Can Lp(a) Lowering Against Background Statin Therapy Really Reduce Cardiovascular Risk?

Lp(a) in the Pathogenesis of Aortic Stenosis and Approach to Therapy with Antisense Oligonucleotides or Short Interfering RNA

To date, no medical therapy can slow the progression of aortic stenosis. Fibrocalcific stenosis is the most frequent form in the general population and affects about 6% of the elderly population. Over the years, diagnosis has evolved thanks to echocardiography and computed tomography assessments. The application of artificial intelligence to electrocardiography could further implement early diagnosis. Patients with severe aortic stenosis, especially symptomatic patients, have valve repair as their only therapeutic option by surgical or percutaneous technique (TAVI). The discovery that the pathogenetic mechanism of aortic stenosis is similar to the atherosclerosis process has made it possible to evaluate the hypothesis of medical therapy for aortic stenosis. Several drugs have been tested to reduce low-density lipoprotein (LDL) and lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) levels, inflammation, and calcification. The Proprotein Convertase Subtilisin/Kexin type 9 inhibitors (PCSK9-i) could decrease the progression of aortic stenosis and the requirement for valve implantation. Great interest is related to circulating Lp(a) levels as causally linked to degenerative aortic stenosis. New therapies with ASO (antisense oligonucleotides) and siRNA (small interfering RNA) are currently being tested. Olpasiran and pelacarsen reduce circulating Lp(a) levels by 85-90%. Phase 3 studies are underway to evaluate the effect of these drugs on cardiovascular events (cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial injury, and non-fatal stroke) in patients with elevated Lp(a) and CVD (cardiovascular diseases). For instance, if a reduction in Lp(a) levels is associated with aortic stenosis prevention or progression, further prospective clinical trials are warranted to confirm this observation in this high-risk population.

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

Background

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

The role of inflammation and the possibilities of inflammation reduction to prevent cardiovascular events

Chronic systemic inflammation is a risk factor for cardiovascular (CV) disease (CVD). Whether this relationship extends to subclinical inflammation, quantified by values of circulating markers associated with inflammation in the high range of the normal interval, remains debatable. This narrative review evaluates evidence exploring this relationship. A review of pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions, including diet and lifestyle strategies, supplements, nutraceuticals, and other natural substances aimed at reducing inflammation was also conducted, since few reviews have synthesized this literature. PubMed and EMBASE were used to search the literature and several well-studied triggers of inflammation [oxidized LDL, Lp(a), as well as C-reactive protein (CRP)/high-sensitivity CRP (hs-CRP)] were included to increase sensitivity and address the lack of existing reviews summarizing their influence in the context of inflammation. All resulting references were assessed. Overall, there is good data supporting associations between circulating hs-CRP and CV outcomes. However, the same was not seen in studies evaluating triggers of inflammation, such as oxidized LDL or Lp(a). There is also insufficient evidence showing treatments to target inflammation and lead to reductions in hs-CRP result in improvements in CV outcomes, particularly in those with normal baseline levels of hs-CRP. Regarding pharmacological interventions, statins, bempedoic acid, and apabetalone significantly reduce circulating hs-CRP, unlike PCSK-9 inhibitors. A variety of natural substances and vitamins were also evaluated and none reduced hs-CRP. Regarding non-pharmacological interventions, weight loss was strongly associated with reductions in circulating hs-CRP, whereas various dietary interventions and exercise regimens were not, unless accompanied by weight loss.

Lipoprotein (a) as a treatment target for cardiovascular disease prevention and related therapeutic strategies: a critical overview

Advances in several fields of cardiovascular (CV) medicine have produced new treatments (e.g. to treat dyslipidaemia) that have proven efficacy in terms of reducing deaths and providing a better quality of life. However, the burden of CV disease (CVD) remains high. Thus, there is a need to search for new treatment targets. Lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] has emerged as a potential novel target since there is evidence that it contributes to CVD events. In this narrative review, we present the current evidence of the potential causal relationship between Lp(a) and CVD and discuss the likely magnitude of Lp(a) lowering required to produce a clinical benefit. We also consider current and investigational treatments targeting Lp(a), along with the potential cost of these interventions.

High lipoprotein(a) concentrations are associated with lower type 2 diabetes risk in the Chinese Han population: a large retrospective cohort study

Background

Lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] is a proven independent risk factor for coronary heart disease. It is also associated with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). However, the correlation between Lp(a) and T2DM has not been clearly elucidated.

Methods

This was a retrospective cohort study involving 9248 T2DM patients and 18,496 control individuals (1:2 matched). Patients were randomly selected from among inpatients in the Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University between 2006 and 2017. Clinical characteristics were compared between the two groups. Spearman rank-order correlation coefficients were used to evaluate the strength and direction of monotonic associations of serum Lp(a) with other metabolic risk factors. Binary logistic regression analysis was used to establish the correlation between Lp(a) levels and T2DM risk.

