Lipoprotein(a)

PSCK9 inhibitors reduced early recurrent stroke in patients with symptomatic intracranial atherosclerotic stenosis

BACKGROUND

Symptomatic intracranial atherosclerotic stenosis (ICAS) is prone to cause early recurrent stroke (ERS). Proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors lower low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels and prevent cardiovascular events. This multicentre, hospital-based prospective cohort study was designed to investigate whether PCSK9 inhibitors would prevent ERS in patients with symptomatic ICAS.

METHODS

From 1 October 2020 to 30 September 2022, consecutive patients with acute ischaemic stroke attributed to ICAS admitted within 1 week after onset were enrolled and followed up for 1 month. Patients were divided into two groups, the PCSK9 inhibitors group receiving PCSK9 inhibitors add-on therapy, and the control group receiving statins and/or ezetimibe. The primary outcome was ERS. Cox proportional hazard models and Kaplan-Meier survival curve were used to estimate the association between PCSK9 inhibitors and ERS.

RESULTS

At the end of follow-up, the LDL-C levels were further lowered by PCSK9 inhibitors add-on therapy (n=232, from 3.06±1.16 mmol/L to 2.12±1.19 mmol/L) than statins and/or ezetimibe treatment (n=429, from 2.91±1.05 mmol/L to 2.64±0.86 mmol/L, p<0.001). The Kaplan-Meier survival curves showed that PCSK9 inhibitors add-on therapy significantly reduced ERS (5.59%, 24/429, vs 2.16%, 5/232; log-rank test, p=0.044). The multivariate Cox regression analysis revealed that, after adjusting for confounders with a p value less than 0.05 in univariate analysis or of particular importance, the HR was 0.335 (95% CI 0.114 to 0.986, p=0.047), compared with the control group.

CONCLUSIONS

In our study, PCSK9 inhibitors add-on therapy further reduced LDL-C levels and ERS in patients with symptomatic ICAS.

4'-O-MethylbavachalconeB Targeted 14-3-3ζ Blocking the Integrin β3 Early Outside-In Signal to Inhibit Platelet Aggregation and Thrombosis

14-3-3ζ protein, the key target in the regulation and control of integrin β3 outside-in signaling, is an attractive new strategy to inhibit thrombosis without affecting hemostasis. In this study, 4'-O-methylbavachalconeB (4-O-MB) in Psoraleae Fructus was identified as a 14-3-3ζ ligand with antithrombosis activity by target fishing combined with ultra-high performance liquid chromatography-quadrupole time-of-flight mass spectrometry (UHPLC-Q-TOF-MS) analysis. The competitive inhibition analysis showed that 4-O-MB targeted 14-3-3ζ and blocked the 14-3-3ζ/integrin β3 interaction with inhibition constant (Ki) values of 9.98 ± 0.22 μM. Molecular docking and amino acid mutation experiments confirmed that 4-O-MB specifically bound to 14-3-3ζ through LSY9 and SER28 to regulate the 14-3-3ζ/integrin β3 interaction. Besides, 4-O-MB affected the integrin β3 early outside-in signal by inhibiting AKT and c-Src phosphorylation. Meanwhile, 4-O-MB could inhibit ADP-, collagen-, or thrombin-induced platelet aggregation function but had no effect on platelet adhesion to collagen-coated surfaces in vivo. Administration of 4-O-MB could significantly inhibit thrombosis formation without disturbing hemostasis in mice. These findings provide new prospects for the antithrombotic effects of Psoraleae Fructus and the potential application of 4-O-MB as lead compounds in the therapy of thrombosis by targeting 14-3-3ζ.

Associations between lipid abnormalities and diabetic retinopathy across a large United States national database

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

While dyslipidaemia has been suggested as a potential risk factor for diabetic retinopathy (DR), previous studies have reported conflicting findings. This study aimed to better characterize the relationship between abnormal serum levels of various lipid markers and the risk of the development and progression of DR.

