Nicotinic acid inhibits hepatic APOA gene expression: studies in humans and in transgenic mice

The Role of Lipoprotein(a) in Peripheral Artery Disease

Lipoprotein(a) is a low-density-lipoprotein-like particle that consists of apolipoprotein(a) bound to apolipoprotein(b). It has emerged as an established causal risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, stroke, and aortic valve stenosis through multifactorial pathogenic mechanisms that include inflammation, atherogenesis, and thrombosis. Despite an estimated 20% of the global population having elevated lipoprotein(a) levels, testing remains underutilized due to poor awareness and a historical lack of effective and safe therapies. Although lipoprotein(a) has a strong association with coronary artery disease and cerebrovascular disease, its relationship with peripheral artery disease is less well established. In this article, we review the epidemiology, biology, and pathogenesis of lipoprotein(a) as it relates to peripheral artery disease. We also discuss emerging treatment options to help mitigate major adverse cardiac and limb events in this population.

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.

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

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

Lipoprotein(a): Cardiovascular Disease, Aortic Stenosis and New Therapeutic Option

Atherosclerosis is a chronic and progressive inflammatory process beginning early in life with late clinical manifestation. This slow pathological trend underlines the importance to early identify high-risk patients and to treat intensively risk factors to prevent the onset and/or the progression of atherosclerotic lesions. In addition to the common Cardiovascular (CV) risk factors, new markers able to increase the risk of CV disease have been identified. Among them, high levels of Lipoprotein(a)-Lp(a)-lead to very high risk of future CV diseases; this relationship has been well demonstrated in epidemiological, mendelian randomization and genome-wide association studies as well as in meta-analyses. Recently, new aspects have been identified, such as its association with aortic stenosis. Although till recent years it has been considered an unmodifiable risk factor, specific drugs have been developed with a strong efficacy in reducing the circulating levels of Lp(a) and their capacity to reduce subsequent CV events is under testing in ongoing trials. In this paper we will review all these aspects: from the synthesis, clearance and measurement of Lp(a), through the findings that examine its association with CV diseases and aortic stenosis to the new therapeutic options that will be available in the next years.

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

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

Pharmacotherapy for children with elevated levels of lipoprotein(a): future directions

INTRODUCTION

Elevated lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is an independent risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). With the advent of the antisense oligonucleotides (ASOs) and small interfering RNAs (siRNAs) targeted at LPA, the gene encoding apolipoprotein(a), that are highly effective for lowering Lp(a) levels, this risk factor might be managed in the near future. Given that Lp(a) levels are mostly genetically determined and once elevated, present from early age, we have evaluated future directions for the treatment of children with high Lp(a) levels.

AREAS COVERED

In the current review, we discuss different pharmacological treatments in clinical development and provide an in-depth overview of the effects of ASOs and siRNAs targeted at LPA.

EXPERT OPINION

Since high Lp(a) is an important risk factor for ASCVD and given the promising effects of both ASOs and siRNAs targeted at apo(a), there is an urgent need for well-designed prospective studies to assess the impact of elevated Lp(a) in childhood. If the Lp(a)-hypothesis is confirmed in adults, and also in children, the rationale might arise for treating children with high Lp(a) levels. However, we feel that this should be limited to children with the highest cardiovascular risk including familial hypercholesterolemia and potentially pediatric stroke.

Changes of lipoprotein(a) levels with endogenous steroid hormones

BACKGROUND

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is an LDL-like molecule that is likely causal for cardiovascular events and Lp(a) variability has been shown to be mostly of genetic origin. Exogenous hormones (hormone replacement therapy) seem to influence Lp(a) levels, but the impact of endogenous hormone levels on Lp(a) is still unknown. The aim of the study was to assess the effect of endogenous steroid hormone metabolites on Lp(a).

METHODS

Lipoprotein(a) levels were measured in 1,021 participants from the Swiss Kidney Project on Genes in Hypertension, a family-based, multicentre, population-based prospective cohort study. Endogenous levels of 28 steroid hormone precursors were measured in 24-h urine collections from 883 individuals. Of the participants with Lp(a) data, 1,011 participants had also genotypes available.

RESULTS

The participants had an average age of 51 years and 53% were female. Median Lp(a) levels were 62 mg/L, and the 90^th percentile was 616 mg/L. The prevalence of a Lp(a) elevation ≥700 mg/L was 3.2%. Forty-three per cent of Lp(a) variability was explained respectively by: age (2%, p < .001), LDL-C (1%, p = .001), and two SNPs (39%, p value<2⋅10^-16 ). Of the 28 endogenous steroid hormones assessed, androstenetriol, androsterone, 16α-OH-DHEA and estriol were nominatively associated with serum Lp(a) levels in univariable analyses and explained 0.4%-1% of Lp(a) variability, but none of them reached significance in multivariable models.

CONCLUSIONS

In this contemporary population-based study, the prevalence of a Lp(a) elevation ≥700 mg/L was 3.2%. The effect of endogenous steroid hormone levels of Lp(a) variability was small at best, suggesting a negligible impact on the wide range of Lp(a) variability.

