Muvalaplin, an Oral Small Molecule Inhibitor of Lipoprotein(a) Formation: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Lipoprotein(a): Are we ready for large-scale clinical trials?

Cardiovascular diseases (CVD) are currently the most important disease threatening human health, which may be due to the high incidence of risk factors including hyperlipidemia. With the deepening of research on lipoprotein, lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] has been shown to be an independent risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases and calcified aortic valve stenosis and is now an unaddressed "residual risk" in current CVD management. Accurate measurement of Lp(a) concentration is the basis for diagnosis and treatment of high Lp(a). This review summarized the Lp(a) structure, discussed the current problems in clinical measurement of plasma Lp(a) concentration and the effects of existing lipid-lowering therapies on 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.

The Off-Treatment Effects of Olpasiran on Lipoprotein(a) Lowering: OCEAN(a)-DOSE Extension Period Results

BACKGROUND

Olpasiran, a small interfering RNA (siRNA), blocks lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) production by preventing translation of apolipoprotein(a) mRNA. In phase 2, higher doses of olpasiran every 12 weeks (Q12W) reduced circulating Lp(a) by >95%.

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to assess the timing of return of Lp(a) to baseline after discontinuation of olpasiran, as well as longer-term safety.

METHODS

OCEAN(a)-DOSE (Olpasiran Trials of Cardiovascular Events And LipoproteiN[a] Reduction-DOSE Finding Study) was a phase 2, dose-finding trial that enrolled 281 participants with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and Lp(a) >150 nmol/L to 1 of 4 active doses of olpasiran vs placebo (10 mg, 75 mg, 225 mg Q12W, or an exploratory dose of 225 mg Q24W given subcutaneously). The last dose of olpasiran was administered at week 36; after week 48, there was an extended off-treatment follow-up period for a minimum of 24 weeks.

RESULTS

A total of 276 (98.2%) participants entered the off-treatment follow-up period. The median study exposure (treatment combined with off-treatment phases) was 86 weeks (Q1-Q3: 79-99 weeks). For the 75 mg Q12W dose, the off-treatment placebo-adjusted mean percent change from baseline in Lp(a) was -76.2%, -53.0%, -44.0%, and -27.9% at 60, 72, 84, and 96 weeks, respectively (all P < 0.001). The respective off-treatment changes in Lp(a) for the 225 mg Q12W dose were -84.4%, -61.6%, -52.2%, and -36.4% (all P < 0.001). During the extension follow-up phase, no new safety concerns were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

Olpasiran is a potent siRNA with prolonged effects on Lp(a) lowering. Participants receiving doses ≥75 mg Q12W sustained a ∼40% to 50% reduction in Lp(a) levels close to 1 year after the last dose. (Olpasiran Trials of Cardiovascular Events And LipoproteiN[a] Reduction-DOSE Finding Study [OCEAN(a)-DOSE]; NCT04270760).

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.

Elderly patients with very high plasma lipoprotein(a) concentrations and few cardiovascular consequences: a case series

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is an atherogenic low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-like particle that is currently regarded as a non-modifiable risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. The number of patients detected with elevated Lp(a) concentrations has been increasing in recent years, although the implication of this finding is unclear for patients and physicians. We screened our lipid clinic database for patients aged >65 years with very high Lp(a) concentrations, which were defined as >230 nmol/L, and cardiovascular outcomes were assessed. The patients' (n = 16) mean (±standard deviation) age was 72.2 ± 7.1 years and the mean Lp(a) concentration was 313 ± 68 nmol/L. After a cumulative 129.0 patient-year follow-up (mean: 8.1 ± 4.2 years), the mean age was 80.3 ± 7.0 years. We observed a low baseline prevalence of cardiovascular events, with only two patients having a history of cardiovascular events. Furthermore, zero incident adverse cardiovascular events were recorded over the follow-up. Therefore, very high Lp(a) concentrations and disease-free old age are not mutually exclusive. Our aggregated clinical experience is that there is only a modest association between elevated Lp(a) concentrations and adverse outcomes. Nonetheless, we still advise treating modifiable risk factors in these patients.

Recent updates on therapeutic targeting of lipoprotein(a) with RNA interference

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

RNA interference (RNAi)-based therapies that target specific gene products have impacted clinical medicine with 16 FDA approved drugs. RNAi therapy focused on reducing plasma lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] levels are under evaluation.

RECENT FINDINGS

RNAi-based therapies have made significant progress over the past 2 decades and currently consist of antisense oligonucleotides (ASO) and small interfering RNA (siRNA). Chemical modification of the RNA backbone and conjugation of siRNA enables efficient gene silencing in hepatocytes allowing development of effective cholesterol lowering therapies. Multiple lines of evidence suggest a causative role for Lp(a) in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, and recent analyses indicate that Lp(a) is more atherogenic than low density lipoprotein- cholesterol (LDL-C). These findings have led to the 'Lp(a) hypothesis' that lowering Lp(a) may significantly improve cardiovascular outcomes. Four RNAi-based drugs have completed early phase clinical trials demonstrating >80% reduction in plasma Lp(a) levels. Phase 3 clinical trials examining clinical outcomes with these agents are currently underway.

SUMMARY

Currently, four RNAi-based drugs have been shown to be effective in significantly lowering plasma Lp(a) levels. Clinical outcome data from phase 3 trials will evaluate the Lp(a) hypothesis.

Lipoprotein(a) in the Year 2024: A Look Back and a Look Ahead

In fitting with the American Heart Association’s 100th anniversary of its founding and Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis and Vascular Biology organizing a Centennial Collection to celebrate this event, lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] celebrates its 61st birthday in November 2024. There has been substantial progress in understanding the biology and pathophysiology of Lp(a) in the last 6 decades, including its discovery as a unique β-lipoprotein containing the pathognomonic apolipoprotein(a) moiety covalently bound to apolipoprotein B-100, its independent monogenetic association with cardiovascular disease and calcific aortic valve disease, its increased content of pro-atherogenic and pro-inflammatory of oxidized phospholipids relative to other lipoproteins and the development of RNA therapeutics to lower plasma Lp(a) levels. The validation or refutation of the “Lp(a) hypothesis”, namely that lowering plasma Lp(a) will lead to clinical benefit, is ongoing in 3 clinical outcomes trials. This essay reviews the discovery of Lp(a), summarizes the seminal pathophysiological findings since its discovery, discusses ongoing clinical trials with novel drugs and approaches, and provides a look ahead to unanswered questions.

