Lipoprotein(a) and coronary atheroma progression rates during long-term high-intensity statin therapy: Insights from SATURN

Lipoprotein(a) and Long-Term Plaque Progression, Low-Density Plaque, and Pericoronary Inflammation

Importance

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]) is a causal risk factor for cardiovascular disease; however, long-term effects on coronary atherosclerotic plaque phenotype, high-risk plaque formation, and pericoronary adipose tissue inflammation remain unknown.

Objective

To investigate the association of Lp(a) levels with long-term coronary artery plaque progression, high-risk plaque, and pericoronary adipose tissue inflammation.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This single-center prospective cohort study included 299 patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD) who underwent per-protocol repeated coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) imaging with an interscan interval of 10 years. Thirty-two patients were excluded because of coronary artery bypass grafting, resulting in a study population of 267 patients. Data for this study were collected from October 2008 to October 2022 and analyzed from March 2023 to March 2024.

Exposures

The median scan interval was 10.2 years. Lp(a) was measured at follow-up using an isoform-insensitive assay. CCTA scans were analyzed with a previously validated artificial intelligence-based algorithm (atherosclerosis imaging-quantitative computed tomography).

Main Outcome and Measures

The association between Lp(a) and change in percent plaque volumes was investigated in linear mixed-effects models adjusted for clinical risk factors. Secondary outcomes were presence of low-density plaque and presence of increased pericoronary adipose tissue attenuation at baseline and follow-up CCTA imaging.

Results

The 267 included patients had a mean age of 57.1 (SD, 7.3) years and 153 were male (57%). Patients with Lp(a) levels of 125 nmol/L or higher had twice as high percent atheroma volume (6.9% vs 3.0%; P = .01) compared with patients with Lp(a) levels less than 125 nmol/L. Adjusted for other risk factors, every doubling of Lp(a) resulted in an additional 0.32% (95% CI, 0.04-0.60) increment in percent atheroma volume during the 10 years of follow-up. Every doubling of Lp(a) resulted in an odds ratio of 1.23 (95% CI, 1.00-1.51) and 1.21 (95% CI, 1.01-1.45) for the presence of low-density plaque at baseline and follow-up, respectively. Patients with higher Lp(a) levels had increased pericoronary adipose tissue attenuation around both the right coronary artery and left anterior descending at baseline and follow-up.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this long-term prospective serial CCTA imaging study, higher Lp(a) levels were associated with increased progression of coronary plaque burden and increased presence of low-density noncalcified plaque and pericoronary adipose tissue inflammation. These data suggest an impact of elevated Lp(a) levels on coronary atherogenesis of high-risk, inflammatory, rupture-prone plaques over the long term.

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.

Burden of elevated lipoprotein(a) among patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: Evidence from a systematic literature review and feasibility assessment of meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Elevated lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] level is an independent genetic risk factor that increases the risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) by 2-4 fold. We aimed to report the burden of clinically relevant elevated Lp(a) in secondary prevention ASCVD population as the evaluation of such evidence is lacking.

METHODS

A systematic literature review (SLR) was conducted using Embase®, MEDLINE®, and MEDLINE® In-Process databases to identify studies reporting burden of elevated Lp(a) levels from January 1, 2010, to March 28, 2022. Full-text, English-language studies including ≥500 participants with ≥1 Lp(a) assessment were included.

RESULTS

Sixty-one studies reported clinical burden of elevated Lp(a). Of these, 25 observational studies and one clinical trial reported clinical burden of clinically relevant elevated Lp(a) levels. Major clinical outcomes included major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE; n = 20), myocardial infarction (MI; n = 11), revascularization (n = 10), stroke (n = 10), cardiovascular (CV) mortality (n = 9), and all-cause mortality (n = 10). Elevated Lp(a) levels significantly increased the risk of MACE (n = 15) and revascularization (n = 8), while they demonstrated a trend for positive association with remaining CV outcomes. Meta-analysis was not feasible for included studies due to heterogeneity in Lp(a) thresholds, outcome definitions, and patient characteristics. Three studies reported humanistic burden. Patients with elevated Lp(a) levels had higher odds of manifesting cognitive impairment (odds ratio [OR] [95% confidence interval; CI]: 1.62 [1.11-2.37]) and disability related to stroke (OR [95% CI]:1.46 [1.23-1.72)]) (n = 2). Elevated Lp(a) levels negatively correlated with health-related quality of life (R = -0.166, p = 0.014) (n = 1). A single study reported no association between elevated Lp(a) levels and economic burden.

CONCLUSIONS

This SLR demonstrated a significant association of elevated Lp(a) levels with major CV outcomes and increased humanistic burden in secondary prevention ASCVD population. These results reinforce the need to quantify and manage Lp(a) for CV risk reduction and to perform further studies to characterize the economic burden.

Sex Differences Define the Vulnerability to Atherosclerosis

For several decades, atherosclerosis has attracted the attention of researchers around the world. Even being a major cause of serious cardiovascular disease and events, atherosclerosis is still not fully understood. Despite the fact that the main players in the pathogenesis of atherosclerosis are well known, many mechanisms of their implementation and interactions remain unknown. The same can be said about the risk factors for atherosclerosis. Many of them are known, but exactly how they work remains to be seen. The main objective of this review is to summarize the latest data on sex as a biological variable in atherosclerosis in humans and animals; to determine what we do not still know about how sex affects the process of growth and complications of atherosclerosis. In this review, we summarized data on sex differences at 3 atherosclerotic aspects: inflammation, vascular remodeling, and plaque morphology. With all overviewed data, we came to the conclusion on the atheroprotective role of female sex.

