Association between lipoprotein(a) and progression of coronary artery disease in middle-aged men

Plasma Lipoprotein(a) Concentration Is Associated With the Coronary Severity but Not With Events in Stable Coronary Artery Disease Patients: A Chinese Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Although lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) has been regarded as an independent risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), its predictive role in outcomes in stable coronary artery disease (CAD) has been undetermined. The aim of the present study was to investigate the relations of Lp(a) to the coronary severity and events in Chinese patients with angiography-proven stable CAD.

METHODS

A total of 3,278 patients with stable CAD were consecutively enrolled and the coronary severity was evaluated by the Gensini Score (GS) system. Patients were divided into two groups according to the median of GS: high GS group (n=1,585) and low GS group (n=1,693). The associations of continuous Lp(a), Lp(a) ≥300mg/L, and tertiles of Lp(a) with GS and events were respectively evaluated.

RESULTS

Patients in the high GS group had significantly higher concentrations of Lp(a). In addition, the multivariate Cox regression analysis indicated that elevated Lp(a) (odds ratio: 1.164, 95% confidence interval: 1.005-1.349), Lp(a) ≥300mg/L (odds ratio: 1.200, 95% confidence interval: 1.028-1.401), and the highest tertile of Lp(a) (odds ratio: 1.205, 95% confidence interval: 1.010-1.438) were statistically associated with GS after adjusted for potential confounders. However, although 215 (6.56%) events were established during a median of follow-up over 10,170 patient-years, no relationship between Lp(a) and events was found.

CONCLUSIONS

In this Chinese cohort study on stable CAD with moderate sample size and follow-up duration, data showed that Lp(a) was significantly associated with the coronary severity while not with cardiovascular events, similar to several studies, suggesting that further study is needed regarding the role of Lp(a) in ASCVD.

Lipoprotein(a) as a therapeutic target in cardiovascular disease

INTRODUCTION

Recent advances in genetics and epidemiology have once again thrust lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) into the clinical spotlight. Elevated plasma concentrations of Lp(a) are an independent, causal risk factor for coronary heart disease. The mechanisms underlying the pathogenicity of Lp(a) remain obscure, and uncertainty continues to surround the appropriate use of Lp(a) in the clinic.

AREAS COVERED

We summarize the most recent findings on the biology and epidemiology of Lp(a), and use this as a platform to discuss strategies to lower plasma Lp(a) concentrations. The majority of the existing approaches are not Lp(a) specific since they also improve other aspects of the lipid profile. It is possible, however, that the unique characteristics of Lp(a) can be exploited to design therapeutics to specifically lower Lp(a).

EXPERT OPINION

Lp(a) should be measured in selected patients, including those with a family history of cardiovascular disease (CVD), those with several risk factors for CVD and those who exhibit resistance to statins. Lp(a) lowering should not be the primary driver of choice of therapy, as it has not yet been established through randomized controlled trials that Lp(a) lowering per se has clinical benefit. The development of agents that specifically lower Lp(a) will allow interrogation of this question.

Lipoprotein(a) for risk assessment in patients with established coronary artery disease

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to assess the prognostic utility of lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] in individuals with coronary artery disease (CAD).

BACKGROUND

Data regarding an association between Lp(a) and cardiovascular (CV) risk in secondary prevention populations are sparse.

METHODS

Plasma Lp(a) was measured in 6,708 subjects with CAD from 3 studies; data were then combined with 8 previously published studies for a total of 18,978 subjects.

RESULTS

Across the 3 studies, increasing levels of Lp(a) were not associated with the risk of CV events when modeled as a continuous variable (odds ratio [OR]: 1.03 per log-transformed SD, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.96 to 1.11) or by quintile (Q5:Q1 OR: 1.05, 95% CI: 0.83 to 1.34). When data were combined with previously published studies of Lp(a) in secondary prevention, subjects with Lp(a) levels in the highest quantile were at increased risk of CV events (OR: 1.40, 95% CI: 1.15 to 1.71), but with significant between-study heterogeneity (p = 0.001). When stratified on the basis of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, the association between Lp(a) and CV events was significant in studies in which average LDL cholesterol was ≥130 mg/dl (OR: 1.46, 95% CI: 1.23 to 1.73, p < 0.001), whereas this relationship did not achieve statistical significance for studies with an average LDL cholesterol <130 mg/dl (OR: 1.20, 95% CI: 0.90 to 1.60, p = 0.21).

CONCLUSIONS

Lp(a) is significantly associated with the risk of CV events in patients with established CAD; however, there exists marked heterogeneity across trials. In particular, the prognostic value of Lp(a) in patients with low cholesterol levels remains unclear.

