High lipoprotein(a) level promotes both coronary atherosclerosis and myocardial infarction: a path analysis using a large number of autopsy cases

The Association of High Lipoprotein(a) Concentration and Risk of Ischaemic Stroke in Atrial Fibrillation Patients

Background

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a well-established risk factor for ischaemic stroke (IS). It is unclear whether Lp(a) is associated with IS in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). The aim of this study is to explore the association between the concentration of Lp(a) and the risk of IS in AF patients, hope to find the potential risk factor for the IS in AF patients.

Methods

This study is a retrospective cohort study. The screened AF patients between January 2017 and July 2021 were matched at 1:1 by the propensity score matching (PSM) method in the Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University. Associations between Lp(a) and ischaemic stroke were analysed using logistic regression models, stratified analysis and sensitivity analysis. Statistical analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS software.

Results

The number of enrolled participates is 2258, which contains 1129 non-AF patients and 1129 AF patients. Among IS patients, the median Lp(a) concentration was higher than that of controls (17.03 vs. 15.36 mg/dL, P = 0.032). The Spearman rank-order correlation coefficients revealed significant positive relationships between IS and Lp(a) (P = 0.032). In addition, a significant increase in IS risk was associated with Lp(a) levels >30.00 mg/dL in unadjusted model [OR:1.263, 95% CI(1.046-1.523), P = 0.015], model 1 [OR:1.284, 95% CI(1.062,1.552), P = 0.010], model 2 [OR: 1.297, 95% CI(1.07,1.573). P = 0.008], and model 3 [OR: 1.290, 95% CI (1.064, 1.562). P = 0.009]. The stratified analysis indicated that this correlation was not affected by female sex [1.484 (1.117, 1.972), P = 0.006], age ≤ 60 [1.864 (1.067-3.254), P=0.029], hypertension [1.359 (1.074, 1.721), P = 0.011], or non-coronary heart disease (CHD) [1.388 (1.108, 1.738), P = 0.004].

Conclusion

High levels of Lp(a) were significantly related to IS in AF patients and may be a potential risk factor in the onset of an IS in AF patients.

Lipoprotein(a) as a Higher Residual Risk for Coronary Artery Disease in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus than without

Purpose

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]) is well-known as a residual risk factor for coronary artery disease (CAD). However, the different adverse effects of Lp(a) about CAD in patients with or without type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) are unclear. This study aimed to investigate the Lp(a) thresholds for CAD diagnosis in T2DM and non-T2DM patients, and further compare the Lp(a) alarm values along with optimal low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level.

Methods

This retrospective study consecutively enrolled patients with suspected CAD who underwent coronary angiography in Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital between September 2014 and July 2015. A logistic regression model was established to explore the association of Lp(a) and CAD in patients. Restricted cubic splines were used to compare the threshold values of Lp(a) for CAD in patients with and without T2DM, and further in optimal LDL-C level situation.

Results

There were 1522 patients enrolled finally. After multivariable adjustment, Lp(a) was an independent risk factor for CAD in patients with T2DM (odds ratio [OR]: 1.98, 95% CI]: 1.12-3.49, p = 0.019) and without T2DM (OR: 3.42, 95% CI: 2.36-4.95, p < 0.001). In the whole population, the Lp(a) threshold of CAD was 155, while 145 mg/L for T2DM and 162 mg/L for non-T2DM ones, respectively. In patients with LDL-C<1.8 mmol/l, the alarm value of Lp(a) was even lower in T2DM than non-T2DM patients (155 vs 174 mg/L).

Conclusion

Lp(a) was a significant residual risk for CAD in patients whether with T2DM or not. And Lp(a) had a lower alarm value in T2DM patients, especially in optimal LDL-C level.

Biomarkers of Coronary Microvascular Dysfunction in Patients With Microvascular Angina: A Narrative Review

The current gold standard for diagnosis of coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD) in the absence of myocardial diseases, whose clinical manifestation is microvascular angina (MVA), is reactivity testing using adenosine or acetylcholine during coronary angiography. This invasive test can be difficult to perform, expensive, and harmful. The identification of easily obtainable blood biomarkers which reflect the pathophysiology of CMD, characterized by high reliability, precision, accuracy, and accessibility may reduce risks and costs related to invasive procedures and even facilitate the screening and diagnosis of CMD. In this review, we summarized the results of several studies that have investigated the possible relationships between blood biomarkers involved with CMD and MVA. More specifically, we have divided the analyzed biomarkers into 3 different groups, according to the main mechanisms underlying CMD: biomarkers of "endothelial dysfunction," "vascular inflammation," and "oxidative stress." Finally, in the last section of the review, we consider mixed mechanisms and biomarkers which are not included in the 3 major categories mentioned above, but could be involved in the pathogenesis of CMD.

