Metabolism of Lp(a): assembly and excretion

Lp(a) and the Risk for Cardiovascular Disease: Focus on the Lp(a) Paradox in Diabetes Mellitus

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is one of the strongest causal risk factors of atherosclerotic disease. It is rich in cholesteryl ester and composed of apolipoprotein B and apo(a). Plasma Lp(a) levels are determined by apo(a) transcriptional activity driven by a direct repeat (DR) response element in the apo(a) promoter under the control of (HNF)4α Farnesoid-X receptor (FXR) ligands play a key role in the downregulation of APOA expression. In vitro studies on the catabolism of Lp(a) have revealed that Lp(a) binds to several specific lipoprotein receptors; however, their in vivo role remains elusive. There are more than 1000 publications on the role of diabetes mellitus (DM) in Lp(a) metabolism; however, the data is often inconsistent and confusing. In patients suffering from Type-I diabetes mellitus (T1DM), provided they are metabolically well-controlled, Lp(a) plasma concentrations are directly comparable to healthy individuals. In contrast, there exists a paradox in T2DM patients, as many of these patients have reduced Lp(a) levels; however, they are still at an increased cardiovascular risk. The Lp(a) lowering mechanism observed in T2DM patients is most probably caused by mutations in the mature-onset diabetes of the young (MODY) gene and possibly other polymorphisms in key transcription factors of the apolipoprotein (a) gene (APOA).

Lp(a) and the Risk for Cardiovascular Disease: Focus on the Lp(a) Paradox in Diabetes Mellitus

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is one of the strongest causal risk factors of atherosclerotic disease. It is rich in cholesteryl ester and composed of apolipoprotein B and apo(a). Plasma Lp(a) levels are determined by apo(a) transcriptional activity driven by a direct repeat (DR) response element in the apo(a) promoter under the control of (HNF)4α Farnesoid-X receptor (FXR) ligands play a key role in the downregulation of APOA expression. In vitro studies on the catabolism of Lp(a) have revealed that Lp(a) binds to several specific lipoprotein receptors; however, their in vivo role remains elusive. There are more than 1000 publications on the role of diabetes mellitus (DM) in Lp(a) metabolism; however, the data is often inconsistent and confusing. In patients suffering from Type-I diabetes mellitus (T1DM), provided they are metabolically well-controlled, Lp(a) plasma concentrations are directly comparable to healthy individuals. In contrast, there exists a paradox in T2DM patients, as many of these patients have reduced Lp(a) levels; however, they are still at an increased cardiovascular risk. The Lp(a) lowering mechanism observed in T2DM patients is most probably caused by mutations in the mature-onset diabetes of the young (MODY) gene and possibly other polymorphisms in key transcription factors of the apolipoprotein (a) gene (APOA).

Lp(a) and the Risk for Cardiovascular Disease: Focus on the Lp(a) Paradox in Diabetes Mellitus

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is one of the strongest causal risk factors of atherosclerotic disease. It is rich in cholesteryl ester and composed of apolipoprotein B and apo(a). Plasma Lp(a) levels are determined by apo(a) transcriptional activity driven by a direct repeat (DR) response element in the apo(a) promoter under the control of (HNF)4α Farnesoid-X receptor (FXR) ligands play a key role in the downregulation of APOA expression. In vitro studies on the catabolism of Lp(a) have revealed that Lp(a) binds to several specific lipoprotein receptors; however, their in vivo role remains elusive. There are more than 1000 publications on the role of diabetes mellitus (DM) in Lp(a) metabolism; however, the data is often inconsistent and confusing. In patients suffering from Type-I diabetes mellitus (T1DM), provided they are metabolically well-controlled, Lp(a) plasma concentrations are directly comparable to healthy individuals. In contrast, there exists a paradox in T2DM patients, as many of these patients have reduced Lp(a) levels; however, they are still at an increased cardiovascular risk. The Lp(a) lowering mechanism observed in T2DM patients is most probably caused by mutations in the mature-onset diabetes of the young (MODY) gene and possibly other polymorphisms in key transcription factors of the apolipoprotein (a) gene (APOA).