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

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

The correlation between lipoprotein(a) elevations and the risk of recurrent cardiovascular events in CAD patients with different LDL-C levels

Background

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] elevation is an important risk factor for coronary artery disease (CAD). However, the correlation between Lp(a) elevations and the risk of recurrent cardiovascular events in patients with established cardiovascular disease is controversial. Some studies have shown that Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels may influence the association between Lp(a) and cardiovascular risk. Our study aims to explore the correlation between Lp(a) elevations and cardiovascular risk in patients with different LDL-C levels.

Methods

We included 516 patients who received coronary stents due to acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and followed them for three years. They were divided into low-Lp(a) group and high-Lp(a) group according to Lp(a) levels, and the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and acute coronary events (ACE) was compared between the two groups. Then the patients were divided into three subgroups (S1:LDL-C ≥ 1.8 mmol/L; S2:1.4 ≤ LDL-C < 1.8 mmol/L; S3:LDL-C < 1.4 mmol/L). The correlation between Lp(a) elevations and cardiovascular risk in different subgroups was analysed by Cox proportional hazards models.

Results

The incidence of MACE and ACE in the high-Lp(a) group was significantly higher than those in the low-Lp(a) group (P < 0.05). Lp(a) elevations had independent prognostic value from the statistical point of view (MACE: HR = 1.63, 95%CI = 1.12–2.38, P = 0.012; ACE: HR = 1.70, 95%CI = 1.03–2.81, P = 0.037). Subgroup analysis showed that Lp(a) elevations increased cardiovascular risk when LDL-C ≥ 1.4 mmol/L. However, this correlation no longer existed when LDL-C levels were very low (< 1.4 mmol/L) (MACE: HR = 0.49, 95%CI = 0.17–1.42, P = 0.186; ACE: HR = 0.68, 95%CI = 0.18–2.61, P = 0.570).

Conclusions

Lp(a) elevations are associated with recurrent cardiovascular events when LDL-C levels are high, but this association may change when LDL-C levels are extremely low. CAD patients with combination of LDL-C ≥ 1.4 mmol/L and Lp(a) elevations shall be considered as high-risk groups and require further medication for the reduction of their LDL-C levels.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12872-022-02618-5.

Baseline Low-Density-Lipoprotein Cholesterol Modifies the Risk of All-Cause Death Associated With Elevated Lipoprotein(a) in Coronary Artery Disease Patients

Background: The prognostic value of elevated lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] in coronary artery disease (CAD) patients is inconsistent in previous studies, and whether such value changes at different low-density-lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels is unclear. Methods and Findings: CAD patients treated with statin therapy from January 2007 to December 2018 in the Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (NCT04407936) were consecutively enrolled. Individuals were categorized according to the baseline LDL-C at cut-off of 70 and 100 mg/dL. The primary outcome was 5-year all-cause death. Multivariate Cox proportional models and penalized spline analyses were used to evaluate the association between Lp(a) and all-cause mortality. Among 30,908 patients, the mean age was 63.1 ± 10.7 years, and 76.7% were men. A total of 2,383 (7.7%) patients died at 5-year follow-up. Compared with Lp(a) <50 mg/dL, Lp(a) ≥ 50 mg/dL predicted higher all-cause mortality (multivariable adjusted HR = 1.19, 95% CI 1.07-1.31) in the total cohort. However, when analyzed within each LDL-C category, there was no significant association between Lp(a) ≥ 50 mg/dL and higher all-cause mortality unless the baseline LDL-C was ≥ 100 mg/dL (HR = 1.19, 95% CI 1.04-1.36). The results from penalized spline analyses were robust. Conclusions: In statin-treated CAD patients, elevated Lp(a) was associated with increased risks of all-cause death, and such an association was modified by the baseline LDL-C levels. Patients with Lp(a) ≥ 50 mg/dL had higher long-term risks of all-cause death compared with those with Lp(a) <50 mg/dL only when their baseline LDL-C was ≥ 100 mg/dL.

Lipoprotein(a) is associated with coronary atheroma progression: analysis from a serial coronary computed tomography angiography study

BACKGROUND

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] has been closely related to coronary atherosclerosis and might affect perivascular inflammation due to its proinflammatory properties. However, there are limited data about Lp(a) and related perivascular inflammation on coronary atheroma progression. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the associations between Lp(a) and the perivascular fat attenuation index (FAI) with coronary atheroma progression detected by coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA).

METHODS

Patients who underwent serial CCTA examinations without a history of revascularization and with available data for Lp(a) within one month before or after baseline and follow-up CCTA imaging scans were considered to be included. CCTA quantitative analyses were performed to obtain the total plaque volume (TPV) and the perivascular FAI. Coronary plaque progression (PP) was defined as a ≥ 10% increase in the change of the TPV at the patient level or the presence of new-onset coronary atheroma lesions. The associations between Lp(a) or the perivascular FAI with PP were examined by multivariate logistic regression.