SUBJECTS/METHODS

This retrospective cohort study utilized a United States national database of electronic medical records. Adults with a history of type 2 diabetes mellitus without type 1 diabetes mellitus were divided into cohorts based on the presence of abnormal serum levels of various lipid markers. Propensity score matching was performed to match cohorts with abnormal lipid levels to those with normal lipid levels on covariates. The cohorts were then compared to evaluate the hazard ratios (HR) of receiving a new DR diagnosis, pars plana vitrectomy, panretinal photocoagulation, vitreous haemorrhage, proliferative diabetic retinopathy, diabetic macular oedema (DMO), and traction retinal detachment.

RESULTS

The database contained 1,126,231 eligible patients (mean age: 60.8 [14.2] years; 46.0% female). Among patients without prior DR, low HDL (HR = 0.94, CI = 0.90-0.98), total cholesterol (HR = 0.88, CI = 0.85-0.91), and high triglyceride (HR = 0.91, CI = 0.86-0.97) levels were associated with a decreased risk of receiving a DR diagnosis. Among patients with preexisting DR, high LDL levels was associated with an increased risk of DMO (HR = 1.42, CI = 1.15-1.75), whereas low HDL levels was associated with a marginally decreased risk (HR = 0.92, CI = 0.85-0.99).

CONCLUSIONS

Elevated levels of markers of dyslipidaemia are inversely associated with the risk of receiving a DR diagnosis, but this relationship is blunted after the onset of DR.

Lp(a) and risk of cardiovascular disease - A review of existing evidence and emerging concepts

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) remains the leading cause of death among adults in the United States. There has been significant advancement in the diagnosis and treatment of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and its underlying risk factors. In certain populations, there remains a significant residual risk despite adequate lowering of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and control of traditional risk factors. This has led to an interest in research to identify additional risk factors that contribute to atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Elevated lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] has been identified as an independent risk factor contributing to an increased risk for CVD. There are also ethnic and racial disparities in Lp(a) inheritance that need to be understood. This paper reviews the current literature on lipoprotein a, proposed mechanisms of actions for cardiovascular disease, recommendations for testing, and the current and emerging therapies for lowering Lp(a).

Genetic study of the causal effect of lipid profiles on insomnia risk: a Mendelian randomization trial

OBJECTIVES

In response to the controversy surrounding observational studies of the association between lipid profiles and the risk of insomnia, the aim of this study was to analyze lipid profiles, including triglycerides (TG), apolipoprotein A-1 (ApoA-1), apolipoprotein B (ApoB) and lipoprotein A (LPA), in a European population to further assess the causal relationship between these lipid types and insomnia.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study explores the causal effect of lipid profiles on insomnia based on a genome-wide association study (GWAS)-derived public dataset using two-sample and multivariate Mendelian randomization (MVMR) analysis. The main MR analyses used inverse variance weighting (IVW) odds ratio (OR), and the sensitivity analyses included weighted median (WM) and MR‒Egger.

RESULTS

Both MR and MVMR showed that lowering ApoA-1 and LPA levels had causal effects on the risk of insomnia [MR: per 10 units, ApoA-1: OR: 0.7546, 95% CI: 0.6075-0.9372, P = 0.011; LPA: OR: 0.8392, 95% CI: 0.7202-0.9778, P = 0.025; MVMR: per 10 units, ApoA-1: OR: 0.7600, 95% CI: 0.6362-0.9079, P = 0.002; LPA, OR: 0.903, 95% CI: 0.8283-0.9845, P = 0.021]. There were no causal effects of TG or ApoB on insomnia (all P > 0.05). The MR‒Egger intercept test, funnel plot, and IVW methods all suggested an absence of strong directional pleiotropy, and leave-one-out permutation analysis did not detect any single single-nucleotide polymorphism that had a strong influence on the results.

CONCLUSION

Elevated levels of ApoA-1 and LPA were independently and causally associated with the risk of insomnia, suggesting that elevated ApoA-1 and LPA levels may contribute to a reduced risk of insomnia.

Clinical characteristics associated with elevated levels of lipoprotein(a) in patients with vascular risk

Objectives

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is increasingly used in the evaluation of patients with vascular risk due to its association with cardiovascular events. The purpose of this study was to identify the clinical characteristics of patients with elevated levels of Lp(a) attended in an outpatient vascular risk unit.

Methods

An observational, retrospective study was conducted to assess the clinical characteristics of patients with elevated levels of Lp(a) (≥50 mg/dL), as compared to patients with normal values (<50 mg/dL). The sample was composed of 878 patients identified as having a high vascular risk due to a diagnosis of vascular disease, attended in a vascular risk unit between 2021 and 2022.

