Lipoprotein (a)-mediated vascular calcification: population-based and in vitro studies.

BACKGROUND: Lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] is a causal risk factor for cardiovascular diseases, while its role in vascular calcification has not been well-established. Here, we investigated an association of Lp(a) with vascular calcification using population-based and in vitro study designs. METHODS: A total of 2806 patients who received coronary computed tomography were enrolled to assess the correlation of Lp(a) with the severity of coronary artery calcification (CAC). Human aortic smooth muscle cells (HASMCs) were used to explore mechanisms of Lp(a)-induced vascular calcification. RESULTS: In the population study, Lp(a) was independently correlated with the presence and severity of CAC (all p < 0.05). In vitro study showed that cell calcific depositions and alkaline phosphatase (ALP) activity were increased and the expression of pro-calcific proteins, including bone morphogenetic protein-2 (BMP2) and osteopontin (OPN), were up-regulated by Lp(a) stimulation. Interestingly, Lp(a) activated Notch1 signaling, resulting in cell calcification, which was inhibited by the Notch1 signaling inhibitor, DAPT. Lp(a)-induced Notch1 activation up-regulated BMP2-Smad1/5/9 pathway. In contrast, Noggin, an inhibitor of BMP2-Smad1/5/9 pathway, significantly blocked Lp(a)-induced HASMC calcification. Notch1 activation also induced translocation of nuclear factor-κB (NF-κB) accompanied by OPN overexpression and elevated inflammatory cytokines production, while NF-κB silencing alleviated Lp(a)-induced vascular calcification. CONCLUSIONS: Elevated Lp(a) concentrations are independently associated with the presence and severity of CAC and the impact of Lp(a) on vascular calcification is involved in the activation of Notch1-NF-κB and Notch1-BMP2-Smad1/5/9 pathways, thus implicating Lp(a) as a potential novel therapeutic target for vascular calcification.

Frequent LPA KIV-2 Variants Lower Lipoprotein(a) Concentrations and Protect Against Coronary Artery Disease.

BACKGROUND: Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) concentrations are a major independent risk factor for coronary artery disease (CAD) and are mainly determined by variation in LPA. Up to 70% of the LPA coding sequence is located in the hypervariable kringle IV type 2 (KIV-2) region. It is hardly accessible by conventional technologies, but may contain functional variants. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to investigate the new, very frequent splicing variant KIV-2 4733G>A on Lp(a) and CAD. METHODS: We genotyped 4733G>A in the GCKD (German Chronic Kidney Disease) study (n = 4,673) by allele-specific polymerase chain reaction, performed minigene assays, identified proxy single nucleotide polymorphisms and used them to characterize its effect on CAD by survival analysis in UK Biobank (n = 440,234). Frequencies in ethnic groups were assessed in the 1000 Genomes Project. RESULTS: The 4733G>A variant (38.2% carrier frequency) was found in most isoform sizes. It reduces allelic expression without abolishing protein production, lowers Lp(a) by 13.6 mg/dL (95% CI: 12.5-14.7; P < 0.0001) and is the strongest variance-explaining factor after the smaller isoform. Splicing of minigenes was modified. Compound heterozygosity (4.6% of the population) for 4733G>A and 4925G>A, another KIV-2 splicing mutation, reduces Lp(a) by 31.8 mg/dL and most importantly narrows the interquartile range by 9-fold (from 42.1 to 4.6 mg/dL) when compared to the wild type. In UK Biobank 4733G>A alone and compound heterozygosity with 4925G>A reduced HR for CAD by 9% (95% CI: 7%-11%) and 12% (95% CI: 7%-16%) (both P < 0.001). Frequencies in ethnicities differ notably. CONCLUSIONS: Functional variants in the previously inaccessible LPA KIV-2 region cooperate in determining Lp(a) variance and CAD risk. Even a moderate but lifelong genetic Lp(a) reduction translates to a noticeable CAD risk reduction.

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.

Expert position statements: comparison of recommendations for the care of adults and youth with elevated lipoprotein(a).

