Lp(a) (Lipoprotein[a]) Concentrations and Incident Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease: New Insights From a Large National Biobank

Lipoprotein(a): Are we ready for large-scale clinical trials?

Cardiovascular diseases (CVD) are currently the most important disease threatening human health, which may be due to the high incidence of risk factors including hyperlipidemia. With the deepening of research on lipoprotein, lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] has been shown to be an independent risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases and calcified aortic valve stenosis and is now an unaddressed "residual risk" in current CVD management. Accurate measurement of Lp(a) concentration is the basis for diagnosis and treatment of high Lp(a). This review summarized the Lp(a) structure, discussed the current problems in clinical measurement of plasma Lp(a) concentration and the effects of existing lipid-lowering therapies on Lp(a).

Longitudinal association between accelerometer-derived rest-activity rhythm and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease

OBJECTIVE

Rest-activity rhythm is an essential behavior for human health. However, the association between rest-activity rhythm and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk remains unclear. Therefore, this study aimed to elucidate the association.

METHODS

This study included 87,039 participants from the UK Biobank who had 7-day accelerometry data and were free of ASCVD at baseline. Relative amplitude was calculated as the difference between the most active continuous 10-h period (M10) and the least active continuous 5-h period (L5) in 24 h, and lower relative amplitude indicated the disruption of rest-activity rhythm. Cox proportional hazard model was used to examine the association of relative amplitude with ASCVD. Further, the linear association between relative amplitude and arterial stiffness measurements, including arterial stiffness index (ASI) and carotid intima-media thickness (cIMT), was examined.

RESULTS

During a mean follow-up period of 6.80 ± 1.10 years, 2798 ASCVD cases were identified. A dose-response relationship was observed between relative amplitude and ASCVD risk (P for trend<0.001). The adjusted hazard ratio, for the highest vs the lowest quintile of relative amplitude, was 1.54 (95 % confidence interval: 1.31, 1.79). Further, we found significant association of lower relative amplitude with ASI and cIMT. The onset timing of M10 at ≤06:00, 09:00, 10:00, or ≥11:00, as opposed to the reference time of 07:00, was associated with higher ASCVD risk.

CONCLUSIONS

Low rest-activity rhythm amplitude was associated with a higher risk of ASCVD. Rest-activity rhythm amplitude may provide a method to identify individuals at risk of ASCVD in public health and clinical practice.

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

Objective

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

Lipoprotein(a) in children and adolescents with genetically confirmed familial hypercholesterolemia followed up at a specialized lipid clinic

Background and aim

Many children with an FH mutation also exhibit elevated lipoprotein(a) levels, which is an independent risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Studies have reported higher levels of lipoprotein(a) in adult and middle-aged women than men. There is limited knowledge on the concentration and change of lipoprotein(a) levels in children with genetic FH, and therefore we investigated sex-differences in lipoprotein(a) level and change in lipoprotein(a) in girls and boys with genetically confirmed FH.

Methods

Medical records were reviewed retrospectively in 438 subjects with heterozygous FH that started follow-up below the age of 19 years at the Lipid Clinic, Oslo University Hospital in Norway, and of these we included 386 subjects with at least one Lp(a) measurement.

Results

Mean (SD) age at baseline was 13.8 (7.3) years and the age was similar between sexes. Girls had a higher lipoprotein(a) level than boys at baseline: median (25-75 percentile) 223 (108-487) vs. 154 (78-360) mg/L, respectively (p < 0.01). From baseline to follow-up measurement (mean [SD] 8.9 [6.1] years apart), the mean (95 % CI) absolute and percentage change in Lp(a) level in girls was 151.4 (54.9-247.8) mg/L and 44.8 (16.4-73.1) %, respectively, and in boys it was 66.8 (22.9-110.8) mg/L and 50.5 (8.8-92.3) %, respectively (both p > 0.05).

Conclusions

We found an increase in Lp(a) levels in children with genetic FH with age, and higher levels in girls than boys, which could impact risk assessment and future ASCVD. Further research is needed to elucidate whether subjects with FH could benefit from lipoprotein(a)-lowering therapies that are under current investigations.

Strategies for management of patients with elevated lipoprotein(a)

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

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

RECENT FINDINGS

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

SUMMARY

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

Lipoprotein (a)-Related Inflammatory Imbalance: A Novel Horizon for the Development of Atherosclerosis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The primary objective of this review is to explore the pathophysiological roles and clinical implications of lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] in the context of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). We seek to understand how Lp(a) contributes to inflammation and arteriosclerosis, aiming to provide new insights into the mechanisms of ASCVD progression.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent research highlights Lp(a) as an independent risk factor for ASCVD. Studies show that Lp(a) not only promotes the inflammatory processes but also interacts with various cellular components, leading to endothelial dysfunction and smooth muscle cell proliferation. The dual role of Lp(a) in both instigating and, under certain conditions, mitigating inflammation is particularly noteworthy. This review finds that Lp(a) plays a complex role in the development of ASCVD through its involvement in inflammatory pathways. The interplay between Lp(a) levels and inflammatory responses highlights its potential as a target for therapeutic intervention. These insights could pave the way for novel approaches in managing and preventing ASCVD, urging further investigation into Lp(a) as a therapeutic target.

Association between lipoprotein (a) and risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease events among maintenance hemodialysis patients in Beijing, China: a single-center, retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Serum lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is an independent risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) in the general population, its association with ASCVD incidence in Chinese maintenance hemodialysis (MHD) patients remains unclear. We aimed to evaluate the relationship between Lp(a) levels and ASCVD incidence among MHD patients in Beijing, China.

METHODS

This retrospective, observational cohort study included MHD patients at Beijing Tongren Hospital from January 1, 2013 to December 1, 2020, and followed until December 1,2023. The primary outcome was ASCVD occurrence. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used to evaluate ASCVD-free survival in MHD patients, with stratification based on Lp(a) levels. Cox regression analyses were conducted to assess the association between Lp(a) levels and the occurrence of ASCVD.

RESULTS

A total of 265 patients were enrolled in the study. The median follow-up period were 71 months.78 (29.4%) participants experienced ASCVD events, and 118 (47%) patients died, with 58 (49.1%) deaths attributed to ASCVD. Spearman rank correlation analyses revealed positive correlations between serum Lp(a) levels and LDL-c levels, and negative correlations with hemoglobin, triglyceride, serum iron, serum creatinine, and albumin levels. Multivariate Cox regression analysis showed that Lp(a) levels ≥ 30 mg/L, increased age, decreased serum albumin levels, and a history of diabetes mellitus were significantly associated with ASCVD incidence.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated an independent and positive association between serum Lp(a) levels and the risk of ASCVD in MHD patients, suggesting that serum Lp(a) could potentially serve as a clinical biomarker for estimating ASCVD risk in this population.

A Polynesian-specific SLC22A3 variant associates with low plasma lipoprotein(a) concentrations independent of apo(a) isoform size in males

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is a low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-like particle in which the apolipoprotein B component is covalently linked to apolipoprotein(a) (apo(a)). Lp(a) is a well-established independent risk factor for cardiovascular diseases. Plasma Lp(a) concentrations vary enormously between individuals and ethnic groups. Several nucleotide polymorphisms in the SLC22A3 gene associate with Lp(a) concentration in people of different ethnicities. We investigated the association of a Polynesian-specific (Māori and Pacific peoples) SLC22A3 gene coding variant p.Thr44Met) with the plasma concentration of Lp(a) in a cohort of 302 healthy Polynesian males. An apo(a)-size independent assay assessed plasma Lp(a) concentrations; all other lipid and apolipoprotein concentrations were measured using standard laboratory techniques. Quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction was used to determine apo(a) isoforms. The range of metabolic (HbA1c, blood pressure, and blood lipids) and blood lipid variables were similar between the non-carriers and carriers in age, ethnicity and BMI adjusted models. However, rs8187715 SLC22A3 variant was significantly associated with lower Lp(a) concentrations. Median Lp(a) concentration was 10.60 nmol/L (IQR: 5.40-41.00) in non-carrier group, and was 7.60 nmol/L (IQR: 5.50-12.10) in variant carrier group (P<0.05). Lp(a) concentration inversely correlated with apo(a) isoform size. After correction for apo(a) isoform size, metabolic parameters and ethnicity, the association between the SLC22A3 variant and plasma Lp(a) concentration remained. The present study is the first to identify the association of this gene variant and low plasma Lp(a) concentrations. This provides evidence for better guidance on ethnic specific cut-offs when defining 'elevated' and 'normal' plasma Lp(a) concentrations in clinical applications.