Associations of lipids and lipid-modifying drug target genes with atrial fibrillation risk based on genomic data

BACKGROUND

The causal associations of lipids and the drug target genes with atrial fibrillation (AF) risk remain obscure. We aimed to investigate the causal associations using genetic evidence.

METHODS

Mendelian randomization (MR) analyses were conducted using summary-level genome-wide association studies (GWASs) in European and East Asian populations. Lipid profiles (low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, triglyceride, and lipoprotein[a]) and lipid-modifying drug target genes (3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-CoA reductase, proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9, NPC1-like intracellular cholesterol transporter 1, apolipoprotein C3, angiopoietin-like 3, and lipoprotein[a]) were used as exposures. AF was used as an outcome. The inverse variance weighted method was applied as the primary method. Summary-data-based Mendelian randomization analyses were performed for further validation using expression quantitative trait loci data. Mediation analyses were conducted to explore the indirect effect of coronary heart disease.

RESULTS

In the European population, MR analyses demonstrated that elevated levels of lipoprotein(a) increased AF risk. Moreover, analyses focusing on drug targets revealed that the genetically proxied target gene LPA, which simulates the effects of drug intervention by reducing lipoprotein(a), exhibited an association with AF risk. This association was validated in independent datasets. There were no consistent and significant associations observed for other traits when analyzed in different datasets. This finding was also corroborated by Summary-data-based Mendelian randomization analyses between LPA and AF. Mediation analyses revealed that coronary heart disease plays a mediating role in this association. However, in the East Asian population, no statistically significant evidence was observed to support these associations.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provided genetic evidence that Lp(a) may be a causal factor for AF and that LPA may represent a promising pharmacological target for preventing AF in the European population.

Therapeutic Potential of Lipoprotein(a) Inhibitors

Increasing evidence has implicated lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] in the causality of atherosclerosis and calcific aortic stenosis. This has stimulated immense interest in developing novel approaches to integrating Lp(a) into the setting of cardiovascular prevention. Current guidelines advocate universal measurement of Lp(a) levels, with the potential to influence cardiovascular risk assessment and triage of higher-risk patients to use of more intensive preventive therapies. In parallel, considerable activity has been undertaken to develop novel therapeutics with the potential to achieve selective and substantial reductions in Lp(a) levels. Early studies of antisense oligonucleotides (e.g., mipomersen, pelacarsen), RNA interference (e.g., olpasiran, zerlasiran, lepodisiran) and small molecule inhibitors (e.g., muvalaplin) have demonstrated effective Lp(a) lowering and good tolerability. These agents are moving forward in clinical development, in order to determine whether Lp(a) lowering reduces cardiovascular risk. The results of these studies have the potential to transform our approach to the prevention of cardiovascular disease.

The importance of LDL-C lowering in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease prevention: Lower for longer is better

Cumulative exposure to low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) is a key driver of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk. An armamentarium of therapies to achieve robust and sustained reduction in LDL-C can reduce ASCVD risk. The gold standard for LDL-C assessment is ultracentrifugation but in routine clinical practice LDL-C is usually calculated and the most accurate calculation is the Martin/Hopkins equation. For primary prevention, consideration of estimated ASCVD risk frames decision making regarding use of statins and other therapies, and tools such as risk enhancing factors and coronary artery calcium enable tailoring of risk assessment and decision making. In patients with diabetes, lipid lowering therapy is recommended in most patients to reduce ASCVD risk with an opportunity to tailor therapy based on other risk factors. Patients with primary hypercholesterolemia and familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) with baseline LDL-C greater than or equal to 190 mg/dL are at elevated risk, and LDL-C lowering with high-intensity statin therapy is often combined with non-statin therapies to prevent ASCVD. Secondary prevention of ASCVD, including in patients with prior myocardial infarction or stroke, requires intensive lipid lowering therapy and lifestyle modification approaches. There is no established LDL-C level below which benefit ceases or safety concerns arise. When further LDL-C lowering is required beyond lifestyle modifications and statin therapy, additional medications include oral ezetimibe and bempedoic acid, or injectables such as PCSK9 monoclonal antibodies or siRNA therapy. A novel agent that acts independently of hepatic LDL receptors is evinacumab, which is approved for patients with homozygous FH. Other emerging agents are targeted at Lp(a) and CETP. In light of the expanding lipid treatment landscape, this manuscript reviews the importance of early, intensive, and sustained LDL-C-lowering for primary and secondary prevention of ASCVD.

The Role of Lipoprotein(a) in Peripheral Artery Disease

Lipoprotein(a) is a low-density-lipoprotein-like particle that consists of apolipoprotein(a) bound to apolipoprotein(b). It has emerged as an established causal risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, stroke, and aortic valve stenosis through multifactorial pathogenic mechanisms that include inflammation, atherogenesis, and thrombosis. Despite an estimated 20% of the global population having elevated lipoprotein(a) levels, testing remains underutilized due to poor awareness and a historical lack of effective and safe therapies. Although lipoprotein(a) has a strong association with coronary artery disease and cerebrovascular disease, its relationship with peripheral artery disease is less well established. In this article, we review the epidemiology, biology, and pathogenesis of lipoprotein(a) as it relates to peripheral artery disease. We also discuss emerging treatment options to help mitigate major adverse cardiac and limb events in this population.

Lipoprotein(a): Emerging insights and therapeutics

The strong association between lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease has led to considerations of Lp(a) being a potential target for mitigating residual cardiovascular risk. While approximately 20 % of the population has an Lp(a) level greater than 50 mg/dL, there are no currently available pharmacological lipid-lowering therapies that have demonstrated substantial reduction in Lp(a). Novel therapies to lower Lp(a) include antisense oligonucleotides and small-interfering ribonucleic acid molecules and have shown promising results in phase 2 trials. Phase 3 trials are currently underway and will test the causal relationship between Lp(a) and ASCVD and whether lowering Lp(a) reduces cardiovascular outcomes. In this review, we summarize emerging insights related to Lp(a)'s role as a risk-enhancing factor for ASCVD, association with calcific aortic stenosis, effects of existing therapies on Lp(a) levels, and variations amongst patient populations. The evolving therapeutic landscape of emerging therapeutics is further discussed.

