Associations between lipoprotein(a) levels and cardiovascular outcomes in black and white subjects: the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) Study

Identification of allele-specific KIV-2 repeats and impact on Lp(a) measurements for cardiovascular disease risk

The abundance of Lp(a) protein holds significant implications for the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD), which is directly impacted by the copy number (CN) of KIV-2, a 5.5 kbp sub-region. KIV-2 is highly polymorphic in the population and accurate analysis is challenging. In this study, we present the DRAGEN KIV-2 CN caller, which utilizes short reads. Data across 166 WGS show that the caller has high accuracy, compared to optical mapping and can further phase approximately 50% of the samples. We compared KIV-2 CN numbers to 24 previously postulated KIV-2 relevant SNVs, revealing that many are ineffective predictors of KIV-2 copy number. Population studies, including USA-based cohorts, showed distinct KIV-2 CN, distributions for European-, African-, and Hispanic-American populations and further underscored the limitations of SNV predictors. We demonstrate that the CN estimates correlate significantly with the available Lp(a) protein levels and that phasing is highly important.

Association between lipoprotein(a) and cardiovascular disease in patients undergoing coronary angiography

OBJECTIVE

Many previous studies reported the relationship between lipoprotein(a) and cardiovascular disease, but the conclusions were controversial. The aim of our study was to retrospectively investigate the association between lipoprotein(a) and cardiovascular disease in patients undergoing coronary angiography.

METHODS

We collected and compared clinical information of patients hospitalized for coronary angiography. Multivariable hierarchical logistic regression was used to evaluate the association between lipoprotein(a) and cardiovascular disease in patients undergoing coronary angiography.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in gender, hypertension, APOA1, smoking, hyperuricemia, obesity, acute myocardial infarction (AMI), cardiac insufficiency, family history of diabetes, or family history of hyperlipidemia among the four groups of lipoprotein(a). Elevated lipoprotein(a) does not increase the risk of hypertriglyceridemia, while elevated lipoprotein(a) increases the risk of high total cholesterol and high low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-c). Elevated lipoprotein(a) increases the risk of diabetes and premature coronary artery disease (CAD). Elevated lipoprotein(a) increases the incidence of CAD, multivessel lesions, and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Multivariate logistic regression analysis further showed that elevated lipoprotein(a) increases the incidence of high total cholesterol, high LDL‑c, diabetes, CAD, premature CAD, multivessel lesions, and PCI.

CONCLUSION

The findings indicated that elevated lipoprotein(a) had no obvious relationship with hypertension and obesity. Elevated lipoprotein(a) increases the risk of high total cholesterol, high LDL‑c, and premature CAD, and increases the occurrence and severity of coronary heart disease.

Lipoprotein(a) and cardiovascular disease

One in five people are at high risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and aortic valve stenosis due to high lipoprotein(a). Lipoprotein(a) concentrations are lowest in people from east Asia, Europe, and southeast Asia, intermediate in people from south Asia, the Middle East, and Latin America, and highest in people from Africa. Concentrations are more than 90% genetically determined and 17% higher in post-menopausal women than in men. Individuals at a higher cardiovascular risk should have lipoprotein(a) concentrations measured once in their lifetime to inform those with high concentrations to adhere to a healthy lifestyle and receive medication to lower other cardiovascular risk factors. With no approved drugs to lower lipoprotein(a) concentrations, it is promising that at least five drugs in development lower concentrations by 65-98%, with three currently being tested in large cardiovascular endpoint trials. This Review covers historical perspectives, physiology and pathophysiology, genetic evidence of causality, epidemiology, role in familial hypercholesterolaemia and diabetes, management, screening, diagnosis, measurement, prevention, and future lipoprotein(a)-lowering drugs.

Course and trajectories of insulin resistance, incident heart failure and all-cause mortality in nondiabetic people

BACKGROUND

In nondiabetic people, the long-term effects of insulin resistance (IR) on heart failure (HF) and all-cause mortality have not been studied.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the association between IR trajectories and incident HF and all-cause mortality in a nondiabetic population.

METHODS

We studied 7835 nondiabetic participants from the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) Study. We estimated IR with several methods: Homeostatic Model Assessment-Insulin Resistance (HOMA-IR), triglyceride to high-density lipoprotein cholesterol ratio (TG/HDL-C), triglyceride glucose Index (TyG Index), and metabolic score for insulin resistance (METS-IR). The latent class analysis identified two trajectories for HOMA-IR ('low level' and 'high level'), and three trajectories for TG/HDL-C, TyG index, and METS-IR ('low level', 'moderate level', and 'high level'). Cox proportional hazard models were employed to examine the association.

RESULTS

Participants in the 'high level' group of HOMA-IR trajectory patterns were more likely to have incident HF and all-cause mortality with HRs (95% CIs) of 1.29 (1.11-1.50) and 1.31(1.19-1.44), respectively, compared to the 'low level' group. Similarly, participants in the 'moderate level' and 'high level' groups of TG/HDL-C, TyG index, and METS-IR trajectories had elevated risks of incident HF and all-cause mortality. However, no increased risk was found for all-cause mortality for men in the 'moderate level' and 'high level' group of TG/HDL-C, TyG index, and METS-IR relative to the 'low level' group.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term moderate and high IR levels were positively associated with increased risks of incident HF for both males and females. For all-cause mortality, however, consistent associations were found only in women.

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.

Lipoprotein(a) in Children and Adolescents: Risk or Causal Factor for Cardiovascular Disease? A Narrative Review

The evaluation of serum Lp(a) values in childhood and adolescence has been widely debated, and in the last few years, many authors have tried to better define Lp(a) role in atherosclerosis pathogenesis, starting from childhood. In our narrative review, we have evaluated the main historical stages of Lp(a) studies in childhood, trying to focus on pathogenic mechanisms linked to elevated serum Lp(a) values, starting from ischemic stroke and vascular damage, and to its possible direct involvement in premature atherosclerosis from childhood onwards. Historic manuscripts on Lp(a) in pediatric patients have mainly focused on serum Lp(a) values and increased stroke risk. More recently, many studies have evaluated Lp(a) as a coronary vascular disease (CVD) risk factor starting from childhood, especially related to a positive family history of premature CVD. Finally, only a few studies evaluated the role of Lp(a) in premature atherosclerotic processes and endothelial and vascular damage in pediatric patients. Lastly, we have hypothesized a future perspective, with the hope that plasma Lp(a) levels will be treated with a tailored pharmacologic approach, and Lp(a) will become a precocious therapeutic target to control the atherosclerotic pathways from the first years of life.

