Most significant reduction of cardiovascular events in patients undergoing lipoproteinapheresis due to raised Lp(a) levels – A multicenter observational study

Long-term lipoprotein apheresis reduces cardiovascular events in high-risk patients with isolated lipoprotein(a) elevation

BACKGROUND

Elevated lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is an established risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD). To date, the only approved treatment to lower Lp(a) is lipoprotein apheresis (LA). Previous studies have demonstrated that LA is effective in reducing cardiovascular (CV) risk in patients with elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and/or Lp(a). Here we report our long-term experience with LA and its effectiveness in reducing CVD events in patients with elevated Lp(a).

METHODS

This retrospective open-label, single-center study included 25 individuals with Lp(a) elevation >60 mg/dL and LDL-C < 2.59 mmol/L who had indication for LA. The primary endpoint of this study was the incidence of any CV event (determined by medical records) after initiation of LA.

RESULTS

Mean LA treatment duration was 7.1 years (min-max: 1-19 years). Median Lp(a) was reduced from 95.0 to 31.1 mg/dL after LA (-67.3 %, p < 0.0001). Mean LDL-C was reduced from 1.85 to 0.76 mmol/L after LA (-58.9 %, p < 0.0001). Prior LA, 81 CV events occurred in total (0.87 events/patient/year). During LA, 49 CV events occurred in total (0.24 events/patient/year; -0.63, p = 0.001). Yearly major adverse cardiac event (MACE) rate was reduced from 0.34 to 0.006 (-0.33, p = 0.0002). Similar results were obtained when considering only individuals with baseline LDL-C below 1.42 mmol/L.

CONCLUSION

In this observational study of a heterogeneous CV high-risk cohort with elevated Lp(a), LA reduced Lp(a) levels and was paralleled by a decrease in CV events and MACE. We recommend LA for patients with high Lp(a) who still have CV events despite optimal lipid-lowering medication and lifestyle changes.

State of the Art: Lipoproteinapherese

Lipoprotein apheresis (LA) is usually a last resort in cardiovascular high-risk patients in the context of secondary prevention after lifestyle measures and maximal pharmacotherapy have failed to prevent the occurrence of new atherosclerotic cardiovascular events (ASCVDE) or to achieve the internationally accepted target values for LDL cholesterol (LDL-C). Patients with homozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (hoFH), in whom myocardial infarctions can occur even in children < 10 years of age without adequate therapy, often owe their survival to LA (used here in primary prevention). Severe hypercholesterolemia (HCH) can often be well controlled with modern potent lipid-lowering agents, including PCSK9 approaches, so that the need for LA has decreased here over the years. In contrast, the number of patients in whom elevation of lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is relevant to atherogenesis is increasing in applications to the apheresis committees of the associations of panel physicians (KV). For this indication, LA is currently the only therapeutic procedure approved by the Federal Joint Committee (G-BA). LA significantly reduces the new occurrence of ASCVDE (comparison with the situation before the start of LA), especially in Lp(a) patients. There are convincing observational studies and a German LA Registry with now 10-year data, but there is no randomized controlled trial. This had been requested by the G-BA in 2008, and a corresponding concept was designed but not accepted by the ethics committee. In addition to the highly effective reduction of atherogenic lipoproteins, many discussed pleiotropic effects of LA itself, the medical rounds and motivating discussions also with the nursing staff, which take place within the weekly LA, certainly contribute to the success of the therapy (steady adjustment of all cardiovascular risk factors, lifestyle measures including smoking cessation, adherence of medication intake). This review article summarizes and discusses the study situation, clinical practical experience as well as the future of LA against the background of the currently rapid development of new pharmacotherapies.

The development of lipoprotein apheresis in Saxony in the last years

METHODS

Three hundred thirty-nine patients (230 men, 109 women) treated with lipoprotein apheresis in Saxony, Germany, in 2018 are described in terms of age, lipid pattern, risk factors, cardiovascular events, medication, and number of new admissions since 2014, and the data are compared with figures from 2010 to 2013.

RESULTS

Patients were treated by 45.5 physicians in 16 lipoprotein apheresis centers. With about 10 patients per 100 000 inhabitants, the number of patients treated with lipoprotein apheresis in Saxony is twice as high as in Germany as a whole. The median treatment time was 3 years. Almost all patients had hypertension; type 2 diabetes mellitus was seen significantly more often in patients with low Lipoprotein(a). Cardiovascular events occurred in almost all patients before initiation of lipoprotein apheresis, under apheresis therapy the cardiovascular events rate was very low in this high-risk group. For some cardiovascular regions even no events could be observed.

