Diet and Lp(a): Does Dietary Change Modify Residual Cardiovascular Risk Conferred by Lp(a)?

New insights into the therapeutic options to lower lipoprotein(a)

BACKGROUND

Elevated levels of lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] represent a risk factor for cardiovascular disease including aortic valve stenosis, myocardial infarction and stroke. While the patho-physiological mechanisms linking Lp(a) with atherosclerosis are not fully understood, from genetic studies that lower Lp(a) levels protect from CVD independently of other risk factors including lipids and lipoproteins. Hereby, Lp(a) has been considered an appealing pharmacological target.

RESULTS

However, approved lipid lowering therapies such as statins, ezetimibe or PCSK9 inhibitors have a neutral to modest effect on Lp(a) levels, thus prompting the development of new strategies selectively targeting Lp(a). These include antisense oligonucleotides and small interfering RNAs (siRNAs) directed towards apolipoprotein(a) [Apo(a)], which are in advanced phase of clinical development. More recently, additional approaches including inhibitors of Apo(a) and gene editing approaches via CRISPR-Cas9 technology entered early clinical development.

CONCLUSION

If the results from the cardiovascular outcome trials, designed to demonstrate whether the reduction of Lp(a) of more than 80% as observed with pelacarsen, olpasiran or lepodisiran translates into the decrease of cardiovascular mortality and major adverse cardiovascular events, will be positive, lowering Lp(a) will become a new additional target in the management of patients with elevated cardiovascular risk.

Dietary n-3 alpha-linolenic and n-6 linoleic acids modestly lower serum lipoprotein(a) concentration but differentially influence other atherogenic lipoprotein traits: A randomized trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a causal, genetically determined cardiovascular risk factor. Limited evidence suggests that dietary unsaturated fat may increase serum Lp(a) concentration by 10-15 %. Linoleic acid may increase Lp(a) concentration through its endogenous conversion to arachidonic acid, a process regulated by the fatty acid desaturase (FADS) gene cluster. We aimed to compare the Lp(a) and other lipoprotein trait-modulating effects of dietary alpha-linolenic (ALA) and linoleic acids (LA). Additionally, we examined whether FADS1 rs174550 genotype modifies Lp(a) responses.

METHODS

A genotype-based randomized trial was performed in 118 men homozygous for FADS1 rs174550 SNP (TT or CC). After a 4-week run-in period, the participants were randomized to 8-week intervention diets enriched with either Camelina sativa oil (ALA diet) or sunflower oil (LA diet) 30-50 mL/day based on their BMI. Serum lipid profile was measured at baseline and at the end of the intervention.

RESULTS

ALA diet lowered serum Lp(a) concentration by 7.3 % (p = 0.003) and LA diet by 9.5 % (p < 0.001) (p = 0.089 for between-diet difference). Both diets led to greater absolute decreases in individuals with higher baseline Lp(a) concentration (p < 0.001). Concentrations of LDL cholesterol (LDL-C), non-HDL-C, remnant-C, and apolipoprotein B were lowered more by the ALA diet (p < 0.01). Lipid or lipoprotein responses were not modified by the FADS1 rs174550 genotype.

CONCLUSIONS

A considerable increase in either dietary ALA or LA from vegetable oils has a similar Lp(a)-lowering effect, whereas ALA may lower other major atherogenic lipids and lipoproteins to a greater extent than LA. Genetic differences in endogenous PUFA conversion may not influence serum Lp(a) concentration.

Elevated lipoprotein(a) levels: A crucial determinant of cardiovascular disease risk and target for emerging therapies

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) remains a significant global health challenge despite advancements in prevention and treatment. Elevated Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] levels have emerged as a crucial risk factor for CVD and aortic stenosis, affecting approximately 20 of the global population. Research over the last decade has established Lp(a) as an independent genetic contributor to CVD and aortic stenosis, beginning with Kare Berg's discovery in 1963. This has led to extensive exploration of its molecular structure and pathogenic roles. Despite the unknown physiological function of Lp(a), studies have shed light on its metabolism, genetics, and involvement in atherosclerosis, inflammation, and thrombosis. Epidemiological evidence highlights the link between high Lp(a) levels and increased cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Newly emerging therapies, including pelacarsen, zerlasiran, olpasiran, muvalaplin, and lepodisiran, show promise in significantly lowering Lp(a) levels, potentially transforming the management of cardiovascular disease. However, further research is essential to assess these novel therapies' long-term efficacy and safety, heralding a new era in cardiovascular disease prevention and treatment and providing hope for at-risk patients.

Lp(a) - an overlooked risk factor

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is an increasingly discussed and studied risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and aortic valve stenosis. Many genetic and epidemiological studies support the important causal role that Lp(a) plays in the incidence of cardiovascular disease. Although dependent upon the threshold and unit of measurement of Lp(a), most estimates suggest between 20 and 30% of the world's population have elevated serum levels of Lp(a). Lp(a) levels are predominantly mediated by genetics and are not significantly modified by lifestyle interventions. Efforts are ongoing to develop effective pharmacotherapies to lower Lp(a) and to determine if lowering Lp(a) with these medications ultimately decreases the incidence of adverse cardiovascular events. In this review, the genetics and pathophysiological properties of Lp(a) will be discussed as well as the epidemiological data demonstrating its impact on the incidence of cardiovascular disease. Recommendations for screening and how to currently approach patients with elevated Lp(a) are also noted. Finally, the spectrum of pharmacotherapies under development for Lp(a) lowering is detailed.

