Lipoprotein (a): a historical appraisal

Elevated lipoprotein(a) levels: A crucial determinant of cardiovascular disease risk and target for emerging therapies

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) remains a significant global health challenge despite advancements in prevention and treatment. Elevated Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] levels have emerged as a crucial risk factor for CVD and aortic stenosis, affecting approximately 20 of the global population. Research over the last decade has established Lp(a) as an independent genetic contributor to CVD and aortic stenosis, beginning with Kare Berg's discovery in 1963. This has led to extensive exploration of its molecular structure and pathogenic roles. Despite the unknown physiological function of Lp(a), studies have shed light on its metabolism, genetics, and involvement in atherosclerosis, inflammation, and thrombosis. Epidemiological evidence highlights the link between high Lp(a) levels and increased cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Newly emerging therapies, including pelacarsen, zerlasiran, olpasiran, muvalaplin, and lepodisiran, show promise in significantly lowering Lp(a) levels, potentially transforming the management of cardiovascular disease. However, further research is essential to assess these novel therapies' long-term efficacy and safety, heralding a new era in cardiovascular disease prevention and treatment and providing hope for at-risk patients.

Ancestry specific distribution of LPA Kringle IV-Type-2 genetic variants highlight associations to apo(a) copy number, glucose, and hypertension

Background

High Lp(a) levels contribute to atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and are tightly regulated by the LPA gene . Lp(a) levels have an inverse correlation with LPA Kringle IV Type-2 (KIV-2) copy number (CN). Black (B) and Hispanic (H) individuals exhibit higher levels of Lp(a), and rates of CVD compared to non-Hispanic Whites (NHW). Therefore, we investigated genetic variations in the LPA KIV-2 region across three ancestries and their associations with metabolic risk factors.

Methods

Using published pipelines, we analyzed a multi-ethnic whole exome dataset comprising 3,817 participants from the Washington Heights and Inwood Columbia Aging Project (WHICAP): 886 [NHW (23%), 1,811 Caribbean (C) H (47%), and 1,120 B individuals (29%). Rare and common variants (alternative allele carrier frequency, CF < 0.01 or > 0.99 and 0.01 < CF < 0.99, respectively) were identified and KIV-2 CN estimated. The associations of variants and CN with history of heart disease, hypertension (HTN), stroke, lipid levels and clinical diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) was assessed. A small pilot provided in-silico validation of study findings.

Results

We report 1421 variants in the LPA KIV-2 repeat region, comprising 267 exonic and 1154 intronic variants. 61.4% of the exonic variants have not been previously described. Three novel exonic variants significantly increase the risk of HTN across all ethnic groups: 4785-C/A (frequency = 78%, odds ratio [OR] = 1.45, p = 0.032), 727-T/C (frequency = 96%, OR = 2.11, p = 0.032), and 723-A/G (frequency = 96%, OR = 1.97, p = 0.038). Additionally, six intronic variants showed associations with HTN: 166-G/A, 387-G/C, 402-G/A, 4527-A/T, 4541-G/A, and 4653-A/T. One intronic variant, 412-C/T, was associated with decreased blood glucose levels (frequency = 72%, β = -14.52, p = 0.02).Three of the associations were not affected after adjusting for LPA KIV-2 CN: 412-C/T (β = -14.2, p = 0.03), 166-G/A (OR = 1.41, p = 0.05), and 387-G/C (OR = 1.40, p = 0.05). KIV CN itself was significantly associated with 314 variants and was negatively correlated with plasma total cholesterol levels.

Conclusions

In three ancestry groups, we identify novel rare and common LPA KIV-2 region variants. We report new associations of variants with HTN and Glucose levels. These results underscore the genetic complexity of the LPA KIV-2 region in influencing cardiovascular and metabolic health, suggesting potential genetic regulation of pathways that can be studied for research and therapeutic interventions.

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

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

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

RECENT FINDINGS

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

Exploring PCSK9 Genetic Impact on Lipoprotein(a) via Dual Approaches: Association and Mendelian Randomization

Previous investigations have suggested an association between the PCSK9 common polymorphism E670G and Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) levels, as well as a link between plasma PCSK9 levels and Lp(a) concentrations. However, the causal relationship between plasma PCSK9 and Lp(a) levels remains uncertain. In this study, we explored the association between PCSK9 E670G polymorphism and Lp(a) levels in 614 healthy Taiwanese individuals. Employing a two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis using openly accessible PCSK9 and Lp(a) summary statistics from the genome-wide association studies (GWAS) and UK Biobank, we aimed to determine if a causal link exists between plasma PCSK9 levels and Lp(a) concentrations. Our findings reveal that the E670G G allele is independently associated with a decreased likelihood of developing elevated Lp(a) levels. This association persists even after adjusting for common cardiovascular risk factors and irrespective of lipid profile variations. The MR analysis, utilizing six PCSK9 GWAS-associated variants as instrumental variables to predict plasma PCSK9 levels, provides compelling evidence of a causal relationship between plasma PCSK9 levels and Lp(a) concentration. In conclusion, our study not only replicates the association between the PCSK9 E670G polymorphism and Lp(a) levels but also confirms a causative relationship between PCSK9 levels and Lp(a) concentrations through MR analysis.

Lipoprotein(a): Just an Innocent Bystander in Arterial Hypertension?

Elevated plasma lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a relatively common and highly heritable trait conferring individuals time-dependent risk of developing atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (CVD). Following its first description, Lp(a) triggered enormous scientific interest in the late 1980s, subsequently dampened in the mid-1990s by controversial findings of some prospective studies. It was only in the last decade that a large body of evidence has provided strong arguments for a causal and independent association between elevated Lp(a) levels and CVD, causing renewed interest in this lipoprotein as an emerging risk factor with a likely contribution to cardiovascular residual risk. Accordingly, the 2022 consensus statement of the European Atherosclerosis Society has suggested inclusion of Lp(a) measurement in global risk estimation. The development of highly effective Lp(a)-lowering drugs (e.g., antisense oligonucleotides and small interfering RNA, both blocking LPA gene expression) which are still under assessment in phase 3 trials, will provide a unique opportunity to reduce "residual cardiovascular risk" in high-risk populations, including patients with arterial hypertension. The current evidence in support of a specific role of Lp(a) in hypertension is somehow controversial and this narrative review aims to overview the general mechanisms relating Lp(a) to blood pressure regulation and hypertension-related cardiovascular and renal damage.

