherosclerosis, aortic valvular stenosis, ischemic stroke, heart failure and peripheral arterial disease. Elevated plasma Lp(a) (≥50 mg/dL or ≥100 nmol/L) is commonly encountered in almost 1 in 5 individuals and confers a higher CV risk compared to those with normal Lp(a) levels, although such normal levels have not been generally agreed upon. Elevated Lp(a) is considered a cause of premature and accelerated atherosclerotic CVD. Thus, in patients with a positive family or personal history of premature coronary artery disease (CAD), Lp(a) should be measured. However, elevated Lp(a) may confer increased risk for incident CAD even in the absence of a family history of CAD, and even in those who have guideline-lowered LDL-cholesterol (<70 mg/dl) and continue to have a persisting CV residual risk. Thus, measurement of Lp(a) will have a significant clinical impact on the assessment of atherosclerotic CVD risk, and will assume a more important role in managing patients with CVD with the advent and clinical application of specific Lp(a)-lowering therapies. Conventional therapeutic approaches like lifestyle modification and statin therapy remain ineffective at lowering Lp(a). Newer treatment modalities, such as gene silencing via RNA interference with use of antisense oligonucleotide(s) or small interfering RNA molecules targeting Lp(a) seem very promising. These issues are herein reviewed, accumulated data are scrutinized, meta-analyses and current guidelines are tabulated and Lp(a)-related CVDs and newer therapeutic modalities are pictorially illustrated.

Non-stenotic Carotid Plaques in Embolic Stroke of Unknown Source

Embolic stroke of unknown source (ESUS) represents one in five ischemic strokes. Ipsilateral non-stenotic carotid plaques are identified in 40% of all ESUS. In this narrative review, we summarize the evidence supporting the potential causal relationship between ESUS and non-stenotic carotid plaques; discuss the remaining challenges in establishing the causal link between non-stenotic plaques and ESUS and describe biomarkers of potential interest for future research. In support of the causal relationship between ESUS and non-stenotic carotid plaques, studies have shown that plaques with high-risk features are five times more prevalent in the ipsilateral vs. the contralateral carotid and there is a lower incidence of atrial fibrillation during follow-up in patients with ipsilateral non-stenotic carotid plaques. However, non-stenotic carotid plaques with or without high-risk features often coexist with other potential etiologies of stroke, notably atrial fibrillation (8.5%), intracranial atherosclerosis (8.4%), patent foramen ovale (5-9%), and atrial cardiopathy (2.4%). Such puzzling clinical associations make it challenging to confirm the causal link between non-stenotic plaques and ESUS. There are several ongoing studies exploring whether select protein and RNA biomarkers of plaque progression or vulnerability could facilitate the reclassification of some ESUS as large vessel strokes or help to optimize secondary prevention strategies.

Relation of Serum Lipoprotein(a) Levels to Lipoprotein and Apolipoprotein Profiles and Atherosclerotic Diseases in Japanese Patients with Heterozygous Familial Hypercholesterolemia: Familial Hypercholesterolemia Expert Forum (FAME) Study

Aims: Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a plasma lipoprotein consisting of a low-density lipoprotein (LDL)–like particle with apolipoprotein (Apo)(a), attached via a disulfide bond to Apo B100. Previous studies have shown that high Lp(a) levels are associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease in patients with familial hypercholesterolemia (FH). To date, limited data are available as to distribution of Lp(a) in FH and associations of Lp(a) with other lipid profiles and cardiovascular disease. Our study aimed to investigate serum Lp(a) levels in relation to other lipid profiles and clinical conditions in the national largest-ever cohort of Japanese FH patients.

Methods: This study is a secondary analysis of the Familial Hypercholesterolemia Expert Forum (FAME) Study that includes a Japanese nationwide cohort of FH patients. In 399 patients under treatment for heterozygous FH who had a baseline measurement of serum Lp(a), the present study examined the distribution of Lp(a) levels and associations of Lp(a) with other lipid profiles and clinical conditions including coronary artery disease (CAD).

Results: The distribution of Lp(a) was skewed to the right with a median of 20.8 mg/dL, showing a log-normal distribution. Serum Apo B and Apo E levels were positively associated with Lp(a) levels. Age-adjusted mean of Apo B was 8.77 mg/dL higher and that of Apo E was 0.39 mg/dL higher in the highest category (40+ mg/dL) of Lp(a) than in the lowest category (＜20 mg/dL). LDL-C levels did not show such an association with Lp(a) levels. A tendency towards a positive relationship between Lp(a) and prevalent CAD was observed in men.