Influence of pseudoxanthoma elasticum on the lipid profile and prognostic implications

Background: Pseudoxanthoma elasticum (PXE) is a rare, inherited disease characterised by specific skin lesions, progressive loss of vision and early onset atherosclerosis. Atherosclerosis in PXE leads to an increased rate of vascular occlusion and severe intermittent claudication. Although genetically determined, the individual course of PXE is highly variable. Up to now, there is no sufficient parameter to identify individuals at risk of rapid disease progression. This present study focused the lipid profile of patients with PXE and its possible influence on the clinical severity of peripheral artery disease (PAD). Patients and methods: 112 patients with PXE were retrospectively screened. Patients without a complete lipid profile consisting of total cholesterol (TC), triglycerides (TGC), high-density lipoprotein (HDL), low-density lipoprotein (LDL) and Lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]) where excluded as well as patients with already initiated lipid-lowering therapy. 52 patients met the inclusion criteria. An age-adjusted ordinal regression model was applied to determine the association of each lipid fraction with the severity of PAD assessed as Fontaine classification. Results: The lipid profile of patients with PXE was unremarkable (TGC: 135.8±105.8 mg/dl; TC: 172.5±44.4 mg/dl; HDL: 63.0±18.2 mg/dl; Lp[a]: 64.7±93.5 nmol/l). Ordinal regression showed a significant association of Lp(a) with the severity of PAD with an odds ratio of 1.01 (1.00-1.02; p = 0.004), whereas the other fractions of the lipid profile had no significant influence. Conclusions: This study provides the largest evaluation of blood lipids up to now and the first characterization of Lp(a) levels in patients with PXE. We were able to provide first evidence of a correlation between elevated levels of Lp(a) and the severity of PAD. The present results suggest that determination of Lp(a) in early stages of PXE could help to identify patients at risk of rapid disease progression and with the need of intensified walking exercise training.

Effects of Inclisiran in Patients With Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease: A Pooled Analysis of the ORION-10 and ORION-11 Randomized Trials

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of inclisiran in participants with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) from ORION-10 and ORION-11 stratified by key patient characteristics.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Participants were randomized 1:1 to receive 300 mg inclisiran sodium (284 mg inclisiran) or placebo on days 1, 90, 270, and 450, alongside background lipid-lowering therapy. This pooled, post hoc analysis stratified participants with ASCVD by sex, age, race, kidney function, body mass index, and glycemic status. Co-primary endpoints were percentage changes in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) from baseline to day 510, and after day 90 and up to day 540 (time-adjusted). LDL-C goal attainment and safety were also assessed.

RESULTS

This analysis of 2975 participants included: female, n=827; Black, n=213; 75 years of age or older, n=458; obese, n=1474; diabetes, n=1182; and moderate-to-severe chronic kidney disease, n=538. Mean baseline LDL-C levels in the total ASCVD population were balanced between treatment arms (inclisiran, 103.4 mg/dL; placebo, 102.0 mg/dL). With inclisiran, mean placebo-corrected percentage changes in LDL-C from baseline were -51.5% (95% CI, -54.0% to -49.0%) and -52.1% (95% CI, -53.9% to -50.4%) to day 510 and day 540 (time-adjusted), respectively; this was consistent across subgroups. LDL-C less than 55 mg/dL at 1 or more visits was reached by 87.6% of participants receiving inclisiran. The inclisiran safety profile was consistent across subgroups.

CONCLUSION

Twice-yearly inclisiran (after initial and 3-month doses) was well-tolerated and provided significant, consistent LDL-C reductions for up to 18 months in participants with ASCVD independent of key patient characteristics (ORION-10 [Inclisiran for Participants With Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease and Elevated Low-density Lipoprotein Cholesterol]; NCT03399370 and ORION-11 [Inclisiran for Subjects With ASCVD or ASCVD-Risk Equivalents and Elevated Low-density Lipoprotein Cholesterol]; NCT03400800).

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), Oxidized Phospholipids, and Progression to Symptomatic Heart Failure: The CASABLANCA Study

BACKGROUND

Higher lipoprotein(a) and oxidized phospholipid concentrations are associated with increased risk for coronary artery disease and valvular heart disease. The role of lipoprotein(a) or oxidized phospholipid as a risk factor for incident heart failure (HF) or its complications remains uncertain.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A total of 1251 individuals referred for coronary angiography in the Catheter Sampled Blood Archive in Cardiovascular Diseases (CASABLANCA) study were stratified on the basis of universal definition of HF stage; those in stage A/B (N=714) were followed up for an average 3.7 years for incident stage C/D HF or the composite of HF/cardiovascular death. During follow-up, 105 (14.7%) study participants in stage A/B progressed to symptomatic HF and 57 (8.0%) had cardiovascular death. In models adjusted for multiple HF risk factors, including severe coronary artery disease and aortic stenosis, individuals with lipoprotein(a) ≥150 nmol/L were at higher risk for progression to symptomatic HF (hazard ratio [HR], 1.90 [95% CI, 1.15-3.13]; P=0.01) or the composite of HF/cardiovascular death (HR, 1.71 [95% CI, 1.10-2.67]; P=0.02). These results remained significant after further adjustment of the model to include prior myocardial infarction (HF: HR, 1.89, P=0.01; HF/cardiovascular death: HR, 1.68, P=0.02). Elevated oxidized phospholipid concentrations were similarly associated with risk, particularly when added to higher lipoprotein(a). In Kaplan-Meier analyses, individuals with stage A/B HF and elevated lipoprotein(a) had shorter time to progression to stage C/D HF or HF/cardiovascular death (both log-rank P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Among individuals with stage A or B HF, higher lipoprotein(a) and oxidized phospholipid concentrations are independent risk factors for progression to symptomatic HF or cardiovascular death.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://wwwclinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT00842868.

The indicative effects of apolipoproteins on organic erectile dysfunction: bridging Mendelian randomization and case-control study

The existing research on the association between apolipoproteins (Apos) and erectile dysfunction (ED) primarily relies on observational studies and does not distinguish between organic and psychogenic causes when diagnosing ED. It is difficult to believe that Apos play a role in psychogenic ED. To address these issues, our study explored the causal relationship between lipoproteins and ED using Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis and differentiate between organic and psychogenic ED through the use of nocturnal penile tumescence and rigidity (NPTR) monitoring. Multivariate MR analysis revealed significant causal associations between high-density lipoprotein (HDL), Apo A1, and Apo B/A1 with ED (OR and 95% CI were 0.33 (0.14-0.78), 3.58 (1.52-8.43), and 0.30 (0.13-0.66)). we conducted statistical and analytical analyses on the data of 212 patients using multivariate analyses and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. Patients with organic ED had significantly lower levels of HDL, Apo A1 and Apo A1/B, whereas patients with organic ED had considerably higher levels of Apo B and low-density lipoprotein (LDL). The diagnostic value of Apos in predicting the risk of organic ED was evaluated using ROC curves. The results indicated that Apo A1 and Apo A1/B demonstrated good predictive value. HDL, Apo A1, and Apo A1/B have been identified as risk factors for ED in our study. Furthermore, our research highlights the significance of Apo A1 and Apo A1/Apo B in the development of organic ED and suggests their potential use as indicators to assess the risks associated with organic ED.