CONCLUSIONS

The importance of lipoprotein apheresis in Saxony had been increasing from 2010 to 2018.

Repeated lipoprotein apheresis and immune response: Effects on different immune cell populations

BACKGROUND

Atherosclerosis is considered a chronic inflammation of arterial vessels with the involvement of several immune cells causing severe cardiovascular diseases. Lipoprotein apheresis (LA) improves cardiovascular conditions of patients with severely disturbed lipid metabolism. In this context, little is known about the impact of LA on various immune cell populations, especially over time.

METHODS

Immune cells of 18 LA-naïve patients starting weekly LA treatment were analyzed before and after four apheresis cycles over the course of 24 weeks by flow cytometry.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

An acute lowering effect of LA on T cell and natural killer (NK) cell subpopulations expressing CD69 was observed. The non-classical and intermediate monocyte subsets as well as HLA-DR⁺ 6-sulfo LacNAc⁺ monocytes were significantly reduced during the apheresis procedure. We conclude that LA has the capacity to alter various immune cell subsets. However, LA has mainly short-term effects than long-term consequences on proportions of immune cells.

Role of Lipid-Lowering Therapy in Peripheral Artery Disease

Atherosclerosis is a multifactorial, lipoprotein-driven condition that leads to plaque formation within the arterial tree, leading to subsequent arterial stenosis and thrombosis that accounts for a large burden of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality globally. Atherosclerosis of the lower extremities is called peripheral artery disease and is a major cause of loss in mobility, amputation, and critical limb ischemia. Peripheral artery disease is a common condition with a gamut of clinical manifestations that affects an estimated 10 million people in the United States of America and 200 million people worldwide. The role of apolipoprotein B-containing lipoproteins, such as LDL and remnant lipoproteins in the development and progression of atherosclerosis, is well-established. The focus of this paper is to review existing data on lipid-lowering therapies in lower extremity atherosclerotic peripheral artery disease.

Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol lowering therapy for the secondary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease

Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) is highly prevalent and a major contributor to morbidity and mortality worldwide. Elevated blood cholesterol is a key driver of risk for atherosclerotic events, and patients with established ASCVD comprise a specific high-risk population in which low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) lowering therapy is strongly endorsed by multiple guidelines. An increasing number of medications across several pharmacologic classes are available today in clinical practice. Therefore, guidance on the appropriate use of these interventions is necessary for cost-effective solutions to managing residual atherothrombotic risk. In this review we summarize the key evidence supporting LDL-C lowering as described in the most recent 2018 multi-society Blood Cholesterol Guidelines, and provide a framework for optimizing LDL-C lowering therapy in secondary prevention populations.

Lipoprotein(a) Lowering-From Lipoprotein Apheresis to Antisense Oligonucleotide Approach

It is well-known that elevated lipoprotein(a)—Lp(a)—levels are associated with a higher risk of cardiovascular (CV) mortality and all-cause mortality, although a standard pharmacotherapeutic approach is still undefined for patients with high CV risk dependent on hyperlipoproteinemia(a). Combined with high Lp(a) levels, familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) leads to a greater CVD risk. In suspected FH patients, the proportion of cases explained by a rise of Lp(a) levels ranges between 5% and 20%. In the absence of a specific pharmacological approach able to lower Lp(a) to the extent required to achieve CV benefits, the most effective strategy today is lipoprotein apheresis (LA). Although limited, a clear effect on Lp(a) is exerted by PCSK9 antagonists, with apparently different mechanisms when given with statins (raised catabolism) or as monotherapy (reduced production). In the era of RNA-based therapies, a new dawn is represented by the use of antisense oligonucleotides APO(a)L_rx, able to reduce Lp(a) from 35% to over 80%, with generally modest injection site reactions. The improved knowledge of Lp(a) atherogenicity and possible prevention will be of benefit for patients with residual CV risk remaining after the most effective available lipid-lowering agents.