Conclusion: Our study demonstrated a distribution pattern of Lp(a) in Japanese FH patients and positive relationships of Lp(a) with Apo B and Apo E levels.

Lipoprotein (a) as a treatment target for cardiovascular disease prevention and related therapeutic strategies: a critical overview

Advances in several fields of cardiovascular (CV) medicine have produced new treatments (e.g. to treat dyslipidaemia) that have proven efficacy in terms of reducing deaths and providing a better quality of life. However, the burden of CV disease (CVD) remains high. Thus, there is a need to search for new treatment targets. Lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] has emerged as a potential novel target since there is evidence that it contributes to CVD events. In this narrative review, we present the current evidence of the potential causal relationship between Lp(a) and CVD and discuss the likely magnitude of Lp(a) lowering required to produce a clinical benefit. We also consider current and investigational treatments targeting Lp(a), along with the potential cost of these interventions.

Emerging Pharmacotherapy to Reduce Elevated Lipoprotein(a) Plasma Levels

Lipoprotein(a) is a unique form of low-density lipoprotein. It is associated with a high incidence of premature atherosclerotic disease such as coronary artery disease, myocardial infarction, and stroke. Plasma levels of this lipoprotein and its activities are highly variable. This is because of a wide variability in the size of the apolipoprotein A moiety, which is determined by the number of repeats of cysteine-rich domains known as "kringles." Although the exact mechanism of lipoprotein(a)-induced atherogenicity is unknown, the lipoprotein has been found in the arterial walls of atherosclerotic plaques. It has been implicated in the formation of foam cells and lipid deposition in these plaques. Pharmacologic management of elevated levels of lipoprotein(a) with statins, fibrates, or bile acid sequestrants is ineffective. The newer and emerging lipid-lowering agents, such as the second-generation antisense oligonucleotides, cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibitors, and proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitors offer the most effective pharmacologic therapy.

Novel Therapeutical Approaches to Managing Atherosclerotic Risk

Atherosclerosis is a multifactorial vascular disease that leads to inflammation and stiffening of the arteries and decreases their elasticity due to the accumulation of calcium, small dense Low Density Lipoproteins (sdLDL), inflammatory cells, and fibrotic material. A review of studies pertaining to cardiometabolic risk factors, lipids alterations, hypolipidemic agents, nutraceuticals, hypoglycaemic drugs, atherosclerosis, endothelial dysfunction, and inflammation was performed. There are several therapeutic strategies including Proprotein Convertase Subtilisin/Kexin 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors, inclisiran, bempedoic acid, Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs), and nutraceuticals that promise improvement in the atheromatous plaque from a molecular point of view, because have actions on the exposure of the LDL-Receptor (LDL-R), on endothelial dysfunction, activation of macrophages, on lipid oxidation, formations on foam cells, and deposition extracellular lipids. Atheroma plaque reduction both as a result of LDL-Cholesterol (LDL-C) intensive lowering and reducing inflammation and other residual risk factors is an integral part of the management of atherosclerotic disease, and the use of valid therapeutic alternatives appear to be appealing avenues to solving the problem.

Lipoprotein (a) and diabetes mellitus: causes and consequences

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review provides an update on the role of lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] in diabetes, including its impact as a risk factor as well as its contribution to the development of cardiovascular disease.

RECENT FINDINGS

Although a specific role for Lp(a) has not yet been conclusively established, it appears to have an inverse association with risk of diabetes. Several population-based studies have demonstrated associations between low levels of Lp(a) and increased risk of type 2 diabetes, but Mendelian randomization studies do not consistently support causality. Conversely, in patients with type 2 diabetes, elevated Lp(a) levels are associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events.

SUMMARY

Although Lp(a) contributes to the development of cardiovascular disease in patients with diabetes, few trials have investigated the benefits of reducing Lp(a) within this patient population. Furthermore, guidelines do not specifically address the risk associated with elevated Lp(a) levels. Despite this, Lp(a) should be measured in patients with diabetes and considered when evaluating their overall risk burden.

