Lipoprotein(a) and the risk of cardiovascular disease in the European population: results from the BiomarCaRE consortium

Dietary n-3 alpha-linolenic and n-6 linoleic acids modestly lower serum lipoprotein(a) concentration but differentially influence other atherogenic lipoprotein traits: A randomized trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a causal, genetically determined cardiovascular risk factor. Limited evidence suggests that dietary unsaturated fat may increase serum Lp(a) concentration by 10-15 %. Linoleic acid may increase Lp(a) concentration through its endogenous conversion to arachidonic acid, a process regulated by the fatty acid desaturase (FADS) gene cluster. We aimed to compare the Lp(a) and other lipoprotein trait-modulating effects of dietary alpha-linolenic (ALA) and linoleic acids (LA). Additionally, we examined whether FADS1 rs174550 genotype modifies Lp(a) responses.

METHODS

A genotype-based randomized trial was performed in 118 men homozygous for FADS1 rs174550 SNP (TT or CC). After a 4-week run-in period, the participants were randomized to 8-week intervention diets enriched with either Camelina sativa oil (ALA diet) or sunflower oil (LA diet) 30-50 mL/day based on their BMI. Serum lipid profile was measured at baseline and at the end of the intervention.

RESULTS

ALA diet lowered serum Lp(a) concentration by 7.3 % (p = 0.003) and LA diet by 9.5 % (p < 0.001) (p = 0.089 for between-diet difference). Both diets led to greater absolute decreases in individuals with higher baseline Lp(a) concentration (p < 0.001). Concentrations of LDL cholesterol (LDL-C), non-HDL-C, remnant-C, and apolipoprotein B were lowered more by the ALA diet (p < 0.01). Lipid or lipoprotein responses were not modified by the FADS1 rs174550 genotype.

CONCLUSIONS

A considerable increase in either dietary ALA or LA from vegetable oils has a similar Lp(a)-lowering effect, whereas ALA may lower other major atherogenic lipids and lipoproteins to a greater extent than LA. Genetic differences in endogenous PUFA conversion may not influence serum Lp(a) concentration.

Lipoprotein(a) as a cardiovascular risk factor among patients with and without diabetes Mellitus: the Mass General Brigham Lp(a) Registry

BACKGROUND

Diabetes mellitus (DM) and Lp(a) are well-established predictors of coronary artery disease (CAD) outcomes. However, their combined association remains poorly understood.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the relationship between elevated Lp(a) and DM with CAD outcomes.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of the MGB Lp(a) Registry involving patients ≥ 18 years who underwent Lp(a) measurements between 2000 and 2019. Exclusion criteria were severe kidney dysfunction, malignant neoplasms, and prior atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). The primary outcome was a combination of cardiovascular death or myocardial infarction (MI). Elevated Lp(a) was defined as > 90th percentile (≥ 216 nmol/L).

RESULTS

Among 6,238 patients who met the eligibility criteria, the median age was 54, 45% were women, and 12% had DM. Patients with DM were older, more frequently male, and had a higher prevalence of additional cardiovascular risk factors. Over a median follow-up of 12.9 years, patients with either DM or elevated Lp(a) experienced higher rates of the primary outcome. Notably, those with elevated Lp(a) had a higher incidence of the primary outcome regardless of their DM status. The annual event rates were as follows: No-DM and Lp(a) < 90th% - 0.6%; No-DM and Lp(a) > 90th% - 1.3%; DM and Lp(a) < 90th% - 1.9%; DM and Lp(a) > 90th% - 4.7% (p < 0.001). After adjusting for confounders, elevated Lp(a) remained independently associated with the primary outcome among both patients with DM (HR = 2.66 [95%CI: 1.55-4.58], p < 0.001) and those without DM (HR = 2.01 [95%CI: 1.48-2.74], p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Elevated Lp(a) constitutes an independent and incremental risk factor for CAD outcomes in patients with and without DM.

Comparative Analysis of Atherogenic Lipoproteins L5 and Lp(a) in Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Low-density lipoprotein (LDL) poses a risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). As LDL comprises various subtypes differing in charge, density, and size, understanding their specific impact on ASCVD is crucial. Two highly atherogenic LDL subtypes-electronegative LDL (L5) and Lp(a)-induce vascular cell apoptosis and atherosclerotic changes independent of plasma cholesterol levels, and their mechanisms warrant further investigation. Here, we have compared the roles of L5 and Lp(a) in the development of ASCVD.

RECENT FINDINGS

Lp(a) tends to accumulate in artery walls, promoting plaque formation and potentially triggering atherosclerosis progression through prothrombotic or antifibrinolytic effects. High Lp(a) levels correlate with calcific aortic stenosis and atherothrombosis risk. L5 can induce endothelial cell apoptosis and increase vascular permeability, inflammation, and atherogenesis, playing a key role in initiating atherosclerosis. Elevated L5 levels in certain high-risk populations may serve as a distinctive predictor of ASCVD. L5 and Lp(a) are both atherogenic lipoproteins contributing to ASCVD through distinct mechanisms. Lp(a) has garnered attention, but equal consideration should be given to L5.

Genetics and Pathophysiological Mechanisms of Lipoprotein(a)-Associated Cardiovascular Risk

Elevated lipoprotein(a) is a genetically transmitted codominant trait that is an independent risk driver for cardiovascular disease. Lipoprotein(a) concentration is heavily influenced by genetic factors, including LPA kringle IV-2 domain size, single-nucleotide polymorphisms, and interleukin-1 genotypes. Apolipoprotein(a) is encoded by the LPA gene and contains 10 subtypes with a variable number of copies of kringle -2, resulting in >40 different apolipoprotein(a) isoform sizes. Genetic loci beyond LPA, such as APOE and APOH, have been shown to impact lipoprotein(a) levels. Lipoprotein(a) concentrations are generally 5% to 10% higher in women than men, and there is up to a 3-fold difference in median lipoprotein(a) concentrations between racial and ethnic populations. Nongenetic factors, including menopause, diet, and renal function, may also impact lipoprotein(a) concentration. Lipoprotein(a) levels are also influenced by inflammation since the LPA promoter contains an interleukin-6 response element; interleukin-6 released during the inflammatory response results in transient increases in plasma lipoprotein(a) levels. Screening can identify elevated lipoprotein(a) levels and facilitate intensive risk factor management. Several investigational, RNA-targeted agents have shown promising lipoprotein(a)-lowering effects in clinical studies, and large-scale lipoprotein(a) testing will be fundamental to identifying eligible patients should these agents become available. Lipoprotein(a) testing requires routine, nonfasting blood draws, making it convenient for patients. Herein, we discuss the genetic determinants of lipoprotein(a) levels, explore the pathophysiological mechanisms underlying the association between lipoprotein(a) and cardiovascular disease, and provide practical guidance for lipoprotein(a) testing.

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.

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.

Independent Relationship of Lipoprotein(a) and Carotid Atherosclerosis With Long-Term Risk of Cardiovascular Disease

BACKGROUND

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is considered to be a causal risk factor of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), but whether there is an independent or joint association of Lp(a) and atherosclerotic plaque with ASCVD risk remains uncertain. This study aims to assess ASCVD risk independently or jointly conferred by Lp(a) and carotid atherosclerotic plaque.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A total of 5471 participants with no history of cardiovascular disease at baseline were recruited and followed up for ASCVD events (all fatal and nonfatal acute coronary and ischemic stroke events) over a median of 11.5 years. Independent association of Lp(a), or the joint association of Lp(a) and carotid plaque with ASCVD risk, was explored using Cox proportional hazards models. Overall, 7.6% of the participants (60.0±7.9 years of age; 2649 [48.4%] men) had Lp(a) ≥50 mg/dL, and 539 (8.4/1000 person-years) incident ASCVD events occurred. Lp(a) concentrations were independently associated with long-term risk of total ASCVD events, as well as coronary events and ischemic stroke events. Participants with Lp(a) ≥50 mg/dL had a 62% higher risk of ASCVD incidence (95% CI, 1.19-2.21) than those with Lp(a) <10 mg/dL, and they exhibited a 10-year ASCVD incidence of 11.7%. This association exists even after adjusting for prevalent plaque. Moreover, participants with Lp(a) ≥30 mg/dL and prevalent plaque had a significant 4.18 times higher ASCVD risk than those with Lp(a) <30 mg/dL and no plaque.

CONCLUSIONS

Higher Lp(a) concentrations are independently associated with long-term ASCVD risk and may exaggerate cardiovascular risk when concomitant with atherosclerotic plaque.

Association of Lipoprotein(a) with arterial stiffness: A Mendelian randomization study

BACKGROUND

In this study we used Mendelian randomization (MR) to investigate the potential causal association of lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] levels with pulse wave velocity (PWV).

