Effect of Alirocumab on Lipoprotein(a) and Cardiovascular Risk After Acute Coronary Syndrome

Persistent lipoprotein(a) exposure and its association with clinical outcomes after acute myocardial infarction: a longitudinal cohort study

AIMS

To assess the link between persistent lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] exposure levels and clinical outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI).

METHODS

This longitudinal cohort study included 1131 AMI patients, categorizing persistent Lp(a) exposure based on measurements at admission and after 1 year. Patients were segmented into four groups using a 300 mg/L Lp(a) threshold: (1) persistent low Lp(a) (lowon admission - lowat 1 year); (2) fortified Lp(a) (lowon admission - highat 1 year); (3) attenuated Lp(a) (highon admission - lowat 1 year); and (4) persistent high Lp(a) (highon admission - highat 1 year). Multivariate Cox regression, subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis assessed the association between Lp(a) trajectories and major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), cardiovascular death, non-fatal MI, non-fatal stroke, unplanned revascularization, and all-cause death.

RESULTS

Over a median 50-month follow-up, 343 (35.70%) patients encountered MACCE, and 210 (18.70%) died, including 126 (11.20%) from cardiovascular causes. The group with persistent high Lp(a) faced increased risk of MACCE (HRadjusted, 1.871; 95% CI: 1.474-2.374), non-fatal stroke (HRadjusted, 1.647; 95% CI: 1.031-2.632), unplanned revascularization (HRadjusted, 1.571; 95% CI: 1.008-2.449), and both all-cause (HRadjusted, 1.546; 95% CI: 1.134-2.108) and cardiovascular death (HRadjusted, 2.163; 95% CI: 1.405-3.331), compared to the persistent low Lp(a) group.

CONCLUSIONS

In AMI patients, sustained high Lp(a) levels were significantly associated with increased risk of MACCE, non-fatal stroke, unplanned revascularization, and both all-cause and cardiovascular death.

Apolipoprotein B modifies the association between lipoprotein(a) and ASCVD risk

BACKGROUND

Elevated lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]) and apolipoprotein B (apoB) are individually associated with the risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Moreover, previous basic research has implicated the potential interaction between apoB and Lp(a) in the atherogenic process. We aimed to determine whether apoB levels significantly modulate ASCVD risk associated with Lp(a) in a large community-based population without baseline cardiovascular disease.

METHODS

Plasma Lp(a) and apoB were measured in the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) study. Elevated Lp(a) was defined as the highest race-specific quintile, and elevated apoB was defined as ≥89 mg/dl (median value). The modifying effect of apoB on the Lp(a)-related risk of ASCVD and coronary heart disease (CHD) was determined using Cox regression models adjusted for cardiovascular risk factors.

RESULTS

Among 12,988 ARIC participants, 3,888 ASCVD events and 1754 CHD events were observed. Elevated apoB (≥89 mg/dl) and elevated Lp(a) (race-specific quintile 5) were independently associated with ASCVD (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.19; 95% CI: 1.08-1.30; P <0.001; HR: 1.27; 95% CI: 1.16-1.40; P < .001, respectively). Lp(a)-by-apoB interaction was noted [Lp(a) (quintile 1-4 or quintile 5) * apoB (<89 or ≥89 mg/dl) = 0.002]. Compared to the concordantly low Lp(a) group, the individuals with high Lp(a) had a greater ASCVD risk only when apoB was elevated (HR: 1.48; 95% CI: 1.34-1.63; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

In the context of primary prevention, ASCVD risk associated with Lp(a) was observed only when apoB was elevated. The measurement of apoB can further refine and contextualize the ASCVD risk associated with Lp(a).

LP(a): The new marker of high cardiovascular risk

The biological functions and role in human diseases of lipoprotein (a) discovered more than 60 years ago are still not fully understood. The high homology of apo(a) with plasminogen initially leads us to think of Lp(a) as a player in the coagulation system as pro-thrombotic factor. Over the years, a solid body of evidence from biology, epidemiology and from genetics and mendelian randomization has contributed to identify Lp(a) as a causal factor of atherosclerotic coronary heart disease, aortic calcific valve stenosis and ischaemic stroke. The active involvement of Lp(a) in atherogenesis and aortic calcific valve stenosis has been demonstrated by experimental data regarding the role of oxidized phospholipids, which are the cargo of Lp(a) and the presence of a Lp(a) receptor in valve interstitial cells. In secondary prevention, patients optimally treated for low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) but with high Lp(a) levels show a residual cardiovascular risk. To date the LDL-C affecting drugs have a marginal effect on Lp(a). Statins produce a modest increase, monoclonal PCSK9i and Inclisiran a modest decrease not sufficient to reduce significantly the risk associated to Lp(a). Only lipoprotein apheresis and obicetrapib, a CETP novel inhibitor, reduce respectively by 75% and 40% Lp(a) levels. To obtain a lifetime risk reduction of 50% similar to that achieved by reducing LDL-C of about 40 mg/dl, Lp(a) should be reduced of about 100 mg/dl. The ongoing trials on drugs such as ASO, SiRnas, assembly inhibitors and maybe in the future the gene editing could obtain these results.

New Approaches to Lipoproteins for the Prevention of Cardiovascular Events

Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) is a leading global cause of mortality, and recent research has underscored the critical role of lipoproteins in modulating cardiovascular (CV) risk. Elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels have been linked to increased CV events, and while numerous trials have confirmed the efficacy of lipid-lowering therapies (LLT), significant gaps remain between recommended LDL-C targets and real-world clinical practice. This review addresses care gaps in LLT, emphasizing the necessity for innovative approaches that extend beyond LDL-C management. It explores combination therapy approaches such as statins combined with ezetimibe or PCSK9 inhibitors, which have shown promise in enhancing LDL-C reduction and improving outcomes in high-risk patients. Additionally, this review discusses new approaches in lipid modification strategies, including bempedoic acid, inclisiran, and drugs that lower Lp(a), highlighting their potential for CV risk reduction. Furthermore, it emphasizes the potential of polygenic risk scores to guide LLT and lifestyle changes despite challenges in implementation and genetic testing ethics. This article discusses the current guidelines and proposes innovative approaches for optimizing lipoprotein management, ultimately contributing to improved patient outcomes in ASCVD prevention.

Achieving More Optimal Lipid Control with Non-Statin Lipid Lowering Therapy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The use of statins has transformed approaches to the prevention of cardiovascular disease. However, many patients remain at a major risk of experiencing cardiovascular events, due to a range of factors including suboptimal control of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C). Accordingly, there is an ongoing need to develop additional strategies, beyond the use of statins, to achieve more effective reductions in cardiovascular risk.

RECENT FINDINGS

Genomic studies have implicated the causal role of LDL in atherosclerosis and identified that polymorphisms influencing factors involved in lipid metabolism influence both the level of LDL-C and cardiovascular risk. These findings have highlighted the potential for cardiovascular benefit from development of therapies targeting these factors and incremental benefit when used in combination with statins. Clinical trials have demonstrated that these new agents have favourable effects on both atherosclerotic plaque and cardiovascular events. Additional work has sought to improve intensification of statin therapy and adherence with lipid lowering therapy, to achieve more effective cardiovascular prevention via lipid lowering. Emerging therapies, beyond statins, have the potential to optimise lipid levels and play an effective role in the prevention of cardiovascular disease.

Lipoprotein(a) as a Pharmacological Target: Premises, Promises, and Prospects

Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease is a major health concern worldwide and requires effective preventive measures. Lp(a) (lipoprotein [a]) has recently garnered attention as an independent risk factor for astherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, with proinflammatory and prothrombotic mechanisms contributing to its atherogenicity. On an equimolar basis, Lp(a) is ~5 to 6 times more atherogenic than particles that have been widely associated with adverse cardiovascular outcomes, such as LDL (low-density lipoprotein). Lp(a) can enter the vessel wall, leading to the accumulation of oxidized phospholipids in the arterial intima, which are crucial for initiating plaque inflammation and triggering vascular disease progression. In addition, Lp(a) may cause atherothrombosis through interactions between apoA (apolipoprotein A) and the platelet PAR-1 (protease-activated receptor 1) receptor, as well as competitive inhibition of plasminogen. Because Lp(a) is mostly determined on genetic bases, a 1-time assessment in a lifetime can suffice to identify patients with elevated levels. Mendelian randomization studies and post hoc analyses of randomized trials of LDL cholesterol-lowering drugs showed a causal link between Lp(a) concentrations and cardiovascular outcomes, with therapeutic reduction of Lp(a) expected to contribute to estimated cardiovascular risk mitigation. Many Lp(a)-lowering drugs, including monoclonal antibodies, small interfering ribonucleic acids, antisense oligonucleotides, small molecules, and gene editing compounds, are at different stages of clinical investigation and show promise for clinical use. In particular, increased Lp(a) testing and treatment are expected to have a substantial impact at the population level, enabling the identification of high-risk individuals and the subsequent prevention of a large number of cardiovascular events. Ongoing phase 3 trials will further elucidate the cardiovascular benefits of Lp(a) reduction over the long term, offering potential avenues for targeted interventions and improved cardiovascular outcomes.