Lipoprotein(a) Reduction With Proprotein Convertase Subtilisin/Kexin Type 9 Inhibitors: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

ABSTRACT

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a cardiovascular factor, for which there is no approved specific lowering treatment. Proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors have been shown to have lowering effects on Lp(a). Aim of this systematic review is to synthesize the current literature and quantify the effects of PCSK9 inhibitors on the serum Lp(a) levels in human subjects. Double-blind, phase 2 or 3, randomized-controlled trials comparing PCSK9 inhibitors (alirocumab or evolocumab) to placebo and/or ezetimibe and/or other lipid-lowering therapy were deemed eligible for inclusion. We searched MEDLINE (via PubMed), CENTRAL, Scopus, and Web of Science as of 17 June 2020. Quality assessment was performed using the Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials. Forty-three studies were identified (64,107 patients randomized) and 41 studies were included in the quantitative analysis. PCSK9 inhibitors reduced Lp(a) levels by -26.7% (95% CI, -29.5% to -23.9%) with a significant heterogeneity within studies. There was significant difference in Lp(a) change from baseline according to comparator (placebo: mean -27.9%; 95% CI, -31.1% to -24.6% vs. ezetimibe: mean, -22.2%; 95% CI, -27.2% to -17.2%; P = 0.04) and duration of treatment (≤12 weeks: mean, -30.9%; 95% CI, -34.7% to -27.1% vs. >12 weeks: mean, -21.9%; 95% CI, -25.2% to -18.6%; P < 0.01). Meta-regression analysis showed that only the mean percentage change from baseline low-density lipoprotein cholesterol due to the intervention is significantly associated with the effect size difference (P < 0.0001). PCSK9 inhibitors reduced low-density lipoprotein cholesterol by -54% (95% CI -57.6% to -50.6%). There is substantial efficacy of the currently approved PCSK9 inhibitors in the lowering of Lp(a) levels. Dedicated randomized controlled trials are needed to establish the benefit of this intervention.

Lipoprotein(a): A Concealed Precursor of Increased Cardiovascular Risk? A Real-World Regional Lipid Clinic Experience

OBJECTIVE

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is an independent cardiovascular risk factor. We present real-life characteristics of patients with increased Lp(a) levels attending a University Lipid Clinic.

METHODS

We retrospectively studied patients attending the University of Ioannina Hospital Lipid Clinic with Lp(a) levels ≥30 mg/dL who were followed-up for a median of 22 months.

RESULTS

One hundred eight patients (median age 59 years, 49% females) were included with median Lp(a) levels 67 mg/dL (30-320). Of patients, 25.1% had established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD): 11.1 and 5.6% positive personal history of myocardial infarction (MI) and stroke, respectively, 6.5% carotid artery disease and 1.9% lower extremities arterial disease (LEAD). In addition, 35.2% of participants had heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (heFH), 37.9% positive family history of premature ASCVD, 29.6% hypertension, 12.0% diabetes and 5.5% chronic kidney disease (CKD). Of patients, 67.6% were receiving statin therapy and 16.6% additional ezetimibe at baseline visit, and 83 and 35% were receiving statin treatment and additional ezetimibe, respectively, during follow-up. Low-density cholesterol (LDL-C) levels and LDL-C_{corrected for Lp(a)} levels were significantly reduced in lipid-lowering therapy naive patients by 37 and 40% (p <0.05), in lipid-lowering therapy intensified patients by 31 and 36% (p <0.05), and in patients on stable lipid-lowering treatment by 15% (p <0.05) and 10% (p >0.05), respectively, during follow-up. Lp(a) levels increased by 9% (p <0.05).

CONCLUSION

Our data confirm the high prevalence of established ASCVD, hFH and positive familial history of premature ASCVD in patients with elevated Lp(a) levels. Lp(a) levels slightly increased during follow-up.

On the present and future role of Lp-PLA2 in atherosclerosis-related cardiovascular risk prediction and management

Circulating concentration and activity of secretory phospholipase A₂ (sPLA₂) and lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A₂ (Lp-PLA₂) have been proven as biomarkers of increased risk of atherosclerosis-related cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Lp-PLA₂ might be part of the atherosclerotic process and may contribute to plaque destabilisation through inflammatory activity within atherosclerotic lesions. However, all attempts to translate the inhibition of phospholipase into clinically beneficial ASCVD risk reduction, including in randomised studies, by either non-specific inhibition of sPLA₂ (by varespladib) or specific Lp-PLA₂ inhibition by darapladib, unexpectedly failed. This gives us a strong imperative to continue research aimed at a better understanding of how Lp-PLA₂ and sPLA₂ regulate vascular inflammation and atherosclerotic plaque development. From the clinical viewpoint there is a need to establish and validate the existing and emerging novel anti-inflammatory therapeutic strategies to fight against ASCVD development, by using potentially better animal models and differently designed clinical trials in humans.

