Relationship of apolipoproteins A-1 and B, and lipoprotein(a) to cardiovascular outcomes: the AIM-HIGH trial (Atherothrombosis Intervention in Metabolic Syndrome with Low HDL/High Triglyceride and Impact on Global Health Outcomes)

Lipoprotein(a) and cardiovascular disease

One in five people are at high risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and aortic valve stenosis due to high lipoprotein(a). Lipoprotein(a) concentrations are lowest in people from east Asia, Europe, and southeast Asia, intermediate in people from south Asia, the Middle East, and Latin America, and highest in people from Africa. Concentrations are more than 90% genetically determined and 17% higher in post-menopausal women than in men. Individuals at a higher cardiovascular risk should have lipoprotein(a) concentrations measured once in their lifetime to inform those with high concentrations to adhere to a healthy lifestyle and receive medication to lower other cardiovascular risk factors. With no approved drugs to lower lipoprotein(a) concentrations, it is promising that at least five drugs in development lower concentrations by 65-98%, with three currently being tested in large cardiovascular endpoint trials. This Review covers historical perspectives, physiology and pathophysiology, genetic evidence of causality, epidemiology, role in familial hypercholesterolaemia and diabetes, management, screening, diagnosis, measurement, prevention, and future lipoprotein(a)-lowering drugs.

Lipoprotein(a) in interventional cardiology: identifying patients at highest risk of recurrent cardiovascular events through early recognition - a case based review

INTRODUCTION

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is linked to higher risks of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Current guideline recommendations are quite liberal on measuring Lp(a) (Class IIa, Level C), and may lead to underuse among (interventional) cardiologists.

AREAS COVERED

This case-based narrative review outlines four clinical cases of patients with elevated Lp(a) to illustrate its pathophysiological impact on coronary artery disease (CAD). The expert consensus statements from the American Heart Association (AHA) and European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS) served as the basis of this review. More recent publications, from 2023 to 2024, were accessed through the MEDLINE online library.

EXPERT OPINION

We highlighted the importance of routine Lp(a) measurement in identifying patients at high risk for atherosclerosis, necessitating potent risk mitigation. Measuring Lp(a) helps clinicians identify which patients are at highest residual risk, who require potent pharmacological treatment and special attention during catheter interventions. As noninvasive and advanced intravascular imaging modalities evolve, future catheterization laboratories will integrate advanced imaging, diagnostics, and treatment, facilitating tailored patient care. Knowing Lp(a) levels is crucial in this context. While Lp(a)-lowering drugs are currently investigated in clinical trials, it is of paramount importance to know Lp(a) levels and strive toward aggressive management of other modifiable risk factors in patients with elevated Lp(a) and established symptomatic CAD being diagnosed or treated in catheterization laboratories.

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).

Recent updates on therapeutic targeting of lipoprotein(a) with RNA interference

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

RNA interference (RNAi)-based therapies that target specific gene products have impacted clinical medicine with 16 FDA approved drugs. RNAi therapy focused on reducing plasma lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] levels are under evaluation.

RECENT FINDINGS

RNAi-based therapies have made significant progress over the past 2 decades and currently consist of antisense oligonucleotides (ASO) and small interfering RNA (siRNA). Chemical modification of the RNA backbone and conjugation of siRNA enables efficient gene silencing in hepatocytes allowing development of effective cholesterol lowering therapies. Multiple lines of evidence suggest a causative role for Lp(a) in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, and recent analyses indicate that Lp(a) is more atherogenic than low density lipoprotein- cholesterol (LDL-C). These findings have led to the 'Lp(a) hypothesis' that lowering Lp(a) may significantly improve cardiovascular outcomes. Four RNAi-based drugs have completed early phase clinical trials demonstrating >80% reduction in plasma Lp(a) levels. Phase 3 clinical trials examining clinical outcomes with these agents are currently underway.

SUMMARY

Currently, four RNAi-based drugs have been shown to be effective in significantly lowering plasma Lp(a) levels. Clinical outcome data from phase 3 trials will evaluate the Lp(a) hypothesis.

The Role of Lipoprotein(a) in Peripheral Artery Disease

Lipoprotein(a) is a low-density-lipoprotein-like particle that consists of apolipoprotein(a) bound to apolipoprotein(b). It has emerged as an established causal risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, stroke, and aortic valve stenosis through multifactorial pathogenic mechanisms that include inflammation, atherogenesis, and thrombosis. Despite an estimated 20% of the global population having elevated lipoprotein(a) levels, testing remains underutilized due to poor awareness and a historical lack of effective and safe therapies. Although lipoprotein(a) has a strong association with coronary artery disease and cerebrovascular disease, its relationship with peripheral artery disease is less well established. In this article, we review the epidemiology, biology, and pathogenesis of lipoprotein(a) as it relates to peripheral artery disease. We also discuss emerging treatment options to help mitigate major adverse cardiac and limb events in this population.

High lipoprotein(a): Actionable strategies for risk assessment and mitigation

High levels of lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] are causal for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Lp(a) is the most prevalent inherited dyslipidemia and strongest genetic ASCVD risk factor. This risk persists in the presence of at target, guideline-recommended, LDL-C levels and adherence to lifestyle modifications. Epidemiological and genetic evidence supporting its causal role in ASCVD and calcific aortic stenosis continues to accumulate, although various facets regarding Lp(a) biology (genetics, pathophysiology, and expression across race/ethnic groups) are not yet fully understood. The evolving nature of clinical guidelines and consensus statements recommending universal measurements of Lp(a) and the scientific data supporting its role in multiple disease states reinforce the clinical merit to start population screening for Lp(a) now. There is a current gap in the implementation of recommendations for primary and secondary cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention in those with high Lp(a), in part due to a lack of protocols for management strategies. Importantly, targeted apolipoprotein(a) [apo(a)]-lowering therapies that reduce Lp(a) levels in patients with high Lp(a) are in phase 3 clinical development. This review focuses on the identification and clinical management of patients with high Lp(a). Specifically, we highlight the clinical value of measuring Lp(a) and its use in determining Lp(a)-associated CVD risk by providing actionable guidance, based on scientific knowledge, that can be utilized now to mitigate risk caused by high Lp(a).

All we need to know about lipoprotein(a)

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)], a genetically determined macromolecular complex, is independently and causally associated with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and calcific aortic stenosis via proposed proinflammatory, prothrombotic, and proatherogenic mechanisms. While Lp(a) measurement standardization issues are being resolved, several guidelines now support testing Lp(a) at least once in each adult's lifetime for ASCVD risk prediction which can foster implementation of more aggressive primary or secondary prevention therapies. Currently, there are several emerging targeted Lp(a) lowering therapies in active clinical investigation for safety and cardiovascular benefit among both primary and secondary prevention populations. First degree relatives of patients with high Lp(a) should be encouraged to undergo cascade screening. Primary prevention patients with high Lp(a) should consider obtaining a coronary calcium score for further risk estimation and to guide further ASCVD risk factor management including consideration of low dose aspirin therapy. Secondary prevention patients with high Lp(a) levels should consider adding PCSK9 inhibition to statin therapy.