[Lp(a): What we know, what we don't know and what we hope for]

There is no doubt that lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a structurally complex molecule with unique biological functions. It plays an important role in the inflammatory process through multiple mechanisms, contributes to endothelial dysfunction, activation of monocytes, macrophages and proliferation of smooth muscle cells, and promotes the development of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). It is important to point out the complex bidirectional relationship between Lp(a) and inflammation, influencing one another and even exerting anti-inflammatory effects in certain situations. Likewise, Lp(a) can favor the development of heart valve disease, especially of the aortic valve. Numerous publications emphasize the need to determine Lp(a) levels in the population at least once in life and possible strategies to mitigate the risk of ASCVD generated by high Lp(a) levels. However, doubts or lack of knowledge persist about the need to measure this parameter, either due to the uncertainty of how to manage patients with high levels of Lp(a), due to insufficient knowledge about its physiological function or because its levels persist unchanged, to a large extent, throughout life as the genetic character of this molecule takes precedence. On the other hand, there are still no specific approved therapies that reduce its levels and arouse sufficient interest for its management. However, many societies, such as the European Society of Cardiology (SEC) or the Spanish Society of Atherosclerosis (SEA), raise the need to determine Lp(a) and intensive management of cardiovascular risk factors in patients with high Lp(a) levels along with therapies that mitigate the associated ASCVD risk. Likewise, the identification of high levels of Lp(a) offers the opportunity to screen family members, better control of cardiovascular risk and the possibility of developing clinical trials that profile individual and population risk that allow for more personalized actions.

Association of rs3798220 Polymorphism with Cardiovascular Incidents in Individuals with Elevated Lp(a)

Background/Objectives: Lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] plays a significant role in atherosclerosis and cardiovascular disease (CVD). Genetic regulation of Lp(a) involves variations in the apo(a) LPA gene, as specific polymorphisms like rs10455872 and rs3798220, both linked to higher Lp(a) levels and CVD. CVD remains the leading global cause of death, with high Lp(a) levels increasingly recognized as a significant factor in younger patients with no other CVD risk factors. We aimed to evaluate the association of LPA genetic variations with Lp(a) levels and its effect on cardiovascular risk as there are existing inconsistent findings. Methods: This case-control study included 251 subjects with a median age of 52 years (interquartile range, IQR = 17) and elevated Lp(a) levels. Cases were subjects who experienced early cardiovascular incidents (women < 65, men < 55 years old), and the control group included subjects without such history. Genotyping of LPA gene polymorphisms (rs10455872 and rs3798220) was performed, and demographic data with Lp(a) levels were collected. To evaluate the association between the LPA genotypes and the risk of cardiovascular incidents (CVI), several logistic regression models were performed. The cut-off points for Lp(a) levels were determined using diagnostic test accuracy measures. Results: The rs3798220-C allele was associated with higher Lp(a) levels (288 ± 166 nmol/L in cases vs. 189 ± 102 nmol/L in controls, p < 0.001) and myocardial infarction (53% in cases vs. 36% in controls, p = 0.036). Among cases, 28.9% carried the rs3798220-C allele, compared to 18.7% in controls. The rs10455872-G allele was slightly more prevalent in controls (34.15% vs. 29.69%) but without further significant associations. In this study, the cut-off Lp(a) value of 151 nmol/L, for patients with a positive family history of early CVD, is associated with a higher chance of developing CVI. Conclusions: This study demonstrates an association between the LPA rs3798220-C allele and higher Lp(a) levels, as well as an increased risk of early onset myocardial infarction. However, the obtained association should further be evaluated at a much larger scale.

Evaluation of a Machine Learning-Guided Strategy for Elevated Lipoprotein(a) Screening in Health Systems

BACKGROUND

While universal screening for Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is increasingly recommended, <0.5% of patients undergo Lp(a) testing. Here, we assessed the feasibility of deploying Algorithmic Risk Inspection for Screening Elevated Lp(a) (ARISE), a validated machine learning tool, to health system electronic health records to increase the yield of Lp(a) testing.

METHODS

We randomly sampled 100 000 patients from the Yale-New Haven Health System to evaluate the feasibility of ARISE deployment. We also evaluated Lp(a)-tested populations in the Yale-New Haven Health System (n=7981) and the Vanderbilt University Medical Center (n=10 635) to assess the association of ARISE score with elevated Lp(a). To compare the representativeness of the Lp(a)-tested population, we included 456 815 participants from the UK Biobank and 23 280 from 3 US-based cohorts of Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities, Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults, and Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis.

RESULTS

Among 100 000 randomly selected Yale-New Haven Health System patients, 413 (0.4%) had undergone Lp(a) measurement. ARISE score could be computed for 31 586 patients based on existing data, identifying 2376 (7.5%) patients with a high probability of elevated Lp(a). A positive ARISE score was associated with significantly higher odds of elevated Lp(a) in the Yale-New Haven Health System (odds ratio, 1.87 [95% CI, 1.65-2.12]) and the Vanderbilt University Medical Center (odds ratio, 1.41 [95% CI, 1.24-1.60]). The Lp(a)-tested population significantly differed from other study cohorts in terms of ARISE features.

CONCLUSIONS

We demonstrate the feasibility of deployment of ARISE in US health systems to define the risk of elevated Lp(a), enabling a high-yield testing strategy. We also confirm the markedly low adoption of Lp(a) testing, which is also being restricted to a highly selected population.

Impact of Proprotein Convertase Subtilisin/Kexin Type 9 Inhibitors on Lipoprotein(a): A Meta-Analysis and Meta-Regression of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] has been independently associated with increased cardiovascular risk.

Objectives

The authors examined the effect of monoclonal antibody proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitors (PCSK9is) on plasma Lp(a) levels across multiple trials.

Methods

Studies were retrieved comparing the effect of PCSK9i vs placebo on Lp(a) levels. The primary outcome was percent change in Lp(a) levels. Factors associated with the treatment effect were determined by meta-regression analysis. Subgroup analyses were done to explore potential treatment effect differences.

Results

PCSK9i reduced Lp(a) levels on average of -27% (95% CI: -29.8% to -24.1%, P < 0.001). Factors associated with the treatment effect included mean percent change in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (P = 0.003, beta coefficient 0.34, 95% CI: 0.11-0.57, tau2 = 94.8, R2 = 11.82) and apolipoprotein B (P < 0.002, beta coefficient 0.4, 95% CI: 0.14-0.64, tau2 = 93.68, R2 = 11.86). Subgroup analyses revealed consistent treatment effect amongst comparators vs placebo: -27.69% (95% CI: -30.85% to -24.54%, P < 0.001), vs ezetimibe: -24.0% (95% CI: -29.95% to -18.01%, P < 0.001), type of PCSK9i, evolocumab: -29.35% (95% CI: -33.56% to -25.14%, P < 0.001) vs alirocumab: -24.50% (95% CI: -27.96% to -21.04%, P < 0.001), and presence of familial hypercholesterolemia: -25.63% (95% CI: -31.96% to -19.30%, P < 0.001 vs no familial hypercholesterolemia: -27.22%; 95% CI: -30.34% to -24.09%, P < 0.001). Varying treatment effects were noted in the duration of treatment (12 weeks or shorter: -32.43% [95% CI: -36.63% to -28.23% vs >12 weeks: -22.31%] [95% CI: -25.13% to -19.49%, P < 0.001]), P interaction < 0.01.

Conclusions

PCSK9is reduce Lp(a) levels by an average of 27%. Mean percent change in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and apolipoprotein B were associated with treatment effect.

Emerging Implications of Elevated Lipoprotein(a) Levels in Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery: A Narrative Review

BACKGROUND

Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) remains a cornerstone in the management of coronary artery disease (CAD). In nonurgent surgical revascularization cases, preoperative optimization of modifiable risk factors can improve outcomes. There is increasing interest in the relationship between lipoprotein(a) levels and the risk for ischemic cardiovascular disease, particularly how CABG outcomes are in turn affected. This review highlights the role of lipoprotein(a) in the pathogenesis of CAD and CABG outcomes and discusses future directions for its optimal management in the perioperative period.

METHODS

The PubMed/MEDLINE database was reviewed until March 2024 to capture publications that evaluated and/or described the relationship between lipoprotein(a) and CABG surgery or CAD outcomes.

RESULTS

The available literature supports lipoprotein(a) as a causal and independent risk factor for the pathogenesis of CAD. Elevated lipoprotein(a) levels are associated with an increased risk of adverse post-CABG outcomes, including graft occlusion incidence and major adverse cardiovascular events. Genetic variations influencing lipoprotein(a) levels play a role in disease progression and surgical outcomes. Several therapies aimed at reducing lipoprotein(a) levels, currently in phase III clinical trials, show promise for improving the prognosis after CABG.

CONCLUSIONS

Among individuals undergoing surgical revascularization for CAD, lipoprotein(a) levels may help define risk and inform best practices for perioperative management. We advocate for the routine measurement of lipoprotein(a) in all patients undergoing CABG. Emerging lipoprotein(a)-lowering agents show promise for secondary prevention of cardiac events, although dedicated analyses in cardiac surgical subcohorts will be important to evaluate their role in improving CABG outcomes.