Dietary management of dyslipidemia

The rising burden of cardiovascular disease (CVD) has made the achievement of optimal lipoprotein levels a major public health priority. As nearly a fifth of global mortality is associated with dietary factors, and recommendations have been mired in controversy, a fresh look on the available data is attempted. Well established concepts regarding nutrition and cardiometabolic health, role of macronutrients, calories, and controversial foods are discussed followed by recommendations in the Indian context. A healthy dietary pattern rather than individual foods or nutrients is emphasized, and this is generally plant based with optional consumption of dairy, eggs, and meats within the suggested limits. Suggestions/recommendations are given for consumption of individual foods, remembering that choosing appropriate replacement foods is as important as restricting unhealthy foods.

Fatty acid analysis in serum of patients with elevated lipoprotein(a) and cardiovascular disease undergoing lipoprotein apheresis

BACKGROUND

Lipoprotein apheresis (LA) is an extracorporeal treatment that transiently reduces lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] by 60% and leads to an 80-92% reduction in major adverse cardiovascular events. LA has a significant impact on lipid profile in serum of patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effects of LA on the composition of serum fatty acids (FAs), focusing on those which could have an impact on cardiovascular disease (CVD).

METHODS

This is a prospective study in the First Department of Cardiology of the Medical University of Gdansk, Poland. Serum samples were collected from 28 patients before LA, just after the procedure, and 7 days after LA. Additionally, in a smaller group of patients, the samples were collected after a second tour of LA (2 weeks later), as well as after 1 year from the first procedure. The serum FA profile was analyzed using gas chromatography-mass spectrometry.

RESULTS

After the LA procedure, a substantial change in serum FA composition along with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and Lp(a) decrease were observed 7 days after procedure, but these parameters returned to the values similar to those before procedure after 14 days. Very long-chain FAs (VLCFAs) and very long-chain monounsaturated FAs (VLC-MUFAs) were eluted at 57% and remained low even 7 days after LA (p=0.027 and p < 0.001, respectively). We also observed an increase in the percentage of total branched-chain FAs (BCFAs) (p=0.004) and anteiso BCFAs (p=0.012) after LA. After 1 year of regular LA, a substantial decrease in serum VLC-MUFAs and n3 polyunsaturated LA (PUFAs) were noted.

CONCLUSIONS

Decreased VLCFAs and VLC-MUFAs involved in CVD development remained low even 7 days after LA. An acute increase in the levels of anti-inflammatory BCFAs was observed. In turn long-term regular administration of LA substantially decreased VLC-MUFA and n3 PUFA.

Recommendations of the Experts of the Polish Cardiac Society (PCS) and the Polish Lipid Association (PoLA) on the diagnosis and management of elevated lipoprotein(a) levels

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is made up of a low-density lipoprotein (LDL) particle and a specific apolipoprotein(a). The blood concentration of Lp(a) is approximately 90% genetically determined, and the main genetic factor determining Lp(a) levels is the size of the apo(a) isoform, which is determined by the number of KIV2 domain repeats. The size of the apo(a) isoform is inversely proportional to the blood concentration of Lp(a). Lp(a) is a strong and independent cardiovascular risk factor. Elevated Lp(a) levels ≥ 50 mg/dl (≥ 125 nmol/l) are estimated to occur in more than 1.5 billion people worldwide. However, determination of Lp(a) levels is performed far too rarely, including Poland, where, in fact, it is only since the 2021 guidelines of the Polish Lipid Association (PoLA) and five other scientific societies that Lp(a) measurements have begun to be performed. Determination of Lp(a) concentrations is not easy due to, among other things, the different sizes of the apo(a) isoforms; however, the currently available certified tests make it possible to distinguish between people with low and high cardiovascular risk with a high degree of precision. In 2022, the first guidelines for the management of patients with elevated lipoprotein(a) levels were published by the European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS) and the American Heart Association (AHA). The first Polish guidelines are the result of the work of experts from the two scientific societies and their aim is to provide clear, practical recommendations for the determination and management of elevated Lp(a) levels.

LP(a): Structure, Genetics, Associated Cardiovascular Risk, and Emerging Therapeutics

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a molecule bound to apolipoprotein(a) with some similarity to low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), which has been found to be a risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD). Lp(a) appears to induce inflammation, atherogenesis, and thrombosis. Approximately 20% of the world's population has increased Lp(a) levels, determined predominantly by genetics. Current clinical practices for the management of dyslipidemia are ineffective in lowering Lp(a) levels. Evolving RNA-based therapeutics, such as the antisense oligonucleotide pelacarsen and small interfering RNA olpasiran, have shown promising results in reducing Lp(a) levels. Phase III pivotal cardiovascular outcome trials [Lp(a)HORIZON and OCEAN(a)] are ongoing to evaluate their efficacy in secondary prevention of major cardiovascular events in patients with elevated Lp(a). The future of cardiovascular residual risk reduction may transition to a personalized approach where further lowering of either LDL-C, triglycerides, or Lp(a) is selected after high-intensity statin therapy based on the individual risk profile and preferences of each patient.

