Report of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Workshop on Lipoprotein(a) and Cardiovascular Disease: Recent Advances and Future Directions

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

Background and aim

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

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

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

Lipoprotein(a) as a Risk Factor for Cardiovascular Diseases: Pathophysiology and Treatment Perspectives

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is still a leading cause of morbidity and mortality, despite all the progress achieved as regards to both prevention and treatment. Having high levels of lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a risk factor for cardiovascular disease that operates independently. It can increase the risk of developing cardiovascular disease even when LDL cholesterol (LDL-C) levels are within the recommended range, which is referred to as residual cardiovascular risk. Lp(a) is an LDL-like particle present in human plasma, in which a large plasminogen-like glycoprotein, apolipoprotein(a) [Apo(a)], is covalently bound to Apo B100 via one disulfide bridge. Apo(a) contains one plasminogen-like kringle V structure, a variable number of plasminogen-like kringle IV structures (types 1-10), and one inactive protease region. There is a large inter-individual variation of plasma concentrations of Lp(a), mainly ascribable to genetic variants in the Lp(a) gene: in the general po-pulation, Lp(a) levels can range from <1 mg/dL to >1000 mg/dL. Concentrations also vary between different ethnicities. Lp(a) has been established as one of the risk factors that play an important role in the development of atherosclerotic plaque. Indeed, high concentrations of Lp(a) have been related to a greater risk of ischemic CVD, aortic valve stenosis, and heart failure. The threshold value has been set at 50 mg/dL, but the risk may increase already at levels above 30 mg/dL. Although there is a well-established and strong link between high Lp(a) levels and coronary as well as cerebrovascular disease, the evidence regarding incident peripheral arterial disease and carotid atherosclerosis is not as conclusive. Because lifestyle changes and standard lipid-lowering treatments, such as statins, niacin, and cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibitors, are not highly effective in reducing Lp(a) levels, there is increased interest in developing new drugs that can address this issue. PCSK9 inhibitors seem to be capable of reducing Lp(a) levels by 25-30%. Mipomersen decreases Lp(a) levels by 25-40%, but its use is burdened with important side effects. At the current time, the most effective and tolerated treatment for patients with a high Lp(a) plasma level is apheresis, while antisense oligonucleotides, small interfering RNAs, and microRNAs, which reduce Lp(a) levels by targeting RNA molecules and regulating gene expression as well as protein production levels, are the most widely explored and promising perspectives. The aim of this review is to provide an update on the current state of the art with regard to Lp(a) pathophysiological mechanisms, focusing on the most effective strategies for lowering Lp(a), including new emerging alternative therapies. The purpose of this manuscript is to improve the management of hyperlipoproteinemia(a) in order to achieve better control of the residual cardiovascular risk, which remains unacceptably high.

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

Rationale & Objective

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

Study Design

Observational cohort study.

Setting & Participants

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

Exposure

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

Outcomes

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

Analytical Approach

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

Results

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

Limitations

Lipoprotein(a) was not available in molar concentration.

Conclusions

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

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Lipoprotein(a) is associated with a larger systemic burden of arterial calcification

AIMS

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a genetically determined risk factor for cardiovascular disease. However, population-based evidence on the link between Lp(a) and subclinical arteriosclerosis is lacking. We assessed associations of Lp(a) concentrations with arteriosclerosis in multiple arteries.

METHODS AND RESULTS

From the population-based Rotterdam study, 2354 participants (mean age: 69.5 years, 52.3% women) underwent non-contrast computed tomography to assess arterial calcification as a hallmark of arteriosclerosis. We quantified the volume of coronary artery calcification (CAC), aortic arch calcification (AAC), extracranial (ECAC), and intracranial carotid artery calcification (ICAC). All participants underwent blood sampling, from which plasma Lp(a) concentrations were derived. The association of plasma Lp(a) levels was assessed with calcification volumes and with severe calcification (upper quartile of calcification volume) using sex-stratified multivariable linear and logistic regression models. Higher Lp(a) levels were associated with larger ln-transformed volumes of CAC [fully adjusted beta 95% confidence interval (CI) per 1 standard deviation (SD) in women: 0.09, 95% CI 0.04-0.14, men: 0.09, 95% CI 0.03-0.14], AAC (women: 0.06, 95% CI 0.01-0.11, men: 0.09, 95% CI 0.03-0.14), ECAC (women: 0.07, 95% CI 0.02-0.13, men: 0.08, 95% CI 0.03-0.14), and ICAC (women: 0.09, 95% CI 0.03-0.14, men: 0.05, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.11]. In the highest Lp(a) percentile, severe ICAC was most prevalent in women [fully adjusted odds ratio (OR) 2.41, 95% CI 1.25-4.63] and severe AAC in men (fully adjusted OR 3.29, 95% CI 1.67-6.49).

CONCLUSION

Higher Lp(a) was consistently associated with a larger calcification burden in all major arteries. The findings of this study indicate that Lp(a) is a systemic risk factor for arteriosclerosis and thus potentially an effective target for treatment. Lp(a)-reducing therapies may reduce the burden from arteriosclerotic events throughout the arterial system.

TRANSLATIONAL PERSPECTIVE

In 2354 participants from the Rotterdam study, we assessed the link between Lp(a) concentrations and arterial calcifications, as proxy for arteriosclerosis, in major arteries. We found that higher Lp(a) levels were consistently associated with larger volumes of calcification in the coronary arteries, aortic arch, extracranial carotid arteries, and intracranial carotid arteries. The findings of our study indicate that Lp(a) is a systemic risk factor for arteriosclerosis, suggesting that the systemic burden of arteriosclerosis throughout the arterial system could be reduced by targeting Lp(a).

Elevated Lp(a) Levels Correlate with Severe and Multiple Coronary Artery Stenotic Lesions

Backgrounds and Aims

The role of Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) in increasing the risk of cardiovascular diseases is reported in several populations. The aim of this study is to investigate the correlation of high Lp(a) levels with the degree of coronary artery stenosis.