Unravelling lipoprotein metabolism with stable isotopes: tracing the flow

Dysregulated lipoprotein metabolism is a major cause of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Use of stable isotope tracers and compartmental modelling have provided deeper understanding of the mechanisms underlying lipid disorders in patients at high risk of ASCVD, including familial hypercholesterolemia (FH), elevated lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] and metabolic syndrome (MetS). In patients with FH, deficiency in low-density lipoprotein (LDL) receptor activity not only impairs the catabolism of LDL, but also induces hepatic overproduction and decreases catabolism of triglyceride-rich lipoproteins (TRLs). Patients with elevated Lp(a) are characterized by increased hepatic secretion of Lp(a) particles. Atherogenic dyslipidemia in MetS patients relates to a combination of overproduction of very-low density lipoprotein-apolipoprotein (apo) B-100, decreased catabolism of apoB-100-containing particles, and increased catabolism of high-density lipoprotein-apoA-I particles, as well as to impaired clearance of TRLs in the postprandial state. Kinetic studies show that weight loss, fish oils, statins and fibrates have complementary modes of action that correct atherogenic dyslipidemia. Defining the kinetic mechanisms of action of proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 and angiopoietin-like 3 inhibitors on lipid and lipoprotein mechanism in dyslipidemic subjects will further our understanding of these therapies in decreasing the development of ASCVD. "Everything changes but change itself. Everything flows and nothing remains the same... You cannot step twice into the same river, for other waters and yet others go flowing ever on." Heraclitus (c.535- c. 475 BCE).

Relation of Serum Lipoprotein(a) Levels to Lipoprotein and Apolipoprotein Profiles and Atherosclerotic Diseases in Japanese Patients with Heterozygous Familial Hypercholesterolemia: Familial Hypercholesterolemia Expert Forum (FAME) Study

Aims: Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a plasma lipoprotein consisting of a low-density lipoprotein (LDL)–like particle with apolipoprotein (Apo)(a), attached via a disulfide bond to Apo B100. Previous studies have shown that high Lp(a) levels are associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease in patients with familial hypercholesterolemia (FH). To date, limited data are available as to distribution of Lp(a) in FH and associations of Lp(a) with other lipid profiles and cardiovascular disease. Our study aimed to investigate serum Lp(a) levels in relation to other lipid profiles and clinical conditions in the national largest-ever cohort of Japanese FH patients.

Methods: This study is a secondary analysis of the Familial Hypercholesterolemia Expert Forum (FAME) Study that includes a Japanese nationwide cohort of FH patients. In 399 patients under treatment for heterozygous FH who had a baseline measurement of serum Lp(a), the present study examined the distribution of Lp(a) levels and associations of Lp(a) with other lipid profiles and clinical conditions including coronary artery disease (CAD).

Results: The distribution of Lp(a) was skewed to the right with a median of 20.8 mg/dL, showing a log-normal distribution. Serum Apo B and Apo E levels were positively associated with Lp(a) levels. Age-adjusted mean of Apo B was 8.77 mg/dL higher and that of Apo E was 0.39 mg/dL higher in the highest category (40+ mg/dL) of Lp(a) than in the lowest category (＜20 mg/dL). LDL-C levels did not show such an association with Lp(a) levels. A tendency towards a positive relationship between Lp(a) and prevalent CAD was observed in men.

Conclusion: Our study demonstrated a distribution pattern of Lp(a) in Japanese FH patients and positive relationships of Lp(a) with Apo B and Apo E levels.

Lipoprotein(a): Knowns, unknowns and uncertainties

Over the last 10 years, there have been advances on several aspects of lipoprotein(a) which are reviewed in the present article. Since the standard immunoassays for measuring lipoprotein(a) are not fully apo(a) isoform-insensitive, the application of an LC-MS/MS method for assaying molar concentrations of lipoprotein(a) has been advocated. Genome wide association, epidemiological, and clinical studies have established high lipoprotein(a) as a causal risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases (ASCVD). However, the relative importance of molar concentration, apo(a) isoform size or variants within the LPA gene is still controversial. Lipoprotein(a)-raising single nucleotide polymorphisms has not been shown to add on value in predicting ASCVD beyond lipoprotein(a) concentrations. Although hyperlipoproteinemia(a) represents an important confounder in the diagnosis of familial hypercholesterolemia (FH), it enhances the risk of ASCVD in these patients. Thus, identification of new cases of hyperlipoproteinemia(a) during cascade testing can increase the identification of high-risk individuals. However, it remains unclear whether FH itself increases lipoprotein(a). The ASCVD risk associated with lipoprotein(a) seems to follow a linear gradient across the distribution, regardless of racial subgroups and other risk factors. The inverse association with the risk of developing type 2 diabetes needs consideration as effective lipoprotein(a) lowering therapies are progressing towards the market. Considering that Mendelian randomization analyses have identified the degree of lipoprotein(a)-lowering that is required to achieve ASCVD benefit, the findings of the ongoing outcome trial with pelacarsen will clarify whether dramatically lowering lipoprotein(a) levels can reduce the risk of ASCVD.

The Role of GPR109a Signaling in Niacin Induced Effects on Fed and Fasted Hepatic Metabolism

Signaling through GPR109a, the putative receptor for the endogenous ligand β-OH butyrate, inhibits adipose tissue lipolysis. Niacin, an anti-atherosclerotic drug that can induce insulin resistance, activates GPR109a at nM concentrations. GPR109a is not essential for niacin to improve serum lipid profiles. To better understand the involvement of GPR109a signaling in regulating glucose and lipid metabolism, we treated GPR109a wild-type (+/+) and knockout (-/-) mice with repeated overnight injections of saline or niacin in physiological states characterized by low (ad libitum fed) or high (16 h fasted) concentrations of the endogenous ligand, β-OH butyrate. In the fed state, niacin increased expression of apolipoprotein-A1 mRNA and decreased sterol regulatory element-binding protein 1 mRNA independent of genotype, suggesting a possible GPR109a independent mechanism by which niacin increases high-density lipoprotein (HDL) production and limits transcriptional upregulation of lipogenic genes. Niacin decreased fasting serum non-esterified fatty acid concentrations in both GPR109a +/+ and -/- mice. Independent of GPR109a expression, niacin blunted fast-induced hepatic triglyceride accumulation and peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor α mRNA expression. Although unaffected by niacin treatment, fasting serum HDL concentrations were lower in GPR109a knockout mice. Surprisingly, GPR109a knockout did not affect glucose or lipid homeostasis or hepatic gene expression in either fed or fasted mice. In turn, GPR109a does not appear to be essential for the metabolic response to the fasting ketogenic state or the acute effects of niacin.