Cardiovascular Risk Factor and Atherosclerosis in Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA)

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To highlight advancements in managing traditional and rheumatoid arthritis (RA) specific risk factors and the impact of RA treatments on cardiovascular outcomes.

RECENT FINDINGS

Advancements in rheumatoid arthritis management have paralleled declining trends in cardiovascular disease risks. Biomarkers like CRP, Lipoprotein(a), Apolipoprotein B 100, and imaging tools such as coronary artery calcium scoring enhance cardiovascular risk stratification, particularly in intermediate-risk RA patients. While effective RA treatments, have demonstrated substantial cardiovascular benefits, subclass differences were noted in high-risk patients. Increased risk of cardiovascular disease is driven by chronic inflammation, altered lipid metabolism, and traditional risk factors. Effective RA treatment significantly lowers cardiovascular events. Standard treatment of hypertension, diabetes and hypercholesterolemia are effective and lowers RA disease activity and inflammatory markers. While RA is considered a risk enhancing state in calculating CV risk scores, currently there exists no RA disease -specific blood pressure, blood sugar or lipid targets.

Lipoprotein(a) in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin-type 9 inhibitors

High plasma lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) levels increase the cardiovascular risk in populations with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Apolipoprotein (a) [apo(a)], a unique protein component of Lp(a), plays an important role in the pathogenesis of atherosclerosis. Statins, the primary medication in managing ASCVD, lower low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) but concurrently elevate plasma Lp(a) levels, contributing to an increased residual cardiovascular risk. In turn, proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin-type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors, a novel class of LDL-C lowering drugs, effectively reduce plasma Lp(a) levels, which is believed to decrease residual cardiovascular risk. However, the mechanism by which PCSK9 inhibitors reduce Lp(a) levels remains unknown. In addition, there are some clinical limitations of PCSK9 inhibitors. Here, we systematically review the past, present, and prospects of studies pertaining to Lp(a), PCSK9 inhibitors, and ASCVD.

Characterization of lipidic plaque features in association with LDL-C<70 mg/dL and lipoprotein(a) <50 mg/dL

BACKGROUND

The ongoing residual cardiovascular risks despite lowering low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels suggest the need to identify additional drivers associated with atherosclerosis. Circulating lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)]promotes formation of foam cells via its proatherogenic properties. However, whether a lower Lp(a) level in combination with favorable LDL-C control could induce a more stable form of disease remains unknown. Near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) generates maximum lipid-core burden index in 4 mm (MaxLCBI4 mm) which is a histologically validated measure of lipidic plaque material in vivo. Therefore, the current study employed NIRS imaging to characterize lipidic plaque in association with LDL-C < 70 mg/dL and Lp(a) <50 mg/dL.

METHODS

We analyzed 439 patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) (554 de-novo target lesions receiving percutaneous coronary intervention) in the REASSURE-NIRS registry (NCT04864171). Clinical characteristics and NIRS-derived MaxLCBI4mm were compared among 4 groups according to LDL-C of 70 mg/dL and Lp(a) of 50 mg/dL.

RESULTS

Almost one-third of study subjects (33.4%) exhibited both LDL-C < 70 mg/dL and Lp(a) <50 mg/dL. They were more likely male with a lower frequency of acute coronary syndrome and lipid lowering therapies were more frequently used in those with LDL-C < 70 mg/dL and Lp(a) <50 mg/dL. On NIRS imaging analysis, a smaller MaxLCBI4mm (P < .001) and a lower frequency of MaxLCBI4mm ≥400 (P = .001) were observed in those with both LDL-C < 70 mg/dL and Lp(a) <50 mg/dL. On multivariable logistic regression analysis, the coexistence of these 2 lipid controls showed an approximately 70% lower risk (adjusted odds ratio: 0.30; 95% confidence interval: 0.13-0.68) of MaxLCBI4mm ≥400 compared with the reference group (LDL-C ≥ 70 mg/dL and Lp(a) ≥50 mg/dL).

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest circulating Lp(a) as a potential therapeutic target to stabilize coronary atherosclerosis in CAD patients who achieved LDL-C < 70 mg/dL.

Current and emerging PCSK9-directed therapies to reduce LDL-C and ASCVD risk: A state-of-the-art review

Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) remains the leading cause of death worldwide. Lowering low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels is a primary strategy to reduce ASCVD risk. Although statin therapy remains the initial therapy of choice to reduce LDL-C and ASCVD risk, statin intolerance and suboptimal LDL-C lowering response prompts the need for additional non-statin therapies. Ezetimibe and bempedoic acid are reasonable options but they modestly reduce LDL-C levels (15% to 25%). Therapies directed at the proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) enzyme, however, reduce LDL-C levels by 50%-60% when added to background statin therapy. PCSK9 is an enzyme synthesized by the liver that facilitates the degradation of LDL receptors and prevents their recycling to the hepatocyte surface to remove LDL-C from circulation. Approaches to inhibit this effect have centered on monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) (alirocumab, evolocumab) targeting PCSK9 functionality and small interfering RNA (siRNA) therapies (inclisiran) targeting the hepatic synthesis of PCSK9. Randomized controlled trials have demonstrated beneficial cardiovascular outcomes of PCSK9 mAbs, but such evidence is not yet available for inclisiran. Current clinical practice guidelines generally recommend PCSK9-directed therapies for higher-risk patients with established ASCVD and those with familial hypercholesterolemia. This approach is, in part, due to their cost and uncertain economic value, but also because these therapies require subcutaneous administration, which is not preferred by some patients. Oral therapies targeting PCSK9 are, however, in development. This scoping review covers the development of current and emerging PCSK9-directed therapies, their efficacy, safety, and role in clinical practice.

Variation in lipoprotein(a) response to potent lipid lowering: The role of apolipoprotein (a) isoform size

BACKGROUND

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a driver of residual cardiovascular risk. Proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitors (PCSK9i) decrease Lp(a) with significant heterogeneity in response. We investigated contributors to the heterogeneous response.

METHODS

CHOlesterol Reduction and Residual Risk in Diabetes (CHORD) was a prospective study examining lipid lowering in participants with a low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) >100 mg/dL with and without diabetes (DM) on lipid lowering therapy (LLT) for 30-days with evolocumab 140 mg every 14 days combined with either atorvastatin 80 mg or ezetimibe 10 mg daily. Lp(a) level was measured by immunoturbidometry, and the apolipoprotein (a) [apo(a)] isoform size was measured by denaturing agarose gel electrophoresis and western blotting. We examined the change in Lp(a) levels from baseline to 30 days.

RESULTS

Among 150 participants (mean age 50 years, 58% female, 50% non-White, 17% Hispanic, 50% DM), median (interquartile range) Lp(a) was 27.5 (8-75) mg/dL at baseline and 23 (3-68) mg/dL at 30 days, leading to a 10% (0-36) median reduction (P < 0.001). Among 73 (49%) participants with Lp(a) ≥30 mg/dL at baseline, there was a 15% (3-25) median reduction in Lp(a) (P < 0.001). While baseline Lp(a) level was not correlated with change in Lp(a) (r = 0.04, P = 0.59), apo(a) size directly correlated with Lp(a) reduction (P < 0.001). After adjustment for age, sex, race/ethnicity, DM, and type of LLT, apo(a) size remained positively associated with a reduction in Lp(a) (Beta 0.95, 95% confidence interval, 0.93-0.97, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Our data demonstrate variation in Lp(a) reduction with potent LLT. Change in Lp(a) was strongly associated with apo(a) isoform size.

PCSK9 Monoclonal Antibodies Have Come a Long Way

PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW

This review examines the pivotal role of monoclonal antibodies against PCSK9 in lipid-lowering therapy, emphasizing their biological and clinical impact.

RECENT FINDINGS

Randomized controlled trials have validated that PCSK9 monoclonal antibodies (Mabs) effectively reduce LDL-c levels by approximately 50%, even when added to maximal statin therapy. They moreover produce a notable 15-20% relative decrease in major cardiovascular events, with a greater reduction among high-risk patients and no evidence for serious adverse effects, assuaging previous concerns. This review highlights the benefits of PCSK9 Mabs in high cardiovascular risk patients. Despite their efficacy and safety, these therapies are hindered by limited access, and require broader integration into clinical practice to optimize therapeutic outcomes.

Lipoprotein(a) and the atherosclerotic burden - Should we wait for clinical trial evidence before taking action?

The fact that lipoprotein(a) levels should be regarded as a causal residual risk factor in the atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases (ASCVD) is now a no-brainer. This review article aims to summarize the latest evidence supporting the causal role of lipoprotein(a) in ASCVD and the potential strategies to reduce the lipoprotein(a) burden until clinical trial results are available. Epidemiological and genetic data demonstrate the causal link between lipoprotein(a) and increased ASCVD risk. That being said, a specific question comes to mind: "must we wait for outcome trials in order to take action?". Given that lipoprotein(a) levels predict incident ASCVD in both primary and secondary prevention contexts, with a linear risk gradient across its distribution, measuring lipoprotein(a) can unequivocally help identify patients who may later benefit from specific lipoprotein(a)-lowering therapies. This understanding has led various National Societies to recommend dosing lipoprotein(a) in high-risk individuals and to support the recommendation of measuring lipoprotein(a) levels at least once in every adult for risk stratification.