Lipoprotein(a)-60 Years Later-What Do We Know?

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) molecule includes two protein components: apolipoprotein(a) and apoB100. The molecule is the main transporter of oxidized phospholipids (OxPL) in plasma. The concentration of this strongly atherogenic lipoprotein is predominantly regulated by the LPA gene expression. Lp(a) is regarded as a risk factor for several cardiovascular diseases. Numerous epidemiological, clinical and in vitro studies showed a strong association between increased Lp(a) and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), calcific aortic valve disease/aortic stenosis (CAVD/AS), stroke, heart failure or peripheral arterial disease (PAD). Although there are acknowledged contributions of Lp(a) to the mentioned diseases, clinicians struggle with many inconveniences such as a lack of well-established treatment lowering Lp(a), and common guidelines for diagnosing or assessing cardiovascular risk among both adult and pediatric patients. Lp(a) levels are different with regard to a particular race or ethnicity and might fluctuate during childhood. Furthermore, the lack of standardization of assays is an additional impediment. The review presents the recent knowledge on Lp(a) based on clinical and scientific research, but also highlights relevant aspects of future study directions that would approach more suitable and effective managing risk associated with increased Lp(a), as well as control the Lp(a) levels.

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

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

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

AIMS

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

DATA SYNTHESIS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Association of free-living diet composition with plasma lipoprotein(a) levels in healthy adults

BACKGROUND

Lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] is an apoB100-containing lipoprotein with high levels being positively associated with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Lp(a) levels are genetically determined. However, previous studies report a negative association between Lp(a) and saturated fatty acid intake. Currently, apoB100 lowering therapies are used to lower Lp(a) levels, and apheresis therapy is FDA approved for patients with extreme elevations of Lp(a). The current study analyzed the association of free-living diet components with plasma Lp(a) levels.

METHODS

Dietary composition data was collected during screening visits for enrollment in previously completed lipid and lipoprotein metabolism studies at Columbia University Irving Medical Center via a standardized protocol by registered dietitians using 24 hour recalls. Data were analyzed with the Nutrition Data System for Research (Version 2018). Diet quality was calculated using the Healthy Eating Index (HEI) score. Fasting plasma Lp(a) levels were measured via an isoform-independent ELISA and apo(a) isoforms were measured using gel electrophoresis.

RESULTS

We enrolled 28 subjects [Black (n = 18); Hispanic (n = 7); White (n = 3)]. The mean age was 48.3 ± 12.5 years with 17 males. Median level of Lp(a) was 79.9 nmol/L (34.4-146.0) and it was negatively associated with absolute (grams/day) and relative (percent of total calories) intake of dietary saturated fatty acids (SFA) (R = -0.43, P = 0.02, SFA …(% CAL): R = -0.38, P = 0.04), palmitic acid intake (R = -0.38, P = 0.05), and stearic acid intake (R = -0.40, P = 0.03). Analyses of associations with HEI score when stratified based on Lp(a) levels > or ≤ 100 nmol/L revealed no significant associations with any of the constituent factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Using 24 hour recall, we confirm previous findings that Lp(a) levels are negatively associated with dietary saturated fatty acid intake. Additionally, Lp(a) levels are not related to diet quality, as assessed by the HEI score. The mechanisms underlying the relationship of SFA with Lp(a) require further investigation.

Reducing saturated fat intake lowers LDL-C but increases Lp(a) levels in African Americans: the GET-READI feeding trial

Reducing dietary saturated fatty acids (SFA) intake results in a clinically significant lowering of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) across ethnicities. In contrast, dietary SFA's role in modulating emerging cardiovascular risk factors in different ethnicities remains poorly understood. Elevated levels of lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)], an independent cardiovascular risk factor, disproportionally affect individuals of African descent. Here, we assessed the responses in Lp(a) levels to dietary SFA reduction in 166 African Americans enrolled in GET-READI (The Gene-Environment Trial on Response in African Americans to Dietary Intervention), a randomized controlled feeding trial. Participants were fed two diets in random order for 5 weeks each: 1) an average American diet (AAD) (37% total fat: 16% SFA), and 2) a diet similar to the Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension (DASH) diet (25% total fat: 6% SFA). The participants' mean age was 35 years, 70% were women, the mean BMI was 28 kg/m2, and the mean LDL-C was 116 mg/dl. Compared to the AAD diet, LDL-C was reduced by the DASH-type diet (mean change: -12 mg/dl) as were total cholesterol (-16 mg/dl), HDL-C (-5 mg/dl), apoA-1 (-9 mg/dl) and apoB-100 (-5 mg/dl) (all P < 0.0001). In contrast, Lp(a) levels increased following the DASH-type diet compared with AAD (median: 58 vs. 44 mg/dl, P < 0.0001). In conclusion, in a large cohort of African Americans, reductions in SFA intake significantly increased Lp(a) levels while reducing LDL-C. Future studies are warranted to elucidate the mechanism(s) underlying the SFA reduction-induced increase in Lp(a) levels and its role in cardiovascular risk across populations.