Small apolipoprotein(a) isoforms may predict primary patency following peripheral arterial revascularization

Background

High lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] is associated with adverse limb events in patients undergoing lower extremity revascularization. Lp(a) levels are genetically pre-determined, with LPA gene encoding for two apolipoprotein (a) [apo(a)] isoforms. Isoform size variations are driven by the number of kringle IV type 2 (KIV-2) repeats. Lp(a) levels are inversely correlated with isoform size. In this study, we examined the role of Lp(a) levels, apo(a) size, and inflammatory markers with lower extremity revascularization outcomes.

Methods

Twenty-five subjects with chronic peripheral arterial disease (PAD) underwent open or endovascular lower extremity revascularization (mean age, 66.7 ± 9.7 years; Female = 12; Male = 13; Black = 8; Hispanic = 5; and White = 12). Pre- and postoperative medical history, self-reported symptoms, ankle-brachial indices (ABIs), and lower extremity duplex ultrasounds were obtained. Plasma Lp(a), apoB100, lipid panel, and pro-inflammatory markers (IL-6, IL-18, hs-CRP, TNFα) were assayed preoperatively. Isoform size was estimated using gel electrophoresis and weighted isoform size (wIS) calculated based on % isoform expression. Firth logistic regression was used to examine the relationship between Lp(a) levels and wIS with procedural outcomes: symptoms (better/worse), early primary patency at 2 to 4 weeks, ABIs, and reintervention within 3 to 6 months. We controlled for age, sex, history of diabetes, smoking, statin, antiplatelet, and anticoagulation use.

Results

Median plasma Lp(a) level was 108 (interrquartile range, 44-301) nmol/L. The mean apoB100 level was 168.0 ± 65.8 mg/dL. These values were not statistically different among races. We found no association between Lp(a) levels and wIS with measured plasma pro-inflammatory markers. However, smaller apo(a) wIS was associated with occlusion of the treated lesion(s) in the postoperative period (odds ratio, 1.97; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-3.86; P < .05). The relationship of smaller apo(a) wIS with reintervention was not as strong (odds ratio, 1.57; 95% confidence interval, 0.96-2.56; P = .07). We observed no association between wIS with patient reported symptoms or change in ABIs.

Conclusions

In this small study, subjects with smaller apo(a) isoform size undergoing peripheral arterial revascularization were more likely to experience occlusion in the postoperative period and/or require reintervention. Larger cohort studies identifying the mechanism and validating these preliminary data are needed to improve understanding of long-term peripheral vascular outcomes.

Relationship Between Metabolic Dysfunction-Associated Steatotic Liver Disease and Lipoprotein (a) and Other Biomarkers

BACKGROUND

Metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) primarily affects the adult population and is closely related to obesity. The most severe form of MASLD, metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (MASH), can progress to liver fibrosis. While lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is known to be associated with cardiovascular disease, its relationship with MASLD remains unclear. This study aims to determine the prevalence of MASLD in ambulatory patients and to explore the association between Lp(a) levels and advanced liver damage.

METHODS

This retrospective cross-sectional study included 130 patients older than 18 years seen in a healthcare center in Medellin, Colombia, between April 2023 and May 2024. Sociodemographic, clinical, and specific biomarker data were collected. Patients with cirrhosis, previous liver disease, frequent alcohol consumption, cancer, and other severe conditions were excluded. Continuous variables were analyzed using Student's t-tests or Mann-Whitney tests according to their distribution, and categorical variables were analyzed using contingency tables and chi-square tests.

RESULTS

Of the 130 patients, 57.9% (n=73) had MASLD, with a higher prevalence in patients with obesity (80%, n=32). Lp(a) levels were abnormally high in 43.1% (n=31) of patients; however, a weak but significant inverse correlation was found between Lp(a) levels and the Fibrosis-4 (FIB-4) score, which is used to assess the severity of liver fibrosis. Patients with MASLD had significantly lower high-density lipoprotein (HDL) and vitamin D levels, and higher levels of gamma-glutamyl transferase (GGT).

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights the significant prevalence of MASLD in outpatients and its relationship with various biomarkers, including Lp(a), HDL, vitamin D, and GGT. Although the findings suggest a possible utility of Lp(a) as a biomarker in MASLD, longitudinal studies are needed to confirm these associations and clarify their role in liver disease progression. The study's limitations include its cross-sectional nature and potential selection bias, indicating the need for further research to validate these results.

Impaired endogenous fibrinolysis status: a potential prognostic predictor in ischemic stroke

Stroke confers a severe global healthcare burden, hence exploring risk factors for stroke occurrence and prognosis is important for stroke prevention and post-stroke management strategies. Endogenous fibrinolysis is a spontaneous physiological protective mechanism that dissolves thrombus to maintain vascular patency. Recently, impaired endogenous fibrinolysis has been considered as a potential novel cardiovascular risk factor, but its link with ischaemic stroke in the past has been underappreciated. In this review, we summarize the latest mechanisms of endogenous fibrinolysis, review the current evidence and data on endogenous fibrinolysis in ischemic stroke. It includes the structure of thrombus in ischemic stroke patients, the effect of fibrin structure on the endogenous fibrinolytic efficiency, and the association between intravenous thrombolytic therapy and endogenous fibrinolysis in ischemic stroke. It also includes the single factors (tissue plasminogen activator, urokinase plasminogen activator, plasminogen activator inhibitor-1, thrombin activatable fibrinolysis inhibitor, complement component 3, complement component 5, alpha-2-antiplasmin, plasmin-alpha-2-antiplasmin complex, and lipoprotein[a]), and the global assessments of endogenous fibrinolysis status (thromboelastography, rotational thromboelastometry, and global thrombosis test), and their potential as predictors to identify occurrence or unfavorable functional outcomes of ischemic stroke. All of these assessments present advantages and limitations, and we suggest that the global thrombosis test may be more appropriate for detecting impaired endogenous fibrinolysis status in ischemic stroke patients.

Lipoprotein(a) Levels in Disaggregated Racial and Ethnic Subgroups Across Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Risk Levels

Background

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a causal risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD).

Objectives

The authors assessed differences in Lp(a) testing and levels by disaggregated race, ethnicity, and ASCVD risk.

Methods

This was a retrospective cohort study of patients from a large California health care system from 2010 to 2021. Eligible individuals were ≥18 years old, with ≥2 primary care visits, and complete race and ethnicity data who underwent Lp(a) testing. Race and ethnicity were self-reported and categorized as follows: non-Hispanic (NH) White, NH-Black, Hispanic (Mexican, Puerto Rican, other), NH-Asian (Asian Indian, Chinese, Filipino, Japanese, Korean, Vietnamese, other). Logistic regression models tested associations between elevated Lp(a) (≥50 mg/dL) and race, ethnicity, and ASCVD risk.

Results

13,689 (0.9%) individuals underwent Lp(a) testing with a mean age of 54.6 ± 13.8 years, 49% female, 28.8% NH Asian. Over one-third of those tested had Lp(a) levels ≥50 mg/dL, ranging from 30.7% of Mexican patients to 62.6% of NH-Black patients. The ASCVD risk of those tested varied by race: 73.6% of Asian Indian individuals had <5% 10-year risk, whereas 27.2% of NH-Black had established ASCVD. Lp(a) prevalence ≥50 mg/dL increased across the ASCVD risk spectrum. After adjustment, Hispanic (OR: 0.76 [95% CI: 0.66-0.88]) and Asian (OR: 0.88 [95% CI: 0.81-0.96]) had lower odds of Lp(a) ≥50 mg/dL, whereas Black individuals had higher odds (OR: 2.46 [95% CI: 1.97-3.07]).