Relation of Serum Lipoprotein(a) Levels to Lipoprotein and Apolipoprotein Profiles and Atherosclerotic Diseases in Japanese Patients with Heterozygous Familial Hypercholesterolemia: Familial Hypercholesterolemia Expert Forum (FAME) Study

Aims: Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a plasma lipoprotein consisting of a low-density lipoprotein (LDL)–like particle with apolipoprotein (Apo)(a), attached via a disulfide bond to Apo B100. Previous studies have shown that high Lp(a) levels are associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease in patients with familial hypercholesterolemia (FH). To date, limited data are available as to distribution of Lp(a) in FH and associations of Lp(a) with other lipid profiles and cardiovascular disease. Our study aimed to investigate serum Lp(a) levels in relation to other lipid profiles and clinical conditions in the national largest-ever cohort of Japanese FH patients.

Methods: This study is a secondary analysis of the Familial Hypercholesterolemia Expert Forum (FAME) Study that includes a Japanese nationwide cohort of FH patients. In 399 patients under treatment for heterozygous FH who had a baseline measurement of serum Lp(a), the present study examined the distribution of Lp(a) levels and associations of Lp(a) with other lipid profiles and clinical conditions including coronary artery disease (CAD).

Results: The distribution of Lp(a) was skewed to the right with a median of 20.8 mg/dL, showing a log-normal distribution. Serum Apo B and Apo E levels were positively associated with Lp(a) levels. Age-adjusted mean of Apo B was 8.77 mg/dL higher and that of Apo E was 0.39 mg/dL higher in the highest category (40+ mg/dL) of Lp(a) than in the lowest category (＜20 mg/dL). LDL-C levels did not show such an association with Lp(a) levels. A tendency towards a positive relationship between Lp(a) and prevalent CAD was observed in men.

Conclusion: Our study demonstrated a distribution pattern of Lp(a) in Japanese FH patients and positive relationships of Lp(a) with Apo B and Apo E levels.

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.

Lipoprotein (a): a historical appraisal

Initially, lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] was believed to be a genetic variant of lipoprotein (Lp)-B. Because its lipid moiety is almost identical to LDL, Lp(a) has been deliberately considered to be highly atherogenic. Lp(a) was detected in 1963 by Kare Berg, and individuals who were positive for this factor were called Lpa⁺ Lpa⁺ individuals were found more frequently in patients with coronary heart disease than in controls. After the introduction of quantitative methods for monitoring of Lp(a), it became apparent that Lp(a), in fact, is present in all individuals, yet to a greatly variable extent. The genetics of Lp(a) had been a mystery for a long time until Gerd Utermann discovered that apo(a) is expressed by a variety of alleles, giving rise to a unique size heterogeneity. This size heterogeneity, as well as countless mutations, is responsible for the great variability in plasma Lp(a) concentrations. Initially, we proposed to evaluate the risk of myocardial infarction at a cut-off for Lp(a) of 30-50 mg/dl, a value that still is adopted in numerous epidemiological studies. Due to new therapies that lower Lp(a) levels, there is renewed interest and still rising research activity in Lp(a). Despite all these activities, numerous gaps exist in our knowledge, especially as far as the function and metabolism of this fascinating Lp are concerned.

Healthy dietary interventions and lipoprotein (a) plasma levels: results from the Omni Heart Trial

BACKGROUND

Increased lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] levels are associated with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Studies of dietary interventions on changes in Lp(a) are sparse. We aimed to compare the effects of three healthy dietary interventions differing in macronutrient content on Lp(a) concentration.

METHODS

Secondary analysis of a randomized, 3-period crossover feeding study including 155 (89 blacks; 66 whites) individuals. Participants were given DASH-type healthy diets rich in carbohydrates [Carb], in protein [Prot] or in unsaturated fat [Unsat Fat] for 6 weeks each. Plasma Lp(a) concentration was assessed at baseline and after each diet.

RESULTS

Compared to baseline, all interventional diets increased mean Lp(a) by 2 to 5 mg/dl. Unsat Fat increased Lp(a) less than Prot with a difference of 1.0 mg/dl (95% CI, -0.5, 2.5; p = 0.196) in whites and 3.7 mg/dl (95% CI, 2.4, 5.0; p < 0.001) in blacks (p-value between races = 0.008); Unsat Fat increased Lp(a) less than Carb with a difference of -0.6 mg/dl, 95% CI, -2.1, 0.9; p = 0.441) in whites and -1.5 mg/dl (95% CI, -0.2, -2.8; p = 0.021) in blacks (p-value between races = 0.354). Prot increased Lp(a) more than Carb with a difference of 0.4 mg/dl (95% CI, -1.1, 1.9; p = 0.597) in whites and 2.2 mg/dl (95%CI, 0.9, 3.5; p = 0.001) in blacks (p-value between races = 0.082).