High lipoprotein(a): Actionable strategies for risk assessment and mitigation

High levels of lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] are causal for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Lp(a) is the most prevalent inherited dyslipidemia and strongest genetic ASCVD risk factor. This risk persists in the presence of at target, guideline-recommended, LDL-C levels and adherence to lifestyle modifications. Epidemiological and genetic evidence supporting its causal role in ASCVD and calcific aortic stenosis continues to accumulate, although various facets regarding Lp(a) biology (genetics, pathophysiology, and expression across race/ethnic groups) are not yet fully understood. The evolving nature of clinical guidelines and consensus statements recommending universal measurements of Lp(a) and the scientific data supporting its role in multiple disease states reinforce the clinical merit to start population screening for Lp(a) now. There is a current gap in the implementation of recommendations for primary and secondary cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention in those with high Lp(a), in part due to a lack of protocols for management strategies. Importantly, targeted apolipoprotein(a) [apo(a)]-lowering therapies that reduce Lp(a) levels in patients with high Lp(a) are in phase 3 clinical development. This review focuses on the identification and clinical management of patients with high Lp(a). Specifically, we highlight the clinical value of measuring Lp(a) and its use in determining Lp(a)-associated CVD risk by providing actionable guidance, based on scientific knowledge, that can be utilized now to mitigate risk caused by high Lp(a).

Single Ascending and Multiple-Dose Trial of Zerlasiran, a Short Interfering RNA Targeting Lipoprotein(a): A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Lipoprotein(a) is a causal risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and calcific aortic stenosis, with no pharmacological treatments approved by regulatory authorities.

Objectives

To assess the safety and tolerability of zerlasiran, a short interfering RNA targeting hepatic synthesis of apolipoprotein(a), and effects on serum concentrations of lipoprotein(a).

Design, Setting, and Participants

Single- and multiple-dose study in healthy participants and patients with stable ASCVD, respectively, with lipoprotein(a) serum concentrations greater than 150 nmol/L, conducted at 7 research sites in the US, the Netherlands, UK, and Australia between November 18, 2020, and February 8, 2023, with last follow-up on August 23, 2023.

Interventions

Participants were randomized to receive (1) a single subcutaneous dose of placebo (n = 8), zerlasiran 300 mg (n = 6) or 600 mg (n = 6); or (2) 2 doses of placebo (n = 9), zerlasiran 200 mg (n = 9) at a 4-week interval or 300 mg (n = 9) or 450 mg (n = 9) at an 8-week interval.

Main Outcomes Measures

The primary outcome was safety and tolerability. Secondary outcomes included serum levels of zerlasiran and effects on lipoprotein(a) serum concentrations.

Results

Among 37 patients in the multiple-dose group (mean age, 56 [SD, 10.4] years; 15 [42%] women), 36 completed the trial. Among 14 participants with extended follow-up after single doses, 13 completed the trial. There were no serious adverse events. Median baseline lipoprotein(a) concentrations in the multiple-dose group were 288 (IQR, 199-352) nmol/L. Median changes in lipoprotein(a) concentration at 365 days after single doses were 14% (IQR, 13% to 15%) for the placebo group, -30% (IQR, -51% to -18%) for the 300 mg of zerlasiran group, and -29% (IQR, -39% to -7%) for the 600-mg dose group. After 2 doses, maximal median changes in lipoprotein(a) concentration were 19 (IQR, -17 to 28) nmol/L for the placebo group, -258 (IQR, -289 to -188) nmol/L for the 200 mg of zerlasiran group, -310 (IQR, -368 to -274) nmol/L for the 300-mg dose group, and -242 (IQR, -343 to -182) nmol/L for the 450-mg dose group, with maximal median percent change of 7% (IQR, -4% to 21%), -97% (IQR, -98% to -95%), -98% (IQR, -99% to -97%), and -99% (IQR, -99% to -98%), respectively, attenuating to 0.3% (IQR, -2% to 21%), -60% (IQR, -71% to -40%), -90% (IQR, -91% to -74%), and -89% (IQR, -91% to -76%) 201 days after administration.

Conclusions

Zerlasiran was well tolerated and reduced lipoprotein(a) concentrations with infrequent administration.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04606602.

Discovery of potent small-molecule inhibitors of lipoprotein(a) formation

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)), an independent, causal cardiovascular risk factor, is a lipoprotein particle that is formed by the interaction of a low-density lipoprotein (LDL) particle and apolipoprotein(a) (apo(a))1,2. Apo(a) first binds to lysine residues of apolipoprotein B-100 (apoB-100) on LDL through the Kringle IV (KIV) 7 and 8 domains, before a disulfide bond forms between apo(a) and apoB-100 to create Lp(a) (refs. 3-7). Here we show that the first step of Lp(a) formation can be inhibited through small-molecule interactions with apo(a) KIV7-8. We identify compounds that bind to apo(a) KIV7-8, and, through chemical optimization and further application of multivalency, we create compounds with subnanomolar potency that inhibit the formation of Lp(a). Oral doses of prototype compounds and a potent, multivalent disruptor, LY3473329 (muvalaplin), reduced the levels of Lp(a) in transgenic mice and in cynomolgus monkeys. Although multivalent molecules bind to the Kringle domains of rat plasminogen and reduce plasmin activity, species-selective differences in plasminogen sequences suggest that inhibitor molecules will reduce the levels of Lp(a), but not those of plasminogen, in humans. These data support the clinical development of LY3473329-which is already in phase 2 studies-as a potent and specific orally administered agent for reducing the levels of Lp(a).