The association of lipoprotein(a) and coronary artery calcium in asymptomatic patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is an atherogenic lipid particle associated with increased risk for coronary heart disease (CHD) events. Coronary artery calcium (CAC) score is a tool to diagnose subclinical atherosclerosis and guide clinical decision-making for primary prevention of CHD. Studies show conflicting results concerning the relationship between Lp(a) and CAC in asymptomatic populations. We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the association of Lp(a) and CAC in asymptomatic patients.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane until April 2023 for studies evaluating the association between Lp(a) and CAC in asymptomatic patients. We evaluated CAC > 0 Agatston units, and CAC ≥ 100. Lp(a) was analysed as a continuous or dichotomous variable. We assessed the association between Lp(a) and CAC with pooled odds ratios (OR) adopting a random-effects model. A total of 23 105 patients from 18 studies were included in the meta-analysis with a mean age of 55.9 years, 46.4% female. Elevated Lp(a) increased the odds of CAC > 0 [OR 1.31; 95% confidence intervals (CI) 1.05-1.64; P = 0.02], CAC ≥100 (OR 1.29; 95% CI 1.01-1.65; P = 0.04; ), and CAC progression (OR 1.43; 95% CI 1.20-1.70; P < 0.01; ). For each increment of 1 mg/dL in Lp(a) there was a 1% in the odds of CAC > 0 (OR 1.01; 95% CI 1.01-1.01; P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Our findings of this meta-analysis suggest that Lp(a) is positively associated with a higher likelihood of CAC. Higher Lp(a) levels increased the odds of CAC >0. These data support the concept that Lp(a) is atherogenic, although with high heterogeneity and a low level of certainty.

PROTOCOL REGISTRATION

CRD42023422034.

KEY FINDINGS

Asymptomatic patients with elevated Lp(a) had 31% higher chances of having any coronary calcification (CAC > 0) and 29% higher chances of having more advanced calcification (CAC > 100). It increased the chances of having progression of coronary calcification over time by 43%. For each 1 mg/dL of Lp(a) there was an increment of 1% chance of having coronary calcification.

Elevated lipoprotein(a) increases risk of subsequent major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and coronary revascularisation in incident ASCVD patients: A cohort study from the UK Biobank

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Elevated lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a genetic driver for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). We aimed to provide novel insights into the associated risk of elevated versus normal Lp(a) levels on major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in an incident ASCVD cohort.

METHODS

This was an observational cohort study of incident ASCVD patients. MACE counts and incidence rates (IRs) per 100-person-years were reported for patients with normal (<65 nmol/L) and elevated (>150 nmol/L) Lp(a) within the first year after incident ASCVD diagnosis and overall follow-up. Cox proportional hazard models quantified the risk of MACE associated with a 100 nmol/L increase in Lp(a).

RESULTS

The study cohort included 32,537 incident ASCVD patients; 5204 with elevated and 22,257 with normal Lp(a). Of those with elevated Lp(a), 41.2% had a subsequent MACE, versus 35.61% with normal Lp(a). Within the first year of follow-up, the IRs of composite MACE and coronary revascularisation were significantly higher (p < 0.001) in patients with elevated versus normal Lp(a) (IR difference 6.79 and 4.66). This trend was also observed in the overall follow-up (median 4.7 years). Using time to first subsequent MACE, a 100 nmol/L increase in Lp(a) was associated with an 8.0% increased risk of composite MACE, and 18.6% increased risk of coronary revascularisation during the overall follow-up period.

CONCLUSIONS

The association of elevated Lp(a) with increased risk of subsequent MACE and coronary revascularisation highlights a population who may benefit from earlier and more targeted intervention for cardiovascular risk including Lp(a), particularly within the first year after ASCVD diagnosis. Proactive Lp(a) testing as part of routine clinical practice can help identify and better manage these higher-risk individuals.

Lipoprotein (a) as a Biomarker for Cardiovascular Diseases and Potential New Therapies to Mitigate Risk

BACKGROUND

Lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] is a molecule that induces inflammation of the blood vessels, atherogenesis, valvular calcification, and thrombosis.

METHODS

We review the available evidence that suggests that high Lp(a) levels are associated with a persisting risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases despite optimization of established risk factors, including low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels.

OBSERVATIONS

Approximately a quarter of the world population have Lp(a) levels of >50 mg/dL (125 nmol/L), a level associated with elevated cardiovascular risk. Lifestyle modification, statins, and ezetimibe do not effectively lower Lp(a) levels, while proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK-9) inhibitors and niacin only lower Lp(a) levels modestly. We describe clinical studies suggesting that gene silencing therapeutics, such as small interfering RNA (siRNA) and antisense oligonucleotide targeting Lp(a), offer a targeted approach with the potential for safe and robust Lp(a)- lowering with only a few doses (3-4) per year. Prospective randomized phase 3 studies are ongoing to validate safety, effectiveness in improving hard clinical outcomes, and tolerability to assess these therapies.

CONCLUSION

Several emerging treatments with robust Lp(a)-lowering effects may significantly lower atherosclerotic cardiovascular risk.

Lp(a) and risk of cardiovascular disease - A review of existing evidence and emerging concepts

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) remains the leading cause of death among adults in the United States. There has been significant advancement in the diagnosis and treatment of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and its underlying risk factors. In certain populations, there remains a significant residual risk despite adequate lowering of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and control of traditional risk factors. This has led to an interest in research to identify additional risk factors that contribute to atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Elevated lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] has been identified as an independent risk factor contributing to an increased risk for CVD. There are also ethnic and racial disparities in Lp(a) inheritance that need to be understood. This paper reviews the current literature on lipoprotein a, proposed mechanisms of actions for cardiovascular disease, recommendations for testing, and the current and emerging therapies for lowering Lp(a).