Methods

Two hundred and sixty-eight patients were enrolled for this study. Patients who underwent coronary artery angiography and who had Lp(a) measurements available were included in this study. Binomial logistic regressions were applied to investigate the association between Lp(a) and stenosis in the four major coronary arteries. The effect of LDL and HDL Cholesterol on modulating the association of Lp(a) with coronary artery disease (CAD) was also evaluated. Multinomial regression analysis was applied to assess the association of Lp(a) with the different degrees of stenosis in the four major coronary arteries.

Results

Our analyses showed that Lp(a) is a risk factor for CAD and this risk is significantly apparent in patients with HDL-cholesterol ≥35 mg/dL and in non-obese patients. A large proportion of the study patients with elevated Lp(a) levels had CAD even when exhibiting high HDL serum levels. Increased HDL with low Lp(a) serum levels were the least correlated with stenosis. A significantly higher levels of Lp(a) were found in patients with >50% stenosis in at least two major coronary vessels arguing for pronounced and multiple stenotic lesions. Finally, the derived variant (rs1084651) of the LPA gene was significantly associated with CAD.

Conclusion

Our study highlights the importance of Lp(a) levels as an independent biological marker of severe and multiple coronary artery stenosis.

Lipoprotein(a) levels in a global population with established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease

OBJECTIVE

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is an important genetically determined risk factor for atherosclerotic vascular disease (ASCVD). With the development of Lp(a)-lowering therapies, this study sought to characterise patterns of Lp(a) levels in a global ASCVD population and identify racial, ethnic, regional and gender differences.

METHODS

A multicentre cross-sectional epidemiological study to estimate the prevalence of elevated Lp(a) in patients with a history of myocardial infarction, ischaemic stroke or peripheral artery disease conducted at 949 sites in 48 countries in North America, Europe, Asia, South America, South Africa and Australia between April 2019 and July 2021. Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and Lp(a) levels were measured either as mass (mg/dL) or molar concentration (nmol/L).

RESULTS

Of 48 135 enrolled patients, 13.9% had prior measurements of Lp(a). Mean age was 62.6 (SD 10.1) years and 25.9% were female. Median Lp(a) was 18.0 mg/dL (IQR 7.9-57.1) or 42.0 nmol/L (IQR 15.0-155.4). Median LDL-C was 77 mg/dL (IQR 58.4-101.0). Lp(a) in women was higher, 22.8 (IQR 9.0-73.0) mg/dL, than in men, 17.0 (IQR 7.1-52.2) mg/dL, p<0.001. Black patients had Lp(a) levels approximately threefold higher than white, Hispanic or Asian patients. Younger patients also had higher levels. 27.9% of patients had Lp(a) levels >50 mg/dL, 20.7% had levels >70 mg/dL, 12.9% were >90 mg/dL and 26.0% of patients exceeded 150 nmol/L.

CONCLUSIONS

Globally, Lp(a) is measured in a small minority of patients with ASCVD and is highest in black, younger and female patients. More than 25% of patients had levels exceeding the established threshold for increased cardiovascular risk, approximately 50 mg/dL or 125 nmol/L.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Use of Lipoprotein(a) in clinical practice: A biomarker whose time has come. A scientific statement from the National Lipid Association

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a well-recognized, independent risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, with elevated levels estimated to be prevalent in 20% of the population. Observational and genetic evidence strongly support a causal relationship between high plasma concentrations of Lp(a) and increased risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease-related events, such as myocardial infarction and stroke, and valvular aortic stenosis. In this scientific statement, we review an array of evidence-based considerations for testing of Lp(a) in clinical practice and the utilization of Lp(a) levels to inform treatment strategies in primary and secondary prevention.

Triglyceride Metabolism Modifies Lipoprotein(a) Plasma Concentration

BACKGROUND

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is a significant cardiovascular risk factor. Knowing the mechanisms that regulate its concentration can facilitate the development of Lp(a)-lowering drugs. This study analyzes the relationship between triglycerides (TGs) and Lp(a) concentrations, cross-sectionally and longitudinally, and the influence of the number and composition of TG-rich lipoproteins, and the APOE genotype.

METHODS

Data from Aragon Workers Health Study (AWHS) (n = 5467), National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey III phase 2 (n = 3860), and Hospital Universitario Miguel Servet (HUMS) (n = 2079) were used for cross-sectional TG and Lp(a) relationship. Lp(a) intrasubject variation was studied in AWHS participants and HUMS patients with repeated measurements. TG-rich lipoproteins were quantified by nuclear magnetic resonance in a subsample from AWHS. Apolipoproteins B and E were quantified by Luminex in very low-density lipoprotein (VLDL) isolated by ultracentrifugation, from HUMS samples. APOE genotyping was carried in AWHS and HUMS participants. Regression models adjusted for age and sex were used to study the association.

RESULTS

The 3 studies showed an inverse relationship between TG and Lp(a). Increased VLDL number, size, and TG content were associated with significantly lower Lp(a). There was an inverse association between the apoE concentration in VLDL and Lp(a). No significant association was observed for apolipoprotein (apo)B. Subjects carrying the apoE2/E2 genotype had significantly lower levels of Lp(a).

CONCLUSION

Our results show an inverse relationship Lp(a)-TG. Subjects with larger VLDL size have lower Lp(a), and lower values of Lp(a) were present in patients with apoE-rich VLDL and apoE2/E2 subjects. Our results suggest that bigger VLDLs and VLDLs enriched in apoE are inversely involved in Lp(a) plasma concentration.