The implications of measuring lipoprotein(a) in clinical practice

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is a well-recognized causal risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and calcific aortic valve stenosis. There are ongoing challenges with screening and management in primary and secondary prevention; however, future recommendations for clinical practice await the outcomes of clinical trials that are in progress.

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 personal ICD-10 diagnosis of ASCVD, aortic valve stenosis, resistant hypercholesterolemia (LDL-C >160 mg/dL on statin therapy), and family history of ASCVD or high Lp(a). 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/ethnicity, socioeconomic score (based on zip codes), public health coverage and the presence of Lp(a) orders.

RESULTS

4 % of our cohort (N=2,249 in 56,833) had an Lp(a) order (17.3 % of whom identified as Hispanic, 8.7 % non-Hispanic Black, 47.5 % non-Hispanic White, and 27 % Asian/other). Non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic patients had lower rates of Lp(a) orders (0.17 % and 0.28 %, respectively) when compared to non-Hispanic White patients (2.35 %), p < 0.001, however, their median Lp(a) levels were higher, p < 0.001. Individuals on Medicaid or belonging to deprived socioeconomic groups were less likely to have an Lp(a) order (IRR = 0.40, p < 0.001 and IRR = 0.39, p < 0.001 respectively). Certain diagnosis (carotid stenosis, family history of ASCVD and FH) and multiple diagnoses (>2) resulted in more Lp(a) orders compared to only one diagnosis (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

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

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

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

Impact of Social Determinants of Health and Lifestyle on Association Between Lipoprotein(a) and Cardiovascular Events

Background

In European cohorts, healthier lifestyle either attenuated or associated with lower cardiovascular risk despite elevated lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)].

Objectives

The purpose of this study was to test if social determinants of health (SDOH) and Life's Simple 7 (LS7) scores impact the association of Lp(a) with cardiovascular events in U.S. cohorts.

Methods

We performed a sequential multivariable Cox proportional hazard analysis using the ARIC (Atherosclerosis Risk In Communities) and MESA (Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis) cohorts. We first adjusted for age, gender, non-high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol, race, and ethnicity, then sequentially added SDOH and LS7 scores. The primary outcomes were time until first myocardial infarction (MI) or stroke.

Results

ARIC (n = 15,072; median Lp(a) = 17.3 mg/dL) had 16.2 years and MESA (n = 6,822; median Lp(a) = 18.3 mg/dL) had 12.3 years of average follow-up. In age, gender, race, and ethnicity, and non-high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol adjusted analyses, Lp(a) was associated with MI in ARIC (HR: 1.10, P < 0.001) and MESA (HR: 1.11, P = 0.001), and stroke in ARIC (HR: 1.07, P < 0.001) but not MESA (HR: 0.97, P = 0.53). In models with SDOH and LS7, associations of Lp(a) remained similar with MI (ARIC, HR: 1.08, P < 0.001; MESA, HR: 1.10, P = 0.001) and stroke (ARIC, HR: 1.06, P = 0.002; MESA, HR: 0.96, P = 0.37). Each additional SDOH correlated positively with MI (ARIC, HR: 1.04, P = 0.01; MESA, HR: 1.08, P = 0.003) and stroke in ARIC (HR: 1.08, P = 0.00) but not MESA (HR: 1.03, P = 0.41). Each additional LS7 point correlated negatively with MI (ARIC, HR: 0.88, P < 0.001; MESA, HR: 0.85, P < 0.001) and stroke (ARIC, HR: 0.91, P < 0.001; MESA, HR: 0.86, P < 0.001).

Conclusions

SDOH and lifestyle factors associated with risk for MI and stroke but did not largely impact the association between Lp(a) and cardiovascular events.

Lipoprotein(a) and Coronary Plaque in Asymptomatic Individuals: The Miami Heart Study at Baptist Health South Florida

BACKGROUND

Elevated levels of lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) are independently associated with an increased risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease events. However, the mechanisms driving this association are poorly understood. We aimed to evaluate the association between Lp(a) and coronary plaque characteristics in a contemporary US cohort without clinical atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, undergoing coronary computed tomography angiography, the noninvasive gold standard for the assessment of coronary atherosclerosis.

METHODS

We used baseline data from the Miami Heart Study-a community-based, prospective cohort study-which included asymptomatic adults aged 40 to 65 years evaluated using coronary computed tomography angiography. Those taking any lipid-lowering therapies were excluded. Elevated Lp(a) was defined as ≥125 nmol/L. Outcomes included any plaque, coronary artery calcium score >0, maximal stenosis ≥50%, presence of any high-risk plaque feature (positive remodeling, spotty calcification, low-attenuation plaque, napkin ring), and the presence of ≥2 high-risk plaque features.

RESULTS

Among 1795 participants (median age, 52 years; 54.3% women; 49.6% Hispanic), 291 (16.2%) had Lp(a) ≥125 nmol/L. In unadjusted analyses, individuals with Lp(a) ≥125 nmol/L had a higher prevalence of all outcomes compared with Lp(a) <125 nmol/L, although differences were only statistically significant for the presence of any coronary plaque and ≥2 high-risk features. In multivariable models, elevated Lp(a) was independently associated with the presence of any coronary plaque (odds ratio, 1.40, [95% CI, 1.05-1.86]) and with ≥2 high-risk features (odds ratio, 3.94, [95% CI, 1.82-8.52]), although only 35 participants had this finding. Among participants with a coronary artery calcium score of 0 (n=1200), those with Lp(a) ≥125 nmol/L had a significantly higher percentage of any plaque compared with those with Lp(a) <125 nmol/L (24.2% versus 14.2%; P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In this contemporary analysis, elevated Lp(a) was independently associated with the presence of coronary plaque. Larger studies are needed to confirm the strong association observed with the presence of multiple high-risk coronary plaque features.