Relationship of apolipoprotein(a) isoform size with clearance and production of lipoprotein(a) in a diverse cohort

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] has two main proteins, apoB100 and apo(a). High levels of Lp(a) confer an increased risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Most people have two circulating isoforms of apo(a) differing in their molecular mass, determined by the number of Kringle IV Type 2 repeats. Previous studies report a strong inverse relationship between Lp(a) levels and apo(a) isoform sizes. The roles of Lp(a) production and fractional clearance and how ancestry affects this relationship remain incompletely defined. We therefore examined the relationships of apo(a) size with Lp(a) levels and both apo(a) fractional clearance rates (FCR) and production rates (PR) in 32 individuals not on lipid-lowering treatment. We determined plasma Lp(a) levels and apo(a) isoform sizes, and used the relative expression of the two isoforms to calculate a "weighted isoform size" (wIS). Stable isotope studies were performed, using D3-leucine, to determine the apo(a) FCR and PR. As expected, plasma Lp(a) concentrations were inversely correlated with wIS (R2 = 0.27; P = 0.002). The wIS had a modest positive correlation with apo(a) FCR (R2 = 0.10, P = 0.08), and a negative correlation with apo(a) PR (R2 = 0.11; P = 0.06). The relationship between wIS and PR became significant when we controlled for self-reported race and ethnicity (SRRE) (R2 = 0.24, P = 0.03); controlling for SRRE did not affect the relationship between wIS and FCR. Apo(a) wIS plays a role in both FCR and PR; however, adjusting for SRRE strengthens the correlation between wIS and PR, suggesting an effect of ancestry.

Pharmacoeconomic analysis (CER) of Dulaglutide and Liraglutide in the treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes

AIM

To evaluate the treatment effect Fand pharmacoeconomic value of Dugaglutide in women with type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

Women (n=96) with type 2 diabetes recruited from June 2019 to December 2021 were randomized into two equal groups. The control group was treated with Liraglutide, and the observation group was treated with Dulaglutide, both for 24 weeks. The blood glucose levels, biochemical index, insulin resistance index (HOMA-IR), cost-effect ratio (CER), and drug safety were determined and compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

Blood glucose levels, the biochemical index, and HOMA-IR were lower in both groups after the treatment (P < 0.05), and there was no statistical difference in the blood glucose levels, biochemical index and HOMA-IR between the two groups (P > 0.05). The CER levels did not differ statistically between the two groups (P > 0.05). Both the cost and the incidence of drug side effects during solution injection were lower in the observation group than in the control group after 24 weeks of treatment (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Both Dulaglutide and Liraglutide can reduce blood glucose levels, improve biochemical index, and HOMA-IR levels in women with type 2 diabetes. Dulaglutide is more cost-effective and safe.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

https://www.chictr.org.cn/index.aspx, identifier ChiCTR1900026514.

Role of lipoprotein(a) in plaque progression

Identified by Berg in 1963, lipoprotein(a) represents a key contemporary residual risk pathway in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) secondary prevention. Indeed, epidemiological and genetic studies have undoubtedly demonstrated that lipoprotein(a) is one of the strongest causal risk factors of ASCVD. Although a risk threshold has been set between 30 and 50 mg/dL, depending on the ethnicity, a linear risk gradient across the distribution has been demonstrated. In the context of the atherosclerotic process, hyperlipoproteinaemia(a) contributes to the atherosclerotic plaque formation by deposition of cholesterol in the same manner as low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, due to the LDL particle component of lipoprotein(a). Lipoprotein(a) accumulates in human coronary and carotid atherosclerotic lesions. High concentrations of lipoprotein(a) are associated with accelerated progression of the necrotic core, but not with coronary calcium score (CAC), although in the latter case, the evaluation of lipoprotein(a) can overcome the potential limitation of CAC to capture the totality of ASCVD risk in asymptomatic individuals. Finally, in the absence of a pharmacological approach to lower lipoprotein(a) to the extent required to achieve a cardiovascular benefit, implementation strategies that increase awareness among the population, patients, and healthcare providers on the importance of lipoprotein(a) in the development of ASCVD are eagerly needed.

Independent association of Lp(a) with platelet reactivity in subjects without statins or antiplatelet agents

The physiological effect of Lp(a) on platelet activity is unclear. Previous studies explored the relationship between Lp(a) and platelet aggregation in patients taking statins and antiplatelet agents, but few was conducted in individuals without the bias of those drugs that either influence Lp(a) or platelet activity. The aim of this study was to assess the relationship between Lp(a) levels and platelet aggregation in subjects not taking statins or antiplatelet drugs. A hospital-based cross-sectional study was conducted to investigate the independent contribution of Lp(a) to platelet activity by controlling the effects of potential confounding factors including lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A2 [Lp-PLA2]. Blood samples were collected from 92 subjects without statins or antiplatelet agents from the Second Xiangya Hospital. The univariate correlation analysis showed a significant correlation between AA-induced average aggregation rate [AAR] and ApoB (r = 0.324, P = 0.002), ApoA1 (r = 0.252, P = 0.015), Lp(a) (r = 0.370, P < 0.001), Lp-PLA2 (r = 0.233, P = 0.025) and platelet counts [PLT] (r = 0.389, P < 0.001). Multivariate regression analysis suggested that Lp(a) contributed independently to AA-induced average aggregation rate (β = 0.023, P = 0.027) after controlling for the effects of ApoB, Lp-PLA2 and platelet counts. Lp(a) is positively associated with platelet aggregation independent of Lp-PLA2, which may partly account for the atherothrombotic effect of Lp(a).

Lp(a): a New Pathway to Target?

Purpose of Review

Over the past decades, genetic and observational evidence has positioned lipoprotein(a) as novel important and independent risk factor for cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and aortic valve stenosis.

Recent Findings

As Lp(a) levels are determined genetically, lifestyle interventions have no effect on Lp(a)-mediated ASCVD risk. While traditional low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) can now be effectively lowered in the vast majority of patients, current lipid lowering therapies have no clinically relevant Lp(a) lowering effect.