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Summarize recent recommendations on clinical management of adults and youth with elevated lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] who are at-risk of or affected by cardiovascular disease (CVD). RECENT FINDINGS: There is ample evidence to support elevated Lp(a) levels, present in approximately 20% of the general population, as a causal, independent risk factor for CVD and its role as a significant risk enhancer. Several guidelines and position statements have been published to assist in the identification, treatment and follow-up of adults with elevated levels of Lp(a). There is growing interest in Lp(a) screening and strategies to improve health behaviors starting in youth, although published recommendations for this population are limited. In addition to the well established increased risk of myocardial infarction, stroke and valvular aortic stenosis, data from the coronavirus pandemic suggest adults with elevated Lp(a) may have a particularly high-risk of cardiovascular complications. Lp(a)-specific-lowering therapies are currently in development. Despite their inability to lower Lp(a), use of statins have been shown to improve outcomes in primary and secondary prevention. SUMMARY: Considerable differences exist amongst published guidelines for adults on the use of Lp(a) in clinical practice, and recommendations for youth are limited. With increasing knowledge of Lp(a)'s role in CVD, including recent observations of COVID-19-related risk of cardiovascular complications, more harmonized and comprehensive guidelines for Lp(a) in clinical practice are required. This will facilitate clinical decision-making and help define best practices for identification and management of elevated Lp(a) in adults and youth.

Zur-regulated lipoprotein A contributes to the fitness of Acinetobacter baumannii.

Acinetobacter baumannii is a notorious nosocomial pathogen that commonly infects severely ill patients. Zinc (Zn) is essential to survive and adapt to different environment and host niches in A. baumannii. Of the Zinc uptake regulator (Zur)-regulated genes in A. baumannii, the A1S_3412 gene encoding a Zur-regulated lipoprotein A (ZrlA) is critical for cell envelope integrity and overcoming antibiotic exposure. This study investigated whether ZrlA contributes to the fitness of A. baumannii in vitro and in vivo using the wildtype A. baumannii ATCC 17978, ΔzrlA mutant, and zrlAcomplemented strains. The ΔzrlA mutant showed reduced biofilm formation, surface motility, and adherence to and invasion of epithelial cells compared to the wild-type strain. In a mouse pneumonia model, the ?zrlA mutant showed significantly lower bacterial numbers in the blood than the wildtype strain. These virulence traits were restored in the zrlAcomplemented strain. Under static conditions, the expression of csuCDE, which are involved in the chaperone-usher pili assembly system, was significantly lower in the ΔzrlA mutant than in the wild-type strain. Moreover, the expression of the bfmR/S genes, which regulate the CsuA/BABCDE system, was significantly lower in the ΔzrlA mutant under static conditions than in the wild-type strain. Our results indicate that the zrlA gene plays a role in the fitness of A. baumannii by regulating the BfmR/S two-component system and subsequently the CsuA/BABCDE chaperone-usher pili assembly system, suggesting it as a potential target for anti-virulence strategies against A. baumannii.

To test, or not to test: that is the question for the future of lipoprotein(a).

INTRODUCTION: Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a potent, highly heritable and common risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Evidence for a causal association between elevated Lp(a) and ASCVD has been provided by large epidemiological investigations that have demonstrated a curvilinear association with increased risk, as well as from genetic examinations and cellular and transgenic animal studies. Although there are several therapies available for lowering Lp(a), none are selective for Lp(a) and there is no clinical trial data that has specifically shown that lowering Lp(a) reduces the risk of ASCVD. Hence, screening for elevated Lp(a) is not routinely incorporated into clinical practice. Areas covered: This paper reviews the current evidence supporting the causal role of Lp(a) in the primary and secondary prevention of ASCVD, screening approaches for high Lp(a), current guidelines on testing Lp(a), and barriers to the routine screening of elevated Lp(a) in clinical practice. Expert opinion: At present, there is a moderate level of evidence supporting the routine screening of elevated Lp(a). Current guidelines recommend testing for elevated Lp(a) in individuals at intermediate or high risk of ASCVD.

Lipoprotein(a) - the cardiovascular risk factor: significance and therapeutic possibilities.