METHODS

Genetic variants associated with Lp(a) were retrieved from the UK Biobank GWAS (N = 290,497). A non- overlapping GWAS based on a European cohort (N = 7,000) was used to obtain genetic associations with PWV (outcome) and utilized two different measures for the same trait, brachial-ankle (baPWV) and carotid-femoral (cfPWV) PWV. We applied a two-sample MR using the inverse variance weighting method (IVW) and a series of sensitivity analyses for 170 SNPs that were selected as instrumental variables (IVs).

RESULTS

Our analyses do not support a causal association between Lp(a) and PWV for neither measurement [βiwv(baPWV) = -.0005, p = .8 and βiwv(cfPWV) = -.006, p = .16]. The above findings were consistent across sensitivity analyses including weighted median, mode-based estimation, MR-Egger regression and MR-PRESSO.

CONCLUSION

We did not find evidence indicating that Lp(a) is causally associated with PWV, the gold standard marker of arterial stiffness.

Impact of Elevated Lipoprotein A on Clinical Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is an inherited lipoprotein particle associated with increased risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular (CV) diseases. However, its impact on outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remains unclear. The objective of this study was to assess the relationship between elevated Lp(a) levels and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) and other outcomes in patients undergoing PCI. We systematically searched Embase, MEDLINE/PubMed, and Web of Science for studies published from 2015 to 2024 comparing CV outcomes between patients with elevated versus non-elevated Lp(a) levels after PCI. Primary outcome was MACE. Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality, CV mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction, and revascularization. Risk ratios (RRs) were pooled using a random-effect model. Fifteen studies with 45,059 patients were included. Patients with elevated Lp(a) had a significantly higher risk of MACE (RR 1.38, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.23-1.56). Elevated Lp(a) was also associated with increased risks of all-cause death (RR 1.26), CV death (RR 1.58), myocardial infarction (RR 1.44), revascularization (RR 1.38), and stroke (RR 1.18). Heterogeneity was considerable for some outcomes. This meta-analysis demonstrates that elevated Lp(a) levels are associated with worse CV outcomes, including higher rates of MACE, mortality, and recurrent ischemic events in patients undergoing PCI. Novel therapeutic approaches specifically targeting Lp(a) reduction may help mitigate residual CV risk in this high-risk population.

Lipoprotein(a) and Long-Term Cardiovascular Risk in a Multi-Ethnic Pooled Prospective Cohort

BACKGROUND

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]) is a causal genetic risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). There are limited long-term follow-up data from large U.S. population cohorts.

OBJECTIVES

This study examined the relationship of Lp(a) with ASCVD outcomes in a large, pooled, multi-ethnic U.S.

COHORT

METHODS

The study included data on Lp(a) and ASCVD outcomes from 5 U.S.

PROSPECTIVE STUDIES

MESA (Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis), CARDIA (Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults), JHS (Jackson Heart Study), FHS-OS (Framingham Heart Study-Offspring), and ARIC (Atherosclerosis Risk In Communities). Lp(a) levels were classified on the basis of cohort-specific percentiles. Multivariable Cox regression related Lp(a) with composite incident ASCVD events by risk group and diabetes status.

RESULTS

The study included 27,756 persons without previous ASCVD who were aged 20 to 79 years, including 55.0% women, 35.6% Black participants, and 7.6% patients with diabetes, with mean follow-up of 21.1 years. Compared with Lp(a) levels <50th percentile, Lp(a) levels in the 50th to <75th, 75th to <90th, and ≥90th percentiles had adjusted HRs of 1.06 (95% CI: 0.99-1.14), 1.18 (95% CI: 1.09-1.28), and 1.46 (95% CI: 1.33-1.59), respectively for ASCVD events. Elevated Lp(a) predicted incident ASCVD events similarly by risk group, sex, and race or ethnic groups, but more strongly in patients with vs without diabetes (interaction P = 0.0056), with HRs for Lp(a) levels ≥90th percentile of 1.92 (95% CI: 1.50-2.45) and 1.41 (95% CI: 1.28-1.55), respectively. Lp(a) also individually predicted myocardial infarction, revascularization, stroke, and coronary heart disease death, but not total mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

The study shows, in a large U.S. pooled cohort, that higher Lp(a) levels are associated with an increased ASCVD risk, including in patients with diabetes.

Lipoprotein(a) as a blood marker for large artery atherosclerosis stroke etiology: validation in a prospective cohort from a swiss stroke center

BACKGROUND

Lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] serum levels are highly genetically determined and promote atherogenesis. High Lp(a) levels are associated with increased cardiovascular morbidity. Serum Lp(a) levels have recently been associated with large artery atherosclerosis (LAA) stroke. We aimed to externally validate this association in an independent cohort.

METHODS

This study stems from the prospective multicentre CoRisk study (CoPeptin for Risk Stratification in Acute Stroke patients [NCT00878813]), conducted at the University Hospital Bern, Switzerland, between 2009 and 2011, in which Lp(a) plasma levels were measured within the first 24 hours after stroke onset. We assessed the association of Lp(a) with LAA stroke using multivariable logistic regression and performed interaction analyses to identify potential effect modifiers.

RESULTS

Of 743 patients with ischaemic stroke, 105 (14%) had LAA stroke aetiology. Lp(a) levels were higher for LAA stroke than non-LAA stroke patients (23.0 nmol/l vs 16.3 nmol/l, p = 0.01). Multivariable regression revealed an independent association of log10and#xA0;Lp(a) with LAA stroke aetiology (aOR 1.47 [95% CI 1.03and#x2013;2.09], p = 0.03). The interaction analyses showed that Lp(a) was not associated with LAA stroke aetiology among patients with diabetes.

CONCLUSIONS

In a well-characterised cohort of patients with ischaemic stroke, we validated the association of higher Lp(a) levels with LAA stroke aetiology, independent of traditional cardiovascular risk factors. These findings may inform randomised clinical trials investigating the effect of Lp(a) lowering agents on cardiovascular outcomes. The CoRisk (CoPeptin for Risk Stratification in Acute Patients) study is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov.

REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT00878813.

Lipoprotein(a) is associated with recurrent cardiovascular events in patients with coronary artery disease and prediabetes or diabetes

PURPOSE

Elevated lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] and diabetes mellitus (DM) are both associated with adverse events in high-risk patients with established coronary artery disease (CAD). Currently, the association between Lp(a) levels and recurrent cardiovascular (CV) events (CVEs) remained undetermined in patients with different glucose status. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the prognostic significance of Lp(a) levels for recurrent CVEs in high-risk CAD patients who suffered from first CVEs according to different glycemic metabolism.

METHODS

We recruited 5257 consecutive patients with prior CVEs and followed up for recurrent CVEs, including CV death, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), and non-fatal stroke. Patients were assigned to low, medium, and high groups according to Lp(a) levels and further stratified by glucose status.

RESULTS

During a median 37-month follow-up, 225 (4.28%) recurrent CVEs occurred. High Lp(a) was independently associated with recurrent CVEs [adjusted Hazard Ratio (HR), 1.57; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.12-2.19; P = 0.008]. When participants were classified according to Lp(a) levels and glycemic status, high Lp(a) levels were associated with an increased risk of recurrent CVEs in pre-DM (adjusted HR, 2.96; 95% CI 1.24-7.05; P = 0.014). Meanwhile, medium and high Lp(a) levels were both associated with an increased risk for recurrent CVEs in DM (adjusted HR, 3.09; 95% CI 1.30-7.34; P = 0.010 and adjusted HR, 3.13, 95% CI 1.30-7.53; P = 0.011, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated that elevated Lp(a) levels were associated with an increased recurrent CVE risk in patients with CAD, particularly among those with pre-DM and DM, indicating that Lp(a) may provide incremental value in risk stratification in this population.

C-reactive protein modifies lipoprotein(a)-related risk for coronary heart disease: the BiomarCaRE project

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Recent investigations have suggested an interdependence of lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)]-related risk for cardiovascular disease with background inflammatory burden. The aim the present analysis was to investigate whether high-sensitive C-reactive protein (hsCRP) modulates the association between Lp(a) and coronary heart disease (CHD) in the general population.

METHODS

Data from 71 678 participants from 8 European prospective population-based cohort studies were used (65 661 without/6017 with established CHD at baseline; median follow-up 9.8/13.8 years, respectively). Fine and Gray competing risk-adjusted models were calculated according to accompanying hsCRP concentration (<2 and ≥2 mg/L).

RESULTS

Among CHD-free individuals, increased Lp(a) levels were associated with incident CHD irrespective of hsCRP concentration: fully adjusted sub-distribution hazard ratios [sHRs (95% confidence interval)] for the highest vs. lowest fifth of Lp(a) distribution were 1.45 (1.23-1.72) and 1.48 (1.23-1.78) for a hsCRP group of <2 and ≥2 mg/L, respectively, with no interaction found between these two biomarkers on CHD risk (Pinteraction = 0.82). In those with established CHD, similar associations were seen only among individuals with hsCRP ≥ 2 mg/L [1.34 (1.03-1.76)], whereas among participants with a hsCRP concentration <2 mg/L, there was no clear association between Lp(a) and future CHD events [1.29 (0.98-1.71)] (highest vs. lowest fifth, fully adjusted models; Pinteraction = 0.024).