A focused update to the 2019 NLA scientific statement on use of lipoprotein(a) in clinical practice

Since the 2019 National Lipid Association (NLA) Scientific Statement on Use of Lipoprotein(a) in Clinical Practice was issued, accumulating epidemiological data have clarified the relationship between lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] level and cardiovascular disease risk and risk reduction. Therefore, the NLA developed this focused update to guide clinicians in applying this emerging evidence in clinical practice. We now have sufficient evidence to support the recommendation to measure Lp(a) levels at least once in every adult for risk stratification. Individuals with Lp(a) levels <75 nmol/L (30 mg/dL) are considered low risk, individuals with Lp(a) levels ≥125 nmol/L (50 mg/dL) are considered high risk, and individuals with Lp(a) levels between 75 and 125 nmol/L (30-50 mg/dL) are at intermediate risk. Cascade screening of first-degree relatives of patients with elevated Lp(a) can identify additional individuals at risk who require intervention. Patients with elevated Lp(a) should receive early, more-intensive risk factor management, including lifestyle modification and lipid-lowering drug therapy in high-risk individuals, primarily to reduce low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved an indication for lipoprotein apheresis (which reduces both Lp(a) and LDL-C) in high-risk patients with familial hypercholesterolemia and documented coronary or peripheral artery disease whose Lp(a) level remains ≥60 mg/dL [∼150 nmol/L)] and LDL-C ≥ 100 mg/dL on maximally tolerated lipid-lowering therapy. Although Lp(a) is an established independent causal risk factor for cardiovascular disease, and despite the high prevalence of Lp(a) elevation (∼1 of 5 individuals), measurement rates are low, warranting improved screening strategies for cardiovascular disease prevention.

Clinical impact of genetic testing for lipid disorders

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Genetic testing is increasingly becoming a common consideration in the clinical approach of dyslipidemia patients. Advances in research in last decade and increased recognition of genetics in biological pathways modulating blood lipid levels created a gap between theoretical knowledge and its applicability in clinical practice. Therefore, it is very important to define the clinical justification of genetic testing in dyslipidemia patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

Clinical indications for genetic testing for most dyslipidemias are not precisely defined and there are no clearly established guideline recommendations. In patients with severe low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels, the genetic analysis can be used to guide diagnostic and therapeutic approach, while in severe hypertriglyceridemia (HTG), clinicians can rely on triglyceride level rather than a genotype along the treatment pathway. Genetic testing increases diagnostic accuracy and risk stratification, access and adherence to specialty therapies, and cost-effectiveness of cascade testing. A shared decision-making model between the provider and the patient is essential as patient values, preferences and clinical characteristics play a very strong role.

SUMMARY

Genetic testing for lipid disorders is currently underutilized in clinical practice. However, it should be selectively used, according to the type of dyslipidemia and when the benefits overcome costs.

All we need to know about lipoprotein(a)

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)], a genetically determined macromolecular complex, is independently and causally associated with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and calcific aortic stenosis via proposed proinflammatory, prothrombotic, and proatherogenic mechanisms. While Lp(a) measurement standardization issues are being resolved, several guidelines now support testing Lp(a) at least once in each adult's lifetime for ASCVD risk prediction which can foster implementation of more aggressive primary or secondary prevention therapies. Currently, there are several emerging targeted Lp(a) lowering therapies in active clinical investigation for safety and cardiovascular benefit among both primary and secondary prevention populations. First degree relatives of patients with high Lp(a) should be encouraged to undergo cascade screening. Primary prevention patients with high Lp(a) should consider obtaining a coronary calcium score for further risk estimation and to guide further ASCVD risk factor management including consideration of low dose aspirin therapy. Secondary prevention patients with high Lp(a) levels should consider adding PCSK9 inhibition to statin therapy.

The current status of lipoprotein (a) measurement in clinical biochemistry laboratories in the UK: Results of a 2021 national survey

BACKGROUND

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is now established as a causal risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD) and accurate laboratory measurement is of pivotal importance in reducing Lp(a) associated risk. The consensus statement by HEART UK in 2019 included recommendations to improve standardisation of clinical laboratory measurement and reporting of Lp(a).

METHODS

A 16 question, electronic audit survey was circulated to 190 accredited clinical biochemistry laboratories to assess the adoption of these recommendations in the UK.

RESULTS

Responses were received from 65 of 190 laboratories (34%). Only 5 (8%) did not offer Lp(a) measurement. Of those providing the test, 23% (n = 14) offered an in-house service (IHS), the remaining laboratories (77%; n = 46) used an external referral service (ERS). The majority (10 of 14 or 71%) of IHS laboratories responded with details of their method, stating whether it minimised sensitivity to the effect of Lp(a) isoform size and used calibrators certified for traceability to the WHO/IFCC reference material, however, only a minority ERS laboratories (13 of the 46 or 28%) were able to specify the method used by their referral laboratory. Of the laboratories who specified their reporting units, 6 of 10 IHS and 7 of 23 ERS laboratories reported in nmol/L. Among the 60 laboratories who responded, the HEART UK recommendations appear to have been adopted in full by only 3 IHS laboratories.

CONCLUSIONS

Further efforts are needed to standardise the measurement and reporting of Lp(a) so that results and interpretation are comparable across clinical biochemistry laboratories in the UK.

Association of Lipoprotein(a) with peri-coronary inflammation in persons with and without HIV infection

BACKGROUND

Persons with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) (PWH) have an increased risk of developing cardiovascular disease (CVD) compared to persons without HIV (PWoH). Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a known atherosclerotic risk factor in PWoH, but there are no studies investigating Lp(a) and peri-coronary inflammation.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether Lp(a) is associated with peri-coronary inflammation as assessed by the fat attenuation index (FAI) and activated monocytes and T lymphocytes in PWH and PWoH.

METHODS

We measured plasma levels of Lp(a) at study entry in 58 PWH and 21 PWoH without CVD and who had FAI measurements. Associations of Lp(a) with FAI values of the right coronary artery (RCA) and left anterior descending artery were evaluated using multivariable regression models adjusted for potential confounders. Correlations between Lp(a) levels and systemic inflammatory markers and immune cell subsets were examined.

RESULTS

Lp(a) was associated with greater peri-coronary inflammation among PWH compared to PWoH (β=1.73, P=0.019) in the RCA, in adjusted models. Significant correlations were observed with certain inflammatory markers (tumor necrosis factor receptor [TNFR]-I, b=0.295, P<0.001; TNFR-II, b=0.270, P=0.002; high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, b=0.195, P=0.028). Significant correlations were found between Lp(a) levels and several markers of monocyte activation: CD16 -CD163+ (b= -0.199, P=0.024), and CD16 -DR+ MFI (b= -0.179, P=0.042) and T cell subset CD38+CD4+ TEMRA (b= 0.177, P= 0.044).

CONCLUSIONS

Lp(a) was associated with greater peri-coronary inflammation in the RCA in PWH compared to PWoH, as well as with select systemic inflammatory markers and specific subsets of immune cells in peripheral circulation.