Conclusions

Lp(a) testing is performed infrequently. Of those tested, Lp(a) levels were frequently elevated and differed significantly across disaggregated race and ethnicity groups. The prevalence of elevated Lp(a) increased with increasing ASCVD risk, with significant variation by race and ethnicity.

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

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

Blood Lipids, Lipoproteins, and Apolipoproteins With Risk of Coronary Heart Disease: A Prospective Study Among Racially Diverse Populations

BACKGROUND

Comprehensive blood lipoprotein profiles and their association with incident coronary heart disease (CHD) among racially and geographically diverse populations remain understudied.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We conducted nested case-control studies of CHD among 3438 individuals (1719 pairs), including 1084 White Americans (542 pairs), 1244 Black Americans (622 pairs), and 1110 Chinese adults (555 pairs). We examined 36 plasma lipids, lipoproteins, and apolipoproteins, measured by nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy, with incident CHD among all participants and subgroups by demographics, lifestyle, and metabolic health status using conditional or unconditional logistic regression adjusted for potential confounders. Conventionally measured blood lipids, that is, total cholesterol, triglycerides, low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol, and high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol, were each associated with incident CHD, with odds ratios (ORs) being 1.33, 1.32, 1.24, and 0.79 per 1-SD increase among all participants. Seventeen lipoprotein biomarkers showed numerically stronger associations than conventional lipids, with ORs per 1-SD among all participants ranging from 1.35 to 1.57 and a negative OR of 0.78 (all false discovery rate <0.05), including apolipoprotein B100 to apolipoprotein A1 ratio (OR, 1.57 [95% CI, 1.45-1.7]), low-density lipoprotein-triglycerides (OR, 1.55 [95% CI, 1.43-1.69]), and apolipoprotein B (OR, 1.49 [95% CI, 1.37-1.62]). All these associations were significant and consistent across racial groups and other subgroups defined by age, sex, smoking, obesity, and metabolic health status, including individuals with normal levels of conventionally measured lipids.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study highlighted several lipoprotein biomarkers, including apolipoprotein B/ apolipoprotein A1 ratio, apolipoprotein B, and low-density lipoprotein-triglycerides, strongly and consistently associated with incident CHD. Our results suggest that comprehensive lipoprotein measures may complement the standard lipid panel to inform CHD risk among diverse populations.

The Neutrophil to Lymphocyte Ratio Modifies Lipoprotein (a)-Related Poor Prognosis in Patients After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] could contribute to coronary artery disease (CAD) through proinflammatory effects. The neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) is an inflammatory biomarker. We consecutively enrolled 7,922 CAD patients to investigate the synergistic association of Lp(a) and NLR with prognosis in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). NLR was calculated as the neutrophil count divided by the lymphocyte count. Cutoff for NLR was a median of 2.07. The threshold value was set at 30 mg/dL for Lp(a). The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), including all-cause mortality and myocardial infarction. During 2 years follow-up, 111 (1.40%) MACEs occurred. Lp(a) > 30 mg/dL was associated with an increased MACE risk in participants with NLR ≥2.07 [adjusted hazard ratio (HR), 1.84; 95% CI, 1.12-3.03], but not in participants with NLR <2.07 (adjusted HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.38-1.45) (Pinteraction = 0.021). Subgroup analysis demonstrated that the synergistic association of Lp(a) and NLR with prognosis was more pronounced in female patients (Pinteraction = 0.028). This study suggested that combining Lp(a) and NLR may be useful for risk stratification in CAD population.

Race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status affect the assessment of lipoprotein(a) levels in clinical practice

Background and Objective

High Lp(a) levels are a risk factor for ASCVD, however Lp(a) ordering in clinical practice is low. This study examines how race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status influence Lp(a) ordering.

Methods

This is a single center, retrospective study (2/1/2020-6/30/2023) using electronic medical records of adults with at least one ICD-10 diagnosis of ASCVD or resistant hyperlipidemia (LDL-C >160 mg/dL on statin therapy). We evaluated Lp(a) level differences among racial/ethnic groups and sexes. We also assessed associations between diagnosis type, diagnosis number, age at diagnosis, race, socioeconomic score (based on zip codes), public health coverage and presence of Lp(a) orders.

Results

4% of our cohort (N=56,833) had an Lp(a) order (17.3% Hispanic, 8.7% non-Hispanic Black, 47.5% non-Hispanic White and, 27% Asian/others). Non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic patients had lower rates of Lp(a) orders (0.17%, 0.28%, respectively) when compared to non-Hispanic White patients (2.35%), p<0.001, however, their median Lp(a) levels were higher. Individuals belonging to deprived socioeconomic groups or on Medicaid, were less likely to have an Lp(a) order (RR=0.39, p<0.001 and RR=0.40, p<0.001 respectively). Certain diagnoses (carotid stenosis, family history of ASCVD and FH) and multiple diagnoses (>2) resulted in more Lp(a) orders compared to those with only one diagnosis (p<0.001).

Conclusions

Lp(a) ordering is low in patients with ASCVD. Non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic patients at risk are less likely to have an Lp(a) order. Individuals residing in socioeconomically deprived neighborhoods and on Medicaid are also less like have Lp(a) order. Lp(a) orders depend on the type and number of patients' diagnoses.

Prognostic value of elevated lipoprotein (a) in patients with acute coronary syndromes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Elevated lipoprotein (a) level was recognized as an independent risk factor for significant adverse cardiovascular events in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients. Despite this recognition, the consensus in the literature regarding the prognostic significance of elevated lipoprotein (a) in ACS was also limited. Consequently, we conducted a thorough systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the prognostic relevance of elevated lipoprotein (a) level in individuals diagnosed with ACS.

Methods and results

A thorough literature review was conducted by systematically searching PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases until September 2023. This review specifically examined cohort studies exploring the prognostic implications of elevated lipoprotein (a) level in relation to major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), including death, stroke, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), and coronary revascularization, in patients with ACS. The meta-analysis utilized aggregated multivariable hazard ratios (HR) and their respective 95% confidence intervals (CI) to evaluate prognostic implications between high and low lipoprotein (a) levels [the cut-off of high lipoprotein (a) level varies from 12.5 to 60 mg/dl]. Among 18,168 patients in the identified studies, elevated lipoprotein (a) was independently associated with increased MACE risk (HR 1.26; 95% CI: 1.17-1.35, P < 0.00001) and all-cause mortality (HR 1.36; 95% CI: 1.05-1.76, P = 0.02) in ACS patients. In summary, elevated lipoprotein (a) levels independently forecast MACE and all-cause mortality in ACS patients. Assessing lipoprotein (a) levels appears promising for risk stratification in ACS, offering valuable insights for tailoring secondary prevention strategies.

Systematic Review Registration

PROSPERO (CRD42023476543).

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.