Associations between lipoprotein(a), oxidized phospholipids, and extracoronary vascular disease

The roles of lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] and related oxidized phospholipids (OxPLs) in the development and progression of coronary disease is known, but their influence on extracoronary vascular disease is not well-established. We sought to evaluate associations between Lp(a), OxPL apolipoprotein B (OxPL-apoB), and apolipoprotein(a) (OxPL-apo(a)) with angiographic extracoronary vascular disease and incident major adverse limb events (MALEs). Four hundred forty-six participants who underwent coronary and/or peripheral angiography were followed up for a median of 3.7 years. Lp(a) and OxPLs were measured before angiography. Elevated Lp(a) was defined as ≥150 nmol/L. Elevated OxPL-apoB and OxPL-apo(a) were defined as greater than or equal to the 75th percentile (OxPL-apoB ≥8.2 nmol/L and OxPL-apo(a) ≥35.8 nmol/L, respectively). Elevated Lp(a) had a stronger association with the presence of extracoronary vascular disease compared to OxPLs and was minimally improved with the addition of OxPLs in multivariable models. Compared to participants with normal Lp(a) and OxPL concentrations, participants with elevated Lp(a) levels were twice as likely to experience a MALE (odds ratio: 2.14, 95% confidence interval: 1.03, 4.44), and the strength of the association as well as the C statistic of 0.82 was largely unchanged with the addition of OxPL-apoB and OxPL-apo(a). Elevated Lp(a) and OxPLs are risk factors for progression and complications of extracoronary vascular disease. However, the addition of OxPLs to Lp(a) does not provide additional information about risk of extracoronary vascular disease. Therefore, Lp(a) alone captures the risk profile of Lp(a), OxPL-apoB, and OxPL-apo(a) in the development and progression of atherosclerotic plaque in peripheral arteries.

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.

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.

Racial and ethnic disparities in cardiovascular disease - analysis across major US national databases

BACKGROUND

There are several studies that have analyzed disparities in cardiovascular disease (CVD) health using a variety of different administrative databases; however, a unified analysis of major databases does not exist. In this analysis of multiple publicly available datasets, we sought to examine racial and ethnic disparities in different aspects of CVD, CVD-related risk factors, CVD-related morbidity and mortality, and CVD trainee representation in the US.

METHODS

We used National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey, National Inpatient Sample, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Wide-Ranging OnLine Data for Epidemiologic Research, United Network for Organ Sharing, and American Commission for Graduate Medical Education data to evaluate CVD-related disparities among Non-Hispanic (NH) White, NH Black and Hispanic populations.

RESULTS

The prevalence of most CVDs and associated risk factors was higher in NH Black adults compared to NH White adults, except for dyslipidemia and ischemic heart disease (IHD). Statins were underutilized in IHD in NH Black and Hispanic patients. Hospitalizations for HF and stroke were higher among Black patients compared to White patients. All-cause, CVD, heart failure, acute myocardial infarction, IHD, diabetes mellitus, hypertension and cerebrovascular disease related mortality was highest in NH Black or African American individuals. The number of NH Black and Hispanic trainees in adult general CVD fellowship programs was disproportionately lower than NH White trainees.

CONCLUSION

Racial disparities are pervasive across the spectrum of CVDs with NH Black adults at a significant disadvantage compared to NH White adults for most CVDs.

Lipoprotein(a): Emerging insights and therapeutics

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

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

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

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.

Association between lipoprotein(a) plasma levels and diabetic nephropathy in Han Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

The goal of this study was to evaluate the relationship between serum lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] levels and diabetic nephropathy (DN) among Han Chinese individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). This retrospective analysis comprised a consecutive case series of 767 grown-up patients with T2DM (199 among them with DN) hospitalized in the Department of Endocrinology at the The First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University from February 20220 to February 2021. Clinical data and other laboratory measurements, such as glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), were extracted from medical records and compared among groups. Clinical characteristics according to Lp(a) quartiles were also studied. Univariate and multivariate regression analysis were used to examine the relationship between serum Lp(a) and DN. Patients with DN had a longer disease duration, higher HbA1c, higher level of Lp(a), and were more likely to have diabetic retinopathy (DR) than those without DN (P < 0.005 for each). With regard to the Lp(a) quartile group, patients with a higher Lp(a) concentration were more likely to have DN and have higher level of HbA1c during the study (P for trend < 0.005 for each). After adjusting for several confounding factors, the development of DN was significantly associated with the serum Lp(a) level (P = 0.026, comparing the 4th vs 1st quartile of Lp(a)) according to multivariate regression analysis. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves for DN development using serum Lp(a) showed that the area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC) was 0.590 (P < 0.001). Findings from this study demonstrated that the DN was independently associated with the serum Lp(a) level in patients with T2DM in this retrospective study.

A focused update to the 2019 NLA scientific statement on use of lipoprotein(a) in clinical practice

Since the 2019 National Lipid Association (NLA) Scientific Statement on Use of Lipoprotein(a) in Clinical Practice was issued, accumulating epidemiological data have clarified the relationship between lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] level and cardiovascular disease risk and risk reduction. Therefore, the NLA developed this focused update to guide clinicians in applying this emerging evidence in clinical practice. We now have sufficient evidence to support the recommendation to measure Lp(a) levels at least once in every adult for risk stratification. Individuals with Lp(a) levels <75 nmol/L (30 mg/dL) are considered low risk, individuals with Lp(a) levels ≥125 nmol/L (50 mg/dL) are considered high risk, and individuals with Lp(a) levels between 75 and 125 nmol/L (30-50 mg/dL) are at intermediate risk. Cascade screening of first-degree relatives of patients with elevated Lp(a) can identify additional individuals at risk who require intervention. Patients with elevated Lp(a) should receive early, more-intensive risk factor management, including lifestyle modification and lipid-lowering drug therapy in high-risk individuals, primarily to reduce low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved an indication for lipoprotein apheresis (which reduces both Lp(a) and LDL-C) in high-risk patients with familial hypercholesterolemia and documented coronary or peripheral artery disease whose Lp(a) level remains ≥60 mg/dL [∼150 nmol/L)] and LDL-C ≥ 100 mg/dL on maximally tolerated lipid-lowering therapy. Although Lp(a) is an established independent causal risk factor for cardiovascular disease, and despite the high prevalence of Lp(a) elevation (∼1 of 5 individuals), measurement rates are low, warranting improved screening strategies for cardiovascular disease prevention.

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.

Long-term lipoprotein apheresis reduces cardiovascular events in high-risk patients with isolated lipoprotein(a) elevation

BACKGROUND

Elevated lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is an established risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD). To date, the only approved treatment to lower Lp(a) is lipoprotein apheresis (LA). Previous studies have demonstrated that LA is effective in reducing cardiovascular (CV) risk in patients with elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and/or Lp(a). Here we report our long-term experience with LA and its effectiveness in reducing CVD events in patients with elevated Lp(a).

METHODS

This retrospective open-label, single-center study included 25 individuals with Lp(a) elevation >60 mg/dL and LDL-C < 2.59 mmol/L who had indication for LA. The primary endpoint of this study was the incidence of any CV event (determined by medical records) after initiation of LA.