CONCLUSIONS

While among CHD-free individuals Lp(a) was significantly associated with incident CHD regardless of hsCRP, in participants with CHD at baseline, Lp(a) was related to recurrent CHD events only in those with residual inflammatory risk. These findings might guide adequate selection of high-risk patients for forthcoming Lp(a)-targeting compounds.

Evaluation of Metabolic and Cardiovascular Risk Measured by Laboratory Biomarkers and Cardiopulmonary Exercise Test in Children and Adolescents Recovered from Brain Tumors: The CARMEP Study

In recent decades, the improvement of treatments and the adoption of therapeutic protocols of international cooperation has led to an improvement in the survival of children affected by brain tumors. However, in parallel with the increase in survival, long-term side effects related to treatments have been observed over time, including the activation of chronic inflammatory processes and metabolic alterations, which can facilitate the onset of metabolic syndrome and increased cardiovascular risk. The aim of this study was to find possible statistically significant differences in the serum concentrations of early biomarkers of metabolic syndrome and in the results of cardiopulmonary exercise testing between survivors of childhood brain tumors and healthy controls. This is a prospective and observational study conducted on a group of 14 male patients who survived childhood brain tumors compared with the same number of healthy controls. The concentrations of early metabolic syndrome biomarkers [adiponectin, leptin, TNF-α, IL-1, IL-6, IL-10, endothelin-1, apolipoprotein B, and lipoprotein (a)] were measured and a cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET) was performed. Results: Childhood brain tumor survivors performed worse on average than controls on the CPET. Furthermore, they showed higher endothelin-1 values than controls (p = 0.025). The CPET results showed an inverse correlation with leptin. The differences found highlight the greater cardiovascular risk of brain tumor survivors, and radiotherapy could be implicated in the genesis of this greater cardiovascular risk.

Is inverse association between lipoprotein(a) and diabetes mellitus another paradox in cardiometabolic medicine?

INTRODUCTION

The impact of Type II Diabetes mellitus (T2DM) on cardiovascular disease (CVD) is well-established, while lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] has recently emerged as a recognized CVD risk factor. The rising prevalence of T2DM resulting from modern lifestyles and the development of specific Lp(a)-lowering agents brought the association between T2DM and Lp(a) in the forefront.

AREAS COVERED

Despite advancements in T2DM treatment, diabetic patients remain at very-high risk of CVD. Lp(a) may, to some extent, contribute to the persistent CVD risk seen in diabetic patients, and the coexistence of T2DM and elevated Lp(a) levels appears to synergistically amplify overall CVD risk. The relationship between T2DM and Lp(a) is paradoxical. On one hand, high Lp(a) plasma concentrations elevate the risk of diabetic microvascular and macrovascular complications. On the other hand, low Lp(a) plasma concentrations have been linked to an increased risk of developing T2DM.

EXPERT OPINION

Comprehending the association between T2DM and Lp(a) is critical due to the pivotal roles both entities play in overall CVD risk, as well as the unique aspects of their relationship. The mechanisms underlying the inverse association between T2DM and Lp(a) remain incompletely understood, necessitating further meticulous research.

Effects of Transdermal 17β-Estradiol + Norethisterone Acetate on Cardiovascular Disease Risk Factors in Postmenopausal Women: A Meta-analysis of Data From Randomized, Controlled Trials

PURPOSE

To date, no study has demonstrated the role of transdermal 17β-estradiol + norethisterone acetate on all of the risk factors for cardiovascular disease in postmenopausal women. To overcome this knowledge gap, a systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to determine the effects of this combination treatment on BMI, body weight, waist/hip ratio, fibrinogen, factor VII, lipoprotein(a), fasting blood sugar, insulin, HbA1c, TG, LDL-C, HDL-C, and TC in postmenopausal women.

METHODS

PubMed/Medline, SCOPUS, Web of Science, Embase, and Google Scholar were searched for relevant articles published between the inception of each database and April 6, 2023. The sample size and mean (SD) were used to calculate overall effect size using a random-effects model.

FINDINGS

A total of 10 articles with 14 arms were included in the meta-analysis. On pooled analysis of effect size, fibrinogen (weighted mean difference [WMD], -0.18 g/L; 95% CI, -0.25 to -0.10), factor VII (WMD, -9.58; 95% CI, -12.51 to -6.64), LDL-C (WMD, -13.09 mg/dL; 95% CI, -18.48 to -7.71), and TC (WMD, -12.61 mg/dL; 95% CI, -18.11 to -7.12) were significantly affected with the use of transdermal 17β-estradiol + norethisterone acetate (all, P < 0.001), but effects on lipoprotein(a), TG, HDL-C, fasting blood sugar, insulin, HbA1c, BMI, body weight, and waist/hip ratio were not significant.

IMPLICATIONS

Based on the findings from the present systematic review and meta-analysis, it was concluded that transdermal administration of 17β-estradiol + norethisterone acetate had beneficial impacts on fibrinogen, factor VII, LDL-C, and TC, suggesting a possible application in the reduction of cardiovascular disease risk.

Prediction of 10-year cardiovascular disease risk by diabetes status and lipoprotein-a levels; the HellenicSCORE II

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to develop an updated model to predict 10-year cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk for Greek adults, i.e., the HellenicSCORE II+, based on smoking, systolic blood pressure (SBP), total and high-density-lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol levels, and stratified by age group, sex, history of diabetes, and lipoprotein (Lp)-a levels.

METHODS

Individual CVD risk scores were calculated through logit-function models using the beta coefficients derived from SCORE2. The Attica study data were used for the calibration (3,042 participants, aged 45 (14) years; 49.1% men). Discrimination ability of the HellenicSCORE II+ was assessed using C-index (range 0-1), adjusted for competing risks.

RESULTS

The mean HellenicSCORE II+ score was 6.3% (95% confidence interval (CI) 5.9% to 6.6%) for men and 3.7% (95% CI 3.5% to 4.0%) for women (p < 0.001), and were higher compared to the relevant SCORE2; 23.5% of men were classified as low risk, 40.2% as moderate, and 36.3% as high risk, whereas the corresponding percentages for women were 56.2%, 18.6%, and 25.2%. C-statistic index was 0.88 for women and 0.79 for men when the HellenicSCORE II+ was applied to the Attica study data, suggesting very good accuracy. Stratified analysis by Lp(a) levels led to a 4% improvement in correct classification among participants with high Lp(a).

CONCLUSION

HellenicSCORE II+ values were higher than SCORE2, confirming that the Greek population is at moderate-to-high CVD risk. Stratification by Lp(a) levels may assist in better identifying individuals at high CVD risk.

Consensus document on Lipoprotein(a) from the Italian Society for the Study of Atherosclerosis (SISA)

AIMS

In view of the consolidating evidence on the causal role of Lp(a) in cardiovascular disease, the Italian Society for the Study of Atherosclerosis (SISA) has assembled a consensus on Lp(a) genetics and epidemiology, together with recommendations for its measurement and current and emerging therapeutic approaches to reduce its plasma levels. Data on the Italian population are also provided.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Lp(a) is constituted by one apo(a) molecule and a lipoprotein closely resembling to a low-density lipoprotein (LDL). Its similarity with an LDL, together with its ability to carry oxidized phospholipids are considered the two main features making Lp(a) harmful for cardiovascular health. Plasma Lp(a) concentrations vary over about 1000 folds in humans and are genetically determined, thus they are quite stable in any individual. Mendelian Randomization studies have suggested a causal role of Lp(a) in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and aortic valve stenosis and observational studies indicate a linear direct correlation between cardiovascular disease and Lp(a) plasma levels. Lp(a) measurement is strongly recommended once in a patient's lifetime, particularly in FH subjects, but also as part of the initial lipid screening to assess cardiovascular risk. The apo(a) size polymorphism represents a challenge for Lp(a) measurement in plasma, but new strategies are overcoming these difficulties. A reduction of Lp(a) levels can be currently attained only by plasma apheresis and, moderately, with PCSK9 inhibitor treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Awaiting the approval of selective Lp(a)-lowering drugs, an intensive management of the other risk factors for individuals with elevated Lp(a) levels is strongly recommended.

Lipoprotein(a) is a new prognostic factor in patients with psoriasis and coronary artery disease: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

The prognostic value of lipoprotein (Lp) (a) in patients who have suffered from coronary artery disease (CAD) has not been fully studied, and the results are inconsistent. This study was conducted to evaluate whether increased Lp(a) concentrations cause differences in clinical adverse outcomes in patients with psoriasis who have already suffered from CAD.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included consecutive patients with psoriasis and CAD between January 2017 and May 2022 in our hospital. The clinical records were collected, and comparisons were made between patients in the low Lp(a) and high Lp(a) groups. Cox proportional hazard analysis and log-rank tests were used to evaluate the association between variables.