Lipoprotein (A): Better assessor of coronary heart disease risk in south Indian population

In an attempt to search for risk factors which can explain the increasing prevalence of coronary heart disease (CHD) in Indian population, we conducted a case-control study to assess the association of Lipoprotein (a)(Lp(a)) with CHD. One hundred and fifty one consecutive patients with clinical and angiographic evidence of CHD and forty-nine healthy controls were drawn for the study. Triglycerides, very low density cholesterol (VLDL-C), total cholesterol (total-C)/high density cholesterol (HDL-C) ratio, low density cholesterol (LDL-C)/HDL cholesterol ratio and Lp(a) were found to be higher in patients than controls. In female sex and in those with family history of CHD, higher total and LDL cholesterol levels were observed to be associated with higher Lp(a) levels. Lp(a) levels were also found to be higher in triple vessel disease than other vessel disease patients. Significant difference in Lp(a) levels were observed between normal coronaries vs. single and triple vessel disease(P<0.05) and also between single vs. double and triple vessel disease (P<0.01).Lp(a) levels correlated positively with vessel severity(P<0.005). Lp(a) levels >25 mg/dl were associated with coronary heart disease (Odds ratio 1.98 P<0.05 95% CI 0.007-1.18). Our findings suggest a cut-off level of 25mg/dl for determination of risk of CHD. Studies from different areas involving larger sample size are needed to confirm the findings of the present study.

Lipoprotein(a) is related to the extent of lesions in the coronary vasculature and to unstable coronary syndromes

BACKGROUND

Lp(a) is a highly atherogenic particle with a prothrombotic effect. Until now its relation to the extent and severity of the atheromatic lesions had not been established by standard procedures.

HYPOTHESIS

This study examined the correlation of Lp(a) to the extent and severity of coronary artery disease (CAD) and its relation to unstable clinical events (not including sudden death).

METHODS

In 202 patients undergoing coronary angiography, plasma lipids were measured with the usual procedures and Lp(a) with the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. The extent of CAD was expressed in the number of diseased vessels and its severity in terms of the severity coefficient and the obstruction coefficient.

RESULTS

A very strong relationship between LP(a) and the number of diseased vessels (p = 0.0007) signifying diffuse atherosclerosis, but no relation with the severity of the lesions. was found. However, it was the only lipid that correlated significantly with the number of totally occluded vessels (p = 0.0003). The thrombogenic ability of Lp(a) was manifested by increased incidence of myocardial infarction and unstable angina episodes in patients with elevated Lp(a) (p = 0.0157).

CONCLUSION

Elevated Lp(a) predisposes to the extent of CAD and total occlusions but not to the severity of lesions. Patients with increased Lp(a) levels and unstable angina are at increased danger of suffering myocardial infarction. Thus, Lp(a) may predispose to plaque destabilization and thrombosis of noncritical lesions.

The role of fibrinogen and fibrinolysis in peripheral arterial disease

Peripheral arterial disease (PAD) is associated with high rates of cerebrovascular and cardiovascular events; PAD is a marker of systemic atherosclerosis. As a result, standard therapy for all PAD patients should be directed at both peripheral and systemic atherosclerosis. Modification of established risk factors in the form of smoking cessation, correcting hypertension, optimizing diabetic control and normalizing lipids is essential. Furthermore, novel risk factors have emerged including fibrinogen and other hemostatic factors. Fibrinogen is a coagulation factor and a marker of the acute phase response (inflammation), a platelet activator, a major determinant of plasma viscosity and a component of the atherosclerotic plaque. Fibrinogen appears not only to predict the severity of PAD, but also serves as a marker for future development of PAD. Whether reducing the levels of fibrinogen and other coagulation factors will decrease the incidence and progression of PAD remains to be resolved. This review summarizes the role of fibrinogen in the pathogenesis of PAD and its association with other hemostatic factors. The role of fibrinolysis in patients with PAD is also considered.

Response of lipoprotein(a) levels to therapeutic life-style change in obese African-Americans

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is regarded as an independent risk factor for Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. The objectives of this study were: to determine the effects of diet and exercise on Lp(a) and to evaluate the relation of Lp(a) with the lipid profile (total serum cholesterol (TC), triglycerides (TG), low density lipoprotein (LDL) and high density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol). Baseline Lp(a), body mass index (BMI) and the lipid profiles were measured in 343 Obese (BMI >30kg/m(2)) African-Americans. After a 3-month intervention of diet and exercise by 105 participants, their lipids were re-measured. Baseline Lp(a) levels ranged from 1.2 to 280mg/dl. Lp(a) was inversely associated with triglyceride (P<0.05). After the intervention, Lp(a) and HDL increased by a mean of 20 and 5%, respectively. Total cholesterol, triglycerides, LDL and BMI decreased by 7, 10, 11 and 8%, respectively. Women taking estrogen replacement had a negligible change in Lp(a) while participants taking HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors had an increase in Lp(a) levels by 30%.