Lipoprotein (a) and diabetes mellitus: causes and consequences

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review provides an update on the role of lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] in diabetes, including its impact as a risk factor as well as its contribution to the development of cardiovascular disease.

RECENT FINDINGS

Although a specific role for Lp(a) has not yet been conclusively established, it appears to have an inverse association with risk of diabetes. Several population-based studies have demonstrated associations between low levels of Lp(a) and increased risk of type 2 diabetes, but Mendelian randomization studies do not consistently support causality. Conversely, in patients with type 2 diabetes, elevated Lp(a) levels are associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events.

SUMMARY

Although Lp(a) contributes to the development of cardiovascular disease in patients with diabetes, few trials have investigated the benefits of reducing Lp(a) within this patient population. Furthermore, guidelines do not specifically address the risk associated with elevated Lp(a) levels. Despite this, Lp(a) should be measured in patients with diabetes and considered when evaluating their overall risk burden.

Emerging RNA Therapeutics to Lower Blood Levels of Lp(a): JACC Focus Seminar 2/4

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] has risen to the level of an accepted cardiovascular disease risk factor, but final proof of causality awaits a randomized trial of Lp(a) lowering. Inhibiting apolipoprotein(a) production in the hepatocyte with ribonucleic acid therapeutics has emerged as an elegant and effective solution to reduce plasma Lp(a) levels. Phase 2 clinical trials have shown that the antisense oligonucleotide pelacarsen reduced mean Lp(a) levels by 80%, allowing 98% of subjects to reach on-treatment levels of <125 nmol/l (∼50 mg/dl). The phase 3 Lp(a)HORIZON (Assessing the Impact of Lipoprotein(a) Lowering With TQJ230 on Major Cardiovascular Events in Patients With CVD) outcomes trial is currently enrolling approximately 7,680 patients with history of myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, and symptomatic peripheral arterial disease and controlled low-density lipoprotein cholesterol to pelacarsen versus placebo. The co-primary endpoints are major adverse cardiovascular events in subjects with Lp(a) >70 mg/dl and >90 mg/dl, in which either of the two being positive will lead to a successful trial. Additional ribonucleic acid-targeted therapies to lower Lp(a) are in preclinical and clinical development. The testing of the Lp(a) hypothesis will provide proof whether Lp(a)-mediated risk can be abolished by potent Lp(a) lowering.

Recent Updates of Lipoprotein(a) and Cardiovascular Disease

In recent years, epidemiological studies, genome-wide association studies, and Mendelian randomization studies have shown a strong association between increased levels of lipoproteins and increased risks of coronary heart disease and cardiovascular disease (CVD). Although lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] was an independent risk factor for ASCVD, the latest international clinical guidelines do not recommend direct reduction of plasma Lp(a) concentrations. The main reason was that there is no effective clinical medicine that directly lowers plasma Lp(a) concentrations. However, recent clinical trials have shown that proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin-type 9 inhibitors (PCSK9) and second-generation antisense oligonucleotides can effectively reduce plasma Lp(a) levels. This review will present the structure, pathogenicity, prognostic evidences, and recent advances in therapeutic drugs for Lp(a).

Calcified Aortic Valve Disease in Patients With Familial Hypercholesterolemia

Familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) is a rare autosomal gene deficiency disease with increased low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, xanthoma, and premature coronary heart disease. Calcified aortic valve disease (CAVD) is prevalent in FH patients, resulting in adverse events and heavy health care burden. Aortic valve calcification is currently considered an active biological process, which shares several common risk factors with atherosclerosis, including aging, hypertension, dyslipidemia, and so on. Unfortunately, the pathogenesis and therapy of CAVD in FH are still controversial. There is no pharmacological intervention recommended to delay the development of CAVD in FH, and the only effective treatment for severe CAVD is aortic valve replacement. In this review, we summarize the detailed description of the pathophysiology, molecular mechanism, risk factors, and treatment of CAVD in FH patients.

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

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

Lipoprotein(a) Lowering-From Lipoprotein Apheresis to Antisense Oligonucleotide Approach

It is well-known that elevated lipoprotein(a)—Lp(a)—levels are associated with a higher risk of cardiovascular (CV) mortality and all-cause mortality, although a standard pharmacotherapeutic approach is still undefined for patients with high CV risk dependent on hyperlipoproteinemia(a). Combined with high Lp(a) levels, familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) leads to a greater CVD risk. In suspected FH patients, the proportion of cases explained by a rise of Lp(a) levels ranges between 5% and 20%. In the absence of a specific pharmacological approach able to lower Lp(a) to the extent required to achieve CV benefits, the most effective strategy today is lipoprotein apheresis (LA). Although limited, a clear effect on Lp(a) is exerted by PCSK9 antagonists, with apparently different mechanisms when given with statins (raised catabolism) or as monotherapy (reduced production). In the era of RNA-based therapies, a new dawn is represented by the use of antisense oligonucleotides APO(a)L_rx, able to reduce Lp(a) from 35% to over 80%, with generally modest injection site reactions. The improved knowledge of Lp(a) atherogenicity and possible prevention will be of benefit for patients with residual CV risk remaining after the most effective available lipid-lowering agents.

Proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitors and lipoprotein(a)-mediated risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: more than meets the eye?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Evidence continues to mount for elevated lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] as a prevalent, independent, and causal risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. However, the effects of existing lipid-lowering therapies on Lp(a) are comparatively modest and are not specific to Lp(a). Consequently, evidence that Lp(a)-lowering confers a cardiovascular benefit is lacking. Large-scale cardiovascular outcome trials (CVOTs) of inhibitory mAbs targeting proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitors (PCSK9i) may address this issue.

RECENT FINDINGS

Although the ability of PCSK9i to lower Lp(a) by 15-30% is now clear, the mechanisms involved continue to be debated, with in-vitro and in-vivo studies showing effects on Lp(a) clearance (through the LDL receptor or other receptors) and Lp(a)/apolipoprotein(a) biosynthesis in hepatocytes. The FOURIER CVOT showed that patients with higher baseline levels of Lp(a) derived greater benefit from evolocumab and those with the lowest combined achieved Lp(a) and LDL-cholesterol (LDL-C) had the lowest event rate. Meta-analysis of ten phase 3 trials of alirocumab came to qualitatively similar conclusions concerning achieved Lp(a) levels, although an effect independent of LDL-C lowering could not be demonstrated.

SUMMARY

Although it is not possible to conclude that PCSK9i specifically lower Lp(a)-attributable risk, patients with elevated Lp(a) could derive incremental benefit from PCSK9i therapy.

Molecular, Population, and Clinical Aspects of Lipoprotein(a): A Bridge Too Far?

There is now significant evidence to support an independent causal role for lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) as a risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Plasma Lp(a) concentrations are predominantly determined by genetic factors. However, research into Lp(a) has been hampered by incomplete understanding of its metabolism and proatherogeneic properties and by a lack of suitable animal models. Furthermore, a lack of standardized assays to measure Lp(a) and no universal consensus on optimal plasma levels remain significant obstacles. In addition, there are currently no approved specific therapies that target and lower elevated plasma Lp(a), although there are recent but limited clinical outcome data suggesting benefits of such reduction. Despite this, international guidelines now recognize elevated Lp(a) as a risk enhancing factor for risk reclassification. This review summarises the current literature on Lp(a), including its discovery and recognition as an atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk factor, attempts to standardise analytical measurement, interpopulation studies, and emerging therapies for lowering elevated Lp(a) levels.

Optimal Non-invasive Strategies to Reduce Recurrent Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Risk

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) remains the leading cause of death worldwide, with coronary artery disease (CAD) responsible for the vast majority of these deaths. Incidence is increasing in developing countries, and prevalence is increasing globally as populations age. Once CAD is manifest, recurrent event risk remains high.

RECENT FINDINGS

Multiple therapeutic avenues have had significant recent developments, including diet, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol management, triglycerides, hypoglycemic agents, antiplatelet agents, and oral anticoagulants. Combined approaches involving specific, tailored lifestyle, and pharmacological interventions will provide the most effective strategy for reducing the risk of recurrent CVD events. Here, we review risk prediction and non-invasive non-pharmacologic and pharmacologic approaches to mitigate residual coronary artery disease risk.

Impact of Apolipoprotein(a) Isoform Size on Lipoprotein(a) Lowering in the HPS2-THRIVE Study

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Background:

Genetic studies have shown lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]) to be an important causal risk factor for coronary disease. Apolipoprotein(a) isoform size is the chief determinant of Lp(a) levels, but its impact on the benefits of therapies that lower Lp(a) remains unclear.

Methods:

HPS2-THRIVE (Heart Protection Study 2–Treatment of HDL to Reduce the Incidence of Vascular Events) is a randomized trial of niacin–laropiprant versus placebo on a background of simvastatin therapy. Plasma Lp(a) levels at baseline and 1 year post-randomization were measured in 3978 participants from the United Kingdom and China. Apolipoprotein(a) isoform size, estimated by the number of kringle IV domains, was measured by agarose gel electrophoresis and the predominantly expressed isoform identified.

Results:

Allocation to niacin–laropiprant reduced mean Lp(a) by 12 (SE, 1) nmol/L overall and 34 (6) nmol/L in the top quintile by baseline Lp(a) level (Lp[a] ≥128 nmol/L). The mean proportional reduction in Lp(a) with niacin–laropiprant was 31% but varied strongly with predominant apolipoprotein(a) isoform size (P_Trend=4×10⁻²⁹) and was only 18% in the quintile with the highest baseline Lp(a) level and low isoform size. Estimates from genetic studies suggest that these Lp(a) reductions during the short term of the trial might yield proportional reductions in coronary risk of ≈2% overall and 6% in the top quintile by Lp(a) levels.

Conclusions:

Proportional reductions in Lp(a) were dependent on apolipoprotein(a) isoform size. Taking this into account, the likely benefits of niacin–laropiprant on coronary risk through Lp(a) lowering are small. Novel therapies that reduce high Lp(a) levels by at least 80 nmol/L (≈40%) may be needed to produce worthwhile benefits in people at the highest risk because of Lp(a).

Clinical Trial Registration:

URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00461630.

New Frontiers in Lp(a)-Targeted Therapies

Interest in lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] has exploded over the past decade with the emergence of genetic and epidemiological studies pinpointing elevated levels of this unique lipoprotein as a causal risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and calcific aortic valve disease (CAVD). This review summarizes the most recent discoveries regarding therapeutic approaches to lower Lp(a) and presents these findings in the context of an emerging, although far from complete, understanding of the biosynthesis and catabolism of Lp(a). Application of Lp(a)-specific lowering agents to outcome trials will be the key to opening this new frontier in the battle against CVD.