Results

The highest levels of Lp(a) were independently associated with a higher probability of having a history of peripheral arterial disease (p=0.024), polygenic familial hypercholesterolemia (PH, p=0.030) and combined familial hypercholesterolemia (CFH, p=0.015); and using PCSK9 inhibitor treatment (p=0.029) and combination therapy with statins and ezetimibe (p=0.018). In contrast, there were no significant differences in relation to familial history of early cardiovascular disease (p=0.143) or personal history of cardiovascular disease (p=0.063), which contrasts with other series.

Conclusions

Elevated levels of Lp(a) were associated with a history of peripheral arterial disease, diagnosis of FHP and CFH, and need for more intense lipid-lowering treatments.

Características clínicas asociadas a niveles elevados de lipoproteína(a) en pacientes atendidos por riesgo vascular

Objectivos

La lipoproteína(a) (Lp(a)) es cada vez más relevante en la evaluación de pacientes con riesgo vascular debido a su asociación con una mayor incidencia de eventos cardiovasculares. Este estudio tiene como objetivo identificar las características clínicas de los pacientes con niveles elevados de Lp(a) atendidos en consultas externas por riesgo vascular.

Métodos

Estudio observacional retrospectivo en donde se compararon las características clínicas de los pacientes con niveles elevados de Lp(a) (≥50 mg/dL) con la de los pacientes con valores normales (<50 mg/dL), en un total de 878 pacientes atendidos por riesgo o enfermedad vascular durante los años 2021 y 2022.

Resultados

Los valores más elevados de Lp(a) se asociaron de forma independiente con una mayor probabilidad de antecedentes de enfermedad arterial periférica (p=0,024), hipercolesterolemia familiar poligénica (HFP, p=0,030) e hipercolesterolemia familiar combinada (HFC, p=0,015), el tratamiento de inhibidores de PCSK9 (p=0,029) y la combinación de estatinas y ezetimiba (p=0,018). Sin embargo, no se obtuvieron diferencias significativas para las variables antecedentes familiares de enfermedad cardiovascular precoz (p=0,143) ni para antecedentes de enfermedad cardiovascular previa (p=0,063) a diferencia de lo identificado en otras series.

Conclusiones

Los niveles elevados de Lp(a) se asociaron con antecedentes de enfermedad arterial periférica, diagnóstico de HFP y HFC, así como con la necesidad de utilizar tratamientos hipolipemiantes más intensos.

Assessment of Apolipoprotein(a) Isoform Size Using Phenotypic and Genotypic Methods

Apolipoprotein(a) (apo(a)) is the protein component that defines lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) particles and is encoded by the LPA gene. The apo(a) is extremely heterogeneous in size due to the copy number variations in the kringle-IV type 2 (KIV2) domains. In this review, we aim to discuss the role of genetics in establishing Lp(a) as a risk factor for coronary heart disease (CHD) by examining a series of molecular biology techniques aimed at identifying the best strategy for a possible application in clinical research and practice, according to the current gold standard.

Lipoprotein(a) as a Risk Factor for Cardiovascular Diseases: Pathophysiology and Treatment Perspectives