First WHO/IFCC International Reference Reagent for Lipoprotein(a) for Immunoassay – Lp(a) SRM 2B

Lipoprotein(a) is an important predictor of cardiovascular disease risk. The lack of internationally accepted standardization has impeded the broad application of this lipoprotein in laboratory medicine. The International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (IFCC), through its Working Group on Lipoprotein(a) and together with research institutions and several diagnostic companies, have succeeded in developing an international reference material that is intended for the transfer of a lipoprotein(a) concentration to manufacturers' master calibrators. IFCC SRM 2B has recently been accepted by the WHO Expert Committee on Biological Standardization as the ‘First WHO/IFCC International Reference Reagent for Lipoprotein(a) for Immunoassay’. The assigned unitage of 0.1071 nanomoles of lipoprotein(a) per vial is traceable to the consensus reference method for lipoprotein( a) and will enable conformity by diagnostic companies to the European Union's Directive on In vitro Diagnostic Medical Devices for the metrological traceability of calibrator materials.

Apolipoprotein(A) expression in intracranial aneurysms

OBJECTIVE

Elevated serum levels of lipoprotein(a), a risk factor for atherosclerosis (AS), are also associated with the presence of asymptomatic intracranial aneurysms. AS is present in some aneurysms, but its contribution to aneurysm formation and growth is unclear. Apolipoprotein(a) [apo(a)], the active moiety of lipoprotein(a), is present in atherosclerotic circle of Willis vessels but not in normal circle of Willis vessels. We wished to determine whether apo(a) is present in intracranial aneurysms independently of AS.

METHODS

With a purified anti-apo(a) monoclonal antibody, aneurysms (n = 25) and feeding vessels (n = 23) were examined for apo(a) expression by immunohistochemical analysis. Circle of Willis arteries with and without AS (n = 19), cavernous angiomas (n = 5), and arteriovenous malformations (n = 6) acted as control samples.

RESULTS

AS was present in 32% of aneurysms, and all of those aneurysms demonstrated mural immunopositivity for apo(a). However, aneurysms devoid of AS also demonstrated apo(a) immunopositivity. Apo(a) was demonstrated in 86% of available feeding vessels. Apo(a) deposition was not observed in cavernous angiomas but was present in arteriovenous malformations. Eleven Circle of Willis arteries (57.9%) were devoid of AS and demonstrated no apo(a) immunostaining, whereas the eight (42.1%) with AS were immunopositive for apo(a).

CONCLUSION

Apo(a) expression in intracranial aneurysms may occur independently of AS. Apo(a) in feeding vessels suggests a possible role for apo(a) in early events leading to aneurysm formation. Multilayered transmural apo(a) deposition in established aneurysms suggests apo(a) involvement in aneurysm growth, possibly via cycles of injury and repair. The absence of apo(a) in cavernous angiomas suggests that such injury might be pressure-mediated.

Atorvastatin lowers lipoprotein(a) but not apolipoprotein(a) fragment levels in hypercholesterolemic subjects at high cardiovascular risk

The effect of statins on Lp(a) levels is controversial; furthermore, the potential action of statins on apo(a) fragmentation is indeterminate. We therefore determined the circulating levels of Lp(a) and of apo(a) fragments in hypercholesterolemic patients before and after treatment (6 weeks) with Atorvastatin 10 mg/day (A10) or Simvastatin 20 mg/day (S20). In a double blind study, hypercholesterolemic patients (n=391) at high cardiovascular risk (LDL-C>=4.13 mmol/l; TG<2.24 mmol/l; 34% with documented CHD; 45% hypertensive; and 29% current smokers) were assigned to treatment with A10 (n=199) or S20 (n=192). Plasma Lp(a) and apo(a) fragment levels (n=206) were measured prior to and after treatment. At baseline, A10 and S20 groups did not differ in plasma levels of lipids, Lp(a) (A10: 0.45+/-0.48 mg/ml, S20: 0.46+/-0.5), and apo(a) fragments (A10: 3.88+/-5.22 microg/ml; S20: 3.25+/-3), and equally in apo(a) isoform size (A10: 26+/-5 kr, S20: 25.5+/-5.3). After treatment, both statins significantly reduced Lp(a) levels (A10: 0.42+/-0.47 mg/ml, 6% variation, P<0.001; S20: 0.45+/-0.53 mg/ml, 0.02% variation, P=0.046). A10 and S20 did not significantly differ in their efficacy to lower Lp(a) levels. In a multivariate logistic regression analysis, the reduction of Lp(a) levels was independently associated with Lp(a) baseline concentration, but not to other variables, including LDL-C reduction. Plasma levels of apo(a) fragments were not modified by either statin. In conclusion, both A10 and S20 significantly lowered Lp(a), although this effect was of greater magnitude in atorvastatin-treated patients.

Dietary advice given by a dietitian versus other health professional or self-help resources to reduce blood cholesterol

BACKGROUND

The average level of blood cholesterol is an important determinant of the risk of coronary heart disease. Blood cholesterol can be reduced by dietary means. Although dietitians are trained to provide dietary advice, for practical reasons it is also given by other health professionals and occasionally through the use of self-help resources.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of dietary advice given by a dietitian compared with another health professional, or the use of self-help resources, in reducing blood cholesterol in adults.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched The Cochrane Library (to Issue 2 1999), MEDLINE (1966 to January 1999), EMBASE (1980 to December 1998), Cinahl (1982 to December 1998), Human Nutrition (1991 to 1998), Science Citation Index, Social Sciences Citation Index, hand searched conference proceedings on nutrition and heart disease, and contacted experts in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials of dietary advice given by a dietitian compared with another health professional or self-help resources. The main outcome was difference in blood cholesterol between dietitian groups compared with other intervention groups.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed study quality.

