Screening for and management of elevated Lp(a)

Health outcomes associated with phytosterols: An umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Phytosterols (PS), as a kind of plant active ingredients, have many benefits to human health. However, there is currently no comprehensive overview of the clinical evidence and an assessment of the evidence quality.

PURPOSE

We conducted an umbrella review, which incorporated verification spanning a number of meta-analyses and systematic reviews to clarify the link that existed between PS consuming and health outcomes.

METHODS

The databases PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and The Cochrane Library were searched for appropriate research and ultimately included 23 articles involving 79 results. Methodological quality and the validity of evidence received designation in the included meta-analyses leveraging the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR-2) and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE).

RESULTS

The consumption of PS makes a contribution to the alleviation of metabolic conditions such as hypercholesterolemia, diabetes, obesity, and hypertension. Its most essential function is to decrease cholesterol absorption, leading to dramatically reductions in total cholesterol and low density lipoprotein cholesterol. Furthermore, utilizing PS products can have a favorable impact on managing apolipoprotein levels along with decreasing the probability of obtaining atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.

CONCLUSION

This umbrella review summarized a range of beneficial functions of PS to humans, highlighting the promising potential for the development of PS into functional foods.

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.

Impact of phytosterol supplementation on plasma lipoprotein(a) and free fatty acid (FFA) concentrations: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Although some earlier studies have indicated the effect of phytosterol (PS) supplementation on serum lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) and free fatty acid (FFA) concentration, findings are still conflicting. We aimed to assess the impact of PS supplementation on serum Lp(a) and FFA concentration through a systematic review and meta-analysis of available RCTs.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We performed a systematic search of all available RCTs conducted up to 21 February 2019 in the following databases: PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane. The choice of fixed- or random-effect model for analysis was determined according to the I² statistic. Effect sizes were expressed as weighted mean difference (WMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Pooling of 12 effect sizes from seven articles revealed a significant reduction of Lp(a) levels following PS supplementation (MD: -0.025 mg/dl, 95% CI: -0.045, -0.004, p = 0.017) without significant heterogeneity among the studies (I² = 0.0%, p = 0.599). Also, PS supplementation significantly lowered FFA (MD: -0.138 mg/dl, 95% CI: -0.195, -0.081, p = 0.000) without significant heterogeneity among the studies (I² = 0.0%, p = 0.911). The results for meta-regression and sensitivity analysis were not significant.

CONCLUSION

The meta-analysis suggests that oral PS supplementation could cause a significant reduction in serum Lp(a) and FFA.

Incidence of elevated lipoprotein (a) levels in a large cohort of patients with cardiovascular disease

Background

Recently it has been demonstrated that elevated lipoprotein (a) (LPA) levels are associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease across multiple ethnic groups. However, there is only scanty data about the incidence of elevated LPA levels in different patient cohorts. As a consequence, we aimed to examine whether patients with elevated LPA levels might be seen more often in a cardiovascular center in comparison to the general population.

Methods

We reviewed LPA concentrations of 52,898 consecutive patients who were admitted to our hospital between January 2004 and December 2014. We subdivided them into different groups according to their LPA levels. Data was compared to available information in medical literature.

Results

26.4% of the patients had LPA levels >30 mg/dl which is in line with the data from literature. Mean level of LPA concentration in our study was twice as high in comparison to the general population (25.8% vs. 13.3%). 4.6% had LPA levels >98 mg/dl (general population <0.3%).

Conclusion

In patients admitted to a cardiovascular center the proportion of LPA >30 mg/dl is comparable to the general population but mean levels over all are twice as high and the proportion of patients with LPA levels of >98 mg/dl is extremely higher.

Lipoprotein(a) and Increased Cardiovascular Risk in Women

BACKGROUND

Approximately 20% of the population has elevated circulating levels of lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]), one of the most robust predictors of cardiovascular disease risk. This is particularly true for women.

HYPOTHESIS

Many female patients with "normal" traditional risk factors or low atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk scores may harbor high risk related to elevated levels of Lp(a).

METHODS

A retrospective, cross-sectional study of consecutive female patients presenting to Heart Centers for Women was performed. Discordance between low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and Lp(a) was determined. The ASCVD risk and Reynolds Risk Score models A (RRS-A) and B (RRS-B) were calculated, and level of agreement in patients meeting treatment threshold (≥7.5% for ASCVD, ≥10% for RRS-A and RRS-B) were compared.

RESULTS

Among 713 women, 290 (41%) had elevated Lp(a); however, LDL-C and Lp(a) were weakly correlated (r = 0.08). Significant discordance was observed between abnormal LDL-C and Lp(a) levels (McNemar P = 0.03). There was moderate correlation between RRS-A and ASCVD risk (r = 0.71, P < 0.001), and Bland-Altman plot showed diminished correlation with increased risk. More patients met treatment threshold by ASCVD risk estimation, but nearly 1 out of 20 patients met treatment threshold by RRS-A but not ASCVD score.

CONCLUSIONS

There is high prevalence of elevated Lp(a) among women presenting to Heart Centers for Women. Although traditional risk markers such as elevated LDL-C or high ASCVD risk may be absent in some women, elevated Lp(a) may identify patients who may benefit from aggressive risk-factor modification and pharmacologic therapy.

Current therapies for lowering lipoprotein (a)

Lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] is a human plasma lipoprotein with unique structural and functional characteristics. Lp(a) is an assembly of two components: a central core with apoB and an additional glycoprotein, called apo(a). Ever since the strong association between elevated levels of Lp(a) and an increased risk for CVD was recognized, interest in the therapeutic modulation of Lp(a) levels has increased. Here, the past and present therapies aiming to lower Lp(a) levels will be reviewed, demonstrating that these agents have had varying degrees of success. The next challenge will be to prove that Lp(a) lowering also leads to cardiovascular benefit in patients with elevated Lp(a) levels. Therefore, highly specific and potent Lp(a)-lowering strategies are awaited urgently.

Role of lipoprotein(a) in predicting the severity of new on-set coronary artery disease in type 2 diabetics: A Gensini score evaluation

The objective of the study was to investigate the usefulness of serum lipoprotein(a) level in predicting the severity of new on-set coronary artery disease in type 2 diabetics. A total of 1254 new on-set, consecutive coronary artery disease patients were classified into two groups: diabetes group (n = 380) and non-diabetes group (n = 874). The relationship between serum lipoprotein(a) levels and the severity of coronary artery disease assessed by Gensini score was analysed. Data showed that the diabetes group had higher serum triglyceride and high sensitivity C-reactive protein levels but lower high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels (all p < 0.05). The multivariate logistic regression analysis suggested that lipoprotein(a) was an independent predictor for high Gensini score (odds ratio = 1.82, 95% confidence interval: 1.10-3.12, p = 0.029) after adjusting for traditional cardiovascular risk factors. Additionally, lipoprotein(a) levels were positively correlated with Gensini score (rho = 0.15, p = 0.014) and significantly elevated according to the tertiles of Gensini score (p = 0.008) in diabetics. However, no such results were observed in non-diabetics. Our data indicate that lipoprotein(a) is an independent predictor for the severity of new on-set coronary artery disease patients accompanied by type 2 diabetes, suggesting that these patients may benefit from lipoprotein(a) management in clinical assessment.