RESULTS

A total of 116 patients were ultimately enrolled in the present study with a mean CCTA interscan interval of 30.80 ± 13.50 months. Among the 116 patients (mean age: 53.49 ± 10.21 years, males: 83.6%), 32 patients presented PP during the follow-up interval. Lp(a) levels were significantly higher among PP patients than those among non-PP patients at both baseline [15.80 (9.09-33.60) mg/dLvs. 10.50 (4.75-19.71) mg/dL,P = 0.029] and follow-up [20.60 (10.45-34.55) mg/dLvs. 8.77 (5.00-18.78) mg/dL,P = 0.004]. However, there were no differences in the perivascular FAI between PP group and non-PP group at either baseline or follow-up. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that elevated baseline Lp(a) level (OR = 1.031, 95% CI: 1.005-1.058,P = 0.019) was an independent risk factor for PP after adjustment for other conventional variables.

CONCLUSIONS

Lp(a) was independently associated with coronary atheroma progression beyond low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and other conventional risk factors. Further studies are warranted to identify the inflammation effect exhibited as the perivascular FAI on coronary atheroma progression.

Very low lipoprotein(a) and increased mortality risk after myocardial infarction

BACKGROUND

Inconclusive data exist on risk associated with Lp(a) in patients after myocardial infarction (MI). Aims of the present study were to evaluate the association of Lp(a) level with total mortality and recurrent cardiovascular events.

DESIGN AND METHODS

Single center prospective registry of consecutive patients hospitalized for acute myocardial infarction between June 2017 and June 2020 at a large tertiary cardiac center with available blood samples drawn <24h of admission.

RESULTS

Data from 851 consecutive patients hospitalized for MI were evaluated. During the median follow-up of 19 months (interquartile range 10-27), 58 (6.8%) patients died. Nonlinear modelling revealed a U-shaped association between Lp(a) and total mortality risk. Compared to patients with Lp(a) ranging between 10-30 nmol/L and after multivariate adjustment, total mortality risk was increased both in patients with Lp(a)<7 nmol/L (hazard ratio (HR) 4.08, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.72-9.68) and Lp(a) ≥125 nmol/L (HR 2.92, 95% CI 1.16-7.37), respectively. Similarly, the risk of combined endpoint of acute coronary syndrome recurrence or cardiovascular mortality was increased both in patients with low (sub-HR 2.60, 95% CI 1.33-5.08) and high (sub-HR 2.10, 95% CI 1.00-4.39) Lp(a). Adjustment for heart failure signs at the time of hospitalization weakened the association with total mortality and recurrent cardiovascular events.

CONCLUSIONS

In the present analysis, both high and low concentrations of Lp(a) were associated with an increased risk of total mortality and recurrent cardiovascular events after MI. The excess of mortality associated with Lp(a) was partially attributable to more prevalent heart failure.

Elevated serum lipoprotein(a) is significantly associated with angiographic progression of coronary artery disease

Background

Lipoprotein(a)[Lp(a)] has been considered as an independent risk factor for coronary artery disease (CAD). The present study aimed to evaluate the association between baseline serum Lp(a) and CAD progression determined by angiographic score.

Methods

A total of 814 patients who had undergone two or more coronary computed tomography angiography at least 6 months apart were consecutively enrolled and the coronary severity was determined by the Gensini score system. Patients were stratified into two groups according to Lp(a)>300 mg/L and Lp(a) ≤ 300 mg/L or classified as “progressors” and “non‐progressors” based on the Gensini score rate of change per year. The association of continuous Lp(a) and Lp(a)>300 mg/L with CAD progression were respectively assessed by logistic regression analysis. Moreover, further evaluation of those association was performed in subgroups of the study population.

Results

Patients in the “progressors” group had significant higher Lp(a) levels. Furthermore, the multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that elevated Lp(a) (odds ratio [OR]: 1.451, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.177–1.789, p<.001) and Lp(a)>300 mg/L (OR:1.642, 95% CI:1.018–2.649, p = .042) were positively associated with CAD progression after adjusting for confounding factors. In addition, those relation seemed to be more prominent in subjects with lower body mass index (OR: 1.880, 95% CI: 1.224–2.888, p for interaction = .060).

Conclusions

Elevated baseline serum Lp(a) is positively and independently associated with angiographic progression of CAD, particularly in participants with relatively low body mass index. Therefore, Lp(a) could be a potent risk factor for CAD progression, assisting in early risk stratification in cardiovascular patients.

Utilization of IVUS improves all-cause mortality in patients undergoing invasive coronary angiography

Background and aims

Available data suggest that the use of IVUS for guidance of percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) improves the prognosis of patients undergoing complex interventions. We aimed to examine how the utilization of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) affects patient survival irrespective of procedure complexity.

Methods

The present analysis is based on the longitudinal ECAD registry of consecutive patients undergoing coronary angiography between 2004 and 2019. The incidence of death due to any cause was evaluated during a mean follow-up of 3.4 years. Cox regression analysis was used to determine the association of IVUS utilization with incident mortality.