New targets and mechanisms of action for lipid-lowering and anti-inflammatory therapies in atherosclerosis: where does the field stand?

INTRODUCTION

Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide, despite widespread use of statins. There is a need to develop additional therapeutic strategies that will complement statins to achieve more effective reductions in cardiovascular risk.

AREAS COVERED

This review provides a comprehensive summary of current areas of therapeutic development targeting both lipid and inflammatory factors implicated in the pathogenesis of atherosclerosis. In addition to develop of novel approaches that will produce more effective lowering of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, clinical trials are currently evaluating the potential to target other atherogenic lipid parameters such as triglyceride-rich lipoproteins and Lp(a), in addition to promoting the biological properties of high-density lipoproteins. Targeting inflammation within the vascular wall has emerged as a new frontier in cardiovascular prevention, with early evidence that use of anti-inflammatory agents have the potential to reduce cardiovascular risk.

EXPERT OPINION

Clinical practice has an increasing array of therapeutic tools to achieve more effective lowering of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol for high-risk patients. In addition, clinical trials have the potential to deliver a range of additional agents to the clinic, that target alternative lipid and inflammatory mediators. This will permit the potential to personalize cardiovascular prevention.

Residual Cardiovascular Risk: Role of Remnants Cholesterol, Monocyte/HDL Ratio and Lipoprotein Ratios on Personalized Cardiovascular Prevention

Cardiovascular diseases represent the leading cause of death in the world and are subject to limitations in prevention strategies despite the use of very effective drugs. The concept of residual risk (RR) is intrinsically related to that of global risk of which it represents a very significant percentage. In the cardiovascular field, the term RR refers to the probability of incurring a major cardiovascular event, despite adequate control of the risk factors present in the individual patient. A significant portion of the RR in the cardiovascular field results from the underestimation of additional risk factors not subjected to adequate intervention such as, for example, triglyceride levels in patients treated for the presence of hypertension and/or hypercholesterolemia. The control of the RR therefore appears as an essential condition for the effective reduction of the global risk profile and is based on an integrated intervention that combines all the different prevention strategies derived from the available evidence and capable of interacting on the basis of a strengthening reciprocal between lifestyle and pharmacological and nutraceutical intervention methods.

Emerging therapies for refractory hypercholesterolemia: a narrative review

Refractory hypercholesterolemia (RH) is characterized by the failure of patients to achieve therapeutic targets for low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) despite receiving maximal tolerable doses of standard lipid-lowering treatments. It predominantly impacts individuals with familial hypercholesterolemia (FH), thereby elevating the risk of cardiovascular complications. The prevalence of RH is now recognized to be substantially greater than previously thought. This review provides a comprehensive insight into current and emerging therapies for RH patients, including groundbreaking genetic-based therapeutic approaches. The review places emphasis on the dependency of therapies on low-density lipoprotein receptors (LDLRs) and highlights the critical role of considering LDLR activity in RH patients for individualization of the treatment.

Novel Therapies for Lipoprotein(a): Update in Cardiovascular Risk Estimation and Treatment

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Lipoprotein(a) is an important causal risk factor for cardiovascular disease but currently no available medication effectively reduces lipoprotein(a). This review discusses recent findings regarding lipoprotein(a) as a causal risk factor and therapeutic target in cardiovascular disease, it reviews current clinical recommendations, and summarizes new lipoprotein(a) lowering drugs.

RECENT FINDINGS

Epidemiological and genetic studies have established lipoprotein(a) as a causal risk factor for cardiovascular disease and mortality. Guidelines worldwide now recommend lipoprotein(a) to be measured once in a lifetime, to offer patients with high lipoprotein(a) lifestyle advise and initiate other cardiovascular medications. Clinical trials including antisense oligonucleotides, small interfering RNAs, and an oral lipoprotein(a) inhibitor have shown great effect on lowering lipoprotein(a) with reductions up to 106%, without any major adverse effects. Recent clinical phase 1 and 2 trials show encouraging results and ongoing phase 3 trials will hopefully result in the introduction of specific lipoprotein(a) lowering drugs to lower the risk of cardiovascular disease.

Cholesterol-Lowering Strategies for Cardiovascular Disease Prevention: The Importance of Intensive Treatment and the Simplification of Medical Therapy

Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) are a leading global cause of mortality and are primarily driven by atherosclerotic coronary artery disease. Their pathogenesis involves multi-factorial mechanisms, among which low-density lipoprotein (LDL) plays a causative role. Recent ESC/EAS guidelines advocate for a shift toward new risk estimation algorithms that better emphasize non-fatal cardiovascular events, lifetime risk prediction, and tailored pharmacological approaches, including statin + ezetimibe and triple therapy, in specific cases. Intensive lipid-lowering therapy has been shown to be pivotal, especially in post-acute coronary events. Intracoronary imaging has revealed insights into the composition of plaque and demonstrated the significant regression that can be achieved through the use of statins such as rosuvastatin and atorvastatin. The positive effects of Proprotein Convertase Subtilisin/Kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors, particularly alirocumab and evolocumab, on plaque regression, have been demonstrated. Inclisiran, which targets PCSK9 gene expression, significantly reduces LDL cholesterol. The associated challenges include hesitancy to prescribe intensive regimens and limited treatment adherence, highlighting the need for pharmacological combinations to improve therapeutic outcomes.

Lipoprotein(a): from Causality to Treatment

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This paper reviews the evidence why lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is a causal risk factor for cardiovascular disease and how high Lp(a) concentrations should be managed now and with an outlook to the future.

REVIEW FINDINGS

No optimal and widely available animal models exist to study the causality of the association between Lp(a) and cardiovascular disease. This has been a major handicap for the entire field. However, genetic studies turned the page. Already in the early 1990s, the principle of Mendelian randomization studies was applied for the first time ever (even if they were not named so at that time). Genetic variants of the LPA gene such as the apolipoprotein(a) isoform size, the number and sum of kringle IV repeats and later single nucleotide polymorphisms are strongly associated with life-long exposure to high Lp(a) concentrations as well as cardiovascular outcomes. This evidence provided a basis for the development of specific Lp(a)-lowering drugs that are currently in clinical testing phase. Lp(a) is one of the most important genetically determined risk factors for cardiovascular disease. With the specific Lp(a)-lowering therapies, we might get tools to fight this common risk factor in case the outcome trials will be positive.

