Lipoprotein(a) levels and long-term cardiovascular risk in the contemporary era of statin therapy

LDL-C and hs-CRP Jointly Modify the Effect of Lp(a) on 5-Year Death in Patients With Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

BACKGROUND

Recent studies have suggested that adverse events associated with lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] might be modified by low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) or high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) levels, but whether LDL-C and hs-CRP jointly mediate the outcome of Lp(a) remains unknown in patients with coronary artery disease.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A prospective study was conducted, enrolling consecutive 10 724 patients with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in 2013. The endpoint event was all-cause death. A total of 10 000 patients with complete baseline data were finally included. During a median follow-up of 5.1 years, Lp(a) ≥ 30 mg/dL was an independent risk factor of all-cause death in the overall population, LDL-C ≥ 70 mg/dL, and hs-CRP ≥ 2 mg/L population, respectively. According to concurrent LDL-C (70 mg/dL) and hs-CRP (2 mg/L) levels, further analysis revealed that when LDL-C < 70 mg/dL regardless of hs-CRP levels, Lp(a) ≥ 30 mg/dL was not an independent predictor of all-cause death. However, when LDL-C ≥ 70 mg/dL, Lp(a) ≥ 30 mg/dL was independently associated with a higher risk of all-cause death in hs-CRP ≥ 2 mg/L (HR: 1.488, 95% CI: 1.059‒2.092), but not in hs-CRP < 2 mg/L (HR: 1.303, 95% CI: 0.914‒1.856).

CONCLUSION

Among PCI patients, Lp(a)-associated outcome was jointly affected by LDL-C and hs-CRP. As long as LDL-C is well controlled, the adverse effects of increased Lp(a) on cardiovascular risk seem to be weakened, and only when LDL-C and hs-CRP increase at the same time, elevated Lp(a) is associated with poorer long-term outcome.

Joint Association of Lipoprotein(a) and a Family History of Coronary Artery Disease with the Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients with Chronic Coronary Syndrome

AIM

No data are currently available regarding the association between Lp(a) and the cardiovascular outcomes in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) according to their family history (FHx) of CAD. This study aimed to evaluate the significance of Lp(a) in predicting major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) in patients with chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) with or without FHx.

METHODS

A total of 6056 patients with CCS were enrolled. Information on FHx was collected, and the plasma Lp(a) levels were measured. All patients were followed up regularly. The independent and joint associations of Lp(a) and FHx with the risk of MACEs, including cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and stroke, were analyzed.

RESULTS

With over an average of 50.35±18.58 months follow-up, 378 MACEs were recorded. A Cox regression analysis showed an elevated Lp(a) level to be an independent predictor for MACEs in patients with [hazard ratio (HR): 2.77, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.38-5.54] or without FHx (HR: 1.35, 95% CI: 1.02-1.77). In comparison to subjects with non-elevated Lp(a) and negative FHx, patients with elevated Lp(a) alone were at a nominally higher risk of MACEs (HR: 1.26, 95% CI: 0.96-1.67), while those with both had the highest risk (HR: 1.93, 95% CI: 1.14-3.28). Moreover, adding Lp(a) to the original model increased the C-statistic by 0.048 in subjects with FHx (p=0.004) and by 0.004 in those without FHx (p=0.391).

CONCLUSIONS

The present study is the first to suggest that Lp(a) could be used to predict MACEs in CCS patients with or without FHx; however, its prognostic significance was more noteworthy in patients with FHx.

Frequency of lipoprotein(a) testing and its levels in Pakistani population

BACKGROUND

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a highly atherogenic particle identified as an independent risk factor for the development of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). This study aimed to investigate the frequency of Lp(a) testing and the incidence of elevated Lp(a) levels in the Pakistani population.

METHODS

For this observational study, Lp(a) and lipid profile data from five years (June 2015 to October 2020) were acquired from the electronic patient records of a diagnostic laboratory with a countrywide network. The association of age and total cholesterol (TC), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), non-HDL, and triglyceride (TG) levels with two thresholds for Lp(a), that is, <30 mg/dL and ≥30 mg/dL, was calculated using the Kruskal-Wallis test, while the association between Lp(a) levels and lipid variables was calculated using Spearman correlation.

RESULTS

For five years, 1060 tests were conducted, averaging 212 tests per year. Of these, 37.2% showed Lp(a) levels above 30 mg/dL. No significant differences were observed in the results between males and females. However, younger individuals displayed significantly higher Lp(a) levels. Additionally, there was only a weak correlation between the Lp(a) levels and other lipid variables.

CONCLUSION

Despite being recognized as a risk factor for ASCVD in the Pakistani population, only a small proportion of the large population underwent Lp(a) testing. Moreover, a significant proportion of the population exceeded this threshold.

Comparative Analysis of Atherogenic Lipoproteins L5 and Lp(a) in Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Low-density lipoprotein (LDL) poses a risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). As LDL comprises various subtypes differing in charge, density, and size, understanding their specific impact on ASCVD is crucial. Two highly atherogenic LDL subtypes-electronegative LDL (L5) and Lp(a)-induce vascular cell apoptosis and atherosclerotic changes independent of plasma cholesterol levels, and their mechanisms warrant further investigation. Here, we have compared the roles of L5 and Lp(a) in the development of ASCVD.

RECENT FINDINGS

Lp(a) tends to accumulate in artery walls, promoting plaque formation and potentially triggering atherosclerosis progression through prothrombotic or antifibrinolytic effects. High Lp(a) levels correlate with calcific aortic stenosis and atherothrombosis risk. L5 can induce endothelial cell apoptosis and increase vascular permeability, inflammation, and atherogenesis, playing a key role in initiating atherosclerosis. Elevated L5 levels in certain high-risk populations may serve as a distinctive predictor of ASCVD. L5 and Lp(a) are both atherogenic lipoproteins contributing to ASCVD through distinct mechanisms. Lp(a) has garnered attention, but equal consideration should be given to L5.

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) is associated with DNA damage in patients with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia

Heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (HeFH) is a common autosomal-dominant inherited disorder associated with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). HeFH subjects have a higher lipoprotein(a), i.e. Lp(a), concentration than the general population. Patients with FH are exposed to elevated levels of LDL from birth and ox-LDL may induce other oxidation pathways. The aim of the study was to determine the levels of markers of oxidative stress and DNA damage in patients with HeFH and describe the effect of Lp(a) on the resulting damage. Higher DNA damage was identified in patients with HeFH compared to the normolipidemic ones, and ASCVD was associated with greater damage. Oxidative stress markers were elevated in HeFH patients; however, only ox-LDL was higher in the ASCVD group and its level correlated with DNA damage. A positive correlation was found between DNA damage and Lp(a) concentration in the HeFH patients. Higher levels of Lp(a) were associated with greater DNA damage, especially in patients with HeFH and ASCVD. In HeFH patients, the optimal Lp(a) cut-off point associated with ASCVD is > 23.45 nmol/L, i.e. much lower than for the general population; however this cut-off point needs validation in a larger group of HeFH patients.

Burden of elevated lipoprotein(a) among patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: Evidence from a systematic literature review and feasibility assessment of meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Elevated lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] level is an independent genetic risk factor that increases the risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) by 2-4 fold. We aimed to report the burden of clinically relevant elevated Lp(a) in secondary prevention ASCVD population as the evaluation of such evidence is lacking.

METHODS

A systematic literature review (SLR) was conducted using Embase®, MEDLINE®, and MEDLINE® In-Process databases to identify studies reporting burden of elevated Lp(a) levels from January 1, 2010, to March 28, 2022. Full-text, English-language studies including ≥500 participants with ≥1 Lp(a) assessment were included.