RESULTS

Among 295 patients, 148 patients were in the low Lp(a) group, and 147 were in the high Lp(a) group. These two groups did not differ significantly in age, gender or body mass index. Compared with the low Lp(a) group, the levels of platelet counts (P = 0.038) and high sensitivity C reactive protein (P = 0.012) were higher in the high Lp(a) group. Patients in the high Lp(a) group had higher total cholesterol levels (P = 0.029) and lower triglyceride levels (P = 0.037). Among the whole cohort, clinical adverse events were not correlated with Lp(a) concentrations after a median follow-up of 3 years. However, in the subgroup analysis, there were significant differences in all-cause death (log rank P = 0.036) and rehospitalization (log rank P = 0.037) between the two groups in patients with diabetes; a difference in rehospitalization (log rank P = 0.042) was also found between the two groups in men.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with psoriasis and CAD, high levels of Lp(a) were related to a poor prognosis, especially in patients with diabetes and in men. These results will provide valuable information for the risk stratification of patients with psoriasis and CAD.

Lipoprotein(a) and the pooled cohort equations for ASCVD risk prediction: The Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is an independent risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) but is not included in the Pooled Cohort Equations (PCE). We aimed to assess how well the PCE predict 10-year event rates in individuals with elevated Lp(a), and whether the addition of Lp(a) improves risk prediction.

METHODS

We compared observed versus PCE-predicted 10-year ASCVD event rates, stratified by Lp(a) level and ASCVD risk category using Poisson regression, and evaluated the association between Lp(a) > 50 mg/dL and ASCVD risk using Cox proportional hazards models in the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA). We evaluated the C-index and net reclassification improvement (NRI) with addition of Lp(a) to the PCE.

RESULTS

The study population included 6639 individuals (20%, n = 1325 with elevated Lp(a)). The PCE accurately predicted 10-year event rates for individuals with elevated Lp(a) with observed event rates falling within predicted limits. Elevated Lp(a) was associated with increased risk of CVD events overall (HR 1.27, 95% CI 1.00-1.60), particularly in low (HR 2.45, 95% CI 1.40-4.31), and high-risk (HR 1.41, 95% CI 1.02-1.96) individuals. Continuous NRI (95% CI) with the addition of Lp(a) to the PCE for CVD was 0.0963 (0.0158-0.1953) overall, and 0.2999 (0.0876, 0.5525) among low-risk individuals.

CONCLUSIONS

The PCE performs well for event rate prediction in individuals with elevated Lp(a). However, Lp(a) is associated with increased CVD risk, and the addition of Lp(a) to the PCE improves risk prediction, particularly among low-risk individuals. These results lend support for increasing use of Lp(a) testing for risk assessment.

Determinants of incident atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease events among individuals with type 2 diabetic microvascular complications in the UK: a prospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the association of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk factors with incident ASCVD events among type 2 diabetes (T2D) individuals with microvascular complications.

METHODS

We included T2D participants with only microvascular complications from the UK Biobank cohort at baseline (2006-2010). Multivariable-adjusted Cox proportional hazards models were used to study the association between ASCVD risk factors with adjudicated incident ASCVD in T2D participants with only microvascular complications. A restricted cubic spline approach was employed to evaluate potential nonlinear associations between ASCVD risk factors and ASCVD.

RESULTS

We studied 4,129 T2D individuals with microvascular complications at baseline. Over a median follow-up of 11.7 years, a total of 1,180 cases of incident ASCVD were documented, of which 1,040 were CHD, 100 were stroke, and 40 were both CHD and stroke events. After multivariable-adjustment, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) level was linearly associated with a decreased risk of incident ASCVD [hazard ratio (HR): 0.49, 95% Confidence interval (CI): 0.32-0.75, Plinear = 0.011] and each 10 nmol/L increase of lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] level (HR: 1.02, 95% CI: 1.00-1.04, Plinear = 0.012) was linearly associated with an increased risk of incident ASCVD in T2D participants with only microvascular complications.

CONCLUSION

HDL-C levels and Lp(a) levels (per 10 nmol/L) showed an independent linear relation with ASCVD risk among T2D individuals with only microvascular complications at long-term follow-up.

Lipoprotein(a) as a Higher Residual Risk for Coronary Artery Disease in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus than without

Purpose

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]) is well-known as a residual risk factor for coronary artery disease (CAD). However, the different adverse effects of Lp(a) about CAD in patients with or without type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) are unclear. This study aimed to investigate the Lp(a) thresholds for CAD diagnosis in T2DM and non-T2DM patients, and further compare the Lp(a) alarm values along with optimal low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level.

Methods

This retrospective study consecutively enrolled patients with suspected CAD who underwent coronary angiography in Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital between September 2014 and July 2015. A logistic regression model was established to explore the association of Lp(a) and CAD in patients. Restricted cubic splines were used to compare the threshold values of Lp(a) for CAD in patients with and without T2DM, and further in optimal LDL-C level situation.

Results

There were 1522 patients enrolled finally. After multivariable adjustment, Lp(a) was an independent risk factor for CAD in patients with T2DM (odds ratio [OR]: 1.98, 95% CI]: 1.12-3.49, p = 0.019) and without T2DM (OR: 3.42, 95% CI: 2.36-4.95, p < 0.001). In the whole population, the Lp(a) threshold of CAD was 155, while 145 mg/L for T2DM and 162 mg/L for non-T2DM ones, respectively. In patients with LDL-C<1.8 mmol/l, the alarm value of Lp(a) was even lower in T2DM than non-T2DM patients (155 vs 174 mg/L).

Conclusion

Lp(a) was a significant residual risk for CAD in patients whether with T2DM or not. And Lp(a) had a lower alarm value in T2DM patients, especially in optimal LDL-C level.

Daring to dream: Targeting lipoprotein(a) as a causal and risk-enhancing factor

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)], a distinct lipoprotein class, has become a major focus for cardiovascular research. This review is written in light of the recent guideline and consensus statements on Lp(a) and focuses on 1) the causal association between Lp(a) and cardiovascular outcomes, 2) the potential mechanisms by which elevated Lp(a) contributes to cardiovascular diseases, 3) the metabolic insights on the production and clearance of Lp(a) and 4) the current and future therapeutic approaches to lower Lp(a) concentrations. The concentrations of Lp(a) are under strict genetic control. There exists a continuous relationship between the Lp(a) concentrations and risk for various endpoints of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). One in five people in the Caucasian population is considered to have increased Lp(a) concentrations; the prevalence of elevated Lp(a) is even higher in black populations. This makes Lp(a) a cardiovascular risk factor of major public health relevance. Besides the association between Lp(a) and myocardial infarction, the relationship with aortic valve stenosis has become a major focus of research during the last decade. Genetic studies provided strong support for a causal association between Lp(a) and cardiovascular outcomes: carriers of genetic variants associated with lifelong increased Lp(a) concentration are significantly more frequent in patients with ASCVD. This has triggered the development of drugs that can specifically lower Lp(a) concentrations: mRNA-targeting therapies such as anti-sense oligonucleotide (ASO) therapies and short interfering RNA (siRNA) therapies have opened new avenues to lower Lp(a) concentrations more than 95%. Ongoing Phase II and III clinical trials of these compounds are discussed in this review.

Cardiovascular outcomes in patients with coronary artery disease and elevated lipoprotein(a): implications for the OCEAN(a)-outcomes trial population

Aims

The ongoing Olpasiran Trials of Cardiovascular Events and Lipoprotein(a) Reduction [OCEAN(a)]-Outcomes trial is evaluating whether Lp(a) lowering can reduce the incidence of cardiovascular events among patients with prior myocardial infarction (MI) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and elevated Lp(a) (≥200 nmol/L). The purpose of this study is to evaluate the association of elevated Lp(a) with cardiovascular outcomes in an observational cohort resembling the OCEAN(a)-Outcomes trial main enrolment criteria.

Methods and results

This study included patients aged 18-85 years with Lp(a) measured as part of their clinical care between 2000 and 2019. While patients were required to have a history of MI, or PCI, those with severe kidney dysfunction or a malignant neoplasm were excluded. Elevated Lp(a) was defined as ≥200 nmol/L consistent with the OCEAN(a)-Outcomes trial. The primary outcome was a composite of coronary heart disease death, MI, or coronary revascularization. Natural language processing algorithms, billing and ICD codes, and laboratory data were employed to identify outcomes and covariates. A total of 3142 patients met the eligibility criteria, the median age was 61 (IQR: 52-73) years, 28.6% were women, and 12.3% had elevated Lp(a). Over a median follow-up of 12.2 years (IQR: 6.2-14.3), the primary composite outcome occurred more frequently in patients with versus without elevated Lp(a) [46.0 vs. 38.0%, unadjHR = 1.30 (95% CI: 1.09-1.53), P = 0.003]. Following adjustment for measured confounders, elevated Lp(a) remained independently associated with the primary outcome [adjHR = 1.33 (95% CI: 1.12-1.58), P = 0.001].