Summary

There are multiple Lp(a)-directed therapies in clinical development targeting LPA mRNA that have shown to lower Lp(a) plasma levels for up to 90%: pelacarsen, olpasiran, and SLN360. Pelacarsen is currently investigated in a phase 3 cardiovascular outcome trial expected to finish in 2024, while olpasiran is about to proceed to phase 3 and SLN360’s phase 1 outcomes were recently published. If proven efficacious, Lp(a) will soon become the next pathway to target in ASCVD risk management.

New and Emerging Therapies for Dyslipidemia

Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) continues to represent a growing global health challenge. Despite guideline-recommended treatment of ASCVD risk, including antihypertensive, high-intensity statin therapy, and antiaggregant agents, high-risk patients, especially those with established ASCVD and patients with type 2 diabetes, continue to experience cardiovascular events. Recent years have brought significant developments in lipid and atherosclerosis research. Several lipid drugs owe their existence, in part, to human genetic evidence. Here, the authors briefly review the mechanisms, the effect on lipid parameters, and safety profiles of some of the most promising new lipid-lowering approaches that will be soon available in our daily clinical practice.

Lipid and Lipoprotein Metabolism

The exogenous lipoprotein pathway starts with the incorporation of dietary lipids into chylomicrons in the intestine. Chylomicron triglycerides are metabolized in muscle and adipose tissue and chylomicron remnants are formed, which are removed by the liver. The endogenous lipoprotein pathway begins in the liver with the formation of very low-density lipoprotein particles (VLDL). VLDL triglycerides are metabolized in muscle and adipose tissue forming intermediate-density lipoprotein (IDL), which may be taken up by the liver or further metabolized to low-density lipoprotein (LDL). Reverse cholesterol transport begins with the formation of nascent high-density lipoprotein (HDL) by the liver and intestine that acquire cholesterol from cells resulting in mature HDL. The HDL then transports the cholesterol to the liver either directly or indirectly by transferring the cholesterol to VLDL or LDL.

Lipoprotein(a): Insights for the Practicing Clinician

Following the discovery of the Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) molecule by Kare Berg in 1963, many physiological and pathological properties of this particle remain to be fully understood. Multiple population-based studies have demonstrated a correlation between elevated Lp(a) levels and the incidence of cardiovascular disease. Data extrapolated from the Copenhagen City Heart and ASTRONOMER studies also demonstrated the link between Lp(a) levels and the incidence and rate of progression of calcific aortic stenosis. Interest in Lp(a) has increased in recent years, partly due to new emerging therapies that can specifically reduce serum Lp(a) concentrations. Given the strong correlation between Lp(a) and CV disease from epidemiological studies, several international guidelines have also been updated to advocate Lp(a) testing in specific population groups. This review aims to highlight the importance of the role of Lp(a) in cardiovascular disease and discusses the potential of novel therapies in patients with elevated Lp(a) levels.

Lp(a) and the Risk for Cardiovascular Disease: Focus on the Lp(a) Paradox in Diabetes Mellitus

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is one of the strongest causal risk factors of atherosclerotic disease. It is rich in cholesteryl ester and composed of apolipoprotein B and apo(a). Plasma Lp(a) levels are determined by apo(a) transcriptional activity driven by a direct repeat (DR) response element in the apo(a) promoter under the control of (HNF)4α Farnesoid-X receptor (FXR) ligands play a key role in the downregulation of APOA expression. In vitro studies on the catabolism of Lp(a) have revealed that Lp(a) binds to several specific lipoprotein receptors; however, their in vivo role remains elusive. There are more than 1000 publications on the role of diabetes mellitus (DM) in Lp(a) metabolism; however, the data is often inconsistent and confusing. In patients suffering from Type-I diabetes mellitus (T1DM), provided they are metabolically well-controlled, Lp(a) plasma concentrations are directly comparable to healthy individuals. In contrast, there exists a paradox in T2DM patients, as many of these patients have reduced Lp(a) levels; however, they are still at an increased cardiovascular risk. The Lp(a) lowering mechanism observed in T2DM patients is most probably caused by mutations in the mature-onset diabetes of the young (MODY) gene and possibly other polymorphisms in key transcription factors of the apolipoprotein (a) gene (APOA).

Lp(a) and the Risk for Cardiovascular Disease: Focus on the Lp(a) Paradox in Diabetes Mellitus

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is one of the strongest causal risk factors of atherosclerotic disease. It is rich in cholesteryl ester and composed of apolipoprotein B and apo(a). Plasma Lp(a) levels are determined by apo(a) transcriptional activity driven by a direct repeat (DR) response element in the apo(a) promoter under the control of (HNF)4α Farnesoid-X receptor (FXR) ligands play a key role in the downregulation of APOA expression. In vitro studies on the catabolism of Lp(a) have revealed that Lp(a) binds to several specific lipoprotein receptors; however, their in vivo role remains elusive. There are more than 1000 publications on the role of diabetes mellitus (DM) in Lp(a) metabolism; however, the data is often inconsistent and confusing. In patients suffering from Type-I diabetes mellitus (T1DM), provided they are metabolically well-controlled, Lp(a) plasma concentrations are directly comparable to healthy individuals. In contrast, there exists a paradox in T2DM patients, as many of these patients have reduced Lp(a) levels; however, they are still at an increased cardiovascular risk. The Lp(a) lowering mechanism observed in T2DM patients is most probably caused by mutations in the mature-onset diabetes of the young (MODY) gene and possibly other polymorphisms in key transcription factors of the apolipoprotein (a) gene (APOA).

Lp(a) and the Risk for Cardiovascular Disease: Focus on the Lp(a) Paradox in Diabetes Mellitus

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is one of the strongest causal risk factors of atherosclerotic disease. It is rich in cholesteryl ester and composed of apolipoprotein B and apo(a). Plasma Lp(a) levels are determined by apo(a) transcriptional activity driven by a direct repeat (DR) response element in the apo(a) promoter under the control of (HNF)4α Farnesoid-X receptor (FXR) ligands play a key role in the downregulation of APOA expression. In vitro studies on the catabolism of Lp(a) have revealed that Lp(a) binds to several specific lipoprotein receptors; however, their in vivo role remains elusive. There are more than 1000 publications on the role of diabetes mellitus (DM) in Lp(a) metabolism; however, the data is often inconsistent and confusing. In patients suffering from Type-I diabetes mellitus (T1DM), provided they are metabolically well-controlled, Lp(a) plasma concentrations are directly comparable to healthy individuals. In contrast, there exists a paradox in T2DM patients, as many of these patients have reduced Lp(a) levels; however, they are still at an increased cardiovascular risk. The Lp(a) lowering mechanism observed in T2DM patients is most probably caused by mutations in the mature-onset diabetes of the young (MODY) gene and possibly other polymorphisms in key transcription factors of the apolipoprotein (a) gene (APOA).