International Migration and Cardiovascular Health: Unraveling the Disease Burden Among Migrants to North America and Europe

Europe and North America are the 2 largest recipients of international migrants from low-resource regions in the world. Here, large differences in cardiovascular disease (CVD) morbidity and death exist between migrants and the host populations. This review discusses the CVD burden and its most important contributors among the largest migrant groups in Europe and North America as well as the consequences of migration to high-income countries on CVD diagnosis and therapy. The available evidence indicates that migrants in Europe and North America generally have a higher CVD risk compared with the host populations. Cardiometabolic, behavioral, and psychosocial factors are important contributors to their increased CVD risk. However, despite these common denominators, there are important ethnic differences in the propensity to develop CVD that relate to pre- and postmigration factors, such as socioeconomic status, cultural factors, lifestyle, psychosocial stress, access to health care and health care usage. Some of these pre- and postmigration environmental factors may interact with genetic (epigenetics) and microbial factors, which further influence their CVD risk. The limited number of prospective cohorts and clinical trials in migrant populations remains an important culprit for better understanding pathophysiological mechanism driving health differences and for developing ethnic-specific CVD risk prediction and care. Only by improved understanding of the complex interaction among human biology, migration-related factors, and sociocultural determinants of health influencing CVD risk will we be able to mitigate these differences and truly make inclusive personalized treatment possible.

Discovery of potent small-molecule inhibitors of lipoprotein(a) formation

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)), an independent, causal cardiovascular risk factor, is a lipoprotein particle that is formed by the interaction of a low-density lipoprotein (LDL) particle and apolipoprotein(a) (apo(a))1,2. Apo(a) first binds to lysine residues of apolipoprotein B-100 (apoB-100) on LDL through the Kringle IV (KIV) 7 and 8 domains, before a disulfide bond forms between apo(a) and apoB-100 to create Lp(a) (refs. 3-7). Here we show that the first step of Lp(a) formation can be inhibited through small-molecule interactions with apo(a) KIV7-8. We identify compounds that bind to apo(a) KIV7-8, and, through chemical optimization and further application of multivalency, we create compounds with subnanomolar potency that inhibit the formation of Lp(a). Oral doses of prototype compounds and a potent, multivalent disruptor, LY3473329 (muvalaplin), reduced the levels of Lp(a) in transgenic mice and in cynomolgus monkeys. Although multivalent molecules bind to the Kringle domains of rat plasminogen and reduce plasmin activity, species-selective differences in plasminogen sequences suggest that inhibitor molecules will reduce the levels of Lp(a), but not those of plasminogen, in humans. These data support the clinical development of LY3473329-which is already in phase 2 studies-as a potent and specific orally administered agent for reducing the levels of Lp(a).

All we need to know about lipoprotein(a)

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)], a genetically determined macromolecular complex, is independently and causally associated with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and calcific aortic stenosis via proposed proinflammatory, prothrombotic, and proatherogenic mechanisms. While Lp(a) measurement standardization issues are being resolved, several guidelines now support testing Lp(a) at least once in each adult's lifetime for ASCVD risk prediction which can foster implementation of more aggressive primary or secondary prevention therapies. Currently, there are several emerging targeted Lp(a) lowering therapies in active clinical investigation for safety and cardiovascular benefit among both primary and secondary prevention populations. First degree relatives of patients with high Lp(a) should be encouraged to undergo cascade screening. Primary prevention patients with high Lp(a) should consider obtaining a coronary calcium score for further risk estimation and to guide further ASCVD risk factor management including consideration of low dose aspirin therapy. Secondary prevention patients with high Lp(a) levels should consider adding PCSK9 inhibition to statin therapy.

Recent advances of mechanosensitive genes in vascular endothelial cells for the formation and treatment of atherosclerosis

Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and its complications are a high-incidence disease worldwide. Numerous studies have shown that blood flow shear has a huge impact on the function of vascular endothelial cells, and it plays an important role in gene regulation of pro-inflammatory, pro-thrombotic, pro-oxidative stress, and cell permeability. Many important endothelial cell mechanosensitive genes have been discovered, including KLK10, CCN gene family, NRP2, YAP, TAZ, HIF-1α, NF-κB, FOS, JUN, TFEB, KLF2/KLF4, NRF2, and ID1. Some of them have been intensively studied, whereas the relevant regulatory mechanism of other genes remains unclear. Focusing on these mechanosensitive genes will provide new strategies for therapeutic intervention in atherosclerotic vascular disease. Thus, this article reviews the mechanosensitive genes affecting vascular endothelial cells, including classical pathways and some newly screened genes, and summarizes the latest research progress on their roles in the pathogenesis of atherosclerosis to reveal effective therapeutic targets of drugs and provide new insights for anti-atherosclerosis.

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Small apolipoprotein(a) isoforms may predict primary patency following peripheral arterial revascularization

Background

High lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] is associated with adverse limb events in patients undergoing lower extremity revascularization. Lp(a) levels are genetically pre-determined, with LPA gene encoding for two apolipoprotein (a) [apo(a)] isoforms. Isoform size variations are driven by the number of kringle IV type 2 (KIV-2) repeats. Lp(a) levels are inversely correlated with isoform size. In this study, we examined the role of Lp(a) levels, apo(a) size and inflammatory markers with lower extremity revascularization outcomes.

Methods

25 subjects with chronic peripheral arterial disease (PAD), underwent open or endovascular lower extremity revascularization (mean age of 66.7±9.7 years; F=12, M=13; Black=8, Hispanic=5, and White=12). Pre- and post-operative medical history, self-reported symptoms, ankle brachial indices (ABIs), and lower extremity duplex ultrasounds were obtained. Plasma Lp(a), apoB100, lipid panel, and pro-inflammatory markers (IL-6, IL-18, hs-CRP, TNFα) were assayed preoperatively. Isoform size was estimated using gel electrophoresis and weighted isoform size ( wIS ) calculated based on % isoform expression. Firth logistic regression was used to examine the relationship between Lp(a) levels, and wIS with procedural outcomes: symptoms (better/worse), primary patency at 2-4 weeks, ABIs, and re-intervention within 3-6 months. We controlled for age, sex, history of diabetes, smoking, statin, antiplatelet and anticoagulation use.

Results

Median plasma Lp(a) level was 108 (44, 301) nmol/L. The mean apoB100 level was 168.0 ± 65.8 mg/dL. These values were not statistically different among races. We found no association between Lp(a) levels and w IS with measured plasma pro-inflammatory markers. However, smaller apo(a) wIS was associated with occlusion of the treated lesion(s) in the postoperative period [OR=1.97 (95% CI 1.01 - 3.86, p<0.05)]. The relationship of smaller apo(a) wIS with re-intervention was not as strong [OR=1.57 (95% CI 0.96 - 2.56), p=0.07]. We observed no association between wIS with patient reported symptoms or change in ABIs.

Conclusions

In this small study, subjects with smaller apo(a) isoform size undergoing peripheral arterial revascularization were more likely to experience occlusion in the perioperative period and/or require re-intervention. Larger cohort studies identifying the mechanism and validating these preliminary data are needed to improve understanding of long-term peripheral vascular outcomes.

Key Findings

25 subjects with symptomatic PAD underwent open or endovascular lower extremity revascularization in a small cohort. Smaller apo(a) isoforms were associated with occlusion of the treated lesion(s) within 2-4 weeks [OR=1.97 (95% CI 1.01 - 3.86, p<0.05)], suggesting apo(a) isoform size as a predictor of primary patency in the early period after lower extremity intervention.

Take Home Message

Subjects with high Lp(a) levels, generally have smaller apo(a) isoform sizes. We find that, in this small cohort, patients undergoing peripheral arterial revascularization subjects with small isoforms are at an increased risk of treated vessel occlusion in the perioperative period.

Table of Contents Summary

Subjects with symptomatic PAD requiring lower extremity revascularization have high median Lp(a) levels. Individuals with smaller apo(a) weighted isoform size (wIS) have lower primary patency rates and/or require re-intervention.

Lipoprotein(a): from Causality to Treatment

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This paper reviews the evidence why lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is a causal risk factor for cardiovascular disease and how high Lp(a) concentrations should be managed now and with an outlook to the future.