RESULTS

Sixty-one studies reported clinical burden of elevated Lp(a). Of these, 25 observational studies and one clinical trial reported clinical burden of clinically relevant elevated Lp(a) levels. Major clinical outcomes included major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE; n = 20), myocardial infarction (MI; n = 11), revascularization (n = 10), stroke (n = 10), cardiovascular (CV) mortality (n = 9), and all-cause mortality (n = 10). Elevated Lp(a) levels significantly increased the risk of MACE (n = 15) and revascularization (n = 8), while they demonstrated a trend for positive association with remaining CV outcomes. Meta-analysis was not feasible for included studies due to heterogeneity in Lp(a) thresholds, outcome definitions, and patient characteristics. Three studies reported humanistic burden. Patients with elevated Lp(a) levels had higher odds of manifesting cognitive impairment (odds ratio [OR] [95% confidence interval; CI]: 1.62 [1.11-2.37]) and disability related to stroke (OR [95% CI]:1.46 [1.23-1.72)]) (n = 2). Elevated Lp(a) levels negatively correlated with health-related quality of life (R = -0.166, p = 0.014) (n = 1). A single study reported no association between elevated Lp(a) levels and economic burden.

CONCLUSIONS

This SLR demonstrated a significant association of elevated Lp(a) levels with major CV outcomes and increased humanistic burden in secondary prevention ASCVD population. These results reinforce the need to quantify and manage Lp(a) for CV risk reduction and to perform further studies to characterize the economic burden.

The Promise of PCSK9 and Lipoprotein(a) as Targets for Gene Silencing Therapies

PURPOSE

High plasma concentrations of LDL and lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]) are independent and causal risk factors for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). There is an unmet therapeutic need for high-risk patients with elevated levels of LDL-C and/or Lp(a). Recent advances in the development of nucleic acids for gene silencing (ie, triantennary N-acetylgalactosamine conjugated antisense-oligonucleotides [ASOs] and small interfering RNA [siRNA]) targeting proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) and Lp(a) offer effective and sustainable therapies.

METHODS

Related articles in the English language were identified through a search for original and review articles in the PubMed database using the following key terms: cardiovascular disease, dyslipidemia, PCSK9 inhibitors, Lp(a), LDL-cholesterol, familial hypercholesterolemia, siRNA, and antisense oligonucleotide and clinical trials (either alone or in combination).

FINDINGS

Inclisiran, the most advanced siRNA-treatment targeting hepatic PCSK9, is well tolerated, producing a >30% reduction on LDL-C levels in randomized controlled trials. Pelacarsen is the most clinical advanced ASO, whereas olpasiran and SLN360 are the 2 siRNAs directed against the mRNA of the LPA gene. Evidence suggests that all Lp(a)-targeting agents are safe and well tolerated, with robust and sustained reduction in plasma Lp(a) concentration up to 70% to 90% in individuals with elevated Lp(a) levels.

IMPLICATIONS

Cumulative evidence from clinical trials supports the value of ASO and siRNA therapies targeting the synthesis of PCSK9 and Lp(a) for lowering LDL-C and Lp(a) in patients with established ASCVD or high risk of ASCVD. Further research is needed to examine whether gene silencing therapy could improve clinical outcomes in patients with elevated LDL and/or Lp(a) levels. Confirmation of the tolerability and cost-effectiveness of long-term inhibition of PCSK9 and Lp(a) with this approach is essential.

Burden of lipoprotein(a) for patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: A retrospective analysis from the United States

BACKGROUND: Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is an inherited, independent, and causal risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). OBJECTIVE: To assess the burden of elevated Lp(a) for patients with ASCVD in a real-world setting in the United States. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study assessed US patients with available Lp(a) measurement and established ASCVD using Optum's Clinformatics Data Mart database (2007-2020). Index date was defined as the first diagnosis of an ASCVD event. Patient demographics, medications, health care resource utilization (HCRU), and occurrence of cardiovascular events were assessed for patients with elevated (≥150 nmol/L) vs normal (≥65 nmol/L) Lp(a) levels, within the first year of index date. HCRU was characterized by inpatient hospitalization, inpatient length of stay (LOS), outpatient visits, and emergency department (ED) visits. All comparative analyses of patients with elevated (≥150 nmol/L) vs normal (≥65 nmol/L) Lp(a) levels within the first year of index date were adjusted for age, sex, baseline statin use, and diabetes. RESULTS: 8,372 patients with ASCVD and Lp(a) measurement in nmol/L were included in this study. Patient demographics and baseline clinical characteristics were similar among those with normal and elevated Lp(a). However, the proportion of patients receiving statins and β-blockers at baseline were significantly higher in the elevated vs normal Lp(a) group (54.76% vs 42.91%, P < 0.0001, and 30.92% vs 27.32%, P = 0.0183, respectively). At 1 year of follow-up, the rates per 100 person-years for ASCVD-related inpatient hospitalizations, outpatient hospitalizations, and ED visits were higher among patients with elevated Lp(a) compared with normal Lp(a) (13.33 vs 9.46, 89.08 vs 85.10, and 2.89 vs 2.29, respectively). The mean LOS per ASCVD-related hospitalization was 7.21 days in the elevated and 6.26 days in the normal Lp(a) group (P = 0.3462). During the 1-year post-index follow-up period, 15% of patients in the elevated Lp(a) group required revascularization compared with 10% of patients in the normal Lp(a) group (P = 0.0002). The odds of composite myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, and revascularization occurrence of events within the first year of index was significantly higher in the elevated Lp(a) group compared with the normal Lp(a) group (1.46; 95% CI = 1.20-1.77; P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: HCRU within the first year of ASCVD diagnosis is substantial among patients with ASCVD and elevated Lp(a). Relatively higher rates of inpatient hospitalizations, increased LOS per hospitalization, and requirement of revascularization procedures within the first year of ASCVD index diagnosis were observed in patients with elevated Lp(a) compared with normal Lp(a) levels. Lp(a) testing in routine clinical practice could help in identification of high-risk patients with ASCVD and play an important role in the overall cardiovascular risk management, aiming to reduce the HCRU associated with ASCVD. DISCLOSURES: Ms Fonseca, Dr Laguna, Dr Itani, Dr Rachel Studer, and Dr Ferber are employees of Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, Switzerland. Ms Byrne is an employee of Novartis AG, Dublin, Ireland. Dr Costa-Scharplatz is an employee of Novartis Sweden AB, Stockholm, Sweden. Dr Heo and Ms Dillon are employees of Genesis Research. Genesis Research was commissioned to conduct the study (data extraction and analysis) on behalf of Novartis Pharma AG.

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) and the Risk for Coronary Heart Disease and Ischemic Stroke Events Among Black and White Adults With Cardiovascular Disease

Background

It is unclear whether lipoprotein(a) is associated with coronary heart disease (CHD) and ischemic stroke events in White and Black adults with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD).

Methods and Results

We conducted a case‐cohort analysis, including Black and White REGARDS (Reasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke) study participants ≥45 years of age with prevalent ASCVD (ie, CHD or stroke) at baseline between 2003 and 2007. Baseline lipoprotein(a) molar concentration was measured in participants with ASCVD who experienced a CHD event by December 2017 (n=1166) or an ischemic stroke by September 2019 (n=492) and in a random subcohort of participants with prevalent ASCVD (n=1948). The hazard ratio (HR) for CHD events per 1 SD (1.5 units) higher log‐transformed lipoprotein(a) was 1.26 (95% CI, 1.02–1.56) among Black participants and 1.16 (95% CI, 1.02–1.31) among White participants (P value comparing HRs, 0.485). The HR for CHD events per 1 SD higher log‐lipoprotein(a) within subgroups with hs‐CRP (high‐sensitivity C‐reactive protein) ≥2 and <2 mg/L was 1.31 (95% CI, 0.99–1.73) and 1.23 (95% CI, 0.85–1.80), respectively (P value comparing HRs, 0.836), among Black participants, and 1.07 (95% CI, 0.91–1.27) and 1.36 (95% CI, 1.10–1.70), respectively (P value comparing HRs, 0.088), among White participants. There was no evidence that the association between lipoprotein(a) and CHD events differed by statin use. There was no evidence of an association between lipoprotein(a) and ischemic stroke events among Black or White participants.

