Women and lipoprotein apheresis: another side of gender medicine

AIM

In heterozygous Familial Hypercholesterolemia (FH) woman atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease occurs 20-years earlier respect woman without FH while homozygous FH women may suffer from atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease even in childhood. Lipoprotein apheresis, a therapeutic "last chance saloon", is a well-tolerated procedure that markedly lowers LDL-cholesterol and Lp(a) levels in patients who do not achieve acceptable levels with maximal lifestyle and drug therapy.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The experience of LA treatment in 3 female homozygous FH patients was described. Moreover, an explore analysis on pre and post-LA hormonal levels was performed in 8 HeFH women showing a significant improvement in the atherogenic lipid profile (total cholesterol -56%, LDL cholesterol -71%, triglycerides -72%, Apo B lipoprotein -69%, Lp(a) -59%;) and a reduction of FSH and LH values (FSH - 28%, LH -31%).

CONCLUSIONS

Women with FH experience specific barriers to care, including underrepresentation in research, significant underestimation of risk, and discontinuation of therapy during pregnancy. Therefore, in this study, we investigated the possible effects of LA treatment on plasma FSH and LH levels.

Dyslipidemia management in women of reproductive potential: An expert clinical consensus from the national lipid association

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of death among women and its incidence has been increasing recently, particularly among younger women. Across major professional society guidelines, dyslipidemia management remains a central tenet for atherosclerotic CVD prevention for both women and men. Despite this, women, particularly young women, who are candidates for statin therapy are less likely to be treated and less likely to achieve their recommended therapeutic objectives for low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels. Elevated LDL-C and triglycerides are the two most common dyslipidemias that should be addressed during pregnancy due to the increased risk for adverse pregnancy outcomes, such as preeclampsia, gestational diabetes mellitus, and pre-term delivery, as well as pancreatitis in the presence of severe hypertriglyceridemia. In this National Lipid Association Expert Clinical Consensus, we review the roles of nutrition, physical activity, and pharmacotherapy as strategies to address elevated levels of LDL-C and/or triglycerides among women of reproductive age. We include a special focus on points to consider during the shared decision-making discussion regarding pharmacotherapy for dyslipidemia during preconception planning, pregnancy, and lactation.

"Eve is not Adam" - differences in efficacy, safety and clinical outcomes with lipoprotein apheresis between sexes

PURPOSE

In Familial Hypercholesterolemia (FH), female atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease occurs 20 years earlier than in women without FH. The aim of this study is to describe the differences in lipoprotein apheresis (LA), a last therapeutic option, in terms of efficacy, safety and clinical outcomes between the two sexes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sex related differences were analysed in 31 subjects in on LA treatment with FH and not achieving LDL-cholesterol and/or Lp(a) target values on maximum lipid-lowering therapies. Moreover, sex related differences in time to major cardiovascular event (MACE) was investigated in 68 subjects, with at least one year of follow-up.

RESULTS

Among the 31 patients currently undergoing LA treatment who did not achieve LDL-cholesterol and/or Lp(a) target values, no differences in comorbidity were recorded despite a worse pre-LA treatment lipid profile (LDL-C 77 ± 60 mg/dl in males vs. 128 ± 105 mg/dl in females; p 0.025) and a longer mean inter-apheresis interval (17 ± 4 days in males vs. 19 ± 5 days in females; p 0.012) reported in females compared to males. Additionally, in comparison with men, it was found that the time between the first cardiovascular event and the beginning of LA, as well as the age at the beginning of LA, were significantly higher in females than in males (p 0.027 and 0.007, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Sex differences in FH subjects not only affect the diagnosis and treatment but also influence varied responses to the treatment itself.

Comorbidity in lipoprotein apheresis: Their role in the era of new lipid-lowering therapies

BACKGROUND

Despite advance in pharmacotherapy of lipid disorders, lipoprotein apheresis (LA) plays a leading role in the management of severe hypercholesterolemia and in atherosclerosis prevention.