REVIEW FINDINGS

No optimal and widely available animal models exist to study the causality of the association between Lp(a) and cardiovascular disease. This has been a major handicap for the entire field. However, genetic studies turned the page. Already in the early 1990s, the principle of Mendelian randomization studies was applied for the first time ever (even if they were not named so at that time). Genetic variants of the LPA gene such as the apolipoprotein(a) isoform size, the number and sum of kringle IV repeats and later single nucleotide polymorphisms are strongly associated with life-long exposure to high Lp(a) concentrations as well as cardiovascular outcomes. This evidence provided a basis for the development of specific Lp(a)-lowering drugs that are currently in clinical testing phase. Lp(a) is one of the most important genetically determined risk factors for cardiovascular disease. With the specific Lp(a)-lowering therapies, we might get tools to fight this common risk factor in case the outcome trials will be positive.

Consideration and Application of Lipoprotein(a) in the Risk Assessment of Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Risk in Adults

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]) is an low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-like particle in which apolipoprotein (apo) B is covalently bound to a plasminogen-like molecule called apo(a). A High level of Lp(a) has been demonstrated to be an independent, causal, and prevalent risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), as well as aortic valve disease, through mechanisms that promote atherogenesis, inflammation, and thrombosis. With reliable and accessible assays, Lp(a) level has been established to be associated linearly with the risk for ASCVD. The 2021 Canadian Cardiovascular Society Dyslipidemia Guidelines recommend measuring an Lp(a) level once in a person's lifetime as part of the initial lipid screening. The aim of this review is to provide an update and overview of the utility and application of Lp(a) level in the assessment and treatment of adults at risk for ASCVD, consistent with this guideline recommendation.

2024 Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics: A Report of US and Global Data From the American Heart Association

BACKGROUND

The American Heart Association (AHA), in conjunction with the National Institutes of Health, annually reports the most up-to-date statistics related to heart disease, stroke, and cardiovascular risk factors, including core health behaviors (smoking, physical activity, nutrition, sleep, and obesity) and health factors (cholesterol, blood pressure, glucose control, and metabolic syndrome) that contribute to cardiovascular health. The AHA Heart Disease and Stroke Statistical Update presents the latest data on a range of major clinical heart and circulatory disease conditions (including stroke, brain health, complications of pregnancy, kidney disease, congenital heart disease, rhythm disorders, sudden cardiac arrest, subclinical atherosclerosis, coronary heart disease, cardiomyopathy, heart failure, valvular disease, venous thromboembolism, and peripheral artery disease) and the associated outcomes (including quality of care, procedures, and economic costs).

METHODS

The AHA, through its Epidemiology and Prevention Statistics Committee, continuously monitors and evaluates sources of data on heart disease and stroke in the United States and globally to provide the most current information available in the annual Statistical Update with review of published literature through the year before writing. The 2024 AHA Statistical Update is the product of a full year's worth of effort in 2023 by dedicated volunteer clinicians and scientists, committed government professionals, and AHA staff members. The AHA strives to further understand and help heal health problems inflicted by structural racism, a public health crisis that can significantly damage physical and mental health and perpetuate disparities in access to health care, education, income, housing, and several other factors vital to healthy lives. This year's edition includes additional global data, as well as data on the monitoring and benefits of cardiovascular health in the population, with an enhanced focus on health equity across several key domains.

RESULTS

Each of the chapters in the Statistical Update focuses on a different topic related to heart disease and stroke statistics.

CONCLUSIONS

The Statistical Update represents a critical resource for the lay public, policymakers, media professionals, clinicians, health care administrators, researchers, health advocates, and others seeking the best available data on these factors and conditions.

Impact of High Lipoprotein(a) on Long-Term Survival Following Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting

BACKGROUND

Lipoprotein(a) is a possible causal risk factor for atherosclerosis and related complications. The distribution and prognostic implication of lipoprotein(a) in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting remain unknown. This study aimed to assess the impact of high lipoprotein(a) on the long-term prognosis of patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Consecutive patients with stable coronary artery disease who underwent isolated coronary artery bypass grafting from January 2013 to December 2018 from a single-center cohort were included. The primary outcome was all-cause death. The secondary outcome was a composite of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events. Of the 18 544 patients, 4072 (22.0%) were identified as the high-lipoprotein(a) group (≥50 mg/dL). During a median follow-up of 3.2 years, primary outcomes occurred in 587 patients. High lipoprotein(a) was associated with increased risk of all-cause death (high lipoprotein(a) versus low lipoprotein(a): adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.31 [95% CI, 1.09-1.59]; P=0.005; lipoprotein(a) per 1-mg/dL increase: aHR, 1.003 [95% CI, 1.001-1.006]; P=0.011) and major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (high lipoprotein(a) versus low lipoprotein(a): aHR, 1.18 [95% CI, 1.06-1.33]; P=0.004; lipoprotein(a) per 1-mg/dL increase: aHR, 1.002 [95% CI, 1.001-1.004]; P=0.002). The lipoprotein(a)-related risk was greater in patients with European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation <3, and tended to attenuate in patients receiving arterial grafts.

CONCLUSIONS

More than 1 in 5 patients with stable coronary artery disease who underwent coronary artery bypass grafting were exposed to high lipoprotein(a), which is associated with higher risks of death and major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events. The adverse effects of lipoprotein(a) were more pronounced in patients with clinically low-risk profiles or not receiving arterial grafts.

Lipoprotein apheresis affects the concentration of extracellular vesicles in patients with elevated lipoprotein (a)

Lipoprotein apheresis (LA) is a therapeutic option for hyperlipoproteinemia(a) (hyper-Lp(a)) and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). LA improves blood rheology, reduces oxidative stress parameters and improves endothelial function. The underlying molecular mechanisms of LA beneficial effects are unknown, but it has been suggested that LA exhibits multiple activities beyond simply removing lipoproteins. We hypothesized that LA removes not only lipoproteins, but also extracellular vesicles (EVs). To test this hypothesis, we performed a prospective study in 22 patients undergoing LA for hyper-Lp(a) and ASCVD. Different EVs subtypes were measured before and directly after LA, and after 7 days. We used calibrated flow cytometry to detect total particle concentration (diameter >  ~ 100 nm), total lipoproteins concentration (diameter > 200 nm, RI > 1.51), total EV concentration (diameter > 200 nm, RI < 1.41), concentrations of EVs derived from erythrocytes (CD235a+; diameter > 200 nm, RI < 1.41), leukocytes (CD45+; diameter > 200 nm, RI < 1.41) and platelets (CD61+, PEVs; diameter > 200 nm, RI < 1.41). LA reduced the concentrations of all investigated EVs subtypes and lipoproteins. Lp(a) concentration was lowered by 64.5% [(58% - 71%); p < 0.001]. Plasma concentrations of EVs > 200 nm in diameter derived from platelets (CD61 +), leukocytes (CD45+) and erythrocytes (CD235a+) decreased after single LA procedure by 42.7% [(12.8-54.7); p = 0.005], 42.6% [(29.7-54.1); p = 0.030] and 26.7% [(1.0-62.7); p = 0.018], respectively, compared to baseline. All EV subtypes returned to the baseline concentrations in blood plasma after 7 days. To conclude, LA removes not only Lp(a), but also cell-derived EVs, which may contribute to LA beneficial effects.