Low Molecular Weight Apolipoprotein(a) Phenotype Rather Than Lipoprotein(a) Is Associated With Coronary Atherosclerosis and Myocardial Infarction

Background and Aims

Current evidence suggests that lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] level above 50 mg/dL is associated with increased cardiovascular risk. Our study aim was to determine the relationship of apolipoprotein(a) [apo(a)] phenotypes and Lp(a) concentration below and above 50 mg/dL with coronary atherosclerosis severity and myocardial infarction (MI).

Material and Methods

The study population consisted of 540 patients (mean age 54.0 ± 8.8 years, 82% men) who passed through coronary angiography. The number of diseased major coronary arteries assessed atherosclerosis severity. Lipids, glucose, Lp(a) levels and apo(a) phenotypes were determined in all patients. All patients were divided into four groups: with Lp(a) &lt;50 mg/dL [ “normal” Lp(a)] or ≥50 mg/dL [hyperLp(a)], and with low-molecular (LMW) or high-molecular weight (HMW) apo(a) phenotypes.

Results

Baseline clinical and biochemical characteristics were similar between the groups. In groups with LMW apo(a) phenotypes, the odds ratio (OR; 95% confidence interval) of multivessel disease was higher [10.1; 3.1–33.5, p &lt; 0.005 for hyperLp(a) and 2.2; 1.0–4.9, p = 0.056 for normal Lp(a)], but not in the group with HMW apo(a) and hyperLp(a) [1.1; 0.3–3.3, p = 0.92] compared with the reference group with HMW apo(a) and normal Lp(a). Similarly, MI was observed more often in patients with LMW apo(a) phenotype and hyperLp(a) and normal Lp(a) than in groups with HMW apo(a) phenotype.

Conclusion

The LMW apo(a) phenotype is associated with the severity of coronary atherosclerosis and MI even when Lp(a) level is below 50 mg/dL. The combination of Lp(a) level above 50 mg/dL and LMW apo(a) phenotype increases the risk of severe coronary atherosclerosis, regardless of other risk factors.

Lipoprotein(a) Serum Levels Predict Pulse Wave Velocity in Subjects in Primary Prevention for Cardiovascular Disease with Large Apo(a) Isoforms: Data from the Brisighella Heart Study

In the last decades, high serum levels of lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) have been associated with increased cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk, in particular among individuals with smaller apolipoprotein(a) (apo(a)) isoforms than those with larger sizes. The aim of our analysis was to evaluate whether Lp(a) levels could predict early vascular aging, and whether smaller apo(a) isoforms had a predictive value for vascular aging different than larger apo(a) isoforms in a cohort of subjects free from CVD. We considered the data of a subset of Brisighella Heart Study (BHS) participants free from CVD (462 men and 516 women) who were clinically evaluated during the 2012 BHS population survey. Predictors of arterial stiffness, measured as carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (cfPWV) were estimated by the application of a step-wise linear regression model. In our cohort, there were 511 subjects with small apo(a) size and 467 subjects with large apo(a) isoforms. Subjects with larger apo(a) isoform sizes had significantly lower serum levels of Lp(a). In the BHS subpopulation sample, cfPWV was predicted by age, systolic blood pressure (SBP), serum levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), triglycerides (TG) and sex, higher HDL-C serum levels and female sex associated with lower values of cfPWV. In subjects with smaller apo(a) isoform sizes, predictors of cfPWV were age, SBP, sex and serum levels of HDL-C, being higher HDL-C serum levels and female sex associated to lower values of cfPWV. In subjects with larger apo(a) isoform sizes, cfPWV was predicted by age, SBP, serum levels of Lp(a) and sex, with female sex associated with lower values of cfPWV. In our subpopulation sample, Lp(a) did not predict cfPWV. However, in subjects with large apo(a) isoform sizes, Lp(a) was a significant predictor of arterial stiffness.

Relationship between lipoprotein (a) and subclinical carotid atherosclerosis in asymptomatic individuals

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to evaluate the associations between Lipoprotein (a) ‒ Lp(a) levels and carotid Intima-Media Thickness (cIMT) and with carotid plaques in healthy subjects because of previous contradictory data.

METHODS

A total of 317 healthy normolipidemic subjects (20‒77 years old) were selected. The cIMT and atherosclerotic plaques were determined by B-mode ultrasonography. Mann-Whitney tests were performed to compare the groups according to Lp(a) levels and to explore the associations between Lp(a), carotid plaques, and cIMT, logistic and linear regression analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Studied population (51% females, median age 43 years old) presented carotid plaques and cIMT ≥ 0.9 mm in 23% and 18% of the participants, respectively. The group with Lp(a) levels > 30 mg/dL presented significantly higher age and atherosclerotic plaques. Indeed, multivariate linear regression analysis showed a significant association between Lp(a), age, and race. On the other hand, logistic regression analysis demonstrated that the subjects with Lp(a) > 30 mg/dL have a significantly high risk of carotid plaques.

CONCLUSION

The data from the present study indicate that Lp(a) levels above 30 mg/dL contribute to the development of carotid plaques even in apparently healthy participants.

Lipoprotein(a): A Genetically Determined, Causal, and Prevalent Risk Factor for Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

High levels of lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)], an apoB100-containing lipoprotein, are an independent and causal risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases through mechanisms associated with increased atherogenesis, inflammation, and thrombosis. Lp(a) is predominantly a monogenic cardiovascular risk determinant, with ≈70% to ≥90% of interindividual heterogeneity in levels being genetically determined. The 2 major protein components of Lp(a) particles are apoB100 and apolipoprotein(a). Lp(a) remains a risk factor for cardiovascular disease development even in the setting of effective reduction of plasma low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and apoB100. Despite its demonstrated contribution to atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease burden, we presently lack standardization and harmonization of assays, universal guidelines for diagnosing and providing risk assessment, and targeted treatments to lower Lp(a). There is a clinical need to understand the genetic and biological basis for variation in Lp(a) levels and its relationship to disease in different ancestry groups. This scientific statement capitalizes on the expertise of a diverse basic science and clinical workgroup to highlight the history, biology, pathophysiology, and emerging clinical evidence in the Lp(a) field. Herein, we address key knowledge gaps and future directions required to mitigate the atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk attributable to elevated Lp(a) levels.