Canadian Society of Clinical Chemists Harmonized Clinical Laboratory Lipid Reporting Recommendations on the Basis of the 2021 Canadian Cardiovascular Society Lipid Guidelines

There is limited guidance on laboratory reporting and interpretation of lipids and lipoproteins used in cardiovascular risk stratification. This contributes to inconsistencies in lipid reporting across clinical laboratories. Recently, the Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) published the 2021 CCS guidelines for the management of dyslipidemia for the prevention of cardiovascular disease in the adult. A subcommittee of the Working Group on Reference Interval Harmonization of the Canadian Society of Clinical Chemists has developed harmonized lipid reporting recommendations that are aligned with the 2021 CCS guidelines, to improve the standardization of lipid assessment and clinical decision-making. The proposed harmonized lipid reporting recommendations were critically reviewed by a broad range of laboratory and clinical experts across Canada. Feedback from approximately 30 expert reviewers was reviewed by the Working Group on Reference Interval Harmonization lipid subcommittee, and consensus decisions were incorporated into the 2021 harmonized lipid reporting recommendations. In this position statement, we provide 6 recommendations for laboratory reporting of lipid parameters. These recommendations include implementing the new National Institutes of Health equation to replace the Friedewald equation for calculating low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, offering lipoprotein (a), either as an in-house or send-out test, and using assays that report lipoprotein (a) in molar units (nmol/L). We also developed a harmonized lipid reporting format with interpretive comments that includes flagging results based on screening patients using treatment decision thresholds in a primary prevention setting. Overall, harmonized lipid reporting will help bridge the gap between clinical guideline recommendations and clinical laboratory reporting and interpretation, and will improve cardiovascular risk assessment across Canada.

Oxidized phospholipids on apolipoprotein B-100 versus plasminogen and risk of coronary heart disease in the PROCARDIS study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Oxidized phospholipids carried on the apolipoprotein B-100 (OxPL-apoB) component of Lp(a) are predictive of coronary heart disease (CHD), but the role of oxidized phospholipids carried on plasminogen (OxPL-PLG) is unknown. We examined the independent effects of OxPL-apoB and OxPL-PLG for risk of CHD before and after adjustment for Lp(a).

METHODS

Plasma levels of OxPL-apoB, OxPL-PLG, plasminogen and Lp(a) were measured in the PROCARDIS study of early-onset CHD (906 cases/858 controls). Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate the odds ratios (OR) for each biomarker with CHD after adjustment for established risk factors.

RESULTS

Mean levels of OxPL-apoB were higher in cases than controls, but levels of OxPL-PLG and plasminogen were similar. For OxPL-apoB, individuals in the top vs bottom fifth had 2-fold higher age and sex-adjusted OR of CHD (OR = 2.61 [95%CI: 1.91, 3.55]), which were partially attenuated after adjustment for established risk factors. The findings for OxPL-apoB and CHD in PROCARDIS were comparable with those of a meta-analysis of all such studies. However, the associations of OxPL-apoB with CHD were fully attenuated by additional adjustment for Lp(a) (OR = 0.93 [0.54,1.60]). Neither OxPL-PLG nor plasminogen were associated with CHD. Overall, there were no differences in the predictive value for CHD of high vs normal levels (<20th or >80th percentile) of OxPL-apoB, OxPL-PLG, plasminogen or Lp(a) after stratifying for each other.

CONCLUSIONS

These results highlight the context-dependency of OxPL in plasma and suggest that their associated risk of CHD is chiefly mediated by their carriage on Lp(a).

Lipoprotein(a) and the Risk for Coronary Heart Disease and Ischemic Stroke Events Among Black and White Adults With Cardiovascular Disease

Background

It is unclear whether lipoprotein(a) is associated with coronary heart disease (CHD) and ischemic stroke events in White and Black adults with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD).

Methods and Results

We conducted a case‐cohort analysis, including Black and White REGARDS (Reasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke) study participants ≥45 years of age with prevalent ASCVD (ie, CHD or stroke) at baseline between 2003 and 2007. Baseline lipoprotein(a) molar concentration was measured in participants with ASCVD who experienced a CHD event by December 2017 (n=1166) or an ischemic stroke by September 2019 (n=492) and in a random subcohort of participants with prevalent ASCVD (n=1948). The hazard ratio (HR) for CHD events per 1 SD (1.5 units) higher log‐transformed lipoprotein(a) was 1.26 (95% CI, 1.02–1.56) among Black participants and 1.16 (95% CI, 1.02–1.31) among White participants (P value comparing HRs, 0.485). The HR for CHD events per 1 SD higher log‐lipoprotein(a) within subgroups with hs‐CRP (high‐sensitivity C‐reactive protein) ≥2 and <2 mg/L was 1.31 (95% CI, 0.99–1.73) and 1.23 (95% CI, 0.85–1.80), respectively (P value comparing HRs, 0.836), among Black participants, and 1.07 (95% CI, 0.91–1.27) and 1.36 (95% CI, 1.10–1.70), respectively (P value comparing HRs, 0.088), among White participants. There was no evidence that the association between lipoprotein(a) and CHD events differed by statin use. There was no evidence of an association between lipoprotein(a) and ischemic stroke events among Black or White participants.

Conclusions

Higher lipoprotein(a) levels were associated with an increased risk for CHD events in Black and White adults with ASCVD.

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): Pathophysiology, measurement, indication and treatment in cardiovascular disease. A consensus statement from the Nouvelle Société Francophone d'Athérosclérose (NSFA)

Lipoprotein(a) is an apolipoprotein B100-containing low-density lipoprotein-like particle that is rich in cholesterol, and is associated with a second major protein, apolipoprotein(a). Apolipoprotein(a) possesses structural similarity to plasminogen but lacks fibrinolytic activity. As a consequence of its composite structure, lipoprotein(a) may: (1) elicit a prothrombotic/antifibrinolytic action favouring clot stability; and (2) enhance atherosclerosis progression via its propensity for retention in the arterial intima, with deposition of its cholesterol load at sites of plaque formation. Equally, lipoprotein(a) may induce inflammation and calcification in the aortic leaflet valve interstitium, leading to calcific aortic valve stenosis. Experimental, epidemiological and genetic evidence support the contention that elevated concentrations of lipoprotein(a) are causally related to atherothrombotic risk and equally to calcific aortic valve stenosis. The plasma concentration of lipoprotein(a) is principally determined by genetic factors, is not influenced by dietary habits, remains essentially constant over the lifetime of a given individual and is the most powerful variable for prediction of lipoprotein(a)-associated cardiovascular risk. However, major interindividual variations (up to 1000-fold) are characteristic of lipoprotein(a) concentrations. In this context, lipoprotein(a) assays, although currently insufficiently standardized, are of considerable interest, not only in stratifying cardiovascular risk, but equally in the clinical follow-up of patients treated with novel lipid-lowering therapies targeted at lipoprotein(a) (e.g. antiapolipoprotein(a) antisense oligonucleotides and small interfering ribonucleic acids) that markedly reduce circulating lipoprotein(a) concentrations. We recommend that lipoprotein(a) be measured once in subjects at high cardiovascular risk with premature coronary heart disease, in familial hypercholesterolaemia, in those with a family history of coronary heart disease and in those with recurrent coronary heart disease despite lipid-lowering treatment. Because of its clinical relevance, the cost of lipoprotein(a) testing should be covered by social security and health authorities.