Recommendations of the Experts of the Polish Cardiac Society (PCS) and the Polish Lipid Association (PoLA) on the diagnosis and management of elevated lipoprotein(a) levels

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is made up of a low-density lipoprotein (LDL) particle and a specific apolipoprotein(a). The blood concentration of Lp(a) is approximately 90% genetically determined, and the main genetic factor determining Lp(a) levels is the size of the apo(a) isoform, which is determined by the number of KIV2 domain repeats. The size of the apo(a) isoform is inversely proportional to the blood concentration of Lp(a). Lp(a) is a strong and independent cardiovascular risk factor. Elevated Lp(a) levels ≥ 50 mg/dl (≥ 125 nmol/l) are estimated to occur in more than 1.5 billion people worldwide. However, determination of Lp(a) levels is performed far too rarely, including Poland, where, in fact, it is only since the 2021 guidelines of the Polish Lipid Association (PoLA) and five other scientific societies that Lp(a) measurements have begun to be performed. Determination of Lp(a) concentrations is not easy due to, among other things, the different sizes of the apo(a) isoforms; however, the currently available certified tests make it possible to distinguish between people with low and high cardiovascular risk with a high degree of precision. In 2022, the first guidelines for the management of patients with elevated lipoprotein(a) levels were published by the European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS) and the American Heart Association (AHA). The first Polish guidelines are the result of the work of experts from the two scientific societies and their aim is to provide clear, practical recommendations for the determination and management of elevated Lp(a) levels.

The ins and outs of lipoprotein(a) assay methods

Pathophysiological, epidemiological and genetic studies convincingly showed lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) to be a causal mediator of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). This happens through a myriad of mechanisms including activation of innate immune cells, endothelial cells as well as platelets. Although these certainties whether or not Lp(a) is ready for prime-time clinical use remain debated. Thus, remit of the present review is to provide an overview of different methods that have been employed for the measurement of Lp(a). The methods include dynamic light scattering, multi-angle light scattering analysis, near-field imaging, sedimentation, gel filtration, and electron microscopy. The development of multiple Lp(a) detection methods is vital for improved prediction of ASCVD risk.

Novel Prediction Equations for Absolute Risk Assessment of Total Cardiovascular Disease Incorporating Cardiovascular-Kidney-Metabolic Health: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

Cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic (CKM) syndrome is a novel construct recently defined by the American Heart Association in response to the high prevalence of metabolic and kidney disease. Epidemiological data demonstrate higher absolute risk of both atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (CVD) and heart failure as an individual progresses from CKM stage 0 to stage 3, but optimal strategies for risk assessment need to be refined. Absolute risk assessment with the goal to match type and intensity of interventions with predicted risk and expected treatment benefit remains the cornerstone of primary prevention. Given the growing number of therapies in our armamentarium that simultaneously address all 3 CKM axes, novel risk prediction equations are needed that incorporate predictors and outcomes relevant to the CKM context. This should also include social determinants of health, which are key upstream drivers of CVD, to more equitably estimate and address risk. This scientific statement summarizes the background, rationale, and clinical implications for the newly developed sex-specific, race-free risk equations: PREVENT (AHA Predicting Risk of CVD Events). The PREVENT equations enable 10- and 30-year risk estimates for total CVD (composite of atherosclerotic CVD and heart failure), include estimated glomerular filtration rate as a predictor, and adjust for competing risk of non-CVD death among adults 30 to 79 years of age. Additional models accommodate enhanced predictive utility with the addition of CKM factors when clinically indicated for measurement (urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio and hemoglobin A1c) or social determinants of health (social deprivation index) when available. Approaches to implement risk-based prevention using PREVENT across various settings are discussed.

Lipoprotein(a): a genetically determined risk factor for Cardiovascular disease

Lipoprotein(a) is a complex lipoprotein with unique characteristics distinguishing it from all the other apolipoprotein B-containing lipoprotein particles. Its lipid composition and the presence of a single molecule of apolipoprotein B per particle, render lipoprotein(a) similar to low-density lipoproteins. However, the presence of a unique, carbohydrate-rich protein termed apolipoprotein(a), linked by a covalent bond to apolipoprotein B imparts unique characteristics to lipoprotein(a) distinguishing it from all the other lipoproteins. Apolipoprotein(a) is highly polymorphic in size ranging in molecular weight from <300 KDa to >800 kDa. Both the size polymorphism and the concentration of lipoprotein(a) in plasma are genetically determined and unlike other lipoproteins, plasma concentration is minimally impacted by lifestyle modifications or lipid-lowering drugs. Many studies involving hundreds of thousands of individuals have provided strong evidence that elevated lipoprotein(a) is genetically determined and a causal risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. The concentration attained in adulthood is already present in children at around 5 years of age and therefore, those with elevated lipoprotein(a) are prematurely exposed to a high risk of cardiovascular disease. Despite the large number of guidelines and consensus statements on the management of lipoprotein(a) in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease published in the last decade, lipoprotein(a) is still seldom measured in clinical settings. In this review, we provide an overview of the most important features that characterize lipoprotein(a), its role in cardiovascular disease, and the importance of adding the measurement of lipoprotein(a) for screening adults and youths to identify those at increased risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease due to their elevated plasma concentration of lipoprotein(a).

Clinical practice recommendations on lipoprotein apheresis for children with homozygous familial hypercholesterolemia: an expert consensus statement from ERKNet and ESPN

Homozygous familial hypercholesterolaemia is a life-threatening genetic condition, which causes extremely elevated LDL-C levels and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease very early in life. It is vital to start effective lipid-lowering treatment from diagnosis onwards. Even with dietary and current multimodal pharmaceutical lipid-lowering therapies, LDL-C treatment goals cannot be achieved in many children. Lipoprotein apheresis is an extracorporeal lipid-lowering treatment, which is well established since three decades, lowering serum LDL-C levels by more than 70% per session. Data on the use of lipoprotein apheresis in children with homozygous familial hypercholesterolaemia mainly consists of case-reports and case-series, precluding strong evidence-based guidelines. We present a consensus statement on lipoprotein apheresis in children based on the current available evidence and opinions from experts in lipoprotein apheresis from over the world. It comprises practical statements regarding the indication, methods, treatment targets and follow-up of lipoprotein apheresis in children with homozygous familial hypercholesterolaemia and on the role of lipoprotein(a) and liver transplantation.

Lipoproteins, Cholesterol, and Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease in East Asians and Europeans

One fifth of the world population live in East Asia comprising Japan, Korea, and China where ischemic heart disease, a major component of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), is the second most frequent cause of death. Each of low-density lipoproteins (LDL), remnant lipoproteins, and lipoprotein(a), summarized as non-high-density lipoproteins (non-HDL) or apolipoprotein B (apoB) containing lipoproteins, causes ASCVD. However, a significant proportion of the evidence on lipoproteins and lipoprotein cholesterol with risk of ASCVD came from White people mainly living in Europe and North America and not from people living in East Asia or of East Asian descent. With a unique biological, geohistorical, and social background in this world region, East Asians have distinctive characteristics that might have potential impact on the association of lipoproteins and lipoprotein cholesterol with risk of ASCVD. Considering the movement across national borders in the World, understanding of lipoprotein and lipoprotein cholesterol evidence on ASCVD in East Asia is important for both East Asian and non-East Asian populations wherever they live in the World.In this review, we introduce the biological features of lipoproteins and lipoprotein cholesterol and the evidence for their association with risk of ASCVD in East Asian and European populations. We also provide an overview of guideline recommendations for prevention of ASCVD in these two different world regions. Finally, specific preventive strategies and future perspectives are touched upon.

Association between lipoprotein(a) and insulin resistance in Chinese adults: results from the China health and nutrition survey

Background

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a well-established risk factor for cardiovascular diseases. However, the relationship between Lp(a) and insulin resistance (IR) remains controversial. The aim of the current study was to investigate the association between Lp(a) concentrations and IR in Chinese adults.

Methods

Cross-sectional study of 1908 cases and 5725 controls was performed for identifying the association of Lp(a) with IR. IR was assessed using the triglyceride glucose (TyG) index, and patients with a TyG index greater than the third quartile were defined as having IR.