Conclusion

In an observational cohort resembling the main OCEAN(a)-Outcomes Trial enrolment criteria, patients with an Lp(a) ≥200 nmol/L had a higher risk of cardiovascular outcomes.

Prognostic impacts of diabetes status and lipoprotein(a) levels in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: a prospective cohort study

OBJECTS

This study aimed to investigate the impact of lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] levels on the prognosis of Chinese patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), and to explore if the impact may differ in the diabetes mellitus (DM) and nonDM groups.

METHODS

Between March 2017 and January 2020, 1543 patients with STEMI who underwent emergency percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) were prospectively recruited. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause death, MI recurrence (reMI), and stroke, known as major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Analyses involving the Kaplan-Meier curve, Cox regression, and restricted cubic spline (RCS) were conducted.

RESULTS

During the 1446-day follow-up period, 275 patients (17.8%) experienced MACEs, including 141 with DM (20.8%) and 134 (15.5%) without DM. As for the DM group, patients with Lp(a) ≥ 50 mg/dL showed an apparently higher MACE risk compared to those with Lp(a) < 10 mg/dL (adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 1.85, 95% confidence interval [CI]:1.10-3.11, P = 0.021). The RCS curve indicates that the HR for MACE appeared to increase linearly with Lp(a) levels exceeding 16.9 mg/dL. However, no similar associations were obtained in the nonDM group, with an adjusted HR value of 0.57 (Lp(a) ≥ 50 mg/dL vs. < 10 mg/dL: 95% CI 0.32-1.05, P = 0.071). Besides, compared to patients without DM and Lp(a) ≥ 30 mg/dL, the MACE risk of patients in the other three groups (nonDM with Lp(a) < 30 mg/dL, DM with Lp(a) < 30 mg/dL, and DM with Lp(a) ≥ 30 mg/dL) increased to 1.67-fold (95% CI 1.11-2.50, P = 0.013), 1.53-fold (95% CI 1.02-2.31, P = 0.041), and 2.08-fold (95% CI 1.33-3.26, P = 0.001), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In this contemporary STEMI population, high Lp(a) levels were linked to an increased MACE risk, and very high Lp(a) levels (≥ 50 mg/dL) significantly indicated poor outcomes in patients with DM, while not for those without DM.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov NCT: 03593928.

Lipoprotein(a) As a Risk Factor in a Cohort of Hospitalised Cardiovascular Patients: A Retrospective Clinical Routine Data Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is a well-recognised risk factor for ischemic heart disease (IHD) and calcific aortic valve stenosis (AVS).

METHODS

A retrospective observational study of Lp(a) levels (mg/dL) in patients hospitalised for cardiovascular diseases (CVD) in our clinical routine was performed. The Lp(a)-associated risk of hospitalisation for IHD, AVS, and concomitant IHD/AVS versus other non-ischemic CVDs (oCVD group) was assessed by means of logistic regression.

RESULTS

In total of 11,767 adult patients, the association with Lp(a) was strongest in the IHD/AVS group (e^β = 1.010, p < 0.001), followed by the IHD (e^β = 1.008, p < 0.001) and AVS group (e^β = 1.004, p < 0.001). With increasing Lp(a) levels, the risk of IHD hospitalisation was higher compared with oCVD in women across all ages and in men aged ≤75 years. The risk of AVS hospitalisation was higher only in women aged ≤75 years (e^β = 1.010 in age < 60 years, e^β = 1.005 in age 60-75 years, p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The Lp(a)-associated risk was highest for concomitant IHD/AVS hospitalisations. The differential impact of sex and age was most pronounced in the AVS group with an increased risk only in women aged ≤75 years.

Lipoprotein(a) distribution and its association with carotid arteriopathy in the Chinese population

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The distribution of lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] has not been well-studied in a large population in China. The relationship between Lp(a) and carotid atherosclerosis remains undefined. In this study, we aimed to investigate the distribution of Lp(a) levels and to assess their association with carotid arteriopathy in China.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, 411,634 adults with Lp(a) measurements from 22 health check-up centers were used to investigate Lp(a) distribution in China. Among participants with Lp(a) data, carotid ultrasound was performed routinely at seven health check-up centers covering 75,305 subjects. Carotid intima-media thickness (cIMT) and carotid plaque were used as surrogate biomarkers of carotid arteriopathy. The multivariate logistic regression model was applied to evaluate the association of increased Lp(a) levels with carotid arteriopathy.

RESULTS

The distribution of Lp(a) concentrations was right-skewed, with a median concentration of 10.60 mg/dL. The proportions of Lp(a) levels ≥30 mg/dL and ≥50 mg/dL were 16.75% and 7.10%, respectively. The median Lp(a) level was higher in females individuals in northern China, and increased with age. Spearman's analysis revealed weak correlations between the Lp(a) concentration as a continuous variable and other lipid profiles. The multiple logistic regression analysis showed that participants with Lp(a) levels ≥50 mg/dL had an increased risk of cIMT ≥1.0 mm (OR = 1.138, 95% CI, 1.071-1.208) and carotid plaque (OR = 1.296, 95% CI, 1.219-1.377) compared with those with Lp(a) levels <50 mg/dL.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study of the Lp(a) distribution in a large population in China. Our findings revealed a positive association between elevated Lp(a) levels (≥50 mg/dL) and increased prevalence of carotid atherosclerosis, which implies an increased risk of cardiovascular disease in the future.

Lipoprotein(a)-related cardiovascular and all-cause mortalities in Korean adults

AIMS

There are inconsistent results on the association between lipoprotein(a) and mortality-related outcomes due to a lack of evidence from large-scale observational studies of Asians. This study aims to evaluate the effects of lipoprotein(a) on mortality-related outcomes in the Korean population.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This cohort study included 275 430 individuals (mean age: 38 years; 50.1% men) enrolled in the Kangbuk Samsung Health Study between 2003 and 2016. The median follow-up period was 6.6 years. Cox proportional hazards analysis was used to estimate the adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for evaluating mortality risk based on lipoprotein(a) levels and specific lipoprotein(a) categories. The median lipoprotein(a) value was 18.5 mg/dL, and the proportion of lipoprotein(a) ≥50 mg/dL was 12.8%. Multivariable Cox regression analysis showed that the group with lipoprotein(a) ≥50 mg/dL had a significantly increased risk of cardiovascular mortality (HR[95% CI]: 1.83[1.26, 2.64]) and all-cause mortality (1.20[1.03, 1.41]) than the group with lipoprotein(a) < 50 mg/dL without increased risk of cancer mortality (1.05[0.81, 1.34]). The relationship between lipoprotein(a) and cardiovascular mortality was significant regardless of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol. Specifically, lipoprotein(a) ≥100 mg/dL was associated with more than twice as increased a risk of cardiovascular mortality (2.45[1.12, 5.34]) than lipoprotein(a) < 10 mg/dL. In subgroup analyses, there was an interaction in the relationships between the two lipoprotein(a) categories and cardiovascular mortality for only high-density lipoprotein cholesterol.

CONCLUSIONS

High lipoprotein(a) concentration is an independent predictor of cardiovascular mortality in the Korean population, regardless of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels.

Circulating lipoprotein (a) and all-cause and cause-specific mortality: a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis

AIMS

To investigate the association between circulating lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) and risk of all-cause and cause-specific mortality in the general population and in patients with chronic diseases, and to elucidate the dose-response relations.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We searched literature to find prospective studies reporting adjusted risk estimates on the association of Lp(a) and mortality outcomes. Forty-three publications, reporting on 75 studies (957,253 participants), were included. The hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95%CI ) for the top versus bottom tertile of Lp(a) levels and risk of all-cause mortality were 1.09 (95%CI: 1.01-1.18, I²: 75.34%, n = 19) in the general population and 1.18 (95%CI: 1.04-1.34, I²: 52.5%, n = 12) in patients with cardiovascular diseases (CVD). The HRs for CVD mortality were 1.33 (95%CI: 1.11-1.58, I²: 82.8%, n = 31) in the general population, 1.25 (95%CI: 1.10-1.43, I²: 54.3%, n = 17) in patients with CVD and 2.53 (95%CI: 1.13-5.64, I²: 66%, n = 4) in patients with diabetes mellitus. Linear dose-response analyses revealed that each 50 mg/dL increase in Lp(a) levels was associated with 31% and 15% greater risk of CVD death in the general population and in patients with CVD. No non-linear dose-response association was observed between Lp(a) levels and risk of all-cause or CVD mortality in the general population or in patients with CVD (P_nonlinearity > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

This study provides further evidence that higher Lp(a) levels are associated with higher risk of all-cause mortality and CVD-death in the general population and in patients with CVD. These findings support the ESC/EAS Guidelines that recommend Lp(a) should be measured at least once in each adult person's lifetime, since our study suggests those with higher Lp(a) might also have higher risk of mortality.