Effects of mixed nut consumption on LDL cholesterol, lipoprotein(a), and other cardiometabolic risk factors in overweight and obese adults

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Elevated LDL-C, lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)], and inflammation are associated with greater risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular events. Consumption of individual nut types decreases these risk factors but knowledge about the effect of mixed nuts on Lp(a) is limited. The objective of this study was to determine the effects of consuming 42.5 g/day of mixed nuts on LDL-C, Lp(a), and inflammatory markers in individuals with overweight or obesity.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In a 16-week randomized control trial, 29 participants with overweight or obesity (BMI 25-40 kg/m²) consumed either 42.5 g/day of mixed nuts (cashews, almonds, macadamia nuts, Brazil nuts, pecans, pistachios, walnuts, and peanuts) or 69 g/day isocaloric pretzels. Blood samples were collected at baseline, week 8, and week 16 for analysis on total cholesterol (TC), LDL-C, Lp(a), inflammation markers, glucose, insulin, adiponectin and liver function enzymes. No significant differences were seen in TC, LDL-C, HDL-C, Lp(a), or liver function enzymes between the two groups. Participants consuming mixed nuts had significantly lower body fat percentage and diastolic blood pressure, and higher adiponectin (all P ≤ 0.05). C-reactive protein (CRP) and 8-oxo-deoxyguanosis (8-oxodG) showed non-significant decreasing trends and total antioxidant capacity (TAC) had a non-significant increasing trend in the mixed nut group.

CONCLUSION

Consumption of mixed nuts had no evidence of an effect on LDL-C or Lp(a) throughout the intervention. Notably, mixed nut consumption lowered body fat percentage without significant changes in body weight or BMI. Future studies with larger sample sizes investigating the changing trends of CRP, 8-oxodG, and TAC are warranted.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTER

NCT03375866.

Nutrition interventions for adults with dyslipidemia: A Clinical Perspective from the National Lipid Association

Lifestyle habits can have a profound impact on atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk. The National Lipid Association previously published recommendations for lifestyle therapies to manage dyslipidemia. This Clinical Perspective provides an update with a focus on nutrition interventions for the three most common dyslipidemias in adults: 1) low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) elevation; 2) triglyceride (TG) elevation, including severe hypertriglyceridemia with chylomicronemia; and 3) combined dyslipidemia, with elevations in both LDL-C and TG levels. Lowering LDL-C and non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol are the primary objectives for reducing ASCVD risk. With severe TG elevation (≥500 mg/dL), the primary objective is to prevent pancreatitis and ASCVD risk reduction is secondary. Nutrition interventions that lower LDL-C levels include reducing cholesterol-raising fatty acids and dietary cholesterol, as well as increasing intakes of unsaturated fatty acids, plant proteins, viscous fibers, and reducing adiposity for patients with overweight or obesity. Selected dietary supplements may be employed as dietary adjuncts. Nutrition interventions for all patients with elevated TG levels include restricting intakes of alcohol, added sugars, and refined starches. Additional lifestyle factors that reduce TG levels are participating in daily physical activity and reducing adiposity in patients with overweight or obesity. For patients with severe hypertriglyceridemia, an individualized approach is essential. Nutrition interventions for addressing concurrent elevations in LDL-C and TG include a combination of the strategies described for lowering LDL-C and TG. A multidisciplinary approach is recommended to facilitate success in making and sustaining dietary changes and the assistance of a registered dietitian nutritionist is highly recommended.

Lipoprotein(a) and diet-a challenge for a role of saturated fat in cardiovascular disease risk reduction?

In this perspective, we discuss new evidence relating to current dietary recommendations to reduce SFA intake to modulate an individual's global risk of CVD. Although it is well established that lowering dietary SFA intake has a beneficial effect on LDL cholesterol concentrations, findings increasingly indicate an opposite effect on lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] concentrations. In recent years, many studies have firmly established a role for an elevated Lp(a) concentration as a genetically regulated, causal, and prevalent risk factor for CVD. However, there is less awareness of the effect of dietary SFA intake on Lp(a) concentrations. This study discusses this issue and highlights the contrasting effect of reducing dietary SFA intake on LDL cholesterol and Lp(a), 2 highly atherogenic lipoproteins. This calls attention to the need for precision nutrition approaches that move beyond a "one-size-fits-all" approach. To illustrate the contrast, we describe the dynamic contributions of Lp(a) and LDL cholesterol concentrations to CVD risk during interventions with a low-SFA diet, with the hope that this will stimulate further studies and discussions regarding dietary management of CVD risk.