Association Between Lipoprotein (A) and Diabetic Nephropathy in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Lipoprotein (a) [Lp (a)] has been well recognized as a risk factor of cardiovascular disease. However, the association between serum Lp (a) and diabetic nephropathy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) remains unknown. We performed a meta-analysis to comprehensively evaluate the above association.

METHODS

Observational studies aiming to evaluate the independent association between serum Lp (a) and diabetic nephropathy in T2DM patients were identified by systematic search of PubMed and Embase databases. A random-effect model which incorporated the potential intra-study heterogeneity was used for the meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Eleven observational studies with 9304 T2DM patients were included. Results showed that compared to those with the lowest Lp (a), patients with the highest Lp (a) level had higher odds of diabetic nephropathy (adjusted odds ratio [OR]: 1.63, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.25-2.14, I² = 54%, P < 0.001). Meta-analysis of studies in which Lp (a) was presented as continuous variables showed consistent result (adjusted OR: 1.13 for 1 mg/dl increment of Lp (a), 95% CI: 1.03-1.24, I2 = 36%, P = 0.008). Subgroup analyses showed that study characteristics such as definitions of diabetic nephropathy and study design did not significantly affect the association (P for subgroup difference all > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Higher serum Lp (a) in patients with T2DM is independently associated with higher odds of diabetic nephropathy. Large scale prospective cohort studies are needed to validate this finding. Moreover, the potential influence of Lp (a) lowering on renal function in T2DM patients may be further investigated.

Increased cardiovascular risk associated with hyperlipoproteinemia (a) and the challenges of current and future therapeutic possibilities

Population, genetic, and clinical studies demonstrated a causative and continuous, from other plasma lipoproteins independent relationship between elevated plasma lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] concentration and the development of cardiovascular disease (CVD), mainly those related to athe-rosclerotic CVD, and calcific aortic stenosis. Currently, a strong international consensus is still lacking regarding the single value which would be commonly used to define hyperlipoproteinemia (a). Its prevalence in the general population is estimated to be in the range of 10%–35% in accordance with the most commonly used threshold levels (>30 or >50 mg/dL). Since elevated Lp(a) can be of special importance in patients with some genetic disorders, as well as in individuals with otherwise controlled major risk factors, the identification and establishment of the proper therapeutic interventions that would lower Lp(a) levels and lead to CVD risk reduction could be very important. The majority of the classical lipid-lowering agents (statins, ezetimibe, and fibrates), as well as nutraceuticals (CoQ10 and garlic), appear to have no significant effect on its plasma levels, whereas for the drugs with the demonstrated Lp(a)-lowering effects (aspirin, niacin, and estrogens), their clinical efficacy in reducing cardiovascular (CV) events has not been unequivocally proven yet. Both Lp(a) apheresis and proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitors can reduce the plasma Lp(a) by approximately 20%–30% on average, in parallel with much larger reduction of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (up to 70%), what puts us in a difficulty to conclude about the true contribution of lowered Lp(a) to the reduction of CV events. The most recent advancement in the field is the introduction of the novel apolipoprotein (a) [apo(a)] antisense oligonucleotide therapy targeting apo(a), which has already proven itself as being very effective in decreasing plasma Lp(a) (by even >90%), but should be further tested in clinical trials. The aim of this review was to present some of the most important accessible scientific data, as well as dilemmas related to the currently and potentially in the near future more widely available therapeutic options for the management of hyperlipoproteinemia (a).