Results

The distribution of Lp(a) in Chinese adults was skewed, with a median of 7.90mg/dL. Lp(a) concentrations were significantly and progressively lower with increasing TyG index values in Chinese adult males, but not in females. Multiple regression analysis adjusted for a wide range of risk factors showed that Lp(a) concentrations were inversely and independently associated with IR in Chinese adult males, but not in females. The suggested Lp (a) cutoff for discriminating IR from non-IR was 4.7 mg/dL in Chinese adult males. Lp(a) interacts with gender in IR on both additive and multiplicative scale in Chinese adults.

Conclusion

Lp(a) concentrations inversely associated with IR in Chinses adult males, but the association in women needs further study. In Chinese adults, Lp(a) interacts with gender in IR.

Role of lipoprotein(a) in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: A review of current and emerging therapies

Lipoprotein(a), or Lp(a), is structurally like low-density lipoprotein (LDL) but differs in that it contains glycoprotein apolipoprotein(a) [apo(a)]. Due to its prothrombotic and proinflammatory properties, Lp(a) is an independent risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and aortic valve stenosis. Lp(a) levels are genetically determined, and it is estimated that 20%-25% of the global population has an Lp(a) level ≥50 mg/dL (or ≥125 nmol/L). Diet and lifestyle interventions have little to no effect on Lp(a) levels. Lipoprotein apheresis is the only approved treatment for elevated Lp(a) but is time-intensive for the patient and only modestly effective. Pharmacological approaches to reduce Lp(a) levels and its associated risks are of significant interest; however, currently available lipid-lowering therapies have limited effectiveness in reducing Lp(a) levels. Although statins are first-line agents to reduce LDL cholesterol levels, they modestly increase Lp(a) levels and have not been shown to change Lp(a)-mediated ASCVD risk. Alirocumab, evolocumab, and inclisiran reduce Lp(a) levels by 20-25%, yet the clinical implications of this reduction for Lp(a)-mediated ASCVD risk are uncertain. Niacin also lowers Lp(a) levels; however, its effectiveness in mitigating Lp(a)-mediated ASCVD risk remains unclear, and its side effects have limited its utilization. Recommendations for when to screen and how to manage individuals with elevated Lp(a) vary widely between national and international guidelines and scientific statements. Three investigational compounds targeting Lp(a), including small interfering RNA (siRNA) agents (olpasiran, SLN360) and an antisense oligonucleotide (pelacarsen), are in various stages of development. These compounds block the translation of messenger RNA (mRNA) into apo(a), a key structural component of Lp(a), thereby substantially reducing Lp(a) synthesis in the liver. The purpose of this review is to describe current recommendations for screening and managing elevated Lp(a), describe the effects of currently available lipid-lowering therapies on Lp(a) levels, and provide insight into emerging therapies targeting Lp(a).

Lipoprotein(a) in patients with breast cancer after chemotherapy: exploring potential strategies for cardioprotection

Developments in neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy (CHT) have led to an increase in the number of breast cancer survivors. The determination of an appropriate follow-up for these patients is of increasing importance. Deaths due to cardiovascular disease (CVD) are an important part of mortality in patients with breast cancer.This review suggests that chemotherapeutic agents may influence lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) concentrations in breast cancer survivors after CHT based on many convincing evidence from epidemiologic and observational researches. Usually, the higher the Lp(a) concentration, the higher the median risk of developing CVD. However, more clinical trial results are needed in the future to provide clear evidence of a possible causal relationship. This review also discuss the existing and emerging therapies for lowering Lp(a) concentrations in the clinical setting. Hormone replacement therapy, statins, proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin-type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors, Antisense oligonucleotides, small interfering RNA, etc. may reduce circulating Lp(a) or decrease the incidence of CVD.

Association of free-living diet composition with plasma lipoprotein(a) levels in healthy adults

BACKGROUND

Lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] is an apoB100-containing lipoprotein with high levels being positively associated with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Lp(a) levels are genetically determined. However, previous studies report a negative association between Lp(a) and saturated fatty acid intake. Currently, apoB100 lowering therapies are used to lower Lp(a) levels, and apheresis therapy is FDA approved for patients with extreme elevations of Lp(a). The current study analyzed the association of free-living diet components with plasma Lp(a) levels.

METHODS

Dietary composition data was collected during screening visits for enrollment in previously completed lipid and lipoprotein metabolism studies at Columbia University Irving Medical Center via a standardized protocol by registered dietitians using 24 hour recalls. Data were analyzed with the Nutrition Data System for Research (Version 2018). Diet quality was calculated using the Healthy Eating Index (HEI) score. Fasting plasma Lp(a) levels were measured via an isoform-independent ELISA and apo(a) isoforms were measured using gel electrophoresis.

RESULTS

We enrolled 28 subjects [Black (n = 18); Hispanic (n = 7); White (n = 3)]. The mean age was 48.3 ± 12.5 years with 17 males. Median level of Lp(a) was 79.9 nmol/L (34.4-146.0) and it was negatively associated with absolute (grams/day) and relative (percent of total calories) intake of dietary saturated fatty acids (SFA) (R = -0.43, P = 0.02, SFA …(% CAL): R = -0.38, P = 0.04), palmitic acid intake (R = -0.38, P = 0.05), and stearic acid intake (R = -0.40, P = 0.03). Analyses of associations with HEI score when stratified based on Lp(a) levels > or ≤ 100 nmol/L revealed no significant associations with any of the constituent factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Using 24 hour recall, we confirm previous findings that Lp(a) levels are negatively associated with dietary saturated fatty acid intake. Additionally, Lp(a) levels are not related to diet quality, as assessed by the HEI score. The mechanisms underlying the relationship of SFA with Lp(a) require further investigation.

Lipid Profile and Lipoprotein(a) Testing

BACKGROUND

The treatment of dyslipidemias plays a major role in the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease. Proper evaluation of the patient's lipid status is very important for risk assessment and as a guide to treatment.

METHODS

This review is based on publications retrieved by a selective search of the literature, including current guidelines.

RESULTS

Measurement of the plasma concentration of cholesterol, triglycerides, HDL- and LDL-cholesterol, calculation of the non-HDL cholesterol concentration, and-on a single occasion-determination of the lipoprotein (a) concentration enable the clinician to quantify the lipid-associated health risk and monitor the effects of treatment. These blood tests can be performed in a non-fasting state except in special situations (particularly, hypertriglyceridemia). The HDL quotient is an obsolete measure. The main goal of treatment is to achieve an LDL-cholesterol level adequate to the patient's cardiovascular risk through lifestyle modification and, if necessary, medication. A high lipoprotein (a) concentration cannot be lowered with orally administered drugs; above all, patients should lower their LDL-cholesterol levels while minimizing all other risk factors.

CONCLUSION

Measurement of the concentration of cholesterol, triglycerides, and HDL- and LDL-cholesterol and calculation of the non-HDL-C suffice as a guide to lipid-lowering treatment. The primary therapeutic goal is to lower LDL cholesterol.

Is there a benefit of aspirin therapy for primary prevention to reduce the risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease in patients with elevated Lipoprotein (a)-A review of the evidence

Aspirin has long been recognized as a beneficial treatment for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) due to its antiplatelet effects. However, there is a need to more precisely identify individuals who would benefit from aspirin therapy for primary prevention in order to reduce the risk of ASCVD. Those with elevated lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] levels are at increased risk of ASCVD. In this article, we provide an overview of studies that have explored the use of aspirin therapy in individuals with elevated Lp(a). We discuss the potential mechanisms by which aspirin therapy may reduce ASCVD risk, and present a review of the data on the effectiveness of aspirin therapy in reducing ASCVD risk in individuals with elevated Lp(a). The presented evidence suggests that individuals with elevated Lp(a) benefit more from aspirin therapy for reduction of ASCVD events than the general population.