Results

The median Lp(a) concentration was lower in T2DM patients than in controls (16.42 vs. 16.88 mg/dL). Based on four quartiles of Lp(a) levels, there was a decrease in T2DM risk from 33.7% (Q1) to 31.96% (Q4) (P for trend < 0.0001). Then, Lp(a) levels > 28.72 mg/dL (Q4) were associated with a significantly lower T2DM risk in the unadjusted model [0.924 (0.861, 0.992), P = 0.030]. Similar results were obtained in adjusted models 1 [Q4, 0.925 (0.862, 0.993), P = 0.031] and 2 [Q4, 0.919 (0.854, 0.990), P = 0.026]. Furthermore, in the stratified analysis, Q4 of Lp(a) was associated with a significantly lower T2DM risk among men [0.813 (0.734, 0.900), P < 0.001] and those age > 60 years [0.819 (0.737, 0.910), P < 0.001]. In contrast, the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels and coronary heart disease (CHD) did not impact these correlations between Lp(a) and diabetes.

Conclusions

There is an inverse association between Lp(a) levels and T2DM risk in the Chinese population. Male patients, especially those aged more than 60 years with Lp(a) > 28.72 mg/dL, are low-risk T2DM individuals, regardless of LDL-C levels and CHD status.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12944-021-01504-x.

Lipoprotein(a) Where Do We Stand? From the Physiopathology to Innovative Terapy

A number of epidemiologic studies have demonstrated a strong association between increasing lipoprotein a [Lp(a)] and cardiovascular disease. This correlation was demonstrated independent of other known cardiovascular (CV) risk factors. Screening for Lp(a) in the general population is not recommended, although Lp(a) levels are predominantly genetically determined so a single assessment is needed to identify patients at risk. In 2019 ESC/EAS guidelines recommend Lp(a) measurement at least once a lifetime, fo subjects at very high and high CV risk and those with a family history of premature cardiovascular disease, to reclassify patients with borderline risk. As concerning medications, statins play a key role in lipid lowering therapy, but present poor efficacy on Lp(a) levels. Actually, treatment options for elevated serum levels of Lp(a) are very limited. Apheresis is the most effective and well tolerated treatment in patients with high levels of Lp(a). However, promising new therapies, in particular antisense oligonucleotides have showed to be able to significantly reduce Lp(a) in phase II RCT. This review provides an overview of the biology and epidemiology of Lp(a), with a view to future therapies.

Phytonutrient supplements and metabolic biomarkers of cardiovascular disease: An umbrella review of meta-analyses of clinical trials

Phytonutrients exert several pharmacological effects on humans. In this study, we performed an umbrella review of the association of phytonutrient supplements (PNSs) with biomarkers of cardiovascular disease. Relevant published systematic reviews and meta-analyses of clinical trials were identified by searching PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library until July 4, 2020. Weighted mean differences (WMDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for summarized effects and I² statistics of heterogeneity were extracted from individual studies or reanalyzed using a random-effects model. Of the 50 included studies, pooled effects of PNSs on blood pressure, lipid profiles, and glycemic control were reported in 16, 25, and 14 articles, respectively. The findings appeared to be highly heterogeneous among individual trials of included systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Ginger (WMD = -6.36 mmHg, 95% CI = -11.27, -1.46) and Hibiscus sabdariffa (WMD = -7.58 mmHg, 95% CI = -9.69, -5.46) were associated with lowered systolic blood pressure, whereas Aloe vera, Nigella sativa, and spirulina were associated with beneficial effects on both lipid profiles and glycemic control. In summary, this umbrella review has provided up-to-date evidence for the effect of PNSs on biomarkers related to hypertension, dyslipidemia, and diabetes. The results must be interpreted with caution due to potential heterogeneity.

Novel Experimental Agents for the Treatment of Hypercholesterolemia

Atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases (ASCVD) are still the leading cause of morbidity and mortality in most developed countries and even more in developing countries. Dyslipidemia is a well known main risk factor for ASCVD. Lipid-lowering treatment, particularly lowering LDL-cholesterol (LDL-C), can decrease the risk for ASCVD. New data and guidelines based upon them suggest that we should go with LDL-C levels as low as we can. Therefore, conventional lipid lowering agents (statins and statins+ezetimibe) are not enough mainly because of poor compliance and statin intolerance which is in the real world mostly pseudo-intolerance. PCSK9 inhibitors provided a new hope to further decrease LDL-C but are still expensive, they have to be injected subcutaneously twice a month and their long-lasting adverse effects are not known. Therefore, there is a constant need to develop novel, more potent, more safe, less expensive, more user friendly regimens of hypolipemic agents (bempedoic acid, selective PPAR alpha receptor modulators etc). One of the ways to overcome poor compliance and increase the potency of therapy with less adverse effects are fixed combinations of established drugs (statin+ezetimibe). The future of hypolipemic agents is based on antisense therapy, ie. the use of specific oligonucleotide sequences blocking the translation of the selected protein (targeting apolipoprotein CIII, lipoprotein (a), apolipoprotein B) or RNA silencing technique (PCSK9 mRNA) and are in various stages of clinical trials. Some of them are almost ready to use in everyday clinical practice. High risk and very high risk patients (eg. familial hypercholesterolemia, familial severe chylomicronemia syndrome) will benefit most. The aim of this review is to inform about novel hypolipemic agents – potent and safe drugs for dyslipidemia which should reduce the risk of ASCVD.