Very low lipoprotein(a) and increased mortality risk after myocardial infarction

BACKGROUND

Inconclusive data exist on risk associated with Lp(a) in patients after myocardial infarction (MI). Aims of the present study were to evaluate the association of Lp(a) level with total mortality and recurrent cardiovascular events.

DESIGN AND METHODS

Single center prospective registry of consecutive patients hospitalized for acute myocardial infarction between June 2017 and June 2020 at a large tertiary cardiac center with available blood samples drawn <24h of admission.

RESULTS

Data from 851 consecutive patients hospitalized for MI were evaluated. During the median follow-up of 19 months (interquartile range 10-27), 58 (6.8%) patients died. Nonlinear modelling revealed a U-shaped association between Lp(a) and total mortality risk. Compared to patients with Lp(a) ranging between 10-30 nmol/L and after multivariate adjustment, total mortality risk was increased both in patients with Lp(a)<7 nmol/L (hazard ratio (HR) 4.08, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.72-9.68) and Lp(a) ≥125 nmol/L (HR 2.92, 95% CI 1.16-7.37), respectively. Similarly, the risk of combined endpoint of acute coronary syndrome recurrence or cardiovascular mortality was increased both in patients with low (sub-HR 2.60, 95% CI 1.33-5.08) and high (sub-HR 2.10, 95% CI 1.00-4.39) Lp(a). Adjustment for heart failure signs at the time of hospitalization weakened the association with total mortality and recurrent cardiovascular events.

CONCLUSIONS

In the present analysis, both high and low concentrations of Lp(a) were associated with an increased risk of total mortality and recurrent cardiovascular events after MI. The excess of mortality associated with Lp(a) was partially attributable to more prevalent heart failure.

Lipids and Lipoproteins in Health and Disease: Focus on Targeting Atherosclerosis

Despite advances in pharmacotherapy, intervention devices and techniques, residual cardiovascular risks still cause a large burden on public health. Whilst most guidelines encourage achieving target levels of specific lipids and lipoproteins to reduce these risks, increasing evidence has shown that molecular modification of these lipoproteins also has a critical impact on their atherogenicity. Modification of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) by oxidation, glycation, peroxidation, apolipoprotein C-III adhesion, and the small dense subtype largely augment its atherogenicity. Post-translational modification by oxidation, carbamylation, glycation, and imbalance of molecular components can reduce the capacity of high-density lipoprotein (HDL) for reverse cholesterol transport. Elevated levels of triglycerides (TGs), apolipoprotein C-III and lipoprotein(a), and a decreased level of apolipoprotein A-I are closely associated with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Pharmacotherapies aimed at reducing TGs, lipoprotein(a), and apolipoprotein C-III, and enhancing apolipoprotein A-1 are undergoing trials, and promising preliminary results have been reported. In this review, we aim to update the evidence on modifications of major lipid and lipoprotein components, including LDL, HDL, TG, apolipoprotein, and lipoprotein(a). We also discuss examples of translating findings from basic research to potential therapeutic targets for drug development.

Lipoprotein(a) as a unique primary risk factor for early atherosclerotic peripheral arterial disease

Elevated plasma lipoprotein(a) is a relatively common condition that contributes to many cardiovascular diseases. However, the awareness and testing for this condition remain low. Herein, we present a case of an otherwise healthy and active man who developed symptoms of peripheral arterial disease starting at age 49, and was found to have hyper-lipoprotein(a) as his only notable risk factor. Diagnosis was not made until years later, after an extensive workup. Upon further screening, he was also found to have subclinical coronary and carotid artery atherosclerotic disease. The patient was treated with aspirin, statin, niacin and angioplasty to bilateral superficial femoral arteries with good symptom resolution. Early screening of his son also revealed a similarly elevated lipoprotein(a) level. It is important to raise awareness of this condition and its relationship to early-onset peripheral arterial disease so patients and their families can be appropriately identified, counselled and treated.

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).

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

OBJECTIVE

Lp(a) (lipoprotein[a]) concentrations are associated with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), and new therapies that enable potent and specific reduction are in development. In the largest study conducted to date, we address 3 areas of uncertainty: (1) the magnitude and shape of ASCVD risk conferred across the distribution of lipoprotein(a) concentrations; (2) variation of risk across racial and clinical subgroups; (3) clinical importance of a high lipoprotein(a) threshold to guide therapy. Approach and Results: Relationship of lipoprotein(a) to incident ASCVD was studied in 460 506 middle-aged UK Biobank participants. Over a median follow-up of 11.2 years, incident ASCVD occurred in 22 401 (4.9%) participants. Median lipoprotein(a) concentration was 19.6 nmol/L (25th-75th percentile 7.6-74.8). The relationship between lipoprotein(a) and ASCVD appeared linear across the distribution, with a hazard ratio of 1.11 (95% CI, 1.10-1.12) per 50 nmol/L increment. Substantial differences in concentrations were noted according to race-median values for white, South Asian, black, and Chinese individuals were 19, 31, 75, and 16 nmol/L, respectively. However, risk per 50 nmol/L appeared similar-hazard ratios of 1.11, 1.10, and 1.07 for white, South Asian, and black individuals, respectively. A high lipoprotein(a) concentration defined as ≥150 nmol/L was present in 12.2% of those without and 20.3% of those with preexisting ASCVD and associated with hazard ratios of 1.50 (95% CI, 1.44-1.56) and 1.16 (95% CI, 1.05-1.27), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Lipoprotein(a) concentrations predict incident ASCVD among middle-aged adults within primary and secondary prevention contexts, with a linear risk gradient across the distribution. Concentrations are variable across racial subgroups, but the associated risk appears similar.