Lipoprotein(a) in atherosclerosis: from pathophysiology to clinical relevance and treatment options

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) was discovered more than 50 years ago, and a decade later, it was recognized as a risk factor for coronary artery disease. However, it has gained importance only in the past 10 years, with emergence of drugs that can effectively decrease its levels. Lp(a) is a low-density lipoprotein (LDL) with an added apolipoprotein(a) attached to the apolipoprotein B component via a disulphide bond. Circulating levels of Lp(a) are mainly genetically determined. Lp(a) has many functions, which include proatherosclerotic, prothrombotic and pro-inflammatory roles. Here, we review recent data on the role of Lp(a) in the atherosclerotic process, and treatment options for patients with cardiovascular diseases. Currently 'Proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9' (PCSK9) inhibitors that act through non-specific reduction of Lp(a) are the only drugs that have shown effectiveness in clinical trials, to provide reductions in cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. The effects of PCSK9 inhibitors are not purely through Lp(a) reduction, but also through LDL cholesterol reduction. Finally, we discuss new drugs on the horizon, and gene-based therapies that affect transcription and translation of apolipoprotein(a) mRNA. Clinical trials in patients with high Lp(a) and low LDL cholesterol might tell us whether Lp(a) lowering per se decreases cardiovascular morbidity and mortality.KEY MESSAGESLipoprotein(a) is an important risk factor in patients with cardiovascular diseases.Lipoprotein(a) has many functions, which include proatherosclerotic, prothrombotic and pro-inflammatory roles.Treatment options to lower lipoprotein(a) levels are currently scarce, but new drugs are on the horizon.

Lipoprotein(a) Lowering-From Lipoprotein Apheresis to Antisense Oligonucleotide Approach

It is well-known that elevated lipoprotein(a)—Lp(a)—levels are associated with a higher risk of cardiovascular (CV) mortality and all-cause mortality, although a standard pharmacotherapeutic approach is still undefined for patients with high CV risk dependent on hyperlipoproteinemia(a). Combined with high Lp(a) levels, familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) leads to a greater CVD risk. In suspected FH patients, the proportion of cases explained by a rise of Lp(a) levels ranges between 5% and 20%. In the absence of a specific pharmacological approach able to lower Lp(a) to the extent required to achieve CV benefits, the most effective strategy today is lipoprotein apheresis (LA). Although limited, a clear effect on Lp(a) is exerted by PCSK9 antagonists, with apparently different mechanisms when given with statins (raised catabolism) or as monotherapy (reduced production). In the era of RNA-based therapies, a new dawn is represented by the use of antisense oligonucleotides APO(a)L_rx, able to reduce Lp(a) from 35% to over 80%, with generally modest injection site reactions. The improved knowledge of Lp(a) atherogenicity and possible prevention will be of benefit for patients with residual CV risk remaining after the most effective available lipid-lowering agents.

Antisense lipoprotein[a] therapy: State-of-the-art and future perspectives

Several lines of evidence now attest that lipoprotein[a] (Lp[a]) is a significant risk factor for many cardiovascular disorders. This enigmatic lipoprotein, composed of a single copy of apolipoprotein B (apoB) and apolipoprotein[a] (apo [a]), expresses peculiar metabolism, virtually independent from lifestyle interventions. Several therapeutic options have hence been proposed for lowering elevated Lp[a] values, with or without concomitant effect on low density lipoprotein (LDL) particles, mostly encompassing statins, ezetimibe, nicotinic acid, lipoprotein apheresis, and anti-PCSK9 monoclonal antibodies. Since all these medical treatments have some technical and clinical drawbacks, a novel strategy is currently being proposed, based on the use of antisense apo[a] and/or apoB inhibitors. Although the role of these agents in hypercholesterolemic patients is now nearby entering clinical practice, the collection of information on Lp[a] is still underway. Preliminary evidence would suggest that apo[a] antisense therapy seems more appropriate in patients with isolated Lp[a] elevations, while apoB antisense therapy is perhaps more advisable in patients with isolated LDL elevations. In patients with concomitant elevations of Lp[a] and LDL, either combining the two apo[a] and apoB antisense therapies (a strategy which has never been tested), or the combination of well-known and relatively inexpensive drugs such as statins with antisense apo[a] inhibitors can be theoretically suggested. The results of an upcoming phase 3 study with antisense apo[a] inhibitors will hopefully provide definitive clues as to whether this approach may become the standard of care in patients with increased Lp[a] concentrations.

What do we know about the role of lipoprotein(a) in atherogenesis 57 years after its discovery?