Lp(a): A Rapidly Evolving Therapeutic Landscape

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Elevated lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]) is a genetically determined cardiovascular risk factor, causally linked to both atherosclerotic coronary artery disease and aortic stenosis. Elevated Lp(a) is widely prevalent, and several cardiovascular societies now recommend performing Lp(a) screening at least once in all adults. However, there are currently no approved drugs aimed specifically at lowering Lp(a). In this review, we describe several promising Lp(a)-lowering therapies in the drug development pipeline and outline what role these may have in future clinical practice.

RECENT FINDINGS

Pelacarsen and olpasiran are two novel RNA-based injectable therapies which are being studied in ongoing phase 3 clinical trials, with the earliest of these to be concluded in 2025. These drugs act by degrading transcribed LPA mRNA, which would normally yield the apolipoprotein(a) constituent of Lp(a). Other candidate drugs, such as Lepodisiran, Zerlasiran, and Muvalaplin, are also in early-stage development. While there are presently no Lp(a)-lowering drugs available for routine clinical use, several promising candidates are currently under investigation. If these prove to be effective in randomized clinical trials, they will expand the cardiovascular care armamentarium and will allow clinicians to treat a presently unmitigated cardiovascular risk factor.

Lipoprotein (a) Testing in Patients With Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease in 5 Large US Health Systems

BACKGROUND

Lipoprotein (a) is an independent risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. However, lipoprotein (a) testing remains variable and it is unclear what factors influence testing and if testing changes clinical management.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A retrospective study using electronic medical record data from 5 health systems identified an atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease cohort divided into those with and without a lipoprotein (a) test between 2019 and 2021. Baseline characteristics and lipid-lowering therapy patterns were assessed. Multivariable regression modeling was used to determine factors associated with lipoprotein (a) testing. Among 595 684 patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, only 2587 (0.4%) were tested for lipoprotein (a). Those who were older or Black individuals were less likely to have lipoprotein (a) testing, while those with familial hypercholesterolemia, ischemic stroke/transient ischemic attack, peripheral artery disease, prior lipid-lowering therapy, or low-density lipoprotein cholesterol ≥130 mg/dL were more likely to be tested. Those with a lipoprotein (a) test, regardless of the lipoprotein (a) value, were more frequently initiated on any statin therapy (30.3% versus 10.6%, P < 0.001), ezetimibe (7.65% versus 0.8%, P < 0.001), or proprotein convertase substilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitor (6.7% versus 0.3%, P < 0.001) compared with those without a test. Those with an elevated lipoprotein (a) level more frequently initiated ezetimibe (11.5% versus 5.9%, P < 0.001) or proprotein convertase substilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitor (10.9% versus 4.8%, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Lipoprotein (a) testing in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease is infrequent, with evidence of disparities among older or Black individuals. Testing for lipoprotein (a), regardless of level, is associated with greater initiation of any lipid-lowering therapy, while elevated lipoprotein (a) is associated with greater initiation of nonstatin lipid-lowering therapy. There is a critical need for multidisciplinary and inclusive approaches to raise awareness for lipoprotein (a) testing, and its implications on management.

Lipoprotein(a) and High-Sensitivity C-Reactive Protein Compound the Risk of Hypoattenuating Leaflet Thickening After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

BACKGROUND

The mechanism for hypoattenuating leaflet thickening (HALT) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement is still not well elucidated, and the role of Lp(a) (lipoprotein[a]) and hs-CRP (high-sensitivity C-reactive protein) has rarely been studied. This study sought to test the hypothesis that the risk of HALT is associated with an elevated level of Lp(a) or hs-CRP.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A total of 307 consecutive individuals who underwent a transcatheter aortic valve replacement procedure were included. All patients received their first postoperative computed tomography scans within 12 months, and raw data were analyzed on 3mensio software. HALT was defined as visually identified increased leaflet thickness with typical meniscal appearance and at least 2 different multiplanar reformation projections. Associations of Lp(a) or hs-CRP with the risk of HALT were evaluated using multivariable logistic regression analysis. The incidence of HALT within 12 months after transcatheter aortic valve replacement in this study was 36.2%, and the risk of HALT was associated with higher baseline Lp(a) (the multivariable adjusted odds ratio [OR] for every 10 mg/dL change was 1.18 [95% CI, 1.09-1.29]) and hs-CRP level (the multivariable adjusted OR for every 1 mg/L change was 1.08 [95% CI, 1.00-1.27]). Compared with individuals out of the top 25th percentile for both Lp(a) and hs-CRP, the multivariable adjusted OR for HALT was 4.74 (95% CI, 1.65-14.37) for the top 25th percentile. This result remained consistent after excluding patients receiving anticoagulant therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The top 25th percentile of Lp(a) level (≥40 mg/dL) combined with the top 25th percentile of hs-CRP level (≥3.5 mg/L) conferred a 4.74-fold risk of HALT.

Medical Therapy to Prevent or Slow Progression of Aortic Stenosis: Current Evidence and Future Directions

Degenerative aortic stenosis is a growing clinical problem owing to the high incidence in an aging population and its significant morbidity and mortality. Currently, aortic valve replacement remains the only treatment. Despite promising observational data, pharmacological management to slow or halt progression of aortic stenosis has remained elusive. Nevertheless, with a greater understanding of the mechanisms which underpin aortic stenosis, research has begun to explore novel treatment strategies. This review will explore the historical agents used to manage aortic stenosis and the emerging agents that are currently under investigation.

Association of Lipoprotein(a) With Changes in Coronary Atherosclerosis in Patients Treated With Alirocumab

BACKGROUND

Elevated Lp(a) (lipoprotein[a]) is a risk marker for atherosclerotic disease, but the underlying mechanisms remain elusive. We examined the association of Lp(a) with changes in coronary atherosclerosis following intensive lipid-lowering therapy.

METHODS

In the PACMAN-AMI trial (Effects of the PCSK9 Antibody Alirocumab on Coronary Atherosclerosis in Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction), 300 patients with acute myocardial infarction were randomized to receive biweekly alirocumab 150 mg or placebo in addition to high-intensity statins. Patients underwent serial 2-vessel intravascular ultrasound, optical coherence tomography, and near-infrared spectroscopy in the non-infarct-related arteries at baseline and after 52 weeks. The main end points were percent atheroma volume by intravascular ultrasound, minimum fibrous cap thickness by optical coherence tomography, and maximum lipid core burden index within 4 mm (maxLCBI4mm) by near-infrared spectroscopy.

RESULTS

A total of 265 patients had serial intravascular ultrasound data (mean age, 58±9 years; 16% women). Alirocumab resulted in greater reductions in percent atheroma volume and maxLCBI4mm, as well as a greater increase in minimum fibrous cap thickness, compared with placebo. In the alirocumab group, the reduction in maxLCBI4mm was smaller in patients with higher baseline Lp(a), defined by the highest quartile (Q4, ≥98 nmol/L; n=30), than in those with lower baseline Lp(a) (Q1-Q3, <98 nmol/L; n=99; -40.2 [-91.1 to 10.7] versus -91.4 [-113.9 to -68.9], respectively; P=0.01 after adjustment for clinically relevant baseline variables), and was comparable to the maxLBI4mm reduction in the placebo group (-37.60 [-57.40 to -17.80]; n=134). These findings were consistent when higher baseline Lp(a) was defined by cut-off values of ≥75 versus <75 nmol/L (n=35 versus 94, respectively, in the alirocumab group) and ≥125 versus <125 nmol/L (n=23 versus 106, respectively). Changes in percent atheroma volume and minimum fibrous cap thickness did not differ in relation to baseline Lp(a).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with acute myocardial infarction, elevated Lp(a) at baseline is associated with attenuation of plaque lipid regression despite intensive treatment with alirocumab plus high-intensity statin. This finding may explain the residual cardiovascular risk associated with high Lp(a) despite optimal control of lipid levels.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03067844.

[Cardiovascular preventive recommendations. PAPPS 2024 thematic updates]

The recommendations of the semFYC's Program for Preventive Activities and Health Promotion (PAPPS) for the prevention of vascular diseases (VD) are presented. New in this edition are new sections such as obesity, chronic kidney disease and metabolic hepatic steatosis, as well as a 'Don't Do' section in the different pathologies treated. The sections have been updated: epidemiological review, where the current morbidity and mortality of CVD in Spain and its evolution as well as the main risk factors are described; vascular risk (VR) and recommendations for the calculation of CV risk; main risk factors such as arterial hypertension, dyslipidemia and diabetes mellitus, describing the method for their diagnosis, therapeutic objectives and recommendations for lifestyle measures and pharmacological treatment; indications for antiplatelet therapy, and recommendations for screening of atrial fibrillation, and recommendations for management of chronic conditions. The quality of testing and the strength of the recommendation are included in the main recommendations.

Comparative efficacy and choice of lipid-lowering drugs for cardiovascular and kidney outcomes in patients with chronic kidney disease: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The effect of exact classes of lipid-lowering drugs (LLDs) on preventing major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) and poor renal outcomes is not well characterized in the chronic kidney disease (CKD) population.