Conclusions

Higher lipoprotein(a) levels were associated with an increased risk for CHD events in Black and White adults with ASCVD.

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.

Effect of Lipoprotein(a) on Stroke Recurrence Attenuates at Low LDL-C (Low-Density Lipoprotein) and Inflammation Levels

BACKGROUND

Lp(a) (lipoprotein(a)) contributes to cardiovascular disease mainly through proatherogenic and proinflammatory effects. Here, we aimed to evaluate whether a residual stroke risk of Lp(a) would remain when the LDL-C (low-density lipoprotein cholesterol) and inflammatory levels are maintained low.

METHODS

This prospective cohort study included 9899 patients with ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack from the Third China National Stroke Registry who had measurements of plasma Lp(a) and were followed up for 1 year. Cutoffs were set at the 50 mg/dL for Lp(a). LDL-C was corrected for Lp(a)-derived cholesterol (LDL-Cc [LDL-C corrected]) and cutoffs were set at 55 and 70 mg/dL.The threshold values of IL-6 (interleukin 6) and hsCRP (high-sensitive C-reactive protein) were the median 2.65 ng/L and 2 mg/L. Multivariable-adjusted hazard ratio (HR) were calculated using Cox regression models for each category to investigate the associations of Lp(a) with stroke recurrence within 1 year.

RESULTS

Among all patients, those with Lp(a) ≥50 mg/dL were at higher stroke recurrence risk than those with Lp(a) <50 mg/dL (11.5% versus 9.4%; adjusted HR, 1.20 [95% CI, 1.02-1.42]). However, the risk associated with elevated Lp(a) was attenuated in patients with LDL-Cc <55 mg/dL (high Lp(a) versus low Lp(a): 8.9% versus 9.0%; adjusted HR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.65-1.30]) or IL-6 <2.65 ng/L (9.0% versus 7.8%; adjusted HR, 1.14 [95% CI, 0.87-1.49]). Notably, in the group with both low LDL-Cc and inflammation levels, the rate of patients with high Lp(a) did not significantly different from the rate of patients with low Lp(a; LDL-Cc <55 mg/dL and IL-6 <2.65 ng/L: 6.2% versus 7.1%; adjusted HR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.46-1.62]; LDL-Cc <55 mg/dL and hsCRP <2 mg/L: 7.7% versus 7.6%; adjusted HR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.57-1.66]). However, there was no interaction between the LDL-Cc, IL-6, hsCRP, and Lp(a) levels on stroke recurrence risk.

CONCLUSIONS

Increased Lp(a) was significantly associated with stroke recurrence risk in patients with ischemic stroke/transient ischemic attack. However, at low LDL-Cc or IL-6 levels, the elevated Lp(a) -associated stroke recurrence risk was attenuated in a secondary prevention setting.

The Predictive Value of Lp(a) for Adverse Cardiovascular Event in ACS Patients With an Achieved LDL-C Target at Follow Up After PCI

Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) is a traditional and important risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (CVD). Recently, lipoprotein (a) (lp(a)) attracts considerable attention as a residual risk factor for CVD. However, the roles of lp(a) in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients with well-controlled LDL-C (≤1.8mmol/L) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remain unclear. Current study results demonstrated that occurrence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and recurrent myocardial infarction (MI) increased with the Lp(a) increasing in patients with LDL-C≤1.8mmol/L at 1-month follow-up. In relatively low-risk patients presented with ACS and underwent PCI (LDL-C ≤1.8mmol/L at 1-month follow-up), lp(a) is still independently related to adverse prognosis. Further researches of targeted therapy against lp(a) are warranted.

Elevated Lipoprotein(a): Background, Current Insights and Future Potential Therapies

Lipoprotein(a) forms a subfraction of the lipid profile and is characterized by the addition of apolipprotein(a) (apo(a)) to apoB100 derived particles. Its levels are mostly genetically determined inversely related to the number of protein domain (kringle) repeats in apo(a). In epidemiological studies, it shows consistent association with cardiovascular disease (CVD) and most recently with extent of aortic stenosis. Issues with standardizing the measurement of Lp(a) are being resolved and consensus statements favor its measurement in patients at high risk of, or with family histories of CVD events. Major lipid-lowering therapies such as statin, fibrates, and ezetimibe have little effect on Lp(a) levels. Therapies such as niacin or cholesterol ester transfer protein (CETP) inhibitors lower Lp(a) as well as reducing other lipid-related risk factors but have failed to clearly reduce CVD events. Proprotein convertase subtilisin kexin-9 (PCSK9) inhibitors reduce cholesterol and Lp(a) as well as reducing CVD events. New antisense therapies specifically targeting apo(a) and hence Lp(a) have greater and more specific effects and will help clarify the extent to which intervention in Lp(a) levels will reduce CVD events.

Lipoprotein(a) is associated with large artery atherosclerosis stroke aetiology and stroke recurrence among patients below the age of 60 years: results from the BIOSIGNAL study

AIMS

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a recognized causal risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease but its role for acute ischaemic stroke (AIS) is controversial. In this study, we evaluated the association of Lp(a) with large artery atherosclerosis (LAA) stroke and risk of recurrent cerebrovascular events in AIS patients.

METHODS AND RESULTS

For this analysis of the prospective, observational, multicentre BIOSIGNAL cohort study we measured Lp(a) levels in plasma samples of 1733 primarily Caucasian (98.6%) AIS patients, collected within 24 h after symptom onset. Primary outcomes were LAA stroke aetiology and recurrent cerebrovascular events (ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack) within 1 year. We showed that Lp(a) levels are independently associated with LAA stroke aetiology [adjusted odds ratio 1.48, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.14-1.90, per unit log10Lp(a) increase] and identified age as a potent effect modifier (Pinteraction =0.031) of this association. The adjusted odds ratio for LAA stroke in patients aged <60 years was 3.64 (95% CI 1.76-7.52) per unit log10Lp(a) increase and 4.04 (95% CI 1.73-9.43) using the established cut-off ≥100 nmol/l. For 152 recurrent cerebrovascular events, we did not find a significant association in the whole cohort. However, Lp(a) levels ≥100 nmol/l were associated with an increased risk for recurrent events among patients who were either <60 years [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 2.40, 95% CI 1.05-5.47], had evident LAA stroke aetiology (adjusted HR 2.18, 95% CI 1.08-4.40), or had no known atrial fibrillation (adjusted HR 1.60, 95% CI 1.03-2.48).

CONCLUSION

Elevated Lp(a) was independently associated with LAA stroke aetiology and risk of recurrent cerebrovascular events among primarily Caucasian individuals aged <60 years or with evident arteriosclerotic disease.

High Levels of Low-Density Lipoproteins Correlate with Improved Survival in Patients with Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck

Circulating lipoproteins as risk factors or prognostic indicators for various cancers have been investigated previously; however, no clear consensus has been reached. In this study, we aimed at evaluating the impact of serum lipoproteins on the prognosis of patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN). Levels of total cholesterol, low-density lipoproteins (LDL), high-density lipoproteins (HDL), triglycerides and lipoprotein(a) were measured in serum samples from 106 patients and 28 healthy controls. We found that HDL was the only lipoprotein exhibiting a significant difference in concentration between healthy controls and patients (p = 0.012). Kaplan–Meier survival curves indicated that patients with high levels of total cholesterol or LDL had better overall survival than patients with normal levels (p = 0.028 and p = 0.007, respectively). Looking at patients without lipid medication (n = 89) and adjusting for the effects of TNM stage and weight change, multivariate Cox regression models indicated that LDL was an independent prognostic factor for both overall (p = 0.005) and disease-free survival (p = 0.013). In summary, our study revealed that high LDL level is beneficial for survival outcome in patients with SCCHN. Use of cholesterol-lowering medicines for prevention or management of SCCHN needs to be evaluated carefully.

