Biology, pathophysiology and current therapies that affect lipoprotein (a) levels

The functions of apolipoproteins and lipoproteins in health and disease

Lipoproteins and apolipoproteins are crucial in lipid metabolism, functioning as essential mediators in the transport of cholesterol and triglycerides and being closely related to the pathogenesis of multiple systems, including cardiovascular. Lipoproteins a (Lp(a)), as a unique subclass of lipoproteins, is a low-density lipoprotein(LDL)-like particle with pro-atherosclerotic and pro-inflammatory properties, displaying high heritability. More and more strong evidence points to a possible link between high amounts of Lp(a) and cardiac conditions like atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and aortic stenosis (AS), making it a risk factor for heart diseases. In recent years, Lp(a)'s role in other diseases, including neurological disorders and cancer, has been increasingly recognized. Although therapies aimed at low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) have achieved significant success, elevated Lp(a) levels remain a significant clinical management problem. Despite the limited efficacy of current lipid-lowering therapies, major clinical advances in new Lp(a)-lowering therapies have significantly advanced the field. This review, grounded in the pathophysiology of lipoproteins, seeks to summarize the wide-ranging connections between lipoproteins (such as LDL-C and HDL-C) and various diseases, alongside the latest clinical developments, special emphasis is placed on the pivotal role of Lp(a) in cardiovascular disease, while also examining its future potential and mechanisms in other conditions. Furthermore, this review discusses Lp(a)-lowering therapies and highlights significant recent advances in emerging treatments, advocates for further exploration into Lp(a)'s pathogenic mechanisms and its potential as a therapeutic target, proposing new secondary prevention strategies for high-risk individuals.

Lipoprotein (a) is a predictor of non-achievement of LDL-C goals in patients with chronic heart disease

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

Lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] concentration influences serum low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels. How it influences the achievement of LDL-C targets established in the guidelines is not well studied. Our aim was to know the prevalence of elevated Lp(a) levels in patients with coronary artery disease, and to assess its influence on the achievement of LDL-C targets.

METHOD

We conducted a cross-sectional study in a cardiology department in Spain. A total of 870 patients with stable coronary artery disease had their lipid profile determined, including Lp(a). Patients were stratified into 2 groups according to Lp(a)>50mg/dL and Lp(a)≤50mg/dL. The association of Lp(a)>50mg/dL with achievement of LDL-C targets was assessed by logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

The prevalence of Lp(a)>50mg/dL was 30.8%. Patients with Lp(a)>50mg/dL had higher baseline (142.30±47.54 vs. 130.47±40.75mg/dL; p=0.0001) and current (72.91±26.44 vs. 64.72±25.30mg/dL; p=0.0001), despite the fact that they were treated with more high-potency statins (77.2 vs. 70.9%; p=0.058) and more combination lipid-lowering therapy (37.7 vs. 25.7%; p=0.001). The proportion of patients achieving target LDL-C was lower in those with Lp(a)>50mg/dL. Independent predictors of having elevated Lp(a) levels>50mg/dL were the use of high-potency statins (OR 1.5; 95% CI 1.08-2.14), combination lipid-lowering therapy with ezetimibe (OR 2.0; 95% CI 1.45-2.73) and failure to achieve a LDL-C ≤55mg/dL (OR 2.3; 95% CI 1.63-3.23).

CONCLUSIONS

Elevated Lp(a) levels influence LDL-C levels and hinder the achievement of targets in patients at very high cardiovascular risk. New drugs that act directly on Lp(a) are needed in these patients.

LP(a): Structure, Genetics, Associated Cardiovascular Risk, and Emerging Therapeutics

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a molecule bound to apolipoprotein(a) with some similarity to low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), which has been found to be a risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD). Lp(a) appears to induce inflammation, atherogenesis, and thrombosis. Approximately 20% of the world's population has increased Lp(a) levels, determined predominantly by genetics. Current clinical practices for the management of dyslipidemia are ineffective in lowering Lp(a) levels. Evolving RNA-based therapeutics, such as the antisense oligonucleotide pelacarsen and small interfering RNA olpasiran, have shown promising results in reducing Lp(a) levels. Phase III pivotal cardiovascular outcome trials [Lp(a)HORIZON and OCEAN(a)] are ongoing to evaluate their efficacy in secondary prevention of major cardiovascular events in patients with elevated Lp(a). The future of cardiovascular residual risk reduction may transition to a personalized approach where further lowering of either LDL-C, triglycerides, or Lp(a) is selected after high-intensity statin therapy based on the individual risk profile and preferences of each patient.