RESULTS

Mean LA treatment duration was 7.1 years (min-max: 1-19 years). Median Lp(a) was reduced from 95.0 to 31.1 mg/dL after LA (-67.3 %, p < 0.0001). Mean LDL-C was reduced from 1.85 to 0.76 mmol/L after LA (-58.9 %, p < 0.0001). Prior LA, 81 CV events occurred in total (0.87 events/patient/year). During LA, 49 CV events occurred in total (0.24 events/patient/year; -0.63, p = 0.001). Yearly major adverse cardiac event (MACE) rate was reduced from 0.34 to 0.006 (-0.33, p = 0.0002). Similar results were obtained when considering only individuals with baseline LDL-C below 1.42 mmol/L.

CONCLUSION

In this observational study of a heterogeneous CV high-risk cohort with elevated Lp(a), LA reduced Lp(a) levels and was paralleled by a decrease in CV events and MACE. We recommend LA for patients with high Lp(a) who still have CV events despite optimal lipid-lowering medication and lifestyle changes.

Impact of Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Levels at Acute Coronary Syndrome Admission on Long-Term Clinical Outcomes

AIM

Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level reduction is highly effective in preventing the occurrence of a cardiovascular event. Contrariwise, an inverse association exists between LDL-C levels and prognosis in some patients with cardiovascular diseases-the so-called "cholesterol paradox." This study aimed to investigate whether the LDL-C level on admission affects the long-term prognosis in patients who develop acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and to examine factors associated with poor prognosis in patients with low LDL-C levels.

METHODS

We enrolled 410 statin-naïve patients with ACS, whom we divided into low- and high-LDL-C groups based on an admission LDL-C cut-off (obtained from the Youden index) of 122 mg/dL. Endothelial function was assessed using the reactive hyperemia index 1 week after statin initiation. The primary composite endpoint included all-cause death, as well as myocardial infarction and ischemic stroke occurrences.

RESULTS

During a median follow-up period of 6.1 years, 76 patients experienced the primary endpoint. Multivariate Cox regression analysis revealed that patients in the low LDL-C group had a 2.3-fold higher risk of experiencing the primary endpoint than those in the high LDL-C group (hazard ratio, 2.34; 95% confidence interval, 1.29-4.27; p=0.005). In the low LDL-C group, slow gait speed (frailty), elevated chronic-phase high-sensitivity C-reactive protein levels (chronic inflammation), and endothelial dysfunction were significantly associated with the primary endpoint.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with low LDL-C levels at admission due to ACS had a significantly worse long-term prognosis than those with high LDL-C levels; frailty, chronic inflammation, and endothelial dysfunction were poor prognostic factors.

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.

Lp(a) and risk of cardiovascular disease - A review of existing evidence and emerging concepts

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) remains the leading cause of death among adults in the United States. There has been significant advancement in the diagnosis and treatment of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and its underlying risk factors. In certain populations, there remains a significant residual risk despite adequate lowering of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and control of traditional risk factors. This has led to an interest in research to identify additional risk factors that contribute to atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Elevated lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] has been identified as an independent risk factor contributing to an increased risk for CVD. There are also ethnic and racial disparities in Lp(a) inheritance that need to be understood. This paper reviews the current literature on lipoprotein a, proposed mechanisms of actions for cardiovascular disease, recommendations for testing, and the current and emerging therapies for lowering Lp(a).

Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease in Women: Providing Protection With Lipid-altering Agents

PURPOSE

Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) is the leading cause of death in women, yet it remains underdiagnosed, undertreated, and understudied in women compared with men. Although estrogen has provided observational evidence of cardioprotection, randomized controlled trials using hormone replacement therapy have generally produced unfavorable results.

METHODS

For this narrative review, a literature search was performed using the key words cardiovascular disease, women, and dyslipidemia in PubMed and Google Scholar with no date limitations. References within each article were also reviewed for additional relevant articles.

FINDINGS

Sex-specific risk factors and underrecognized conditions more predominant in women elevate ASCVD risk, creating further clinical challenges, such as the need for accurate risk stratification, compared with in men. Dyslipidemia frequently manifests or worsens during the menopausal transition. Therefore, identification during midlife and implementing lipid-lowering strategies to reduce ASCVD risk is imperative. Women have historically been poorly represented in cardiovascular (CV) outcome trials. However, more recent studies and meta-analyses have indicated that lipid-lowering therapies are equally effective in women and produce similar reductions in CV events and total mortality. Major cholesterol guidelines address many of the challenges that clinicians face when assessing ASCVD risk in women. Key points specific to women include obtaining a detailed history of pregnancy-related conditions, identification of common autoimmune disorders associated with systemic inflammation, and use of 10-year ASCVD risk calculators and imaging modalities (coronary artery calcium) to optimize ASCVD assessment. In terms of treatment, similar to men, women with existing ASCVD or high-risk primary prevention patients should be treated aggressively to achieve ≥50% LDL-C reductions and/or LDL-C goals as low as <55 mg/dL. Appropriate lipid-lowering therapies include high-intensity statins with or without ezetimibe and proprotein convertase subtilisin kexin/type 9 inhibitors. Women with lower ASCVD risk may be considered for low- to moderate-intensity statin therapy (approximately 30%-50% LDL-C reduction). All women, regardless of ASCVD risk category, should implement therapeutic lifestyle changes, which improve many common age-related cardiometabolic conditions.

IMPLICATIONS

Although ASCVD and current risk factor trends in women are concerning, numerous evidence-based approaches are available to protect women with ASCVD risk from life-changing CV events.

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

AIMS

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

DATA SYNTHESIS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42022350297.

Is Lipoprotein(a) Clinically Actionable with Today's Evidence? The Answer is Yes

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Lipoprotein(a) is an independent risk factor for cardiovascular disease. We review the ongoing shifts in consensus guidelines for the testing and management of Lp(a) and provide insight into whether current evidence suggests that awareness and testing of Lp(a) is clinically actionable.

RECENT FINDINGS

GWAS and Mendelian randomization studies have established causal links between elevated Lp(a) and forms of CVD, including CAD and calcific aortic valve disease. Testing of Lp(a) identifies patients with similar risk to that of heterozygous FH, enhances risk stratification in patients with borderline/intermediate risk as determined through traditional factors, and facilitates the assessment of inherited CVD risk through cascade screening in patients with known family history of elevated Lp(a). Reductions in Lp(a) through non-targeted therapies including PCSK9 inhibition and lipoprotein apheresis have demonstrated reductions in ASCVD risk that are likely attributable to lowering Lp(a). Targeted therapies to potently lower Lp(a) are in clinical development. Lp(a) is actionable, and can be used to identify high risk patients for primary prevention and their family members through cascade screening, and to guide intensification of therapy in primary and secondary prevention of ASCVD.