MAIN RESULTS

Eleven studies with 12 comparisons were included, involving 704 people receiving advice from dietitians, 486 from other health professionals and 551 people using self-help leaflets. Four studies compared dietitian with doctor, seven with self-help resources, and one compared dietitian with nurse. Participants receiving advice from dietitians experienced a greater reduction in blood cholesterol than those receiving advice only from doctors (-0.25 mmol/L (95% CI -0.37, -0.12 mmol/L)). There was no statistically significant difference in change in blood cholesterol between dietitians and self-help resources (-0.10 mmol/L (95% CI -0.22, 0.03 mmol/L)). No statistically significant differences were detected for secondary outcome measures between any of the comparisons with the exception of dietitian versus nurse for HDLc, where the dietitian groups showed a greater reduction (-0.06 mmol/L (95% CI -0.11, -0.01)). No significant heterogeneity between the studies was detected.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

Dietitians were better than doctors at lowering blood cholesterol in the short to medium term, but there was no evidence that they were better than self-help resources. The results should be interpreted with caution as the studies were not of good quality and the analysis was based on a limited number of trials. More evidence is required to assess whether change can be maintained in the longer term. There was no evidence that dietitians provided better outcomes than nurses.

High level of lipoprotein(a) is a strong predictor for progression of coronary artery disease

Elevated levels of serum lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] are reported to be associated with risk of atherosclerosis and thrombosis. Little is known about the influence of Lp(a) on the progression of coronary artery disease. We evaluated the association of serum Lp(a) and the long-term changes of angiographic severity in patients who underwent repeated coronary angiography at intervals of more than 2 years. We evaluated 70 patients, and divided them into 3 groups by angiographic findings. Median Lp(a) concentration was significantly higher in the progression group (N=36) than in the no-change group (N=23) or the regression group (N=11) (32.4 vs 22, 19.3 mg/dl, p<0.05). Furthermore, the progression group had more patients whose Lp(a) levels were greater than 30 mg/dl (p=0.006), while in the regression group all patients were under 30 mg/dl. Stepwise logistic regression analysis for progression of lesions showed that Lp(a) > or =30 mg/dl remained significant, giving an estimated odds ratio (OR) of 2.46 (p= 0.005). In the subgroup analysis, OR in patients with mild lesions was reduced to 2.05 (p<0.05) while in patients with severe lesions OR was increased to 3.39 (p=0.003). The serum Lp(a) level has a close correlation with angiographic progression, and may be an important predictor for progression.

Relation between lipoprotein (a) and in vitro oxidation of apolipoprotein B-containing lipoproteins

OBJECTIVES

To assess the relationship between lipoprotein (a) [Lp (a)] and lipoprotein oxidation in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD).

DESIGN AND METHODS

Oxidation of apolipoprotein (apo)B-containing lipoproteins, vitamin E, carotenoids, lipid-lipoprotein levels were determined in 171 CAD and 70 non-CAD subjects.

RESULTS

In CAD patients with Lp (a) concentrations >/= 30 mg/dL; total cholesterol (TC), low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), malondialdehyde (MDA), and apo B levels were significantly higher and lag-time and age were significantly lower than those of CAD patients with Lp (a) concentrations < 30 mg/dL. In non-CAD subjects with Lp (a) concentrations >/= 30 mg/dL; TC, LDL-C, and vitamin E levels were significantly higher and lag-time was significantly lower than those of non-CAD subjects with Lp (a) concentrations < 30 mg/dL. In CAD patients, Lp (a) correlated negatively with lag-time and positively with MDA levels. Lp (a) correlated negatively with lag-time and vitamin E levels in non-CAD subjects.

CONCLUSIONS

We have shown that plasma apo B-containing lipoproteins of both CAD and non-CAD subjects with Lp (a) levels >/= 30 mg/dL are more susceptible to in vitro oxidative modification than those of subjects with Lp (a) levels < 30 mg/dL. The relationship between Lp (a) and enhanced susceptibility of apo B-containing lipoproteins to oxidation, appears to support routine investigation of Lp (a).

Lipoprotein classes and coronary disease regression

Lowering LDL cholesterol (LDL-C) levels to reduce or prevent coronary artery disease (CAD) progression and cardiac events in hypercholesterolemic subjects is now widely accepted. The clinical benefit of lowering LDL-C has recently been extended to individuals with normal or mildly elevated LDL-C. Recent analyses of large primary and secondary CAD prevention trials, however, clearly demonstrated that reducing LDL-C levels does not entirely account for the coronary event reduction associated with lipid-lowering therapy. Growing and compelling evidence is emerging on the role of triglyceride-rich lipoproteins (VLDL and IDL), high density lipoproteins (HDL), and small, dense LDL, as well as non lipid risk factors, in the regression or stabilization of atherosclerotic plaques of mild/moderate severity, which are associated with clinical cardiac events. Enzymes involved in the tight metabolic interrelationship between triglyceride-rich lipoproteins, small, dense LDL and HDL levels may represent potential therapeutic targets for CAD prevention by favourably altering lipoprotein composition and physical properties in addition to the current therapeutic focus on lipoprotein levels.