Lp(a): When and how to measure it

Lipoprotein(a) has long been regarded as a risk factor for cardiovascular disease; however, its routine use in clinical practice has been hampered by difficulties inherent in the measurement of this complex lipoprotein. The major challenges relate to its size heterogeneity and related issues including (1) use of appropriate calibrators (2) standardization of calibration protocols (3) traceability and (4) reporting units. In the UK, results from the current EQA schemes for lipoprotein(a) suggest that there is considerable work required to standardize lipoprotein(a) measurement. This is becoming increasingly pertinent with the increasing recognition of lipoprotein(a) as an independent risk factor for cardiovascular disease in international guidelines and the emergence of novel antisense therapies to effectively reduce lipoprotein(a). This article raises awareness of the importance of measurement of lipoprotein(a) for the assessment of cardiovascular disease risk and gives guidance to clinical laboratories regarding choice of appropriate assays.

Lipoprotein(a) plasma levels are not associated with incident microvascular complications in type 2 diabetes mellitus

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS

Microvascular disease in type 2 diabetes is a significant cause of end-stage renal disease, blindness and peripheral neuropathy. The strict control of known risk factors, e.g. lifestyle, hyperglycaemia, hypertension and dyslipidaemia, reduces the incidence of microvascular complications, but a residual risk remains. Lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] is a strong risk factor for macrovascular disease in the general population. We hypothesised that plasma Lp(a) levels and the LPA gene SNPs rs10455872 and rs3798220 are associated with the incident development of microvascular complications in type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

Analyses were performed of data from the DiaGene study, a prospective study for complications of type 2 diabetes, collected in the city of Eindhoven, the Netherlands (n = 1886 individuals with type 2 diabetes, mean follow-up time = 6.97 years). To assess the relationship between plasma Lp(a) levels and the LPA SNPs with each newly developed microvascular complication (retinopathy n = 223, nephropathy n = 246, neuropathy n = 236), Cox proportional hazards models were applied and adjusted for risk factors for microvascular complications (age, sex, mean arterial pressure, non-HDL-cholesterol, HDL-cholesterol, BMI, duration of type 2 diabetes, HbA_1c and smoking).

RESULTS

No significant associations of Lp(a) plasma levels and the LPA SNPs rs10455872 and rs3798220 with prevalent or incident microvascular complications in type 2 diabetes were found. In line with previous observations the LPA SNPs rs10455872 and rs3798220 did influence the plasma Lp(a) levels.

CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION

Our data show no association between Lp(a) plasma levels and the LPA SNPs with known effect on Lp(a) plasma levels with the development of microvascular complications in type 2 diabetes. This indicates that Lp(a) does not play a major role in the development of microvascular complications. However, larger studies are needed to exclude minimal effects of Lp(a) on the development of microvascular complications.

Elevated Lipoprotein A in South Asians and the Associated Risk of Cardiovascular Disease: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

South Asians have a premature risk of cardiovascular disease and increased lipoprotein A which enhances their risk.

METHODS

This systematic review evaluates the role of elevated lipoprotein A in cardiovascular disease risk for South Asians. It discusses the pathophysiology, clinical studies, and treatment of elevated lipoprotein A using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses method.

RESULTS

A total of 72 articles was incorporated which consisted of clinical studies, case-control and cohort studies, meta-analysis, reviews, and editorials. Cardiovascular disease and myocardial infarction occurs prematurely in South Asians, which is further enhanced with an elevated lipoprotein A.

CONCLUSIONS

South Asians with an elevated lipoprotein A have an increased risk of coronary artery disease so they should have early enactment of lifestyle modification and aggressive medical management.

Lipoprotein(a) the Insurgent: A New Insight into the Structure, Function, Metabolism, Pathogenicity, and Medications Affecting Lipoprotein(a) Molecule

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)], aka “Lp little a”, was discovered in the 1960s in the lab of the Norwegian physician Kåre Berg. Since then, we have greatly improved our knowledge of lipids and cardiovascular disease (CVD). Lp(a) is an enigmatic class of lipoprotein that is exclusively formed in the liver and comprises two main components, a single copy of apolipoprotein (apo) B-100 (apo-B100) tethered to a single copy of a protein denoted as apolipoprotein(a) apo(a). Plasma levels of Lp(a) increase soon after birth to a steady concentration within a few months of life. In adults, Lp(a) levels range widely from <2 to 2500 mg/L. Evidence that elevated Lp(a) levels >300 mg/L contribute to CVD is significant. The improvement of isoform-independent assays, together with the insight from epidemiologic studies, meta-analyses, genome-wide association studies, and Mendelian randomization studies, has established Lp(a) as the single most common independent genetically inherited causal risk factor for CVD. This breakthrough elevated Lp(a) from a biomarker of atherosclerotic risk to a target of therapy. With the emergence of promising second-generation antisense therapy, we hope that we can answer the question of whether Lp(a) is ready for prime-time clinic use. In this review, we present an update on the metabolism, pathophysiology, and current/future medical interventions for high levels of Lp(a).

Lipoprotein(a) Levels and the Risk of Myocardial Infarction Among 7 Ethnic Groups

BACKGROUND

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] levels predict the risk of myocardial infarction (MI) in populations of European ancestry; however, few data are available for other ethnic groups. Furthermore, differences in isoform size distribution and the associated Lp(a) concentrations have not fully been characterized between ethnic groups.

METHODS

We studied 6086 cases of first MI and 6857 controls from the INTERHEART study that were stratified by ethnicity and adjusted for age and sex. A total of 775 Africans, 4443 Chinese, 1352 Arabs, 1856 Europeans, 1469 Latin Americans, 1829 South Asians, and 1221 Southeast Asians were included in the study. Lp(a) concentration was measured in each participant using an assay that was insensitive to isoform size, with isoform size being assessed by Western blot in a subset of 4219 participants.