METHODS

We performed a frequentist random-effects network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the protective effect of the LLDs in non-dialysis CKD patients. The PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched for relevant trials published before March 31, 2024. The primary outcome was the incidence of MACEs. The secondary outcomes comprised all-cause mortality, end-stage kidney disease, changes in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and proteinuria, and safety.

RESULTS

Forty-nine eligible RCTs with 77,826 participants with non-dialysis CKD were included. With moderate confidence in the evidence, rosuvastatin and atorvastatin showed statistically significantly more efficacy in reducing the risk of MACE, with a pooled risk ratio of 0.55 (95% CI 0.33-0.91) for rosuvastatin and 0.67 (0.49-0.90) for atorvastatin, respectively, compared with the control group. For the change in the eGFR, atorvastatin (mean difference [MD], 1.40; 95% CI, 0.61 to 2.18), rosuvastatin (MD, 1.73; 95% CI, 0.63 to 2.83), and statin plus ezetimibe (MD, 2.35; 95% CI, 0.44 to 4.26) showed statistically significant increases in the mean eGFR.

CONCLUSION

In patients with non-dialysis CKD, there is sufficient evidence to show that rosuvastatin and atorvastatin were statistically significantly more effective and preferable in reducing the risk of MACE and increasing the mean eGFR compared with the control group.

Serum Lipoprotein(a) Levels and Their Association with Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease in Japan

AIMS

To investigate the distribution of lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) and its association with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) in Japanese patients at high risk for ASCVD using a health insurance database.

METHODS

Between July 2013 and June 2021, patients eligible for ASCVD prevention according to the 2017 Japan Atherosclerosis Society (JAS) guidelines with documented Lp(a) test results were extracted from the Medical Data Vision claims database and divided into three groups: primary prevention high-risk (Group I), secondary prevention (Group II) and secondary prevention high-risk (Group III). Data on lipid levels, cardiovascular morbidity risk factors and lipid-lowering treatments were extracted.

RESULTS

Of 700,580 patients with documented low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), 2,967 (0.42%) were tested for Lp(a). In 2,170 eligible patients, the median [interquartile range] serum concentration of Lp(a) was 13.9 [7.5-24.6] mg/dL, with 151 patients (7.0%) above the recommended risk threshold of ≥ 50 mg/dL. Lp(a) levels increased with risk across all prevention groups. Being in the highest Lp(a) quintile (Q5) was associated with an increased frequency of ASCVD (28.9% versus 18.9% in the lowest quintile (Q1) for unstable angina; 18.7% versus 10.1% for myocardial infarction; 27.9% versus 17.0% for ischemic stroke). In the secondary prevention groups, the proportion of patients meeting an LDL-C target of ＜70 mg/dL decreased from 30.2% in Q1 to 19.0% in Q5 for Group II and from 32.9% to 16.3% for Group III.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite a high prevalence of Lp(a) ≥ 50mg/dL in Japanese patients at high risk for ASCVD, it found that the Lp(a) testing rate was very low.

Strategies for management of patients with elevated lipoprotein(a)

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

There is growing literature that supports the testing of Lp(a). However, few patients are tested, including those with a personal or family history of cardiovascular disease (CVD). One often noted barrier to more widespread testing is uncertainty regarding what to do with an elevated Lp(a) level. Although guidelines vary, there is agreement on the use of Lp(a) as a risk enhancer to guide medical care and shared decision-making. This review will discuss a clinical approach with supporting evidence for management of patients with elevated Lp(a).

RECENT FINDINGS

At the minimum, elevated Lp(a) increases cardiovascular risk and can be incorporated into existing risk stratification paradigms. The cornerstone of management is aggressive management of traditional cardiovascular risk factors, including LDL-cholesterol (LDL-C). More recent studies have highlighted the potential role for proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitors (PCSK9i), aspirin in primary prevention, and prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy in secondary prevention.

SUMMARY

Although there is optimism for Lp(a)-targeted therapies in the near future, an elevated Lp(a) level is actionable today, and uncertainty regarding the management of patients with elevated Lp(a) should not be a barrier to more widespread testing.

Emerging clinical role of proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibition-Part two: Current and emerging concepts in the clinical use of PCSK9 inhibition

BACKGROUND

Proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors have emerged as a novel class of drugs with cardioprotective effects through their lipid-lowering effects.

OBJECTIVE

This review aims to discuss existing and novel strategies of PCSK9 inhibition, providing an overview of established randomized controlled trials and ongoing outcome trials that assess the efficacy and long-term safety of PCSK9 inhibitors. It also explores the evolving role of PCSK9 beyond lipid metabolism and outlines the pleiotropic actions of PCSK9 inhibition in various disorders and future directions including novel strategies to target PCSK9.

CONCLUSION

PCSK9 inhibition shows promise not only in lipid metabolism but also in other disease processes, including atherosclerotic plaque remodeling, acute coronary syndrome, stroke, inflammation, and immune response.

Gene Mutation in Patients with Familial Hypercholesterolemia and Response to Alirocumab Treatment-A Single-Centre Analysis

Background: Familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) is an autosomal dominant genetic disorder characterized by significantly elevated levels of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, which plays a major role in the progression of atherosclerosis and leads to a heightened risk of premature atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Methods: We have carried out an observational study on a group of 17 patients treated at the Outpatient Lipid Clinic from 2019 to 2024. Result: The most frequent mutation observed was found in the LDL receptor (LDLR) gene, which was identified in ten patients (58.8%). Five patients were identified to have a mutation in the apolipoprotein B (APOB) gene, whereas two patients had two points mutations, one in the LDLR, and the other in the APOB gene. The average age of patients with LDLR mutation was 54.8 (12.3); for APOB mutation it was 61.4 (9.3) and for patients with two points mutation it was 61.5 (14.8). The study results showed that at Week 12, individuals with LDLR-defective heterozygotes who were given alirocumab 150 mg every two weeks experienced a 63.0% reduction in LDL cholesterol levels. On the other hand, individuals with APOB heterozygotes experienced a 59% reduction in LDL cholesterol levels. However, in patients with double heterozygous for mutations in LDLR and APOB genes, there was a hyporesponsiveness to alirocumab, and the reduction in LDL-C was only by 23% in two individuals. Conclusions: In patients with a single mutation, there was a greater response to treatment with alirocumab in contrast to patients with double heterozygous mutation, who did not respond to treatment with PCSK9 inhibitors.

Efficacy of Traditional Anti-lipidemic Drugs in Lowering Lipoprotein(a) Levels: A Systematic Review

Lipoprotein(a), or Lp(a), was identified in the early 1960. Its role as an independent risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) became widely recognized by the late 20th century, regardless of other traditional risk markers such as low-density lipoproteins and high-density lipoproteins. This study aimed to systematically review available literature and compare the efficacy of different lipid-lowering drugs, both approved for clinical use and currently undergoing trials, in lowering Lp(a) levels. A comprehensive search of medical databases including PubMed, PubMed Central (PMC), Medline, ScienceDirect, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar was conducted to identify relevant studies. A total of 29 research papers met the inclusion criteria, focusing on the impact of various lipid-lowering drugs on Lp(a) concentration in patients with significantly elevated baseline Lp(a) levels. Plasma Lp(a) levels exceeding 30 mg/dL are associated with a higher risk of ASCVD, including myocardial infarction, stroke, aortic valve stenosis, heart failure, peripheral arterial disease, and increased all-cause mortality. Most commonly used lipid-lowering agents, such as statins, fibrates, ezetimibe, and nutraceuticals like coenzyme Q10 (CoQ10), showed no significant effect on Lp(a) plasma levels. However, Lp(a) apheresis and proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK-9) inhibitors were found to effectively reduce plasma Lp(a) concentrations. Emerging therapies targeting apolipoprotein(a) RNA, including anti-sense oligonucleotides (ASO) and small interfering RNA (siRNA), significantly reduced Lp(a) levels in Phase 2 trials. While several lipid-lowering agents have minimal impact on Lp(a) levels, therapies like Lp(a) apheresis, PCSK-9 inhibitors, and novel RNA-targeting drugs show promise in effectively reducing Lp(a) concentrations. However, whether these reductions translate into decreased cardiovascular events remains to be determined.

Real-world effectiveness of monoclonal antibody inhibitors of PCSK9 in patients with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia: A retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (HeFH) is a genetic condition that is associated with a high risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) due to elevated lipid levels. Proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) monoclonal antibody inhibitors have been shown to reduce low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) substantially. This study aimed to assess the real-world effectiveness of PCSK9 inhibitor therapy among patients with HeFH.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study of patients with probable or definite HeFH on a PCSK9 inhibitor at a specialized lipid clinic between 2015 and 2022. The primary objective was the proportion of patients who attained a ≥50% reduction in LDL-C after 12 months of treatment.

