Association of Long-term Exposure to Elevated Lipoprotein(a) Levels With Parental Life Span, Chronic Disease-Free Survival, and Mortality Risk: A Mendelian Randomization Analysis

Atherosclerosis and the Bidirectional Relationship between Cancer and Cardiovascular Disease: From Bench to Bedside-Part 1

Atherosclerosis, a complex metabolic-immune disease characterized by chronic inflammation driven by the buildup of lipid-rich plaques within arterial walls, has emerged as a pivotal factor in the intricate interplay between cancer and cardiovascular disease. This bidirectional relationship, marked by shared risk factors and pathophysiological mechanisms, underscores the need for a comprehensive understanding of how these two formidable health challenges intersect and influence each other. Cancer and its treatments can contribute to the progression of atherosclerosis, while atherosclerosis, with its inflammatory microenvironment, can exert profound effects on cancer development and outcomes. Both cancer and cardiovascular disease involve intricate interactions between general and personal exposomes. In this review, we aim to summarize the state of the art of translational data and try to show how oncologic studies on cardiotoxicity can broaden our knowledge of crucial pathways in cardiovascular biology and exert a positive impact on precision cardiology and cardio-oncology.

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.

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

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

Polygenic prediction of human longevity on the supposition of pervasive pleiotropy

The highly polygenic nature of human longevity renders cross-trait pleiotropy an indispensable feature of its genetic architecture. Leveraging the genetic correlation between the aging-related traits (ARTs), we sought to model the additive variance in lifespan as a function of cumulative liability from pleiotropic segregating variants. We tracked allele frequency changes as a function of viability across different age bins and prioritized 34 variants with an immediate implication on lipid metabolism, body mass index (BMI), and cognitive performance, among other traits, revealed by PheWAS analysis in the UK Biobank. Given the highly complex and non-linear interactions between the genetic determinants of longevity, we reasoned that a composite polygenic score would approximate a substantial portion of the variance in lifespan and developed the integrated longevity genetic scores (iLGSs) for distinguishing exceptional survival. We showed that coefficients derived from our ensemble model could potentially reveal an interesting pattern of genomic pleiotropy specific to lifespan. We assessed the predictive performance of our model for distinguishing the enrichment of exceptional longevity among long-lived individuals in two replication cohorts and showed that the median lifespan in the highest decile of our composite prognostic index is up to 4.8 years longer. Finally, using the proteomic correlates of i L G S , we identified protein markers associated with exceptional longevity irrespective of chronological age and prioritized drugs with repurposing potentials for gerotherapeutics. Together, our approach demonstrates a promising framework for polygenic modeling of additive liability conferred by ARTs in defining exceptional longevity and assisting the identification of individuals at higher risk of mortality for targeted lifestyle modifications earlier in life. Furthermore, the proteomic signature associated with i L G S highlights the functional pathway upstream of the PI3K-Akt that can be effectively targeted to slow down aging and extend lifespan.

Contribution of Lipoprotein(a) to Polygenic Risk Prediction of Coronary Artery Disease: A Prospective UK Biobank Analysis

BACKGROUND

Lp(a) (lipoprotein[a]) is a highly atherogenic lipoprotein subfraction that may contribute to polygenic risk of coronary artery disease (CAD), but the extent of this contribution is unknown. Our objective was to estimate the contribution of Lp(a) to polygenic risk of CAD and to evaluate the respective contributions of Lp(a) and a CAD polygenic risk score (PRS) to CAD.

METHODS

A total of 372 385 UK Biobank participants of European ancestry free of CAD at baseline were included. Plasma Lp(a) levels were measured and a CAD-PRS was calculated using the LDpred2 algorithm. Over the median follow-up of 12.6 years, 13 538 participants had incident CAD (myocardial infarction, coronary artery bypass grafting, or coronary angioplasty).