RESULTS

Variations in Lp(a) concentrations and isoform size distributions were observed between populations, with Africans having the highest Lp(a) concentration (median=27.2 mg/dL) and smallest isoform size (median=24 kringle IV repeats). Chinese samples had the lowest concentration (median=7.8 mg/dL) and largest isoform sizes (median=28). Overall, high Lp(a) concentrations (>50 mg/dL) were associated with an increased risk of MI (odds ratio, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.32-1.67; P<0.001). The association was independent of established MI risk factors, including diabetes mellitus, smoking, high blood pressure, and apolipoprotein B and A ratio. An inverse association was observed between isoform size and Lp(a) concentration, which was consistent across ethnic groups. Larger isoforms tended to be associated with a lower risk of MI, but this relationship was not present after adjustment for concentration. Consistent with variations in Lp(a) concentration across populations, the population-attributable risk of high Lp(a) for MI varied from 0% in Africans to 9.5% in South Asians.

CONCLUSIONS

Lp(a) concentration and isoform size varied markedly between ethnic groups. Higher Lp(a) concentrations were associated with an increased risk of MI and carried an especially high population burden in South Asians and Latin Americans. Isoform size was inversely associated with Lp(a) concentration, but did not significantly contribute to risk.

Lp(a): Addressing a Target for Cardiovascular Disease Prevention

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review the current recommendations for lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) screening, the evidence behind the thresholds for increased cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk, and the available data supporting Lp(a) lowering.

RECENT FINDINGS

Lp(a) is almost entirely genetically determined and has an independent causal association with CVD. Measurement of Lp(a) is challenging given the structural heterogeneity of apolipoprotein a (apo(a)), for which isoform-insensitive immunoassays should be used. Current guidelines do not recommend treatment to lower Lp(a) but rather focus on intensified preventive measures including low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) lowering in patients with high Lp(a). Evidence suggests that levels higher than 50 mg/dL (125 nmol/L) identify significantly increased CVD risk. Mendelian randomization studies suggest that in order to have a clinically significant reduction in coronary heart disease, Lp(a) levels should be reduced by at least 60-70 mg/dL to attain a significant benefit. Ongoing studies of targeted therapy with antisense oligonucleotides (ASO) have shown promising reductions in Lp(a) up to 80%, but a cardiovascular outcomes trial is needed. There is unquestionably an increased risk for CVD in patients with elevated Lp(a); however, measurement assay issues and the lack of Lp(a)-targeted therapies with proven outcome reduction limit the clinical utility of this important risk factor. Available evidence suggesting specific thresholds for clinically significant CVD risk are based on European or Caucasian populations, not accounting for important racial differences. Novel Lp(a)-targeted emerging therapies may need to account for an expected reduction of at least 60-70 mg/dL to achieve a clinically significant benefit.

NHLBI Working Group Recommendations to Reduce Lipoprotein(a)-Mediated Risk of Cardiovascular Disease and Aortic Stenosis

Pathophysiological, epidemiological, and genetic studies provide strong evidence that lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a causal mediator of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and calcific aortic valve disease (CAVD). Specific therapies to address Lp(a)-mediated CVD and CAVD are in clinical development. Due to knowledge gaps, the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute organized a working group that identified challenges in fully understanding the role of Lp(a) in CVD/CAVD. These included the lack of research funding, inadequate experimental models, lack of globally standardized Lp(a) assays, and inadequate understanding of the mechanisms underlying current drug therapies on Lp(a) levels. Specific recommendations were provided to facilitate basic, mechanistic, preclinical, and clinical research on Lp(a); foster collaborative research and resource sharing; leverage expertise of different groups and centers with complementary skills; and use existing National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute resources. Concerted efforts to understand Lp(a) pathophysiology, together with diagnostic and therapeutic advances, are required to reduce Lp(a)-mediated risk of CVD and CAVD.

Effect of Ezetimibe Monotherapy on Plasma Lipoprotein(a) Concentrations in Patients with Primary Hypercholesterolemia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Ezetimibe reduces plasma low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels by up to 20%. However, its effect on plasma lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] concentrations in patients with primary hypercholesterolemia has not been defined.

OBJECTIVE

Therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess this effect based on the available randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

METHODS

We searched the PubMed and SCOPUS databases from inception until 28 February 2017 to identify RCTs that investigated the effect of ezetimibe monotherapy on plasma Lp(a) concentrations in patients with primary hypercholesterolemia. We pooled mean percentage changes in plasma Lp(a) concentrations as a mean difference (MD) with a 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

Seven RCTs with 2337 patients met the selection criteria and were included in the analysis. Overall pooled analysis suggested that ezetimibe 10 mg significantly reduced plasma Lp(a) concentrations in patients with primary hypercholesterolemia by - 7.06% (95% CI - 11.95 to - 2.18; p = 0.005) compared with placebo. No significant heterogeneity was observed (χ² = 5.34; p = 0.5). Excluding one study from the analysis resulted in insignificant differences between the two groups (p = 0.2). Meta-regression did not find a significant association between the mean percentage changes in Lp(a) and other potential moderator variables, which included the mean percentage changes of LDL-C concentrations (p = 0.06) and baseline Lp(a) mean values (p = 0.46).

CONCLUSIONS

Ezetimibe monotherapy (10 mg/day) showed a small (7.06%) but statistically significant reduction in the plasma levels of Lp(a) in patients with primary hypercholesterolemia. According to current literature, this magnitude of reduction seems to have no clinical relevance. However, further studies are warranted to clarify the mechanism mediating this effect of ezetimibe and to investigate its efficacy in combination with other drugs that have shown promise in lowering Lp(a) levels.

Recent AHA/ACC guidelines on cholesterol management expands the role of the clinical laboratory

The American Heart Association (AHA) and American College of Cardiology (ACC) recently published new guidelines for managing blood cholesterol. Five years from the publication of Pooled Cohort Equation to estimate 10-year risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), the newest guidelines put more focus on individualized risk assessment which necessitates increased participation of laboratory medicine in the prevention and management of ASCVD. This mini-review summarizes key ideas from the new guideline that influence laboratory practice, including the renewed low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) treatment targets in primary and secondary prevention, the use of non-fasting lipids, new calculations of LDL cholesterol, and recommendations on assessing risk-enhancing factors in certain populations to aid the decision on statin and non-statin therapy. The shift in strategies for monitoring and lowering LDL-C has created opportunities for clinical laboratorians to more actively contribute to better identification of individuals at risk for ASCVD and partner with physicians taking care of the patient.