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

AIMS

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

DATA SYNTHESIS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

The Impact of Social Determinants of Health and Lifestyle on the Association of Lipoprotein(a) with Myocardial Infarction and Stroke

Background

In European cohorts, a higher Mediterranean diet or Life's Simple 7 (LS7) score abolished or attenuated the risk associated with increasing Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] on cardiovascular outcomes. This is unstudied in US cohorts. The impact of social determinants of health (SDOH) on the association of Lp(a) with cardiovascular outcomes remains unstudied. We sought to test if a SDOH score and LS7 score impacts the association of Lp(a) with myocardial infarction (MI) or stroke.

Methods

Observational Cohort of US Adults from the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) and Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA) cohorts. We performed sequential multivariable Cox proportional hazard analysis, first adjusting for age, gender, non-HDL-C, race and ethnicity, then added SDOH and LS7 scores sequentially. The primary outcomes were time until first fatal or nonfatal MI or stroke.

Results

ARIC (n=15,072; median Lp(a)=17.3 mg/dL) had 16.2 years average follow up. MESA (n=6,822; median Lp(a)=18.3 mg/dL had 12.3 years average follow-up. In multivariable analyses adjusted for age, gender, race and ethnicity, and non-HDL-C, Lp(a) was associated (HR, p-value) with MI in ARIC (1.10, <0.001) and MESA (1.09, <0.001), and stroke in ARIC (1.08, <0.001) but not MESA (0.97, 0.50). With SDOH and LS7 added to the model associations remained similar (association of Lp(a) with MI in ARIC 1.09, <0.001 and in MESA 1.10, 0.001, with stroke in ARIC 1.06, <0.003 and in MESA 0.96, 0.39). In models with all covariates, each additional SDOH correlated positively with MI (ARIC 1.13, <0.001; MESA 1.11, <0.001) and stroke (ARIC 1.17, <0.001; HR 1.07, p=0.11) and each additional LS7 score point correlated negatively with MI (ARIC 0.81, <0.001; MESA 0.84, <0.001) and stroke (ARIC 0.82, <0.001; MESA 0.84, <0.001).

Conclusions and Relevance

SDOH and lifestyle factors were predictors for MI and stroke that did not impact the association between Lp(a) and cardiovascular events. Our findings support that Lp(a) is an independent risk factor for MI and possibly stroke.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Plasma tissue-type plasminogen activator is associated with lipoprotein(a) and clinical outcomes in hospitalized patients with COVID-19

Background

Patients with COVID-19 have a higher risk of thrombosis and thromboembolism, but the underlying mechanism(s) remain to be fully elucidated. In patients with COVID-19, high lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is positively associated with the risk of ischemic heart disease. Lp(a), composed of an apoB-containing particle and apolipoprotein(a) (apo(a)), inhibits the key fibrinolytic enzyme, tissue-type plasminogen activator (tPA). However, whether the higher Lp(a) associates with lower tPA activity, the longitudinal changes of these parameters in hospitalized patients with COVID-19, and their correlation with clinical outcomes are unknown.

Objectives

To assess if Lp(a) associates with lower tPA activity in COVID-19 patients, and how in COVID-19 populations Lp(a) and tPA change post infection.

Methods

Endogenous tPA enzymatic activity, tPA or Lp(a) concentration were measured in plasma from hospitalized patients with and without COVID-19. The association between plasma tPA and adverse clinical outcomes was assessed.

Results

In hospitalized patients with COVID-19, we found lower tPA enzymatic activity and higher plasma Lp(a) than that in non-COVID-19 controls. During hospitalization, Lp(a) increased and tPA activity decreased, which associates with mortality. Among those who survived, Lp(a) decreased and tPA enzymatic activity increased during recovery. In patients with COVID-19, tPA activity is inversely correlated with tPA concentrations, thus, in another larger COVID-19 cohort, we utilized plasma tPA concentration as a surrogate to inversely reflect tPA activity. The tPA concentration was positively associated with death, disease severity, plasma inflammatory, and prothrombotic markers, and with length of hospitalization among those who were discharged.

Conclusion

High Lp(a) concentration provides a possible explanation for low endogenous tPA enzymatic activity, and poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19.

Lipoprotein(a) and the Risk for Recurrent Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Events Among Adults With CKD: The Chronic Renal Insufficiency Cohort (CRIC) Study

Rationale & Objective

Many adults with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) have high lipoprotein(a) levels. It is unclear whether high lipoprotein(a) levels confer an increased risk for recurrent ASCVD events in this population. We estimated the risk for recurrent ASCVD events associated with lipoprotein(a) in adults with CKD and prevalent ASCVD.

Study Design

Observational cohort study.

Setting & Participants

We included 1,439 adults with CKD and prevalent ASCVD not on dialysis enrolled in the Chronic Renal Insufficiency Cohort study between 2003 and 2008.

Exposure

Baseline lipoprotein(a) mass concentration, measured using a latex-enhanced immunoturbidimetric assay.

Outcomes

Recurrent ASCVD events (primary outcome), kidney failure, and death (exploratory outcomes) through 2019.

Analytical Approach

We used Cox proportional-hazards regression models to estimate adjusted HR (aHRs) and 95% CIs.

Results

Among participants included in the current analysis (mean age 61.6 years, median lipoprotein(a) 29.4 mg/dL [25th-75th percentiles 9.9-70.9 mg/dL]), 641 had a recurrent ASCVD event, 510 developed kidney failure, and 845 died over a median follow-up of 6.6 years. The aHR for ASCVD events associated with 1 standard deviation (SD) higher log-transformed lipoprotein(a) was 1.04 (95% CI, 0.95-1.15). In subgroup analyses, 1 SD higher log-lipoprotein(a) was associated with an increased risk for ASCVD events in participants without diabetes (aHR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.02-1.48), but there was no evidence of an association among those with diabetes (aHR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.88-1.10, P comparing aHRs = 0.031). The aHR associated with 1 SD higher log-lipoprotein(a) in the overall study population was 1.16 (95% CI, 1.04-1.28) for kidney failure and 1.02 (95% CI, 0.94-1.11) for death.

Limitations

Lipoprotein(a) was not available in molar concentration.

Conclusions

Lipoprotein(a) was not associated with the risk for recurrent ASCVD events in adults with CKD, although it was associated with a risk for kidney failure.