METHODS

Aim of this study was to retrospectively evaluate Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), presence of major comorbidity, and/or concomitant polypharmacy (definite as 5+ drugs daily) in patients with inherited dyslipidemias on chronic LA.

RESULTS

Since 1994, we performed more than 500 LA treatment/year and followed a total of 83 patients (age 56 [47-65] years, male 75%). In subjects with more than 5 years of LA treatment (38 patients, age 54 [45-62] years, male 66%), at the end of the observation time (9 [7-16] years), patients had higher CCI, polypharmacy, anemia, heart failure, peptic ulcer disease, and benign prostatic hyperplasia.

DISCUSSION

Even in the era of new lipid-lowering therapies, the LA treatment established itself as a safe and lifesaving intervention. Patients on chronic LA require a multidisciplinary approach to address their comorbidity and the apheresis unit's medical staff (doctors and nurses) play a pivotal role creating a bridge toward the general practitioner and other specialists for overcoming clinical issues.

The development of lipoprotein apheresis in Saxony in the last years

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Comparison of plasma separation using centrifugation or filtration for MONET lipoprotein apheresis in patients with cardiovascular disease and severe dyslipidemia

INTRODUCTION

Homozygous or severe heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia and elevated lipoprotein(a) levels may be treated with membrane filtration. The MONET system (Fresenius Medical Care, Bad Homburg, Germany) involves plasma separation by centrifugation or filtration.

METHODS

Whether the method of plasma separation affects lipoprotein lowering and treatment safety was investigated in a single-center retrospective study.

RESULTS

The centrifugation-based plasma separation achieved a higher plasma flow and shorter time to treat 1 L of plasma (46.2 ± 8.6 min), than the filtration-based system (71.5 ± 40.0 min; p = 0.001). The mean reduction of LDL-cholesterol was 69% and 67% with centrifugation and filtration and was 75% for lipoprotein(a) with both plasma separation methods. A reduction of IgM by more than 60%, of albumin and total protein by approximately 20% and low frequency of side effects was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

The efficacy of lowering atherogenic lipoproteins was comparable with both plasma separation methods. Centrifugation was more time-efficient compared to filtration.

[Lipoprotein apheresis : State of the art and case report of the longest HELP treatment worldwide]

Lipoprotein apheresis is an extracorporeal procedure for the treatment of patients with homozygous familial hypercholesterolemia, patients with severe treatment-resistant hypercholesterolemia and patients with lipoprotein(a) hypercholesterolemia, who show progressive atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease despite optimal treatment. This article reports on the historical developments of the procedures, the most frequently used methods for apheresis as well as the data situation on efficacy and tolerability. Randomized prospective studies on clinical outcomes are not available. Furthermore, the article reports on a patient with homozygous familial hypercholesterolemia and 34 years of treatment with heparin-induced extracorporeal low-density lipoprotein (LDL) precipitation (HELP) apheresis, the longest treatment of this kind worldwide. A second patient with combined heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia and 31 years of liposorber and HELP apheresis is also described. The observational studies and the case reports demonstrate the safety and long-term tolerability of the procedure.

Long-term lipoprotein apheresis in the treatment of severe familial hypercholesterolemia refractory to high intensity statin therapy: Three year experience at a lipoprotein apheresis centre

BACKGROUND

Severe familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) individuals, refractory to conventional lipidlowering medications are at exceptionally high risk of cardiovascular events. The established therapeutic option of last choice is lipoprotein apheresis (LA). Herein, it was sought to investigate the clinical usefulness of LA in a highly selected group of severe heterozygous FH (HeFH), as recently described by the International Atherosclerosis Society (IAS), for their efficacy in lipid reduction and safety.

METHODS

Efficacy and safety of LA were investigated in 318 sessions of 7 severe HeFH females with cardiovascular disease, over a mean period of 26.9 ± 6.5 months. Relative reduction of low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) ≥ 60%, clinical complications and vascular access problems were evaluated and compared between the direct adsorption of lipoproteins (DALI) and lipoprotein filtration (Membrane Filtration Optimized Novel Extracorporeal Treatment [MONET]). Additionally, lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)], total cholesterol (TC), high density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), triglycerides (TG) and fibrinogen concentrations were investigated.

