Molecular, Population, and Clinical Aspects of Lipoprotein(a): A Bridge Too Far?

Causal association of blood lipids with all-cause and cause-specific mortality risk: a Mendelian randomization study

Dyslipidemia has long been implicated in elevating mortality risk; yet, the precise associations between lipid traits and mortality remained undisclosed. Our study aimed to explore the causal effects of lipid traits on both all-cause and cause-specific mortality. One-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) with linear and nonlinear assumptions was conducted in a cohort of 407,951 European participants from the UK Biobank. Six lipid traits, consisting of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), triglycerides, apolipoprotein A1 (ApoA1), apolipoprotein B (ApoB), and lipoprotein(a), were included to investigate the causal associations with mortality. Two-sample MR was performed to replicate the association between each lipid trait and all-cause mortality. Univariable MR results showed that genetically predicted higher ApoA1 was significantly associated with a decreased all-cause mortality risk (HR[95% CI]:0.93 [0.89-0.97], P value = 0.001), which was validated by the two-sample MR analysis. Higher lipoprotein(a) was associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality (1.03 [1.01-1.04], P value = 0.002). Multivariable MR confirmed the direct causal effects of ApoA1 and lipoprotein(a) on all-cause mortality. Meanwhile, nonlinear MR found no evidence for nonlinearity between lipids and all-cause mortality. Our examination into cause-specific mortality revealed a suggestive inverse association between ApoA1 and cancer mortality, a significant positive association between lipoprotein(a) and cardiovascular disease mortality, and a suggestive positive association between lipoprotein(a) and digestive disease mortality. High LDL-C was associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease mortality but a decreased risk of neurodegenerative disease mortality. The findings suggest that implementing interventions to raise ApoA1 and decrease lipoprotein(a) levels may improve overall health outcomes and mitigate cancer and digestive disease mortality.

Lipoprotein(a): A Review of Risk Factors, Measurements, and Novel Treatment Modalities

The study of lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] has long been a source of interest as a possible independent risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). The results of large sample observational studies, genome-wide association studies, and Mendelian randomization studies have been strong indicators supporting the link between ASCVD and Lp(a) despite early studies, with less sensitive assays, failing to show a connection. The recommendations for the indications and frequency of testing Lp(a) levels vary between US, Canadian, and European organizations due to the uncertain role of Lp(a) in ASCVD. The innovation of recent therapies, such as antisense oligonucleotides and small interfering RNA, designed to specifically target and reduce Lp(a) levels by targeting mRNA translation have once more thrust LP(a) into the spotlight of inquiry. These emerging modalities serve the dual purpose of definitively elucidating the connection between elevated Lp(a) levels and atherosclerotic cardiovascular risk, as well as the possibility of providing clinicians with the tools necessary to manage elevated Lp(a) levels in vulnerable populations. This review seeks to examine the mechanisms of atherogenicity of Lp(a) and explore the most current pharmacologic therapies currently in development.

New Horizons: Revival of Lipoprotein (a) as a Risk Factor for Cardiovascular Disease

The status of lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] as a cardiovascular risk factor has been resurrected by advances in genetics. Mendelian randomization studies show a causal link of Lp(a) with coronary artery disease (CAD), peripheral artery disease (PAD), and calcific aortic valve stenosis (CAVS). The genetics of Lp(a) is complex and extends beyond the kringle-IV type 2, as it is also dependent on ancestry. The plasma concentration of Lp(a) is determined by the hepatic production of apolipoprotein(a) [apo(a)] component of Lp(a), supporting the use of nucleic acids that inhibit the messenger RNA (mRNA) gene transcript for apo(a). Analytical barriers to measurement of Lp(a) are being addressed using isoform independent assays and a traceable standard. The association of Lp(a) and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease is higher for myocardial infarction than PAD and CAVS. Increased risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus associated with low Lp(a) levels is perplexing and requires further investigation. The greatest advancement in Lp(a)-lowering therapies is based on using RNA therapeutics that are now being investigated in clinical trials. Proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibition lowers Lp(a) modestly, but whether cardiovascular benefit is independent of low-density lipoprotein lowering remains unclear. Opportunistic and selective testing for Lp(a) is supported by moderate evidence, with the case for universal screening premature. Modification of behavioral and clinical risk factors may be targeted to mitigate Lp(a)-mediated risk of cardiovascular disease. Clinical practice guidelines have been developed to address gaps in care of high Lp(a), but full implementation awaits the findings of clinical outcome trials using RNA-directed therapies currently underway.

Elevated Lipoprotein(a) prevalence and association with family history of premature cardiovascular disease in general population with moderate cardiovascular risk and increased LDL cholesterol

Background

Elevated Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is independently associated with increased cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. There are discrepancies regarding its epidemiology due to great variability in different populations. This study aimed to evaluate the prevalence of elevated Lp(a) in people with moderate CVD risk and increased LDL-c and to determine the association between family history of premature CVD and elevated Lp(a).

Methods

Random subjects from the CESCAS population-based study of people with moderate CVD risk (Framingham score 10–20 %) and LDL-c ≥ 130 mg/dL, were selected to evaluate Lp(a) by immunoturbidimetry independent of the Isoforms variability. The association between family history of premature CVD and elevated Lp(a) was evaluated using multivariate logistic regression models. Elevated Lp(a) was defined as Lp(a) ​​≥ 125 nmol/L.

Results

Lp(a) was evaluated in 484 samples; men = 39.5 %, median age = 57 years (Q1-Q3: 50–63), mean CVD risk = 14.4 % (SE: 0.2), family history of premature CVD = 11.2 %, Lp(a) median of 21 nmol/L (Q1-Q3: 9–42 nmol/L), high Lp(a) = 6.1 % (95 % CI = 3.8–9.6). Association between family history of premature CVD and elevated Lp(a) in total population: OR 1.31 (95 % CI = 0.4, 4.2) p = 0.642; in subgroup of people with LDL-c ≥ 160 mg%, OR 4.24 (95 % CI = 1.2, 15.1) p = 0.026.