Impact of Postprocedural High-Sensitivity C-Reactive Protein on Lipoprotein(a)-Associated Cardiovascular Risk with ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction With Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

This study aimed to investigate the impact of high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) on Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] associated cardiovascular risk in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). A total of 2318 STEMI-PCI patients were retrospectively recruited, and further stratified based on postprocedural hsCRP levels (≥ 2 vs < 2 mg/L). Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) were defined as all-cause death, myocardial infarction and stroke. During a mean follow-up of 2.5 years, MACE occurred in 159 (6.9%) patients. In the setting of hsCRP ≥ 2mg/L, per unit increase of Lp(a) was associated with a 28% increase of MACE risk (HR: 1.28, 95% CI: 1.09 to 1.49, p = 0.002; p = 0.031 for interaction); increasing tertiles of Lp(a) were significantly related to greater rates of MACE (p = 0.011 for interaction; p = 0.005 for trend across tertiles). Patients with upper tertile of Lp(a) had a significant lower event-free survival (p = 0.034) when hsCRP ≥ 2mg/L. No similar association between Lp(a) and MACE was noted when hsCRP < 2mg/L. In conclusion, high Lp(a) levels were associated with poor prognosis when hsCRP ≥ 2mg/L, implying systemic inflammation can modulate Lp(a)-associated MACE risk in STEMI-PCI patients. Measurement of Lp(a) in patients with high inflammation risk may identify individuals at high cardiovascular risk.

Predictors of severe sepsis-related in-hospital mortality based on a multicenter cohort study: The Focused Outcomes Research in Emergency Care in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome, Sepsis, and Trauma study

This study aimed to identify prognostic factors for severe sepsis-related in-hospital mortality using the structural equation model (SEM) analysis with statistical causality. Sepsis data from the Focused Outcomes Research in Emergency Care in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome, Sepsis, and Trauma study (FORECAST), a multicenter cohort study, was used. Forty seven observed variables from the database were used to construct 4 latent variables. SEM analysis was performed on these latent variables to analyze the statistical causality among these data. This study evaluated whether the variables had an effect on in-hospital mortality. Overall, 1148 patients were enrolled. The SEM analysis showed that the 72-hour physical condition was the strongest latent variable affecting mortality, followed by physical condition before treatment. Furthermore, the 72-hour physical condition and the physical condition before treatment strongly influenced the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score with path coefficients of 0.954 and 0.845, respectively. The SOFA score was the strongest variable that affected mortality after the onset of severe sepsis. The score remains the most robust prognostic factor and can facilitate appropriate policy development on care.

High Lipoprotein(a) Level Is Independently Associated with Adverse Clinicopathological Features in Patients with Prostate Cancer

Background

The effect of lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) on prostate cancer (PCa) is unclear. The aim of this study was to investigate the association between serum Lp(a) levels and clinicopathological features in patients with PCa.

Methods

A total of 376 consecutive pathologically diagnosed PCa patients were enrolled and were classified as a low-intermediate-risk group or a high-risk group. The association of Lp(a) and the other lipid parameters including total cholesterol (TC), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), triglycerides (TG), TC/HDL-C, LDL-C/HDL-C, and remnant cholesterol (RC) with clinicopathological parameters was tested by univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses.

Results

The high-risk PCa patients tended to have higher Lp(a) levels (p = 0.022) while there was no significant difference regarding the other lipid parameters (p > 0.05) compared to low-intermediate-risk counterparts. Patients with PSA ≥ 100 ng/ml had significantly higher Lp(a) levels than subjects with PSA < 100 ng/ml (p = 0.002). Univariate logistic regression analyses revealed that high Lp(a) levels were correlated with high-risk PCa (Q4 vs. Q1, HR = 2.687, 95% CI: 1.113-6.491, p = 0.028), while the other lipid parameters were not correlated with high-risk PCa. In the stepwise multivariate regression analysis, the association between Lp(a) levels and high-risk PCa remained significant (Q4 vs. Q1, HR = 2.890, 95% CI: 1.148-7.274, p = 0.024) after adjusting for confounding factors including age, body mass index, hypertension, diabetes, coronary artery disease, and lipid-lowering drugs.

Conclusions

This is the first study showing the positive association between high Lp(a) and adverse clinicopathological features of PCa. PCa patients with high Lp(a) tends to be more aggressive and should receive more attention in clinical practice.