[Laboratory diagnostics of lipid metabolism disorders]

Clinically, disorders of lipid metabolism often remain without symptoms. Typical skin lesions, however, can be indicative. Secondary hyperlipoproteinemias (HLP) are more common than primary hyperlipoproteinemias; they can (partially) be improved by treating the underlying disease. Basic diagnostics consist of the determination of cholesterol, triglycerides, LDL cholesterol and HDL cholesterol. To exclude secondary HLP, glucose, HbA1C, TSH, transaminases, creatinine, urea, protein and protein in the urine are useful. Since virtually all routine methods for LDL-C are biased by high triglycerides, lipoprotein electrophoresis is indicated for triglycerides above 400 mg/dl (4.7 mmol/l). Primary HLPs have known or yet unknown genetic causes. Primary hyperlipidemias should be taken into consideration especially in young patients with an LDL cholesterol concentration are above 190 mg/dl (4.9 mmol/l) and/or triglycerides above 400 mg/dl (10 mmol/l) and secondary HLP (obesity, alcohol, diabetes mellitus, kidney disease) is excluded. The basic diagnostics is meaningfully extended by the measurement of lipoprotein (a) (Lp(a)). It is indicated in moderate and high risk of vascular disease, progression of atherosclerosis in "well-controlled" LDL cholesterol, familial clustering of atherosclerosis or high Lp(a), evidence for elevated Lp(a) coming from lipoprotein electrophoresis, aortic stenosis and in patients in whom statins have a poor effect. Genetic diagnostics needs to be considered if primary HLP is suspected. It is most frequently conducted for suspected familial hypercholesterolemia and has already been recommended in guidelines.

High residual cardiovascular risk after lipid-lowering: prime time for Predictive, Preventive, Personalized, Participatory, and Psycho-cognitive medicine

As time has come to translate trial results into individualized medical diagnosis and therapy, we analyzed how to minimize residual risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) by reviewing papers on "residual cardiovascular disease risk". During this review process we found 989 papers that started off with residual CVD risk after initiating statin therapy, continued with papers on residual CVD risk after initiating therapy to increase high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (HDL-C), followed by papers on residual CVD risk after initiating therapy to decrease triglyceride (TG) levels. Later on, papers dealing with elevated levels of lipoprotein remnants and lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] reported new risk factors of residual CVD risk. And as new risk factors are being discovered and new therapies are being tested, residual CVD risk will be reduced further. As we move from CVD risk reduction to improvement of patient management, a paradigm shift from a reductionistic approach towards a holistic approach is required. To that purpose, a personalized treatment dependent on the individual's CVD risk factors including lipid profile abnormalities should be configured, along the line of P5 medicine for each individual patient, i.e., with Predictive, Preventive, Personalized, Participatory, and Psycho-cognitive approaches.

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): Just an Innocent Bystander in Arterial Hypertension?

Elevated plasma lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a relatively common and highly heritable trait conferring individuals time-dependent risk of developing atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (CVD). Following its first description, Lp(a) triggered enormous scientific interest in the late 1980s, subsequently dampened in the mid-1990s by controversial findings of some prospective studies. It was only in the last decade that a large body of evidence has provided strong arguments for a causal and independent association between elevated Lp(a) levels and CVD, causing renewed interest in this lipoprotein as an emerging risk factor with a likely contribution to cardiovascular residual risk. Accordingly, the 2022 consensus statement of the European Atherosclerosis Society has suggested inclusion of Lp(a) measurement in global risk estimation. The development of highly effective Lp(a)-lowering drugs (e.g., antisense oligonucleotides and small interfering RNA, both blocking LPA gene expression) which are still under assessment in phase 3 trials, will provide a unique opportunity to reduce "residual cardiovascular risk" in high-risk populations, including patients with arterial hypertension. The current evidence in support of a specific role of Lp(a) in hypertension is somehow controversial and this narrative review aims to overview the general mechanisms relating Lp(a) to blood pressure regulation and hypertension-related cardiovascular and renal damage.

Lipoprotein(a) in clinical practice: A guide for the clinician

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) remains the leading cause of death worldwide. Serum lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) has been shown to be an independent and causative risk factor for atherosclerotic CVD and calcific aortic valvular disease. Lp(a) continues to be studied, with emerging insights into the epidemiology of CVD with respect to Lp(a), pathogenic mechanisms of Lp(a) and strategies to mitigate disease. There have been novel insights into genetic polymorphisms of the LPA gene, interactions between concomitant risk factors and Lp(a) based on real-world data, and metabolic pathway targets for Lp(a) reduction. This review highlights these recent advances in our understanding of Lp(a) and discusses management strategies as recommended by cardiovascular professional societies, emerging therapies for lowering Lp(a), and future directions in targeting Lp(a) to reduce CVD.

Current Management and Future Perspectives in the Treatment of Lp(a) with a Focus on the Prevention of Cardiovascular Diseases

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a lipid molecule with atherogenic, inflammatory, thrombotic, and antifibrinolytic effects, whose concentrations are predominantly genetically determined. The association between Lp(a) and cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) has been well-established in numerous studies, and the ability to measure Lp(a) levels is widely available in the community. As such, there has been increasing interest in Lp(a) as a therapeutic target for the prevention of CVD. The impact of the currently available lipid-modifying agents on Lp(a) is modest and heterogeneous, except for the monoclonal antibody proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitors (PCSK9i), which demonstrated a significant reduction in Lp(a) levels. However, the absolute reduction in Lp(a) to significantly decrease CVD outcomes has not been definitely established, and the magnitude of the effect of PCSK9i seems insufficient to directly reduce the Lp(a)-related CVD risk. Therefore, emerging therapies are being developed that specifically aim to lower Lp(a) levels and the risk of CVD, including RNA interference (RNAi) agents, which have the capacity for temporary and reversible downregulation of gene expression. This review article aims to summarize the effects of Lp(a) on CVD and to evaluate the available evidence on established and emerging therapies targeting Lp(a) levels, focusing on the potential reduction of CVD risk attributable to Lp(a) concentrations.

Frequent questions and responses on the 2022 lipoprotein(a) consensus statement of the European Atherosclerosis Society

In 2022, the European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS) published a new consensus statement on lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)], summarizing current knowledge about its causal association with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and aortic stenosis. One of the novelties of this statement is a new risk calculator showing how Lp(a) influences lifetime risk for ASCVD and that global risk may be underestimated substantially in individuals with high or very high Lp(a) concentration. The statement also provides practical advice on how knowledge about Lp(a) concentration can be used to modulate risk factor management, given that specific and highly effective mRNA-targeted Lp(a)-lowering therapies are still in clinical development. This advice counters the attitude: "Why should I measure Lp(a) if I can't lower it?". Subsequent to publication, questions have arisen relating to how the recommendations of this statement impact everyday clinical practice and ASCVD management. This review addresses 30 of the most frequently asked questions about Lp(a) epidemiology, its contribution to cardiovascular risk, Lp(a) measurement, risk factor management and existing therapeutic options.

Clinical Trial Design for Lipoprotein(a)-Lowering Therapies: JACC Focus Seminar 2/3

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a source of residual risk in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Clinical trials of fully human monoclonal antibodies targeting proprotein convertase subtilisin kexin 9 have shown that reductions in Lp(a) concentrations may be a predictor of event reduction with this class of cholesterol-lowering therapy. With the advent of selective therapies targeting Lp(a) such as antisense oligonucleotides, small-interfering RNA-based therapies, and gene editing, lowering of Lp(a) may lead to reduction in ASCVD. The phase 3 Lp(a)HORIZON (Assessing the Impact of Lipoprotein(a) Lowering with TQJ230 on Major Cardiovascular Events in Patients With CVD) outcomes trial is currently testing the effect of pelacarsen, an antisense oligonucleotide, on ASCVD risk. Olpasiran is a small-interfering RNA that is in a phase 3 clinical trial. As these therapies enter clinical trials, challenges in trial design will have to be addressed to optimize patient selection and outcomes.