CONCLUSION

Diets high in unsaturated fat increased Lp(a) levels less than diets rich in carbohydrate or protein with greater changes in blacks than whites. Our results suggest that substitutions with dietary mono- and polyunsaturated fatty acids in healthy diets may be preferable over protein or carbohydrates with regards to Lp(a).

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00051350.

Quo vadis haemapheresis. Current developments in haemapheresis

The techniques of haemapheresis originated in the development of centrifugal devices separating cells from plasma and later on plasma from cells. Subsequently membrane filtration was developed allowing for plasma-cell separation. The unspecificity of therapeutic plasma exchange led to the development of secondary plasma separation technologies being specific, semi-selective or selective such as adsorption, filtration or precipitation. In contrast on-line differential separation of cells is still under development. Whereas erythrocytapheresis, granulocytapheresis, lymphocytapheresis and stem cell apheresis are technically advanced, monocytapheresis may need further improvement. Also, indications such as erythrocytapheresis for the treatment of polycythaemia vera or photopheresis though being clinically effective and of considerable importance for an appropriate disease control are to some extent under debate as being either too costly or without sufficient understanding of the mechanism. Other forms of cell therapy are under development. Rheohaemapheresis as the most advanced technology of extracorporeal haemorheotherapy is a rapidly developing approach contributing to the treatment of microcirculatory diseases and tissue repair. Whereas the control of a considerable number of (auto-) antibody mediated diseases is beyond discussion, the indication of apheresis therapy for immune complex mediated diseases is quite often still under debate. Detoxification for artificial liver support advanced considerably during the last years, whereas conclusions on the efficacy of septicaemia treatment are debatable indeed. LDL-apheresis initiated in 1981 as immune apheresis is well established since 24 years, other semi-selective or unspecific procedures, allowing for the elimination of LDL-cholesterol among other plasma components are also being used. Correspondingly Lp(a) apheresis is available as a specific, highly efficient elimination procedure superior to techniques which also eliminate Lp(a). Quality control systems, more economical technologies as for instance by increasing automation, influencing the over-interpretation of evidence based medicine especially in patients with rare diseases without treatment alternative, more insight into the need of controlled clinical trials or alternatively improved diagnostic procedures are among others tools ways to expand the application of haemapheresis so far applied in cardiology, dermatology, haematology, immunology, nephrology, neurology, ophthalmology, otology, paediatrics, rheumatology, surgery and transfusion medicine.

Lack of genetic linkage evidence for a trans-acting factor having a large effect on plasma lipoprotein[a] levels in African Americans

The distribution of plasma lipoprotein[a] (Lp[a]) concentrations, a risk factor for cardiovascular disease, varies greatly among racial groups, with African Americans having values that are shifted toward higher levels than those of whites. The underlying cause of this heterogeneity is unknown, but a role for "trans-acting" factors has been hypothesized. This study used genetic linkage analysis to localize genetic factors influencing Lp[a] levels in African Americans that were absent in other populations; linkage results were analyzed separately in non-Hispanic whites, Hispanic whites, and African Americans. As expected, all three samples showed highly significant linkage at the approximate location of the lysophosphatidic acid locus. The white populations also independently had regions of significant linkage on chromosome 19 (LOD 3.80) and suggestive linkage on chromosomes 12 (LOD 1.60), 14 (LOD 2.56), and 19 (LOD 2.52). No linkage evidence was found to support the hypothesis of another single gene with large effects specifically segregating in African Americans that may account for their elevated Lp[a] levels.