Changes in lipoprotein particle subclasses, standard lipids, and apolipoproteins after supplementation with n-3 or n-6 PUFAs in abdominal obesity: A randomized double-blind crossover study

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Marine-derived omega-3 (n-3) polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs), mainly eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA), lower circulating levels of triacylglycerols (TAGs), and the plant-derived omega-6 (n-6) PUFA linoleic acid (LA) may reduce cholesterol levels. Clinical studies on effects of these dietary or supplemental PUFAs on other blood fat fractions are few and have shown conflicting results. This study aimed to determine effects of high-dose supplemental n-3 (EPA + DHA) and n-6 (LA) PUFAs from high-quality oils on circulating lipoprotein subfractions and standard lipids (primary outcomes), as well as apolipoproteins, fatty acids, and glycemic control (secondary outcomes), in females and males with abdominal obesity.

METHODS

This was a randomized double-blind crossover study with two 7-wk intervention periods separated by a 9-wk washout phase. Females (n = 16) were supplemented with 3 g/d of EPA + DHA (TAG fish oil) or 15 g/d of LA (safflower oil), while males (n = 23) received a dose of 4 g/d of EPA + DHA or 20 g/d of LA. In fasting blood samples, we investigated lipoprotein particle subclasses by nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy, as well as standard lipids, apolipoproteins, fatty acid profiles, and glucose and insulin. Data were analyzed by linear mixed-effects modeling with 'subjects' as the random factor.

RESULTS

The difference between interventions in relative change scores was among the lipoprotein subfractions significant for total very-low-density lipoproteins (VLDLs) (n-3 vs. n-6: -38%∗ vs. +16%, p < 0.001; ∗: significant within-treatment change score), large VLDLs (-58%∗ vs. -0.91%, p < 0.001), small VLDLs (-57%∗ vs. +41%∗, p < 0.001), total low-density lipoproteins (LDLs) (+5.8%∗ vs. -4.3%∗, p = 0.002), large LDLs (+23%∗ vs. -2.1%, p = 0.004), total high-density lipoproteins (HDLs) (-6.0%∗ vs. +3.7%, p < 0.001), large HDLs (+11%∗ vs. -5.3%, p = 0.001), medium HDLs (-24%∗ vs. +6.2%, p = 0.030), and small HDLs (-9.9%∗ vs. +9.6%∗, p = 0.002), and among standard lipids for TAGs (-16%∗ vs. -2.6%, p = 0.014), non-esterified fatty acids (-19%∗ vs. +5.5%, p = 0.033), and total cholesterol (-0.28% vs. -4.4%∗, p = 0.042). A differential response in relative change scores was also found for apolipoprotein (apo)B (+0.40% vs. -6.0%∗, p = 0.008), apoA-II (-6.0%∗ vs. +1.5%, p = 0.001), apoC-II (-11%∗ vs. -1.7%, p = 0.025), and apoE (+3.3% vs. -3.8%, p = 0.028).

CONCLUSIONS

High-dose supplementation of high-quality oils with n-3 (EPA + DHA) or n-6 (LA) PUFAs was followed by reductions in primarily TAG- or cholesterol-related markers, respectively. The responses after both interventions point to changes in the lipoprotein-lipid-apolipoprotein profile that have been associated with reduced cardiometabolic risk, also among people with TAG or LDL-C levels within the normal range.

REGISTRATION

Registered under ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02647333.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registered at https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02647333.

Lipoprotein(a) in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes and Premature Coronary Artery Disease in the Coronary Care Unit

INTRODUCTION

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] and diabetes are independently associated with premature coronary artery disease (pCAD). However, there is an inverse relationship between Lp(a) concentration and type 2 diabetes (T2D) risk. We examine whether Lp(a) distribution in patients with pCAD differs between those with or without T2D, and whether elevated Lp(a) is associated with pCAD in patients with T2D.

METHODS

Lp(a) concentration was measured in consecutive acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients in two coronary care units (study one: ACS with or without diabetes, study two: ACS and diabetes). Elevated Lp(a) mass concentration was defined as ≥0.5 g/L and pCAD where CAD was diagnosed age <60 years. The association between elevated Lp(a) and pCAD was assessed using logistic regression.

RESULTS

Of 449 patients, 233 (51.9%) had pCAD and 278 (61.9%) had T2D. In patients with pCAD, those with T2D had a significantly lower median Lp(a) concentration (0.13 g/L versus 0.27 g/L, p=0.004). In patients with T2D, elevated Lp(a) was significantly associated with pCAD (OR 2.419, 95% CI 1.513-3.867, p<0.001). After adjusting for gender, smoking, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and triglycerides, elevated Lp(a) remained significantly associated with pCAD (OR 2.895, 95% CI 1.427-5.876, p=0.003) in patients with T2D.

CONCLUSIONS

In coronary care patients with pCAD, patients with T2D had lower Lp(a) concentrations than those without T2D. Despite this, elevated Lp(a) remained predictive of pCAD in patients with T2D. Measurement of Lp(a) should be considered in younger adults with T2D to identify who may benefit from earlier preventative therapies to reduce pCAD burden.

Association of lipoprotein(a) levels with recurrent events in patients with coronary artery disease

OBJECTIVE

Whether lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is a predictor for recurrent cardiovascular events (RCVEs) in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) has not been established. This study, hence, aimed to examine the potential impact of Lp(a) on RCVEs in a real-world, large cohort of patients with the first cardiovascular event (CVE).

METHODS

In this multicentre, prospective study, 7562 patients with angiography-diagnosed CAD who had experienced a first CVE were consecutively enrolled. Lp(a) concentrations of all subjects were measured at admission and the participants were categorised according to Lp(a) tertiles. All patients were followed-up for the occurrence of RCVEs including cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction and stroke.

RESULTS

During a mean follow-up of 61.45±19.57 months, 680 (9.0%) RCVEs occurred. The results showed that events group had significantly higher Lp(a) levels than non-events group (20.58 vs 14.95 mg/dL, p<0.001). Kaplan-Meier analysis indicated that Lp(a) tertile 2 (p=0.001) and tertile 3 (p<0.001) groups had significantly lower cumulative event-free survival rates compared with tertile 1 group. Moreover, multivariate Cox regression analysis further revealed that Lp(a) was independently associated with RCVEs risk (HR: 2.01, 95% CI: 1.44 to 2.80, p<0.001). Moreover, adding Lp(a) to the SMART risk score model led to a slight but significant improvement in C-statistic (∆C-statistic: 0.018 (95% CI: 0.011 to 0.034), p=0.002), net reclassification (6.8%, 95% CI: 0.5% to 10.9%, p=0.040) and integrated discrimination (0.3%, 95% CI: 0.1% to 0.7%, p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Circulating Lp(a) concentration was indeed a useful predictor for the risk of RCVEs in real-world treated patients with CAD, providing additional information concerning the future clinical application of Lp(a).

Elevated Lipoprotein A in South Asians and the Associated Risk of Cardiovascular Disease: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

South Asians have a premature risk of cardiovascular disease and increased lipoprotein A which enhances their risk.

METHODS

This systematic review evaluates the role of elevated lipoprotein A in cardiovascular disease risk for South Asians. It discusses the pathophysiology, clinical studies, and treatment of elevated lipoprotein A using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses method.

RESULTS

A total of 72 articles was incorporated which consisted of clinical studies, case-control and cohort studies, meta-analysis, reviews, and editorials. Cardiovascular disease and myocardial infarction occurs prematurely in South Asians, which is further enhanced with an elevated lipoprotein A.

CONCLUSIONS

South Asians with an elevated lipoprotein A have an increased risk of coronary artery disease so they should have early enactment of lifestyle modification and aggressive medical management.

Prognostic impact of lipoprotein (a) on long-term clinical outcomes in diabetic patients on statin treatment after percutaneous coronary intervention

BACKGROUND

Serum levels of lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] have been reported as a residual risk marker for adverse events in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). However, the prognostic impact of Lp(a) on long-term clinical outcomes among diabetic patients on statin therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remains unclear.