Is Lp(a) ready for prime time use in the clinic? A pros-and-cons debate

Lipoprotein (a) (Lp(a)) is a cholesterol-rich lipoprotein known since 1963. In spite of extensive research on Lp(a), there are still numerous gaps in our knowledge relating to its function, biosynthesis and catabolism. One reason for this might be that apo(a), the characteristic glycoprotein of Lp(a), is expressed only in primates. Results from experiments using transgenic animals therefore may need verification in humans. Studies on Lp(a) are also handicapped by the great number of isoforms of apo(a) and the heterogeneity of apo(a)-containing fractions in plasma. Quantification of Lp(a) in the clinical laboratory for a long time has not been standardized. Starting from its discovery, reports accumulated that Lp(a) contributed to the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD), myocardial infarction (MI) and stroke. Early reports were based on case control studies but in the last decades a great deal of prospective studies have been published that highlight the increased risk for CVD and MI in patients with elevated Lp(a). Final answers to the question of whether Lp(a) is ready for wider clinical use will come from intervention studies with novel selective Lp(a) lowering medications that are currently underway. This article expounds arguments for and against this proposition from currently available data.

Lipoprotein(a) in clinical practice: New perspectives from basic and translational science

Elevated plasma concentrations of lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) are a causal risk factor for coronary heart disease (CHD) and calcific aortic valve stenosis (CAVS). Genetic, epidemiological and in vitro data provide strong evidence for a pathogenic role for Lp(a) in the progression of atherothrombotic disease. Despite these advancements and a race to develop new Lp(a) lowering therapies, there are still many unanswered and emerging questions about the metabolism and pathophysiology of Lp(a). New studies have drawn attention to Lp(a) as a contributor to novel pathogenic processes, yet the mechanisms underlying the contribution of Lp(a) to CVD remain enigmatic. New therapeutics show promise in lowering plasma Lp(a) levels, although the complete mechanisms of Lp(a) lowering are not fully understood. Specific agents targeted to apolipoprotein(a) (apo(a)), namely antisense oligonucleotide therapy, demonstrate potential to decrease Lp(a) to levels below the 30-50 mg/dL (75-150 nmol/L) CVD risk threshold. This therapeutic approach should aid in assessing the benefit of lowering Lp(a) in a clinical setting.

Emerging Therapeutic Options for Lowering of Lipoprotein(a): Implications for Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Elevated plasma concentrations of lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) are an independent and causal risk factor for cardiovascular diseases including coronary artery disease, ischemic stroke, and calcific aortic valve stenosis. This review summarizes the rationale for Lp(a) lowering and surveys relevant clinical trial data using a variety of agents capable of lowering Lp(a).

RECENT FINDINGS

Contemporary guidelines and recommendations outline populations of patients who should be screened for elevated Lp(a) and who might benefit from Lp(a) lowering. Therapies including drugs and apheresis have been described that lower Lp(a) levels modestly (∼20 %) to dramatically (∼80 %). Existing therapies that lower Lp(a) also have beneficial effects on other aspects of the lipid profile, with the exception of Lp(a)-specific apheresis and an antisense oligonucleotide that targets the mRNA encoding apolipoprotein(a). No clinical trials conducted to date have managed to answer the key question of whether Lp(a) lowering confers a benefit in terms of ameliorating cardiovascular risk, although additional outcome trials of therapies that lower Lp(a) are ongoing. It is more likely, however, that Lp(a)-specific agents will provide the most appropriate approach for addressing this question.

Lipoprotein (a): a historical appraisal

Initially, lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] was believed to be a genetic variant of lipoprotein (Lp)-B. Because its lipid moiety is almost identical to LDL, Lp(a) has been deliberately considered to be highly atherogenic. Lp(a) was detected in 1963 by Kare Berg, and individuals who were positive for this factor were called Lpa⁺ Lpa⁺ individuals were found more frequently in patients with coronary heart disease than in controls. After the introduction of quantitative methods for monitoring of Lp(a), it became apparent that Lp(a), in fact, is present in all individuals, yet to a greatly variable extent. The genetics of Lp(a) had been a mystery for a long time until Gerd Utermann discovered that apo(a) is expressed by a variety of alleles, giving rise to a unique size heterogeneity. This size heterogeneity, as well as countless mutations, is responsible for the great variability in plasma Lp(a) concentrations. Initially, we proposed to evaluate the risk of myocardial infarction at a cut-off for Lp(a) of 30-50 mg/dl, a value that still is adopted in numerous epidemiological studies. Due to new therapies that lower Lp(a) levels, there is renewed interest and still rising research activity in Lp(a). Despite all these activities, numerous gaps exist in our knowledge, especially as far as the function and metabolism of this fascinating Lp are concerned.

Lipoprotein(a): novel target and emergence of novel therapies to lower cardiovascular disease risk

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This article summarizes recent observations on the role of lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] as a risk factor mediating cardiovascular disease.

RECENT FINDINGS

Lp(a) is a highly prevalent cardiovascular risk factor, with levels above 30 mg/dl affecting 20-30% of the global population. Up until now, no specific therapies have been developed to lower Lp(a) levels. Three major levels of evidence support the notion that elevated Lp(a) levels are a causal, independent, genetic risk factor for cardiovascular disease: epidemiologic studies and meta-analyses, genome-wide association studies and Mendelian randomization studies. Recent studies also have noted that individuals with low levels of Lp(a) are associated with a higher risk of incident type 2 diabetes mellitus, and conversely individuals with high levels have a lower risk, but this association does not appear to be causal. Novel therapies to lower Lp(a) include PCSK9 inhibitors and antisense oligonucleotides directly preventing translation of apolipoprotein(a) mRNA.