Lipoprotein(a), family history of cardiovascular disease, and incidence of heart failure

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is a largely genetically determined biomarker for cardiovascular disease (CVD), while its potential interplay with family history (FHx) of CVD, a measure of both genetic and environmental exposures, remains unclear. We examined the associations of Lp(a) in terms of circulating concentration or polygenetic risk score (PRS), and FHx of CVD with risk of incident heart failure (HF). Included were 299,158 adults from the UK Biobank without known HF and CVD at baseline. Hazards ratios (HRs) and 95% Cls were estimated by Cox regression models adjusted for traditional risk factors defined by the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities study HF risk score. During the 11.8-year follow-up, 5,502 incidents of HF occurred. Higher levels of circulating Lp(a), Lp(a) PRS, and positive FHx of CVD were associated with higher risks of HF. Compared with individuals who had lower circulating Lp(a) and no FHx, HRs (95% CIs) of HF were 1.36 (1.25, 1.49), 1.31 (1.19, 1.43), and 1.42 (1.22, 1.67) for those with higher Lp(a) and a positive history of CVD for all family members, parents, and siblings, respectively; similar results were observed by using Lp(a) PRS. The risk estimates for HF associated with elevated Lp(a) and positive FHx were attenuated after excluding those with incident myocardial infarction (MI) during follow-up. Lp(a) and FHx of CVD were independent risk factors for incident HF, and the highest risk of HF was observed among individuals with both risk factors. The association may be partly mediated by myocardial infarction.

Incident CHD and ischemic stroke associated with lipoprotein(a) by levels of Factor VIII and inflammation

BACKGROUND

Inflammation and coagulation may contribute to the increased risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) associated with high lipoprotein(a). The association of lipoprotein(a) with ASCVD is stronger in individuals with high versus low high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), a marker of inflammation.

OBJECTIVES

Determine the association of lipoprotein(a) with incident ASCVD by levels of coagulation Factor VIII controlling for hs-CRP.

METHODS

We analyzed data from 6,495 men and women 45 to 84 years of age in the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA) without prevalent ASCVD at baseline (2000-2002). Lipoprotein(a) mass concentration, Factor VIII coagulant activity, and hs-CRP were measured at baseline and categorized as high or low (≥75th or <75th percentile of the distribution). Participants were followed for incident coronary heart disease (CHD) and ischemic stroke through 2015.

RESULTS

Over a median follow-up of 13.9 years, there were 390 CHD and 247 ischemic stroke events. The hazard ratio (95%CI) for CHD associated with high lipoprotein(a) (≥40.1 versus <40.1 mg/dL) including adjustment for hs-CRP among participants with low and high Factor VIII was 1.07 (0.80-1.44) and 2.00 (1.33-3.01), respectively (p-value for interaction 0.016). The hazard ratio (95%CI) for CHD associated with high lipoprotein(a) including adjustment for Factor VIII was 1.16 (0.87-1.54) and 2.00 (1.29-3.09) among participants with low and high hs-CRP, respectively (p-value for interaction 0.042). Lp(a) was not associated with ischemic stroke regardless of Factor VIII or hs-CRP levels.

CONCLUSION

High lipoprotein(a) is a risk factor for CHD in adults with high levels of hemostatic or inflammatory markers.

Lipoprotein(a) in clinical practice: A guide for the clinician

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) remains the leading cause of death worldwide. Serum lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) has been shown to be an independent and causative risk factor for atherosclerotic CVD and calcific aortic valvular disease. Lp(a) continues to be studied, with emerging insights into the epidemiology of CVD with respect to Lp(a), pathogenic mechanisms of Lp(a) and strategies to mitigate disease. There have been novel insights into genetic polymorphisms of the LPA gene, interactions between concomitant risk factors and Lp(a) based on real-world data, and metabolic pathway targets for Lp(a) reduction. This review highlights these recent advances in our understanding of Lp(a) and discusses management strategies as recommended by cardiovascular professional societies, emerging therapies for lowering Lp(a), and future directions in targeting Lp(a) to reduce CVD.

Evidence and Uncertainties on Lipoprotein(a) as a Marker of Cardiovascular Health Risk in Children and Adolescents

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is made up of apoprotein(a) (apo(a)) and an LDL-like particle. The LPA gene encodes apo(a) and thus determines the characteristics and amount of apo(a) and Lp(a). The proportion of Lp(a) in each individual is genetically determined and is only minimally modifiable by the environment or diet. Lp(a) has important pro-atherosclerotic and pro-inflammatory effects. It has been hypothesized that Lp(a) also has pro-coagulant and antifibrinolytic actions. For these reasons, high Lp(a) values are an important independent risk factor for cardiovascular disease and calcific aortic valve stenosis. Numerous studies have been performed in adults about the pathophysiology and epidemiology of Lp(a) and research is under way for the development of drugs capable of reducing Lp(a) plasma values. Much less information is available regarding Lp(a) in children and adolescents. The present article reviews the evidence on this topic. The review addresses the issues of Lp(a) changes during growth, the correlation between Lp(a) values in children and those in their parents, and between Lp(a) levels in children, and the presence of cardiovascular disease in the family. Gaining information on these points is particularly important for deciding whether Lp(a) assay may be useful for defining the cardiovascular risk in children, in order to plan a prevention program early.

Frequent questions and responses on the 2022 lipoprotein(a) consensus statement of the European Atherosclerosis Society

In 2022, the European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS) published a new consensus statement on lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)], summarizing current knowledge about its causal association with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and aortic stenosis. One of the novelties of this statement is a new risk calculator showing how Lp(a) influences lifetime risk for ASCVD and that global risk may be underestimated substantially in individuals with high or very high Lp(a) concentration. The statement also provides practical advice on how knowledge about Lp(a) concentration can be used to modulate risk factor management, given that specific and highly effective mRNA-targeted Lp(a)-lowering therapies are still in clinical development. This advice counters the attitude: "Why should I measure Lp(a) if I can't lower it?". Subsequent to publication, questions have arisen relating to how the recommendations of this statement impact everyday clinical practice and ASCVD management. This review addresses 30 of the most frequently asked questions about Lp(a) epidemiology, its contribution to cardiovascular risk, Lp(a) measurement, risk factor management and existing therapeutic options.

Cardiovascular Disease Risk Factors in Women: The Impact of Race and Ethnicity: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death in women, yet differences exist among certain racial and ethnic groups. Aside from traditional risk factors, behavioral and environmental factors and social determinants of health affect cardiovascular health and risk in women. Language barriers, discrimination, acculturation, and health care access disproportionately affect women of underrepresented races and ethnicities. These factors result in a higher prevalence of cardiovascular disease and significant challenges in the diagnosis and treatment of cardiovascular conditions. Culturally sensitive, peer-led community and health care professional education is a necessary step in the prevention of cardiovascular disease. Equitable access to evidence-based cardiovascular preventive health care should be available for all women regardless of race and ethnicity; however, these guidelines are not equally incorporated into clinical practice. This scientific statement reviews the current evidence on racial and ethnic differences in cardiovascular risk factors and current cardiovascular preventive therapies for women in the United States.