METHODS

The present investigation was a single-center, observational, retrospective cohort study. Among consecutive patients with CAD who underwent first PCI in our institution from 2000 to 2016, we enrolled diabetic patients on statin treatment. As a result, 927 patients (81% men; mean age, 67 years) were enrolled and divided into 2 groups according to a median Lp(a) level of 19.5 mg/dL. The incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE), including all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), and non-fatal cerebral infarction (CI), was evaluated.

RESULT

No significant differences were seen in age, sex, smoking habits, hypertension, chronic kidney disease, or body mass index between high and low Lp(a) groups. During follow-up (median, 5.0 years; interquartile range, 1.9-9.7 years), MACE occurred in 90 cases (17.6%), including 40 (7.9%) cardiac deaths, 18 (3.6%) non-fatal MI, and 37 (7.9%) non-fatal CI. Frequency of MACE was significantly higher in the high-Lp(a) group than in the low-Lp(a) group (log-rank test, p = 0.002). Higher Lp(a) level at the time of PCI was significantly associated with higher frequency of MACE, even after adjusting for other covariates, including other lipid profiles (hazard ratio, 1.91; 95% confidence interval, 1.20-3.09; p = 0.006).

CONCLUSION

Our results demonstrated that in diabetic patients with CAD on statin treatment, increased Lp(a) levels could offer a good residual lipid risk marker. Assessing Lp(a) levels may be useful for risk stratification of long-term clinical outcomes after PCI, especially in diabetic patients.

Predicting Cardiovascular Outcomes by Baseline Lipoprotein(a) Concentrations: A Large Cohort and Long-Term Follow-up Study on Real-World Patients Receiving Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Background Although several studies have indicated that lipoprotein(a) is a useful prognostic predictor for patients following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), previous observations have somewhat been limited by either small sample size or short-term follow-up. Hence, this study aimed to evaluate the impact of lipoprotein(a) on long-term outcomes in a large cohort of stable coronary artery disease patients after PCI. Methods and Results In this multicenter and prospective study, we consecutively enrolled 4078 stable coronary artery disease patients undergoing PCI from March 2011 to March 2016. They were categorized according to both the median of lipoprotein(a) levels and lipoprotein(a) values of <15 (low), 15 to 30 (medium), and ≥30 mg/dL (high). All patients were followed up for occurrence of cardiovascular events, including cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and stroke. During an average of 4.9 years of follow-up, 315 (7.7%) cardiovascular events occurred. The events group had significantly higher lipoprotein(a) levels than the nonevents group. Compared with the low lipoprotein(a) group, Kaplan-Meier analysis showed that the high lipoprotein(a) group had a significantly lower cumulative event-free survival rate, and multivariate Cox regression analysis further revealed that the high lipoprotein(a) group had significantly increased cardiovascular events risk. Moreover, adding continuous or categorical lipoprotein(a) to the Cox model led to a significant improvement in C-statistic, net reclassification, and integrated discrimination. Conclusions With a large sample size and long-term follow-up, our data confirmed that high lipoprotein(a) levels could be associated with a poor prognosis after PCI in stable coronary artery disease patients, suggesting that lipoprotein(a) measurements may be useful for patient risk stratification before selective PCI.

Apolipoprotein(a) Kinetics in Statin-Treated Patients With Elevated Plasma Lipoprotein(a) Concentration

BACKGROUND

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a low-density lipoprotein‒like particle containing apolipoprotein(a) [apo(a)]. Patients with elevated Lp(a), even when treated with statins, are at increased risk of cardiovascular disease. We investigated the kinetic basis for elevated Lp(a) in these patients.

OBJECTIVES

Apo(a) production rate (PR) and fractional catabolic rate (FCR) were compared between statin-treated patients with and without elevated Lp(a).

METHODS

The kinetics of apo(a) were investigated in 14 patients with elevated Lp(a) and 15 patients with normal Lp(a) levels matched for age, sex, and body mass index using stable isotope techniques and compartmental modeling. All 29 patients were on background statin treatment. Plasma apo(a) concentration was measured using liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry.

RESULTS

The plasma concentration and PR of apo(a) were significantly higher in patients with elevated Lp(a) than in patients with normal Lp(a) concentration (all P < 0.01). The FCR of apo(a) was not significantly different between the groups. In univariate analysis, plasma concentration of apo(a) was significantly associated with apo(a) PR in both patient groups (r = 0.699 and r = 0.949, respectively; all P < 0.01). There was no significant association between plasma apo(a) concentration and FCR in either of the groups (r = 0.160 and r = -0.137, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Elevated plasma Lp(a) concentration is a consequence of increased hepatic production of Lp(a) particles in these patients. Our findings provide a kinetic rationale for the use of therapies that target the synthesis of apo(a) and production of Lp(a) particles in patients with elevated Lp(a).

Prognostic impact of lipoprotein(a) levels during lipid management with statins after ST-elevation acute myocardial infarction

The causal relationship of lipoprotein(a) with cardiovascular disease has been established. However, clinical impacts of lipoprotein(a) levels on adverse vascular events in patients with established coronary artery disease who are undergoing statin treatment have not been fully elucidated. We measured lipoprotein(a) levels of 668 consecutive patients with ST-elevated myocardial infarction upon admission and reevaluated lipoprotein(a) of 189 of these patients during statin treatment at least 6 months later than the date of index ST-elevated myocardial infarction. Changes in lipoprotein(a) and associations between lipoprotein(a) levels and the incidence of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event for 3 years were examined. Lipoprotein(a) at baseline was an independent predictor of 3-year major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event after ST-elevated myocardial infarction. Levels of lipoprotein(a) at follow-up were slightly but significantly elevated despite improvements in other lipid parameters due to statin treatment. Furthermore, higher levels of lipoprotein(a) achieved with statin treatment were also associated with the subsequent incidence of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event over 3 years, regardless of whether or not the LDL-cholesterol levels were below 100 mg/dl. In conclusion, lipoprotein(a) levels during lipid management by statin are also predictive of adverse vascular events in Japanese patients with ST-elevated myocardial infarction.

Impact of serum lipoprotein(a) on endothelium-dependent coronary vasomotor response assessed by intracoronary acetylcholine provocation

BACKGROUND

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is an independent risk factor for atherosclerotic vascular disease. However, there are limited data regarding the impact of Lp(a) levels on the incidence and severity of endothelium-dependent coronary vasomotor response.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 2416 patients without significant coronary artery lesion (<50% stenosis) by coronary angiography and underwent acetylcholine (ACh) provocation test were enrolled and categorized according to their serum Lp(a) level into four quartile groups: less than 6.70, 6.70-13.30, 13.30-26.27, and more than 26.27 mg/dl. The aim of this study is to estimate the incidence and severity of endothelium-dependent positive ACh provocation test in each group; moreover, to access the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events, the composite of total death, myocardial infarction, and de novo percutaneous coronary intervention were compared between the four groups up to 5 years.

RESULTS

The group with higher Lp(a) had a higher incidence of coronary heart disease, myocardial infarction, and peripheral arterial disease history. However, there was no difference among the four groups as regards the incidence of positive ACh provocation test, spasm severity, spasm extent, and location. However, at up to 5 years of clinical follow-up, the higher-Lp(a) group showed higher total death, de novo percutaneous coronary intervention, recurrent angina, and total major adverse cardiovascular events compared with the lower-Lp(a) groups.

CONCLUSION

In our study, there was no relationship between the elevated Lp(a) level and the vasospastic response to the intracoronary ACh provocation test; however, higher Lp(a) levels were associated with poor clinical outcomes up to 5 years.