Apolipoproteins and lipoprotein particles in Moroccan patients with previous myocardial infarction

We investigated for the first time in the Moroccan population the relationship between lipoprotein particles and the progression of coronary atherosclerosis. Plasma lipid variables, including total cholesterol, triglycerides, high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol, apolipoproteins AI and B, Lp AI, Lp AI: AII, and Lp(a) were measured in 40 Moroccan adults who suffered a verified myocardial infarction before the age of 50 years. The results were compared with a healthy control group. Plasma total cholesterol, triglyceride, and Lp AI: AII levels of patients did not differ significantly from control subjects. Patients had lower plasma high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (P < 0.05), apo AI (P < 0.05), and Lp AI (P < 0.001) than control subjects, suggesting that the cholesterol reverse transport system is altered in patients with previous myocardial infarction. However, patients had higher plasma low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (P < 0.001), apo B (P < 0.001), and Lp(a) (P < 0.001). In all patients the best predictor of cardiovascular risk was the independent risk factor Lp(a) plasma level, and the Lp AI plasma level. In this study, the increased coronary atherosclerosis risk with elevated plasma levels of apo B and Lp(a), and with reduced Lp AI, was substantially modified by smoking habits, but not by family history of myocardial infarction.

Modulation of lipoprotein(a) atherogenicity by high density lipoprotein cholesterol levels in middle-aged men with symptomatic coronary artery disease and normal to moderately elevated serum cholesterol. Regression Growth Evaluation Statin Study (REGRESS) Study Group

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to examine whether lipoprotein(a) levels predict coronary artery lumen changes in patients with symptomatic coronary artery disease (CAD) and normal to moderate hypercholesterolemia.

BACKGROUND

Recent conflicting reports have confirmed or refuted the association of lipoprotein(a) with clinical events or angiographically verified disease progression.

METHODS

The association between serum lipoprotein(a) and changes in coronary artery lumen was studied in 704 men entered into the Regression Growth Evaluation Statin Study (REGRESS), a double-blind, placebo-controlled, quantitative angiographic study that assessed the effect of 2 years of pravastatin treatment. The primary end points were changes in average mean segment diameter (MSD) and average minimal obstruction diameter (MOD). Pravastatin- and placebo-treated patients were classified as having progressing, regressing or stable CAD, and median lipoprotein(a) concentrations were compared. Bivariate and multivariate regression analyses were performed in the overall patient group and in high risk subgroups.

RESULTS

Pravastatin treatment did not affect serum apolipoprotein(a) levels. Median in-trial (sampled at 24 months) apolipoprotein(a) levels for regressing, stable and progressing CAD were, respectively, 130, 162 and 251 U/liter in placebo-treated patients and 143, 224 and 306 U/liter in pravastatin-treated patients. Predictors of MSD and MOD changes were baseline MSD and MOD, in-trial apolipoprotein(a), in-trial high density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol and baseline use of long-acting nitrates. The multivariate models predicted 14% of MSD changes and 12% of MOD changes; apolipoprotein(a) predicted only 2.6% and 4.8%, respectively. However, in patients with in-trial HDL cholesterol levels <0.7 mmol/liter, apolipoprotein(a) predicted up to 37% of the arteriographic changes.

CONCLUSIONS

Serum lipoprotein(a) levels predict coronary artery lumen changes in normal to moderately hypercholesterolemic white men with CAD; its atherogenicity is marked in the presence of concomitant hypoalphalipoproteinemia.

The solution phase interaction between apolipoprotein(a) and plasminogen inhibits the binding of plasminogen to a plasmin-modified fibrinogen surface