Results

Overall, data from 30,814 coronary angiography exams (mean age 64.9 ± 12.5 years, 70.3% male) were included, among which 4991 procedures (16.2%) were guided by IVUS. Utilization of IVUS was associated with a 35% reduction in mortality, independent of traditional risk factors (0.64(0.58-0.71), p < 0.0001). The effect of IVUS on mortality was equally present in patients undergoing IVUS-guided coronary interventions (0.75[0.67-0.84], p < 0.0001) as well as purely diagnostic coronary angiography exams (0.62[0.56-0.72], p < 0.0001). In patients without coronary intervention, IVUS utilization led to a higher frequency of aspirin (82.6% vs. 61.9% for IVUS vs. no IVUS, p < 0.0001) and statin therapy (74.9% vs. 62.5%, p < 0.0001).

Conclusions

In a large longitudinal registry cohort of patients undergoing invasive coronary angiography, IVUS utilization was associated with lower long-term mortality. The beneficial role of IVUS utilization on survival was equally present for coronary interventions and diagnostic coronary angiograms. Our results support the use of intravascular imaging for decision making in interventional cardiology.

Lipoprotein (a) and the risk of elevated depressive symptoms: The Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis

Previous studies suggested a potential relationship between plasma lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] and elevated depressive symptoms. We aimed to investigate any such relationship in the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis participants who were free of cardiovascular events. Analysis included 4938 participants without elevated depressive symptoms and with Lp(a) levels measured at baseline. Participants were examined at four clinic visits over a 10-year period. Elevated depressive symptoms were assessed by the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) and were defined as a CES-D score ≥16 or use of anti-depressants. Lp(a) level was measured with a latex-enhanced turbidimetric immunoassay. After adjusting for demographics, socioeconomic factors and other confounding factors in Cox regression analyses, a higher ln-transformed Lp(a) level was associated with new elevated depressive symptoms since baseline (hazard ratio [95% CI] = 1.09 [1.02-1.16] per SD increment in ln-transformed level, P = 0.01). However, no association was found when elevated Lp(a) levels were assessed using clinical cut-off point (≥30 or 50 mg/dL), nor in sensitivity analyses using alternative definitions of elevated depressive symptoms. No significant interaction with race/ethnicity was found for all the above analyses. Also, no significant association was found between baseline Lp(a) levels and absolute or relative changes in CES-D score between baseline and last follow-up visits. Our study suggests a potential association between Lp(a) level and new elevated depressive symptoms, but such association was not robust in the sensitivity analyses. Future studies are warranted to investigate the role of Lp(a) in depressive symptoms in other cohorts.

Atherosclerosis: Making a U Turn

The development of potent cholesterol-reducing medications in the last decade of the twentieth century has altered the approach to prevention and treatment of cardiovascular disease (CVD). Initial experience with statins, and more recently with the addition of PCSK9 inhibitors, has proven that human CVD, like that in animal models, can be halted and regressed. Available clinical data show that the lower the achieved level of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, the greater the regression of disease. Investigative studies are now aimed to understand those factors that both accelerate and impede this healing process. Some of these are likely to be modifiable, and the future of atherosclerotic CVD treatment is likely to be early screening, use of measures to repair atherosclerotic arteries, and prevention of most CVD events.

Effect of different types and dosages of statins on plasma lipoprotein(a) levels: A network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Studies differ with respect to the effects of statins and their on lipoprotein(a)[Lp(a)] levels. The aim of the present study was to resolve these differences by determining the effect of various types and dosages of statins on Lp(a) levels.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane library for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the efficacy of statins on plasma Lp(a) levels. Study selection, data extraction and risk of bias assessment were conducted independently by four authors. We conducted pairwise meta-analysis and network meta-analysis (NMA). Consistency models were applied to NMA and the ranking probabilities for each treatment's efficacy were calculated. Node-splitting analysis was used to test inconsistency. This study was registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42020167612.

RESULTS

Twenty RCTs with 23,605 participants were included, involving 11 interventions. Most of the included studies presented some risks of bias, especially risks of performance and detection bias. In the pairwise meta-analysis, pooled results showed a small but statistically significant difference between high-intensity rosuvastatin and placebo on Lp(a) levels (MD = 1.81, 95 % CI [0.43, 3.19], P = 0.01). In the NMA, different types and dosages of statins showed no significant effect on the level of Lp(a), and there was no obvious difference between them. Subgroup analysis based on different populations and treatment durations did not provide any statistically significant findings about different statins on Lp(a) levels. Node-splitting analysis showed that no significant inconsistency existed (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Statins have no clinically significant effect on Lp(a) levels, and there is no significant difference in the effect on Lp(a) levels between different types and dosages of statins. Moderate-intensity pitavastatin tended to have the best effect on reducing Lp(a) levels; nevertheless, it was insignificant. Our findings highlight the necessity for further study of the effect of statins on Lp(a) levels in future studies.

Effect of C-Reactive Protein on Lipoprotein(a)-Associated Cardiovascular Risk in Optimally Treated Patients With High-Risk Vascular Disease: A Prespecified Secondary Analysis of the ACCELERATE Trial

Importance

Although lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]) is a causal genetic risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, it remains unclear which patients with established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease stand to benefit the most from Lp(a) lowering. Whether inflammation can modulate Lp(a)-associated cardiovascular (CV) risk during secondary prevention is unknown.