RESULTS

In total, 141 patients were screened and 95 were included. Mean age was 63 years, 51% were female, and mean baseline LDL-C level was 4.0 mmol/L (155 mg/dL). A majority of patients (60%) had statin intolerance, and 73% were on ezetimibe. The most common PCSK9 inhibitor was evolocumab (94%). Overall, 74% of patients achieved a ≥50% reduction in LDL-C after 12 months of therapy. Mean LDL-C concentration decreased to 1.7 mmol/L (66 mg/dL) (approximately 59% reduction from baseline) after 12 months of follow-up but increased to 1.9 mmol/L (73 mg/dL) after ≥24 months of follow-up. Similar trends were observed in non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and apolipoprotein B. Lipoprotein(a) was significantly reduced by 45% over 12 months. Twelve percent of patients permanently discontinued therapy. Barriers to PCSK9i use were mostly related to cost.

CONCLUSIONS

In a real-world cohort of HeFH patients, most of which were intolerant to statins, a high majority were able to achieve a ≥50% reduction in LDL-C after 12 months of PCSK9 inhibitor therapy (mean reduction of approximately 59%), which is similar to clinical trial data of patients with ASCVD. A significant reduction in non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, apolipoprotein B, and lipoprotein(a) were also observed.

Moderate Aortic Stenosis-Advanced Imaging, Risk Assessment, and Treatment Strategies

Moderate aortic stenosis is increasingly recognized as a disease entity with poor prognosis. Diagnosis of moderate aortic stenosis may be complemented by laboratory tests and advanced imaging techniques focused at detecting signs of cardiac damage such as increase of cardiac enzymes (N-terminal pro-B-type Natriuretic Peptide, troponin), left ventricular remodeling (hypertrophy, reduced left ventricular ejection fraction), or myocardial fibrosis. Therapy should include guideline-directed optimal medical therapy for heart failure. Patients with signs of cardiac damage may benefit from early intervention, which is the focus of several ongoing randomized controlled trials. As yet, no evidence-based therapy exists to halt the progression of aortic valve calcification.

Advances in targeting LDL cholesterol: PCSK9 inhibitors and beyond

There is a direct relationship between the duration and level of exposure to low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels over one's lifespan and cardiovascular events. Early treatment to lower elevated LDL-C is crucial for better outcomes with multiple therapies currently available to reduce atherogenic lipoproteins. Statins remain the foundation of LDL-C lowering therapy as one of the most cost-effective drugs to reduce atherosclerotic events (ASCVD) and mortality. Nonetheless, LDL-driven goal attainment remains suboptimal globally, highlighting a considerable need for non-statin therapies to address residual risk related to statin intolerance, non-adherence, and inherited lipoprotein disorders. LDL-C lowering interventions beyond statins include ezetimibe, PCSK9 monoclonal antibodies, inclisiran and bempedoic acid with specific guideline recommendations as to when to consider each. For patients with homozygous familial hypercholesterolemia requiring more advanced therapy, lomitapide and evinacumab are available, providing mechanisms that are not LDL receptor dependent. Lipoprotein apheresis remains an effective option for clinical familial hypercholesterolemia as well as elevated lipoprotein (a). There are investigational therapies being explored to add to our current armamentarium including CETP inhibitors, a third-generation PCSK9 inhibitor (small recombinant fusion protein oral PCSK9 inhibitor) and gene editing which aims to directly restore or disrupt genes of interest at the DNA level. This article is a brief review of the pharmacotherapy options beyond statins for lowering LDL-C and their impact on ASCVD risk reduction. Our primary aim is to guide physicians on the role these therapies play in achieving appropriate LDL-C goals, with an algorithm of when to consider each based on efficacy, safety and outcomes.

Ebronucimab in Chinese patients with hypercholesterolemia---A randomized double-blind placebo-controlled phase 3 trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ebronucimab

Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of PCSK9 monoclonal antibody(mAb) specifically for Chinese patients have been limited. This multi-center RCT is to clarify the efficacy and safety of a novel mAb, Ebronucimab, in Chinese patients. Patients diagnosed with primary hypercholesterolemia, including Heterozygous Familial Hypercholesterolemia, or mixed dyslipidemia, were categorized by ASCVD risk and randomly assigned at a ratio of 2:1:2:1 to receive Ebronucimab 450 mg or matching placebo every 4 weeks (Q4W), or Ebronucimab 150 mg or matching placebo every 2 weeks (Q2W). The primary outcome was the percentage change of LDL-C from baseline to week 12 for all groups. The least squares mean reduction difference (95 %CI) in LDL-C from baseline to week 12 of Ebronucimab 450 mg Q4W and Ebronucimab 150 mg Q2W groups versus the placebo group was -59.13 (-64.103, -54.153) (Adjusted p<0.0001) and -60.43 (-65.450, -55.416) (Adjusted p<0.0001), respectively. Meanwhile, the Ebronucimab group exhibited notably high rates in reaching LDL-C goals of each cardiovascular risk stratification. In addition, Ebronucimab effectively improved other lipid panel. During the double-blind treatment period, relatively frequently reported adverse events (AEs) were injection site reactions (ISR), urinary tract infection, and hyperuricemia (Incidence rate are 6.9 %, 4.8 % and 3.5 %). Among treatment-associated AEs, only injection site reactions (ISR) occurred more in the dose groups. In conclusion, Ebronucimab, with either 450 mg Q4W or 150 mg Q2W doses, demonstrated significant efficacy in lowering serum LDL-C level with a favorable safety and immunogenicity profile among hypercholesterolemic patients.

Testing practices and clinical management of lipoprotein(a) levels: A 5-year retrospective analysis from the Johns Hopkins Hospital

Objective

Elevated lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is an independent, genetically determined risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). We evaluated the frequency of testing for elevated Lp(a) and subsequent management at the Johns Hopkins Hospital, a large academic medical center, over a 5-year period.

Methods

The Johns Hopkins Hospital (JHH) electronic medical record was queried to identify patients with an encounter between 2017 and 2021, either with established ASCVD or at increased risk, defined as being on any lipid lowering medication or having LDL-C ≥ 190 mg/dL. The frequency of Lp(a) testing and of elevated levels were identified for each year.

Results

Among 111,350 unique adult patients, 2,785 (2.5 %) had at least one Lp(a) test. Patients with Lp(a) testing, compared to those without testing, were younger (mean age 56 years vs. 66 years), more often female (49 % vs. 44 %), Black (24.7 % vs. 24.6 %) or "other" race/ethnicity (12 % vs 10 %), and had higher LDL-C levels (median 118 vs. 91 mg/dL; p < 0.001). The number and frequency of Lp(a) testing increased from 167 (0.57 %) in 2017 to 1155 (5.67 %) in 2021. Lp(a) levels were abnormal in 43.4 % of patients (moderate [75-125 nmol/L]: 10.3 %, high [126-600 nmol/L]: 32.2 %, severe [>600 nmol/L]: 0.9 %). Among 920 patients with high or severe Lp(a) levels, 200 (22 %) had a subsequent referral to cardiology or lipid specialist, and 180 (20 %) had a new lipid-lowering medication prescribed in the subsequent 18 months.

Conclusion

Based on a single-center experience, the frequency of incident Lp(a) testing among increased-risk patients was low but increased significantly over 5-years, likely due to Lipid Clinic referrals with reflex Lp(a) testing and greater awareness about this risk factor. Future work should target appropriate population based Lp(a) testing strategies and clinical decision-making regarding risk management once Lp(a) elevation is diagnosed.

Atherogenic lipid profile in patients with statin treatment after acute coronary syndrome: a real-world analysis from Chinese cardiovascular association database

BACKGROUND

Adverse atherogenic lipid profile is associated with an increased risk of major adverse cardiac events in patients after acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Knowledge regarding the impact of statins on lipid profile remains limited.

METHODS

We retrospectively analysed multicenter, real-world data from the Chinese Cardiovascular Association Database-iHeart Project. Patients with a primary diagnosis of ACS from 2014 to 2021 during index hospitalisation and having at least one lipid panel record after discharge within 12 months were enrolled. We analysed target achievement of atherogenic lipid profile, including apolipoprotein B (< 80 mg/dL), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) (< 1.8 mmol/L), lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] (< 30 mg/dL), triglycerides (< 1.7 mmol/L), remnant cholesterol (RC) (< 0.78 mmol/L), non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (< 2.6 mmol/L) at baseline and follow-up. Multivariate Cox regression models were employed to investigate the association between patient characteristics and target achievement.

RESULTS

Among 4861 patients, the mean age was 64.9 years. Only 7.8% of patients had all atherogenic lipids within the target range at follow-up. The proportion of target achievement was for LDL-C 42.7%, Lp(a) 73.3%, and RC 78.5%. Patients with female sex, younger age, myocardial infarction, hypertension, and hypercholesteremia were less likely to control LDL-C, Lp(a), and RC. An increase in the burden of comorbidities was negatively associated with LDL-C and Lp(a) achievements but not with RC.

CONCLUSIONS

A substantial gap exists between lipid control and the targets recommended by contemporary guidelines. Novel therapeutics targeting the whole atherogenic lipid profile will be warranted to improve cardiovascular outcomes.

Lipoprotein(a) in interventional cardiology: identifying patients at highest risk of recurrent cardiovascular events through early recognition - a case based review

INTRODUCTION

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is linked to higher risks of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Current guideline recommendations are quite liberal on measuring Lp(a) (Class IIa, Level C), and may lead to underuse among (interventional) cardiologists.