Lipoprotein (a) and Hypertension

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide an overview of the associations between elevated blood pressure and lipoprotein (a) and possible causal links, as well as data on the prevalence of elevated lipoprotein (a) in a cohort of hypertensive patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

Elevated lipoprotein (a) is now considered to be an independent and causal risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and calcific aortic valve disease. Despite this, there are limited data demonstrating an association between elevated lipoprotein (a) and hypertension. Further, there is limited mechanistic data linking lipoprotein (a) and hypertension through either renal impairment or direct effects on the vasculature. Despite the links between lipoprotein (a) and atherosclerosis, there are limited data demonstrating an association with hypertension. Evidence from our clinic suggests that ~ 30% of the patients in this at-risk, hypertensive cohort had elevated lipoprotein (a) levels and that measurement of lipoprotein (a) maybe useful in risk stratification.

Modern Approaches to Lower Lipoprotein(a) Concentrations and Consequences for Cardiovascular Diseases

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is a low density lipoprotein particle that is associated with poor cardiovascular prognosis due to pro-atherogenic, pro-thrombotic, pro-inflammatory and pro-oxidative properties. Traditional lipid-lowering therapy does not provide a sufficient Lp(a) reduction. For PCSK9 inhibitors a small reduction of Lp(a) levels could be shown, which was associated with a reduction in cardiovascular events, independently of the effect on LDL cholesterol. Another option is inclisiran, for which no outcome data are available yet. Lipoprotein apheresis acutely and in the long run decreases Lp(a) levels and effectively improves cardiovascular prognosis in high-risk patients who cannot be satisfactorily treated with drugs. New drugs inhibiting the synthesis of apolipoprotein(a) (an antisense oligonucleotide (Pelacarsen) and two siRNA drugs) are studied. Unlike LDL-cholesterol, for Lp(a) no target value has been defined up to now. This overview presents data of modern capabilities of cardiovascular risk reduction by lowering Lp(a) level.

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.

Lipoprotein (a): When to Measure and How to Treat?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this article is to review current evidence for lipoprotein (a) (Lp(a)) as a risk factor for multiple cardiovascular (CV) disease phenotypes, provide a rationale for Lp(a) lowering to reduce CV risk, identify therapies that lower Lp(a) levels that are available clinically and under investigation, and discuss future directions.

RECENT FINDINGS

Mendelian randomization and epidemiological studies have shown that elevated Lp(a) is an independent and causal risk factor for atherosclerosis and major CV events. Lp(a) is also associated with non-atherosclerotic endpoints such as venous thromboembolism and calcific aortic valve disease. It contributes to residual CV risk in patients receiving standard-of-care LDL-lowering therapy. Plasma Lp(a) levels present a skewed distribution towards higher values and vary widely between individuals and according to ethnic background due to genetic variants in the LPA gene, but remain relatively constant throughout a person's life. Thus, elevated Lp(a) (≥50 mg/dL) is a prevalent condition affecting >20% of the population but is still underdiagnosed. Treatment guidelines have begun to advocate measurement of Lp(a) to identify patients with very high levels that have a family history of premature CVD or elevated Lp(a). Lipoprotein apheresis (LA) efficiently lowers Lp(a) and was recently associated with a reduction of incident CV events. Statins have neutral or detrimental effects on Lp(a), while PCSK9 inhibitors significantly reduce its level by up to 30%. Specific lowering of Lp(a) with antisense oligonucleotides (ASO) shows good safety and strong efficacy with up to 90% reductions. The ongoing CV outcomes study Lp(a)HORIZON will provide a first answer as to whether selective Lp(a) lowering with ASO reduces the risk of major CV events. Given the recently established association between Lp(a) level and CV risk, guidelines now recommend Lp(a) measurement in specific clinical conditions. Accordingly, Lp(a) is a current target for drug development to reduce CV risk in patients with elevated levels, and lowering Lp(a) with ASO represents a promising avenue.

Lipoproteins in chronic kidney disease: from bench to bedside

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is associated with high cardiovascular risk. CKD patients exhibit a specific lipoprotein pattern termed 'uraemic dyslipidaemia', which is characterized by rather normal low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and high triglyceride plasma levels. All three lipoprotein classes are involved in the pathogenesis of CKD-associated cardiovascular diseases (CVDs). Uraemia leads to several modifications of the structure of lipoproteins such as changes of the proteome and the lipidome, post-translational protein modifications (e.g. carbamylation) and accumulation of small-molecular substances within the lipoprotein moieties, which affect their functionality. Lipoproteins from CKD patients interfere with lipid transport and promote inflammation, oxidative stress, endothelial dysfunction as well as other features of atherogenesis, thus contributing to the development of CKD-associated CVD. While, lipid-modifying therapies play an important role in the management of CKD patients, their efficacy is modulated by kidney function. Novel therapeutic agents to prevent the adverse remodelling of lipoproteins in CKD and to improve their functional properties are highly desirable and partially under development.

Beyond Lipoprotein(a) plasma measurements: Lipoprotein(a) and inflammation

Genome wide association, epidemiological, and clinical studies have established high lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] as a causal risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Lp(a) is an apoB100 containing lipoprotein covalently bound to apolipoprotein(a) [apo(a)], a glycoprotein. Plasma Lp(a) levels are to a large extent determined by genetics. Its link to cardiovascular disease (CVD) may be driven by its pro-inflammatory effects, of which its association with oxidized phospholipids (oxPL) bound to Lp(a) is the most studied. Various inflammatory conditions, such as rheumatoid arthritis (RA), systemic lupus erythematosus, acquired immunodeficiency syndrome, and chronic renal failure are associated with high Lp(a) levels. In cases of RA, high Lp(a) levels are reversed by interleukin-6 receptor (IL-6R) blockade by tocilizumab, suggesting a potential role for IL-6 in regulating Lp(a) plasma levels. Elevated levels of IL-6 and IL-6R polymorphisms are associated with CVD. Therapies aimed at lowering apo(a) and thereby reducing plasma Lp(a) levels are in clinical trials. Their results will determine if reductions in apo(a) and Lp(a) decrease cardiovascular outcomes. As we enter this new arena of available treatments, there is a need to improve our understanding of mechanisms. This review will focus on the role of Lp(a) in inflammation and CVD.