Objective

To examine whether Lp(a)-associated CV risk is modulated by systemic inflammation in optimally treated patients at high risk of CV disease.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A prespecified secondary post hoc analysis of the double-blind, multicenter randomized clinical Assessment of Clinical Effects of Cholesteryl Ester Transfer Protein Inhibition With Evacetrapib in Patients at a High Risk for Vascular Outcomes (ACCELERATE) trial was conducted between October 1, 2012, and December 31, 2013; the study was terminated October 12, 2015. The study was conducted at 543 academic and community hospitals in 36 countries among 12 092 patients at high risk of CV disease (acute coronary syndrome, stroke, peripheral arterial disease, or type 2 diabetes with coronary artery disease) with measurable Lp(a) and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) levels during treatment. Statistical analysis for this post hoc analysis was performed from September 26, 2018, to March 28, 2020.

Interventions

Participants received evacetrapib, 130 mg/d, or matching placebo.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The ACCELERATE trial found no significant benefit or harm of evacetrapib on 30-month major adverse cardiovascular events (CV death, myocardial infarction [MI], stroke, coronary revascularization, or hospitalization for unstable angina). This secondary analysis evaluated rates of CV death, MI, and stroke across levels of Lp(a).

Results

High-sensitivity C-reactive protein and Lp(a) levels were measured in 10 503 patients (8135 men; 8561 white; 10 134 received concurrent statins; mean [SD] age, 64.6 [9.4] years). In fully adjusted analyses, in patients with hsCRP of 2 mg/L or more but not less than 2 mg/L, increasing quintiles of Lp(a) were significantly associated with greater rates of death, MI, and stroke (P = .006 for interaction). Each unit increase in log Lp(a) levels was associated with a 13% increased risk of CV death, nonfatal MI, or stroke only in those with hsCRP levels of 2 mg/L or more (P = .008 for interaction). There was also a significant stepwise relationship between increasing Lp(a) quintiles and time to first CV death, MI, or stroke (log-rank P < .001) when hsCRP levels were 2 mg/L or more but not less than 2 mg/L. Sensitivity analyses in the ACCELERATE placebo-treated group yielded similar significant associations exclusively in the group with hsCRP of 2 mg/L or more.

Conclusions and Relevance

Elevated Lp(a) levels during treatment are related to CV death, MI, and stroke when hsCRP levels are 2 mg/L or more but not less than 2mg/L. This finding suggests a potential benefit of lowering Lp(a) in patients with residual systemic inflammation despite receipt of optimal medical therapy.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01687998.

Prognostic impact of lipoprotein(a) levels during lipid management with statins after ST-elevation acute myocardial infarction

The causal relationship of lipoprotein(a) with cardiovascular disease has been established. However, clinical impacts of lipoprotein(a) levels on adverse vascular events in patients with established coronary artery disease who are undergoing statin treatment have not been fully elucidated. We measured lipoprotein(a) levels of 668 consecutive patients with ST-elevated myocardial infarction upon admission and reevaluated lipoprotein(a) of 189 of these patients during statin treatment at least 6 months later than the date of index ST-elevated myocardial infarction. Changes in lipoprotein(a) and associations between lipoprotein(a) levels and the incidence of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event for 3 years were examined. Lipoprotein(a) at baseline was an independent predictor of 3-year major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event after ST-elevated myocardial infarction. Levels of lipoprotein(a) at follow-up were slightly but significantly elevated despite improvements in other lipid parameters due to statin treatment. Furthermore, higher levels of lipoprotein(a) achieved with statin treatment were also associated with the subsequent incidence of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event over 3 years, regardless of whether or not the LDL-cholesterol levels were below 100 mg/dl. In conclusion, lipoprotein(a) levels during lipid management by statin are also predictive of adverse vascular events in Japanese patients with ST-elevated myocardial infarction.

Association of Lipoprotein(a) With Risk of Recurrent Ischemic Events Following Acute Coronary Syndrome: Analysis of the dal-Outcomes Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

It is uncertain whether lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)], which is associated with incident cardiovascular disease, is an independent risk factor for recurrent cardiovascular events after acute coronary syndrome (ACS).

Objective

To determine the association of Lp(a) concentration measured after ACS with the subsequent risk of ischemic cardiovascular events.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This nested case-cohort analysis was performed as an ad hoc analysis of the dal-Outcomes randomized clinical trial. This trial compared dalcetrapib, the cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibitor, with placebo in patients with recent ACS and was performed between April 2008 and September 2012 at 935 sites in 27 countries. There were 969 case patients who experienced a primary cardiovascular outcome, and there were 3170 control patients who were event free at the time of a case event and had the same type of index ACS (unstable angina or myocardial infarction) as that of the respective case patients. Concentration of Lp(a) was measured by immunoturbidimetric assay. Data analysis for this present study was conducted from June 8, 2016, to April 21, 2017.

Interventions

Patients were randomly assigned to receive treatment with dalcetrapib, 600 mg daily, or matching placebo, beginning 4 to 12 weeks after ACS.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Death due to coronary heart disease, a major nonfatal coronary event (myocardial infarction, hospitalization for unstable angina, or resuscitated cardiac arrest), or fatal or nonfatal ischemic stroke.