Elevated lipoprotein (a) levels are associated with the presence and severity of coronary artery disease in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The role of lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] in coronary artery diseases (CAD) with special clinical background such as type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) has not been fully determined. The aim of the present study was to investigate the relation of Lp(a) to type 2 diabetic patients with or without CAD.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A total of 2040 consecutive patients with T2DM who received selective coronary angiography (CAG) due to angina-like chest pain were enrolled. The patients were subsequently divided into CAD and non-CAD groups according to the results of CAG. The severity of CAD was evaluated by the Gensini Score (GS), number of stenotic vessels, and history of myocardial infarction (MI). Data showed that Lp(a) levels were higher in the CAD group than in the non-CAD group (median: 15.00 mg/dL vs. 11.88 mg/dL, P = 0.025). The results from CAD subgroup analysis indicated that the patients with MI, multiple-vessel disease and high GS had higher Lp(a) levels compared with those in their matched subgroups (P < 0.05, respectively). After adjustment for confounders, Lp(a) levels were independently related to the presence and severity of CAD (CAD:OR = 1.564; MI:OR = 1.523; high GS:OR = 1.388; multiple-vessel disease:OR = 1.455; P < 0.05, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Elevated Lp(a) levels were independently associated with the presence and severity of CAD in patients with T2DM. More studies are necessary to confirm our findings.

[Lipoprotein(a): influence on cardiovascular manifestation]

The clinical relevance of lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) as a cardiovascular risk factor is currently underestimated. The aim of our study was to assess the influence of increased Lp(a) values on the development and severity of coronary artery disease (CAD).In our retrospective analysis of 31,274 patients, who were hospitalized for the first time, we compared patients with isolated increased Lp(a) (> 110 mg/dl) and normal Lp(a) (< 30 mg/dl), with increased Lp(a) concentrations (30-60 mg/dl, 61-90 mg/dl, 91-110 mg/dl), and in a third analysis with additionally increased LDL cholesterol and HbA1c values.Patients with high Lp(a) levels showed a significantly higher incidence of advanced CAD with a three-vessel disease being present in 50.2 vs. 25.1 %. Patients with high Lp(a) levels had a significantly more frequent history of myocardial infarction (34.6 vs. 16.6 %, p < 0.001), surgical myocardial revascularization (40.8 vs. 20.8 %, p < 0.001) and percutaneous coronary intervention (55.3 vs. 33.6 %, p < 0.001). In addition, there was a marked difference in gender to the disadvantage of male patients regarding development and severity of CAD. CAD risk (Odds ratio) was increased 5.5-fold in patients with Lp(a) ≥ 110 mg/dl. Additionally elevated LDL and HbA1c levels were not associated with increased manifestation and severity of CAD.High Lp(a) concentration leads to an increased manifestation and severity of coronary artery disease. Additional risk factors do not aggravate manifestation of CAD.

Total cholesterol content of erythrocyte membranes is associated with the severity of coronary artery disease and the therapeutic effect of rosuvastatin

INTRODUCTION

Numerous studies suggest that total cholesterol content of erythrocyte membranes (CEM) might play a critical role in atherosclerotic plaque progression and instability. However, the exact role of CEM in atherosclerosis remains obscure. Our study was designed to investigate the association between CEM and the severity of coronary artery disease (CAD), and to assess the effect of rosuvastatin on CEM levels.

METHODS

CEM levels were assessed in 136 participants, including acute coronary syndrome (ACS) (non-ST-segment elevation ACS (NSTEACS) and ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI)), stable angina pectoris (SAP), and controls. The Gensini score was used to estimate the severity of CAD. Additionally, 54 patients with CAD were medicated with rosuvastatin, 5 or 10 mg once daily, and then checked at 6 months.

RESULTS

The highest level of CEM was found in the STEMI group, followed by the NSTEACS, the SAP, and the control groups. Gensini score in group IV (CEM > 141.6 μg/mg) was markedly higher compared with group I (CEM ≤77.6 μg/mg). Gensini scores in group II (77.6 < CEM ≤111.1 μg/mg) and group III (111.1 < CEM ≤141.6 μg/mg) were also higher than in group I (all P < 0.001). Furthermore, a positive correlation was found between CEM levels and Gensini score (r = 0.714, P < 0.001). CEM levels were dose-dependently reduced by rosuvastatin therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

CEM levels are positively associated with the severity of CAD, meaning that CEM might contribute to the development of CAD. Importantly, rosuvastatin could decrease CEM levels in patients with CAD and might effectively help to attenuate the progression of CAD.

Low lipoprotein(a) concentration is associated with cancer and all-cause deaths: a population-based cohort study (the JMS cohort study)

BACKGROUND

Experimental studies support the anti-neoplastic effect of apo(a), but several clinical studies have reported contradictory results. The purpose of this study was to determine whether a low lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] concentration is related to mortality from major causes of death, especially cancer.