SUMMARY

With this robust and expanding clinical database, a reawakening of interest in Lp(a) as clinical risk factor is taking place. Trials are underway with novel drugs that substantially lower Lp(a) and may reduce its contribution to cardiovascular disease.

Current therapies for lowering lipoprotein (a)

Lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] is a human plasma lipoprotein with unique structural and functional characteristics. Lp(a) is an assembly of two components: a central core with apoB and an additional glycoprotein, called apo(a). Ever since the strong association between elevated levels of Lp(a) and an increased risk for CVD was recognized, interest in the therapeutic modulation of Lp(a) levels has increased. Here, the past and present therapies aiming to lower Lp(a) levels will be reviewed, demonstrating that these agents have had varying degrees of success. The next challenge will be to prove that Lp(a) lowering also leads to cardiovascular benefit in patients with elevated Lp(a) levels. Therefore, highly specific and potent Lp(a)-lowering strategies are awaited urgently.

Effects of extended-release niacin on the postprandial metabolism of Lp(a) and ApoB-100-containing lipoproteins in statin-treated men with type 2 diabetes mellitus

OBJECTIVE

The effects of extended-release niacin (ERN; 1-2 g/d) on the metabolism of lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) and apolipoprotein (apo) B-100-containing lipoproteins were investigated in 11 statin-treated white men with type 2 diabetes mellitus in a randomized, crossover trial of 12-weeks duration.

APPROACH AND RESULTS

The kinetics of Lp(a) and very low-density lipoprotein (VLDL), intermediate-density lipoprotein, and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) apoB-100 were determined following a standardized oral fat load (87% fat) using intravenous administration of D3-leucine, gas chromatography-mass spectrometry, and compartmental modeling. ERN significantly decreased fasting plasma total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, and triglyceride concentrations. These effects were achieved without significant changes in body weight or insulin resistance. ERN significantly decreased plasma Lp(a) concentration (-26.5%) and the production rates of apo(a) (-41.5%) and Lp(a)-apoB-100 (-32.1%); the effect was greater in individuals with elevated Lp(a) concentration. ERN significantly decreased VLDL (-58.7%), intermediate-density lipoprotein (-33.6%), and LDL (-18.3%) apoB-100 concentrations and the corresponding production rates (VLDL, -49.8%; intermediate-density lipoprotein, -44.7%; LDL, -46.1%). The number of VLDL apoB-100 particles secreted increased in response to the oral fat load. Despite this, total VLDL apoB-100 production over the 10-hour postprandial period was significantly decreased with ERN (-21.9%).

CONCLUSIONS

In statin-treated men with type 2 diabetes mellitus, ERN decreased plasma Lp(a) concentrations by decreasing the production of apo(a) and Lp(a)-apoB-100. ERN also decreased the concentrations of apoB-100-containing lipoproteins by decreasing VLDL production and the transport of these particles down the VLDL to LDL cascade. Our study provides further mechanistic insights into the lipid-regulating effects of ERN.

Effects of Extended-Release Nicotinic Acid on Apolipoprotein (a) Kinetics in Hypertriglyceridemic Patients

OBJECTIVE

To determine the mechanisms by which extended-release nicotinic acid reduces circulating lipoprotein (a) concentrations in hypertriglyceridemic patients.

APPROACH AND RESULTS

Eight nondiabetic, obese male subjects (aged 48±12 years; body mass index, 31.2±1.8 kg/m(2)) with hypertriglyceridemia (triglycerides, 226±78 mg/dL) were enrolled in an 8 week, double blind, placebo-controlled cross-over study. At the end of each treatment phase, fasted subjects received a 10 µmol/L per kg bolus injection of [5,5,5-(2)H3]-l-Leucine immediately followed by constant infusion of [5,5,5-(2)H3]-l-Leucine (10 µmol L(-1) kg(-1) h(-1)) for 14 hours, and blood samples were collected. A liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method was used to study apolipoprotein (a) (Apo(a)) kinetics. The fractional catabolic rate of Apo(a) was calculated with a single compartmental model using the apolipoprotein B100 (ApoB100) containing very low density lipoprotein tracer enrichment as a precursor pool. Extended-release nicotinic acid decreased plasma triglycerides (-46%; P=0.023), raised high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (+20%; P=0.008), and decreased Apo(a) plasma concentrations (-20%; P=0.008). Extended-release nicotinic acid also decreased ApoB100 (22%; P=0.008) and proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9, -29%; P=0.008) plasma concentrations. Apo(a) fractional catabolic rate and production rates were decreased by 37% (0.58±0.28 versus 0.36±0.19 pool/d; P=0.008) and 50% (1.4±0.8 versus 0.7±0.4 nmol/kg per day; P=0.008), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Extended-release nicotinic acid treatment decreased Apo(a) plasma concentrations by 20%, production rates by 50%, and catabolism by 37%. ApoB100 and PCSK9 concentrations were also decreased by treatment, but no correlation was found with Apo(a) kinetic parameters.