Results

The mean (SD) age was 63 (10) years for the 969 case patients and 60 (9) years for the 3170 control patients, and both cohorts were composed of predominantly male (770 case patients [79%] and 2558 control patients [81%]; P = .40) and white patients (858 case patients [89%] and 2825 control patients [89%]; P = .62). At baseline, the median (interquartile range) Lp(a) level was 12.3 (4.7-50.9) mg/dL. There was broad application of evidence-based secondary prevention strategies after ACS, including use of statins in 4030 patients (97%). The cumulative distribution of baseline Lp(a) levels did not differ between cases and controls at P = .16. Case-cohort regression analysis showed no association of baseline Lp(a) level with risk of cardiovascular events. For a doubling of Lp(a) concentration, the hazard ratio (case to control) was 1.01 (95% CI, 0.96-1.06; P = .66) after adjustment for 16 baseline variables, including assigned study treatment.

Conclusions and Relevance

For patients with recent ACS who are treated with statins, Lp(a) concentration was not associated with adverse cardiovascular outcomes. These findings call into question whether treatment specifically targeted to reduce Lp(a) levels would thereby lower the risk for ischemic cardiovascular events after ACS.

Trial Registration

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00658515.

NHLBI Working Group Recommendations to Reduce Lipoprotein(a)-Mediated Risk of Cardiovascular Disease and Aortic Stenosis

Pathophysiological, epidemiological, and genetic studies provide strong evidence that lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a causal mediator of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and calcific aortic valve disease (CAVD). Specific therapies to address Lp(a)-mediated CVD and CAVD are in clinical development. Due to knowledge gaps, the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute organized a working group that identified challenges in fully understanding the role of Lp(a) in CVD/CAVD. These included the lack of research funding, inadequate experimental models, lack of globally standardized Lp(a) assays, and inadequate understanding of the mechanisms underlying current drug therapies on Lp(a) levels. Specific recommendations were provided to facilitate basic, mechanistic, preclinical, and clinical research on Lp(a); foster collaborative research and resource sharing; leverage expertise of different groups and centers with complementary skills; and use existing National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute resources. Concerted efforts to understand Lp(a) pathophysiology, together with diagnostic and therapeutic advances, are required to reduce Lp(a)-mediated risk of CVD and CAVD.

Prognostic value of elevated lipoprotein(a) in patients with acute coronary syndromes

BACKGROUND

Minimal lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] target values are advocated for high-risk cardiovascular patients. We investigated the prognostic value of Lp(a) in the acute setting of patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Plasma levels of Lp(a) were collected at time of angiography from 1711 patients hospitalized for ACS in a multicentre Swiss prospective cohort. Associations between elevated Lp(a) ≥30 mg/dL (cut-off corresponding to the 75th percentile of the assay) or Lp(a) tertiles at baseline, and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) at 1 year, defined as a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction or stroke, were assessed using hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) adjusting for traditional cardiovascular risk factors (age, sex, smoking, diabetes, hypertension, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol [LDL-C], high-density lipoprotein cholesterol [HDL-C] and triglycerides.

RESULTS

Lp(a) levels range between 2.5 and 132 mg/dL with a median value of 6 mg/dL and a mean value of 14.2 mg/dL. A total of 276 patients (23.0%) had Lp(a) plasma levels ≥30 mg/dL. Patients with elevated Lp(a) were more likely to be of female gender and to have higher levels of total cholesterol, LDL-C, HDL-C and triglycerides. Higher Lp(a) was associated with failure to reach the LDL-C target <1.8 mmol/L at 1 year (HR 1.71, 95% CI 1.13-2.58, P = 0.01). No association was found between elevated Lp(a) and MACE at 1 year (HR 1.05, 95% CI 0.64-1.73), nor for Lp(a) tertiles (HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.52-1.28, P > 0.20) or standardized continuous variables (0.98, 95% CI 0.82-1.19 for each increase of standard deviation).

CONCLUSIONS

Our real-world data suggest high Lp(a) levels at time of angiography are not predictive for cardiovascular outcomes in patients otherwise medically well controlled, but might be useful to identify patients who would not be on LDL-C targets 1 year after ACS.

Optimal Non-invasive Strategies to Reduce Recurrent Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Risk

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) remains the leading cause of death worldwide, with coronary artery disease (CAD) responsible for the vast majority of these deaths. Incidence is increasing in developing countries, and prevalence is increasing globally as populations age. Once CAD is manifest, recurrent event risk remains high.

RECENT FINDINGS

Multiple therapeutic avenues have had significant recent developments, including diet, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol management, triglycerides, hypoglycemic agents, antiplatelet agents, and oral anticoagulants. Combined approaches involving specific, tailored lifestyle, and pharmacological interventions will provide the most effective strategy for reducing the risk of recurrent CVD events. Here, we review risk prediction and non-invasive non-pharmacologic and pharmacologic approaches to mitigate residual coronary artery disease risk.

Lipoprotein(a) reductions from PCSK9 inhibition and major adverse cardiovascular events: Pooled analysis of alirocumab phase 3 trials

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Elevated lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] levels are considered a causal factor for cardiovascular disease. In phase 3 ODYSSEY trials, alirocumab reduced levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and Lp(a), with concomitant reductions in the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). We assessed whether lower on-study and greater percentage reductions in Lp(a) are associated with a lower risk of MACE.

METHODS

Post-hoc analysis of data pooled from 10 phase 3 ODYSSEY trials comparing alirocumab with control (placebo or ezetimibe) in patients (n = 4983) with cardiovascular disease and/or risk factors, and hypercholesterolemia despite statin/other lipid-lowering therapies.