Predictive value of lipoprotein(a) in coronary artery calcification among asymptomatic cardiovascular disease subjects: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

Studies have indicated inconsistent results regarding the association between plasma levels of Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] and coronary artery calcification (CAC). We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the association between elevated levels of Lp(a) and risk of CAC in populations free of cardiovascular disease (CVD) symptoms.

DATA SYNTHESIS

PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Scopus were searched up to July 2022 and the methodological quality was assessed using Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) scale. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to estimate pooled odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval. Out of 298 studies, data from 8 cross-sectional (n = 18,668) and 4 cohort (n = 15,355) studies were used in meta-analysis. Cohort studies demonstrated a positive significant association between Lp(a) and CAC, so that individuals with Lp(a)≥30-50 exposed to about 60% risk of CAC incidence compared to those with lower Lp(a) concentrations in asymptomatic CVD subjects (OR, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.38-1.80; l2, 0.0%; P, 0.483); Subgroup analysis showed that a cut-off level for Lp(a) measurement could not statistically affect the association, but race significantly affected the relationship between Lp(a) and CAC (OR,1.60; 95% CI, 1.41-1.81). Analyses also revealed that both men and women with higher Lp(a) concentrations are at the same risk for increased CAC.

CONCLUSIONS

Blood Lp(a) level was significantly associated with CAC incidence in asymptomatic populations with CVD, indicating that measuring Lp(a) may be a useful biomarker for diagnosing subclinical atherosclerosis in individuals at higher risk of CAC score.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42022350297.

Treatment of Lp(a): Is It the Future or Are We Ready Today?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The goal of this review is to present the pharmacodynamic effectiveness as well as the clinical efficacy and safety of investigational antisense oligonucleotides (ASOs) and small interference RNAs (siRNAs) drugs that specifically target lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)). The review will discuss whether the existing lipid-lowering therapies are adequate to treat high Lp(a) levels or whether it is necessary to use the emerging new therapeutic approaches which are based on the current RNA technologies.

RECENT FINDINGS

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is a causal risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), independent of other conventional risk factors. High Lp(a) levels are also independently associated with an increased risk of aortic stenosis progression rate. Plasma Lp(a) levels are primarily genetically determined by variation in the LPA gene coding for apo(a). All secondary prevention trials have demonstrated that the existing hypolipidemic therapies are not adequate to reduce Lp(a) levels to such an extent that could lead to a substantial reduction of ASCVD risk. This has led to the development of new drugs that target the mRNA transcript of LPA and efficiently inhibit Lp(a) synthesis leading to potent Lp(a) reduction. These new drugs are the ASO pelacarsen and the siRNAs olpasiran and SLN360. Recent pharmacodynamic studies showed that all these drugs potently reduce Lp(a) up to 98%, in a dose-dependent manner. Ongoing clinical trials will determine the Lp(a)-lowering efficacy, tolerability, and safety of these drugs as well as their potential effectiveness in reducing the ASCVD risk attributed to high plasma Lp(a) levels. We are not ready today to significantly reduce plasma Lp(a). Emerging therapies potently decrease Lp(a) and ongoing clinical trials will determine their effectiveness in reducing ASCVD risk in subjects with high Lp(a) levels.

Proteomic studies on apoB-containing lipoprotein in cardiovascular research: A comprehensive review

The complexity of cardiovascular diseases (CVDs), which remains the leading cause of death worldwide, makes the current clinical pathway for cardiovascular risk assessment unsatisfactory, as there remains a substantial unexplained residual risk. Simultaneous assessment of a large number of plasma proteins may be a promising tool to further refine risk assessment, and lipoprotein-associated proteins have the potential to fill this gap. Technical advances now allow for high-throughput proteomic analysis in a reproducible and cost-effective manner. Proteomics has great potential to identify and quantify hundreds of candidate marker proteins in a sample and allows the translation from isolated lipoproteins to whole plasma, thus providing an individual multiplexed proteomic fingerprint. This narrative review describes the pathophysiological roles of atherogenic apoB-containing lipoproteins and the recent advances in their mass spectrometry-based proteomic characterization and quantitation for better refinement of CVD risk assessment.