A more detailed fatty acid composition of human lipoprotein(a)--a comparison with low density lipoprotein

Lipoprotein(a)'s (Lp(a)'s) fatty acid composition is partially known for the cholesteryl ester (CE), triglyceride (TG) and total phospholipid (PL) fractions. Individual PLs' fatty acids are unknown. This study sought to confirm and extend existing data and elucidate the individual PLs of Lp(a). For Lp(a) versus LDL, the mole percentage saturated fatty acids comprised 11.3+/-1.3 versus 16.8+/-1.2 (CE) (P<0.05), 43.4+/-5.2 versus 39.2+/-4.0 (TG) (P<0.05), 55.7+/-6.3 versus 54.7+/-5.9 (PL) (P>0.05), 51.9+/-3.5 versus 50.2+/-4.2 (choline-containing phospholipids (PC)) (P>0.05), 40.2+/-4.6 versus 43.1+/-3.9 (ethanolamine-containing phospholipids (PE)) (P>0.05), 73.2+/-7.6 versus 81.2+/-8.2 (sphingomyelin (SPH)) (P<0.05). Linoleic acid was CE's major fatty acid and while palmitic acid was the major fatty acid in all other fractions except PE.

Functional approach to investigate Lp(a) in ischaemic heart and cerebral diseases

BACKGROUND

Lp(a), a major cardiovascular risk factor, contains a specific apolipoprotein, apo(a), which by virtue of structural homology with plasminogen inhibits the formation of plasmin, the fibrinolytic enzyme. A number of clinical reports support the role of Lp(a) as a cardiovascular or cerebral risk factor, and experimental data suggest that it may contribute to atherothrombosis by inhibiting fibrinolysis.

DESIGN

A well-characterized model of a fibrin surface and an apo(a)-specific monoclonal antibody were used to develop a functional approach to detect pathogenic Lp(a). The assay is based on the competitive binding of Lp(a) and plasminogen for fibrin, and quantifies fibrin-bound Lp(a). High Lp(a) binding to fibrin is correlated with decreased plasmin formation. In a transversal case-control study we studied 248 individuals: 105 had a history of ischaemic cardiopathy (IC), 52 had cerebro-vascular disease (CVD) of thrombotic origin, and 91 were controls.

RESULTS

The remarkably high apo(a) fibrin-binding in CVD (0.268 +/- 0.15 nmol L-1) compared with IC (0.155 +/- 0.12 nmol L-1) suggests the existence of peculiar and poorly understood differences in pro- or anti-thrombotic mechanisms in either cerebral and/or coronary arteries.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results demonstrated that Lp(a) fibrin-binding and small Apo(a) isoforms are associated with athero-thrombotic disease.

Lipoprotein Lp(a) and atherothrombotic disease

High plasma concentrations of lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] are now considered a major risk factor for atherosclerosis and cardiovascular disease. This effect of Lp(a) may be related to its composite structure, a plasminogen-like inactive serine-proteinase, apoprotein (a) [apo(a)], which is disulfide-linked to the apoprotein B100 of an atherogenic low-density lipoprotein (LDL) particle. Apo(a) contains, in addition to the protease region and a copy of kringle 5 of plasminogen, a variable number of copies of plasminogen-like kringle 4, giving rise to a series of isoforms. This structural homology endows Lp(a) with the capacity to bind to fibrin and to membrane proteins of endothelial cells and monocytes, and thereby inhibits binding of plasminogen and plasmin formation. This mechanism favors fibrin and cholesterol deposition at sites of vascular injury and impairs activation of transforming growth factor-beta (TGF-beta) that may result in migration and proliferation of smooth muscle cells into the vascular intima. It is currently accepted that this effect of Lp(a) is linked to its concentration in plasma, and an inverse relationship between apo(a) isoform size and Lp(a) concentrations that is under genetic control has been documented. Recently, it has been shown that inhibition of plasminogen binding to fibrin by apo(a) from homozygous subjects is also inversely associated with isoform size. These findings suggest that the structural polymorphism of apo(a) is not only inversely related to the plasma concentration of Lp(a), but also to a functional heterogeneity of apo(a) isoforms. Based on these pathophysiological findings, it can be proposed that the predictive value of Lp(a) as a risk factor for vascular occlusive disease in heterozygous subjects would depend on the relative concentration of the isoform with the highest affinity for fibrin.

Dietary and genetic interactions in the regulation of plasma lipoprotein(a)

Lipoprotein(a) is a plasma particle which is considered to be a risk factor for the development of coronary heart disease. Plasma levels of lipoprotein(a) are affected by different types of dietary fat and steroid hormones. Two regions upstream of the apolipoprotein(a) promoter have been isolated which could be the site of regulation of apolipoprotein(a) gene transcription.