Elevated circulating concentrations of lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is strongly associated with increased risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (CVD) and degenerative aortic stenosis. This relationship was first observed in prospective observational studies, and the causal relationship was confirmed in genetic studies. Everybody should have their Lp(a) concentration measured once in their lifetime. CVD risk is elevated when Lp(a) concentrations are high i.e. > 50 mg/dL (≥100 mmol/L). Extremely high Lp(a) levels >180 mg/dL (≥430 mmol/L) are associated with CVD risk similar to that conferred by familial hypercholesterolemia. Elevated Lp(a) level was previously treated with niacin, which exerts a potent Lp(a)-lowering effect. However, niacin is currently not recommended because, despite the improvement in lipid profile, no improvements on clinical outcomes have been observed. Furthermore, niacin use has been associated with severe adverse effects. Post hoc analyses of clinical trials with proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type-9 (PCSK9) inhibitors have shown that these drugs exert clinical benefits by lowering Lp(a), independent of their potent reduction of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C). It is not yet known whether PCSK9 inhibitors will be of clinical use in patients with elevated Lp(a). Apheresis is a very effective approach to Lp(a) reduction, which reduces CVD risk but is invasive and time-consuming and is thus reserved for patients with very high Lp(a) levels and progressive CVD. Studies are ongoing on the practical application of genetic approaches to therapy, including antisense oligonucleotides against apolipoprotein(a) and small interfering RNA (siRNA) technology, to reduce the synthesis of Lp(a).

Association of lipoprotein(a) and major adverse cardiovascular events in patients with percutaneous coronary intervention

INTRODUCTION

The aim of the current study was to evaluate the association between lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) in patients with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) treatment.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This was a retrospective study. The demographics, prior medical histories, comorbidities and laboratory parameters were collected from the electronic health record. All participants were followed up for 1 year after the indexed PCI. Studied end points were a composite of MACEs including all-cause mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), non-fatal ischemic stroke, transient ischemic attack and stent restenosis.

RESULTS

During 1-year follow-up, 87 MACEs occurred. Compared to patients who did not have MACEs, patients who had MACEs were older, more likely to have higher body mass index, diabetes mellitus and left main lesion, and also had higher baseline low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and Lp(a) levels. All patients in both groups were prescribed aspirin and clopidogrel at discharge. Nearly 97.4% and 95.4% of patients in both groups were treated with statins and a higher proportion of patients in the MACE group were treated with ezetimibe (11.5% vs. 3.5%, p < 0.05). In multivariate regression analysis, diabetes mellitus, LDL-C, Lp(a) and glomerular filtration rate were independent risk factors for MACEs; statin use appeared to be a protective factor for MACEs. Patients with increased Lp(a) level had significantly higher incidence of MACEs than the normal Lp(a) level group (p = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Baseline serum Lp(a) can be used to predict MACEs in patients after PCI treatment, which was independent of LDL-C.

SCP2-mediated cholesterol membrane trafficking promotes the growth of pituitary adenomas via Hedgehog signaling activation

Background

Metabolic reprogramming is an important characteristic of tumors. In the progression of pituitary adenomas (PA), abnormal glucose metabolism has been confirmed by us before. However, whether cholesterol metabolism is involved in the process of PA remains unclear. This study aimed to investigate whether abnormal cholesterol metabolism could affect the progression of PA.

Methods

We analyzed the expression of sterol carrier protein 2 (SCP2) in 40 surgical PA samples. In vitro experiments and xenograft models were used to assess the effects of SCP2 and cholesterol on proliferation of PA. The incidence of hypercholesterolemia between 140 PA patients and 100 heathy controls were compared.

Results

We found an upregulation of SCP2 in PA samples, especially in tumors with high proliferation index. Forced expression of SCP2 promoted PA cell lines proliferation in vitro. Furthermore, SCP2 regulated cholesterol trafficking from cytoplasm to membrane in GH3 cells, and extracellularly treating GH3 cells and primary PA cells with methyl-β-cyclodextrin/cholesterol complex to mimic membrane cholesterol concentration enhanced cell proliferation, which suggested a proliferative effect of cholesterol. Mechanistically, cholesterol induced activation of PKA/SUFU/GLI1 signaling via smoothened receptor, which was well-known as Hedgehog signaling, resulting in inhibiting apoptosis and promoting cell cycle. Accordingly, activation of Hedgehog signaling was also confirmed in primary PA cells and surgical PA samples. In vivo, SCP2 overexpression and high cholesterol diet could promote tumor growth. Intriguingly, the incidence of hypercholesterolemia was significantly higher in PA patients than healthy controls.

Conclusions

Our data indicated that dysregulated cholesterol metabolism could promote PA growth by activating Hedgehog signaling, supporting a potential tumorigenic role of cholesterol metabolism in PA progression.