Influence of rosuvastatin on apolipoproteins and coagulation factor levels: Results from the STAtin Reduce Thrombophilia trial

Background

The STAtins Reduce Thrombophilia trial showed that, in patients with prior venous thrombosis, rosuvastatin decreased various coagulation factor levels.

Objectives

Here, we investigated the hypothesis that statins decrease coagulation factor levels through shared mechanisms of synthesis or regulatory pathways with apolipoproteins.

Methods

We measured the levels of apolipoprotein (Apo)A-I, A-II, A-IV, (a), B-100, B-total, C-I, C-II, C-III, and E in patients (n = 126) randomized to 28 days of rosuvastatin use. We assessed the association between apolipoproteins and coagulation factors at baseline using linear regression. The mean difference in apolipoprotein levels between baseline and after 28 days of rosuvastatin use was determined through linear regression, adjusting for age, sex, and body mass index. Coagulation factors were added to this model to determine if the lowering of apolipoproteins by rosuvastatin was linked with coagulation factor levels.

Results

At baseline, levels of all apolipoproteins, except Apo(a), were positively associated with FVII, FIX, and FXI. Apolipoproteins levels, except for ApoA-I, A-IV, and Apo(a), were decreased after 28 days of rosuvastatin. ApoB-100 showed the largest mean decrease of -0.43 g/L (95% CI = -0.46 to -0.40). The decrease in ApoC-I and C-III levels was associated with a decrease in FVII, whereas the decrease in apoA-II, B-100, and B-total was associated with a decrease in FXI. The decrease in apolipoproteins was neither associated with FVIII or vWF decrease nor with endogenous thrombin potential changes.

Conclusions

Rosuvastatin decreases the level of several apolipoproteins, but this decrease was associated only with a decrease in FVII and XI and not with FVIII/vWF.

The nonlinear correlation between lipoprotein (a) and the prevalence of aortic valve calcification in patients with new-onset acute myocardial infarction

BACKGROUND

Growing studies show that lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] is related to calcified aortic valve diseases in general population, while the relationship between Lp(a) and aortic valve calcification (AVC) in patients with new-onset acute myocardial infarction (AMI) remains unclear. Therefore, this study was to evaluate the correlation between Lp(a) and AVC in patients with new-onset AMI.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study included 410 patients with new-onset AMI who were hospitalised in Zhongda Hospital affiliated to Southeast University from January 1, 2020 to December 31, 2021. Multivariable logistic regression, subgroup analysis, generalised additive model, threshold and saturation effect and receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve were used to explore the association between Lp(a) and AVC.

RESULTS

Patients with AVC had higher levels of Lp(a) than those without AVC. Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that higher Lp(a) was still associated with higher risk of AVC after adjusting for confounding factors, and this correlation was robust in most subgroups and sensitivity analyses (p < 0.05). Additionally, the generalised additive model showed that there was a nonlinear correlation between Lp(a) and AVC (P for nonlinearity = 0.037). Threshold and saturation effect analysis indicated that when Lp(a) < 840 mg/L, it was positively correlated with the prevalence of AVC (p < 0.05), but when Lp(a) ≥ 840 mg/L, this correlation no longer existed. Besides, ROC curve analysis demonstrated that Lp(a) had a good diagnostic performance for AVC.

CONCLUSION

Lp(a) was independently associated with the prevalence of AVC in patients with new-onset AMI.

Clinical associations between exercise and lipoproteins

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

One of the major concerns in global health is the deteriorating control of dyslipidemia (DLD), which is a very strong modifiable risk factor for untoward cardiovascular disease (CVD) outcomes. It serves as a foundation for atherosclerotic lesions that can be destabilized by co-inflammatory processes leading to distal clot migration and other related CVD events. There are many misconceptions regarding the management of DLD. Many health sectors advocate for weight loss without a clear-cut target to achieve better CVD outcomes. There is growing evidence that exercise training compliance regardless of weight change is a more reliable indicator of favorable outcomes. This review is intended to understand the relationship between exercise training, lipoprotein readings, and with CVD and all-cause morbidity and mortality.