Sedentariness and overweight in relation to mortality in sub-Saharan Africa. A mediation analysis based on the World Health Organization-Global Health Observatory data repository

Background

Globally, noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) have been continuously reported to be the number one leading cause of reduced life expectancy and poor life quality and have thus become a major public health concern.

Objective

This study aimed to investigate the complex mediation analysis between physical inactivity and overweight in relation to mortality.

Methods

The study is based on public data collected by the Global Health Observatory of the World Health Organization.

Results

We showed that the median early mortality attributable to NCDs during the period 2016-2019 in both men and women was 23.2% (5th to 95th range=17.2, 35.6) while that in men alone was 25.1% (16.5, 45.7) and that of women alone was 22.0% (17.0, 27.9). When considering regional early NCDs mortality for both men and women, a systematically high median was observed in Southern Africa [28.7% (22.2, 43.8)] and a low median in Eastern Africa [21.1% (17.15, 27.3)]. The analysis of the overall relation between physical inactivity, overweight and early mortality due to NCDs revealed a statistical significance of the direct association between physical inactivity and early mortality due to NCDs.

Conclusion

Our findings revealed three main epidemiological and public health concerns. First, early mortality attributable to NCDs in a range of about 20 to 30% across the sub-Saharan African regions for both sexes was observed. Second, there was a direct effect between physical inactivity and early NCDs mortality as well as the indirect effect mediated by overweight. Finally, a percentage point decrease in physical inactivity prevalence and overweight could effectively generate a reduction in mortality due to NCDs. Future studies are needed to confirm the scientific evidence observed in this study. Such studies should be based on observation of individual subjects, adopt a longitudinal design, and collect information that evaluates the complex relationship between physical inactivity and early NCDs mortality, along with the role of overweight as a possible mediator.

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

INTRODUCTION

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Identification of allele-specific KIV-2 repeats and impact on Lp(a) measurements for cardiovascular disease risk

The abundance of Lp(a) protein holds significant implications for the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD), which is directly impacted by the copy number (CN) of KIV-2, a 5.5 kbp sub-region. KIV-2 is highly polymorphic in the population and accurate analysis is challenging. In this study, we present the DRAGEN KIV-2 CN caller, which utilizes short reads. Data across 166 WGS show that the caller has high accuracy, compared to optical mapping and can further phase ~50% of the samples. We compared KIV-2 CN numbers to 24 previously postulated KIV-2 relevant SNVs, revealing that many are ineffective predictors of KIV-2 copy number. Population studies, including USA-based cohorts, showed distinct KIV-2 CN, distributions for European-, African-, and Hispanic-American populations and further underscored the limitations of SNV predictors. We demonstrate that the CN estimates correlate significantly with the available Lp(a) protein levels and that phasing is highly important.

Association of vitamins, minerals, and lead with lipoprotein(a) in a cross-sectional cohort of US adults

Lipoprotein(a)(Lp[a]) is a low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C)-like particle with potent pro-atherothrombotic properties. The association of Lp(a) with several circulating factors, including vitamins, remains unresolved. We performed an observational analysis using the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey III cohort, a cohort used to monitor the nutrition status of US-citizens. We used multivariable linear regression to test associations of Lp(a) and LDL-C with levels of serum vitamins and minerals and whole-blood lead. Analyses controlled for factors known to associate with Lp(a) (age, sex, race/ethnicity, statin use, hemoglobin A1c, body mass index, hypertension, diabetes, glomerular filtration rate, alcohol intake, and saturated fat intake). LDL-C was corrected for Lp(a) mass. Multiple sensitivity tests were performed, including considering factors as categorical variables (deficient, normal, elevated). Among 7,662 subjects, Lp(a) correlated (β-coefficient) positively (change per 1 conventional unit increase) with carotenoids (lycopene (0.17(0.06,0.28), p=0.005), lutein (0.19(0.07,0.30), p=0.002), β-cryptoxanthin (0.21(0.05,0.37), p=0.01), β-carotene (0.05(0.02,0.09), p=0.003), and α-carotene (0.15(0.01,0.30), p=0.04)) and lead (0.54(0.03,1.05), p=0.04) levels when tested as continuous variables. LDL-C had similar associations. Lp(a) did not associate with vitamins A, B12, C, or E retinyl esters, folate, RBC-folate, selenium, ferritin, transferrin saturation, or calcium. With factors as categorical variables, Lp(a) but not LDL-C negatively associated with elevated vitamin B12 (-5.41(-9.50, -1.53), p=0.01) and folate (-2.86(-5.09, -0.63), p=0.01). In conclusion, Lp(a) associated similarly to LDL-C when vitamins, minerals, and lead were tested as continuous variables, while only Lp(a) correlated with vitamin B12 and folate when tested as categorical variables. These observations are hypotheses generating and require further studies to determine causality.

A Systematic Review on the Risk Modulators of Myocardial Infarction in the "Young"-Implications of Lipoprotein (a)

The presence of a myocardial infarction at a younger age is of special interest, considering the psychological and socioeconomic impact, as well as long-term morbidity and mortality. However, this group has a unique risk profile, with less traditional cardiovascular risk factors that are not well studied. This systematic review aims to evaluate traditional risk factors of myocardial infarction in the "young", highlighting the clinical implications of lipoprotein (a). We performed a comprehensive search using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) standards; we systematically searched the PubMed, EMBASE, and Science Direct Scopus databases, using the terms: "myocardial infarction", "young", "lipoprotein (a)", "low-density lipoprotein", "risk factors". The search identified 334 articles which were screened, and, at the end, 9 original research articles regarding the implications of lipoprotein (a) in myocardial infarction in the "young" were included in the qualitative synthesis. Elevated lipoprotein (a) levels were independently associated with an increased risk of coronary artery disease, especially in young patients, where this risk increased by threefold. Thus, it is recommended to measure the lipoprotein (a) levels in individuals with suspected familial hypercholesterolaemia or with premature atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and no other identifiable risk factors, in order to identify patients who might benefit from a more intensive therapeutic approach and follow-up.

The effects of ART on the dynamics of lipid profiles in Chinese Han HIV-infected patients: comparison between NRTI/NNRTI and NRTI/INSTI

Introduction

This article aimed to compare the prevalence of dyslipidemia and determine risk factors associated with lipid levels in a cohort of HIV-infected patients receiving two different antiretroviral therapy (ART) regimens, nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor/non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI/NNRTI) and nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor/integrase strand transfer inhibitor (NRTI/INSTI).