RESULTS

The LPA region contribution to the CAD-PRS-mediated CAD risk was modest (7.2% [95% CI, 6.1-8.3]). Lp(a) levels significantly increased the predictive performance of a CAD-PRS including age and sex in Cox regression (C statistic 0.751 versus 0.746, difference, 0.005 [95% CI, 0.004-0.006]). Compared with participants in the bottom CAD-PRS quintile with Lp(a) levels <25 nmol/L (CAD event rate, 1.4%), the hazard ratio for incident CAD in participants in the top CAD-PRS quintile with Lp(a) levels ≥125 nmol/L was 5.45 (95% CI, 4.93-6.03; P=9.35×10-242, CAD event rate 6.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with individuals with a low genetic risk of CAD (low CAD-PRS and low Lp[a] levels), those with a high genetic risk (high CAD-PRS and high Lp[a] levels) had a 5-fold higher CAD risk. These results highlight a substantial contribution of genetic risk factors to CAD and that accurate estimation of genetic risk of CAD may need to consider blood levels of Lp(a).

Lipid Profile and Lipoprotein(a) Testing

BACKGROUND

The treatment of dyslipidemias plays a major role in the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease. Proper evaluation of the patient's lipid status is very important for risk assessment and as a guide to treatment.

METHODS

This review is based on publications retrieved by a selective search of the literature, including current guidelines.

RESULTS

Measurement of the plasma concentration of cholesterol, triglycerides, HDL- and LDL-cholesterol, calculation of the non-HDL cholesterol concentration, and-on a single occasion-determination of the lipoprotein (a) concentration enable the clinician to quantify the lipid-associated health risk and monitor the effects of treatment. These blood tests can be performed in a non-fasting state except in special situations (particularly, hypertriglyceridemia). The HDL quotient is an obsolete measure. The main goal of treatment is to achieve an LDL-cholesterol level adequate to the patient's cardiovascular risk through lifestyle modification and, if necessary, medication. A high lipoprotein (a) concentration cannot be lowered with orally administered drugs; above all, patients should lower their LDL-cholesterol levels while minimizing all other risk factors.

CONCLUSION

Measurement of the concentration of cholesterol, triglycerides, and HDL- and LDL-cholesterol and calculation of the non-HDL-C suffice as a guide to lipid-lowering treatment. The primary therapeutic goal is to lower LDL cholesterol.

Association between cumulative lipoprotein(a) exposure and adverse cardiovascular outcomes in patients with prediabetes or diabetes

Few studies have characterized long-term exposure to lipoprotein(a), or Lp(a), different glucose metabolism status, and their joint role in adverse cardiovascular outcomes risk. We consecutively enrolled 10,724 coronary heart disease (CAD) patients from January to December 2013 in Fuwai Hospital. Associations of cumulative lipoprotein(a) (CumLp(a)) exposure and different glucose metabolism status with major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs) risk were evaluated using Cox regression models. Compared with participants with normal glucose regulation and lower CumLp(a), those with type 2 diabetes and higher CumLp(a) were at the highest risk (HR 1.56, 95% CI 1.25-1.94), and those with prediabetes and higher CumLp(a) and those with type 2 diabetes and lower CumLp(a) were at relatively higher risk (HR 1.41, 95% CI 1.14-1.76; HR 1.37, 95% CI 1.11-1.69; respectively). Similar findings concerning the joint association were observed in sensitivity analyses. Cumulative lipoprotein(a) exposure and different glucose metabolism status were associated with 5-year MACCEs risk and may be useful concurrently for guiding secondary prevention therapy decisions.