Actual situation of lipoprotein apheresis in patients with elevated lipoprotein(a) levels

An elevation of lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is an internationally recognized atherogenic risk factor, documented in epidemiological studies, in studies with Mendelian randomization and in genome-wide association studies (GWAS). At present, no drug is available to effectively reduce its concentration. In Germany, an elevation of Lp(a) associated with progressive cardiovascular diseases is officially recognized as an indication for a lipoprotein apheresis (LA). The number of patients who were treated with LA with this abnormality was steadily increasing in the years 2013-2016 - the official data are reported. In all new patients, who started to be treated at our LA center in 2017 (n = 20) the increased Lp(a) was a main indication for extracorporeal therapy, though some of them also showed clearly elevated LDL cholesterol (LDL-C) concentrations despite being treated with a maximal tolerated lipid-lowering drug therapy. A diabetes mellitus was seen in 5 patients. The higher was the Lp(a) level before the first LA session, the higher was the cardiovascular risk. Lp(a) concentrations measured before LA sessions were usually about 20% lower than those before the start of the LA therapy. Acutely, Lp(a) levels were reduced by about 70%. Following LA sessions the Lp(a) levels increased and in the majority reach pre-session concentrations after one week. Thus a weekly interval is best for the patients, but a few may need two sessions per week to stop the progress of atherosclerosis. The interval mean values were about 39% lower than previous levels. Several papers had been published showing a higher efficiency of LA therapy on the incidence of cardiovascular events in patients with high Lp(a) values when comparing with hypercholesterolemic patients with normal Lp(a) concentrations. Russian specific anti-Lp(a) columns positively affected coronary atherosclerosis. PCSK9 inhibitors reduce Lp(a) concentrations in many patients and in this way have a positive impact on cardiovascular outcomes. In the future, an antisense oligonucleotide against apolipoprotein(a) may be an alternative therapeutic option, provided a clear-cut reduction of cardiovascular events will be demonstrated.

Short- and long-term effects of lipoprotein apheresis on plasma hormones in patients with therapy-resistant dyslipidemia

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Lipoprotein apheresis (LA) is a highly effective method to improve the clinical and metabolic situation in patients with therapy-resistant disorders of lipid metabolism. Cholesterol is the substrate for the synthesis of all steroid hormones. If repeated massive reduction of LDL-cholesterol may interfere with human adrenal steroidogenesis, and could become clinically relevant is unknown, so far. Thus, the aim of this study was to determine possible short- and long-term effects of LA on blood plasma levels of ACTH, cortisol, aldosterone, DHEAS, renin and testosterone.

METHODS

In total, 39 patients, treated with one of four LA techniques were studied: 1. Lipid Filtration (LF; n = 7), 2. Dextran Sulfate Adsorption (DSA; n = 7), 3. Membrane Filtration Optimised Novel Extracorporeal Treatment (MONET; n = 8), and 4. Direct Absorption of Lipoproteins (DALI; n = 15). Hormone levels were analyzed before and after five LA sessions with an interval of 20 weeks covering a total observation time of two years. In addition patients were comprehensively characterized by clinical and laboratory data.

RESULTS

Patients treated with LA revealed an acute reduction of steroid hormones and ACTH, independent of apheresis technology but no long-term insufficiency in steroidogenesis was observed. Plasma renin levels were stable in LF patients and were highly elevated in patients under DSA, MONET and DALI apheresis throughout the observation period.

CONCLUSIONS

In summary, these data suggest that although different LA techniques considerably differ in their acute effects on hormone levels during LA, they did not alter long-term hormone levels sustainably.

Cardiovascular risk factors in patients with premature cardiovascular events attending the University of Dresden Lipid Clinic

OBJECTIVES

Despite improved treatment, premature cardiovascular (CV) events remain a major health problem. Aim of this study was to evaluate the patterns of risk factors in patients with premature CV events.

METHODS

CV risk factors (CVRF) were evaluated in 130 patients with a history of CV events (myocardial infarction, stroke, limb ischemia, stent and bypass intervention in any vessel bed) under 50 years of age attending our lipid clinic. Patients were also stratified according to their Lp(a) concentrations: group 1: 0-45 nmol/l (<18 mg/dl); group 2: >45-120 nmol/l (>18-50 mg/dl); group 3: >120 nmol/l (>50 mg/dl).

RESULTS

The most common risk factors in our patients were male sex (75%), current (61%) and previous smoking (9%), arterial hypertension (70%), and a positive family history of early CV events (54%) and hyperlipidemia (69%). Only 27% had a BMI >30 kg/m² and 14% had diabetes mellitus. 69% of patients with premature CV disease (CVD) showed Lp(a) levels > 120 nmol/l (>50 mg/dl). Patients with the highest Lp(a) showed a tendency of more frequent positive family histories of hyperlipidemia. They had experienced their first CV event on average 3 years earlier than those with low Lp(a). CV events predominantly involved coronary arteries. 85% of patients experienced at least one coronary event.