RESULTS

Median (Q1, Q3) baseline Lp(a) levels were 23.5 (8.0, 67.0) mg/dL. Median Lp(a) changes from baseline with alirocumab were -25.6% vs. -2.5% with placebo (absolute reductions 6.8 vs. 0.5 mg/dL) in placebo-controlled trials, and -21.4% vs. 0.0% with ezetimibe (4.5 vs. 0.0 mg/dL) in ezetimibe-controlled trials. During follow-up (6699 patient-years), 104 patients experienced MACE. A 12% relative risk reduction in MACE per 25% reduction in Lp(a) (p=0.0254) was no longer significant after adjustment for LDL-C changes: hazard ratio per 25% reduction: 0.89 (95% confidence interval, 0.79-1.01; p=0.0780). In subgroup analysis, the association between Lp(a) reduction and MACE remained significant in a fully adjusted model among participants with baseline Lp(a) ≥50 mg/dL (p-interaction vs. Lp(a) < 50 mg/dL: 0.0549).

CONCLUSIONS

In this population, Lp(a) reductions were not significantly associated with MACE independently of LDL-C reductions. Reducing the risk of MACE by targeting Lp(a) may require greater reductions in Lp(a) with more potent therapies and/or higher initial Lp(a) levels.

Levels of Lipoprotein (a) in patients with coronary artery disease with and without inflammatory rheumatic disease: a cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVES

Patients with various inflammatory rheumatic diseases (IRDs) have increased risk of atherothrombotic disease. Lipoprotein (a) (Lp(a)) is a risk factor for atherosclerosis but its role in IRD with accompanying coronary artery disease (CAD) is still unclear. We aimed to examine if serum Lp(a) levels differed between CAD patients with and without accompanying IRD.

DESIGN

A cross-sectional observational, patient-based cohort study.

SETTING

Referred centre for coronary artery bypass grafting in the South Eastern part of Norway.

PARTICIPANTS

67 CAD patients with IRD (CAD/IRD) and 52 CAD patients without IRD (CAD/non-IRD). All patients were Caucasians, aged >18 years, without any clinically significant infection or malignancy.

METHODS

Lp(a) levels in serum were analysed by particle enhanced immunoturbidimetric assay, and Lp(a) levels were related to clinical and biochemical characteristics of the patient population.

RESULTS

We found no differences in serum levels of Lp(a) between CAD patients with and without IRD. In general, we found that Lp(a) correlated poorly with clinical and biochemical parameters including C reactive protein with the same pattern in the CAD/non-IRD and CAD/IRD groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data do not support a link between inflammation and Lp(a) levels in CAD and in general Lp(a) levels were not correlated with other risk factors for cardiovascular disease.

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

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The association between elevated plasma levels of lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) has been discussed for many years. Recent genetic findings have confirmed that elevated Lp(a) similar to elevated LDL-cholesterol (LDL-C) might be causally related to premature ASCVD. Lp(a) is relatively refractory to lifestyle interventions. The results of studies with statins and their possible effect on Lp(a) are conflicting. Specific Lp(a) apheresis is used as a treatment against background statin therapy and can decrease Lp(a). The purpose of this review is to discuss whether new drugs which decrease Lp(a) can prevent ASCVD and decrease ASCVD mortality when applied in addition to statins.

RECENT FINDINGS

Some new LDL-C-lowering drugs such as mipomersen and lomitapide decrease elevated Lp(a) in addition to statins but they have some unpleasant adverse effects. Recently, an antisense oligonucleotide against apo(a), AKCEA-APO(a)Rx, has been shown to selectively decrease Lp(a). The most recent advance in LDL-C lowering are PCSK9 inhibitors. Alirocumab and evolocumab do not only significantly reduce LDL-C on top of maximally tolerated statin therapy and prevent ASCVD events, but also further decrease Lp(a). There is no data to indicate whether mipomersen, lomitapide, or IONIS-APO(a)-LRx decrease ASCVD events and mortality. Conclusive evidence is still lacking as to whether the treatment with PCSK9 inhibitors against background statin therapy actually additionally reduces ASCVD risk due to the lowering of Lp(a) or simply due to lowering LDL-C to levels much lower than high-intensity statin treatment as monotherapy. Ongoing trials will probably provide an answer to these questions.

[Correlation of lipoprotein(a) with clinical stability and severity of coronary artery lesions in patients with coronary artery disease]

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the correlation of lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] with the clinical stability and severity of coronary artery stenosis in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD).

METHODS

A total of 531 patients undergoing coronary angiography in Nanfang Hospital between January, 2013 and December, 2016 were enrolled in this study. At the cutoff Lp(a) concentration of 300 mg/L, the patients were divided into high Lp(a) group (n=191) and low Lp(a) group (n=340). In each group, the patients with an established diagnosis of CAD based on coronary angiography findings were further divided into stable angina pectoris (SAP) group and acute coronary syndrome (ACS) group. The correlation between the severity of coronary artery stenosis and Lp(a) was evaluated.