Can Lp(a) Lowering Against Background Statin Therapy Really Reduce Cardiovascular Risk?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The association between elevated plasma levels of lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) has been discussed for many years. Recent genetic findings have confirmed that elevated Lp(a) similar to elevated LDL-cholesterol (LDL-C) might be causally related to premature ASCVD. Lp(a) is relatively refractory to lifestyle interventions. The results of studies with statins and their possible effect on Lp(a) are conflicting. Specific Lp(a) apheresis is used as a treatment against background statin therapy and can decrease Lp(a). The purpose of this review is to discuss whether new drugs which decrease Lp(a) can prevent ASCVD and decrease ASCVD mortality when applied in addition to statins.

RECENT FINDINGS

Some new LDL-C-lowering drugs such as mipomersen and lomitapide decrease elevated Lp(a) in addition to statins but they have some unpleasant adverse effects. Recently, an antisense oligonucleotide against apo(a), AKCEA-APO(a)Rx, has been shown to selectively decrease Lp(a). The most recent advance in LDL-C lowering are PCSK9 inhibitors. Alirocumab and evolocumab do not only significantly reduce LDL-C on top of maximally tolerated statin therapy and prevent ASCVD events, but also further decrease Lp(a). There is no data to indicate whether mipomersen, lomitapide, or IONIS-APO(a)-LRx decrease ASCVD events and mortality. Conclusive evidence is still lacking as to whether the treatment with PCSK9 inhibitors against background statin therapy actually additionally reduces ASCVD risk due to the lowering of Lp(a) or simply due to lowering LDL-C to levels much lower than high-intensity statin treatment as monotherapy. Ongoing trials will probably provide an answer to these questions.

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.

Dietary natural products as emerging lipoprotein(a)-lowering agents

Elevated plasma lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) levels are associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). Hitherto, niacin has been the drug of choice to reduce elevated Lp(a) levels in hyperlipidemic patients but its efficacy in reducing CVD outcomes has been seriously questioned by recent clinical trials. Additional drugs may reduce to some extent plasma Lp(a) levels but the lack of a specific therapeutic indication for Lp(a)-lowering limits profoundly reduce their use. An attractive therapeutic option is natural products. In several preclinical and clinical studies as well as meta-analyses, natural products, including l-carnitine, coenzyme Q ₁₀ , and xuezhikang were shown to significantly decrease Lp(a) levels in patients with Lp(a) hyperlipoproteinemia. Other natural products, such as pectin, Ginkgo biloba, flaxseed, red wine, resveratrol and curcuminoids can also reduce elevated Lp(a) concentrations but to a lesser degree. In conclusion, aforementioned natural products may represent promising therapeutic agents for Lp(a) lowering.

Investigating the Atherogenic Risk of Lipoprotein(a) in Type 2 Diabetic Patients

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) has high morbidity and results in increased risk of mortality mainly due to cardiovascular diseases. Different factors have been found to be responsible for the increased prevalence of coronary artery disease (CAD) in T2DM. One of these factors includes raised serum levels of lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)). The present study was designed to evaluate the association of Lp(a) levels with T2DM in Libyan patients and find the degree of association between Lp(a), glycemic control, insulin, and lipid profile. The study included 100 T2DM patients, recruited from the Benghazi Center for Diagnosis and Treatment of Diabetes, and 30 apparently healthy age and sex-matched individuals, to serve as controls. All participants completed a questionnaire to obtain clinical information and medical history. Blood samples were collected and analyzed for Lp(a), fasting blood glucose (FBS), HbA1c, insulin, total cholesterol (TC), triglycerides (TAG), low-density lipoprotein c (LDL-c), and high-density lipoprotein c (HDL-c). The results from the comparison between the control and experimental groups showed that Lp(a) was significantly higher in diabetic patients. It showed the positive correlation with TC and LDL-c. On the contrary, it showed no significant correlations with glycemic control parameters nor insulin, TAG, HDL-c, body mass index (BMI), and blood pressor (BP). Cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk in type 2 diabetic patients could be dependent on risk factors other than LDL-c, which may not be an independent risk factor for the development and progression of atherogenesis in T2DM. Lp(a) may be a new metabolic syndrome risk factor, and it may be useful as a cardiovascular risk biomarker in future clinical practice.

Lipoprotein(a): the revenant

In the mid-1990s, the days of lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] were numbered and many people would not have placed a bet on this lipid particle making it to the next century. However, genetic studies brought Lp(a) back to the front-stage after a Mendelian randomization approach used for the first time provided strong support for a causal role of high Lp(a) concentrations in cardiovascular disease and later also for aortic valve stenosis. This encouraged the use of therapeutic interventions to lower Lp(a) as well numerous drug developments, although these approaches mainly targeted LDL cholesterol, while the Lp(a)-lowering effect was only a 'side-effect'. Several drug developments did show a potent Lp(a)-lowering effect but did not make it to endpoint studies, mainly for safety reasons. Currently, three therapeutic approaches are either already in place or look highly promising: (i) lipid apheresis (specific or unspecific for Lp(a)) markedly decreases Lp(a) concentrations as well as cardiovascular endpoints; (ii) PCSK9 inhibitors which, besides lowering LDL cholesterol also decrease Lp(a) by roughly 30%; and (iii) antisense therapy targeting apolipoprotein(a) which has shown to specifically lower Lp(a) concentrations by up to 90% in phase 1 and 2 trials without influencing other lipids. Until the results of phase 3 outcome studies are available for antisense therapy, we will have to exercise patience, but with optimism since never before have we had the tools we have now to prove Koch's extrapolated postulate that lowering high Lp(a) concentrations might be protective against cardiovascular disease.

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.