Consideration and Application of Lipoprotein(a) in the Risk Assessment of Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Risk in Adults

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]) is an low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-like particle in which apolipoprotein (apo) B is covalently bound to a plasminogen-like molecule called apo(a). A High level of Lp(a) has been demonstrated to be an independent, causal, and prevalent risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), as well as aortic valve disease, through mechanisms that promote atherogenesis, inflammation, and thrombosis. With reliable and accessible assays, Lp(a) level has been established to be associated linearly with the risk for ASCVD. The 2021 Canadian Cardiovascular Society Dyslipidemia Guidelines recommend measuring an Lp(a) level once in a person's lifetime as part of the initial lipid screening. The aim of this review is to provide an update and overview of the utility and application of Lp(a) level in the assessment and treatment of adults at risk for ASCVD, consistent with this guideline recommendation.

The 10 essential questions regarding lipoprotein(a)

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Lp(a) is one of the most atherogenic lipoproteins, and significant progress has been made to understand its pathophysiology over the last 20 years. There are now selective therapies in late-stage clinical trials to lower Lp(a). Yet there are many outstanding questions about Lp(a). This review outlines 10 of the most burning questions and tries to answer some of them.

RECENT FINDINGS

Antisense oligonucleotide (ASO) treatment is currently the most advanced therapy to lower plasma Lp(a) by 60-80%. There are, however, also two small molecule medications in early stage of development with similar efficacy.

SUMMARY

This review aims to answer important preclinical and clinical questions about the metabolism and physiological role of Lp(a) and also outlines possible therapeutic approaches with nutraceuticals, currently available lipid-lowering therapies and new medications. In addition, ways are illustrated to use Lp(a) as a marker to better predict cardiovascular risk.

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.

Residual cardiovascular risk: When should we treat it?

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) still being the most common cause of death in worldwide. In spite of development of new lipid-lowering therapies which optimize low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-c) levels, recurrence of CVD events implies addressing factors related with residual cardiovascular (CV) risk. The key determinants of residual CV risk include triglyceride-rich lipoproteins (TRLs) and remnant cholesterol (RC), lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] and inflammation including its biochemical markers such as high sensitivity C reactive protein (hs-CRP). On the other hand, unhealthy lifestyle habits, environmental pollution, residual thrombotic risk and the residual metabolic risk determined by obesity and type 2 diabetes (T2D) have a specific weight in the residual CV risk. New pharmacologic therapies and pathways are being explored such as inhibition of apolipoprotein C-III (apoC-III) and angiopoietin-related protein 3 (ANGPTL3) in order to explore if a reduction in TRLs and RC reduce CVD events. Therapeutic target of inflammation plays an attractive way to reduce the atherosclerotic process and to date, approved therapies as colchicine plays a beneficial effect in chronic inflammation and residual CV risk. Lp(a) constitutes one of the most residual CV risk factor due to linkage with CVD and aortic valve stenosis. New and hopeful treatments including antisense oligonucleotides (ASO) and small-interfering ribonucleic acid (siRNA) which interfere in LP(a) codification have been developed to achieve an adequate control in Lp(a) levels. This review points out the paradigms of residual CV risk, discus how we should manage their features and summarize the different therapies targeting each residual CV risk factor.

Relationship Between Lipoprotein(a), Renal Function Indicators, and Chronic Kidney Disease: Evidence From a Large Prospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) poses a significant global public health challenge. While lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]) has been established as a significant factor in cardiovascular disease, its connection to CKD risk remains a topic of debate. Existing evidence indicates diverse risks of kidney disease among individuals with various renal function indicators, even when within the normal range.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to investigate the joint associations between different renal function indicators and Lp(a) regarding the risks of incident CKD in the general population.

METHODS

The analysis involved a cohort of 329,415 participants without prior CKD who were enrolled in the UK Biobank between 2006 and 2010. The participants, with an average age of 56 (SD 8.1) years, included 154,298/329,415 (46.84%) males. At baseline, Lp(a) levels were measured using an immunoturbidimetric assay and classified into 2 groups: low (<75 nmol/L) and high (≥75 nmol/L). To assess participants' baseline renal function, we used the baseline urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio (UACR) and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). The relationship between Lp(a), renal function indicators, and the risk of CKD was evaluated using multivariable Cox regression models. These models were adjusted for various factors, including sociodemographic variables, lifestyle factors, comorbidities, and laboratory measures.

RESULTS

A total of 6003 incident CKD events were documented over a median follow-up period of 12.5 years. The association between elevated Lp(a) levels and CKD risk did not achieve statistical significance among all participants, with a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.05 and a 95% CI ranging from 0.98 to 1.13 (P=.16). However, a notable interaction was identified between Lp(a) and UACR in relation to CKD risk (P for interaction=.04), whereas no significant interaction was observed between Lp(a) and eGFR (P for interaction=.96). When compared with the reference group with low Lp(a) and low-normal UACR (<10 mg/g), the group with high Lp(a) and low-normal UACR exhibited a nonsignificant association with CKD risk (HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.90-1.08; P=.74). By contrast, both the low Lp(a) and high-normal UACR (≥10 mg/g) group (HR 1.16, 95% CI 1.08-1.24; P<.001) and the high Lp(a) and high-normal UACR group (HR 1.32, 95% CI 1.19-1.46; P<.001) demonstrated significant associations with increased CKD risks. In individuals with high-normal UACR, elevated Lp(a) was linked to a significant increase in CKD risk, with an HR of 1.14 and a 95% CI ranging from 1.03 to 1.26 (P=.01). Subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses consistently produced results that were largely in line with the main findings.

CONCLUSIONS

The analysis revealed a significant interaction between Lp(a) and UACR in relation to CKD risk. This implies that Lp(a) may act as a risk factor for CKD even when considering UACR. Our findings have the potential to provide valuable insights into the assessment and prevention of CKD, emphasizing the combined impact of Lp(a) and UACR from a public health perspective within the general population. This could contribute to enhancing public awareness regarding the management of Lp(a) for the prevention of CKD.

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.

Lifestyle and Lipoprotein(a) Levels: Does a Specific Counseling Make Sense?