Elevated levels of serum PCSK9 in male patients with symptomatic peripheral artery disease: The CAVASIC study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Peripheral artery disease (PAD) affects more than 200 million people worldwide. Increased low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C)levels are a risk factor for PAD and the concentrations are influenced by proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9). PCSK9 regulates the recycling of the LDL receptors to the cell membrane surface. Only a limited number of mostly small studies investigated the association between serum PCSK9 concentrations and PAD of different definition, which revealed contrasting results.

METHODS

Serum PCSK9, lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] and other lipoprotein concentrations were measured in male participants of the CAVASIC study, a case-control study of 248 patients with intermittent claudication and 251 age and diabetes-matched controls.

RESULTS

PAD patients had significantly higher PCSK9 concentrations when compared to controls (250 ± 77 vs. 222 ± 68 ng/mL, p < 0.001). Logistic regression analysis with adjustment for age revealed that an increase in PCSK9 concentrations of 100 ng/mL was associated with a 1.78-fold higher risk for PAD (95%CI 1.38-2.33, p = 1.43 × 10^-5). The association attenuated, but was still significant when adjusting additionally for age, Lp(a)-corrected LDL cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, high-sensitivity-CRP, statin treatment, hypertension, diabetes mellitus and smoking (OR = 1.49, 95%CI 1.03-2.18, p = 0.035). The strongest association was observed when both PCSK9 concentrations were above the median and Lp(a) concentrations were above 30 mg/dL (OR = 3.35, 95%CI 1.49-7.71, p = 0.0038).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest an association of higher PCSK9 concentrations with PAD, which was independent of other lipid parameters and classical cardiovascular risk factors.

Statin Treatment in Specific Patient Groups: Role for Improved Cardiovascular Risk Markers

Ample evidence supports the use of statin therapy for secondary prevention in patients with a history of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), but evidence is wanting in the case of primary prevention, low-risk individuals, and elderly adults 65+. Statins are effective in lowering low-density lipoprotein (LDL), which has long been a target for treatment decisions. We discuss the weakening dependence between cholesterol levels and mortality as a function of age and highlight recent findings on lipoprotein subfractions and other superior markers of ASCVD risk. The efficacy of statins is compared for distinct subsets of patients based on age, diabetes, ASCVD, and coronary artery calcium (CAC) status. Most cardiovascular risk calculators heavily weight age and overestimate one's absolute risk of ASCVD, particularly in very old adults. Improvements in risk assessment enable the identification of specific patient populations that benefit most from statin treatment. Derisking is particularly important for adults over 75, in whom treatment benefits are reduced and adverse musculoskeletal effects are amplified. The CAC score stratifies the benefit effect size obtainable with statins, and forms of coenzyme Q are discussed for improving patient outcomes. Robust risk estimator tools and personalized, evidence-based approaches are needed to optimally reduce cardiovascular events and mortality rates through administration of cholesterol-lowering medications.

Circulating Complex of Lipoprotein(a) and Proprotein Convertase Subtilisin/Kexin Type 9 in the Serum Measured by ELISA

The presence of a complex of lipoprotein(a) and proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) in the blood of healthy volunteers and patients with cardiovascular diseases was analyzed by ELISA. The levels of the complex varied in a wide range and did not depend on the concentrations of Lp(a) and PCSK9. Moreover, the complex was found not only in patients with cardiovascular diseases, but also in healthy volunteers, which can indicate physiological role of lipoprotein(a) as PCSK9 transporter.

Actual situation of lipoprotein apheresis in patients with elevated lipoprotein(a) levels

An elevation of lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is an internationally recognized atherogenic risk factor, documented in epidemiological studies, in studies with Mendelian randomization and in genome-wide association studies (GWAS). At present, no drug is available to effectively reduce its concentration. In Germany, an elevation of Lp(a) associated with progressive cardiovascular diseases is officially recognized as an indication for a lipoprotein apheresis (LA). The number of patients who were treated with LA with this abnormality was steadily increasing in the years 2013-2016 - the official data are reported. In all new patients, who started to be treated at our LA center in 2017 (n = 20) the increased Lp(a) was a main indication for extracorporeal therapy, though some of them also showed clearly elevated LDL cholesterol (LDL-C) concentrations despite being treated with a maximal tolerated lipid-lowering drug therapy. A diabetes mellitus was seen in 5 patients. The higher was the Lp(a) level before the first LA session, the higher was the cardiovascular risk. Lp(a) concentrations measured before LA sessions were usually about 20% lower than those before the start of the LA therapy. Acutely, Lp(a) levels were reduced by about 70%. Following LA sessions the Lp(a) levels increased and in the majority reach pre-session concentrations after one week. Thus a weekly interval is best for the patients, but a few may need two sessions per week to stop the progress of atherosclerosis. The interval mean values were about 39% lower than previous levels. Several papers had been published showing a higher efficiency of LA therapy on the incidence of cardiovascular events in patients with high Lp(a) values when comparing with hypercholesterolemic patients with normal Lp(a) concentrations. Russian specific anti-Lp(a) columns positively affected coronary atherosclerosis. PCSK9 inhibitors reduce Lp(a) concentrations in many patients and in this way have a positive impact on cardiovascular outcomes. In the future, an antisense oligonucleotide against apolipoprotein(a) may be an alternative therapeutic option, provided a clear-cut reduction of cardiovascular events will be demonstrated.