Detection strategies for elevated lipoprotein(a): will implementation let the genie out of the bottle?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Elevated Lp(a) level is an important causal risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), principally coronary artery disease. Selective testing for Lp(a) is highly recommended in patients at intermediate and high risk for ASCVD. Lp(a) levels are predominantly genetically determined, and this has implications for cascade testing.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent studies show that cascade testing is effective in identifying elevated Lp(a) in close relatives of probands with high Lp(a). Apart from selective testing and cascade testing as detection strategies, some recent guidelines recommend testing of Lp(a) in all adults at least once in their lifetime and various implementation strategies have been suggested.

SUMMARY

Hyper-Lp(a) is an important global health problem that can be easily detected. Hyper-Lp(a) meets all the criteria for universal screening except that there is not yet supportive evidence from clinical interventional trials showing a reduction of ASCVD events. The cost-effectiveness of the various detection and implementation strategies need to be further evaluated.

Association of vitamins, minerals, and lead with lipoprotein(a) in a cross-sectional cohort of US adults

Lipoprotein(a)(Lp[a]) is a low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C)-like particle with potent pro-atherothrombotic properties. The association of Lp(a) with several circulating factors, including vitamins, remains unresolved. We performed an observational analysis using the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey III cohort, a cohort used to monitor the nutrition status of US-citizens. We used multivariable linear regression to test associations of Lp(a) and LDL-C with levels of serum vitamins and minerals and whole-blood lead. Analyses controlled for factors known to associate with Lp(a) (age, sex, race/ethnicity, statin use, hemoglobin A1c, body mass index, hypertension, diabetes, glomerular filtration rate, alcohol intake, and saturated fat intake). LDL-C was corrected for Lp(a) mass. Multiple sensitivity tests were performed, including considering factors as categorical variables (deficient, normal, elevated). Among 7,662 subjects, Lp(a) correlated (β-coefficient) positively (change per 1 conventional unit increase) with carotenoids (lycopene (0.17(0.06,0.28), p=0.005), lutein (0.19(0.07,0.30), p=0.002), β-cryptoxanthin (0.21(0.05,0.37), p=0.01), β-carotene (0.05(0.02,0.09), p=0.003), and α-carotene (0.15(0.01,0.30), p=0.04)) and lead (0.54(0.03,1.05), p=0.04) levels when tested as continuous variables. LDL-C had similar associations. Lp(a) did not associate with vitamins A, B12, C, or E retinyl esters, folate, RBC-folate, selenium, ferritin, transferrin saturation, or calcium. With factors as categorical variables, Lp(a) but not LDL-C negatively associated with elevated vitamin B12 (-5.41(-9.50, -1.53), p=0.01) and folate (-2.86(-5.09, -0.63), p=0.01). In conclusion, Lp(a) associated similarly to LDL-C when vitamins, minerals, and lead were tested as continuous variables, while only Lp(a) correlated with vitamin B12 and folate when tested as categorical variables. These observations are hypotheses generating and require further studies to determine causality.

A Systematic Review on the Risk Modulators of Myocardial Infarction in the "Young"-Implications of Lipoprotein (a)

The presence of a myocardial infarction at a younger age is of special interest, considering the psychological and socioeconomic impact, as well as long-term morbidity and mortality. However, this group has a unique risk profile, with less traditional cardiovascular risk factors that are not well studied. This systematic review aims to evaluate traditional risk factors of myocardial infarction in the "young", highlighting the clinical implications of lipoprotein (a). We performed a comprehensive search using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) standards; we systematically searched the PubMed, EMBASE, and Science Direct Scopus databases, using the terms: "myocardial infarction", "young", "lipoprotein (a)", "low-density lipoprotein", "risk factors". The search identified 334 articles which were screened, and, at the end, 9 original research articles regarding the implications of lipoprotein (a) in myocardial infarction in the "young" were included in the qualitative synthesis. Elevated lipoprotein (a) levels were independently associated with an increased risk of coronary artery disease, especially in young patients, where this risk increased by threefold. Thus, it is recommended to measure the lipoprotein (a) levels in individuals with suspected familial hypercholesterolaemia or with premature atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and no other identifiable risk factors, in order to identify patients who might benefit from a more intensive therapeutic approach and follow-up.

Secondary Cardiovascular Prevention after Acute Coronary Syndrome: Emerging Risk Factors and Novel Therapeutic Targets

The control of cardiovascular risk factors, the promotion of a healthy lifestyle, and antithrombotic therapy are the cornerstones of secondary prevention after acute coronary syndrome (ACS). However, many patients have recurrent ischemic events despite the optimal control of traditional modifiable risk factors and the use of tailored pharmacological therapy, including new-generation antiplatelet and lipid-lowering agents. This evidence emphasizes the importance of identifying novel risk factors and targets to optimize secondary preventive strategies. Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) has emerged as an independent predictor of adverse events after ACS. New molecules such as anti-PCSK9 monoclonal antibodies, small interfering RNAs, and antisense oligonucleotides can reduce plasma Lp(a) levels and are associated with a long-term outcome benefit after the index event. The inflammatory stimulus and the inflammasome, pivotal elements in the development and progression of atherosclerosis, have been widely investigated in patients with coronary artery disease. More recently, randomized clinical trials including post-ACS patients treated with colchicine and monoclonal antibodies targeting cytokines yielded promising results in the reduction in major cardiovascular events after an ACS. Gut dysbiosis has also raised great interest for its potential pathophysiological role in cardiovascular disease. This evidence, albeit preliminary and needing confirmation by larger population-based studies, suggests the possibility of targeting the gut microbiome in particularly high-risk populations. The risk of recurrent ischemic events after ACS is related to the complex interaction between intrinsic predisposing factors and environmental triggers. The identification of novel risk factors and targets is fundamental to customizing patient clinical management with a precision medicine perspective.