About 20 % of the population has raised Lp(a) concentrations and evidence suggests that high levels of Lp(a) are an independent cardiovascular risk factor. Both the European Society of Cardiology and the European Atherosclerosis Society recommend measuring Lp(a) values in intermediate to high-risk patients for risk stratification, as well as in patients already under statin treatment and with recurrent clinical events as a residual risk factor that calls for lipid-lowering therapy intensification. Strategies used to lower Lp(a) concentrations have either been partially disappointing in the past or lack cardiovascular outcome data. Therefore, Lp(a) has often been considered as a nonmodifiable cardiovascular risk factor. New and consistent data retrieved from the PCSK9 inhibitor trials now suggest that Lp(a) can be decreased effectively by roughly 30 %, while emerging data from apo(a) antisense therapy trials suggest that selective and potent Lp(a) reduction is a feasible treatment approach in the future. The impact of such decreases on the occurrence of cardiovascular outcomes, independent from LDL-C, could, if established, herald Lp(a) in the treatment of atherosclerosis. Key words: alirocumab - atherosclerosis - cardiovascular disease - evolocumab - hypercholesterolaemia - lipoprotein(a) - lipoprotein apheresis.

[Lipoprotein (a) in patients with carotid atherosclerosis]. / Lipoprotein (a) u bol'nykh s karotidnym aterosklerozom.

AIM: To evaluate the role of lipoprotein (a) in an atherosclerotic lesion of precerebral arteries and stroke development. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Thirty-eight patients with atherosclerotic lesions of the carotid arteries established by duplex scanning, including 28 post stroke patients and 10 patients with asymptomatic atherosclerosis, were examined. Lipoprotein (a) was determined by immunosorbent assay in the serum and supernatant after 3-day cultivation of neutrophils. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: There was a correlation between serum lipoprotein (a) and endothelium-dependent vasodilation of the brachial artery, and the relationship of culture lipoprotein (a) with the severity of atherosclerotic lesions of precerebral arteries and prothrombin time. Thus, the effect of lipoprotein (a) on the atherogenesis may be mediated by endothelial dysfunction and the mechanism of realization of stroke development is prothrombogenic effects on hemostasis.

Lipoprotein(a) and the risk of cardiovascular disease in the European population: results from the BiomarCaRE consortium.

AIMS: As promising compounds to lower Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) are emerging, the need for a precise characterization and comparability of the Lp(a)-associated cardiovascular risk is increasing. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the distribution of Lp(a) concentrations across the European population, to characterize the association with cardiovascular outcomes and to provide high comparability of the Lp(a)-associated cardiovascular risk by use of centrally determined Lp(a) concentrations. METHODS AND RESULTS: Based on the Biomarkers for Cardiovascular Risk Assessment in Europe (BiomarCaRE)-project, we analysed data of 56 804 participants from 7 prospective population-based cohorts across Europe with a maximum follow-up of 24 years. All Lp(a) measurements were performed in the central BiomarCaRE laboratory (Biokit Quantia Lp(a)-Test; Abbott Diagnostics). The three endpoints considered were incident major coronary events (MCE), incident cardiovascular disease (CVD) events, and total mortality. We found lower Lp(a) levels in Northern European cohorts (median 4.9 mg/dL) compared to central (median 7.9 mg/dL) and Southern European cohorts (10.9 mg/dL) (Jonckheere-Terpstra test P < 0.001). Kaplan-Meier curves showed the highest event rate of MCE and CVD events for Lp(a) levels ≥90th percentile (log-rank test: P < 0.001 for MCE and CVD). Cox regression models adjusted for age, sex, and cardiovascular risk factors revealed a significant association of Lp(a) levels with MCE and CVD with a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.30 for MCE [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.15‒1.46] and of 1.25 for CVD (95% CI 1.12‒1.39) for Lp(a) levels in the 67‒89th percentile and a HR of 1.49 for MCE (95% CI 1.29‒1.73) and of 1.44 for CVD (95% CI 1.25‒1.65) for Lp(a) levels ≥ 90th percentile vs. Lp(a) levels in the lowest third (P < 0.001 for all). There was no significant association between Lp(a) levels and total mortality. Subgroup analysis for a continuous version of cube root transformed Lp(a) identified the highest Lp(a)-associated risk in individuals with diabetes [HR for MCE 1.31 (95% CI 1.15‒1.50)] and for CVD 1.22 (95% CI 1.08‒1.38) compared to those without diabetes [HR for MCE 1.15 (95% CI 1.08‒1.21; HR for CVD 1.13 (1.07-1.19)] while no difference of the Lp(a)- associated risk were seen for other cardiovascular high risk states. The addition of Lp(a) levels to a prognostic model for MCE and CVD revealed only a marginal but significant C-index discrimination measure increase (0.001 for MCE and CVD; P < 0.05) and net reclassification improvement (0.010 for MCE and 0.011 for CVD). CONCLUSION: In this large dataset on harmonized Lp(a) determination, we observed regional differences within the European population. Elevated Lp(a) was robustly associated with an increased risk for MCE and CVD in particular among individuals with diabetes. These results may lead to better identification of target populations who might benefit from future Lp(a)-lowering therapies.