Methods

This longitudinal study analyzed 633 HIV-infected patients with complete blood lipid profile records for at least 1 year at the ART clinic of Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, China, from June 2018 to March 2021. Demographic and clinical data, including age, gender, body weight, height, current/former/non-smoker, current drinker, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, were extracted from electronic medical records. Laboratory tests included hematology, total cholesterol (TC), triglyceride (TG), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), Lipoprotein(a) and CD4 cell count. The observation duration of this study was a maximum of 33 months. Data comparisons were performed using the Chi-square test, Student's t-test and Mann-Whitney U test. Generalized linear mixed-effects model (GLMM) and value of p < 0.05 were used to determine factors associated with serum lipid profiles.

Results

In this study, the effect of the NNRTIs group on the lipid profile over time was mainly an increase in TC and HDL-C, while a decrease in TC/HDL-C and LDL/HDL-C. However, the INSTIs group had higher mean TC and lower HDL-C compared to the NNRTIs group, with significantly increased levels of TC, TG, HDL-C, and LDL-C. In the analysis of dyslipidemia rates, there were significant differences in the prevalence of abnormal TG and TC/HDL-C in HIV-infected patients receiving two different ART regimen groups during different follow-up periods. Dyslipidemia, defined as hypercholesterolemia, hypertriglyceridemia, and low HDL-C, was more prevalent in the INSTIs group, with a higher risk of developing hypertriglyceridemia and a higher TC/HDL-C ratio compared to the NNRTIs group. GLMM analysis suggested significantly higher TG values in the INSTIs group (estimated 0.36[0.10, 0.63], SE 0.14, p = 0.008) compared to the NNRTIs group, even after adjusting for other covariates. In addition, GLMM analysis also showed that age, gender, BMI, CD4 count, and ART duration were associated with dyslipidemia.

Conclusion

In conclusion, treatment with both commonly-used ART regimens can increase the mean values of lipid profiles and the risk of dyslipidemia. The findings indicated that TG values were significantly higher in the INSTIs group than in HIV-infected patients receiving the NNRTIs regimens. Longitudinal TG values are independently associated with the clinical types of ART regimens.Clinical Trial Number: ChiCTR2200059861.

Lipoprotein (a) and long-term outcome in patients with peripheral artery disease undergoing revascularization

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Despite low LDL-C goals, the residual risk for further cardiovascular (CV) events in patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD) remains high. Lipoprotein (a) (Lp(a)) is a known risk factor for PAD incidence, but little is known regarding the outcome in patients with symptomatic PAD. Thus, this study investigates Lp(a) and CV mortality in PAD after endovascular repair.

METHODS

A total of 1222 patients with PAD in two cohorts according to Lp(a) assay in nmol/L (n = 964, Lip-LEAD-A) or mg/dl (n = 258, Lip-LEAD-B) were followed up for 4.3 (IQR 3.0-5.6) or 7.6 (IQR 3.2-8.1) years. Lp(a) was measured before endovascular repair for either intermittent claudication (IC) or critical limb ischemia (CLI). Outcome information was obtained from the federal death registry.

RESULTS

In Lip-LEAD-A, 141 CV-deaths occurred (annual calculated CV-death rate 3.4%), whereas 64 CV-deaths were registered in Lip-LEAD-B (annual calculated CV-death rate 3.3%). After adjustment for traditional CV risk factors Lp(a) was neither associated with outcome in Lip-LEAD-A (highest tertile HR 1.47, 95%CI [0.96-2.24]) nor in Lip-LEAD-B (highest tertile HR 1.34 [0.70-2.58]). Subanalyses for IC (HR 1.37 [0.74-2.55]; HR 1.10 [0.44-2.80], CLI (HR 1.55 [0.86-2.80], HR 3.01 [0.99-9.10]), or concomitant coronary artery disease (CAD; HR 1.34 [0.71-2.54]; HR 1.21 [0.46-3.17]) failed to show a significant association between Lp(a) and CV-mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

In this large-scale cohort of symptomatic PAD no association of elevated Lp(a) with CV mortality was found over a median observation period of 5 years. Thus, an even longer study including asymptomatic patients is warranted.

Association of Lipoprotein(a) Levels With Incidence of Major Adverse Limb Events

IMPORTANCE

High lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]) levels are involved in the development of cardiovascular events, particularly in myocardial infarction, stroke, and peripheral artery disease. Studies assessing the Lp(a) levels associated with adverse lower-limb events are lacking.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the association between Lp(a) levels and incidence of major adverse limb events in unselected hospitalized patients.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This large retrospective monocentric cohort study was conducted from January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2020. Data were derived from the clinical information system of the Hôpital Européen Georges-Pompidou, a Paris-based university hospital. Patients who underwent at least 1 Lp(a) measurement at the center during the study period were included. Patients who had no follow-up data or who had the first Lp(a) measurement after the study outcome had occurred were excluded. Data analyses were performed from May 2021 to January 2022.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was the first inpatient major adverse limb event, defined as a major amputation, peripheral endovascular revascularization, or peripheral surgical revascularization, during follow-up. Secondary outcomes included individual components of the primary outcome. Lipoprotein(a) levels were categorized as follows: normal (<50 mg/dL), high (50 to <134 mg/dL), and very high (≥134 mg/dL); to convert Lp(a) values to milligrams per liter, multiply by 0.1.

RESULTS

A total of 16 513 patients (median [IQR] age, 58.2 [49.0-66.7] years; 9774 men [59.2%]) were included in the cohort. The median (IQR) Lp(a) level was 24 (10.0-60.0) mg/dL. The 1-year incidence of major adverse limb event was 2.44% in the overall population and 4.54% among patients with very high Lp(a) levels. High (adjusted accelerated failure time [AFT] exponential estimate: 0.43; 95% CI, 0.24-0.78; Benjamini-Hochberg-corrected P = .01) and very high (adjusted AFT exponential estimate: 0.17; 95% CI, 0.07-0.40; Benjamini-Hochberg-corrected P < .001) Lp(a) levels were independently associated with an increased risk of major adverse limb event.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Results of this study showed that higher Lp(a) levels were independently associated with an increased risk of a major adverse limb event in hospitalized patients. The Lp(a) measurement needs to be taken into account to improve lower-limb vascular risk assessment.

South Asian ethnicity: What can we do to make this risk enhancer a risk equivalent?

South Asians account for around 25% of the global population and are the fastest-growing ethnicity in the US. This population has an increasing burden of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) which is also seen in the diaspora. Current risk prediction equations underestimate this risk and consider the South Asian ethnicity as a risk-enhancer among those with borderline-intermediate risk. In this review, we discuss why the South Asian population is at a higher risk of ASCVD and strategies to mitigate this increased risk.