Conclusions

In general population with moderate CVD risk and elevated LDL-c from the Southern Cone of Latin America, less than one over ten people had elevated Lp(a). Family history of premature CVD was significantly associated with the presence of elevated Lp(a) in people with LDL-c ≥ 160 mg/dL.

Lipoprotein (a) and Hypertension

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide an overview of the associations between elevated blood pressure and lipoprotein (a) and possible causal links, as well as data on the prevalence of elevated lipoprotein (a) in a cohort of hypertensive patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

Elevated lipoprotein (a) is now considered to be an independent and causal risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and calcific aortic valve disease. Despite this, there are limited data demonstrating an association between elevated lipoprotein (a) and hypertension. Further, there is limited mechanistic data linking lipoprotein (a) and hypertension through either renal impairment or direct effects on the vasculature. Despite the links between lipoprotein (a) and atherosclerosis, there are limited data demonstrating an association with hypertension. Evidence from our clinic suggests that ~ 30% of the patients in this at-risk, hypertensive cohort had elevated lipoprotein (a) levels and that measurement of lipoprotein (a) maybe useful in risk stratification.

Lipoprotein(a) as predictor of coronary artery disease and myocardial infarction in a multi-ethnic Asian population

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The role of Lp(a) in multi-ethnic Asian populations with coronary artery disease (CAD) has not been well established. The aims of this study were (i) to investigate whether Lp(a) is a predictor of CAD, and (ii) amongst patients with CAD, to ascertain whether Lp(a) is a predictor of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and severity of CAD.

METHODS

We compared three cardiovascular phenotypes from patients recruited at coronary angiography. CAD was defined as ≥50% coronary artery stenosis and subdivided into a group with AMI history (CAD+AMI+) and a group without (CAD+AMI-). Minimal CAD group (CAD-) was defined as normal or <30% coronary artery stenosis and no AMI. The severity of CAD was defined using the modified Gensini score.

RESULTS

We studied 2025 patients comprising 94.5% men and 61.4% of Chinese ethnicity. The median Lp(a) level was highest in CAD+AMI+, followed by CAD+AMI- and CAD- (26.2, 20.1, and 15.8 nmol/L respectively). Similarly, the frequency of patients with Lp(a) ≥120 nmol/L were in the same order (11.8%, 9.1% and 2.4%). Lp(a) levels were highest among Asian Indians, followed by Malays and Chinese patients (p < 0.001). Lp(a) levels and Lp(a) ≥120 nmol/L were significant predictors of CAD (Odds ratio (OR) = 1.12 per 10 nmol/L increment, p < 0.001, and OR = 5.41 p = 0.004 respectively). Among patients with CAD, higher Lp(a) levels were associated with increased AMI risk (OR = 1.02 per 10 nmol/L increment, p = 0.024). Lp(a) ≥120 nmol/L was positively associated with CAD severity (p = 0.020).

CONCLUSIONS

Plasma Lp(a) concentration is a positive predictor of CAD and AMI in a mostly male South East Asian population.

Modern Approaches to Lower Lipoprotein(a) Concentrations and Consequences for Cardiovascular Diseases

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is a low density lipoprotein particle that is associated with poor cardiovascular prognosis due to pro-atherogenic, pro-thrombotic, pro-inflammatory and pro-oxidative properties. Traditional lipid-lowering therapy does not provide a sufficient Lp(a) reduction. For PCSK9 inhibitors a small reduction of Lp(a) levels could be shown, which was associated with a reduction in cardiovascular events, independently of the effect on LDL cholesterol. Another option is inclisiran, for which no outcome data are available yet. Lipoprotein apheresis acutely and in the long run decreases Lp(a) levels and effectively improves cardiovascular prognosis in high-risk patients who cannot be satisfactorily treated with drugs. New drugs inhibiting the synthesis of apolipoprotein(a) (an antisense oligonucleotide (Pelacarsen) and two siRNA drugs) are studied. Unlike LDL-cholesterol, for Lp(a) no target value has been defined up to now. This overview presents data of modern capabilities of cardiovascular risk reduction by lowering Lp(a) level.

The lipid paradox in neuroprogressive disorders: Causes and consequences

Chronic systemic inflammation is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease in an environment of low low-density lipoprotein (LDL) and low total cholesterol and with the pathophysiology of neuroprogressive disorders. The causes and consequences of this lipid paradox are explored. Circulating activated neutrophils can release inflammatory molecules such as myeloperoxidase and the pro-inflammatory cytokines interleukin-1 beta, interleukin-6 and tumour necrosis factor-alpha. Since activated neutrophils are associated with atherosclerosis and cardiovascular disease and with major depressive disorder, bipolar disorder and schizophrenia, it seems reasonable to hypothesise that the inflammatory molecules released by them may act as mediators of the link between systemic inflammation and the development of atherosclerosis in neuroprogressive disorders. This hypothesis is tested by considering the association at a molecular level of systemic inflammation with increased LDL oxidation; increased small dense LDL levels; increased lipoprotein (a) concentration; secretory phospholipase A₂ activation; cytosolic phospholipase A₂ activation; increased platelet activation; decreased apolipoprotein A1 levels and function; decreased paroxonase-1 activity; hyperhomocysteinaemia; and metabolic endotoxaemia. These molecular mechanisms suggest potential therapeutic targets.

Lipoprotein (a) and diabetes mellitus: causes and consequences

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

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

RECENT FINDINGS

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

SUMMARY

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