Effects of Lipid-Modifying and Other Drugs on Lipoprotein(a) Levels-Potent Clinical Implications

The past few years have shown an ongoing interest in lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)), a lipid molecule that has been proven to have atherogenic, thrombogenic, and inflammatory properties. Several lines of evidence, indeed, have demonstrated an increased risk of cardiovascular disease as well as calcific aortic valve stenosis in patients with elevated Lp(a) levels. Statins, the mainstay of lipid-lowering therapy, slightly increase Lp(a) levels, while most other lipid-modifying agents do not significantly alter Lp(a) concentrations, except for proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors. The latter have been shown to reduce Lp(a) levels; however, the clinical significance of this effect has not been clearly elucidated. Of note, the pharmaceutical lowering of Lp(a) may be achieved with novel treatments specifically designed for this purpose (i.e., antisense oligonucleotides (ASOs) and small interfering RNAs (siRNAs)). Large clinical trials with cardiovascular outcomes with these agents are ongoing, and their results are eagerly awaited. Furthermore, several non-lipid-modifying drugs of various classes may influence Lp(a) concentrations. We have searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases up to 28 January 2023 and summarized the effects of established and emerging lipid-modifying drugs and other medications on Lp(a) levels. We also discuss the potent clinical implications of these alterations.

Supporting evidence for lipoprotein(a) measurements in clinical practice

High levels of lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] are causal for development of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and highly regulated by genetics. Levels are higher in Blacks compared to Whites, and in women compared to men. Lp(a)'s main protein components are apolipoprotein (apo) (a) and apoB100, the latter being the main component of Low-Density Lipoprotein (LDL) particles. Studies have identified Lp(a) to be associated with inflammatory, coagulation and wound healing pathways. Lack of validated and accepted assays to measure Lp(a), risk cutoff values, guidelines for diagnosis, and targeted therapies have added challenges to the field. Scientific efforts are ongoing to address these, including studies evaluating the cardiovascular benefits of decreasing Lp(a) levels with targeted apo(a) lowering treatments. This review will provide a synopsis of evidence-based effects of high Lp(a) on disease presentation, highlight available guidelines and discuss promising therapies in development. We will conclude with current clinical information and future research needs in the field.

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

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

Lp(a) does not affect intima media thickness in hypercholesterolemic children -a retrospective cross sectional study

PURPOSE

Combined hyperlipidaemia results in premature atherosclerosis and a high burden of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Early identification of highly affected subjects within this population is of utmost importance to enable informed treatment decisions. The measurement of intima media thickness (IMT) is a readily available, non-invasive method to investigate evidence of early atherosclerosis. To assess the usefulness of this method in pediatric subjects with hypercholesterolemia, we here examined a possible interaction of LDL-C and Lp(a) on IMT.

METHODS

Blood lipids (Lp(a), LDL-cholesterol, total cholesterol, triglycerides, high density lipoprotein (HDL) -cholesterol, apolipoprotein A1, apolipoprotein B), anthropometric parameters (age, height, weight, body mass index (BMI)) and possibly existing early evidence of atherosclerotic lesions measured by intima media thickness (IMT zscore).as a surrogate parameter was examined retrospectively in 113 children and adolescents (aged 1-18 years) with elevated Lp(a) and/or LDL-cholesterol (Lp(a) > 30 mg/dL, LDL>130 mg/dL). Furthermore, we compared hsCRP levels between groups.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in IMT Zscore or hsCRP between groups. Regression analysis did not reveal a statistically significant interaction between Lp(a) and LDL-C.

CONCLUSIONS

At the age of 6-18 years, we found no significant differences in early markers of atherosclerosis between subjects with high Lp(a)- and/or high LDL-cholesterol with no detectable synergistic effects between the two lipoproteins.

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

INTRODUCTION

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

AREAS COVERED

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

EXPERT OPINION

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

The effects of coconut oil on the cardiometabolic profile: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

Background

Despite having a 92% concentration of saturated fatty acid composition, leading to an apparently unfavorable lipid profile, body weight and glycemic effect, coconut oil is consumed worldwide. Thus, we conducted an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) to analyze the effect of coconut oil intake on different cardiometabolic outcomes.

Methods

We searched Medline, Embase, and LILACS for RCTs conducted prior to April 2022. We included RCTs that compared effects of coconut oil intake with other substances on anthropometric and metabolic profiles in adults published in all languages, and excluded non-randomized trials and short follow-up studies. Risk of bias was assessed with the RoB 2 tool and certainty of evidence with GRADE. Where possible, we performed meta-analyses using a random-effects model.