Serum lipoprotein(a) and risk of periprocedural myocardial injury in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention

Recent studies and guidelines have indicated that lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)]was an independent risk factor of arteriosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). This study aimed to determine the relationship between serum Lp(a) levels and the risk of periprocedural myocardial injury following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in coronary heartdisease (CHD) patients. This study enrolled 528 nonacute myocardial infarction (AMI) coronary heart disease (CHD) patients who successfully underwent PCI. Fasting serum lipids including Lp(a) were tested before PCI. High-sensitivity cardiac troponin I (hs-cTnI) was tested before PCI and 24 h after PCI. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to determine the relationship between preprocedural Lp(a) levels and postprocedural cTnI elevation from 1 × upper limit of normal (ULN) to 70 × ULN. As a continuous variable, multivariate analyses adjusting for conventional covariates and other serum lipids revealed that increased Lp(a) levels were independently associated with the risk of elevated postprocedural cTnI values above 1 × ULN (odds ratio [OR] per log-unit higher: 1.31, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.02-1.68, P = 0.033], 5 × ULN (OR: 1.25, 95%CI: 1.02-1.53, P = 0.032), 10 × ULN (OR: 1.48, 95%CI: 1.18-1.86, P = 0.001) and 15 × ULN (OR: 1.28, 95%CI: 1.01-1.61, P = 0.038). As a categorical variable, Lp(a) > 300 mg/L was an independent risk factor of postproceduralc TnI≥1 × ULN (OR 2.17, 95%CI 1.12-4.21, P = 0.022), ≥5 × ULN (OR 1.82, 95%CI 1.12-2.97, P = 0.017) and ≥10 × ULN (OR 2.17, 95%CI 1.33-3.54, P = 0.002). Therefore, it could be concluded that elevated preprocedural Lp(a) levels were associated with the risk of PCI-related myocardial injury in non-AMI CHD patients.

Increased cardiovascular risk associated with hyperlipoproteinemia (a) and the challenges of current and future therapeutic possibilities

Population, genetic, and clinical studies demonstrated a causative and continuous, from other plasma lipoproteins independent relationship between elevated plasma lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] concentration and the development of cardiovascular disease (CVD), mainly those related to athe-rosclerotic CVD, and calcific aortic stenosis. Currently, a strong international consensus is still lacking regarding the single value which would be commonly used to define hyperlipoproteinemia (a). Its prevalence in the general population is estimated to be in the range of 10%–35% in accordance with the most commonly used threshold levels (>30 or >50 mg/dL). Since elevated Lp(a) can be of special importance in patients with some genetic disorders, as well as in individuals with otherwise controlled major risk factors, the identification and establishment of the proper therapeutic interventions that would lower Lp(a) levels and lead to CVD risk reduction could be very important. The majority of the classical lipid-lowering agents (statins, ezetimibe, and fibrates), as well as nutraceuticals (CoQ10 and garlic), appear to have no significant effect on its plasma levels, whereas for the drugs with the demonstrated Lp(a)-lowering effects (aspirin, niacin, and estrogens), their clinical efficacy in reducing cardiovascular (CV) events has not been unequivocally proven yet. Both Lp(a) apheresis and proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitors can reduce the plasma Lp(a) by approximately 20%–30% on average, in parallel with much larger reduction of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (up to 70%), what puts us in a difficulty to conclude about the true contribution of lowered Lp(a) to the reduction of CV events. The most recent advancement in the field is the introduction of the novel apolipoprotein (a) [apo(a)] antisense oligonucleotide therapy targeting apo(a), which has already proven itself as being very effective in decreasing plasma Lp(a) (by even >90%), but should be further tested in clinical trials. The aim of this review was to present some of the most important accessible scientific data, as well as dilemmas related to the currently and potentially in the near future more widely available therapeutic options for the management of hyperlipoproteinemia (a).

Lipoprotein(a) and Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease: Current Understanding and Future Perspectives

PURPOSE

To review current knowledge of elevated lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] levels in relation to atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and discuss their potential use as biomarkers and therapeutic approaches in clinical practice.