RECENT FINDINGS

Aerobic exercise training (aET) and resistance exercise training (rET) increase cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) and muscular strength (MusS), respectively. Regardless of weight loss, aET and rET are both known to independently reduce mortality possibly partly through improvement of lipid profiles. Of the two modes of exercise, rET has propensity for enhanced compliance because of its significant lipid and mortality-attenuating effect even with just brief exercise sessions. However, there are several studies showing that participation in both modes of exercise causes more pronounced improvements in DLD and CVD-related mortality compared with either mode of exercise training alone. In addition, Lipoprotein-a [Lp(a)] has been increasingly acknowledged to be atherogenic because of its LDL core. The close proximity of Lp(a) with macrophages triggers the development of atheromas, plaque formation, and growth. This causes a cascade of inflammatory processes that increase the development of ischemic CVD and calcific aortic valve stenosis. Although exercise training is known to reduce plasma LDL-C levels, it has no direct effect on Lp(a) levels as the latter lipoprotein is not influenced by motion nor exercise. Reviews of multiple studies lead us to infer that exercise training may potentially have an indirect impact on Lp(a) attenuation because of the ability of exercise training to inhibit Proprotein Convertase Subtisilin/Kexin type-9 (PCSK-9), as some studies using pharmacologic therapy with PCSK-9 inhibitors were able to show a concomitant decrease in Lp(a) levels.

SUMMARY

It is clear that normal-to-overweight populations who are highly active have better CVD outcomes and lipid profiles than their sedentary counterparts, and those who were underweight and unfit fared much worse. This allows us to take a more precise approach in the management of DLD rather than plainly focusing on gross weight in patients. Exercise training certainly has beneficial impact on longevity owing to its advantageous effect on lipoprotein levels and particle size. As such, reputable health societies, such as the ESC, ACC, and AHA have prescribed the ideal exercise training regimen, which have noticeable similarities. Increasing the use of wearable devices may help improve our ability to prescribe, quantify, and precisely track physical activity in our continuing efforts to combat increasing morbidity related to unhealthy lifestyles and inactivity.

The associations between exercise and lipid biomarkers

Cardiovascular diseases (CVD) remain the leading cause of death globally, and further efforts are being undertaken to understand and modify CVD risk factors, such as dyslipidemia (DLD), hypertension, and diabetes. The sedentary lifestyle of most individuals today contributes to the prevalence of these conditions. Uncontrolled dyslipidemia serves as a fertile ground for atherosclerotic plaque formation, while lipoproteins (Lp) act as cofactors for inflammatory processes that cause plaque destabilization leading to subsequent CVD events. As such, many health experts and institutions continue to emphasize the importance of cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) and muscular strength (MusS) with the intent to reduce atherogenic lipoproteins and proprotein convertase subtilisin kexin type 9 (PCSK-9) expression. Concordantly, the two modes of exercise training (ET), such as aerobic ET (aET) and resistance ET (rET) have both demonstrated to improve CRF and MusS, respectively. Although both modes of ET were shown to independently reduce mortality, participation in both forms resulted in a more pronounced improvement in cholesterol levels and CVD-related mortality. Though reduction of adiposity is not a pre-requisite to achieve better control of DLD through increased CRF and MusS, the beneficial effects of physical activity on the inflammatory processes linked to atherosclerosis are almost always associated with a simultaneous decrease in overall adiposity. It is therefore essential to promote both aET and rET, including weight loss in order to attenuate the risks stemming from atherosclerosis and its proinflammatory components.