Lipoprotein(a)-related cardiovascular and all-cause mortalities in Korean adults

AIMS

There are inconsistent results on the association between lipoprotein(a) and mortality-related outcomes due to a lack of evidence from large-scale observational studies of Asians. This study aims to evaluate the effects of lipoprotein(a) on mortality-related outcomes in the Korean population.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This cohort study included 275 430 individuals (mean age: 38 years; 50.1% men) enrolled in the Kangbuk Samsung Health Study between 2003 and 2016. The median follow-up period was 6.6 years. Cox proportional hazards analysis was used to estimate the adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for evaluating mortality risk based on lipoprotein(a) levels and specific lipoprotein(a) categories. The median lipoprotein(a) value was 18.5 mg/dL, and the proportion of lipoprotein(a) ≥50 mg/dL was 12.8%. Multivariable Cox regression analysis showed that the group with lipoprotein(a) ≥50 mg/dL had a significantly increased risk of cardiovascular mortality (HR[95% CI]: 1.83[1.26, 2.64]) and all-cause mortality (1.20[1.03, 1.41]) than the group with lipoprotein(a) < 50 mg/dL without increased risk of cancer mortality (1.05[0.81, 1.34]). The relationship between lipoprotein(a) and cardiovascular mortality was significant regardless of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol. Specifically, lipoprotein(a) ≥100 mg/dL was associated with more than twice as increased a risk of cardiovascular mortality (2.45[1.12, 5.34]) than lipoprotein(a) < 10 mg/dL. In subgroup analyses, there was an interaction in the relationships between the two lipoprotein(a) categories and cardiovascular mortality for only high-density lipoprotein cholesterol.

CONCLUSIONS

High lipoprotein(a) concentration is an independent predictor of cardiovascular mortality in the Korean population, regardless of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels.

Circulating lipoprotein (a) and all-cause and cause-specific mortality: a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis

AIMS

To investigate the association between circulating lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) and risk of all-cause and cause-specific mortality in the general population and in patients with chronic diseases, and to elucidate the dose-response relations.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We searched literature to find prospective studies reporting adjusted risk estimates on the association of Lp(a) and mortality outcomes. Forty-three publications, reporting on 75 studies (957,253 participants), were included. The hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95%CI ) for the top versus bottom tertile of Lp(a) levels and risk of all-cause mortality were 1.09 (95%CI: 1.01-1.18, I²: 75.34%, n = 19) in the general population and 1.18 (95%CI: 1.04-1.34, I²: 52.5%, n = 12) in patients with cardiovascular diseases (CVD). The HRs for CVD mortality were 1.33 (95%CI: 1.11-1.58, I²: 82.8%, n = 31) in the general population, 1.25 (95%CI: 1.10-1.43, I²: 54.3%, n = 17) in patients with CVD and 2.53 (95%CI: 1.13-5.64, I²: 66%, n = 4) in patients with diabetes mellitus. Linear dose-response analyses revealed that each 50 mg/dL increase in Lp(a) levels was associated with 31% and 15% greater risk of CVD death in the general population and in patients with CVD. No non-linear dose-response association was observed between Lp(a) levels and risk of all-cause or CVD mortality in the general population or in patients with CVD (P_nonlinearity > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

This study provides further evidence that higher Lp(a) levels are associated with higher risk of all-cause mortality and CVD-death in the general population and in patients with CVD. These findings support the ESC/EAS Guidelines that recommend Lp(a) should be measured at least once in each adult person's lifetime, since our study suggests those with higher Lp(a) might also have higher risk of mortality.

Association of lipoprotein(a) with all-cause and cause-specific mortality: A prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

A growing number of studies have demonstrated a causal association between lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] and atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases (ASCVDs), but its association with all-cause and cause-specific mortality remains unclear. Therefore, this study aimed to explore the association of Lp(a) with all-cause and cause-specific mortality.

METHODS

This prospective cohort study included 8,525 participants from the third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Lp(a) was considered an exposure variable, all-cause and cause-specific mortality were used as outcome variables, and all participants were followed from the interview date until death or December 31, 2015. COX proportional hazards regression models, stratified analysis, sensitivity analysis, restricted cubic spline plots and Kaplan-Meier survival curves were used to analyze the association of Lp(a) with all-cause and cause-specific mortality.

RESULTS

After adjusting for traditional cardiovascular risk factors, Lp(a) remained strongly associated with all-cause and CVDs-related mortality (P for trend = 0.007 and < 0.001). Subgroup analyses showed that higher Lp(a) remained associated with higher risk of all-cause mortality in those > 60 years of age, with a BMI < 30 kg/m², and without diabetes, whereas the association between Lp(a) and CVDs-related mortality remained stable in participants ≤ 60 years of age, male, with a BMI < 30 kg/m², with hypertension, without diabetes, or without CVDs (P < 0.05). In sensitivity analyses, we found that the association of Lp(a) with all-cause and CVDs-related mortality remained robust after excluding individuals who died within one year of follow-up (P for trend = 0.041 and 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

Lp(a) was associated with the risk of all-cause and CVDs-related mortality.