RESULTS

The patients in high and low Lp(a) groups showed no significant differences in age, gender, body mass index, smoking status, hypertension, or diabetes (P>0.05). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that age, gender, and serum levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and Lp(a) were independent risk factors for CAD in these patients. A high Lp(a) level was associated with an increased risk of CAD (OR=2.443, 95%CI: 1.205-4.951, P=0.013). The patients with a high Lp(a) level were at a significantly higher risk of CAD than those with a low Lp(a) level irrespective of a low or high level of LDL-C (P=0.006 and 0.020). In the patients with CAD, the ACS group had a significantly higher Lp(a) level than the SAP group (P < 0.001); the proportion of the patients with high Gensini scores was significantly greater in high Lp(a) group than in low Lp(a) group (17.3% vs 5.6%, P=0.026), and a linear relationship was found between Lp(a) level and Gensini score (R=0.130, P=0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

Serum level of Lp(a) is an independent risk factor for CAD, and an increased Lp(a) is the residual risk for CAD. In patients with CAD, a high Lp(a) level is associated with the clinical instability and severity of coronary artery stenosis.

Lipoprotein(a) screening in young and middle-aged patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome

BACKGROUND

Elevated lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is an independent risk factor for coronary artery disease (CAD). However, its role in real-world practice and implications for clinical care remains limited. Under investigation herein, are the clinical characteristics associated with increased Lp(a) levels in patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome (ACS).

METHODS

Lp(a) was measured at admission in patients ≤ 65 years of age presenting with ACS in a single center. Logistic regression model was used to determine the independent association of clinical characteristics with elevated Lp(a).

RESULTS

A total of 134 patients were screened for Lp(a); 83% males, mean age 52 ± 8 years. Median Lp(a) level was 46 nmol/L (interquartile range [IQR] 13-91). Elevated Lp(a) > 72 nmol/L (30 mg/dL) was documented in 32% and associated with younger age at CAD diagnosis. In a multiple logistic regression model, premature CAD (odds ratio [OR] 3.85, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.48-10.07, p = 0.06), previous revascularization (OR 2.56, 95% CI 1.17-5.59, p = 0.019) and probable/definite familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) (OR 3.18, 95% CI 1.10-9.21, p = 0.033), were independently associated with elevated Lp(a). In contrast, Lp(a) levels were not associated with other traditional cardiovascular risk factors, previous statin treatment, C-reactive protein level or ACS type.

CONCLUSIONS

In young and middle-aged patients presenting with ACS, premature CAD, previous revascularization and FH were independently associated with elevated Lp(a), indicating progressive CAD and higher cardiovascular risk. These results, are in accordance with guideline based recommendations for Lp(a) screening, and may be of importance in addressing residual cardiovascular risk in young ACS patients, in light of the novel emerging therapies targeting Lp(a).

Is Lipoprotein(a) Ready for Prime-Time Use in the Clinic?

Lipoprotein (a) is a low-density lipoprotein-like particle covalently bound to a glycoprotein called apolipoprotein(a) that is under potent genetic control. Plasma levels of lipoprotein (a) vary by up to 1000-fold among individuals, with 1 in 4 having levels that increase the risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. New evidence supports a causal role for lipoprotein (a) in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and aortic valve stenosis. Individuals with elevated lipoprotein (a) have a high life-time burden of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. This notion is important for coronary prevention. But is lipoprotein (a) ready for prime-time use in coronary prevention clinics?

Lp(a) (Lipoprotein(a)) Levels Predict Progression of Carotid Atherosclerosis in Subjects With Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease on Intensive Lipid Therapy: An Analysis of the AIM-HIGH (Atherothrombosis Intervention in Metabolic Syndrome With Low HDL/High Triglycerides: Impact on Global Health Outcomes) Carotid Magnetic Resonance Imaging Substudy-Brief Report

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether Lp(a) (lipoprotein(a)) levels and other lipid levels were predictive of progression of atherosclerosis burden as assessed by carotid magnetic resonance imaging in subjects who have been treated with LDL-C (low-density lipoprotein cholesterol)-lowering therapy and participated in the AIM-HIGH trial (Atherothrombosis Intervention in Metabolic Syndrome With Low HDL/High Triglycerides: Impact on Global Health Outcomes).

APPROACH AND RESULTS

AIM-HIGH was a randomized, double-blind study of subjects with established vascular disease, elevated triglycerides, and low HDL-C (high-density lipoprotein cholesterol). One hundred fifty-two AIM-HIGH subjects underwent both baseline and 2-year follow-up carotid artery magnetic resonance imaging. Plaque burden was measured by the percent wall volume (%WV) of the carotid artery. Associations between annualized change in %WV with baseline and on-study (1 year) lipid variables were evaluated using multivariate linear regression and the Bonferroni correction to account for multiple comparisons. Average %WV at baseline was 41.6±6.8% and annualized change in %WV over 2 years ranged from -3.2% to 3.7% per year (mean: 0.2±1.1% per year; P=0.032). Increases in %WV were significantly associated with higher baseline Lp(a) (β=0.34 per 1-SD increase of Lp(a); 95% confidence interval, 0.15-0.52; P<0.001) after adjusting for clinical risk factors and other lipid levels. On-study Lp(a) had a similar positive association with %WV progression (β=0.33; 95% confidence interval, 0.15-0.52; P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite intensive lipid therapy, aimed at aggressively lowering LDL-C to <70 mg/dL, carotid atherosclerosis continued to progress as assessed by carotid magnetic resonance imaging and that elevated Lp(a) levels were independent predictors of increases in atherosclerosis burden.