Effects of formulation design on niacin therapeutics: mechanism of action, metabolism, and drug delivery

Niacin is a highly effective, lipid regulating drug associated with a number of metabolically induced side effects such as prostaglandin (PG) mediated flushing and hepatic toxicity. In an attempt to reduce the development of these adverse effects, scientists have investigated differing methods of niacin delivery designed to control drug release and alter metabolism. However, despite successful formulation of various orally based capsule and tablet delivery systems, patient adherence to niacin therapy is still compromised by adverse events such as PG-induced flushing. While the primary advantage of orally dosed formulations is ease of use, alternative delivery options such as transdermal delivery or polymeric micro/nanoparticle encapsulation for oral administration have shown promise in niacin reformulation. However, the effectiveness of these alternative delivery options in reducing inimical effects of niacin and maintaining drug efficacy is still largely unknown and requires more in-depth investigation. In this paper, we present an overview of niacin applications, its metabolic pathways, and current drug delivery formulations. Focus is placed on oral immediate, sustained, and extended release niacin delivery as well as combined statin and/or prostaglandin antagonist niacin formulation. We also examine and discuss current findings involving transdermal niacin formulations and polymeric micro/nanoparticle encapsulated niacin delivery.

Niacin as antidyslipidemic drug

Niacin is an important vitamin (B3) that can be used in gram doses to positively modify pathogenetically relevant lipid disorders: elevated LDL cholesterol, elevated non-HDL cholesterol, elevated triglycerides, elevated lipoprotein(a), and reduced HDL cholesterol. This review reports the latest published findings with respect to niacin's mechanisms of action on these lipids and its anti-inflammatory and anti-atherosclerotic effects. In the pre-statin era, niacin was shown to have beneficial effects on cardiovascular end-points; but in recent years, two major studies performed in patients whose LDL cholesterol levels had been optimized by a statin therapy did not demonstrate an additional significant effect on these end-points in the groups where niacin was administered. Both studies have several drawbacks that suggest that they are not representative for other patients. Thus, niacin still plays a role either as an additive to a statin or as a substitute for a statin in statin-intolerant patients. Moreover, patients with elevated triglyceride and low HDL cholesterol levels and patients with elevated lipoprotein(a) concentrations will possibly benefit from niacin, although currently the study evidence for these indications is rather poor. Niacin may be useful for compliant patients, however possible side effects (flushing, liver damage) and contraindications should be taken into consideration.

Identification and validation of N-acetyltransferase 2 as an insulin sensitivity gene

Decreased insulin sensitivity, also referred to as insulin resistance (IR), is a fundamental abnormality in patients with type 2 diabetes and a risk factor for cardiovascular disease. While IR predisposition is heritable, the genetic basis remains largely unknown. The GENEticS of Insulin Sensitivity consortium conducted a genome-wide association study (GWAS) for direct measures of insulin sensitivity, such as euglycemic clamp or insulin suppression test, in 2,764 European individuals, with replication in an additional 2,860 individuals. The presence of a nonsynonymous variant of N-acetyltransferase 2 (NAT2) [rs1208 (803A>G, K268R)] was strongly associated with decreased insulin sensitivity that was independent of BMI. The rs1208 "A" allele was nominally associated with IR-related traits, including increased fasting glucose, hemoglobin A1C, total and LDL cholesterol, triglycerides, and coronary artery disease. NAT2 acetylates arylamine and hydrazine drugs and carcinogens, but predicted acetylator NAT2 phenotypes were not associated with insulin sensitivity. In a murine adipocyte cell line, silencing of NAT2 ortholog Nat1 decreased insulin-mediated glucose uptake, increased basal and isoproterenol-stimulated lipolysis, and decreased adipocyte differentiation, while Nat1 overexpression produced opposite effects. Nat1-deficient mice had elevations in fasting blood glucose, insulin, and triglycerides and decreased insulin sensitivity, as measured by glucose and insulin tolerance tests, with intermediate effects in Nat1 heterozygote mice. Our results support a role for NAT2 in insulin sensitivity.

Update on lipoprotein(a) as a cardiovascular risk factor and mediator

Recent genetic studies have put the spotlight back onto lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] as a causal risk factor for coronary heart disease. However, there remain significant gaps in our knowledge with respect to how the Lp(a) particle is assembled, the route of its catabolism, and the mechanism(s) of Lp(a) pathogenicity. It has long been speculated that the effects of Lp(a) in the vasculature can be attributed to both its low-density lipoprotein moiety and the unique apolipoprotein(a) component, which is strikingly similar to the kringle-containing fibrinolytic zymogen plasminogen. However, the ability of Lp(a) to modulate either purely thrombotic or purely atherothrombotic processes in vivo remains unclear. The presence of oxidized phospholipid on Lp(a) may underlie many of the proatherosclerotic effects of Lp(a) that have been identified both in cell models and in animal models, and provides a possible avenue for identifying therapeutics aimed at mitigating the effects of Lp(a) in the vasculature. However, the beneficial effects of targeted Lp(a) therapeutics, designed to either lower Lp(a) concentrations or interfere with its effects, on cardiovascular outcomes remains to be determined.

miR-206 controls LXRα expression and promotes LXR-mediated cholesterol efflux in macrophages

Liver X receptors (LXRα and LXRβ) are key transcription factors in cholesterol metabolism that regulate cholesterol biosynthesis/efflux and bile acid metabolism/excretion in the liver and numerous organs. In macrophages, LXR signaling modulates cholesterol handling and the inflammatory response, pathways involved in atherosclerosis. Since regulatory pathways of LXR transcription control are well understood, in the present study we aimed at identifying post-transcriptional regulators of LXR activity. MicroRNAs (miRs) are such post-transcriptional regulators of genes that in the canonical pathway mediate mRNA inactivation. In silico analysis identified miR-206 as a putative regulator of LXRα but not LXRβ. Indeed, as recently shown, we found that miR-206 represses LXRα activity and expression of LXRα and its target genes in hepatic cells. Interestingly, miR-206 regulates LXRα differently in macrophages. Stably overexpressing miR-206 in THP-1 human macrophages revealed an up-regulation and miR-206 knockdown led to a down-regulation of LXRα and its target genes. In support of these results, bone marrow-derived macrophages (BMDMs) from miR-206 KO mice also exhibited lower expression of LXRα target genes. The physiological relevance of these findings was proven by gain- and loss-of-function of miR-206; overexpression of miR-206 enhanced cholesterol efflux in human macrophages and knocking out miR-206 decreased cholesterol efflux from MPMs. Moreover, we show that miR-206 expression in macrophages is repressed by LXRα activation, while oxidized LDL and inflammatory stimuli profoundly induced miR-206 expression. We therefore propose a feed-back loop between miR-206 and LXRα that might be part of an LXR auto-regulatory mechanism to fine tune LXR activity.