Association of Lipoprotein(a) Levels With Incidence of Major Adverse Limb Events

IMPORTANCE

High lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]) levels are involved in the development of cardiovascular events, particularly in myocardial infarction, stroke, and peripheral artery disease. Studies assessing the Lp(a) levels associated with adverse lower-limb events are lacking.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the association between Lp(a) levels and incidence of major adverse limb events in unselected hospitalized patients.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This large retrospective monocentric cohort study was conducted from January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2020. Data were derived from the clinical information system of the Hôpital Européen Georges-Pompidou, a Paris-based university hospital. Patients who underwent at least 1 Lp(a) measurement at the center during the study period were included. Patients who had no follow-up data or who had the first Lp(a) measurement after the study outcome had occurred were excluded. Data analyses were performed from May 2021 to January 2022.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was the first inpatient major adverse limb event, defined as a major amputation, peripheral endovascular revascularization, or peripheral surgical revascularization, during follow-up. Secondary outcomes included individual components of the primary outcome. Lipoprotein(a) levels were categorized as follows: normal (<50 mg/dL), high (50 to <134 mg/dL), and very high (≥134 mg/dL); to convert Lp(a) values to milligrams per liter, multiply by 0.1.

RESULTS

A total of 16 513 patients (median [IQR] age, 58.2 [49.0-66.7] years; 9774 men [59.2%]) were included in the cohort. The median (IQR) Lp(a) level was 24 (10.0-60.0) mg/dL. The 1-year incidence of major adverse limb event was 2.44% in the overall population and 4.54% among patients with very high Lp(a) levels. High (adjusted accelerated failure time [AFT] exponential estimate: 0.43; 95% CI, 0.24-0.78; Benjamini-Hochberg-corrected P = .01) and very high (adjusted AFT exponential estimate: 0.17; 95% CI, 0.07-0.40; Benjamini-Hochberg-corrected P < .001) Lp(a) levels were independently associated with an increased risk of major adverse limb event.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Results of this study showed that higher Lp(a) levels were independently associated with an increased risk of a major adverse limb event in hospitalized patients. The Lp(a) measurement needs to be taken into account to improve lower-limb vascular risk assessment.

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.

Elevated lipoprotein(a) as a predictor for coronary events in older men

Elevated circulating lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] is associated with an increased risk of first and recurrent cardiovascular events; however, the effect of baseline Lp(a) levels on long-term outcomes in an elderly population is not well understood. The current single-center prospective study evaluated the association of Lp(a) levels with incident acute coronary syndrome to identify populations at risk of future events. Lp(a) concentration was assessed in 755 individuals (mean age of 71.9 years) within the community and followed for up to 8 years (median time to event, 4.5 years; interquartile range, 2.5–6.5 years). Participants with clinically relevant high levels of Lp(a) (>50 mg/dl) had an increased absolute incidence rate of ASC of 2.00 (95% CI, 1.0041) over 8 years (P = 0.04). Moreover, Kaplan-Meier cumulative event analyses demonstrated the risk of ASC increased when compared with patients with low (<30 mg/dl) and elevated (30–50 mg/dl) levels of Lp(a) over 8 years (Gray’s test; P = 0.16). Within analyses adjusted for age and BMI, the hazard ratio was 2.04 (95% CI, 1.0–4.2; P = 0.05) in the high versus low Lp(a) groups. Overall, this study adds support for recent guidelines recommending a one-time measurement of Lp(a) levels in cardiovascular risk assessment to identify subpopulations at risk and underscores the potential utility of this marker even among older individuals at a time when potent Lp(a)-lowering agents are undergoing evaluation for clinical use.