CONCLUSION

In patients with premature CV disease male sex, smoking, hypertension, a positive family history and elevated Lp(a) are the most important CV risk factors. Lp(a) should be considered in the management of young patients with CV disease.

One year follow-up of patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) on lipoprotein apheresis

BACKGROUND

Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is a valuable measure to assess left ventricular systolic function. Lipid lowering therapy by statins has been shown to have an impact on LVEF already after a 6 months treatment. Higher doses of statins have been claimed to be more effective as compared to a conventional one and even a difference between lipophilic and hydrophilic compounds has been reported. The effect of regular lipoprotein-apheresis (LP-apheresis) on LVEF was previously poorly examined. Patients involved in a regular LP-apheresis program are supposed to undergo a number of follow-up investigations among them myocardial scintigraphy and LVEF, measured by radionuclide ventriculography.

METHODS

We examined 18 patients before initiation and after one year of ongoing LP-apheresis. 13 patients (11 males, 2 females, mean age 58.3 ± 5.3 years, groups A) were since more than a year on stable, unchanged statin treatment (atorvastatin 40 mg, simvastatin 40 mg, rosuvastatin 20 mg±ezetimibe), the other 5 patients (3 males, 2 females, mean age 57.1 ± 4.6 years, group B) were intolerant to statins being on micronized fenofibrate±resorption inhibitors (cholestyramine). All patients had a Lp(a) < 30 mg/dl. As part of the usual follow-up monitoring, LVEF was determined by means of radionuclide ventriculography after application of 550 MBq ^99m Tc-pertechnetate.

RESULTS

The follow-up LVEF was checked at a mean of 48.7 weeks in group A and 51.2 weeks in group B. Except in 1 patient (LVEF 46.8% before vs. 45.2% after LP-apheresis initiation) in group A we noted a significant increase in LVEF in 12 patients of group A (92%) and in all patients of group B. Mean LVEF increased significantly in both groups (A: 42.7±8.1 → 46.5±7.5% (p < 0.001) and B: 41.9±8.4 → 46.5±6.3 %; p < 0.001). The relative rise was nearly identical (group A 9.6%, in group B 9.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicate that regular long-term LP-apheresis treatment apparently increases LVEF, independently on current statin treatment. This implies a role of lowering of atherogenic lipoproteins as underlying mechanism. A prospective study should clarify the relative extent of LVEF improvement induced by LP-apheresis.

Guidelines on the Use of Therapeutic Apheresis in Clinical Practice - Evidence-Based Approach from the Writing Committee of the American Society for Apheresis: The Eighth Special Issue

The American Society for Apheresis (ASFA) Journal of Clinical Apheresis (JCA) Special Issue Writing Committee is charged with reviewing, updating and categorizing indications for the evidence-based use of therapeutic apheresis (TA) in human disease. Since the 2007 JCA Special Issue (Fourth Edition), the committee has incorporated systematic review and evidence-based approaches in the grading and categorization of apheresis indications. This Eighth Edition of the JCA Special Issue continues to maintain this methodology and rigor in order to make recommendations on the use of apheresis in a wide variety of diseases/conditions. The JCA Eighth Edition, like its predecessor, continues to apply the category and grading system definitions in fact sheets. The general layout and concept of a fact sheet that was introduced in the Fourth Edition, has largely been maintained in this edition. Each fact sheet succinctly summarizes the evidence for the use of TA in a specific disease entity or medical condition. The Eighth Edition comprises 84 fact sheets for relevant diseases and medical conditions, with 157 graded and categorized indications and/or TA modalities. The Eighth Edition of the JCA Special Issue seeks to continue to serve as a key resource that guides the utilization of TA in the treatment of human disease.

Looking at Lp(a) and Related Cardiovascular Risk: from Scientific Evidence and Clinical Practice

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

A considerable body of data from genetic and epidemiological studies strongly support a causal relationship between high lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] levels, and the development of atherosclerosis and cardiovascular disease. This relationship is continuous, unrelated to Lp(a) threshold, and independent of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) and high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol levels. Unfortunately, the mechanism(s) through which Lp(a) promotes atherosclerosis are not clarified yet. Suggested hypotheses include: an increased Lp(a)-associated cholesterol entrapment in the arterial intima followed by inflammatory cell recruitment, abnormal upload of proinflammatory oxidized phospholipids, impaired fibrinolysis by inhibition of plasminogen activation, and enhanced coagulation, through inhibition of the tissue factor pathway inhibitor. This review is aimed at summarizing the available evidence on the topic.