Australian Atherosclerosis Society Position Statement on Lipoprotein(a): Clinical and Implementation Recommendations

This position statement provides guidance to cardiologists and related specialists on the management of adult patients with elevated lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)]. Elevated Lp(a) is an independent and causal risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and calcific aortic valve disease (CAVD). While circulating Lp(a) levels are largely determined by ancestry, they are also influenced by ethnicity, hormones, renal function, and acute inflammatory events, such that measurement should be done after accounting for these factors. Further, circulating Lp(a) concentrations should be estimated using an apo(a)-isoform independent assay that employs appropriate calibrators and reports the results in molar units (nmol/L). Selective screening strategies of high-risk patients are recommended, but universal screening of the population is currently not advised. Testing for elevated Lp(a) is recommended in all patients with premature ASCVD and those considered to be at intermediate-to-high risk of ASCVD. Elevated Lp(a) should be employed to assess and stratify risk and to enable a decision on initiation or intensification of preventative treatments, such as cholesterol lowering therapy. In adult patients with elevated Lp(a) at intermediate-to-high risk of ASCVD, absolute risk should be reduced by addressing all modifiable behavioural, lifestyle, psychosocial and clinical risk factors, including maximising cholesterol-lowering with statin and ezetimibe and, where appropriate, PCSK9 inhibitors. Apheresis should be considered in patients with progressive ASCVD. New ribonucleic acid (RNA)-based therapies which directly lower Lp(a) are undergoing clinical trials.

Predictive value of neutrophil-to-apolipoprotein A1 ratio in all-cause and cardiovascular death in elderly non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients

Neutrophil-to-apolipoprotein AI ratio's (NAR's) predictive value for the elderly non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients' death has not been fully recognized. We consecutively enrolled 1224 elderly patients with NVAF (≥75 years). With an average follow-up of 733.35 ± 271.39 days, 222 all-cause deaths were identified. Among these, 101 were caused by cardiovascular diseases. Cox regression showed that after correcting for potential confounders, patients in the Q4 group had an increased all-cause (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.90, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.20-2.99) and cardiovascular death (HR = 2.59, 95% CI: 1.30-5.15) risk compared to those in the lowest NAR quartile. Kaplan-Meier analysis indicated that all-cause and cardiovascular death were higher in the high NAR than those in the lowest NAR category (log rank, all, P < 0.001). A nonlinear association was observed between death and NAR. NAR may be a promising predictive biomarker for identifying elderly NVAF patients with poor clinical prognoses.

Impact of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and lipoprotein(a) on mid-term clinical outcomes following coronary artery bypass grafting: A secondary analysis of the DACAB trial

Purpose

The objective was to evaluate the influence of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] on clinical outcomes in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG).

Methods

This is a secondary analysis of a 5-year follow-up of the DACAB trial (NCT02201771), in which 500 patients who underwent primary isolated CABG were randomized to three-antiplatelet therapy for 1 year after surgery. Of them, 459 patients were recruited in this secondary analysis. Baseline LDL-C and Lp(a) levels were collected, and repeated measurement of LDL-C levels during the follow-up were recorded. Cut-off values for LDL-C were set at 1.8 and 2.6 mmol/L; thus, the patients were stratified into LDL-C <1.8, 1.8-<2.6, and ≥2.6 mmol/L subgroups. Cut-off value for Lp(a) was 30 mg/dL; thus, the patients were divided into Lp(a) <30 and ≥30 mg/dL subgroups. The primary outcome was 4-point major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE-4), a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and repeated revascularization. Median follow-up time was 5.2 (interquartile range, 4.2-6.1) years.

Results

During the follow-up, 129 (28.1%) patients achieved the attainment of LDL-C <1.8 mmol/L, 186 (40.5%) achieved LDL-C 1.8-<2.6 mmol/L, and 144 (31.4%) remained LDL-C ≥2.6 mmol/L. Compared with the postoperative LDL-C <1.8 mmol/L group, the risk of MACE-4 was significantly higher in the LDL-C 1.8-<2.6 mmol/L group [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) = 1.92, 95% CI, 1.12-3.29; P = 0.019] and LDL-C ≥2.6 mmol/L group (aHR = 3.90, 95% CI, 2.29-6.64; P < 0.001). Baseline Lp(a) ≥30 mg/dL was identified in 131 (28.5%) patients and was associated with an increased risk of MACE-4 (aHR = 1.52, 95% CI, 1.06-2.18; P = 0.022).

Conclusions

For CABG patients, exposure to increased levels of postoperative LDL-C or baseline Lp(a) was associated with worse mid-term clinical outcomes. Our findings suggested the necessity of achieving LDL-C target and potential benefit of adding Lp(a) targeted lipid-lowering therapy in CABG population.

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).

Lipoprotein(a) and Cardiovascular Disease in Chinese Population: A Beijing Heart Society Expert Scientific Statement

Elevated concentration of lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is an independent risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, including coronary artery disease, stroke, peripheral artery disease, and so on. Emerging data suggest that Lp(a) contributes to the increased risk for cardiovascular events even in the setting of effective reduction of plasma low-density lipoprotein cholesterol. Nevertheless, puzzling issues exist covering potential genetic factors, Lp(a) assay, possible individuals for analysis, a cutoff point of increased risk, and clinical interventions. In the Chinese population, Lp(a) exhibited a distinctive prevalence and regulated various cardiovascular diseases in specific ways. Hence, it is valuable to clarify the role of Lp(a) in cardiovascular diseases and explore prevention and control measures for the increase in Lp(a) prevalence in the Chinese population. This Beijing Heart Society experts' scientific statement will present the detailed knowledge concerning Lp(a)-related studies combined with Chinese population observations to provide the key points of reference.

Lipoprotein(a): Evidence for Role as a Causal Risk Factor in Cardiovascular Disease and Emerging Therapies

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is an established risk factor for multiple cardiovascular diseases. Several lines of evidence including mechanistic, epidemiologic, and genetic studies support the role of Lp(a) as a causal risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and aortic stenosis/calcific aortic valve disease (AS/CAVD). Limited therapies currently exist for the management of risk associated with elevated Lp(a), but several targeted therapies are currently in various stages of clinical development. In this review, we detail evidence supporting Lp(a) as a causal risk factor for ASCVD and AS/CAVD, and discuss approaches to managing Lp(a)-associated risk.

New and Emerging Therapies for Dyslipidemia

Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) continues to represent a growing global health challenge. Despite guideline-recommended treatment of ASCVD risk, including antihypertensive, high-intensity statin therapy, and antiaggregant agents, high-risk patients, especially those with established ASCVD and patients with type 2 diabetes, continue to experience cardiovascular events. Recent years have brought significant developments in lipid and atherosclerosis research. Several lipid drugs owe their existence, in part, to human genetic evidence. Here, the authors briefly review the mechanisms, the effect on lipid parameters, and safety profiles of some of the most promising new lipid-lowering approaches that will be soon available in our daily clinical practice.

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.