Lipoprotein(a), Cardiovascular Events and Sex Differences: A Single Cardiological Unit Experience

Lipoprotein(a)-Lp(a), which retains proatherogenic and prothrombotic properties, may be modified by hormonal and metabolic factors. However, few studies have focused on differences related to sex and cardiometabolic risk factors in the relationship between Lp(a) and cardiovascular disease, especially in terms of prognosis. This study aimed at evaluating the predictive value of Lp(a) (cut-off 30 mg/dL) for hard events (HEs: mortality and non-fatal myocardial infarction) according to sex and cardiometabolic risk factors in 2110 patients (1501 males, mean age: 68 ± 9 years) undergoing coronary angiography for known or suspected coronary artery disease. There were 211 events over a median follow-up period of 33 months. Lp(a) > 30 mg/dL did not confer a worse prognosis on the overall population. However, Kaplan-Meier subgroup analysis evidenced a worse prognosis in type 2 diabetes (T2D) females with elevated Lp(a) (log-rank test: p = 0.03) vs. T2D males and no-T2D patients, but not in other high-risk cardiovascular states (e.g., smoking, hypertension, reduced left ventricular ejection fraction or obesity). After Cox multivariate adjustment, Lp(a) remained an independent determinant for HEs in the T2D female subgroup, conferring an HR of 2.9 (95% CI 1.1-7.7, p < 0.05). Lp(a) is therefore a strong independent predictor of HR in T2D women, but not in T2D men, or in noT2D patients.

Impact of Lipoprotein(a) on Macrovascular Complications of Diabetes in a Multiethnic Population in the French Amazon

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

In French Guiana, the prevalence of diabetes is around 10%, and cardio and neurovascular pathologies are the first medical cause of early mortality. Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is described in the literature as a risk factor independent of other cardiovascular risk factors, but there are important interindividual differences, especially according to ethnicity. The objective of this study was to investigate the association of Lp(a) and macrovascular complications in a multiethnic population of patients with diabetes in the French Amazon.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Since May 2019, 1243 patients were screened 806 of whom had Lp(a) determination. We compared the prevalence of macrovascular complications in three groups according to Lp(a) concentration: between 0 and 75 mg/mL, between 76 and 300 mg/mL, and >300 mg/mL.

RESULTS

712 patients in the study had type 2 diabetes (88.34% of the sample). A history of hypertension was significantly associated with greater Lp(a) levels. Lp(a) concentration was greater among Creole ethnic groups. No association was found between Lp(a) levels and macrovascular complications in the Lp(a) > 300 mg/mL group.

CONCLUSIONS

These results do not replicate findings in mostly Caucasian populations suggesting that the Lp(a) threshold for, or the link with, cardiovascular risk may be different given the predominantly African origin of the French Guianese population. Further studies should study genetic polymorphisms in our population.

Differential effects of bariatric surgery and lifestyle interventions on plasma levels of Lp(a) and fatty acids

BACKGROUND

Limited evidence suggests that surgical and non-surgical obesity treatment differentially influence plasma Lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] levels. Further, a novel association between plasma arachidonic acid and Lp(a) has recently been shown, suggesting that fatty acids are a possible target to influence Lp(a). Here, the effects of bariatric surgery and lifestyle interventions on plasma levels of Lp(a) were compared, and it was examined whether the effects were mediated by changes in plasma fatty acid (FA) levels.

METHODS

The study includes two independent trials of patients with overweight or obesity. Trial 1: Two-armed intervention study including 82 patients who underwent a 7-week low energy diet (LED), followed by Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and 52-week follow-up (surgery-group), and 77 patients who underwent a 59-week energy restricted diet- and exercise-program (lifestyle-group). Trial 2: A clinical study including 134 patients who underwent a 20-week very-LED/LED (lifestyle-cohort).

RESULTS

In the surgery-group, Lp(a) levels [median (interquartile range)] tended to increase in the pre-surgical LED-phase [17(7-68)-21(7-81)nmol/L, P = 0.05], but decreased by 48% after surgery [21(7-81)-11(7-56)nmol/L, P < 0.001]. In the lifestyle-group and lifestyle-cohort, Lp(a) increased by 36%[14(7-77)-19(7-94)nmol/L, P < 0.001] and 14%[50(14-160)-57(19-208)nmol/L, P < 0.001], respectively. Changes in Lp(a) were independent of weight loss. Plasma levels of total saturated FAs remained unchanged after surgery, but decreased after lifestyle interventions. Arachidonic acid and total n-3 FAs decreased after surgery, but increased after lifestyle interventions. Plasma FAs did not mediate the effects on Lp(a).

CONCLUSION

Bariatric surgery reduced, whereas lifestyle interventions increased plasma Lp(a), independent of weight loss. The interventions differentially influenced changes in plasma FAs, but these changes did not mediate changes in Lp(a).

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Trial 1: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00626964. Trial 2: Netherlands Trial Register NL2140 (NTR2264).

Lipoprotein(a), high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, and cardiovascular risk in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

In patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), the effects of high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) on Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a))-associated cardiovascular risk remains unclear. This study aimed to investigate the independent and combined association of Lp(a) and hsCRP with cardiovascular events in this specific population.

METHODS

A total of 10,424 patients with measurements of both Lp(a) and hsCRP were included in this prospective cohort study. Cox proportional hazards models and Kaplan-Meier analysis were performed to evaluate the relationship between Lp(a), hsCRP and adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE; all-cause death, myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke and revascularization).

RESULTS

During 5 years of follow-up, 2140 (20.5%) MACCE occurred. Elevated Lp(a) and hsCRP levels were associated with increased risks of MACCE (p<0.05). Notably, there might be a significant interaction between Lp(a) and hsCRP (P for interaction = 0.019). In the setting of hsCRP≥2 mg/L, significant higher risk of MACCE was observed with Lp(a) 15-29.9 mg/dL (HR: 1.18; 95% CI 1.01-1.39) and Lp(a) ≥30 mg/dL (HR: 1.20; 95% CI 1.04-1.39), whereas such association was attenuated when hsCRP was <2 mg/L with Lp(a) 15-29.9 mg/dL (HR: 0.94; 95% CI 0.80-1.10) and Lp(a) ≥30 mg/dL (HR: 1.12; 95% CI 0.98-1.28). Moreover, when Lp(a) and hsCRP were combined for risk stratification, patients with dual elevation of these two biomarkers had a significant higher risk of MACCE compared with the reference group (Lp(a) < 15 mg/dL and hsCRp<2 mg/L) (p<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with CAD undergoing PCI, high Lp(a) level was associated with worse outcomes, and this association might be stronger in those with elevated hsCRP concomitantly. Evaluation of Lp(a) and hsCRP together may help identify high-risk individuals for targeted intervention in clinical utility.

New Horizons: Revival of Lipoprotein (a) as a Risk Factor for Cardiovascular Disease

The status of lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] as a cardiovascular risk factor has been resurrected by advances in genetics. Mendelian randomization studies show a causal link of Lp(a) with coronary artery disease (CAD), peripheral artery disease (PAD), and calcific aortic valve stenosis (CAVS). The genetics of Lp(a) is complex and extends beyond the kringle-IV type 2, as it is also dependent on ancestry. The plasma concentration of Lp(a) is determined by the hepatic production of apolipoprotein(a) [apo(a)] component of Lp(a), supporting the use of nucleic acids that inhibit the messenger RNA (mRNA) gene transcript for apo(a). Analytical barriers to measurement of Lp(a) are being addressed using isoform independent assays and a traceable standard. The association of Lp(a) and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease is higher for myocardial infarction than PAD and CAVS. Increased risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus associated with low Lp(a) levels is perplexing and requires further investigation. The greatest advancement in Lp(a)-lowering therapies is based on using RNA therapeutics that are now being investigated in clinical trials. Proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibition lowers Lp(a) modestly, but whether cardiovascular benefit is independent of low-density lipoprotein lowering remains unclear. Opportunistic and selective testing for Lp(a) is supported by moderate evidence, with the case for universal screening premature. Modification of behavioral and clinical risk factors may be targeted to mitigate Lp(a)-mediated risk of cardiovascular disease. Clinical practice guidelines have been developed to address gaps in care of high Lp(a), but full implementation awaits the findings of clinical outcome trials using RNA-directed therapies currently underway.

Genetic proxies for PCSK9 inhibition associate with lipoprotein(a): Effects on coronary artery disease and ischemic stroke

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Post hoc analyses of clinical trials show that PCSK9 inhibitors might lower lipoprotein(a), but whether this effect contributes to reductions in cardiovascular risk remains unknown. We aimed to assess whether genetically proxied PCSK9 inhibition influences lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)), and whether any such effect could mediate its effects on coronary artery disease (CAD) and ischemic stroke (IS).