Lipoprotein(Lp)(a) is a variant of low-density lipoprotein (LDL), bound to apolipoprotein B100, whose levels are associated with a significant increase in the risk of atherosclerosis-related cardiovascular events, but also to aortic stenosis and atrial fibrillation. Since plasma levels of Lp(a) are commonly considered resistant to lifestyle changes, we critically reviewed the available evidence on the effect of weight loss, dietary supplements, and physical activity on this risk factor. In our review, we observed that relevant body weight loss, a relatively high intake of saturated fatty acids, the consumption of red wine, and intense physical exercise seems to be associated with significantly lower plasma Lp(a) levels. On the contrary, foods rich in trans-unsaturated fatty acids are associated with increased Lp(a) levels. With regard to dietary supplements, coenzyme Q10, L-Carnitine, and flaxseed exert a mild but significant lowering effect on plasma Lp(a).

An LC-MS-based designated comparison method with similar performance to the Lp(a) reference measurement procedure to guide molar Lp(a) standardization

BACKGROUND

The 2022 consensus statement of the European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS) on lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) recognizes the role of Lp(a) as a relevant genetically determined risk factor and recommends its measurement at least once in an individual's lifetime. It also strongly urges that Lp(a) test results are expressed as apolipoprotein (a) (apo(a)) amount of substance in molar units and no longer in confounded Lp(a) mass units (mg/dL or mg/L). Therefore, IVD manufacturers should transition to molar units. A prerequisite for this transition is the availability of an Lp(a) Reference Measurement Procedure (RMP) that allows unequivocal molecular detection and quantification of apo(a) in Lp(a). To that end an ISO 17511:2020 compliant LC-MS based and IFCC-endorsed RMP has been established that targets proteotypic peptides of apolipoprotein(a) (apo(a)) in Lp(a). The RMP is laborious and requires highly skilled operators. To guide IVD-manufacturers of immunoassay-based Lp(a) test kits in the transition from mass to molar units, a Designated Comparison Method (DCM) has been developed and evaluated.

METHODS

To assess whether the DCM provides equivalent results compared to the RMP, the procedural designs were compared and the analytical performance of DCM and RMP were first evaluated in a head-to-head comparison. Subsequently, apo(a) was quantified in 153 human clinical serum samples. Both DCM and RMP were calibrated using external native calibrators that produce results traceable to SRM2B. Measurement uncertainty (MU) was checked against predefined allowable MU.

RESULTS

The major difference in the design of the DCM for apo(a) is the use of only one enzymatic digestion step. The analytical performance of the DCM and RMP for apo(a) is highly similar. In a direct method comparison, equivalent results were obtained with a median regression slope 0.997 of and a median bias of - 0.2 nmol/L (- 0.2%); the intermediate imprecision of the test results was within total allowable error (TEa) (CVa of 10.2% at 90 nmol/L).

CONCLUSIONS

The semi-automated, higher throughput, LC-MS-based method for Lp(a) meets the predefined analytical performance specifications and allowable MU and is hence applicable as a higher order Designated Comparison Method, which is ideally suited to guide IVD manufacturers in the transition from Lp(a) mass to molar units.

Lipoprotein (a) as a Biomarker for Cardiovascular Diseases and Potential New Therapies to Mitigate Risk

BACKGROUND

Lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] is a molecule that induces inflammation of the blood vessels, atherogenesis, valvular calcification, and thrombosis.

METHODS

We review the available evidence that suggests that high Lp(a) levels are associated with a persisting risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases despite optimization of established risk factors, including low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels.

OBSERVATIONS

Approximately a quarter of the world population have Lp(a) levels of >50 mg/dL (125 nmol/L), a level associated with elevated cardiovascular risk. Lifestyle modification, statins, and ezetimibe do not effectively lower Lp(a) levels, while proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK-9) inhibitors and niacin only lower Lp(a) levels modestly. We describe clinical studies suggesting that gene silencing therapeutics, such as small interfering RNA (siRNA) and antisense oligonucleotide targeting Lp(a), offer a targeted approach with the potential for safe and robust Lp(a)- lowering with only a few doses (3-4) per year. Prospective randomized phase 3 studies are ongoing to validate safety, effectiveness in improving hard clinical outcomes, and tolerability to assess these therapies.

CONCLUSION

Several emerging treatments with robust Lp(a)-lowering effects may significantly lower atherosclerotic cardiovascular risk.

Measuring lipoprotein(a) for cardiovascular disease prevention - in whom and when?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The aim of this study is to summarize major cardiovascular guideline recommendations on lipoprotein(a) and highlighting recent findings that emphasize how measuring lipoprotein(a) once in all adults is meaningful regardless of age, sex, comorbidities, or ethnicity.

RECENT FINDINGS

Many international guidelines now recommend once in a lifetime measurement of lipoprotein(a) in all adult individuals to facilitate accurate risk prediction. Lipoprotein(a)-lowering therapy to reduce cardiovascular disease is on the horizon, with results from the first phase 3 trial expected in 2025.

SUMMARY

Elevated lipoprotein(a) is an independent causal risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and aortic valve stenosis and measuring lipoprotein(a) once in all individuals regardless of age, sex, comorbidities, or ethnicity is meaningful to aid in risk stratification.

Estimating the Prevalence and Characteristics of Patients Potentially Eligible for Lipoprotein(a)-Lowering Therapies in a Real-World Setting

High lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) plasma levels are significantly associated with an increased risk of developing atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases (ASCVD). The aim of this analysis was to estimate the prevalence and characteristics of patients potentially eligible for Lp(a)-lowering therapies in a real-world setting (i.e., patients with ASCVD and Lp(a) levels > 70 mg/dL). For this reason, we pooled data from a large cohort of Italian outpatients (N = 5961; men: 2879, women: 3982) with dyslipidemia. A binary logistic regression analysis was used to determine the significant predictors of ASCVD in the cohort, which were age (Odds Ratio (OR): 1.158, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 1.114 to 1.203, p < 0.001), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol at entry (OR: 1.989, 95% CI: 1.080 to 1.198, p = 0.020) and Lp(a) (OR: 1.090, 95% CI: 1.074 to 1.107, p < 0.001). In our cohort, almost half of patients with ASCVD (44.7%) may be eligible to be treated with Lp(a)-lowering agents. Interestingly, patients who do not meet the treatment criteria despite high Lp(a) (50-70 mg/dL), respectively, account for 4.7% and 7.3% of those in primary and secondary ASCVD prevention. In conclusion, in our large cohort of outpatients with dyslipidemia, the prevalence of individuals with ASCVD and very high Lp(a) plasma levels is quite high, even with a conservative estimation.