High Level of Lipoprotein(a) as Predictor for Recurrent Heart Failure in Patients with Chronic Heart Failure: a Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Elevated plasma levels of Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] are recognized as a significant risk factor for atherosclerotic vascular disease. However, there are limited data regarding association between Lp(a) and recurrent heart failure (HF) in patients with chronic HF caused by coronary heart disease (CHD).

OBJECTIVE

Elevated levels of Lp(a) might have a prognostic impact on recurrent HF in patients with chronic HF caused by CHD.

METHODS

A total of 309 patients with chronic HF caused by CHD were consecutively enrolled in this study. The patients were divided into 2 groups according to whether Lp(a) levels were above or below the median level for the entire cohort (20.6 mg/dL): the high Lp(a) group (n = 155) and the low Lp(a) group (n = 154). A 2-sided p < 0.05 was statistically considered significant.

RESULTS

During the median follow-up period of 186 days, 31 cases out of a total of 309 patients (10.03%) could not be reached during follow-up. A Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated that patients with higher Lp(a) levels had a higher incidence of recurrent HF than those with lower Lp(a) levels (log-rank < 0.0001). A multivariate Cox regression analysis revealed that Lp(a) levels were independently correlated with the incidence of recurrent HF after adjustment of potential confounders (hazard ratio: 2.720, 95 % confidence interval: 1.730-4.277, p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

In Chinese patients with chronic HF caused by CHD, elevated levels of Lp(a) are independently associated with recurrent HF.

Prognostic value of lipoprotein (a) level in patients with coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis

Background

Elevated lipoprotein (a) is recognized as a risk factor for incident cardiovascular events in the general population and established cardiovascular disease patients. However, there are conflicting findings on the prognostic utility of elevated lipoprotein (a) level in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD).Thus, we performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the prognostic value of elevated lipoprotein (a) level in CAD patients.

Methods and results

A systematic literature search of PubMed and Embase databases was conducted until April 16, 2019. Observational studies reporting the prognostic value of elevated lipoprotein (a) level for cardiac events (cardiac death and acute coronary syndrome), cardiovascular events (death, stroke, acute coronary syndrome or coronary revascularisation), cardiovascular death, and all-cause mortality in CAD patients were included. Pooled multivariable adjusted risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for the highest vs. the lowest lipoprotein (a) level were utilized to calculate the prognostic value. Seventeen studies enrolling 283,328 patients were identified. Meta-analysis indicated that elevated lipoprotein (a) level was independently associated with an increased risk of cardiac events (RR 1.78; 95% CI 1.31–2.42) and cardiovascular events (RR 1.29; 95% CI 1.17–1.42) in CAD patients. However, elevated lipoprotein (a) level was not significantly associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular mortality (RR 1.43; 95% CI 0.94–2.18) and all-cause mortality (RR 1.35; 95% CI 0.93–1.95).

Conclusions

Elevated lipoprotein (a) level is an independent predictor of cardiac and cardiovascular events in CAD patients. Measurement of lipoprotein (a) level has potential to improve the risk stratification among patients with CAD.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12944-019-1092-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

SLC22A3 is associated with lipoprotein (a) concentration and cardiovascular disease in familial hypercholesterolemia

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Several clinical and genetic factors have been shown to modulate the cardiovascular risk in subjects affected by familial hypercholesterolemia (FH). Genome wide association studies (GWAS) in the general population have identified several single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) significantly associated with the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). This include the rs2048327 variant in the SLC22A3 gene. However, the effect of this SNP in FH subjects is unknown. The objectives of this study are to investigate the association between rs2048327 and the prevalence of CVD as well as with the concentration of lipoprotein (a) (Lp (a)), in a cohort of genetically-confirmed heterozygous FH patients.

METHODS

An enzyme-linked immunoassay kit was used to assess the Lp (a) concentration, whereas an exome chip genotyping method was used to impute the rs2048327 genotype.

RESULTS

The cohort comprised 287 non-carriers (TT), 305 heterozygous carriers (TC) and 76 homozygous carriers of the rs2048327 variant. In a model corrected for traditional cardiovascular risk factors, rs2048327 was significantly associated with Lp (a) level (median value of 12, 16 and 29 mg/dL in TT, TC and CC carriers, respectively, p < .0001). In a model corrected for cardiovascular risk factors and Lp(a) value, carrying the C allele was associated with a 2-fold increased risk of CVD (OR 1.96, 95%CI 1.21-3.19, p = .007).

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, we demonstrated that the rs2048327 SNP of the SLC22A3 gene was significantly associated with Lp(a) as well as with CVD events in FH subjects. Further studies are required in order to investigate the mechanisms behind these associations.

Lipoprotein (a) and Low-density lipoprotein apolipoprotein B metabolism following apheresis in patients with elevated lipoprotein(a) and coronary artery disease

BACKGROUND

Lipoprotein apheresis effectively lowers lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) by approximately 60%-70%. The rebound of LDL and Lp(a) particle concentrations following lipoprotein apheresis allows the determination of fractional catabolic rate (FCR) and hence production rate (PR) during non-steady state conditions. We aimed to investigate the kinetics of Lp(a) and LDL apolipoprotein B-100 (apoB) particles in patients with elevated Lp(a) and coronary artery disease undergoing regular apheresis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A cross-sectional study was carried out in 13 patients with elevated Lp(a) concentration (>500 mg/L) and coronary artery disease. Lp(a) and LDL-apoB metabolic parameters, including FCR and PR were derived by the fit of a compartment model to the Lp(a) and LDL-apoB concentration data following lipoprotein apheresis.

RESULTS

The FCR of Lp(a) was significantly lower than that of LDL-apoB (0.39 [0.31, 0.49] vs 0.57 [0.46, 0.71] pools/day, P = 0.03) with no significant differences in the corresponding PR (14.80 [11.34, 19.32] vs 15.73 [11.93, 20.75] mg/kg/day, P = 0.80). No significant associations were observed between the FCR and PR of Lp(a) and LDL-apoB.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with elevated Lp(a), the fractional catabolism of Lp(a) is slower than that of LDL-apoB particles, implying that different metabolic pathways are involved in the catabolism of these lipoproteins. These findings have implications for new therapies for lowering apolipoprotein(a) and apoB to prevent atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.

Dietary natural products as emerging lipoprotein(a)-lowering agents

Elevated plasma lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) levels are associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). Hitherto, niacin has been the drug of choice to reduce elevated Lp(a) levels in hyperlipidemic patients but its efficacy in reducing CVD outcomes has been seriously questioned by recent clinical trials. Additional drugs may reduce to some extent plasma Lp(a) levels but the lack of a specific therapeutic indication for Lp(a)-lowering limits profoundly reduce their use. An attractive therapeutic option is natural products. In several preclinical and clinical studies as well as meta-analyses, natural products, including l-carnitine, coenzyme Q ₁₀ , and xuezhikang were shown to significantly decrease Lp(a) levels in patients with Lp(a) hyperlipoproteinemia. Other natural products, such as pectin, Ginkgo biloba, flaxseed, red wine, resveratrol and curcuminoids can also reduce elevated Lp(a) concentrations but to a lesser degree. In conclusion, aforementioned natural products may represent promising therapeutic agents for Lp(a) lowering.

Is Lp(a) ready for prime time use in the clinic? A pros-and-cons debate

Lipoprotein (a) (Lp(a)) is a cholesterol-rich lipoprotein known since 1963. In spite of extensive research on Lp(a), there are still numerous gaps in our knowledge relating to its function, biosynthesis and catabolism. One reason for this might be that apo(a), the characteristic glycoprotein of Lp(a), is expressed only in primates. Results from experiments using transgenic animals therefore may need verification in humans. Studies on Lp(a) are also handicapped by the great number of isoforms of apo(a) and the heterogeneity of apo(a)-containing fractions in plasma. Quantification of Lp(a) in the clinical laboratory for a long time has not been standardized. Starting from its discovery, reports accumulated that Lp(a) contributed to the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD), myocardial infarction (MI) and stroke. Early reports were based on case control studies but in the last decades a great deal of prospective studies have been published that highlight the increased risk for CVD and MI in patients with elevated Lp(a). Final answers to the question of whether Lp(a) is ready for wider clinical use will come from intervention studies with novel selective Lp(a) lowering medications that are currently underway. This article expounds arguments for and against this proposition from currently available data.