Lipoprotein(a) in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and aortic stenosis: a European Atherosclerosis Society consensus statement

This 2022 European Atherosclerosis Society lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] consensus statement updates evidence for the role of Lp(a) in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and aortic valve stenosis, provides clinical guidance for testing and treating elevated Lp(a) levels, and considers its inclusion in global risk estimation. Epidemiologic and genetic studies involving hundreds of thousands of individuals strongly support a causal and continuous association between Lp(a) concentration and cardiovascular outcomes in different ethnicities; elevated Lp(a) is a risk factor even at very low levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol. High Lp(a) is associated with both microcalcification and macrocalcification of the aortic valve. Current findings do not support Lp(a) as a risk factor for venous thrombotic events and impaired fibrinolysis. Very low Lp(a) levels may associate with increased risk of diabetes mellitus meriting further study. Lp(a) has pro-inflammatory and pro-atherosclerotic properties, which may partly relate to the oxidized phospholipids carried by Lp(a). This panel recommends testing Lp(a) concentration at least once in adults; cascade testing has potential value in familial hypercholesterolaemia, or with family or personal history of (very) high Lp(a) or premature ASCVD. Without specific Lp(a)-lowering therapies, early intensive risk factor management is recommended, targeted according to global cardiovascular risk and Lp(a) level. Lipoprotein apheresis is an option for very high Lp(a) with progressive cardiovascular disease despite optimal management of risk factors. In conclusion, this statement reinforces evidence for Lp(a) as a causal risk factor for cardiovascular outcomes. Trials of specific Lp(a)-lowering treatments are critical to confirm clinical benefit for cardiovascular disease and aortic valve stenosis.

Use of Lipoprotein(a) in clinical practice: A biomarker whose time has come. A scientific statement from the National Lipid Association

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a well-recognized, independent risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, with elevated levels estimated to be prevalent in 20% of the population. Observational and genetic evidence strongly support a causal relationship between high plasma concentrations of Lp(a) and increased risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease-related events, such as myocardial infarction and stroke, and valvular aortic stenosis. In this scientific statement, we review an array of evidence-based considerations for testing of Lp(a) in clinical practice and the utilization of Lp(a) levels to inform treatment strategies in primary and secondary prevention.

Pharmacokinetics, Pharmacodynamics, and Tolerability of Olpasiran in Healthy Japanese and Non-Japanese Participants: Results from a Phase I, Single-dose, Open-label Study

PURPOSE

Olpasiran, an N-acetyl galactosamine-conjugated, hepatocyte-targeted, small interfering RNA, is being developed to reduce plasma lipoprotein (Lp)-(a) concentration by directly targeting the LPA gene. This study evaluated the pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and tolerability of a single SC injection of olpasiran in healthy, Japanese and non-Japanese participants.

METHODS

In this Phase I, open-label, parallel-design study, Japanese participants were randomized in a 1:1:1:1 ratio to receive a single 3, 9, 75, or 225 mg dose of olpasiran. Non-Japanese participants received a single 75 mg dose of olpasiran. The primary end points were pharmacokinetic parameters, including C_max, AUC_inf, t_max, and t_1/2. Tolerability and change in Lp(a) concentration were also assessed.

FINDINGS

A total of 27 enrolled participants had a mean (SD) age of 48.0 (12.5) years. Olpasiran C_max and AUC_inf were increased in an approximately dose-proportional manner in the Japanese groups. Mean (SD) C_max values were 242 (121.0) and 144 (71.3) ng/mL, and mean (SD) AUC_inf values were 3550 (592.0) and 2620 (917.0) h·ng/mL, in the Japanese and non-Japanese groups, respectively, given 75 mg of olpasiran. Median t_max ranged from 3.0 to 9.0 hours and mean (SD) t_1/2 ranged from 4.0 (0.3) to 6.9 (1.6) hours across all groups. The maximal Lp(a) reduction occurred at day 57, with mean (SD) Lp(a) percentage reductions from baseline ranging from 56.0% (21.0%) to 99.0% (0.2%). A reductions in Lp(a) was observed as early as day 4. All adverse events were mild in severity, with no serious or fatal adverse events. No clinically important changes in tolerability-related laboratory analytes or vital signs were observed.

IMPLICATIONS

In this population of healthy Japanese participants, dose-proportional increases in exposure and reduced Lp(a) in a dose-dependent manner were found with single 3, 9, 75, and 225 mg doses of olpasiran. The magnitude and durability of Lp(a) reductions were similar between the Japanese and non-Japanese groups. Olpasiran was well tolerated, with no clinically important adverse events or laboratory or vital sign abnormalities.

Elevated lipoprotein(a) levels as an independent predictor of long-term recurrent events in patients with acute coronary syndrome: an observational, retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Whether lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is associated with recurrent cardiovascular events (RCVEs) still remains controversial. The present study aimed to investigate the prognostic value of Lp(a) for long-term RCVEs and each component of it in people with acute coronary syndrome (ACS).

METHODS

This multicenter, observational and retrospective study enrolled 765 ACS patients at 11 hospitals in Chengdu from January 2014 to June 2019. Patients were assigned to low-Lp(a) group [Lp(a) < 30 mg/dl] and high-Lp(a) group [Lp(a) ≥ 30 mg/dl]. The primary and secondary endpoints were defined as RCVEs and their elements, including all-cause death, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), nonfatal stroke and unplanned revascularization.

RESULTS

Over a median 17-month follow-up, 113 (14.8%) patients presented with RCVEs were reported, among which we observed 57 (7.5%) all-cause deaths, 22 (2.9%) cases of nonfatal stroke, 13 (1.7%) cases of nonfatal MI and 33 (4.3%) cases of unplanned revascularization. The incidences of RCVEs and revascularization in the high-Lp(a) group were significantly higher than those in the low-Lp(a) group ( P < 0.05), whereas rates of all-cause death, nonfatal stroke and nonfatal MI were not statistically different ( P > 0.05). Kaplan-Meier analysis also revealed the same trend. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards analysis showed that 1-SD increase of Lp(a) was independently associated with both the primary endpoint event [hazard ratio (HR), 1.285 per 1-SD; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.112-1.484; P < 0.001] and revascularization (HR, 1.588 per 1-SD; 95% CI, 1.305-1.932; P < 0.001), but not with the other secondary events.

CONCLUSION

Increased Lp(a) is an independent predictor of RCVEs and unplanned revascularization in patients with ACS.

Impact of High Lipoprotein(a) Levels on Clinical Outcomes Following Peripheral Endovascular Therapy

BACKGROUND

Elevated lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]) levels are an independent risk factor for the development of atherosclerotic diseases, including peripheral artery disease (PAD). However, their prognostic impact in patients with PAD remains unknown.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to examine the prognostic impact of elevated Lp(a) levels in patients with PAD undergoing endovascular therapy (EVT).

METHODS

In total, 1,169 patients who underwent successful EVT for symptomatic PAD between September 2016 and August 2021 were included in this study. High Lp(a) levels were defined as >30 mg/dL. The associations of high Lp(a) levels with incident major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (all-cause death, myocardial infarction, and stroke) and major adverse limb events (MALE) (repeat revascularization for target limb and major amputation) were analyzed.