Lepodisiran, an Extended-Duration Short Interfering RNA Targeting Lipoprotein(a): A Randomized Dose-Ascending Clinical Trial

Importance

Epidemiological and genetic data have implicated lipoprotein(a) as a potentially modifiable risk factor for atherosclerotic disease and aortic stenosis, but there are no approved pharmacological treatments.

Objectives

To assess the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and effects of lepodisiran on lipoprotein(a) concentrations after single doses of the drug; lepodisiran is a short interfering RNA directed at hepatic synthesis of apolipoprotein(a), an essential component necessary for assembly of lipoprotein(a) particles.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A single ascending-dose trial conducted at 5 clinical research sites in the US and Singapore that enrolled 48 adults without cardiovascular disease and with lipoprotein(a) serum concentrations of 75 nmol/L or greater (or ≥30 mg/dL) between November 18, 2020, and December 7, 2021; the last follow-up visit occurred on November 9, 2022.

Interventions

Participants were randomized to receive placebo or a single dose of lepodisiran (4 mg, 12 mg, 32 mg, 96 mg, 304 mg, or 608 mg) administered subcutaneously.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was the safety and tolerability of the single ascending doses of lepodisiran. The secondary outcomes included plasma levels of lepodisiran for 168 days after dose administration and changes in fasting lipoprotein(a) serum concentrations through a maximum follow-up of 336 days (48 weeks).

Results

Of the 48 participants enrolled (mean age, 46.8 [SD, 11.6] years; 35% were women), 1 serious adverse event occurred. The plasma concentrations of lepodisiran reached peak levels within 10.5 hours and were undetectable by 48 hours. The median baseline lipoprotein(a) concentration was 111 nmol/L (IQR, 78 to 134 nmol/L) in the placebo group, 78 nmol/L (IQR, 50 to 152 nmol/L) in the 4 mg of lepodisiran group, 97 nmol/L (IQR, 86 to 107 nmol/L) in the 12-mg dose group, 120 nmol/L (IQR, 110 to 188 nmol/L) in the 32-mg dose group, 167 nmol/L (IQR, 124 to 189 nmol/L) in the 96-mg dose group, 96 nmol/L (IQR, 72 to 132 nmol/L) in the 304-mg dose group, and 130 nmol/L (IQR, 87 to 151 nmol/L) in the 608-mg dose group. The maximal median change in lipoprotein(a) concentration was -5% (IQR, -16% to 11%) in the placebo group, -41% (IQR, -47% to -20%) in the 4 mg of lepodisiran group, -59% (IQR, -66% to -53%) in the 12-mg dose group, -76% (IQR, -76% to -75%) in the 32-mg dose group, -90% (IQR, -94% to -85%) in the 96-mg dose group, -96% (IQR, -98% to -95%) in the 304-mg dose group, and -97% (IQR, -98% to -96%) in the 608-mg dose group. At day 337, the median change in lipoprotein(a) concentration was -94% (IQR, -94% to -85%) in the 608 mg of lepodisiran group.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this phase 1 study of 48 participants with elevated lipoprotein(a) levels, lepodisiran was well tolerated and produced dose-dependent, long-duration reductions in serum lipoprotein(a) concentrations. The findings support further study of lepodisiran.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04914546.

Highlights of Cardiovascular Disease Prevention Studies Presented at the 2023 European Society of Cardiology Congress

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To summarize selected late-breaking science on cardiovascular (CV) disease prevention presented at the 2023 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) congress.

RECENT FINDINGS

The NATURE-PARADOX was a naturally randomized trial that used genetic data from the UK Biobank registry to create "cumulative exposure to low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C)" biomarker and evaluate its association with major CV events regardless of plasma LDL-C levels or age. Safety and efficacy data of inclisiran, a PCSK9-interfering mRNA (PCSK9i) administered subcutaneously twice annually, were presented. Data on two new PCSK9is were presented, recaticimab, an oral drug, and lerodalcibep, a subcutaneous drug with a slightly different architecture than currently available PSCK9is. A phase 1 trial on muvalaplin, an oral lipoprotein (a) inhibitor, was presented. An atherosclerotic CV disease (ASCVD) risk prediction algorithm for the Asian population using SCORE2 data was presented. Long-term follow-up of patients enrolled in the CLEAR outcomes trial showed sustained and more significant ASCVD risk reduction with bempedoic acid in high-risk patients. The late-breaking clinical science at the 2023 congress of the ESC extends the known safety and efficacy data of a PCSK9i with the introduction of new drugs in this class. Using cumulative exposure to LDL-C rather than a single value will help clinicians tailor the LDL-C reduction strategy to individual risk and is an important step towards personalized medicine.

New Insights into Cardiovascular Diseases Treatment Based on Molecular Targets

Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) which consist of ischemic heart disease, stroke, heart failure, peripheral arterial disease, and several other cardiac and vascular conditions are one of the most common causes of death worldwide and often co-occur with diabetes mellitus and lipid disorders which worsens the prognosis and becomes a therapeutic challenge. Due to the increasing number of patients with CVDs, we need to search for new risk factors and pathophysiological changes to create new strategies for preventing, diagnosing, and treating not only CVDs but also comorbidities like diabetes mellitus and lipid disorders. As increasing amount of patients suffering from CVDs, there are many therapies which focus on new molecular targets like proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9), angiopoietin-like protein 3, ATP-citrate lyase, or new technologies such as siRNA in treatment of dyslipidemia or sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 and glucagon-like peptide-1 in treatment of diabetes mellitus. Both SGLT-2 inhibitors and GLP-1 receptor agonists are used in the treatment of diabetes, however, they proved to have a beneficial effect in CVDs as well. Moreover, a significant amount of evidence has shown that exosomes seem to be associated with myocardial ischaemia and that exosome levels correlate with the severity of myocardial injury. In our work, we would like to focus on the above mechanisms. The knowledge of them allows for the appearance of new strategies of treatment among patients with CVDs.