Results

We included seven studies in the meta-analysis (n = 515; 50% females, follow up from 4 weeks to 2 years). The amount of coconut oil consumed varied and is expressed differently among studies: 12 to 30 ml of coconut oil/day (n = 5), as part of the amount of SFAs or total daily consumed fat (n = 1), a variation of 6 to 54.4 g/day (n = 5), or as part of the total caloric energy intake (15 to 21%) (n = 6). Coconut oil intake did not significantly decrease body weight (MD -0.24 kg, 95% CI -0.83 kg to 0.34 kg), waist circumference (MD -0.64 cm, 95% CI -1.69 cm to 0.41 cm), and % body fat (-0.10%, 95% CI -0.56% to 0.36%), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) (MD -1.67 mg/dL, 95% CI -6.93 to 3.59 mg/dL), and triglyceride (TG) levels (MD -0.24 mg/dL, 95% CI -5.52 to 5.04 mg/dL). However, coconut oil intake was associated with a small increase in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) (MD 3.28 mg/dL, 95% CI 0.66 to 5.90 mg/dL). Overall risk of bias was high, and certainty of evidence was very-low. Study limitations include the heterogeneity of intervention methods, in addition to small samples and short follow-ups, which undermine the effects of dietary intervention in metabolic parameters.

Conclusions

Coconut oil intake revealed no clinically relevant improvement in lipid profile and body composition compared to other oils/fats. Strategies to advise the public on the consumption of other oils, not coconut oil, due to proven cardiometabolic benefits should be implemented.

Registration

PROSPERO CRD42018081461.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12944-022-01685-z.

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

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

The Effect of Bariatric Surgery on Circulating Levels of Lipoprotein (a): A Meta-analysis

Background

Obesity, especially severe obesity, is associated with a higher risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) morbidity and mortality. Bariatric surgery is a durable and effective weight loss therapy for patients with severe obesity and weight-related comorbidities. Elevated plasma levels of lipoprotein (a) (Lp(a)) are causally associated with ASCVD. The aim of this meta-analysis was to analyze whether bariatric surgery is associated with Lp(a) concentrations.

Methods

A literature search in PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science was performed from inception to May 1st, 2021. A random-effects model and the generic inverse variance weighting method were used to compensate for the heterogeneity of studies in terms of study design, treatment duration, and the characteristics of the studied populations. A random-effects metaregression model was used to explore the association with an estimated effect size. Evaluation of funnel plot, Begg's rank correlation, and Egger's weighted regression tests were used to assess the presence of publication bias in the meta-analysis.

Results

Meta-analysis of 13 studies including 1551 patients showed a significant decrease of circulating Lp(a) after bariatric surgery (SMD: -0.438, 95% CI: -0.702, -0.174, p < 0.001, I²: 94.05%). The results of the metaregression did not indicate any significant association between the changes in Lp(a) and duration of follow-up after surgery, reduction in body mass index, or baseline Lp(a) concentration. The reduction in circulating Lp(a) was robust in the leave-one-out sensitivity analysis.

Conclusion

Bariatric surgery significantly decreases circulating Lp(a) concentrations. This decrease may have a positive effect on ASCVD in obese patients.

Importance of Coagulation Factors as Critical Components of Premature Cardiovascular Disease in Familial Hypercholesterolemia

For almost a century, familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) has been considered a serious disease, causing atherosclerosis, cardiovascular disease, and ischemic stroke. Closely related to this is the widespread acceptance that its cause is greatly increased low-density-lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C). However, numerous observations and experiments in this field are in conflict with Bradford Hill’s criteria for causality. For instance, those with FH demonstrate no association between LDL-C and the degree of atherosclerosis; coronary artery calcium (CAC) shows no or an inverse association with LDL-C, and on average, the life span of those with FH is about the same as the surrounding population. Furthermore, no controlled, randomized cholesterol-lowering trial restricted to those with FH has demonstrated a positive outcome. On the other hand, a number of studies suggest that increased thrombogenic factors—either procoagulant or those that lead to high platelet reactivity—may be the primary risk factors in FH. Those individuals who die prematurely have either higher lipoprotein (a) (Lp(a)), higher factor VIII and/or higher fibrinogen compared with those with a normal lifespan, whereas their LDL-C does not differ. Conclusions: Many observational and experimental studies have demonstrated that high LDL-C cannot be the cause of premature cardiovascular mortality among people with FH. The number who die early is also much smaller than expected. Apparently, some individuals with FH may have inherited other, more important risk factors than a high LDL-C. In accordance with this, our review has shown that increased coagulation factors are the commonest cause, but there may be other ones as well.

Non-genetic influences on lipoprotein(a) concentrations

An elevated level of lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a genetically regulated, independent, causal risk factor for cardiovascular disease. However, the extensive variability in Lp(a) levels between individuals and population groups cannot be fully explained by genetic factors, emphasizing a potential role for non-genetic factors. In this review, we provide an overview of current evidence on non-genetic factors influencing Lp(a) levels with a particular focus on diet, physical activity, hormones and certain pathological conditions. Findings from randomized controlled clinical trials show that diets lower in saturated fats modestly influence Lp(a) levels and often in the opposing direction to LDL cholesterol. Results from studies on physical activity/exercise have been inconsistent, ranging from no to minimal or moderate change in Lp(a) levels, potentially modulated by age and the type, intensity, and duration of exercise modality. Hormone replacement therapy (HRT) in postmenopausal women lowers Lp(a) levels with oral being more effective than transdermal estradiol; the type of HRT, dose of estrogen and addition of progestogen do not modify the Lp(a)-lowering effect of HRT. Kidney diseases result in marked elevations in Lp(a) levels, albeit dependent on disease stages, dialysis modalities and apolipoprotein(a) phenotypes. In contrast, Lp(a) levels are reduced in liver diseases in parallel with the disease progression, although population studies have yielded conflicting results on the associations between Lp(a) levels and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Overall, current evidence supports a role for diet, hormones and related conditions, and liver and kidney diseases in modifying Lp(a) levels.