Impact of Lipoprotein (a) on Long-Term Outcomes in Patients with Coronary Artery Disease Treated with Statin After a First Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

AIMS

Cardiovascular risk persists despite intensive lipid lowering therapy using statins. Serum levels of lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] can be a residual cardiovascular risk for adverse events. Aim of the present study was to evaluate the impact of Lp(a) on long-term clinical outcomes in patients treated with statin after percutaneous coronary intervention.

METHODS

We prospectively enrolled 3507 consecutive CAD patients who underwent a first percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) between 1997 and 2011 at our institution. We identified 1768 patients (50.4%) who had treated with statin during PCI. Eligible 1336 patients were stratified to two groups according to Lp(a) levels (median Lp (a) 21.5 mg/dL). The primary outcome was major adverse cardiac events (MACE) including cardiac death and non-fatal acute coronary syndrome.

RESULTS

MACE occurred 144 (10.8%) including 34 (2.5%) cardiac death and 110 (8.7%) non-fatal ACS during median follow-up period of 1920 days. The cumulative rate of MACE was significantly higher in group with high Lp(a) group (log-rank p=0.0460). Multivariate Cox regression analysis showed a significant correlation between Lp (a) levels treated as a natural logarithm-transformed continuous variable and increased MACE (adjusted HR for MACE 1.28, 95%CI 1.04-1.58, p=0.0184)Conclusion: Elevated levels of Lp(a) is significantly associated with long-term adverse clinical outcomes among CAD patients who received statin therapy after PCI.

Association of matrix γ-carboxyglutamic acid protein levels with insulin resistance and Lp(a) in diabetes: A cross-sectional study

AIMS

The risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and mortality is increased in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD), with a background role of vascular calcification in the development of CVD also reported. Studies have demonstrated that high lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) levels accelerate the development of atherosclerolsis and are potentially involved in the vascular calcification. Matrix Gla Protein (MGP) seems to play an important role in vascular calcification. The aim of the study was to examine the potential association of MGP concentrations with Lp(a) and insulin resistance.

METHODS

The study involved 100patients divided in four groups: 25 with both CKD stage 4 and Type2 Diabetes (DM) (Group-A), 25 with CKD4 without DM (Group-B), 25 non uremic patients with DM (Group-C) and 25 healthy subjects (Group-D). Serum glucose, Lp(a), MGP, plasma HBA1c and insulin were measured in all patients. Insulin resistance was estimated by the homeostasis model assessment equation (HOMA-IR).

RESULTS

A significant positive linear association between MGP and Lp(a) levels (r=0.272, p=0.006) was noted, as well as between MGP and HOMA-IR levels (r=0.308, p=0.002). However, no significant linear association between Lp(a) and HOMA-IR levels was recorded. A similar positive association between MGP and insulin levels (r=0.204, p=0.042) was also found.

CONCLUSION

This study concluded that diabetes coexisting with renal disease leads to extreme vascular calcification expressed by elevated MGP levels, resulting in higher frequency of cardiovascular disease in comparison to CKD patients without diabetes. The detected Lp(a) and MGP association in CKD4 patients may also represent the key to the complicated mechanism of their coexisting accelerated atherosclerosis and vascular calcification.

Lipoprotein(a) and coronary atheroma progression rates during long-term high-intensity statin therapy: Insights from SATURN

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-like particle that associates with major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). We examined relationships between Lp(a) measurements and changes in coronary atheroma volume following long-term maximally-intensive statin therapy in coronary artery disease patients.

METHODS

Study of coronary atheroma by intravascular ultrasound: Effect of Rosuvastatin Versus Atorvastatin (SATURN) used serial intravascular ultrasound measures of coronary atheroma volume in patients treated with rosuvastatin 40 mg or atorvastatin 80 mg for 24 months. Baseline and follow-up Lp(a) levels were measured in 915 of the 1039 SATURN participants, and were correlated with changes in percent atheroma volume (ΔPAV).

RESULTS

Mean age was 57.7 ± 8.6 years, 74% were men, 96% were Caucasian, with statin use prior to study enrolment occurring in 59.3% of participants. Baseline [median (IQR)] LDL-cholesterol (LDL-C) and measured Lp(a) levels (mg/dL) were 114 (99, 137) and 17.4 (7.6, 52.9) respectively; follow-up measures were 60 (47, 77), and 16.5 (6.7, 57.7) (change from baseline: p < 0.001, p = 0.31 respectively). At baseline, there were 676 patients with Lp(a) levels <50 mg/dL [median Lp(a) of 10.9 mg/dL], and 239 patients with Lp(a) levels ≥ 50 mg/dL [median Lp(a) of 83.2 mg/dL]. Quartiles of baseline and follow-up Lp(a) did not associate with ΔPAV. Irrespective of the achieved LDL-C (<vs. ≥70 mg/dL), neither baseline nor on-treatment (<vs. ≥median) Lp(a) levels significantly associated with ΔPAV. No significant differences were observed in ΔPAV in Lp(a) risers versus non-risers, nor in those patients with baseline or on-treatment Lp(a) levels <vs. > 50 mg/dL.

CONCLUSIONS

In coronary artery disease patients prescribed long-term maximally intensive statin therapy with low on-treatment LDL-C levels, measured Lp(a) levels (predominantly below the 50 mg/dL threshold) do not associate with coronary atheroma progression. Alternative biomarkers may thus associate with residual cardiovascular risk in such patients.

Association of lipoprotein(a) with long-term mortality following coronary angiography or percutaneous coronary intervention

BACKGROUND

There is no consistent evidence to suggest the association of plasma lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]) with long-term mortality in patients undergoing coronary angiography (CAG) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

HYPOTHESIS

Level of Lp(a) is associated with long-term mortality following CAG or PCI.

METHODS

We enrolled 1684 patients with plasma Lp(a) data undergoing CAG or PCI between April 2009 and December 2013. The patients were divided into 2 groups: a low-Lp(a) group (Lp[a] <16.0 mg/dL; n = 842) and a high-Lp(a) group (Lp[a] ≥16.0 mg/dL; n = 842).

RESULTS

In-hospital mortality was not significantly different between the high and low Lp(a) groups (0.8% vs 0.5%, respectively; P = 0.364). During the median follow-up period of 1.95 years, the high-Lp(a) group had a higher long-term mortality than did the low-Lp(a) group (5.8% vs 2.5%, respectively; P = 0.003). After adjustment of confounders, multivariate Cox regression analysis revealed that a higher Lp(a) level was an independent predictor of long-term mortality (hazard ratio: 1.96, 95% confidence interval: 1.07-3.59, P = 0.029).

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggested that an elevated Lp(a) level was significantly associated with long-term mortality following CAG or PCI. However, additional larger multicenter studies will be required to investigate the predictive value of Lp(a) levels and evaluate the benefit of controlling Lp(a) levels for patients undergoing CAG or PCI.

Anti-sense oligonucleotide therapies for the treatment of hyperlipidaemia

INTRODUCTION

Anti-sense oligonucleotide (ASO) therapies are a new development in clinical pharmacology offering greater specificity compared to small molecule inhibitors and the ability to target intracellular process' not susceptible to antibody-based therapies.

AREAS COVERED

This article reviews the chemical biology of ASOs and related RNA therapeutics. It then reviews the data on their use to treat hyperlipidaemia. Data on mipomersen - an ASO to apolipoprotein B-100(apoB) licensed for treatment of homozygous familial hypercholesterolaemia (FH) is presented. Few effective therapies are available to reduce atehrogenic lipoprotein (a) levels. An ASO therapy to apolipoprotein(a) (ISIS Apo(a)Rx) specifically reduced lipoprotein (a) levels by up to 78%. Treatment options for patients with familial chylomicronaemia syndrome (lipoprotein lipase deficiency; LPLD) or lipodystrophies are highly limited and often inadequate. Volanesorsen, an ASO to apolipoprotein C-3, shows promise in the treatment of LPLD and severe hypertriglyceridaemia as it increases clearance of triglyceride-rich lipoproteins and can normalise triglycerides in these patients.