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.

A Test in Context: Lipoprotein(a): Diagnosis, Prognosis, Controversies, and Emerging Therapies.

Evidence that elevated lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]) levels contribute to cardiovascular disease (CVD) and calcific aortic valve stenosis (CAVS) is substantial. Development of isoform-independent assays, in concert with genetic, epidemiological, translational, and pathophysiological insights, have established Lp(a) as an independent, genetic, and likely causal risk factor for CVD and CAVS. These observations are consistent across a broad spectrum of patients, risk factors, and concomitant therapies, including patients with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol <70 mg/dl. Statins tend to increase Lp(a) levels, possibly contributing to the "residual risk" noted in outcomes trials and at the bedside. Recently approved proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin-type 9 inhibitors and mipomersen lower Lp(a) 20% to 30%, and emerging RNA-targeted therapies lower Lp(a) >80%. These approaches will allow testing of the "Lp(a) hypothesis" in clinical trials. This review summarizes the current landscape of Lp(a), discusses controversies, and reviews emerging therapies to reduce plasma Lp(a) levels to decrease risk of CVD and CAVS.

Structure, function, and genetics of lipoprotein (a).

Lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] has attracted the interest of researchers and physicians due to its intriguing properties, including an intragenic multiallelic copy number variation in the LPA gene and the strong association with coronary heart disease (CHD). This review summarizes present knowledge of the structure, function, and genetics of Lp(a) with emphasis on the molecular and population genetics of the Lp(a)/LPA trait, as well as aspects of genetic epidemiology. It highlights the role of genetics in establishing Lp(a) as a risk factor for CHD, but also discusses uncertainties, controversies, and lack of knowledge on several aspects of the genetic Lp(a) trait, not least its function.

Lipoprotein (a): truly a direct prothrombotic factor in cardiovascular disease?

Elevated plasma concentrations of lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] have been determined to be a causal risk factor for coronary heart disease, and may similarly play a role in other atherothrombotic disorders. Lp(a) consists of a lipoprotein moiety indistinguishable from LDL, as well as the plasminogen-related glycoprotein, apo(a). Therefore, the pathogenic role for Lp(a) has traditionally been considered to reflect a dual function of its similarity to LDL, causing atherosclerosis, and its similarity to plasminogen, causing thrombosis through inhibition of fibrinolysis. This postulate remains highly speculative, however, because it has been difficult to separate the prothrombotic/antifibrinolytic functions of Lp(a) from its proatherosclerotic functions. This review surveys the current landscape surrounding these issues: the biochemical basis for procoagulant and antifibrinolytic effects of Lp(a) is summarized and the evidence addressing the role of Lp(a) in both arterial and venous thrombosis is discussed. While elevated Lp(a) appears to be primarily predisposing to thrombotic events in the arterial tree, the fact that most of these are precipitated by underlying atherosclerosis continues to confound our understanding of the true pathogenic roles of Lp(a) and, therefore, the most appropriate therapeutic target through which to mitigate the harmful effects of this lipoprotein.