•

Functional differences of miR-206 in the liver and macrophages

•

In the liver, miR-206 suppresses LXRα expression and signaling.

•

In macrophages, miR-206 increases LXRα abundance and promotes cholesterol efflux.

•

In macrophages, LXRα activation represses miR-206 expression.

•

In macrophages, pro-inflammatory stimuli increase miR-206 expression.

Effect of Nicotinic acid/Laropiprant in the lipoprotein(a) concentration with regard to baseline lipoprotein(a) concentration and LPA genotype

BACKGROUND

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a lipoprotein in which apolipoproteinB-100 is linked to apolipoprotein(a) [apo(a)]. Significant variation in Lp(a) concentration is specific to LPA gene, which codes for apo(a). Nicotinic acid (NA) is used for treatment of dyslipidemias, and the lowering effect of NA on Lp(a) has been previously reported.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the Lp(a) lowering effect of 1g/20mg and 2g/40mgday of Nicotinic acid/Laropiprant in subjects with different baseline Lp(a) concentrations and depending on the LPA genotype.

METHODS

In an open-label, 10-week study, 1g/20mgday of NA/Laropiprant for 4weeks followed by 6weeks of 2g/40mgday conducted at 3 centers in Spain, 82 subjects were enrolled. Patients were studied at baseline and at the end of both treatment periods and were enrolled in three groups: normal Lp(a) (<50mg/dL), high Lp(a) (50-120mg/dL) and very high Lp(a) (>120mg/dL). The LPA genetic polymorphism was analyzed by a real-time PCR.

RESULTS

There was a significant difference in LPA genotypes among Lp(a) concentration groups and an inverse and significant correlation between baseline Lp(a) concentration and LPA genotype was found (R=-0.372, p<0.001). There were a significant decrease in total cholesterol, triglycerides, LDL cholesterol, apo B and Lp(a), and a significant increase in HDL cholesterol after NA/Laropiprant treatment, without changes in BMI. However, there were no statistical differences in percentage variation of analyzed variables depending on LPA genotype.

CONCLUSION

LPA genotype is a major determinant of Lp(a) baseline concentration. However, the lipid lowering effect of NA is not related to LPA genotype.

When should we measure lipoprotein (a)?

Recently published epidemiological and genetic studies strongly suggest a causal relationship of elevated concentrations of lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] with cardiovascular disease (CVD), independent of low-density lipoproteins (LDLs), reduced high density lipoproteins (HDL), and other traditional CVD risk factors. The atherogenicity of Lp(a) at a molecular and cellular level is caused by interference with the fibrinolytic system, the affinity to secretory phospholipase A2, the interaction with extracellular matrix glycoproteins, and the binding to scavenger receptors on macrophages. Lipoprotein (a) plasma concentrations correlate significantly with the synthetic rate of apo(a) and recent studies demonstrate that apo(a) expression is inhibited by ligands for farnesoid X receptor. Numerous gaps in our knowledge on Lp(a) function, biosynthesis, and the site of catabolism still exist. Nevertheless, new classes of therapeutic agents that have a significant Lp(a)-lowering effect such as apoB antisense oligonucleotides, microsomal triglyceride transfer protein inhibitors, cholesterol ester transfer protein inhibitors, and PCSK-9 inhibitors are currently in trials. Consensus reports of scientific societies are still prudent in recommending the measurement of Lp(a) routinely for assessing CVD risk. This is mainly caused by the lack of definite intervention studies demonstrating that lowering Lp(a) reduces hard CVD endpoints, a lack of effective medications for lowering Lp(a), the highly variable Lp(a) concentrations among different ethnic groups and the challenges associated with Lp(a) measurement. Here, we present our view on when to measure Lp(a) and how to deal with elevated Lp(a) levels in moderate and high-risk individuals.

Lipoprotein(a): resurrected by genetics

Plasma lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a quantitative genetic trait with a very broad and skewed distribution, which is largely controlled by genetic variants at the LPA locus on chromosome 6q27. Based on genetic evidence provided by studies conducted over the last two decades, Lp(a) is currently considered to be the strongest genetic risk factor for coronary heart disease (CHD). The copy number variation of kringle IV in the LPA gene has been strongly associated with both Lp(a) levels in plasma and risk of CHD, thereby fulfilling the main criterion for causality in a Mendelian randomization approach. Alleles with a low kringle IV copy number that together have a population frequency of 25-35% are associated with a doubling of the relative risk for outcomes, which is exceptional in the field of complex genetic phenotypes. The recently identified binding of oxidized phospholipids to Lp(a) is considered as one of the possible mechanisms that may explain the pathogenicity of Lp(a). Drugs that have been shown to lower Lp(a) have pleiotropic effects on other CHD risk factors, and an improvement of cardiovascular endpoints is up to now lacking. However, it has been established in a proof of principle study that lowering of very high Lp(a) by apheresis in high-risk patients with already maximally reduced low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels can dramatically reduce major coronary events.