RESULTS

The relative reduction of LDL-C, TC, TG and Lp(a) were 69.4 ± 12.9%, 59.7 ± 9.1, 51.5 ± ± 14.2% and 71.3 ± 14.4%, respectively. A similar efficacy was found in both systems in LDL-C removal. DALI system led to larger depletions of Lp(a) (80.0 [76-83]% vs. 73.0 [64.7-78.8]%; p < 0.001). The frequency of clinical side effects and vascular access problems were low (8.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term LA in severe HeFH individuals is safe and efficiently reduces LDL-C and Lp(a). Higher efficacy of the DALI system than MONET in Lp(a) removal may indicate the need for individualized application of the LA system in severe HeFH individuals.

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

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

Lipidological competence centres and networks: Future perspectives to improve healthcare of patients with disorders of lipid metabolism

BACKGROUND

Numerous healthcare studies have shown that more than 90% of all patients with dyslipidaemia are not treated adequately.

OBJECTIVES

The "Deutsche Gesellschaft zur Bekämpfung von Fettstoffwechselstörungen und ihren Folgeerkrankungen (DGFF)" [German Society of Lipidology], a non-profit professional membership organization, has already made a series of efforts to improve the care of patients suffering from dyslipidaemia. A recent outcome is the nationwide implementation and certification of Lipidological Competence Centres and Networks (LCCNs).

METHODS AND RESULTS

By involving numerous external medical cooperation partners and combining the detailed work of different in-house medical specialists, the Medical Care Centre Kempten-Allgäu was able to improve both the diagnosis and treatment of patients exhibiting disorders of lipid metabolism (DLM). This local lipidological network is so successful, that it may serve as a nationwide standard model for outpatient lipidological care. Detailed organizational structures for improved lipidological care which are suitable to provide a template for future guidelines for the certification of LCCNs have been developed by the Medical Care Centre Kempten-Allgäu. Stringent requirements of implementation with respect to medical staff, content and structure, staff training, patient education and public relations as well as to documentation, quality assurance and quality improvement must be fulfilled both by the lipidological competence centre (LCC) and the cooperation partners within the lipidological network (LN). Finally, members of the health care system (e.g. health policy and health insurances) should be involved in this attempt and convinced of financial support.

CONCLUSION

The implementation and certification of national LCCNs supported by DGFF could contribute to a comprehensive improvement in the care of patients with dyslipidaemia, resulting in prevention of cardiovascular diseases and reduction of cardiovascular sequelae.

Efficacy of lipid reduction with DALI and MONET

BACKGROUND

Lipidapheresis techniques are increasingly used to treat drug-resistant hyperlipidemia but few efficacy studies under routine application are available. In this multicenter observational study we investigated direct adsorption of lipoproteins (DALI) and lipoprotein filtration (MONET) for the short and the long-term effects on lipid-lowering effects.

METHODS

Data of 122 apheresis patients from 11 centers (DALI: n = 78, MONET: n = 44) were prospectively collected for a period of 2 years. Routine lipid measurements were evaluated (2154 DALI and 1297 MONET sessions). It was investigated whether the relative reduction of LDL-C during apheresis session achieves at least 60%. Also relative reduction of total cholesterol, HDL, triglyceride, and Lp(a) were analyzed.

RESULTS

The relative reduction of LDL-C was at least 60%: DALI: 70.62%, 95% CI = [69.34; 71.90] and MONET: 64.12%, 95% CI = [60.79; 67.46]. Also triglycerides were reduced with both systems: DALI 38.63%, 95% CI = [33.95; 43.30] vs. MONET 57.68%, 95% CI = [51.91; 63.45]. Relative reductions of total cholesterol were in the range of 50% (DALI 95% CI = [46.49; 49.65] MONET 95% CI = [48.93; 55.26]) and of Lp(a) in the range of 65% (DALI 95% CI = [61.92; 65.83] MONET 95% CI = [63.71; 70.30]. HDL reduction was: DALI 15.01%, 95% CI = [13.22; 16.79] and MONET 22.59%, 95% CI = [19.33; 25.84]. For both devices treated patient plasma/blood volume and in case of DALI the use of the larger adsorber configurations (DALI 1000 and DALI 1250) were independent positive predictors of the relative reduction of LDL-C and of Lp(a).