METHODS

We summarized the current understanding and recent advances in the structure, metabolism, atherogenic mechanisms, standardized laboratory measurement, recommended screening populations, and prognostic value of Lp(a), with a special focus on the current potential treatment approaches for hyperlipoprotein(a)emia in patients with ASCVD.

RESULTS

Lp(a) is composed of LDL-like particle and characteristic apolipoprotein(a) [apo(a)] connected by a disulfide bond. Substantial evidence shows that elevated plasma Lp(a) level is a heritable, independent, and possibly causal risk factor for ASCVD through its proatherogenic, proinflammatory, and potentially prothrombotic properties. Current guidelines recommend Lp(a) measurement for patients with an intermediate-high risk of ASCVD, familial hypercholesterolemia, a family history of early ASCVD or elevated Lp(a), and progressive ASCVD despite receiving optimal therapy. Traditional Lp(a)-lowering approaches such as niacin, PCSK9 inhibitors, mipomersen, lomitapide, and lipoprotein apheresis were associated with a non-specific and limited reduction of Lp(a), intolerable side effects, invasive procedure, and high expense. The phase 2 randomized controlled trial of antisense oligonucleotide against the apo(a) encoding gene LPA mRNA showed that IONIS-APO(a)-L_RX could specifically reduce the level of Lp(a) by 90% with good tolerance, which may become a promising candidate for the prevention and treatment of ASCVD in the future.

CONCLUSIONS

It is reasonable to measure Lp(a) levels to reclassify ASCVD risk and manage individuals with elevated Lp(a) to further reduce the residual risk of ASCVD, especially with IONIS-APO(a)-L_RX.

What do we know about the role of lipoprotein(a) in atherogenesis 57 years after its discovery?

Elevated circulating concentrations of lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is strongly associated with increased risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (CVD) and degenerative aortic stenosis. This relationship was first observed in prospective observational studies, and the causal relationship was confirmed in genetic studies. Everybody should have their Lp(a) concentration measured once in their lifetime. CVD risk is elevated when Lp(a) concentrations are high i.e. > 50 mg/dL (≥100 mmol/L). Extremely high Lp(a) levels >180 mg/dL (≥430 mmol/L) are associated with CVD risk similar to that conferred by familial hypercholesterolemia. Elevated Lp(a) level was previously treated with niacin, which exerts a potent Lp(a)-lowering effect. However, niacin is currently not recommended because, despite the improvement in lipid profile, no improvements on clinical outcomes have been observed. Furthermore, niacin use has been associated with severe adverse effects. Post hoc analyses of clinical trials with proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type-9 (PCSK9) inhibitors have shown that these drugs exert clinical benefits by lowering Lp(a), independent of their potent reduction of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C). It is not yet known whether PCSK9 inhibitors will be of clinical use in patients with elevated Lp(a). Apheresis is a very effective approach to Lp(a) reduction, which reduces CVD risk but is invasive and time-consuming and is thus reserved for patients with very high Lp(a) levels and progressive CVD. Studies are ongoing on the practical application of genetic approaches to therapy, including antisense oligonucleotides against apolipoprotein(a) and small interfering RNA (siRNA) technology, to reduce the synthesis of Lp(a).

A new dawn for managing dyslipidemias: The era of rna-based therapies

The high occurrence of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) events is still a major public health issue. Although a major determinant of ASCVD event reduction is the absolute change of low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C), considerable residual risk remains and new therapeutic options are required, in particular, to address triglyceride-rich lipoproteins and lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)]. In the era of Genome Wide Association Studies and Mendelian Randomization analyses aimed at increasing the understanding of the pathophysiology of ASCVD, RNA-based therapies may offer more effective treatment options. The advantage of oligonucleotide-based treatments is that drug candidates are targeted at highly specific regions of RNA that code for proteins that in turn regulate lipid and lipoprotein metabolism. For LDL-C lowering, the use of inclisiran - a silencing RNA that inhibits proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) synthesis - has the advantage that a single s.c. injection lowers LDL-C for up to 6 months. In familial hypercholesterolemia, the use of the antisense oligonucleotide (ASO) mipomersen, targeting apolipoprotein (apoB) to reduce LDL-C, has been a valuable therapeutic approach, despite unquestionable safety concerns. The availability of specific ASOs lowering Lp(a) levels will allow rigorous testing of the Lp(a) hypothesis; by dramatically reducing plasma triglyceride levels, Volanesorsen (APOC3) and angiopoietin-like 3 (ANGPTL3)-LRx will further clarify the causality of triglyceride-rich lipoproteins in ASCVD. The rapid progress to date heralds a new dawn in therapeutic lipidology, but outcome, safety and cost-effectiveness studies are required to establish the role of these new agents in clinical practice.