METHODS

To explore associations between the genetic proxies for PCSK9 inhibitors and Lp(a) levels, we used UK Biobank data (310,020 individuals). We identified 10 variants in the PCSK9 gene associated with lower PCSK9 and LDL-C levels as proxies for PCSK9 inhibition. We explored the effects of genetically proxied PCSK9 inhibition on Lp(a) levels, as well as on odds of CAD (60,801 cases, 184,305 controls) and IS (60,341 cases, 454,450 controls) in two-sample Mendelian randomization analyses. In mediation analyses, we assessed the effects of genetically proxied PCSK9 inhibition on CAD and IS mediated through reductions in Lp(a) levels.

RESULTS

Genetically proxied PCSK9 inhibition (1-SD decrement in PCSK9 concentration; corresponding to 20.6 mg/dl decrement in LDL-C levels) was associated with a 4% decrease in log-Lp(a) levels (beta: -0.038, 95%CI: -0.053 to -0.023). We estimated a 0.8% reduction in the odds for CAD (OR: 0.992, 95%CI: 0.989-0.995) and a 0.5% reduction in the odds for atherosclerotic IS (OR: 0.995, 95%CI: 0.992-0.998) due to reductions in Lp(a) levels through genetically proxied PCSK9 inhibition, corresponding to 3.8% and 3.2% of the total effects, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Genetic proxies for PCSK9 inhibition are associated with lower Lp(a) levels. However, Lp(a) lowering explains only a small proportion of the total effects of genetic proxies for PCSK9 inhibitors on risk of CAD and IS.

Lipoprotein(a) and Cardiovascular Disease in Chinese Population

Elevated concentration of lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is an independent risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, including coronary artery disease, stroke, peripheral artery disease, and so on. Emerging data suggest that Lp(a) contributes to the increased risk for cardiovascular events even in the setting of effective reduction of plasma low-density lipoprotein cholesterol. Nevertheless, puzzling issues exist covering potential genetic factors, Lp(a) assay, possible individuals for analysis, a cutoff point of increased risk, and clinical interventions. In the Chinese population, Lp(a) exhibited a distinctive prevalence and regulated various cardiovascular diseases in specific ways. Hence, it is valuable to clarify the role of Lp(a) in cardiovascular diseases and explore prevention and control measures for the increase in Lp(a) prevalence in the Chinese population. This Beijing Heart Society experts' scientific statement will present the detailed knowledge concerning Lp(a)-related studies combined with Chinese population observations to provide the key points of reference.

Elevated Lipoprotein(a) prevalence and association with family history of premature cardiovascular disease in general population with moderate cardiovascular risk and increased LDL cholesterol

Background

Elevated Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is independently associated with increased cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. There are discrepancies regarding its epidemiology due to great variability in different populations. This study aimed to evaluate the prevalence of elevated Lp(a) in people with moderate CVD risk and increased LDL-c and to determine the association between family history of premature CVD and elevated Lp(a).

Methods

Random subjects from the CESCAS population-based study of people with moderate CVD risk (Framingham score 10–20 %) and LDL-c ≥ 130 mg/dL, were selected to evaluate Lp(a) by immunoturbidimetry independent of the Isoforms variability. The association between family history of premature CVD and elevated Lp(a) was evaluated using multivariate logistic regression models. Elevated Lp(a) was defined as Lp(a) ​​≥ 125 nmol/L.

Results

Lp(a) was evaluated in 484 samples; men = 39.5 %, median age = 57 years (Q1-Q3: 50–63), mean CVD risk = 14.4 % (SE: 0.2), family history of premature CVD = 11.2 %, Lp(a) median of 21 nmol/L (Q1-Q3: 9–42 nmol/L), high Lp(a) = 6.1 % (95 % CI = 3.8–9.6). Association between family history of premature CVD and elevated Lp(a) in total population: OR 1.31 (95 % CI = 0.4, 4.2) p = 0.642; in subgroup of people with LDL-c ≥ 160 mg%, OR 4.24 (95 % CI = 1.2, 15.1) p = 0.026.

Conclusions

In general population with moderate CVD risk and elevated LDL-c from the Southern Cone of Latin America, less than one over ten people had elevated Lp(a). Family history of premature CVD was significantly associated with the presence of elevated Lp(a) in people with LDL-c ≥ 160 mg/dL.

Lipoprotein(a) levels and risk of adverse events after myocardial infarction in patients with and without diabetes

Introduction: The aim of this study was to evaluate the association of lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] levels with long-term outcome in patients with recent history of myocardial infarction (MI), and to investigate if diabetes may influence this association.

Methods: Consecutive MI patients who underwent urgent/emergent coronary angiography from February 2013 to June 2019 were prospectively collected. The primary outcome was the composite of MI recurrence and all-cause death. The propensity score weighting technique was used to account for covariates potentially influencing the relationship between Lp(a) levels and the study outcomes.

Results: The study population consisted of 1018 post-MI patients (median age 63 years). Diabetes was reported in 280 patients (27.5%), who showed lower Lp(a) levels than patients without diabetes (p = 0.026). At a median follow-up of 1121 days, the primary outcome was reported in 182 patients (17.9%). At univariable Cox regression analysis, Lp(a) was associated with the risk of the primary outcome in the overall population and in non-diabetic patients, but not in diabetics. The adjusted Cox regression analysis confirmed the independent association between Lp(a) values and the primary outcome in non-diabetic patients, but not in diabetics.

Lp(a) levels > 70 mg/dL were independently associated with the risk of the primary outcome in non-diabetic patients (adjusted HR: 2.839; 95% CI, 1.382–5.832), but not in diabetics.

Conclusions: In this real-world post-MI population, increasing Lp(a) levels were significantly associated with the risk of recurrent MI and all-cause death, and very high Lp(a) serum concentration independently predicted long-term outcome in non-diabetic patients, but not in diabetics.

The role of inflammation and the possibilities of inflammation reduction to prevent cardiovascular events

Chronic systemic inflammation is a risk factor for cardiovascular (CV) disease (CVD). Whether this relationship extends to subclinical inflammation, quantified by values of circulating markers associated with inflammation in the high range of the normal interval, remains debatable. This narrative review evaluates evidence exploring this relationship. A review of pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions, including diet and lifestyle strategies, supplements, nutraceuticals, and other natural substances aimed at reducing inflammation was also conducted, since few reviews have synthesized this literature. PubMed and EMBASE were used to search the literature and several well-studied triggers of inflammation [oxidized LDL, Lp(a), as well as C-reactive protein (CRP)/high-sensitivity CRP (hs-CRP)] were included to increase sensitivity and address the lack of existing reviews summarizing their influence in the context of inflammation. All resulting references were assessed. Overall, there is good data supporting associations between circulating hs-CRP and CV outcomes. However, the same was not seen in studies evaluating triggers of inflammation, such as oxidized LDL or Lp(a). There is also insufficient evidence showing treatments to target inflammation and lead to reductions in hs-CRP result in improvements in CV outcomes, particularly in those with normal baseline levels of hs-CRP. Regarding pharmacological interventions, statins, bempedoic acid, and apabetalone significantly reduce circulating hs-CRP, unlike PCSK-9 inhibitors. A variety of natural substances and vitamins were also evaluated and none reduced hs-CRP. Regarding non-pharmacological interventions, weight loss was strongly associated with reductions in circulating hs-CRP, whereas various dietary interventions and exercise regimens were not, unless accompanied by weight loss.

The Ability of Lipoprotein (a) Level to Predict Early Carotid Atherosclerosis Is Impaired in Patients With Advanced Liver Fibrosis Related to Metabolic-Associated Fatty Liver Disease

INTRODUCTION

Hepatic fibrosis reduces the serum level of lipoprotein (a) (Lp(a)) and may affect its accuracy in cardiovascular disease prediction of metabolic-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD). We aimed to estimate the association between Lp(a) levels and the risk of carotid atherosclerosis in MAFLD patients with advanced fibrosis.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional study enrolling 4,348 consecutive individuals (1,346 patients with MAFLD and 3,002 non-MAFLD patients) who were admitted to the First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, and underwent abdominal and carotid ultrasonography from 2015 to 2021. Lp(a) levels, liver biochemical markers, metabolic indices, and anthropometric parameters were measured. Liver fat content and fibrosis severity were assessed by MRI-PDFF, using the NAFLD fibrosis score (NFS) and liver stiffness measurement (LSM) of two-dimensional shear wave elastography, respectively.