In the present study, we assessed the binding of recombinant forms of apolipoprotein(a) [r-apo(a)] to plasminogen. Apo(a)-plasminogen interactions were demonstrated to be lysine-dependent, as they were abolished by the addition of epsilon-aminocaproic acid. Binding of r-apo(a) and plasma-derived Lp(a) to Glu-plasminogen was assessed in solution using a mutant form of recombinant plasminogen [Plg(S741C)] labeled at the active site with 5'-(iodoacetamido)fluorescein. High-affinity binding of apo(a) to plasminogen was observed with the 17-kringle r-apo(a) (Kd = 20.1 +/- 3.3 nM) as well as with plasma-derived Lp(a) (Kd = 5.58 +/- 0.08 nM). Binding studies using various truncated and mutant forms of r-apo(a) demonstrated that sequences within apo(a) kringle IV types 2-9 and the strong lysine binding site (LBS) in apo(a) kringle IV type 10 are not required for high-affinity binding to plasminogen. In all cases, the binding stoichiometry for the apo(a)-plasminogen interaction was determined to be 1:1. Binding data obtained using a 17-kringle r-apo(a) derivative lacking the protease-like domain (17KDeltaP; Kd = 3158 +/- 138 nM) indicate that sequences within the protease-like domain of apo(a) mediate its interaction with LBS in plasminogen. We determined that r-apo(a) and plasminogen bind to distinct sites on plasmin-modified fibrinogen with the concentration of plasminogen binding sites exceeding the concentration of r-apo(a) sites by a factor of 10. Furthermore, r-apo(a) is capable of inhibiting the binding of plasminogen to plasmin-modified fibrinogen surfaces, an effect which we show is attributable to the formation of a solution phase apo(a)/plasminogen complex which exhibits a greatly reduced affinity for plasminogen binding sites on plasmin-modified fibrinogen. The results of this study provide new insights into the mechanism by which apo(a) and Lp(a) may inhibit fibrinolysis, thus contributing to the atherothrombotic risk associated with this lipoprotein.

The familial hypercholesterolemia regression study: a randomized comparison of therapeutic reduction of both low-density lipoprotein and lipoprotein(a) versus low-density lipoprotein alone

Lipoprotein (a) [Lp (a)] is a risk factor for coronary heart disease (CHD), especially in the presence of a raised low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol (LDL-C). To ascertain whether reduction of both LDL and Lp(a) is more advantageous than reduction of LDL alone, patients with heterozygous FH and CHD were selected randomly to receive either LDL apheresis fortnightly plus simvastatin 40 mg/day or colestipol 20 g plus simvastatin 40 mg/day. Quantitative coronary angiography was undertaken before and after 2.1 years. Changes in serum lipids were similar in both groups except for the greater reduction of LDL-C and Lp(a) by apheresis. There were no significant differences in primary angiographic endpoints, and none of the angiographic changes correlated with Lp(a). Although LDL apheresis plus simvastatin was more effective than colestipol plus simvastatin in reducing LDL-C and Lp(a), it was not more beneficial in influencing coronary atherosclerosis. Decreasing Lp(a) seems unnecessary if LDL-C is reduced below 130 mg/dl.

The Lipoprotein and Coronary Atherosclerosis Study (LCAS): design, methods, and baseline data of a trial of fluvastatin in patients without severe hypercholesterolemia

Few direct clinical data are available regarding whether cholesterol-lowering therapy should be extended to patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) and normal or only slightly elevated plasma cholesterol concentrations. The one published angiographic trial designed to examine this question found no benefit. Additional prospective data will be provided by the Lipoprotein and Coronary Atherosclerosis Study (LCAS), a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of fluvastatin therapy (20 mg twice daily) monitored by both quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) and, in a subset of patients, positron-emission tomography (PET). Eligible subjects in LCAS were men and women 35-75 years of age with low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol of 115-190 mg/dL on stable dietary therapy and with angiographic evidence by caliper measurement of at least one coronary atherosclerotic lesion causing 30-75% diameter stenosis. Among the 429 patients randomized (mean age 58.8, 81% male), mean baseline LDL cholesterol was only 145.6 mg/dL. Any patient with mean prerandomization LDL cholesterol of 160 mg/dL or higher also received open-label adjunctive cholestyramine. The primary endpoint is within-patient per-lesion change in minimum lumen diameter (MLD) as measured by QCA at baseline and 2.5-year follow-up. All evaluable lesions had MLD at least 0.8mm less than the reference lumen diameter at either baseline or follow-up and MLD at least 25% of the reference lumen diameter at baseline. Data obtained on myocardial perfusion changes (99 patients underwent initial PET), special lipid particles, and coagulation factors may help define which patients with CHD and relatively low LDL cholesterol will benefit from lipid-lowering treatment.

Risk of primary and recurrent acute myocardial infarction from lipoprotein(a) in men and women

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to examine whether lipoprotein(a) concentrations were risk factors for a first acute and recurrent myocardial infarction.

BACKGROUND

There is conflicting evidence concerning the risk of acute myocardial infarction from lipoprotein(a). No studies have examined the risk of recurrent acute myocardial infarction from lipoprotein(a), and few have addressed the risk in women.

METHODS

This was a population-based case-control study of 893 men and women 35 to 69 years old participating in the World Health Organization Monitoring Trends and Determinants in Cardiovascular Disease (MONICA) Project in Newcastle, Australia in 1993 to 1994. Case and control patients were classified into those with and without a previous myocardial infarction, and median lipoprotein(a) concentrations were compared after adjusting for other variables. Quintiles of lipoprotein(a) concentration were also examined.