RESULTS

During a median follow-up period of 1.7 years (IQR: 0.6-3.0 years), 230 MACE (210 deaths, 15 myocardial infarctions, and 22 strokes) and 263 MALE (219 reinterventions and 36 major amputations) were observed. The cumulative incidence rate of MACE (48.1% vs 27.3%) and MALE (67.9% vs 27.2%) was significantly higher in patients with high Lp(a) levels (P < 0.001 for both). The adjusted HR were 1.93 (95% CI: 1.44-2.59; P < 0.001) for MACE and 4.15 (95% CI: 3.14-5.50; P < 0.001) for MALE. These associations were not influenced by low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels or statin administration (P for interaction >0.05 for all).

CONCLUSIONS

Elevated Lp(a) levels were independently associated with incident MACE and MALE in patients with PAD treated with revascularization irrespective of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level and statin administration.

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.

Lipoprotein(a) and Subclinical Vascular and Valvular Calcification on Cardiac Computed Tomography: The Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities Study

Background Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is a potent causal risk factor for cardiovascular events and mortality. However, its relationship with subclinical atherosclerosis, as defined by arterial calcification, remains unclear. This study uses the ARIC (Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities Study) to evaluate the relationship between Lp(a) in middle age and measures of vascular and valvular calcification in older age. Methods and Results Lp(a) was measured at ARIC visit 4 (1996-1998), and coronary artery calcium (CAC), together with extracoronary calcification (including aortic valve calcium, aortic valve ring calcium, mitral valve calcification, and thoracic aortic calcification), was measured at visit 7 (2018-2019). Lp(a) was defined as elevated if >50 mg/dL and CAC/extracoronary calcification were defined as elevated if >100. Logistic and linear regression models were used to evaluate the association between Lp(a) and CAC/extracoronary calcification, with further stratification by race. The mean age of participants at visit 4 was 59.2 (SD 4.3) years, with 62.2% women. In multivariable adjusted analyses, elevated Lp(a) was associated with higher odds of elevated aortic valve calcium (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.82; 95% CI, 1.34-2.47), CAC (aOR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.08-1.81), aortic valve ring calcium (aOR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.07-1.73), mitral valve calcification (aOR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.06-1.78), and thoracic aortic calcification (aOR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.05-1.77). Similar results were obtained when Lp(a) and CAC/extracoronary calcification were examined on continuous logarithmic scales. There was no significant difference in the association between Lp(a) and each measure of calcification by race or sex. Conclusions Elevated Lp(a) at middle age is significantly associated with vascular and valvular calcification in older age, represented by elevated CAC, aortic valve calcium, aortic valve ring calcium, mitral valve calcification, thoracic aortic calcification. Our findings encourage assessing Lp(a) levels in individuals with increased cardiovascular disease risk, with subsequent comprehensive vascular and valvular assessment where elevated.

A method for lipoprotein (a) Isolation from a small volume of plasma with applications for clinical research

High levels of circulating Lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] are an independent risk factor for CVD. One of the major limitations to investigating Lp(a) biology is the need for large volumes of plasma (4-10 mL) for its isolation. We developed an isolation technique requiring only 0.4 mL of plasma yielding an enriched Lp(a) fraction suitable for compositional and functional studies. We collected plasma from patients (n = 9) in EDTA presenting to our Center for Preventive Cardiology for CVD risk management and with circulating Lp(a) > 66 mg/dL. 0.4 mL of plasma was added to 90 µL of potassium bromide (1.33 g/mL) and subjected to our two-step density-gradient ultracentrifugation method. The first step separates VLDL and LDL from the Lp(a) and HDL fractions and the second step further separates VLDL from LDL and Lp(a) from HDL. Lp(a) is then dialyzed for up to 24 h in potassium phosphate buffer. We performed cholesterol gel electrophoresis, immunoblotting and LC-MS/MS proteomics on isolated lipoprotein fractions to confirm fraction enrichment. Functional studies including Lp(a)-dependent induction of macrophage gene expression and cholesterol efflux inhibition were performed on isolated Lp(a) to confirm its preserved bioactivity. Lp(a) yields (264 ± 82.3 µg/mL on average) correlated with Lp(a) plasma concentrations (r2 = 0.75; p < 0.01) and represented the relative distribution of circulating apo(a) isoforms. Proteomic analyses confirm lipoprotein fraction separation. Functional integrity was confirmed by the findings that isolated Lp(a) inhibited plasminogen-dependent cholesterol efflux in HEK293T cells expressing ABCA1 and increased expressions of Il1b, Nos2 and Ccl2. We developed a small-volume isolation technique for Lp(a) suited for a range of applications used in biomedical research. The use of this technique circumvents volume-dependent limitations and expands our ability to investigate the mysteries of this deleterious lipoprotein.

Synergistic effect of the commonest residual risk factors, remnant cholesterol, lipoprotein(a), and inflammation, on prognosis of statin-treated patients with chronic coronary syndrome

Background

Currently, remnant cholesterol (RC), lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)], and inflammation are considered the principal residual cardiovascular risk (RCVR) factors. This study sought to evaluate the combined impact of RC, Lp(a), and inflammation on prognosis of statin-treated patients with chronic coronary syndrome (CCS), which has not been investigated.

Methods

A total of 6839 patients with CCS were consecutively enrolled. Baseline RC, Lp(a), and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) concentrations were measured and their medians were used for categorizations. All patients were followed for the major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), including cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and stroke. The individual and combined effects of RC, Lp(a), and hsCRP on MACEs were examined and stratification analysis according to low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) was performed.

Results

Over an average of 54.93 ± 18.59 months follow-up, 462 MACEs were recorded. Multivariate Cox analysis showed that elevated RC and Lp(a) levels were significantly associated with an increased risk of MACEs, while high hsCRP levels were related to a slightly but non-significantly increased MACEs risk. Moreover, when participants were subgrouped according to RC, Lp(a), and hsCRP levels together, only High RC-High Lp(a)-High hsCRP group had significantly higher risk of MACEs [hazard ratio (HR) 1.99, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.15–3.47] compared with the reference group (Low RC-Low Lp(a)-Low hsCRP), especially in patients with LDL-C < 2.6 mmol/L.

Conclusions

The combination of elevated levels of RC, Lp(a), and hsCRP potentiated the adverse effect on MACEs among statin-treated patients with CCS, suggesting that multiple RCVR factors assessment may be a better strategy to improve stratification in very-high risk population.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12967-022-03448-x.

Lipoprotein(a) and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease and Different Metabolic Phenotypes

Background

The positive relationship between metabolic healthy obesity (MHO) and cardiovascular risk has been under debate in recent years. Previously, strong evidence supported the causal role of increased plasma lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] levels in cardiovascular disease (CVD). The current study aimed to investigate the different associations of Lp(a) and cardiovascular events (CVEs) in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) and different metabolic phenotypes.