Lipoprotein(a) and livedoid vasculopathy: A new thrombophilic factor?

Livedoid vasculopathy is a chronic disorder characterised by recurrent reticulated purpura on lower extremities, associated with painful purpuric or necrotic macules and ulcerations. Current knowledge indicates LV to be a thrombo-occlusive vasculopathy of cutaneous blood vessels; exact pathogenesis is yet to be understood. Elevated levels of lipoprotein(a) have been found in LV patients. To date, elevated plasma levels of lipoprotein(a) are considered an independent and causal genetic risk factor for the development of cardiovascular disease, as well as a relevant factor in hypercoagulable states. Because of its structural homology with plasminogen, Lp(a) might have important anti-fibrinolytic properties. Altered endothelial function and participation in immune and autoimmune processes, such as antiphospholipid syndrome, are also potential mechanisms of Lp(a) involvement in LV pathogenesis. Lp(a) is part of the wound healing process; the possibility of Lp(a) serum elevation to reflect an acute-phase reagent in LV scenario is also considered. The objective of this review is to examine the possible association of lipoprotein(a) with LV pathogenesis, based on its effects on thrombogenesis, fibrinolysis and autoimmunity.

Lipoprotein (a): structure, pathophysiology and clinical implications.

The chemical structure of lipoprotein (a) is similar to that of LDL, from which it differs due to the presence of apolipoprotein (a) bound to apo B100 via one disulfide bridge. Lipoprotein (a) is synthesized in the liver and its plasma concentration, which can be determined by use of monoclonal antibody-based methods, ranges from < 1 mg to > 1,000 mg/dL. Lipoprotein (a) levels over 20-30 mg/dL are associated with a two-fold risk of developing coronary artery disease. Usually, black subjects have higher lipoprotein (a) levels that, differently from Caucasians and Orientals, are not related to coronary artery disease. However, the risk of black subjects must be considered. Sex and age have little influence on lipoprotein (a) levels. Lipoprotein (a) homology with plasminogen might lead to interference with the fibrinolytic cascade, accounting for an atherogenic mechanism of that lipoprotein. Nevertheless, direct deposition of lipoprotein (a) on arterial wall is also a possible mechanism, lipoprotein (a) being more prone to oxidation than LDL. Most prospective studies have confirmed lipoprotein (a) as a predisposing factor to atherosclerosis. Statin treatment does not lower lipoprotein (a) levels, differently from niacin and ezetimibe, which tend to reduce lipoprotein (a), although confirmation of ezetimibe effects is pending. The reduction in lipoprotein (a) concentrations has not been demonstrated to reduce the risk for coronary artery disease. Whenever higher lipoprotein (a) concentrations are found, and in the absence of more effective and well-tolerated drugs, a more strict and vigorous control of the other coronary artery disease risk factors should be sought.

Lipoprotein (a): Structure, Pathophysiology and Clinical Implications / Lipoproteína (a): Estrutura, Metabolismo, Fisiopatologia e Implicações Clínicas

The chemical structure of lipoprotein (a) is similar to that of LDL, from which it differs due to the presence of apolipoprotein (a) bound to apo B100 via one disulfide bridge. Lipoprotein (a) is synthesized in the liver and its plasma concentration, which can be determined by use of monoclonal antibody-based methods, ranges from < 1 mg to > 1,000 mg/dL. Lipoprotein (a) levels over 20-30 mg/dL are associated with a two-fold risk of developing coronary artery disease. Usually, black subjects have higher lipoprotein (a) levels that, differently from Caucasians and Orientals, are not related to coronary artery disease. However, the risk of black subjects must be considered. Sex and age have little influence on lipoprotein (a) levels. Lipoprotein (a) homology with plasminogen might lead to interference with the fibrinolytic cascade, accounting for an atherogenic mechanism of that lipoprotein. Nevertheless, direct deposition of lipoprotein (a) on arterial wall is also a possible mechanism, lipoprotein (a) being more prone to oxidation than LDL. Most prospective studies have confirmed lipoprotein (a) as a predisposing factor to atherosclerosis. Statin treatment does not lower lipoprotein (a) levels, differently from niacin and ezetimibe, which tend to reduce lipoprotein (a), although confirmation of ezetimibe effects is pending. The reduction in lipoprotein (a) concentrations has not been demonstrated to reduce the risk for coronary artery disease. Whenever higher lipoprotein (a) concentrations are found, and in the absence of more effective and well-tolerated drugs, a more strict and vigorous control of the other coronary artery disease risk factors should be sought.