Relationship Between Lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] and Cognition in Different Ischemic Stroke Subtypes

Background and Purpose: Although elevated serum lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] is considered to be a risk factor of ischemic stroke, the relationship between Lp(a) and cognitive impairment after stroke remains unclear. This study investigated the association between serum Lp(a) and cognitive function after acute ischemic stroke (AIS) or transient ischemic attack (TIA). Methods: The study included 1,017 patients diagnosed with AIS or TIA from the cognition subgroup of the Third China National Stroke Registry (CNSR3). Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) at 2 weeks or discharge, 3 months, and 1 year was evaluated. The primary outcome was cognitive impairment at 1 year, defined as MoCA ≤ 22. The secondary outcome was cognition improvement at 1 year compared with 2 weeks. The association between Lp(a) levels and cognitive function was analyzed. Results: Among the 1,017 patients included, 326 (32.1%) had cognitive impairment at 1 year. Patients with MoCA ≤ 22 at 1 year were older, received less education, and had higher baseline NIHSS, higher proportion of ischemic stroke history, large artery atherosclerosis (LAA) subtype, and multiple infarctions (P < 0.05 for all). Patients with highest Lp(a) quartile had slightly higher percentage of cognitive impairment at 1 year but without statistical difference. In subgroup analysis of LAA subtype, the patients with highest Lp(a) quartile had higher percentage of cognitive impairment at 1 year (adjusted OR:2.63; 95% CI: 1.05-6.61, P < 0.05). What is more, the patients with highest Lp(a) quartile in LAA subtype had lower percentage of cognition improvement at 1 year. However, similar results were not found in small artery occlusion (SAO) subtype. Conclusion: Higher Lp(a) level was associated with cognitive impairment and less improvement of cognition in patients after AIS or TIA with large-artery atherosclerosis subtype.

The Effects of Exercise on Lipid Biomarkers

The World Health Organization has declared obesity to be a global epidemic that increases cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality risk factors, such as hypertension, diabetes, dyslipidemia, and atherosclerosis. The increasing ratio of time spent in sedentary activities to that spent performing physically demanding tasks increases the trends to obesity and susceptibility to these risk factors. Dyslipidemia is the foundation of atherosclerotic buildup and lipoproteins serve as cofactors to the inflammatory processes that destabilize plaques. Increasing cardiorespiratory fitness and muscular strength helps attenuate concentrations of low-density lipoproteins (LDLs), such as LDL cholesterol, and increase levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, as well as reduce proprotein convertase subtilisin kexin type 9 expression. Effects of physical activity on the inflammatory pathways of atherosclerosis, specifically C-reactive protein, are more closely related to reducing the levels of adiposity in tandem with increasing fitness, than with exercise training alone. The purpose of this review is to describe the physiology of dyslipidemia and relate it to CVD and exercise therapies.

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

Background

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

Lipoprotein (a) and coronary artery calcification: prospective study assessing interactions with other risk factors

BACKGROUND

Elevated plasma lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] and coronary artery calcification (CAC) are established cardiovascular risk factors that correlate with each other. We hypothesized that other cardiovascular risk factors could affect their relationship.

METHODS

We tested for interactions of 24 study variables related to dyslipidemia, diabetes, insulin resistance, hypertension, inflammation and coagulation with baseline Lp(a) on change in CAC volume and density over 9.5 years in 5975 Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA) participants, free of apparent cardiovascular disease at baseline.

RESULTS

Elevated Lp(a) was associated with larger absolute increase in CAC volume (3.21 and 4.45 mm3/year higher for Lp(a) ≥30 versus <30 mg/dL, and Lp(a) ≥50 versus <50 mg/dL, respectively), but not relative change in CAC volume. No association was found with change in CAC density when assessing continuous ln-transformed Lp(a). The association between elevated Lp(a) (≥30 mg/dL) and absolute change in CAC volume was greater in participants with higher circulating levels of interleukin-2 soluble receptor α, soluble tumor necrosis factor alpha receptor 1 and fibrinogen (15.33, 11.81 and 7.02 mm3/year in quartile 4, compared to -3.44, -0.59 and 1.91 mm3/year in quartile 1, respectively). No significant interaction was found for other study variables. Similar interactions were seen when assessing Lp(a) levels ≥50 mg/dL.

CONCLUSIONS

Elevated Lp(a) was associated with an absolute increase in CAC volume, especially in participants with higher levels of selected markers of inflammation and coagulation. These results suggest Lp(a) as a potential biomarker for CAC volume progression.