AREAS COVERED

This case-based narrative review outlines four clinical cases of patients with elevated Lp(a) to illustrate its pathophysiological impact on coronary artery disease (CAD). The expert consensus statements from the American Heart Association (AHA) and European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS) served as the basis of this review. More recent publications, from 2023 to 2024, were accessed through the MEDLINE online library.

EXPERT OPINION

We highlighted the importance of routine Lp(a) measurement in identifying patients at high risk for atherosclerosis, necessitating potent risk mitigation. Measuring Lp(a) helps clinicians identify which patients are at highest residual risk, who require potent pharmacological treatment and special attention during catheter interventions. As noninvasive and advanced intravascular imaging modalities evolve, future catheterization laboratories will integrate advanced imaging, diagnostics, and treatment, facilitating tailored patient care. Knowing Lp(a) levels is crucial in this context. While Lp(a)-lowering drugs are currently investigated in clinical trials, it is of paramount importance to know Lp(a) levels and strive toward aggressive management of other modifiable risk factors in patients with elevated Lp(a) and established symptomatic CAD being diagnosed or treated in catheterization laboratories.

Elevated lipoprotein(a) levels: A crucial determinant of cardiovascular disease risk and target for emerging therapies

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) remains a significant global health challenge despite advancements in prevention and treatment. Elevated Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] levels have emerged as a crucial risk factor for CVD and aortic stenosis, affecting approximately 20 of the global population. Research over the last decade has established Lp(a) as an independent genetic contributor to CVD and aortic stenosis, beginning with Kare Berg's discovery in 1963. This has led to extensive exploration of its molecular structure and pathogenic roles. Despite the unknown physiological function of Lp(a), studies have shed light on its metabolism, genetics, and involvement in atherosclerosis, inflammation, and thrombosis. Epidemiological evidence highlights the link between high Lp(a) levels and increased cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Newly emerging therapies, including pelacarsen, zerlasiran, olpasiran, muvalaplin, and lepodisiran, show promise in significantly lowering Lp(a) levels, potentially transforming the management of cardiovascular disease. However, further research is essential to assess these novel therapies' long-term efficacy and safety, heralding a new era in cardiovascular disease prevention and treatment and providing hope for at-risk patients.

Association between evolocumab use and slow progression of aortic valve stenosis

No medications have been reported to inhibit the progression of aortic valve stenosis (AS). The present study aimed to investigate whether evolocumab use is related to the slow progression of AS evaluated by serial echocardiography. This was a retrospective observational study from 2017 to 2022 at Yokohama City University Medical Center. Patients aged ≥ 18 with moderate AS were included. Exclusion criteria were (1) mild AS; (2) severe AS defined by maximum aortic valve (AV) velocity ≥ 4.0 m/s; and/or (3) no data of annual follow-up echocardiography. The primary endpoint was the association between evolocumab use and annual changes in the maximum AV-velocity or peak AV-pressure gradient (PG). A total of 57 patients were enrolled: 9 patients treated with evolocumab (evolocumab group), and the other 48 patients assigned to a control group. During a median follow-up of 33 months, the cumulative incidence of AS events (a composite of all-cause death, AV intervention, or unplanned hospitalization for heart failure) was 11% in the evolocumab group and 58% in the control group (P = 0.012). Annual change of maximum AV-velocity or peak AV-PG from the baseline to the next year was 0.02 (- 0.18 to 0.22) m/s per year or 0.60 (- 4.20 to 6.44) mmHg per year in the evolocumab group, whereas it was 0.29 (0.04-0.59) m/s per year or 7.61 (1.46-16.48) mmHg per year in the control group (both P < 0.05). Evolocumab use was associated with slow progression of AS and a low incidence of AS events in patients with moderate AS.

Sex Differences in Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Treatment Among Young Israeli Patients Following Premature Acute Coronary Syndrome

Introduction: Effective management of dyslipidemias is crucial for reducing morbidity and mortality among patients after acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Sex differences in dyslipidemia management after premature ACS in Israeli patients have not been extensively studied. This study aimed to investigate potential disparities between men and women in managing dyslipidemia, considering current guidelines. Methods: This retrospective cohort study examined patients who were 55 years old or younger and admitted to Meir Medical Center for ACS from January 2018 to February 2019. The study aimed to evaluate the use of lipid-lowering therapy (LLT), measure the achievement of target low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels, and analyze the occurrence of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) in both male and female patients. Results: The study included a total of 687 participants, of which 23.3% were identified as females. Upon discharge, ∼80% of the patients were prescribed high-intensity statins. After 1 year, it was observed that females had higher levels of LDL-C and lower rates of achieving target LDL-C levels (<70 and 55 mg/dL) as compared with males (45% vs. 54.6% and 30% vs. 42.2%, respectively). The use of non-statin LLT at the 1-year mark was minimal in both groups. Finally, it was found that the occurrence of MACCE was similar between males and females. Conclusion: Sex disparities in dyslipidemia management after a premature ACS were apparent, with females having higher LDL-C levels and lower rates of target achievement. Intervention is necessary to address these disparities and encourage greater use of non-statin LLT.

Safety of the PCSK9 inhibitor alirocumab: insights from 47 296 patient-years of observation

The ODYSSEY OUTCOMES trial, comprising over 47 000 patient-years of placebo-controlled observation, demonstrated important reductions in the risk of recurrent ischaemic cardiovascular events with the monoclonal antibody to proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 alirocumab, as well as lower all-cause death. These benefits were observed in the context of substantial and persistent lowering of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol with alirocumab compared with that achieved with placebo. The safety profile of alirocumab was indistinguishable from matching placebo except for a ∼1.7% absolute increase in local injection site reactions. Further, the safety of alirocumab compared with placebo was evident in vulnerable groups identified before randomization, such as the elderly and those with diabetes mellitus, previous ischaemic stroke, or chronic kidney disease. The frequency of adverse events and laboratory-based abnormalities was generally similar to that in placebo-treated patients. Thus, alirocumab appears to be a safe and effective lipid-modifying treatment over a duration of at least 5 years.

Consensus on lipoprotein(a) of the Spanish Society of Arteriosclerosis. Literature review and recommendations for clinical practice

The irruption of lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) in the study of cardiovascular risk factors is perhaps, together with the discovery and use of proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (iPCSK9) inhibitor drugs, the greatest novelty in the field for decades. Lp(a) concentration (especially very high levels) has an undeniable association with certain cardiovascular complications, such as atherosclerotic vascular disease (AVD) and aortic stenosis. However, there are several current limitations to both establishing epidemiological associations and specific pharmacological treatment. Firstly, the measurement of Lp(a) is highly dependent on the test used, mainly because of the characteristics of the molecule. Secondly, Lp(a) concentration is more than 80% genetically determined, so that, unlike other cardiovascular risk factors, it cannot be regulated by lifestyle changes. Finally, although there are many promising clinical trials with specific drugs to reduce Lp(a), currently only iPCSK9 (limited for use because of its cost) significantly reduces Lp(a). However, and in line with other scientific societies, the SEA considers that, with the aim of increasing knowledge about the contribution of Lp(a) to cardiovascular risk, it is relevant to produce a document containing the current status of the subject, recommendations for the control of global cardiovascular risk in people with elevated Lp(a) and recommendations on the therapeutic approach to patients with elevated Lp(a).

Recent updates on therapeutic targeting of lipoprotein(a) with RNA interference

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

RNA interference (RNAi)-based therapies that target specific gene products have impacted clinical medicine with 16 FDA approved drugs. RNAi therapy focused on reducing plasma lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] levels are under evaluation.

RECENT FINDINGS

RNAi-based therapies have made significant progress over the past 2 decades and currently consist of antisense oligonucleotides (ASO) and small interfering RNA (siRNA). Chemical modification of the RNA backbone and conjugation of siRNA enables efficient gene silencing in hepatocytes allowing development of effective cholesterol lowering therapies. Multiple lines of evidence suggest a causative role for Lp(a) in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, and recent analyses indicate that Lp(a) is more atherogenic than low density lipoprotein- cholesterol (LDL-C). These findings have led to the 'Lp(a) hypothesis' that lowering Lp(a) may significantly improve cardiovascular outcomes. Four RNAi-based drugs have completed early phase clinical trials demonstrating >80% reduction in plasma Lp(a) levels. Phase 3 clinical trials examining clinical outcomes with these agents are currently underway.

SUMMARY

Currently, four RNAi-based drugs have been shown to be effective in significantly lowering plasma Lp(a) levels. Clinical outcome data from phase 3 trials will evaluate the Lp(a) hypothesis.