RESULTS

Compared with control subjects without a previous myocardial infarction, median lipoprotein(a) concentrations increased from case patients with a first myocardial infarction (15 mg/liter higher, 95% confidence interval [CI] -36 to 60) to control patients with a previous myocardial infarction (159 mg/ liter higher, 95% CI 40 to 278) and case patients with a previous myocardial infarction (60 mg/liter higher, 95% CI -16 to 136, p < 0.01, test for trend). Women had significantly higher lipoprotein(a) concentrations than men (median 71 mg/liter higher, 95% CI 23 to 118). The highest quintile of lipoprotein(a) (>550 mg/liter) was a significant risk factor for a first acute myocardial infarction (odds ratio [OR] 1.77, 95% CI 1.03 to 3.03); but in those with a previous myocardial infarction, the highest quintile was not associated with recurrent myocardial infarction (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.30 to 2.37).

CONCLUSIONS

High lipoprotein(a) concentrations may be a marker of vascular or tissue injury or may be associated with other genetic or environmental factors that cause acute myocardial infarction. Currently, lipoprotein(a) measurement cannot be recommended for assessment of risk for acute myocardial infarction.

Exercise-induced increase in lipoprotein (a)

In the Oslo Diet and Exercise Study (ODES) 219 healthy middle-aged physically inactive persons with moderately deranged risk factor levels (increased bodyweight, diastolic blood pressure, serum cholesterol, triglycerides, decreased HDL-cholesterol) were randomized to 4 intervention groups: dietary intervention, exercise, diet + exercise and control. The purpose of the study was to test if these interventions maintained for a year, isolated or in combination, would change coronary risk factor levels as compared to control. One of the risk factors included was lipoprotein (a) (Lp(a)). The hypothesis to be tested was if physical exercise would be associated with increased levels of Lp(a) as a result of intervention. Those who exercised increased their Lp(a) levels with 15.4 (S.E. = 8.0) mg/l as compared to no exercise (P < 0.05). Also, dietary intervention tended to increase Lp(a), but the increase did not reach statistical significance. There was no detectable interaction on the effect on Lp(a) of the two intervention modalities. A dose-response relationship was found between change in the exercise-specific variables heart rate and peak oxygen uptake, and Lp(a)-change and this dose-response was most pronounced in the exercise group. Change in Lp(a) was associated to change in several lifestyle related variables such as alcohol intake and waist circumference, pointing to the possibility that Lp(a), at least in some subpopulations, is more amenable to change through lifestyle alterations than reported so far.

Plasma lipoprotein(a) levels in subjects attending a metabolic ward. Discrimination between individuals with and without a history of ischemic stroke

In this cross-sectional study we compared the abilities of lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)], plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 (PAI-1), and tissue plasminogen activator (TPA) to discriminate between individuals with and without a history of stroke from among subjects in a metabolic ward. A total of 210 subjects (108 men and 102 women; mean age, 63.8 years; range, 31 to 86 years) provided plasma and DNA samples for the study. Of these, 51 men and 50 women had a history of ischemic stroke. The 109 subjects without a history of stroke were compared with those with such a history for major risk factors for ischemic events. Mean plasma TPA and PAI-1 levels significantly (P < .001) discriminated among subjects younger than 70 years with a history of stroke. The mean plasma Lp(a) level of stroke subjects (21.9 mg/dL) did not differ significantly from that of control subjects (15.2 mg/dL). However, among individuals < 70 years old, Lp(a) plasma levels > 50 mg/dL were more common among stroke patients (8 with versus 1 without, P < .01 by chi 2 test). A molecular variation in the 5' flanking region of the apo(a) gene that has been related to elevated Lp(a) plasma levels (G/A-914) was not strongly correlated with circulating levels of Lp(a), nor did Lp(a) levels correlate with a polymorphism of the apo(a) gene (G/A-21), which is strongly linked (P < .001) to the G/A-914 variation. In this setting, the relation between Lp(a) and cerebral ischemia appears to be limited to individuals below 70 years with elevated (> 50 mg/dL) plasma levels of the lipoprotein.

Serum lipoprotein(a) concentrations are related to coronary disease progression without new myocardial infarction

OBJECTIVE

To examine the association between serum lipoprotein(a) and angiographically assessed coronary artery disease progression without new myocardial infarction.

PATIENTS AND DESIGN

85 patients with coronary artery disease who underwent serial angiography with an interval of at least two years were studied. Progression of coronary artery disease was defined as an increase in diameter stenosis of 15% or more. Vessels on which angioplasty had been performed were excluded from the analysis. The patients were classified into two groups: a progression group without new myocardial infarction (n = 48) and non-progression group (n = 37). Risk factors including lipoprotein(a) were evaluated to see how they were related to progression without myocardial infarction.

RESULTS

There were no differences between the two groups in the following factors: age, gender, the time interval between the angiographic studies, the distribution of the analysed coronary arteries, and history of well established coronary risk factors. Univariate analysis showed that serum lipoprotein(a) (P = 0.0002), cigarette smoking between the studies (P = 0.002), serum high density lipoprotein (P = 0.003), and serum low density lipoprotein (P = 0.01) were related to progression without myocardial infarction. Multivariate analysis selected two independent factors for progression without myocardial infarction: serum lipoprotein(a) (P = 0.003) and serum high density lipoprotein (P = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Serum lipoprotein(a) concentrations are closely related to the progression of coronary artery disease without new myocardial infarction. Lipoprotein(a) lowering treatment may be needed to prevent disease progression in patients with coronary artery disease and high serum lipoprotein(a).