Lipoprotein(a) and cardiovascular and valvular diseases: A genetic epidemiological perspective

Rates of atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases (CVD) in the Western world have spectacularly decreased over the past 50 years. However, a substantial proportion of high-risk patients still develop heart attacks, strokes and valvular heart diseases despite benefiting from state-of-the-art treatments including lipid-lowering therapies. Over the past 10-15 years, it has become increasingly clear that Lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]) is a critical component of this so-called residual risk. Genetic association studies revealed that Lp(a) is robustly, independently and causally associated with a broad range of cardiovascular and valvular heart diseases. Up to 1 billion people around the globe may have an Lp(a) level that places them in a high-risk category. Lp(a) is strongly associated with calcific aortic valve stenosis (CAVS), coronary artery disease (CAD), peripheral arterial disease (PAD) and to a lesser extent with ischemic stroke (IS) and heart failure (HF). Because of this strong association with cardiovascular and valvular heart diseases, Lp(a) even emerged as one of the most important genetic determinants of human lifespan and healthspan. Here, we review the evidence from the largest and most informative genetic association studies and prospective studies that have investigated the association between Lp(a) and human lifespan, healthspan, CVD, CAVS and non-cardiovascular diseases. We present Lp(a) threshold values that may be clinically relevant and identify other cardiovascular risk factors that may modulate the absolute risk of CVD in individuals with high Lp(a) levels. Finally, we identify key clinical and research questions that require further investigation to eventually and optimally reduce CVD risk in patients with high Lp(a) levels.

Mendelian randomization of genetically independent aging phenotypes identifies LPA and VCAM1 as biological targets for human aging

Length and quality of life are important to us all, yet identification of promising drug targets for human aging using genetics has had limited success. In the present study, we combine six European-ancestry genome-wide association studies of human aging traits-healthspan, father and mother lifespan, exceptional longevity, frailty index and self-rated health-in a principal component framework that maximizes their shared genetic architecture. The first principal component (aging-GIP1) captures both length of life and indices of mental and physical wellbeing. We identify 27 genomic regions associated with aging-GIP1, and provide additional, independent evidence for an effect on human aging for loci near HTT and MAML3 using a study of Finnish and Japanese survival. Using proteome-wide, two-sample, Mendelian randomization and colocalization, we provide robust evidence for a detrimental effect of blood levels of apolipoprotein(a) and vascular cell adhesion molecule 1 on aging-GIP1. Together, our results demonstrate that combining multiple aging traits using genetic principal components enhances the power to detect biological targets for human aging.

A trans-omic Mendelian randomization study of parental lifespan uncovers novel aging biology and therapeutic candidates for chronic diseases

The study of parental lifespan has emerged as an innovative tool to advance aging biology and our understanding of the genetic architecture of human longevity and aging-associated diseases. Here, we leveraged summary statistics of a genome-wide association study including over one million parental lifespans to identify genetically regulated genes from the Genotype-Tissue Expression project. Through a combination of multi-tissue transcriptome-wide association analyses and genetic colocalization, we identified novel genes that may be associated with parental lifespan. Mendelian randomization (MR) analyses also identified circulating proteins and metabolites causally associated with parental lifespan and chronic diseases offering new drug repositioning opportunities such as those targeting apolipoprotein-B-containing lipoproteins. Liver expression of HP, the gene encoding haptoglobin, and plasma haptoglobin levels were causally linked with parental lifespan. Phenome-wide MR analyses were used to map genetically regulated genes, proteins and metabolites with other human traits as well as the disease-related phenome in the FinnGen cohorts (n = 135,638). Altogether, this study identified new candidate genes, circulating proteins and metabolites that may influence human aging as well as potential therapeutic targets for chronic diseases that warrant further investigation.

Sex-Specific Associations of Genetically Predicted Circulating Lp(a) (Lipoprotein(a)) and Hepatic LPA Gene Expression Levels With Cardiovascular Outcomes: Mendelian Randomization and Observational Analyses

BACKGROUND

Elevated Lp(a) (Lipoprotein(a)) levels are associated with coronary artery disease (CAD), ischemic stroke (IS), and calcific aortic valve stenosis (CAVS). Studies investigating the association between Lp(a) levels and these diseases in women have yielded inconsistent results.