Emerging Therapeutic Strategies in Cardiovascular Diseases

Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs), including ischemic heart disease and stroke, are the leading cause of mortality worldwide, causing nearly 20 million deaths annually. Traditional therapies, while effective, have not curbed the rising prevalence of CVDs driven by aging populations and lifestyle factors. This review highlights innovative therapeutic strategies that show promise in improving patient outcomes and transforming cardiovascular care. Emerging pharmacological treatments, such as proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors and sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors, introduce novel mechanisms to complement existing therapies, significantly reducing cardiovascular events and mortality. These advancements emphasize the necessity of ongoing clinical trials and research to discover new therapeutic targets. Advanced biological therapies, including gene therapy, stem cell therapy, and RNA-based treatments, offer groundbreaking potential for repairing and regenerating damaged cardiovascular tissues. Despite being in various stages of clinical validation, early results are promising, suggesting these therapies could fundamentally change the CVD treatment landscape. Innovative medical devices and technologies, such as implantable devices, minimally invasive procedures, and wearable technology, are revolutionizing CVD management. These advancements facilitate early diagnosis, continuous monitoring, and effective treatment, driving care out of hospitals and into homes, improving patient outcomes and reducing healthcare costs. Personalized medicine, driven by genetic profiling and biomarker identification, allows for tailored therapies that enhance treatment efficacy and minimize adverse effects. However, the adoption of these emerging therapies faces significant challenges, including regulatory hurdles, cost and accessibility issues, and ethical considerations. Addressing these barriers and fostering interdisciplinary collaboration are crucial for accelerating the development and implementation of innovative treatments. Integrating emerging therapeutic strategies in cardiovascular care holds immense potential to transform CVD management. By prioritizing future research and overcoming existing challenges, a new era of personalized, effective, and accessible cardiovascular care can be achieved.

Alirocumab and cardiovascular outcomes according to sex and lipoprotein(a) after acute coronary syndrome: a report from the ODYSSEY OUTCOMES study

BACKGROUND

The ODYSSEY OUTCOMES trial (NCT01663402) compared the effects of the proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitor alirocumab with placebo on major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in patients with recent acute coronary syndrome (ACS).

OBJECTIVE

We assessed efficacy and safety of alirocumab versus placebo according to sex and lipoprotein(a) level.

METHODS

This prespecified analysis compared the effects of alirocumab versus placebo on lipoproteins, MACE (coronary heart disease death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, fatal/non-fatal ischemic stroke, unstable angina requiring hospitalization), death, total cardiovascular events, and adverse events in 4762 women and 14,162 men followed for a median of 2.8 years. In post-hoc analysis, we evaluated total cardiovascular events according to sex, baseline lipoprotein(a), and treatment.

RESULTS

Women were older, had higher baseline low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels (89.6 vs 85.3 mg/dL) and lipoprotein(a) (28.0 vs 19.3 mg/dL) and had more co-morbidities than men. At 4 months, alirocumab lowered LDL-C by 49.4 mg/dL in women and 54.0 mg/dL in men and lipoprotein(a) by 9.7 and 8.1 mg/dL, respectively (both p < 0.0001). Alirocumab reduced MACE, death, and total cardiovascular events similarly in both sexes. In the placebo group, lipoprotein(a) was a risk factor for total cardiovascular events in women and men. In both sexes, reduction of total cardiovascular events was greater at higher baseline lipoprotein(a), but this effect was more evident in women than men (pinteraction=0.08). Medication adherence and adverse event rates were similar in both sexes.

CONCLUSIONS

Alirocumab improves cardiovascular outcomes after ACS irrespective of sex. Reduction of total cardiovascular events was greater at higher baseline lipoprotein(a).

Synergetic impact of lipoprotein(a) and fibrinogen on stroke in coronary artery disease patients

BACKGROUND

Emerging data suggested that lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is an independent risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Previous studies indicated fibrinogen (Fib) had synergetic effect on Lp(a)-induced events. However, combined impact of Fib and Lp(a) on ischemic stroke has not been elucidated.

METHODS

In this prospective study, we consecutively enrolled 8263 patients with stable coronary artery diseases (CAD) from 2011 to 2017. Patients were categorized into three groups according to tertiles of Lp(a) levels [Lp(a)-low, Lp(a)-medium, and Lp(a)-high] and further divided into nine groups by Lp(a) and Fib levels. All subjects were followed up for the occurrence of ischemic stroke.

RESULTS

During a median follow-up of 37.7 months, 157 (1.9%) ischemic strokes occurred. Stroke incidence increased by Lp(a) (1.1 vs. 2.1 vs. 2.5%, Cochran-Armitage p < .001) and Fib (1.1 vs. 2.0 vs. 2.6%, Cochran-Armitage p < .001) categories. When further classified into nine groups by Lp(a) and Fib levels, the incidence of ischemic stroke in group 9 [Lp(a)-high and Fib-high] was significantly higher than that in group 1 [Lp(a)-low and Fib-low] (3.1 vs. 6%, p < .001). The group 9 was associated with a highest risk for ischemic stroke (adjusted HR 4.907, 95% CI: 2.154-11.18, p < .001), compared with individuals in the Lp(a)-high (adjusted HR 2.290, 95% CI: 1.483-3.537, p < .001) or Fib-high (adjusted HR 1.184, 95% CI: 1.399-3.410, p = .001). Furthermore, combining Lp(a) with Fib increased C-statistics by .045 (p = .004).

CONCLUSIONS

Current study first demonstrated that elevated Lp(a) combining with Fib evaluation enhanced the risk of ischemic stroke in patients with CAD beyond Lp(a) or Fib alone.

Lipoprotein(a): Emerging insights and therapeutics

The strong association between lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease has led to considerations of Lp(a) being a potential target for mitigating residual cardiovascular risk. While approximately 20 % of the population has an Lp(a) level greater than 50 mg/dL, there are no currently available pharmacological lipid-lowering therapies that have demonstrated substantial reduction in Lp(a). Novel therapies to lower Lp(a) include antisense oligonucleotides and small-interfering ribonucleic acid molecules and have shown promising results in phase 2 trials. Phase 3 trials are currently underway and will test the causal relationship between Lp(a) and ASCVD and whether lowering Lp(a) reduces cardiovascular outcomes. In this review, we summarize emerging insights related to Lp(a)'s role as a risk-enhancing factor for ASCVD, association with calcific aortic stenosis, effects of existing therapies on Lp(a) levels, and variations amongst patient populations. The evolving therapeutic landscape of emerging therapeutics is further discussed.

High lipoprotein(a): Actionable strategies for risk assessment and mitigation

High levels of lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] are causal for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Lp(a) is the most prevalent inherited dyslipidemia and strongest genetic ASCVD risk factor. This risk persists in the presence of at target, guideline-recommended, LDL-C levels and adherence to lifestyle modifications. Epidemiological and genetic evidence supporting its causal role in ASCVD and calcific aortic stenosis continues to accumulate, although various facets regarding Lp(a) biology (genetics, pathophysiology, and expression across race/ethnic groups) are not yet fully understood. The evolving nature of clinical guidelines and consensus statements recommending universal measurements of Lp(a) and the scientific data supporting its role in multiple disease states reinforce the clinical merit to start population screening for Lp(a) now. There is a current gap in the implementation of recommendations for primary and secondary cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention in those with high Lp(a), in part due to a lack of protocols for management strategies. Importantly, targeted apolipoprotein(a) [apo(a)]-lowering therapies that reduce Lp(a) levels in patients with high Lp(a) are in phase 3 clinical development. This review focuses on the identification and clinical management of patients with high Lp(a). Specifically, we highlight the clinical value of measuring Lp(a) and its use in determining Lp(a)-associated CVD risk by providing actionable guidance, based on scientific knowledge, that can be utilized now to mitigate risk caused by high Lp(a).

Association of Lipoprotein (a) and Standard Modifiable Cardiovascular Risk Factors With Incident Myocardial Infarction: The Mass General Brigham Lp(a) Registry

BACKGROUND

Lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] is a robust predictor of coronary heart disease outcomes, with targeted therapies currently under investigation. We aimed to evaluate the association of high Lp(a) with standard modifiable risk factors (SMuRFs) for incident first acute myocardial infarction (AMI).

METHODS AND RESULTS

This retrospective study used the Mass General Brigham Lp(a) Registry, which included patients aged ≥18 years with an Lp(a) measurement between 2000 and 2019. Exclusion criteria were severe kidney dysfunction, malignant neoplasm, and prior known atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Diabetes, dyslipidemia, hypertension, and smoking were considered SMuRFs. High Lp(a) was defined as >90th percentile, and low Lp(a) was defined as <50th percentile. The primary outcome was fatal or nonfatal AMI. A combination of natural language processing algorithms, International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes, and laboratory data was used to identify the outcome and covariates. A total of 6238 patients met the eligibility criteria. The median age was 54 (interquartile range, 43-65) years, and 45% were women. Overall, 23.7% had no SMuRFs, and 17.8% had ≥3 SMuRFs. Over a median follow-up of 8.8 (interquartile range, 4.2-12.8) years, the incidence of AMI increased gradually, with higher number of SMuRFs among patients with high (log-rank P=0.031) and low Lp(a) (log-rank P<0.001). Across all SMuRF subgroups, the incidence of AMI was significantly higher for patients with high Lp(a) versus low Lp(a). The risk of high Lp(a) was similar to having 2 SMuRFs. Following adjustment for confounders and number of SMuRFs, high Lp(a) remained significantly associated with the primary outcome (hazard ratio, 2.9 [95% CI, 2.0-4.3]; P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with no prior atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, high Lp(a) is associated with significantly higher risk for first AMI regardless of the number of SMuRFs.