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is still a leading cause of morbidity and mortality, despite all the progress achieved as regards to both prevention and treatment. Having high levels of lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a risk factor for cardiovascular disease that operates independently. It can increase the risk of developing cardiovascular disease even when LDL cholesterol (LDL-C) levels are within the recommended range, which is referred to as residual cardiovascular risk. Lp(a) is an LDL-like particle present in human plasma, in which a large plasminogen-like glycoprotein, apolipoprotein(a) [Apo(a)], is covalently bound to Apo B100 via one disulfide bridge. Apo(a) contains one plasminogen-like kringle V structure, a variable number of plasminogen-like kringle IV structures (types 1-10), and one inactive protease region. There is a large inter-individual variation of plasma concentrations of Lp(a), mainly ascribable to genetic variants in the Lp(a) gene: in the general po-pulation, Lp(a) levels can range from <1 mg/dL to >1000 mg/dL. Concentrations also vary between different ethnicities. Lp(a) has been established as one of the risk factors that play an important role in the development of atherosclerotic plaque. Indeed, high concentrations of Lp(a) have been related to a greater risk of ischemic CVD, aortic valve stenosis, and heart failure. The threshold value has been set at 50 mg/dL, but the risk may increase already at levels above 30 mg/dL. Although there is a well-established and strong link between high Lp(a) levels and coronary as well as cerebrovascular disease, the evidence regarding incident peripheral arterial disease and carotid atherosclerosis is not as conclusive. Because lifestyle changes and standard lipid-lowering treatments, such as statins, niacin, and cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibitors, are not highly effective in reducing Lp(a) levels, there is increased interest in developing new drugs that can address this issue. PCSK9 inhibitors seem to be capable of reducing Lp(a) levels by 25-30%. Mipomersen decreases Lp(a) levels by 25-40%, but its use is burdened with important side effects. At the current time, the most effective and tolerated treatment for patients with a high Lp(a) plasma level is apheresis, while antisense oligonucleotides, small interfering RNAs, and microRNAs, which reduce Lp(a) levels by targeting RNA molecules and regulating gene expression as well as protein production levels, are the most widely explored and promising perspectives. The aim of this review is to provide an update on the current state of the art with regard to Lp(a) pathophysiological mechanisms, focusing on the most effective strategies for lowering Lp(a), including new emerging alternative therapies. The purpose of this manuscript is to improve the management of hyperlipoproteinemia(a) in order to achieve better control of the residual cardiovascular risk, which remains unacceptably high.

Daring to dream: Targeting lipoprotein(a) as a causal and risk-enhancing factor

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)], a distinct lipoprotein class, has become a major focus for cardiovascular research. This review is written in light of the recent guideline and consensus statements on Lp(a) and focuses on 1) the causal association between Lp(a) and cardiovascular outcomes, 2) the potential mechanisms by which elevated Lp(a) contributes to cardiovascular diseases, 3) the metabolic insights on the production and clearance of Lp(a) and 4) the current and future therapeutic approaches to lower Lp(a) concentrations. The concentrations of Lp(a) are under strict genetic control. There exists a continuous relationship between the Lp(a) concentrations and risk for various endpoints of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). One in five people in the Caucasian population is considered to have increased Lp(a) concentrations; the prevalence of elevated Lp(a) is even higher in black populations. This makes Lp(a) a cardiovascular risk factor of major public health relevance. Besides the association between Lp(a) and myocardial infarction, the relationship with aortic valve stenosis has become a major focus of research during the last decade. Genetic studies provided strong support for a causal association between Lp(a) and cardiovascular outcomes: carriers of genetic variants associated with lifelong increased Lp(a) concentration are significantly more frequent in patients with ASCVD. This has triggered the development of drugs that can specifically lower Lp(a) concentrations: mRNA-targeting therapies such as anti-sense oligonucleotide (ASO) therapies and short interfering RNA (siRNA) therapies have opened new avenues to lower Lp(a) concentrations more than 95%. Ongoing Phase II and III clinical trials of these compounds are discussed in this review.

Frequent questions and responses on the 2022 lipoprotein(a) consensus statement of the European Atherosclerosis Society

In 2022, the European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS) published a new consensus statement on lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)], summarizing current knowledge about its causal association with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and aortic stenosis. One of the novelties of this statement is a new risk calculator showing how Lp(a) influences lifetime risk for ASCVD and that global risk may be underestimated substantially in individuals with high or very high Lp(a) concentration. The statement also provides practical advice on how knowledge about Lp(a) concentration can be used to modulate risk factor management, given that specific and highly effective mRNA-targeted Lp(a)-lowering therapies are still in clinical development. This advice counters the attitude: "Why should I measure Lp(a) if I can't lower it?". Subsequent to publication, questions have arisen relating to how the recommendations of this statement impact everyday clinical practice and ASCVD management. This review addresses 30 of the most frequently asked questions about Lp(a) epidemiology, its contribution to cardiovascular risk, Lp(a) measurement, risk factor management and existing therapeutic options.