CONCLUSIONS

Both systems effectively improved lipid profile and reduced atherogenic lipids. The results point to the importance of the individualized application of these valuable therapies to achieve clinical targets.

Lipoprotein apheresis in the treatment of dyslipidaemia - the Czech Republic experience

In 1984, we started using therapeutic plasmapheresis (plasma exchange) as a method of extracorporeal lipoprotein elimination for the treatment of hypercholesterolemic patients. We evaluated the results of long-term therapy in 14 patients, 8 men and 6 women. The average age was 55.6+/-13.2 (range 28-70), median 59.5 years. 14 patients were diagnosed with familial hypercholesterolemia (FH): 5 homozygous, 9 heterozygous. Ten patients in the group were treated using immunoadsorption lipoprotein apheresis and 4 using hemorheopheresis. Immunoapheretic interventions decreased LDL-cholesterol (82+/-1 %), ApoB (73+/-13 %) and even Lp(a) by 82+/-19 %, respectively. Selected non-invasive methods are important for long-term and repeated follow-up. Carotid intima-media thickness showed improvement or stagnation in 75 % of the patients. Biomarkers of endothelial dysfunction such as endoglin (in the control group: 3.85+/-1.25 microg/l, in lipoprotein apheresis-treated hypercholesterolemic individuals 5.74+/-1.47 microg/l), CD40 ligand (before lipoprotein apheresis: 6498+/-2529 ng/l, after lipoprotein apheresis: 4057+/-2560 ng/l) and neopterin (before lipoprotein apheresis: 5.7+/-1.1 nmol/l, after lipoprotein apheresis: 5.5+/-1.3 nmol/l) related to the course of atherosclerosis, but did not reflect the actual activity of the disease nor facilitate the prediction or planning of therapy. Hemorheopheresis may improve blood flow in microcirculation in familial hypercholesterolemia and also in some other microcirculation disorders via significantly decreased activity of thrombomodulin (p<0.0001), tissue factor (p<0.0001), aggregation of thrombocytes (p<0.0001) and plasma and whole blood viscosity (p<0.0001). In conclusion, lipoprotein apheresis and hemorheopheresis substantially lowered LDL-cholesterol in severe hypercholesterolemia. Our experience with long-term therapy also shows good tolerance and a small number of complications (6.26 % non-serious clinical complications).

Lipoprotein apheresis in the management of severe hypercholesterolemia and of elevation of lipoprotein(a): current perspectives and patient selection

This review reports the current situation with respect to therapeutic options (lifestyle and drugs) reducing the concentrations of atherogenic low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]). Three lipoprotein apheresis (LA) principles have been realized: precipitation, filtration, and adsorption. Available LA methods are herein described in detail - major components, pumps, extracorporeal volume, treated volume, and anticoagulation. General features of all LA methods as well as pleotropic effects are elaborated. Indications for LA therapy are quoted: homozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (HCH), severe HCH, and isolated elevation of Lp(a) and progress of atherosclerotic disease. A major focus is on the evidence of the effect of LA on cardiovascular outcome data, and the most important publications are cited in this context. The best studies have been performed in patients with elevated Lp(a) in whom cardiovascular events were reduced by more than 80%. Major adverse effects and contraindications are listed. The impact of an LA therapy on patient quality of life and the requirements they have to fulfill are also highlighted. Finally, the future role of LA in treating high-risk patients with high LDL-C and/or high Lp(a) is discussed. It is probable that the significance of LA for treating patients with elevated LDL-C will decrease (with the exception of homozygous familial HCH) due to the application of PCSK9 inhibitors. The antisense oligonucleotide against apolipoprotein(a) could replace LA in patients with high Lp(a), provided positive outcome data are generated.