METHODS

To investigate the association of Lp(a) with sex-specific cardiovascular outcomes, we determined the association between genetically predicted Lp(a) levels (using 27 single nucleotide polymorphisms at the LPA locus) and hepatic LPA expression (using 80 single nucleotide polymorphisms at the LPA locus associated with LPA mRNA expression in liver samples from the Genotype-Tissue Expression dataset) on CAD, IS, and CAVS using individual participant data from the UK Biobank: 408 403 participants of European ancestry (37 102, 4283, and 2574 with prevalent CAD, IS, and CAVS, respectively). The long-term association between Lp(a) levels and incident CAD, IS, and CAVS was also investigated in European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition-Norfolk: 18 721 participants (3964, 846, and 424 with incident CAD, IS, and CAVS, respectively).

RESULTS

Genetically predicted plasma Lp(a) levels were positively and similarly associated with prevalent and incident CAD and CAVS in men and women. Genetically predicted plasma Lp(a) levels were associated with prevalent and incident IS when we studied men and women pooled together, and in men only. Genetically predicted LPA expression levels were associated with prevalent CAD and CAVS in men and women but not with IS.

CONCLUSIONS

Genetically predicted blood Lp(a) and hepatic LPA gene expression as well as serum Lp(a) levels predict the risk of CAD and CAVS in men and in women. Whether RNA interference therapies aiming at lowering Lp(a) levels could be useful in reducing cardiovascular disease risk in both men and women with high Lp(a) levels needs to be determined in large-scale cardiovascular outcomes trials.

Investigating causal relationships between exposome and human longevity: a Mendelian randomization analysis

BACKGROUND

Environmental factors are associated with human longevity, but their specificity and causality remain mostly unclear. By integrating the innovative "exposome" concept developed in the field of environmental epidemiology, this study aims to determine the components of exposome causally linked to longevity using Mendelian randomization (MR) approach.

METHODS

A total of 4587 environmental exposures extracting from 361,194 individuals from the UK biobank, in exogenous and endogenous domains of exposome were assessed. We examined the relationship between each environmental factor and two longevity outcomes (i.e., surviving to the 90th or 99th percentile age) from various cohorts of European ancestry. Significant results after false discovery rates correction underwent validation using an independent exposure dataset.

RESULTS

Out of all the environmental exposures, eight age-related diseases and pathological conditions were causally associated with lower odds of longevity, including coronary atherosclerosis (odds ratio = 0.77, 95% confidence interval [0.70, 0.84], P = 4.2 × 10-8), ischemic heart disease (0.66, [0.51, 0.87], P = 0.0029), angina (0.73, [0.65, 0.83], P = 5.4 × 10-7), Alzheimer's disease (0.80, [0.72, 0.89], P = 3.0 × 10-5), hypertension (0.70, [0.64, 0.77], P = 4.5 × 10-14), type 2 diabetes (0.88 [0.80, 0.96], P = 0.004), high cholesterol (0.81, [0.72, 0.91], P = 0.0003), and venous thromboembolism (0.92, [0.87, 0.97], P = 0.0028). After adjusting for genetic correlation between different types of blood lipids, higher levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (0.72 [0.64, 0.80], P = 2.3 × 10-9) was associated with lower odds of longevity, while high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (1.36 [1.13, 1.62], P = 0.001) showed the opposite. Genetically predicted sitting/standing height was unrelated to longevity, while higher comparative height size at 10 was negatively associated with longevity. Greater body fat, especially the trunk fat mass, and never eat sugar or foods/drinks containing sugar were adversely associated with longevity, while education attainment showed the opposite.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study supports that some age-related diseases as well as education are causally related to longevity and highlights several new targets for achieving longevity, including management of venous thromboembolism, appropriate intake of sugar, and control of body fat. Our results warrant further studies to elucidate the underlying mechanisms of these reported causal associations.