Evaluation of lipoprotein(a) in the prevention and management of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: A survey among the Lipid Clinics Network

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS) Lipid Clinics Network promoted a survey in order to identify and understand how and when lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is tested and clinically evaluated in lipid clinics throughout Europe, and the challenges that may prevent evaluation from being carried out.

METHODS

This survey was divided into three areas of inquiry: background and clinical setting information of clinicians, questions for doctors who claimed not to measure Lp(a), in order to understand what were the reasons for not ordering the test, and questions for doctors who measure Lp(a), to investigate the use of this value in the management of patients.

RESULTS

A total of 151 centres clinicians filled in the survey, out of 226 invited. The proportion of clinicians who declare to routinely measure Lp(a) in clinical practice was 75.5%. The most common reasons for not ordering the Lp(a) test were the lack of reimbursement or of treatment options, the non-availability of Lp(a) test, and the high cost of performing the laboratory test. The availability of therapies targeting this lipoprotein would result in a greater propensity of clinicians to start testing Lp(a). Among those who declared to routinely measure Lp(a), the Lp(a) measurement is mostly requested to further stratify patients' cardiovascular risk, and half of them recognized 50 mg/dL (approx. 110 nmol/L) as the threshold for increased cardiovascular risk due.

CONCLUSIONS

These results warrant for a great deal of effort from scientific societies to address the barriers that limit the routine use of the measurement of Lp(a) concentration and to recognise the importance of Lp(a) as a risk factor.

LDL-cholesterol control in the primary prevention of cardiovascular diseases: An expert opinion for clinicians and health professionals

AIMS

Although adequate clinical management of patients with hypercholesterolemia without a history of known cardiovascular disease is essential for prevention, these subjects are often disregarded. Furthermore, the scientific literature on primary cardiovascular prevention is not as rich as that on secondary prevention; finally, physicians often lack adequate tools for the effective management of subjects in primary prevention and have to face some unsolved relevant issues. This document aims to discuss and review the evidence available on this topic and provide practical guidance.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Available algorithms and risk charts represent the main tool for the assessment of cardiovascular risk in patients in primary prevention. The accuracy of such an estimate can be substantially improved considering the potential contribution of some additional risk factors (C-reactive protein, lipoprotein(a), family history of cardiovascular disease) and conditions (environmental pollution, sleep quality, socioeconomic status, educational level) whose impact on the cardiovascular risk has been better understood in recent years. The availability of non-invasive procedures to evaluate subclinical atherosclerosis may help to identify subjects needing an earlier intervention. Unveiling the presence of these conditions will improve cardiovascular risk estimation, granting a more appropriate intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

The accurate assessment of cardiovascular risk in subjects in primary prevention with the use of algorithms and risk charts together with the evaluation of additional factors will allow physicians to approach each patient with personalized strategies, which should translate into an increased adherence to therapy and, as a consequence, a reduced cardiovascular risk.

Elevated lipoprotein (a) levels and risk of peripheral artery disease outcomes: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Despite strong association of elevated lipoprotein (a) (Lp(a)) levels with incident coronary and cerebrovascular disease, data for incident peripheral artery disease (PAD) are less robust. The main objective of the present systematic review was to analyze the association between elevated Lp(a) levels and PAD outcomes.

METHODS

This systematic review was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. A literature search was performed to detect randomized clinical trials or observational studies with a cohort design that evaluated the association between Lp(a) levels and PAD outcomes.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies including 493,650 subjects were identified and considered eligible for this systematic review. This systematic review showed that the vast majority of the studies reported a significant association between elevated Lp(a) levels and the risk of PAD outcomes. The elevated Lp(a) levels were associated with a higher risk of incident claudication (RR: 1.20), PAD progression (HR: 1.41), restenosis (HR: 6.10), death and hospitalization related to PAD (HR: 1.37), limb amputation (HR: 22.75), and lower limb revascularization (HR: 1.29 and 2.90). In addition, the presence of elevated Lp(a) values were associated with a higher risk of combined PAD outcomes, with HRs in a range between 1.14 and 2.80, despite adjusting for traditional risk factors. Heterogeneity of results can be explained by different patient populations studied and varying Lp(a) cut-off points of Lp(a) analyzed.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review suggests that evidence is available to support an independent positive association between Lp(a) levels and the risk of future PAD outcomes. PROSPERO Registration No.: 289253.