RESULTS

There was an L-shaped relationship between Lp(a) levels and LSMs in patients with MAFLD, and Lp(a) levels had a different relationship with liver fat content in MAFLD patients with F1-2 versus those with F3-4. Non-MAFLD patients had higher levels of Lp(a) than MAFLD patients with or without advanced fibrosis (both P < 0.05). Lp(a) levels and degree of liver fibrosis were both positively correlated with carotid atherosclerosis in patients with MAFLD. Lp(a) levels performed well on carotid atherosclerosis risk prediction for non-MAFLD patients with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.819, which was significantly better than the carotid atherosclerosis risk prediction for MAFLD patients with NFS ≤ -1.836 (AUC: 0.781), NFS > -1.836 (AUC: 0.692), and LSM ≥ 9.0 kPa (AUC: 0.635) (all P < 0.05).

DISCUSSION

Advanced liver fibrosis significantly reduces the predictive value of Lp(a) levels for the risk of carotid atherosclerosis in patients with MAFLD.

Association of C-peptide and lipoprotein(a) as two predictors with cardiometabolic biomarkers in patients with type 2 diabetes in KERCADR population-based study

We sought association between serum Lipoprotein(a) and C-Peptide levels as two predictors with cardiometabolic biomarkers in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. This nested case-control study was conducted on 253 participants with type 2 diabetes mellitus and control from the second phase of the KERCADR cohort study. The participants were randomly allocated into case and control groups. The quantitative levels of Lipoprotein(a) and C-Peptide were measured by ELISA. Atherogenic indices of plasma were measured. The plasma Atherogenic Index of Plasma significantly decreased (P = 0.002) in case-male participants, and plasma Castelli Risk Index II level significantly increased (P = 0.008) in control-male participants with the highest dichotomy of Lipoprotein(a). The plasma Atherogenic Index of Plasma level in case-female participants significantly increased (P = 0.023) with the highest dichotomy of C-Peptide. Serum C-Peptide level significantly increased (P = 0.010 and P = 0.002, respectively) in control-male participants with the highest dichotomies of Atherogenic Index of Plasma and Castelli Risk Index I. There was a significant association between the highest quartile of C-Peptide and higher anthropometric values in case participants; and higher atherogenic indices of plasma and anthropometric values in control participants. Raised serum C-peptide than raised Lipoprotein(a) can be a prior predictor for cardiometabolic disease risk in healthy participants and patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus with increased cardiometabolic biomarkers. Case and control males with general and visceral obesity and case and control females with visceral obesity are exposure to increased C-peptide, respectively. Lipoprotein(a) may be risk independent biomarker for type 2 diabetes mellitus. Reducing raised Lipoprotein(a) levels to less than 30ng/ml with strict control of low density lipoprotein cholesterol would be the best approach to prevent coronary artery disease consequences. It is suggested that a screening system be set up to measure the Lp(a) levels in the community for seemingly healthy people or individuals with one or more cardiometabolic biomarkers.

Biomarkers Predictive of Metabolic Syndrome and Cardiovascular Disease in Childhood Cancer Survivors

The improvement in childhood cancer treatments resulted in a marked improvement in the survival of pediatric cancer patients. However, as survival increased, it was also possible to observe the long-term side effects of cancer therapies. Among these, metabolic syndrome is one of the most frequent long-term side effects, and causes high mortality and morbidity. Consequently, it is necessary to identify strategies that allow for early diagnosis. In this review, the pathogenetic mechanisms of metabolic syndrome and the potential new biomarkers that can facilitate its diagnosis in survivors of pediatric tumors are analyzed.

Lipoprotein(a) and its Significance in Cardiovascular Disease: A Review

Importance

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]) is a low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol-like particle bound to apolipoprotein(a). This novel marker of cardiovascular disease acts through induction of vascular inflammation, atherogenesis, calcification, and thrombosis. While an absolute risk threshold remains to be universally accepted, an estimated 20% to 25% of the global population have Lp(a) levels of 50 mg/dL or higher, a level noted by the European Atherosclerosis Society to confer increased cardiovascular risk.

Observations

Compelling evidence from pathophysiological, observational, and genetic studies suggest a potentially causal association between high Lp(a) levels, atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, and calcific aortic valve stenosis. Additional evidence has demonstrated that elevated Lp(a) levels are associated with a residual cardiovascular risk despite traditional risk factor optimization, including LDL cholesterol reduction. These findings have led to the formulation of the Lp(a) hypothesis, namely that Lp(a) lowering leads to cardiovascular risk reduction, intensifying the search for Lp(a)-reducing therapies. The ineffectiveness of lifestyle modification, statins, and ezetimibe to lower Lp(a); the modest Lp(a) reduction with proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitors; the adverse effect profile and unclear cardiovascular benefit of pharmacotherapies such as niacin and mipomersen; and the impracticality of regular lipoprotein apheresis represent major challenges to currently available therapies. Nevertheless, emerging nucleic acid-based therapies, such as the antisense oligonucleotide pelacarsen and the small interfering RNA olpasiran, are generating interest because of their potent Lp(a)-lowering effects. Assessment of new-onset diabetes in patients achieving very low Lp(a) levels will be important in future trials.

Conclusions and Relevance

Epidemiologic and genetic studies suggest a potentially causal association between elevated Lp(a) levels, atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, and aortic valve stenosis. Emerging nucleic acid-based therapies have potent Lp(a)-lowering effects and appear safe; phase 3 trials will establish whether they improve cardiovascular outcomes.

Lipoprotein(a) beyond the kringle IV repeat polymorphism: The complexity of genetic variation in the LPA gene

High lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] concentrations are one of the most important genetically determined risk factors for cardiovascular disease. Lp(a) concentrations are an enigmatic trait largely controlled by one single gene (LPA) that contains a complex interplay of several genetic elements with many surprising effects discussed in this review. A hypervariable coding copy number variation (the kringle IV type-2 repeat, KIV-2) generates >40 apolipoprotein(a) protein isoforms and determines the median Lp(a) concentrations. Carriers of small isoforms with up to 22 kringle IV domains have median Lp(a) concentrations up to 5 times higher than those with large isoforms (>22 kringle IV domains). The effect of the apo(a) isoforms are, however, modified by many functional single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) distributed over the complete range of allele frequencies (<0.1% to >20%) with very pronounced effects on Lp(a) concentrations. A complex interaction is present between the apo (a) isoforms and LPA SNPs, with isoforms partially masking the effect of functional SNPs and, vice versa, SNPs lowering the Lp(a) concentrations of affected isoforms. This picture is further complicated by SNP-SNP interactions, a poorly understood role of other polymorphisms such as short tandem repeats and linkage structures that are poorly captured by common R² values. A further layer of complexity derives from recent findings that several functional SNPs are located in the KIV-2 repeat and are thus not accessible to conventional sequencing and genotyping technologies. A critical impact of the ancestry on correlation structures and baseline Lp(a) values becomes increasingly evident.

This review provides a comprehensive overview on the complex genetic architecture of the Lp(a) concentrations in plasma, a field that has made tremendous progress with the introduction of new technologies. Understanding the genetics of Lp(a) might be a key to many mysteries of Lp(a) and booster new ideas on the metabolism of Lp(a) and possible interventional targets.

Elevated lipoprotein(a) and genetic polymorphisms in the LPA gene may predict cardiovascular events

Elevated lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a risk factor for coronary heart disease (CHD), but there are few studies on the prediction of future cardiovascular events by Lp(a) and its LPA single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). The aim of this study was to investigate whether elevated Lp(a) and its SNPs can predict cardiovascular events. We evaluated whether Lp(a) and LPA SNPs rs6415084 and rs12194138 were associated with the incidence rate and severity of CHD. All participants were followed up for 5 years. Elevated Lp(a) is an independent risk factor for the risk and severity of CHD (CHD group vs. control group: OR = 1.793, 95% CI: 1.053–2.882, p = 0.043; multiple-vessel disease group vs. single-vessel disease group: OR = 1.941, 95% CI: 1.113–3.242, p = 0.027; high GS group vs. low GS group: OR = 2.641, 95% CI: 1.102–7.436, p = 0.040). Both LPA SNPs were risk factors for CHD, and were positively associated with the severity of CHD (LPA SNPs rs6415084: CHD group vs. control group: OR = 1.577, 95% CI: 1.105–1.989, p = 0.004; multiple-vessel disease group vs. single-vessel disease group: OR = 1.613, 95% CI: 1.076–2.641, p = 0.030; high GS group vs. low GS group: OR = 1.580, 95% CI: 1.088–2.429, p = 0.024; LPA SNPs rs12194138: CHD group vs. control group: OR = 1.475, 95% CI: 1.040–3.002, p = 0.035; multiple-vessel disease group vs. single-vessel disease group: OR = 2.274, 95% CI: 1.060–5.148, p = 0.038; high GS group vs. low GS group: OR = 2.067, 95% CI: 1.101–4.647, p = 0.021). After 5 years of follow-up, elevated Lp(a) and LPA SNPs rs6415084 and rs12194138 can independently predict cardiovascular events. The increase of serum Lp(a) and LPA SNPs rs6415084 and rs12194138 are associated with increased prevalence and severity of CHD, and can independently predict cardiovascular events.