RECENT FINDINGS

There are two clinical forms, isolated hyperlipidemia(a) [HyperLp(a)] with acceptable LDL-C levels (< 70 mg/dL), and combined elevation of Lp(a) and LDL-C in plasma. To date, no drugs that selectively decrease Lp(a) are available. Some novel lipid-lowering drugs can lower Lp(a) levels, but to a limited extent, as their main effect is aimed at decreasing LDL-C levels. Significant Lp(a) lowering effects were obtained with nicotinic acid at high doses. However, adverse effects apart, nicotinic acid is no longer prescribed and available in Europe for clinical use, after European Agency of Medicines (EMA) ban. The only effective therapeutic option for now is Lipoprotein Apheresis (LA), albeit with some limitations. Lastly, it is to be acknowledged that the body of evidence confirming that reducing plasma isolated elevation of Lp(a) brings cardiovascular benefit is still insufficient. However, the growing bulk of clinical, genetic, mechanistic, and epidemiological available evidence strongly suggests that Lp(a) is likely to be the smoking gun.

A genome-wide association study on lipoprotein (a) levels and coronary artery disease severity in a Chinese population

Lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] is a genetically determined risk factor of coronary artery disease (CAD). Previous genome-wide association studies (GWASs), which were mostly carried out in Caucasians, have identified many Lp(a)-associated SNPs. Here, we performed a GWAS on Lp(a) levels and further explored the relationships between Lp(a)-associated SNPs and CAD severity in 1,403 Han Chinese subjects. We observed that elevated Lp(a) levels were significantly associated with the increased synergy between percutaneous coronary intervention with TAXUS and cardiac surgery (SYNTAX) score and the counts of heavily calcified lesions and long-range lesions (LRLs; P < 0.05), which are defined as lesions spanning >20 mm. Moreover, we identified four independent SNPs, namely, rs7770628, rs73596816, and rs6926458 in LPA, and rs144217738 in SLC22A2, that were significantly associated with Lp(a) levels. We also found that rs7770628 was associated with high SYNTAX scores [odds ratio (OR) (95% CI): 1.37 (1.05-1.80), P = 0.0213, false discovery rate (FDR) = 0.0852], and that rs7770628 and rs73596816 were associated with high risk of harboring LRLs [OR (95% CI): 1.53 (1.17-2.01), P = 0.0018, FDR = 0.0072 and 1.72 (1.19-2.49), P = 0.0040, FDR = 0.0080, respectively]. Our study was a large-scale GWAS to identify Lp(a)-associated variants in the Han Chinese population. Our findings highlight the importance and potential of Lp(a) intervention and expand our understanding of CAD prevention and treatment.

Lipoprotein(a) apheresis in patients with peripheral arterial disease: rationale and clinical results

Patients with symptomatic peripheral arterial disease (PAD) are at a very high risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Elevated lipoprotein(a) levels have been shown to be a risk factor for coronary artery disease (CAD) and stroke. More recently elevated lipoprotein(a) levels have also been demonstrated to be associated with prevalent and incident PAD, and even may be a stronger risk factor for PAD compared with CAD. Lipoprotein apheresis is currently the only efficient way to lower lipoprotein(a) levels. Lipoprotein(a) apheresis has been shown to reduce major coronary events in patients with CAD. There is increasing evidence that lipoprotein(a) apheresis also reduces the rate of major adverse limb events such as peripheral revascularizations and amputations in PAD patients, and improves symptoms of PAD such as pain on exertion. This review summarizes the current knowledge on the clinical role of lipoprotein(a) for PAD and the disease-specific effect of lipoprotein(a) apheresis, and suggests indications for screening for and treating of elevated lipoprotein(a) levels in patients with PAD.