A genome-wide analysis of DNA methylation identifies a novel association signal for Lp(a) concentrations in the LPA promoter

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a major cardiovascular risk factor, which is largely genetically determined by one major gene locus, the LPA gene. Many aspects of the transcriptional regulation of LPA are poorly understood and the role of epigenetics has not been addressed yet. Therefore, we conducted an epigenome-wide analysis of DNA methylation on Lp(a) levels in two population-based studies (total n = 2208). We identified a CpG site in the LPA promoter which was significantly associated with Lp(a) concentrations. Surprisingly, the identified CpG site was found to overlap the SNP rs76735376. We genotyped this SNP de-novo in three studies (total n = 7512). The minor allele of rs76735376 (1.1% minor allele frequency) was associated with increased Lp(a) values (p = 1.01e-59) and explained 3.5% of the variation of Lp(a). Statistical mediation analysis showed that the effect on Lp(a) is rather originating from the base change itself and is not mediated by DNA methylation levels. This finding is supported by eQTL data from 208 liver tissue samples from the GTEx project, which shows a significant association of the rs76735376 minor allele with increased LPA expression. To evaluate, whether the association signal at rs76735376 may actually be derived from a stronger eQTL signal in LD with this SNP, eQTL association results of all correlated SNPs (r2≥0.1) were integrated with genetic association results. This analysis pinpointed to rs10455872 as the potential trigger of the effect of rs76735376. Furthermore, both SNPs coincide with short apo(a) isoforms. Adjusting for both, rs10455872 and the apo(a) isoforms diminished the effect size of rs76735376 to 5.38 mg/dL (p = 0.0463). This indicates that the effect of rs76735376 can be explained by both an independent effect of the SNP and a strong correlation with rs10455872 and apo(a) isoforms.

Relationship Between Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol and Lipoprotein(a) Lowering in Response to PCSK9 Inhibition With Evolocumab

Background

Beyond their potent LDL (low‐density lipoprotein) cholesterol (LDL‐C)–lowering efficacy (50–60%), PCSK9 (proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9) inhibitors also reduce Lp(a) (lipoprotein[a]) levels by 25% to 30%, suggesting a 2:1 response ratio. We aimed to characterize the relationship between LDL‐C and Lp(a) lowering by evolocumab, a PCSK9 inhibitor, in a large clinical trial population and to determine the prevalence of concordant/discordant LDL‐C and Lp(a) responses to PCSK9 inhibition.

Methods and Results

Data were analyzed from 4 randomized, 12‐week, multicenter, phase 3 evolocumab trials. Patients with familial hypercholesterolemia, nonfamilial hypercholesterolemia, or statin intolerance participated in the trials. The main measure was the degree of concordance or discordance of LDL‐C and Lp(a) in response to PCSK9 inhibition; concordant response was defined as LDL‐C reduction >35% and Lp(a) reduction >10%. The study cohort comprised 895 patients (438 female; median age: 59.0 years [interquartile range: 51–66 years]). Baseline mean level of LDL‐C was 133.6 mg/dL (SE: 1.7) and median Lp(a) level was 46.4 mg/dL (interquartile range: 18.4–82.4 mg/dL). A discordant response was observed in 165 (19.7%) patients. With these cutoffs, the prevalence of discordance was higher when considering baseline Lp(a) concentrations >30 mg/dL (26.5%) or >50 mg/dL (28.6%).

Conclusions

We demonstrate high prevalence of discordance in LDL‐C and Lp(a) reduction in response to evolocumab, particularly when considering higher baseline Lp(a) concentrations, indicating the possibility of alternative pathways beyond LDLR (LDL receptor)–mediated clearance involved in Lp(a) reduction by evolocumab.

Clinical Trial Registration

URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifiers: NCT01763827, NCT01763866, NCT01763905, NCT01763918.

See Editorial by Nestel

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.

Apolipoprotein(a) phenotype determines the correlations of lipoprotein(a) and proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 levels in patients with potential familial hypercholesterolemia

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The aim of this study is to investigate the relation between lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] and proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) concentrations, and their complex, in patients with potential familial hypercholesterolemia (FH), depending on apo(a) phenotype.

METHODS

The study included 205 patients with total cholesterol (TC) > 7.5 mmol/L and/or low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C)>4.9 mmol/L, 32 (15%) patients suffered from ischemic heart disease (IHD), 64 were taking statins. The diagnosis of FH was estimated according to the Dutch Lipid Clinics Network criteria. Lipid parameters, apoB-containing lipoprotein subfractions, Lp(a), PCSK9, Lp(a)-PCSK9 complex levels and apo(a) phenotype were determined. Depending on the apo(a) phenotype, all patients were divided into 2 groups: with high molecular weight (HMW) (n = 145) and low molecular weight (LMW) (n = 60) apo(a) phenotype.

RESULTS

The groups were comparable by all major clinical characteristics and biochemical parameters. In the whole group, PCSK9 concentration correlated with age, statins intake, Lp(a), TC and TG levels. Correlation between Lp(a) and PCSK9 levels was found only in the LMW apo(a) phenotype group independently of statins intake (r = 0.46, p < 0.001). Associations between Lp(a)-PCSK9 complex and large subfractions of intermediate (r = 0.30) and low-density lipoproteins (r = 0.30, p < 0.05 for both) were observed, with more significance in group 2 (r = 0.59, p < 0.005 and r = 0.40, p < 0.05, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with potential familial hypercholesterolemia, positive correlations between concentrations of Lp(a) and PCSK9, as well as of Lp(a)-PCSK9 plasma complex with large subfractions of intermediate and low-density lipoproteins (IDL-1 and LDL-C), were determined by the LMW apo(a) phenotype.

The PCSK9 revolution: Current status, controversies, and future directions

Proprotein Convertase Subtilisin/Kexin Type 9 (PCSK9) has revolutionized our understanding of cholesterol homeostasis and added to our arsenal against atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). In a span of approximately 15 years, PCSK9 has morphed from an esoteric and rare cause of familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) into the most efficient cholesterol-lowering target ever known, with the completion of two large scale cardiovascular outcome trials showing positive results. Current Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved modalities to inhibit PCSK9 are in the form of monoclonal antibodies which display an unparalleled degree of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) lowering and expand upon the notion that lower LDL-C is better for ASCVD risk reduction. However, the accelerated pace of discovery and therapeutic development has left large gaps in our knowledge regarding the physiology and function of PCSK9. The aim of this review is to provide context to the discovery, history, treatment and current status of PCSK9 and its therapeutic inhibitors and highlight areas of controversy and future directions.