The Effects of Tamoxifen on Plasma Lipoprotein(a) Concentrations: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Introduction

Tamoxifen is a selective estrogen receptor modulator widely used in the treatment of breast cancer. Tamoxifen therapy is associated with lower circulating low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and increased triglycerides, but its effects on other lipids are less well studied.

Aims

We aimed to investigate the effect of tamoxifen on circulating concentrations of lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] through a meta-analysis of available randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies.

Methods

This study was registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42016036890). Scopus, MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched from inception until 22 March 2016 to identify studies investigating the effect of tamoxifen on Lp(a) values in humans. Meta-analysis was performed using an inverse variance-weighted, random-effects model with standardized mean difference (SMD) as the effect size estimate.

Results

Meta-analysis of five studies with 215 participants suggested a statistically significant reduction of Lp(a) levels following tamoxifen treatment (SMD −0.41, 95% confidence interval −0.68 to −0.14, p = 0.003). This effect was robust in the sensitivity analysis.

Conclusions

Meta-analysis suggested a statistically significant reduction of Lp(a) levels following tamoxifen treatment. Further well-designed trials are required to validate these results.

Maternal serum markers of lipid metabolism in relation to neonatal anthropometry

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study is to examine associations between lipids (high-density lipoprotein, low-density lipoprotein, total cholesterol, triglycerides and lipoprotein (a)) measured on average three time points during pregnancy and neonatal anthropometrics.

STUDY DESIGN

Stored samples from a preeclampsia trial measured as part of a case-control study from five US centers (1992 to 1995) were used. The sample included women without pregnancy complications (n=136) and cases of gestational diabetes (n=93), abnormal glucose tolerance (AGT; n=76), gestational hypertension (n=170) and preeclampsia (n=177). Linear regression and linear mixed-effects models estimated adjusted associations between lipids and birth weight z-score, ponderal index (PI), length and head circumference.

RESULTS

Among women without complications, cross-sectional associations between total cholesterol measured at different gestational ages increased PI 2.23 to 2.55 kg m^-3 per-unit increase in cholesterol. HDL was inversely associated with birth length (β's=-2.21 and -2.56 cm). For gestational hypertension, triglycerides were associated with birth weight z-score (β's=0.24 to 0.31). For preeclampsia, HDL was associated with lower birth weight z-scores (β's=-0.49 and -0.82). Women with gestational diabetes or AGT had inconsistent associations. Examining the level changes across pregnancy, each 0.0037 mmol l^-1 increase in HDL was associated with decreased birth weight z-score (β=-0.22), length (β=-0.24 cm) and head circumference (β=-0.24 cm), whereas each 0.028 mmol l^-1 increase in triglycerides was associated with increased birth weight z-score (β=0.13) and head circumference (β=0.19 cm).

CONCLUSIONS

Although associations varied by complications, in general, growth-promoting fuels such as total cholesterol and triglycerides were associated with increased neonatal size, whereas high HDL was associated with smaller size. Maternal HDL that failed to decrease over pregnancy was associated with smaller neonate size.

[Lipoprotein(a), its autoantibodies, and circulating T lymphocyte subpopulations as independent risk factors for coronary artery atherosclerosis]

AIM

To study the role of lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] as a potential autoantigen causing the activation of immunocompetent cells in atherosclerosis.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

A total of 104 men with stable coronary artery (CA) disease and different degrees of progressive coronary atherosclerosis were examined. Clinical blood analysis was carried out and lymphocyte subpopulations (CD4+, Th1, Th17, and Treg) were determined using immunofluorescence and flow cytometry. In addition, the indicators of blood lipid composition, Lp(a), autoantibody (autoAb) titer to Lp(a), and low-density lipoproteins (LDL), and the lymphocyte activation marker sCD25 were also measured.

RESULTS

The Lp(a) level was shown to predict the severity of CA lesions (β=0.28, p<0.05), regardless of age, the level of cholesterol, different T-lymphocyte subpopulations, sCD25, and autoAb. A combination of the concentration of Lp(a) above 11.8 mg/dl, that of Th17 over 11.4∙103 cells/ml and the reduced levels of regulatory T cells and IL-10-producing CD4+ T cells showed a manifold increase in the risk of severe and progressive CA atherosclerosis. There was a direct correlation of the blood level of Th1 with that of IgG autoAb specific to all atherogenic apoB-containing lipoproteins, including Lp(a). There was an inverse correlations of the lymphocyte activation marker sCD25 with IgM anti-Lp(a) autoAb titers (r=-0.36; p<0.005), but this was less significant with autoAbs to native and oxidized LDL (r=-0.21 and r=-0.24; p<0.05, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The slightly elevated Lp(a) concentration along with changes in the level of T lymphocyte subpopulations was first shown to significantly potentiate the risk of progressive and multiple CA lesion in the examinees. The correlation of IgM anti-Lp(a) autoAb with the lymphocyte activation marker sCD25 and that of IgG anti-Lp(a) autoAb with Th1 have demonstrated that Lp(a) is involved in the autoimmune inflammatory processes in atherosclerosis.

Human Genetics and the Causal Role of Lipoprotein(a) for Various Diseases

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a highly atherogenic lipoprotein that is under strong genetic control by the LPA gene locus. Genetic variants including a highly polymorphic copy number variation of the so called kringle IV repeats at this locus have a pronounced influence on Lp(a) concentrations. High concentrations of Lp(a) as well as genetic variants which are associated with high Lp(a) concentrations are both associated with cardiovascular disease which very strongly supports causality between Lp(a) concetrations and cardiovascular disease. This method of using a genetic variant that has a pronounced influence on a biomarker to support causality with an outcome is called Mendelian randomization approach and was applied for the first time two decades ago with data from Lp(a) and cardiovascular disease. This approach was also used to demonstrate a causal association between high Lp(a) concentrations and aortic valve stenosis, between low concentrations and type-2 diabetes mellitus and to exclude a causal association between Lp(a) concentrations and venous thrombosis. Considering the high frequency of these genetic variants in the population makes Lp(a) the strongest genetic risk factor for cardiovascular disease identified so far. Promising drugs that lower Lp(a) are on the horizon but their efficacy in terms of reducing clinical outcomes still has to be shown.