Effects of different lipoprotein apheresis methods on serum protein levels

BACKGROUND

A total plasma exchange was the first extracorporeal method to treat patients with severe hypercholesterolemia. But in the long run it has several disadvantages. The newer lipoprotein apheresis (LA) methods claim to be more selective with respect to the removal of atherogenic lipoproteins and thus are supposed to avoid an additional protein loss.

METHODS

We wanted to compare the effect of these methods on serum protein concentrations (total serum protein, albumin, proteins measured with electrophoresis, immunoglobulins, fibrinogen, transferrin, and ferritin) which were checked before and after a single LA session in 75 patients. All patients underwent active LA treatment using 6 different LA methods (HELP, TheraSorb(®) LDL, DALI, Lipidfiltration, Liposorber D, MONET). Post-apheresis concentrations were corrected for changes in hematocrit.

RESULTS

The slightest impact on total serum protein was observed with the whole-blood methods. Liposorber D showed the least reduction of albumin levels. All LA methods had a small effect on alpha1-globulins and beta-globulins, but alpha2-and gamma-globulins were reduced to a different extent. A major effect was seen on the immunoglobulins when filtration methods were applied. In the patients treated with MONET, both pre- and post-apheresis Immunoglobulin M concentrations were below the normal range. HELP and the filtration methods significantly reduced the fibrinogen concentrations. The filtration methods also decreased ferritin levels but the post-apheresis ferritin levels were still in the normal range.

CONCLUSION

All LA methods had an influence on protein concentrations. At present, these findings will not yield an individualized treatment approach for any selective LA method due to the lack of prospective comparative studies. At minimum, special attention should be paid to protein concentrations in patients suffering from protein deficit.

Effects of Lipoprotein apheresis on the Lipoprotein(a) levels in the long run

BACKGROUND

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is a low density lipoprotein-like particle to which apolipoprotein(a) is bound. It is recognized as an atherosclerosis-inducing risk factor. Up to now a detailed description of the effect of Lipoprotein apheresis (LA) on Lp(a) levels in the long run is lacking.

METHODS

We studied 59 patients with elevated Lp(a) levels who were treated with LA at the Lipoprotein Apheresis Center at the University Hospital Dresden. We analyzed Lp(a) concentrations before the start of the LA treatment and during this extracorporeal therapy.

RESULTS

Comparing the Lp(a) levels before the start of LA therapy and pre-apheresis (measured before the LA sessions) Lp(a) levels, we observed a reduction of the Lp(a) levels of about 22.8% in all patients. Lp(a) levels were acutely (comparing post-apheresis with pre-apheresis concentrations) reduced by all 6 available LA methods (by about 70%). A linear regression analysis was performed to differentiate the long term course of pre-apheresis Lp(a) levels. In 30 patients we saw an increase of the pre-apheresis Lp(a) levels over the time, in 15 patients a constancy and in 14 patients a decrease. Patients with a decrease of pre-apheresis Lp(a) levels over the time had significantly higher initial (before the start of the extracorporeal treatment) and pre-apheresis values and they were significantly older. These patients had significantly more severe peripheral arterial disease as well as cardiac valve and carotid stenosis. The patients with the lowest initial Lp(a) levels and an increase of the pre-apheresis Lp(a) levels over the time had the highest percentage of intake of Tredaptive(®)/Niaspan(®) though after stopping the intake of these nicotinic acid preparations no clear increase of Lp(a) concentrations was observed. The applied LA systems did not seem to have a significant influence on the course of pre-apheresis Lp(a) levels. In all patients there was a high variability of Lp(a) concentrations between LA sessions which may in part be due to the inaccuracy of the method used to measure Lp(a) concentrations.

CONCLUSION

Pre-apheresis Lp(a) levels (before the LA sessions) are lower than those before the start of a LA treatment but they behave differently among patients during LA treatment.