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

Importance

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

Observations

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

Conclusions and Relevance

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

Value of repeated measurements of lipoprotein (a) to assess cardiovascular risk: a retrospective study

Background: High plasma concentrations of lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] are associated with an increased cardiovascular risk. Current guidelines recommend measurement of only a single Lp(a) in an individual's lifetime under specific circumstances to improve cardiovascular risk prediction. Accordingly, the question raised is the number of false positives and negatives missed through only a single measurement.Methods: All Lp(a) measurements between 2004 and March 2021 were retrieved from the laboratory database of the Erasme hospital. Only patients with repeated measurement were included. The first and subsequent Lp(a) measurement were compared. Two different cohorts were studied as a result of a change in Lp(a) determination methodology (n = 2049 and n = 309, respectively). The effects of a third Lp(a) measurement were assessed through binary analyses (n = 678). The 180 mg/dl (430 nmol/L) threshold recommended in the ESC guidelines was assessed first. Analysis was repeated for 100, 70 and 50 mg/dl thresholds of raised Lp(a) levels.Results: A low rate of false negatives (0.8%-1%) and false positives (0.6-0.3%) were revealed with two Lp(a) measurements. There was no difference in regards to the divergent Lp(a) thresholds nor the measurement of Lp(a) on two or three occasions.Conclusion: The present study showed Lp(a) determination to be reproducible. A single measurement is sufficient to assess if a patient exceeds various cut-off values of elevated Lp(a) levels.

Lipoprotein(a): A Genetically Determined, Causal, and Prevalent Risk Factor for Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

High levels of lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)], an apoB100-containing lipoprotein, are an independent and causal risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases through mechanisms associated with increased atherogenesis, inflammation, and thrombosis. Lp(a) is predominantly a monogenic cardiovascular risk determinant, with ≈70% to ≥90% of interindividual heterogeneity in levels being genetically determined. The 2 major protein components of Lp(a) particles are apoB100 and apolipoprotein(a). Lp(a) remains a risk factor for cardiovascular disease development even in the setting of effective reduction of plasma low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and apoB100. Despite its demonstrated contribution to atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease burden, we presently lack standardization and harmonization of assays, universal guidelines for diagnosing and providing risk assessment, and targeted treatments to lower Lp(a). There is a clinical need to understand the genetic and biological basis for variation in Lp(a) levels and its relationship to disease in different ancestry groups. This scientific statement capitalizes on the expertise of a diverse basic science and clinical workgroup to highlight the history, biology, pathophysiology, and emerging clinical evidence in the Lp(a) field. Herein, we address key knowledge gaps and future directions required to mitigate the atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk attributable to elevated Lp(a) levels.

Effects of a low-carbohydrate diet on insulin-resistant dyslipoproteinemia-a randomized controlled feeding trial

BACKGROUND

Carbohydrate restriction shows promise for diabetes, but concerns regarding high saturated fat content of low-carbohydrate diets limit widespread adoption.

OBJECTIVES

This preplanned ancillary study aimed to determine how diets varying widely in carbohydrate and saturated fat affect cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors during weight-loss maintenance.

METHODS

After 10-14% weight loss on a run-in diet, 164 participants (70% female; BMI = 32.4 ± 4.8 kg/m2) were randomly assigned to 3 weight-loss maintenance diets for 20 wk. The prepared diets contained 20% protein and differed 3-fold in carbohydrate (Carb) and saturated fat as a proportion of energy (Low-Carb: 20% carbohydrate, 21% saturated fat; Moderate-Carb: 40%, 14%; High-Carb: 60%, 7%). Fasting plasma samples were collected prerandomization and at 20 wk. Lipoprotein insulin resistance (LPIR) score was calculated from triglyceride-rich, high-density, and low-density lipoprotein particle (TRL-P, HDL-P, LDL-P) sizes and subfraction concentrations (large/very large TRL-P, large HDL-P, small LDL-P). Other outcomes included lipoprotein(a), triglycerides, HDL cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, adiponectin, and inflammatory markers. Repeated measures ANOVA was used for intention-to-treat analysis.