Lipoprotein Proteomics and Aortic Valve Transcriptomics Identify Biological Pathways Linking Lipoprotein(a) Levels to Aortic Stenosis

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is one of the most important risk factors for the development of calcific aortic valve stenosis (CAVS). However, the mechanisms through which Lp(a) causes CAVS are currently unknown. Our objectives were to characterize the Lp(a) proteome and to identify proteins that may be differentially associated with Lp(a) in patients with versus without CAVS. Our second objective was to identify genes that may be differentially regulated by exposure to high versus low Lp(a) levels in explanted aortic valves from patients with CAVS. We isolated Lp(a) from the blood of 21 patients with CAVS and 22 volunteers and performed untargeted label-free analysis of the Lp(a) proteome. We also investigated the transcriptomic signature of calcified aortic valves from patients who underwent aortic valve replacement with high versus low Lp(a) levels (n = 118). Proteins involved in the protein activation cascade, platelet degranulation, leukocyte migration, and response to wounding may be associated with Lp(a) depending on CAVS status. The transcriptomic analysis identified genes involved in cardiac aging, chondrocyte development, and inflammation as potentially influenced by Lp(a). Our multi-omic analyses identified biological pathways through which Lp(a) may cause CAVS, as well as key molecular events that could be triggered by Lp(a) in CAVS development.

Lipoprotein(a) and Cardiovascular Disease

BACKGROUND

High lipoprotein(a) concentrations present in 10%-20% of the population have long been linked to increased risk of ischemic cardiovascular disease. It is unclear whether high concentrations represent an unmet medical need. Lipoprotein(a) is currently not a target for treatment to prevent cardiovascular disease.

CONTENT

The present review summarizes evidence of causality for high lipoprotein(a) concentrations gained from large genetic epidemiologic studies and discusses measurements of lipoprotein(a) and future treatment options for high values found in an estimated >1 billion individuals worldwide.

SUMMARY

Evidence from mechanistic, observational, and genetic studies support a causal role of lipoprotein(a) in the development of cardiovascular disease, including coronary heart disease and peripheral arterial disease, as well as aortic valve stenosis, and likely also ischemic stroke. Effect sizes are most pronounced for myocardial infarction, peripheral arterial disease, and aortic valve stenosis where high lipoprotein(a) concentrations predict 2- to 3-fold increases in risk. Lipoprotein(a) measurements should be performed using well-validated assays with traceability to a recognized calibrator to ensure common cut-offs for high concentrations and risk assessment. Randomized cardiovascular outcome trials are needed to provide final evidence of causality and to assess the potential clinical benefit of novel, potent lipoprotein(a) lowering therapies.

A Comparative Analysis of the Lipoprotein(a) and Low-Density Lipoprotein Proteomic Profiles Combining Mass Spectrometry and Mendelian Randomization

Background

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]), which consists of a low-density lipoprotein (LDL) bound to apolipoprotein(a), is one of the strongest genetic risk factors for atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases. Few studies have performed hypothesis-free direct comparisons of the Lp(a) and the LDL proteomes. Our objectives were to compare the Lp(a) and the LDL proteomic profiles and to evaluate the effect of lifelong exposure to elevated Lp(a) or LDL cholesterol levels on the plasma proteomic profile.

Methods

We performed a label-free analysis of the Lp(a) and LDL proteomic profiles of healthy volunteers in a discovery (n = 6) and a replication (n = 9) phase. We performed inverse variance weighted Mendelian randomization to document the effect of lifelong exposure to elevated Lp(a) or LDL cholesterol levels on the plasma proteomic profile of participants of the INTERVAL study.

Results

We identified 15 proteins that were more abundant on Lp(a) compared with LDL (serping1, pi16, itih1, itih2, itih3, pon1, podxl, cd44, cp, ptprg, vtn, pcsk9, igfals, vcam1, and ttr). We found no proteins that were more abundant on LDL compared with Lp(a). After correction for multiple testing, lifelong exposure to elevated LDL cholesterol levels was associated with the variation of 18 plasma proteins whereas Lp(a) did not appear to influence the plasma proteome.

Conclusions

Results of this study highlight marked differences in the proteome of Lp(a) and LDL as well as in the effect of lifelong exposure to elevated LDL cholesterol or Lp(a) on the plasma proteomic profile.