Lipoprotein(a)-an interdisciplinary challenge

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is an internationally recognized atherogenic risk factor which is inherited and not changed by nutrition or physical activity. At present, only proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors may modestly decrease its concentration (but not in all patients)-leading to a certain decrease in cardiovascular events (CVE) in controlled studies. However, at present an elevation of Lp(a) is not a generally accepted indication for their use. More effective is lipoprotein apheresis (LA) therapy with respect to both lowering Lp(a) levels and reduction of CVE. In the future, an antisense oligonucleotide against apolipoprotein(a) will probably be available. Atherosclerosis in patients with an elevation of Lp(a) may affect several vessel regions (carotids, aorta, coronaries, leg arteries). Thus, Lp(a) should be measured in high-risk patients. These patients are usually cared for by their family doctors and by other specialists who should closely cooperate. Lipidologists should decide whether costly therapies like PCSK9 inhibitors or LA should be started. The main aim of current therapy is to optimize all other risk factors (LDL cholesterol, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, body weight, renal insufficiency). Patients should be regularly monitored (lab data, heart, arteries). This paper describes the duties of physicians of different specialties when caring for patients with high Lp(a) concentrations.

Criteria for referring patients to Spanish Atherosclerosis Society lipid units

The Spanish Arteriosclerosis Society has accredited more than 70 lipid units across the country. The main criteria for patients to be referred to these units are presented. These are not only grouped by the type of dyslipidaemia or the lipid levels, but also on certain clinical characteristics suggesting primary hyperlipidaemia, a complex diagnosis, or difficult management due to inefficacy, or side effects.

Reduced incidence of cardiovascular events in hyper-Lp(a) patients on lipoprotein apheresis. The G.I.L.A. (Gruppo Interdisciplinare Aferesi Lipoproteica) pilot study

BACKGROUND

Lipoprotein apheresis (LA) is the elective therapy for homozygous and other forms of Familial Hypercholesterolemia, Familial Combined Hypercholesterolemia, resistant/intolerant to lipid lowering drugs, and hyper-lipoproteinemia(a). Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] has been classified as the most prevalent genetic risk factor for coronary artery disease and aortic valve stenosis.

AIM

Our multicenter retrospective study has the aim to analyze the incidence of adverse cardiovascular events (ACVE) before and during the LA treatment, in subjects with elevated level of Lp(a) (>60 mg/dL) [hyper-Lp(a)] and chronic ischemic heart disease.

METHODS

We collected data of 23 patients (mean age 63 ± 9 years, male 77%; from hospital of Pisa 11/23, Pistoia 7/23, Verona 2/23, Padova 2/23 and Ferrara 1/23), with hyper-Lp(a), pre-apheresis LDL-cholesterol <100 mg/dL, cardiovascular disease, on maximally tolerated lipid lowering therapy and LA treatment (median 7 years, interquartile range 3-9 years). The LA treatment was performed by heparin-induced LDL precipitation apheresis (16/23), dextran-sulphate (4/23), cascade filtration (2/23) and immunoadsorption (1/23). The time lapse between first cardiovascular event and beginning of apheresis was 6 years (interquartile range 1-12 years).

RESULTS

The recorded ACVE, before and after the LA treatment inception, were 40 and 10 respectively (p < 0.05), notably, the AVCE rates/year were 0.43 and 0.11 respectively (p < 0.05) with a 74% reduction of event occurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data confirm long-term efficacy and positive impact of LA on morbidity in patients with hyper-Lp(a) and chronic ischemic heart disease on maximally tolerated lipid lowering therapy.

Current Role of Lipoprotein Apheresis in the Treatment of High-Risk Patients

Lipoprotein apheresis (LA) is a therapeutic approach to save the lives of patients who are at an extremely high risk of developing cardiovascular events (CVE), especially after all other therapeutic options were not tolerated, or appeared not to be effective enough. Homozygous familial hypercholesterolemia represents a clear indication to start LA therapy. Another recognized indication is a severe hypercholesterolemia, which induced CVE, often in association with other risk factors. In the last years, an expressive elevation of lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) emerged as an indication for LA. In Germany, progress of atherosclerosis should have been documented before the permission to start LA therapy is given in these patients. Usually, all LA methods acutely decrease both LDL-C and Lp(a). However, specific columns which reduce only Lp(a) are available. Case reports and prospective observations comparing the situation before and during LA therapy clearly show a high efficiency with respect to the reduction of CVE, especially in patients with high Lp(a) levels. PCSK9 inhibitors may reduce the need for LA in patients with heterozygous or polygenetic hypercholesterolemia, but in some patients, a combination of these drugs with LA will be necessary. In the future, an antisense oligonucleotide against apolipoprotein(a) may offer an alternative therapeutic approach.