Association of lipoprotein(a) with atherothrombotic events and fibrinolytic variables. A case-control study

Elevated plasma levels of lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] have been associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease. The aim of the present study was to investigate whether Lp(a) plasma levels were associated with subsequent ischemic events and with fibrinolytic variables in patients with established atherosclerotic disease enrolled in the prospective PLAT study. Lp(a) levels and fibrinolytic variables in 37 atherosclerotic patients who subsequently developed an atherothrombotic event during the first year of follow-up (cases) were compared with those in paired controls, matched for age, sex, diagnosis at enrollment and lipid pattern, who remained free from vascular events during the same time frame. Median and mean Lp(a) levels were similar in cases (6.05 mg/dl; 13.8 +/- 19.4 mg/dl) and controls (6.05 mg/dl; 17.1 +/- 21.6 mg/dl). In the whole group plasma Lp(a) levels correlated significantly with the increase of t-PA antigen (r = 0.368; p = 0.002) and fibrinolytic activity (r = 0.410; p = 0.001) induced by venous stasis but not with baseline fibrinolytic variables. These findings indicate that in patients with established atherosclerotic disease Lp(a) may interfere in vivo with the fibrinolytic process but is not predictive of subsequent ischemic events.

Antifibrinolytic effect of recombinant apolipoprotein(a) in vitro is primarily due to attenuation of tPA-mediated Glu-plasminogen activation

The effect of a 17-kringle form of recombinant apo(a) [r-apo(a)] on in vitro fibrin clot lysis was studied. In these assays, fibrin clots were formed in the wells of microtiter plates, and lysis of the clots was monitored by measurement of the turbidity at 405 nm. The results indicate that r-apo(a) produces a dose-dependent antifibrinolytic effect in clots formed using either purified components or barium-adsorbed plasma. This effect was found to be independent of clot structure, since lysis of clots formed using both high and low concentrations of thrombin was prolonged by r-apo(a) to the same extent. The two components of the antifibrinolytic effect of r-apo(a) were determined to be (i) attenuation of tPA-mediated plasminogen activation (the major component) and (ii) inhibition of plasmin degradation of fibrin, although r-apo(a) did not directly attenuate plasmin activity, as measured by S-2251 hydrolysis. r-Apo(a) interfered most substantially with tPA-mediated activation of Glu-plasminogen and less substantially with tPA-mediated Lys-plasminogen activation and urokinase-mediated activation of plasminogen. In summary, we have demonstrated that apo(a) is able to attenuate fibrin clot lysis in vitro, primarily as a consequence of the interference by apo(a) with tPA-mediated Glu-plasminogen activation. These studies illuminate possible mechanisms by which Lp(a) may contribute to the development of vascular disease in vivo.

Familial Hypercholesterolaemia Regression Study: a randomised trial of low-density-lipoprotein apheresis

Low-density-lipoprotein (LDL) apheresis has the theoretical advantage over anion-exchange resins and hydroxymethylglutaryl coenzyme A inhibitors of decreasing lipoprotein(a) as well as LDL. To confirm this advantage, patients with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolaemia and coronary artery disease were randomised to receive LDL apheresis fortnightly (with disposable dextran sulphate/cellulose columns) plus simvastatin 40 mg daily, or colestipol 20 g plus simvastatin 40 mg daily. Quantitative coronary angiography was repeated after a mean of 2.1 years in 20 patients undergoing apheresis and in 19 on combination drug therapy. Changes in serum lipoproteins were similar in both groups apart from greater lowering by apheresis of LDL cholesterol (3.2 vs 3.4 mmol/L in drug group, p = 0.03) and lipoprotein(a) (geometric means 14 vs 21 mg/dL, p = 0.03). There were no significant differences in primary angiographic endpoints per patient but lesion-based and segment-based secondary endpoints were biased in favour of the drug group (change in minimum lumen diameter of lesions 0.07 vs -0.004 mm, p = 0.046; change in mean lumen diameter of segments 0.02 vs -0.06 mm, p = 0.01). None of the angiographic changes correlated with lipoprotein(a) concentrations. Per patient changes in % diameter stenosis and minimum lumen diameter in the two groups were as or more favourable than those observed in five published trials that assessed lipid-lowering drug therapy by quantitative coronary angiography. Although LDL apheresis combined with simvastatin was more effective than colestipol plus simvastatin in reducing LDL cholesterol and lipoprotein(a), it was less beneficial in influencing coronary atherosclerosis and should be reserved for patients unresponsive to drugs. Decreasing lipoprotein(a) seems to be unnecessary if LDL cholesterol is reduced to 3.4 mmol/L or less.