RESULTS

Retention was 90%. Mean change in LPIR (scale 0-100) differed by diet in a dose-dependent fashion: Low-Carb (-5.3; 95% CI: -9.2, -1.5), Moderate-Carb (-0.02; 95% CI: -4.1, 4.1), High-Carb (3.6; 95% CI: -0.6, 7.7), P = 0.009. Low-Carb also favorably affected lipoprotein(a) [-14.7% (95% CI: -19.5, -9.5), -2.1 (95% CI: -8.2, 4.3), and 0.2 (95% CI: -6.0, 6.8), respectively; P = 0.0005], triglycerides, HDL cholesterol, large/very large TRL-P, large HDL-P, and adiponectin. LDL cholesterol, LDL-P, and inflammatory markers did not differ by diet.

CONCLUSIONS

A low-carbohydrate diet, high in saturated fat, improved insulin-resistant dyslipoproteinemia and lipoprotein(a), without adverse effect on LDL cholesterol. Carbohydrate restriction might lower CVD risk independently of body weight, a possibility that warrants study in major multicentered trials powered on hard outcomes. The registry is available through ClinicialTrials.gov: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02068885.

Long-term fasting improves lipoprotein-associated atherogenic risk in humans

Purpose

Dyslipidemia is a major health concern associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular mortality. Long-term fasting (LF) has been shown to improve plasma lipid profile. We performed an in-depth investigation of lipoprotein composition.

Methods

This observational study included 40 volunteers (50% men, aged 32–65 years), who underwent a medically supervised fast of 14 days (250 kcal/day). Changes in lipid and lipoprotein levels, as well as in lipoprotein subclasses and particles, were measured by ultracentrifugation and nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) at baseline, and after 7 and 14 fasting days.

Results

The largest changes were found after 14 fasting days. There were significant reductions in triglycerides (TG, − 0.35 ± 0.1 mmol/L), very low-density lipoprotein (VLDL)-TG (− 0.46 ± 0.08 mmol/L), VLDL-cholesterol (VLDL-C, − 0.16 ± 0.03 mmol/L) and low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-C (− 0.72 ± 0.14 mmol/L). Analysis of LDL subclasses showed a significant decrease in LDL1-C (− 0.16 ± 0.05 mmol/L), LDL2-C (− 0.30 ± 0.06 mmol/L) and LDL3-C (− 0.27 ± 0.05 mmol/L). NMR spectroscopy showed a significant reduction in large VLDL particles (− 5.18 ± 1.26 nmol/L), as well as large (− 244.13 ± 39.45 nmol/L) and small LDL particles (− 38.45 ± 44.04 nmol/L). A significant decrease in high-density lipoprotein (HDL)-C (− 0.16 ± 0.04 mmol/L) was observed. By contrast, the concentration in large HDL particles was significantly raised. Apolipoprotein A1 decreased significantly whereas apolipoprotein B, lipoprotein(a), fibrinogen and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein were unchanged.

Conclusion

Our results suggest that LF improves lipoprotein levels and lipoprotein subclasses and ameliorates the lipoprotein-associated atherogenic risk profile, suggesting a reduction in the cardiovascular risk linked to dyslipidemia.

Trial Registration

Study registration number: DRKS-ID: DRKS00010111 Date of registration: 03/06/2016 “retrospectively registered”.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00394-021-02578-0.

Evolution and Outcomes of Premature Coronary Artery Disease

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this review is to explore the evolution and outcomes of premature coronary artery disease (PCAD) while reviewing strategies for effective screening of those at high risk for developing this disease.

RECENT FINDINGS

Premature coronary artery disease (PCAD) affects a population of patients not typically identified as high risk by current risk stratification guidelines or traditional risk calculation tools. Not only does PCAD represent a large proportion of overall cardiovascular disease, it also afflicts a population in which the rate of mortality from cardiovascular disease has plateaued despite an overall declining population-wide cardiovascular mortality rate. There is ample opportunity for behavioral change strategies, screening tools, adapted imaging modalities, and precision pharmacotherapies to be more precisely targeted toward those at highest risk for premature coronary artery disease. Premature coronary artery disease (PCAD) is pervasive and not frequently represented within contemporary risk calculation models. Providers should pursue proactive screening and aggressive risk factor modification and deploy appropriate preventative therapies in caring for younger populations.

Does a ketogenic diet lower a very high Lp(a)? A striking experiment in a male physician

The level of lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)), an important cardiovascular risk factor, is considered to be genetically determined. I am a 55-year-old male physician specialised in preventive medicine and a hobby triathlete with a body mass index of 24.9 kg/m² and a maximum oxygen consumption (VO₂max) of ~50 mL/(kg×min), with an average of 7-10 hours of exercise per week. I discovered my own Lp(a) at 92-97 mg/dL in 2004 and measured a maximum Lp(a) of 108 mg/dL in 2013. Surprisingly, I observed a much lower Lp(a) of 65 mg/dL in 2018. This happened after I had adopted a very-low-carb ketogenic diet for long-term endurance exercise. My n=1 experiment in July 2020 demonstrated an increase in Lp(a) back to 101 mg/dL on a very high-carb diet within 2 weeks, and a drop back to 74 mg/dL after 3 weeks on the ketogenic diet afterwards. The observed large changes in my Lp(a) were thus reproducible by a change in carbohydrate consumption and might have clinical relevance for patients as well as researchers in the field of Lp(a).