Concentration of Lp(a) (Lipoprotein[a]) in Aneurysm Sac Is Associated With Wall Enhancement of Unruptured Intracranial Aneurysm

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Atherosclerotic remodeling of the aneurysm wall, which could be detected as aneurysm wall enhancement (AWE) by magnetic resonance-vessel wall imaging, is a part of degenerative change of unruptured intracranial aneurysms (UIAs). The purpose of this study was to determine whether the luminal concentrations of atherosclerotic proteins in the aneurysm sac were associated with increased wall enhancement of UIAs in vessel wall imaging.

METHODS

We performed a prospective study of subjects undergoing endovascular treatments for UIAs. All subjects underwent evaluation using 3T-magnetic resonance imaging, including pre/postcontrast vessel wall imaging of the UIAs. Blood samples were collected from the aneurysm sac and the parent artery during endovascular procedures. Presence/absence of AWE was correlated with the delta difference in concentration for each atherosclerotic protein between the lumen of UIA and in the parent artery.

RESULTS

A total of consecutive 17 patients with 19 UIAs were enrolled. The delta difference of lipoprotein(a) was significantly higher in UIAs with AWE compared with those without AWE (-6.9±16.0 versus -45.4±44.9 μg/mL, P=0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Higher luminal concentrations of lipoprotein(a) in the aneurysm sac were significantly associated with increased wall enhancement of UIAs. A larger study is needed to confirm these findings.

Serum lipoprotein(a) and risk of periprocedural myocardial injury in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention

Recent studies and guidelines have indicated that lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)]was an independent risk factor of arteriosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). This study aimed to determine the relationship between serum Lp(a) levels and the risk of periprocedural myocardial injury following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in coronary heartdisease (CHD) patients. This study enrolled 528 nonacute myocardial infarction (AMI) coronary heart disease (CHD) patients who successfully underwent PCI. Fasting serum lipids including Lp(a) were tested before PCI. High-sensitivity cardiac troponin I (hs-cTnI) was tested before PCI and 24 h after PCI. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to determine the relationship between preprocedural Lp(a) levels and postprocedural cTnI elevation from 1 × upper limit of normal (ULN) to 70 × ULN. As a continuous variable, multivariate analyses adjusting for conventional covariates and other serum lipids revealed that increased Lp(a) levels were independently associated with the risk of elevated postprocedural cTnI values above 1 × ULN (odds ratio [OR] per log-unit higher: 1.31, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.02-1.68, P = 0.033], 5 × ULN (OR: 1.25, 95%CI: 1.02-1.53, P = 0.032), 10 × ULN (OR: 1.48, 95%CI: 1.18-1.86, P = 0.001) and 15 × ULN (OR: 1.28, 95%CI: 1.01-1.61, P = 0.038). As a categorical variable, Lp(a) > 300 mg/L was an independent risk factor of postproceduralc TnI≥1 × ULN (OR 2.17, 95%CI 1.12-4.21, P = 0.022), ≥5 × ULN (OR 1.82, 95%CI 1.12-2.97, P = 0.017) and ≥10 × ULN (OR 2.17, 95%CI 1.33-3.54, P = 0.002). Therefore, it could be concluded that elevated preprocedural Lp(a) levels were associated with the risk of PCI-related myocardial injury in non-AMI CHD patients.

Increased cardiovascular risk associated with hyperlipoproteinemia (a) and the challenges of current and future therapeutic possibilities