METHODS

The subjects were 10,413 participants (4,005 men and 6,408 women) from a multi-center population-based cohort study in Japan (The Jichi Medical School cohort study). The average age at registration was 55.0 years, and the median observation period was 4,559 days. As the estimated hazard ratio was high for both the low and very high Lp(a) levels, we defined two Lp(a) groups: a low Lp(a) group [Lp(a)<80 mg/L] and an intermediate-to-high Lp(a) group [Lp(a) ≥ 80]. Participants who died from malignant neoplasms (n = 316), cardiovascular disease (202), or other causes (312) during the observation period were examined.

RESULTS

Cumulative incidence plots showed higher cumulative death rates for the low Lp(a) group than for the intermediate-to-high Lp(a) group for all-cause, cancer, and miscellaneous-cause deaths (p<0.001, p = 0.03, and p = 0.03, respectively). Cox proportional hazards analyses with the sex and age of the participants, body mass index, and smoking and drinking histories as covariates showed that a low Lp(a) level was a significant risk for all-cause, cancer, and miscellaneous-cause deaths (p<0.001, p = 0.003, and p = 0.01, respectively). The hazard ratio (95% CI) [1.48, 1.15-1.92] of a low Lp(a) level for cancer deaths was almost the same as that for a male sex (1.46, 1.00-2.13).

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first report to describe the association between a low Lp(a) level and all-cause or cancer death, supporting the anti-neoplastic effect of Lp(a). Further epidemiological studies are needed to confirm the present results.

Serum lipoprotein(a) levels are greater in female than male patients with type-2 diabetes

Women with diabetes are faced with a higher risk of dyslipidemia and cardiovascular disorders than men with diabetes. We aimed to study the role of gender and menopausal status in serum Lp(a) levels in patients with type 2 diabetes. We quantified serum Lp(a) levels in a group of 477 patients with type 2 diabetes (men, premenopausal and postmenopausal women with diabetes), as well as in 105 controls. We stratified the patients into two groups of low Lp(a) levels (Lp(a) <35 mg/dl) and elevated Lp(a) levels (Lp(a) >35 mg/dl). Patients with diabetes had higher serum Lp(a) levels than the controls. Serum Lp(a) levels was significantly higher in women with diabetes than men with diabetes. Lp(a) levels did not differ between male and females in the control group. Premenopausal and postmenopausal women with diabetes did not differ significantly in serum Lp(a) levels. The odds ratio of having a serum Lp(a) level higher than 35 was 5.85 in premenopausal women with diabetes, 5.08 in postmenopausal women with diabetes, 2.41 in men with diabetes and 1.9 in the women in the control group compared to the men in the control group, after adjustment for age and BMI. This observational study clearly indicated that serum Lp(a) levels were significantly higher in women and men with diabetes. The increase in women was independent of menopause. The level of serum Lp(a) had no correlation with lipid parameters in men or women.

Management of dyslipidemia in the elderly population

The elderly population is increasing worldwide. Despite a major decrease in deaths from coronary heart disease (CHD), this malady remains the major cause of death in elderly men and women. In this paper, we review the role of dyslipidemia as a major known risk factor in the pathogenesis of CHD, age-related changes in lipoprotein metabolism, and differences in changes in lipids that occur in men and women during aging. Next we provide an overview of the available studies and recommendations from ATP III. Finally, we comment on the screening and management, cost and side effects of therapy as it applies to an aging population.

Effect of lipoprotein (a) on annexin A5 binding to cell membrane

BACKGROUND

High blood lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] concentration is a risk factor for a thrombotic event. Annexin A5 is involved in anticoagulation on the endothelial surface. How Lp(a) affects the annexin A5 function is not clear. This study investigates annexin A5 binding on the cell membrane in the presence of Lp(a).

METHODS

Lp(a) was isolated from human blood plasma by ultracentrifugation and annexin A5 protein was purchased commercially. The cell membrane was prepared from primary human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVEC) and cultured cell line HepG2 by sucrose density gradient centrifugation. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA) were used to examine annexin A5 binding to the cell membrane in the presence of Lp(a). Flow cytometry was used to analyze the binding of fluorescence-labeled annexin A5 to phosphatidylserine (PS)-translocated intact cells in the presence of Lp(a).

RESULTS

Annexin A5 binding to the cell membrane was attenuated by a high concentration of Lp(a) in both HUVEC and HepG2 membrane surfaces. The phenomenon was also observed with annexin A5 surface labeling of HepG2 cells and flow cytometry analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

The results imply that Lp(a) interferes with annexin A5 binding to the procoagulant PS which translocates to the membrane surface under stress condition and therefore may increase the risk for thrombosis.