Oxyphospholipids in Cardiovascular Calcification

Mineralization of cardiovascular structures including blood vessels and heart valves is a common feature. We postulate that ectopic mineralization is a response-to-injury in which signals delivered to cells trigger a chain of events to restore and repair tissues. Maladaptive response to external or internal signals promote the expression of danger-associated molecular patterns, which, in turn, promote, when expressed chronically, a procalcifying gene program. Growing evidence suggest that danger-associated molecular patterns such as oxyphospholipids and small lipid mediators, generated by enzyme activity, are involved in the transition of vascular smooth muscle cells and valve interstitial cells to an osteoblast-like phenotype. Understanding the regulation and the molecular processes underpinning the mineralization of atherosclerotic plaques and cardiac valves are providing valuable mechanistic insights, which could lead to the development of novel therapies. Herein, we provide a focus account on the role oxyphospholipids and their mediators in the development of mineralization in plaques and calcific aortic valve disease.

Short-term regulation of hematopoiesis by lipoprotein(a) results in the production of pro-inflammatory monocytes

BACKGROUND

Lipoproteins are important regulators of hematopoietic stem and progenitor cell (HSPC) biology, predominantly affecting myelopoiesis. Since myeloid cells, including monocytes and macrophages, promote the inflammatory response that propagates atherosclerosis, it is of interest whether the atherogenic low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-like particle lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] contributes to atherogenesis via stimulating myelopoiesis.

METHODS & RESULTS

To assess the effects of Lp(a)-priming on long-term HSPC behavior we transplanted BM of Lp(a) transgenic mice, that had been exposed to elevated levels of Lp(a), into lethally-irradiated C57Bl6 mice and hematopoietic reconstitution was analyzed. No differences in HSPC populations or circulating myeloid cells were detected ten weeks after transplantation. Likewise, in vitro stimulation of C57Bl6 BM cells for 24 h with Lp(a) did not affect colony formation, total cell numbers or myeloid populations 7 days later. To assess the effects of elevated levels of Lp(a) on myelopoiesis, C57Bl6 bone marrow (BM) cells were stimulated with lp(a) for 24 h, and a marked increase in granulocyte-monocyte progenitors, pro-inflammatory Ly6^high monocytes and macrophages was observed. Seven days of continuous exposure to Lp(a) increased colony formation and enhanced the formation of pro-inflammatory monocytes and macrophages. Antibody-mediated neutralization of oxidized phospholipids abolished the Lp(a)-induced effects on myelopoiesis.

CONCLUSION

Lp(a) enhances the production of inflammatory monocytes at the bone marrow level but does not induce cell-intrinsic long-term priming of HSPCs. Given the short-term and direct nature of this effect, we postulate that Lp(a)-lowering treatment has the capacity to rapidly revert this multi-level inflammatory response.

Preventing Premature Atherosclerotic Disease

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) can begin in youth. Prevention is essential to reducing the burden of CVD-related risk factors in childhood and disease development in adulthood. This review addresses the clinical scope of CVD prevention, including a review of conditions encountered, proposed diagnostic criteria, and management strategies. We also highlight the impact of the intrauterine environment on the development of CVD risk. Finally, we highlight the potential role of telehealth in the management of pediatric patients with risk factors for premature CVD.

RECENT FINDINGS

Growing evidence suggests that maternal obesity, diabetes, and preeclampsia may play an important role in the development of CVD risk among offspring contributing to the development of known traditional CVD risk factors among offspring. As the prevalence of CVD continues to rise, knowledge as well as appropriate diagnosis and management of primordial and traditional risk factors for CVD is needed. The diagnosis and management of CVD risk factors is a central role of the preventive pediatric cardiologist, but it is imperative that the general physician and other pediatric subspecialists be aware of these risk factors, diagnoses, and management strategies. Finally, telehealth may offer an additional method for providing preventive care, including screening and counseling of at risk children and adolescents for traditional risk factors and for providing education regarding risk factors in cases of long distance care and/or during periods of social distancing.