Population, genetic, and clinical studies demonstrated a causative and continuous, from other plasma lipoproteins independent relationship between elevated plasma lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] concentration and the development of cardiovascular disease (CVD), mainly those related to athe-rosclerotic CVD, and calcific aortic stenosis. Currently, a strong international consensus is still lacking regarding the single value which would be commonly used to define hyperlipoproteinemia (a). Its prevalence in the general population is estimated to be in the range of 10%–35% in accordance with the most commonly used threshold levels (>30 or >50 mg/dL). Since elevated Lp(a) can be of special importance in patients with some genetic disorders, as well as in individuals with otherwise controlled major risk factors, the identification and establishment of the proper therapeutic interventions that would lower Lp(a) levels and lead to CVD risk reduction could be very important. The majority of the classical lipid-lowering agents (statins, ezetimibe, and fibrates), as well as nutraceuticals (CoQ10 and garlic), appear to have no significant effect on its plasma levels, whereas for the drugs with the demonstrated Lp(a)-lowering effects (aspirin, niacin, and estrogens), their clinical efficacy in reducing cardiovascular (CV) events has not been unequivocally proven yet. Both Lp(a) apheresis and proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitors can reduce the plasma Lp(a) by approximately 20%–30% on average, in parallel with much larger reduction of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (up to 70%), what puts us in a difficulty to conclude about the true contribution of lowered Lp(a) to the reduction of CV events. The most recent advancement in the field is the introduction of the novel apolipoprotein (a) [apo(a)] antisense oligonucleotide therapy targeting apo(a), which has already proven itself as being very effective in decreasing plasma Lp(a) (by even >90%), but should be further tested in clinical trials. The aim of this review was to present some of the most important accessible scientific data, as well as dilemmas related to the currently and potentially in the near future more widely available therapeutic options for the management of hyperlipoproteinemia (a).

Lipoprotein(a) in atherosclerosis: from pathophysiology to clinical relevance and treatment options

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) was discovered more than 50 years ago, and a decade later, it was recognized as a risk factor for coronary artery disease. However, it has gained importance only in the past 10 years, with emergence of drugs that can effectively decrease its levels. Lp(a) is a low-density lipoprotein (LDL) with an added apolipoprotein(a) attached to the apolipoprotein B component via a disulphide bond. Circulating levels of Lp(a) are mainly genetically determined. Lp(a) has many functions, which include proatherosclerotic, prothrombotic and pro-inflammatory roles. Here, we review recent data on the role of Lp(a) in the atherosclerotic process, and treatment options for patients with cardiovascular diseases. Currently 'Proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9' (PCSK9) inhibitors that act through non-specific reduction of Lp(a) are the only drugs that have shown effectiveness in clinical trials, to provide reductions in cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. The effects of PCSK9 inhibitors are not purely through Lp(a) reduction, but also through LDL cholesterol reduction. Finally, we discuss new drugs on the horizon, and gene-based therapies that affect transcription and translation of apolipoprotein(a) mRNA. Clinical trials in patients with high Lp(a) and low LDL cholesterol might tell us whether Lp(a) lowering per se decreases cardiovascular morbidity and mortality.KEY MESSAGESLipoprotein(a) is an important risk factor in patients with cardiovascular diseases.Lipoprotein(a) has many functions, which include proatherosclerotic, prothrombotic and pro-inflammatory roles.Treatment options to lower lipoprotein(a) levels are currently scarce, but new drugs are on the horizon.

Serum lipoprotein(a) and risk of mortality in patients on peritoneal dialysis

BACKGROUND

Elevated serum lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] level is an independent risk factor for atherosclerotic diseases in the general population and hemodialysis patients. However, the association between Lp(a) levels and mortality has received little attention in peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the study was to evaluate the association of Lp(a) levels with all-cause and cardiovascular (CV) mortality in PD patients.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study was conducted in PD patients enrolled from January 1, 2006 to December 31, 2015, and followed until December 31, 2018. Cox regression models were performed to assess the association of serum Lp(a) levels with all-cause and CV mortality in PD patients.

RESULTS

In total, 1492 incident PD patients were eligible for the study. During a median follow-up period of 45.1 months, 402 all-cause and 210 CV deaths occurred. Multivariate Cox regression analysis revealed that the first and third tertiles of Lp(a) levels were significantly associated with increased risk for all-cause mortality [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.33, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) = 1.01-1.75, P = .041; HR = 1.53, 95% CI = 1.18-1.98, P = .001, respectively] when compared with the second tertile, and the third tertile of Lp(a) level was independently associated with an 80% increased risk of CV mortality (HR = 1.80, 95% CI = 1.26-2.56, P = .001). Moreover, our results showed that the HRs per log unit higher Lp(a) level for all-cause and CV mortality were 1.53 (95% CI = 1.05-2.22, P = .027) and 2.41 (95% CI = 1.44-4.03, P < .001), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that both low and high serum Lp(a) levels are risk markers for all-cause death, but only a higher baseline serum Lp(a) level is an independent risk factor for CV mortality in PD patients.