Methods

A total of 5,089 patients who were angiography-proven CAD were consecutively included and followed up for CVEs. Obesity was defined as a body mass index (BMI) ≥25 kg/m² according to Asia-specific BMI criteria. Patients were divided into four groups according to metabolic phenotypes, namely metabolically healthy/unhealthy non-obese and metabolically healthy/unhealthy obese [metabolically healthy non-obese (MHN), MHO, metabolically unhealthy non-obese (MUN), and metabolically unhealthy obesity (MUO)]. Comparisons of CAD severity and outcomes were performed among four groups. Cox regression analyses and cubic spline models were used to examine the relationship between Lp(a) and CVEs in patients with different metabolic phenotypes.

Results

During a median of 7.5 years’ follow-up, 540 (10.6%) CVEs occurred. MUN and MUO populations had more severe coronary stenosis than MHN ones, while no significant difference in the Gensini score (GS) was observed between MHN and MHO. Patients with MUN and MUO presented a higher risk of CVEs than patients with MHN (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.414, 95% CI: 1.024–1.953–1.556 and HR: 1.747, 95% CI: 1.295–1.363, p < 0.05). In subgroup analysis, restricted cubic spline models showed that there was no association between Lp(a) and CVEs in patients in MHN and MHO, while the MUN and MUO groups presented increasing associations between Lp(a) and CVEs and such association was stronger in the MUO group. In Cox regression analysis, Lp(a) >50 mg/dl was associated with a 2.032- and 2.206-fold higher risk of subsequent CVEs in the MUO and MUN subgroups, respectively.

Conclusion

Among patients with angiography-proven stable CAD, Lp(a) had a more significant prognostic value in both MUO and MUN individuals regardless of obesity, suggesting the importance of screening for cardiovascular risk with Lp(a) in metabolically unhealthy patients.

Lipoprotein(a) and its Significance in Cardiovascular Disease: A Review

Importance

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]) is a low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol-like particle bound to apolipoprotein(a). This novel marker of cardiovascular disease acts through induction of vascular inflammation, atherogenesis, calcification, and thrombosis. While an absolute risk threshold remains to be universally accepted, an estimated 20% to 25% of the global population have Lp(a) levels of 50 mg/dL or higher, a level noted by the European Atherosclerosis Society to confer increased cardiovascular risk.

Observations

Compelling evidence from pathophysiological, observational, and genetic studies suggest a potentially causal association between high Lp(a) levels, atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, and calcific aortic valve stenosis. Additional evidence has demonstrated that elevated Lp(a) levels are associated with a residual cardiovascular risk despite traditional risk factor optimization, including LDL cholesterol reduction. These findings have led to the formulation of the Lp(a) hypothesis, namely that Lp(a) lowering leads to cardiovascular risk reduction, intensifying the search for Lp(a)-reducing therapies. The ineffectiveness of lifestyle modification, statins, and ezetimibe to lower Lp(a); the modest Lp(a) reduction with proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitors; the adverse effect profile and unclear cardiovascular benefit of pharmacotherapies such as niacin and mipomersen; and the impracticality of regular lipoprotein apheresis represent major challenges to currently available therapies. Nevertheless, emerging nucleic acid-based therapies, such as the antisense oligonucleotide pelacarsen and the small interfering RNA olpasiran, are generating interest because of their potent Lp(a)-lowering effects. Assessment of new-onset diabetes in patients achieving very low Lp(a) levels will be important in future trials.

Conclusions and Relevance

Epidemiologic and genetic studies suggest a potentially causal association between elevated Lp(a) levels, atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, and aortic valve stenosis. Emerging nucleic acid-based therapies have potent Lp(a)-lowering effects and appear safe; phase 3 trials will establish whether they improve cardiovascular outcomes.

Lipoprotein(a) and Metabolic Syndrome

BACKGROUND

An inverse association between lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]) and type 2 diabetes mellitus is well documented. However, data on the association of the metabolic syndrome (MetS) with Lp(a) are sparse.

METHODS

Cross-sectional data for MetS and Lp(a) were available for 5743 BASE-II and SHIP-0 participants (48.7% men; age 58 [20-85] years) (BASE, Berlin Aging Study; SHIP, Study of Health in Pomerania). The association of MetS and its components with Lp(a) was analyzed by means of median regression adjusted for age, sex, and study. Associations were evaluated for the total population as well as stratified by sex and menopausal status.

RESULTS

Overall, 27.6% (n = 1573) of the participants in the two studies had MetS and 22.5% (n = 1291) were premenopausal women. There was an inverse association between MetS and Lp(a) in the whole study sample (β = -11.9, 95% confidence interval [-21.3; -2.6]) as well as in men (β = -16.5 [-28.6; -4.3]). Participants with MetS (whole study sample) had 11.9 mmol/L lower Lp(a). Analogous results were found in postmenopausal women (β = -25.4 [-46.0; -4.8]). In premenopausal women with MetS, Lp(a) levels were higher by 39.1 mg/L on average [12.3; 65.9]) than in premenopausal women without MetS.

CONCLUSION

Hormonal aspects and menopausal alterations seem to affect the association between MetS and Lp(a), as the expected inverse association was not present in premenopausal women.

Impact of Lipoprotein(a) as a Residual Risk Factor in Long-Term Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome Treated With Statins

The association between lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]) levels and cardiovascular disease has been reported. However, it is still uncertain whether Lp(a) concentration could be a residual risk factor for cardiovascular events after acute coronary syndrome (ACS). The aim of the present study is to evaluate the impact of Lp(a) on long-term cardiovascular outcomes in patients with ACS treated with statins. We studied 1,758 consecutive patients with ACS who underwent emergency percutaneous coronary intervention between 2008 and 2017. We finally enrolled 1,131 patients for whom Lp(a) data were available and who were treated with statins at discharge. Patients were divided into 2 groups according to Lp(a) levels (median Lp(a) 15.0 mg/100 ml). The primary end points were major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), composite of all-cause death, and myocardial infarction up to 5 years. Overall, 107 MACEs (9.5%) were identified. The cumulative incidence of MACE was significantly higher in the high Lp(a) group than the low Lp(a) group (log-rank p = 0.01). After adjustment for other cardiovascular risk factors, the high Lp(a) group had a significantly higher risk of MACE (hazard ratio 1.66, 95% confidence interval 1.05 to 2.61, p = 0.03). Multivariate Cox hazard analysis also showed that increasing Lp(a) as a continuous variable was associated with the incidence of MACE (hazard ratio 1.35 per log Lp[a] 1 increase, 95% confidence interval 1.07 to 1.72, p = 0.01). In conclusion, high Lp(a) level is significantly associated with long-term cardiovascular outcomes in patients with ACS treated with statins after primary percutaneous coronary intervention and is likely to be a potential biomarker for residual risk prediction of future clinical events.