EXPERT OPINION

The uptake of the novel ASO therapies is likely to be limited to selected niche groups or orphan diseases. These will include homozygous FH, severe heterozygous FH for mipomersen; LPLD deficiency and lipodystrophy syndromes for volanesorsen and treatment of patients with high elevated Lp(a) levels.

A Case-Control Study of the Relationship Between SLC22A3-LPAL2-LPA Gene Cluster Polymorphism and Coronary Artery Disease in the Han Chinese Population

Background

Mutations in the solute carrier family 22 member 3 (SLC22A3), lipoprotein (a)-like 2 (LPAL2), and the lipoprotein (a) (LPA) gene cluster, which encodes apolipoprotein (a) [apo (a)] of the lipoprotein (a) [Lp (a)] lipoprotein particle, have been suggested to contribute to the risk of coronary artery disease (CAD), but the precise variants of this gene cluster have not yet been identified in Chinese populations.

Objectives

We sought to investigate the association between SLC22A3-LPAL2-LPA gene cluster polymorphisms and the risk of CAD in the Han Chinese population.

Patients and Methods

We recruited 551 CAD patients and 544 healthy controls for this case-control study. Four SNPs (rs9346816, rs2221750, rs3127596, and rs9364559) were genotyped in real time using the MassARRAY system (Sequenom; USA) in the SLC22A3-LPAL2-LPA gene cluster. All subjects were Chinese and of Han descent, and were recruited from the First Hospital of Jilin University based on convenience sampling from June 2009 to September 2012.

Results

The frequency of the minor allele G (34.8%) in rs9364559 was significantly higher in the CAD patients than in the healthy controls (29.4%) (P = 0.006). There was genotypic association between rs9364559 and CAD (P = 0.022), and these results still remained significant after adjustment for the conventional CAD risk factors through forward logistic regression analysis (P = 0.020, P = 0.019). Haplotype analyses from different blocks indicated that 11 haplotypes were associated with the risk of CAD. Seven haplotypes were associated with a reduced risk of CAD, whereas four haplotypes were associated with an increased risk of CAD.

Conclusions

Rs9364559 in the LPA gene may contribute to the risk of CAD in the Han Chinese population; haplotypes which contain rs9346816-G were all associated with an increased risk of CAD in this study.

The relationship between Lp(a) and CVD outcomes: a systematic review

Robust associations between lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] and CVD outcomes among general populations have been published in previous studies. However, associations in high risk primary prevention and secondary prevention populations are less well defined. In order to investigate this further, a systematic review was performed including prospective studies, which assessed the relationship between Lp(a) and CVD outcomes using multivariable analyses. Additional information was gathered on Lp(a) assays, multivariable modelling and population characteristics. Literature searches from inception up to December 2015 retrieved 2850 records. From these 60 studies were included. Across 39 primary prevention studies in the general population (hazard ratios ranged from 1.16 to 2.97) and seven high risk primary prevention studies (hazard ratios ranged from 1.01 to 3.7), there was evidence of a statistically significant relationship between increased Lp(a) and an increased risk of future CVD. Results in 14 studies of secondary prevention populations were also suggestive of a modest statistically significant relationship (hazard ratios ranged from 0.75 to 3.7).Therefore current evidence would suggest that increased Lp(a) levels are associated with modest increases in the risk of future CVD events in both general and higher risk populations. However, further studies are required to confirm these findings.

Impact of high lipoprotein(a) levels on in-stent restenosis and long-term clinical outcomes of angina pectoris patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents in Asian population

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is known to be associated with cardiovascular complications and atherothrombotic properties in general populations. However, it has not been examined whether Lp(a) levels are able to predict adverse cardiovascular outcomes in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES). A total of 595 consecutive patients with angina pectoris who underwent elective PCI with DES were enrolled from 2004 to 2010. The patients were divided into two groups according to the levels of Lp(a): Lp(a) < 50 mg/dL (n = 485 patients), and Lp(a) ≥ 50 mg/dL (n = 111 patients). The 6-9-month angiographic outcomes and 3-year cumulative major clinical outcomes were compared between the two groups. Binary restenosis occurred in 26 of 133 lesions (19.8%) in the high Lp(a) group and 43 of 550 lesions (7.9%) in the low Lp(a) group (P = 0.001). In multivariate analysis, the reference vessel diameter, low density lipoprotein cholesterol, total lesion length, and Lp(a) ≥ 50 mg/dL were predictors of binary restenosis. In the Cox proportional hazards regression analysis, Lp(a) > 50 mg/dL was significantly associated with the 3-year adverse clinical outcomes including any myocardial infarction, revascularization (target lesion revascularization (TLR) and target vessel revascularization (TVR)), TLR-major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), TVR-MACE, and All-MACEs. In our study, high Lp(a) level ≥ 50 mg/dL in angina pectoris patients undergoing elective PCI with DES was significantly associated with binary restenosis and 3-year adverse clinical outcomes in an Asian population.

Impact of L-carnitine on plasma lipoprotein(a) concentrations: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

We aimed to assess the impact of L-carnitine on plasma Lp(a) concentrations through systematic review and meta-analysis of available RCTs. The literature search included selected databases up to 31^st January 2015. Meta-analysis was performed using fixed-effects or random-effect model according to I² statistic. Effect sizes were expressed as weighted mean difference (WMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI). The meta-analysis showed a significant reduction of Lp(a) levels following L-carnitine supplementation (WMD: −8.82 mg/dL, 95% CI: −10.09, −7.55, p < 0.001). When the studies were categorized according to the route of administration, a significant reduction in plasma Lp(a) concentration was observed with oral (WMD: −9.00 mg/dL, 95% CI: −10.29, −7.72, p < 0.001) but not intravenous L-carnitine (WMD: −2.91 mg/dL, 95% CI: −10.22, 4.41, p = 0.436). The results of the meta-regression analysis showed that the pooled estimate is independent of L-carnitine dose (slope: −0.30; 95% CI: −4.19, 3.59; p = 0.878) and duration of therapy (slope: 0.18; 95% CI: −0.22, 0.59; p = 0.374). In conclusion, the meta-analysis suggests a significant Lp(a) lowering by oral L-carnitine supplementation. Taking into account the limited number of available Lp(a)-targeted drugs, L-carnitine might be an effective alternative to effectively reduce Lp(a). Prospective outcome trials will be required to fully elucidate the clinical value and safety of oral L-carnitine supplementation.

Lipoprotein apheresis results in plaque stabilization and prevention of cardiovascular events: comments on the prospective Pro(a)LiFe study

Elevated lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) has emerged as an important independent cardiovascular risk factor, and causal association has been accepted with adverse outcome in atherosclerotic disease. Lipoprotein apheresis (LA) can lower low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol and Lp(a) by 60–70 % and is the final escalating therapeutic option in patients with hyperlipoproteinemias (HLP) involving LDL or Lp(a) particles. Major therapeutic effect of LA is preventing cardiovascular events. Stabilizing plaque morphology might be an important underlying mechanism of action. In Germany, since 2008, a reimbursement guideline has been implemented to establish the indication for LA not only for familial or severe forms of hypercholesterolemia but also for Lp(a)-HLP associated with a progressive course of cardiovascular disease, that persists despite effective treatment of other concomitant cardiovascular risk factors, i.e. isolated Lp(a)-HLP. The Pro(a)LiFe-study confirmed with a prospective multicenter design that LA can effectively reduce Lp(a) plasma levels and prevent cardiovascular events.

[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.