Lipoprotein(a)-an interdisciplinary challenge

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is an internationally recognized atherogenic risk factor which is inherited and not changed by nutrition or physical activity. At present, only proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors may modestly decrease its concentration (but not in all patients)-leading to a certain decrease in cardiovascular events (CVE) in controlled studies. However, at present an elevation of Lp(a) is not a generally accepted indication for their use. More effective is lipoprotein apheresis (LA) therapy with respect to both lowering Lp(a) levels and reduction of CVE. In the future, an antisense oligonucleotide against apolipoprotein(a) will probably be available. Atherosclerosis in patients with an elevation of Lp(a) may affect several vessel regions (carotids, aorta, coronaries, leg arteries). Thus, Lp(a) should be measured in high-risk patients. These patients are usually cared for by their family doctors and by other specialists who should closely cooperate. Lipidologists should decide whether costly therapies like PCSK9 inhibitors or LA should be started. The main aim of current therapy is to optimize all other risk factors (LDL cholesterol, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, body weight, renal insufficiency). Patients should be regularly monitored (lab data, heart, arteries). This paper describes the duties of physicians of different specialties when caring for patients with high Lp(a) concentrations.

Lipoprotein(a): An independent, genetic, and causal factor for cardiovascular disease and acute myocardial infarction

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a circulating lipoprotein, and its level is largely determined by variation in the Lp(a) gene (LPA) locus encoding apo(a). Genetic variation in the LPA gene that increases Lp(a) level also increases coronary artery disease (CAD) risk, suggesting that Lp(a) is a causal factor for CAD risk. Lp(a) is the preferential lipoprotein carrier for oxidized phospholipids (OxPL), a proatherogenic and proinflammatory biomarker. Lp(a) adversely affects endothelial function, inflammation, oxidative stress, fibrinolysis, and plaque stability, leading to accelerated atherothrombosis and premature CAD. The INTER-HEART Study has established the usefulness of Lp(a) in assessing the risk of acute myocardial infarction in ethnically diverse populations with South Asians having the highest risk and population attributable risk. The 2018 Cholesterol Clinical Practice Guideline have recognized elevated Lp(a) as an atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk enhancer for initiating or intensifying statin therapy.

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.

Apolipoprotein(a) is the Product of a Pseudogene: Implications for the Pathophysiology of Lipoprotein(a)

Apolipoprotein(a) [apo(a)] is an apolipoprotein unique to lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)]. Although it has no known function, Lp(a) is a risk factor for accelerated atherothrombosis. We hypothesize that LPA, the gene which encodes apo(a), is a heretofore unrecognized unprocessed pseudogene created by duplication of PLG, the gene which encodes plasminogen. Unprocessed pseudogenes are genes which were created by duplication of functional genes and subsequently lost function after acquiring various mutations. This hypothesis explains many of the unusual features of Lp(a) and apo(a). Also, this hypothesis has implications for the therapy of elevated Lp(a) and atherothrombosis theory. Because apo(a) is functionless, the diseases associated with elevated levels of Lp(a) are due to its impact on blood viscosity.

CETP (Cholesteryl Ester Transfer Protein) Inhibition With Anacetrapib Decreases Production of Lipoprotein(a) in Mildly Hypercholesterolemic Subjects

OBJECTIVE

Lp(a) [lipoprotein (a)] is composed of apoB (apolipoprotein B) and apo(a) [apolipoprotein (a)] and is an independent risk factor for cardiovascular disease and aortic stenosis. In clinical trials, anacetrapib, a CETP (cholesteryl ester transfer protein) inhibitor, causes significant reductions in plasma Lp(a) levels. We conducted an exploratory study to examine the mechanism for Lp(a) lowering by anacetrapib.

APPROACH AND RESULTS

We enrolled 39 participants in a fixed-sequence, double-blind study of the effects of anacetrapib on the metabolism of apoB and high-density lipoproteins. Twenty-nine patients were randomized to atorvastatin 20 mg/d, plus placebo for 4 weeks, and then atorvastatin plus anacetrapib (100 mg/d) for 8 weeks. The other 10 subjects were randomized to double placebo for 4 weeks followed by placebo plus anacetrapib for 8 weeks. We examined the mechanisms of Lp(a) lowering in a subset of 12 subjects having both Lp(a) levels >20 nmol/L and more than a 15% reduction in Lp(a) by the end of anacetrapib treatment. We performed stable isotope kinetic studies using ²H₃-leucine at the end of each treatment to measure apo(a) fractional catabolic rate and production rate. Median baseline Lp(a) levels were 21.5 nmol/L (interquartile range, 9.9-108.1 nmol/L) in the complete cohort (39 subjects) and 52.9 nmol/L (interquartile range, 38.4-121.3 nmol/L) in the subset selected for kinetic studies. Anacetrapib treatment lowered Lp(a) by 34.1% (P≤0.001) and 39.6% in the complete and subset cohort, respectively. The decreases in Lp(a) levels were because of a 41% reduction in the apo(a) production rate, with no effects on apo(a) fractional catabolic rate.

CONCLUSIONS

Anacetrapib reduces Lp(a) levels by decreasing its production.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00990808.

The metabolism of lipoprotein (a): an ever-evolving story

Lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] is characterized by apolipoprotein (a) [apo(a)] covalently bound to apolipoprotein B 100. It was described in human plasma by Berg et al. in 1963 and the gene encoding apo(a) (LPA) was cloned in 1987 by Lawn and colleagues. Epidemiologic and genetic studies demonstrate that increases in Lp(a) plasma levels increase the risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Novel Lp(a) lowering treatments highlight the need to understand the regulation of plasma levels of this atherogenic lipoprotein. Despite years of research, significant uncertainty remains about the assembly, secretion, and clearance of Lp(a). Specifically, there is ongoing controversy about where apo(a) and apoB-100 bind to form Lp(a); which apoB-100 lipoproteins bind to apo(a) to create Lp(a); whether binding of apo(a) is reversible, allowing apo(a) to bind to more than one apoB-100 lipoprotein during its lifespan in the circulation; and how Lp(a) or apo(a) leave the circulation. In this review, we highlight past and recent data from stable isotope studies of Lp(a) metabolism, highlighting the critical metabolic uncertainties that exist. We present kinetic models to describe results of published studies using stable isotopes and suggest what future studies are required to improve our understanding of Lp(a) metabolism.