A partícula de lipoproteína (a) apresenta estrutura semelhante à da LDL, diferenciando-se pela presença da apolipoproteína (a) ligada por uma ponte dissulfeto à apolipoproteína B. Sua síntese ocorre no fígado e sua concentração plasmática varia de < 1 mg a > 1.000 mg/dL, podendo ser dosada de rotina em laboratório clínico por método baseado em anticorpos monoclonais. Acima de 20 a 30 mg/dL o risco de desenvolvimento de doença cardiovascular aumenta em cerca de duas vezes, o que não é válido para os afrodescendentes, que já apresentam normalmente níveis mais altos dessa lipoproteína, do que caucasianos e orientais. Entretanto, o risco para indivíduos negros também deve ser levado em conta. Gênero e idade exercem pouca influência na concentração de lipoproteína (a). A homologia com o plasminogênio, que interfere na cascata fibrinolítica, pode ser um mecanismo da aterogenicidade da lipoproteína (a). Entretanto, a deposição direta na parede da artéria também é um dos mecanismos possíveis, sendo a lipoprotrína (a) mais oxidável do que a LDL. De forma geral estudos prospectivos confirmam a lipoproteína (a) como fator predisponente à aterosclerose. O uso de estatinas não interfere no nível da lipoproteína (a), diferentemente da niacina e da ezetimiba, que promovem sua diminuição, embora essa última dependa de confirmação. Não está demonstrado que a redução de lipoproteína (a) resulte em diminuição de risco de doença arterial coronária. Diante de concentrações mais elevadas de lipoproteína (a) e na falta de medicações mais efetivas e de boa tolerabilidade, deve-se, pelo menos, procurar controlar, de forma mais rigorosa, os outros fatores de risco de doença arterial coronária.

Mendelian randomization studies in coronary artery disease.

Epidemiological research over the last 50 years has discovered a plethora of biomarkers (including molecules, traits or other diseases) that associate with coronary artery disease (CAD) risk. Even the strongest association detected in such observational research precludes drawing conclusions about the causality underlying the relationship between biomarker and disease. Mendelian randomization (MR) studies can shed light on the causality of associations, i.e whether, on the one hand, the biomarker contributes to the development of disease or, on the other hand, the observed association is confounded by unrecognized exogenous factors or due to reverse causation, i.e. due to the fact that prevalent disease affects the level of the biomarker. However, conclusions from a MR study are based on a number of important assumptions. A prerequisite for such studies is that the genetic variant employed affects significantly the biomarker under investigation but has no effect on other phenotypes that might confound the association between the biomarker and disease. If this biomarker is a true causal risk factor for CAD, genotypes of the variant should associate with CAD risk in the direction predicted by the association of the biomarker with CAD. Given a random distribution of exogenous factors in individuals carrying respective genotypes, groups represented by the genotypes are highly similar except for the biomarker of interest. Thus, the genetic variant converts into an unconfounded surrogate of the respective biomarker. This scenario is nicely exemplified for LDL cholesterol. Almost every genotype found to increase LDL cholesterol level by a sufficient amount has also been found to increase CAD risk. Pending a number of conditions that needed to be fulfilled by the genetic variant under investigation (e.g. no pleiotropic effects) and the experimental set-up of the study, LDL cholesterol can be assumed to act as the functional component that links genotypes and CAD risk and, more importantly, it can be assumed that any modulation of LDL cholesterol-by whatever mechanism-would have similar effects on disease risk. Therefore, MR analysis has tremendous potential for identifying therapeutic targets that are likely to be causal for CAD. This review article discusses the opportunities and challenges of MR studies for CAD, highlighting several examples that involved multiple biomarkers, including various lipid and inflammation traits as well as hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and obesity.