Precision Medicine Approach for Cardiometabolic Risk Factors in Therapeutic Apheresis.

Lipoprotein apheresis (LA) is currently the most powerful intervention possible to reach a maximal reduction of lipids in patients with familial hypercholesterolemia and lipoprotein(a) hyperlipidemia. Although LA is an invasive method, it has few side effects and the best results in preventing further major cardiovascular events. It has been suggested that the highly significant reduction of cardiovascular complications in patients with severe lipid disorders achieved by LA is mediated not only by the potent reduction of lipid levels but also by the removal of other proinflammatory and proatherogenic factors. Here we performed a comprehensive proteomic analysis of patients on LA treatment using intra-individually a set of differently sized apheresis filters with the INUSpheresis system. This study revealed that proteomic analysis correlates well with routine clinical chemistry in these patients. The method is eminently suited to discover new biomarkers and risk factors for cardiovascular disease in these patients. Different filters achieve reduction and removal of proatherogenic proteins in different quantities. This includes not only apolipoproteins, C-reactive protein, fibrinogen, and plasminogen but also proteins like complement factor B (CFAB), protein AMBP, afamin, and the low affinity immunoglobulin gamma Fc region receptor III-A (FcγRIIIa) among others that have been described as atherosclerosis and metabolic vascular diseases promoting factors. We therefore conclude that future trials should be designed to develop an individualized therapy approach for patients on LA based on their metabolic and vascular risk profile. Furthermore, the power of such cascade filter treatment protocols may improve the prevention of cardiometabolic disease and its complications.

Lipoprotein(a) and proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitors.

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is an internationally accepted independent atherogenic risk factor. Details about its synthesis, many aspects of composition and clearance from the bloodstream are still unknown. LDL receptor (LDLR) (and probably other receptors) play a role in the elimination of Lp(a) particles. Proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors increase the number of available LDLRs and in this way very effectively reduce the LDL cholesterol (LDL-C) concentrations. As shown in controlled studies using PCSK9 inhibitors, Lp(a) levels are decreased by 20 to 30%, though in some patients no effect was observed. So far, it has not been clarified whether this decrease is associated with an effect on the incidence of cardiovascular events (CVEs). In two recently published well-performed secondary prevention studies (FOURIER with evolocumab, ODYSSEY OUTCOMES with alirocumab) baseline Lp(a) levels were shown to have an impact on CVEs independently of baseline LDL-C concentrations. The rather modest PCSK9 inhibitor-induced decrease of Lp(a) was associated with a reduction of CVEs in both studies, even after adjusting (ODYSSEY OUTCOMES) for demographic variables (age, sex, race, region), baseline Lp(a), baseline LDL-C, change in LDL-C, and clinical variables (time from acute coronary syndrome, body mass index, diabetes, smoking history). The largest decrease of CVEs was seen in patients with relatively low concentrations of both LDL-C and Lp(a) (FOURIER). These findings will probably have an influence on the use of PCSK9 inhibitors in patients with high Lp(a) concentrations.

Lipoprotein(a)-an interdisciplinary challenge.

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

Kinetics of Lipoprotein(a) in patients undergoing weekly lipoprotein apheresis for Lp(a) hyperlipoproteinemia.

INTRODUCTION: Lipoprotein apheresis (LA) represents the only effective therapeutic option for patients with elevated Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) levels. We aimed at analyzing the Lp(a) reduction, rebound rates as well as mean interval values between two weekly apheresis sessions, since this might be important for the prediction of the residual cardiovascular risk and development of individualized approaches for this special therapeutic strategy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 20 patients under weekly and 2 patients under twice weekly apheresis were included. We measured serum concentrations of Lp(a), total, LDL-, HDL - cholesterol and triglycerides daily over 7 days after single LA sessions. RESULTS: Mean Lp(a) levels was 158.1 ± 69.82 nmol/l before the LA session, decreased acutely by 76 ± 7% and increased to 97 ± 13% of the baseline value within 7 days in patients under weekly treatment. By mathematical modeling, the acute Lp(a) reduction can be calculated from the function: y (nmol/l) = 3.415 + 0.738 * x (R2 = 0.970), where x is the baseline Lp(a) value. The recovery rate can be predicted from the equation: y (%) = 22.49 + 18.64 * x - 1.14 * x2 (R2 = 0.874), where x is the day after apheresis. The empirical formula for the mean interval value is: y (nmol/l) = x - 12, where x is the absolute reduction in nmol/l. CONCLUSION: We modeled - for the first time - equations to predict the course of Lp(a) serum levels under weekly LA which are simple, reliable and enable the development of optimal individualized protocols of this costly lipid lowering therapy.

Most significant reduction of cardiovascular events in patients undergoing lipoproteinapheresis due to raised Lp(a) levels - A multicenter observational study.

OBJECTIVES: Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is an independent cardiovascular (CV) risk factor, predisposing to premature and progressive CV events. Lipoproteinapheresis (LA) is the only efficacious therapy for reducing Lp(a). Data comparing the clinical efficacy of LA with respect to reduction of CV events in subjects with elevated Lp(a) versus LDL-C versus both disorders is scarce. We aimed to perform this comparison in a multicenter observational study. METHODS: 113 LA patients from 8 apheresis centers were included (mean age 56.3 years). They were divided into 3 groups: Group I: Lp(a) < 600 mg/l, LDL-C > 2.6 mmol/l, Group II: Lp(a) > 600 mg/l, LDL-C < 2.6 mmol/l, and Group III: Lp(a) > 600 mg/l, LDL-C > 2.6 mmol/l. CV events were documented 2 years before versus 2 years after LA start. RESULTS: Before start of LA Group II showed the highest CV event rate (p 0.001). Group III had a higher CV event rate than Group I (p 0.03). During LA there was a significant reduction of CV events/patient in all vessel beds (1.22 ± 1.16 versus 0.33 ± 0.75, p < 0.001). The highest CV event rate during LA was seen in coronaries followed by peripheral arteries, cerebrovascular events were least common. Greater CV event reduction rates were achieved in patients with isolated Lp(a) elevation (-77%, p < 0.001) and in patients with Lp(a) and LDL-C elevation (-74%, p < 0.001) than in subjects with isolated hypercholesterolemia (-53%, p 0.06). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that patients with Lp(a) elevation benefit most from LA treatment. Prospective trials to confirm these data are warranted.

Lipoprotein apheresis influences monocyte subpopulations.

BACKGROUND: Monocytes can be differentiated into subpopulations depending on their expression profile of CD14 and CD16. CD16-positive monocytes are associated with coronary artery disease. Up to now, no data exist about the effect of lipoprotein apheresis (LA) on the distribution of monocyte subpopulations. METHODS: 80 patients who underwent LA at the University Hospital Dresden were included in the study. 8 out of the 80 LA patients received LA for the first time at the time point of blood analysis. Six different methods of LA were used (H.E.L.P. n = 8; Liposorber D n = 10; LF n = 14; DALI n = 17; MONET n = 11; Therasorb® LDL n = 12). Blood samples were taken immediately before and after LA and analyzed for CD14 and CD16 expression on monocytes. A total of 42 patients with cardiovascular risk factors but no indication for LA served as control group. RESULTS: The composition of monocyte-population was analyzed in regard to the 3 subpopulations. After LA, an increase in classical monocytes (CD14++CD16-) (93.3% vs. 93.9%, p < 0.01) and a decrease in non-classical monocytes (CD14+CD16+) (1.5% vs 1.0%; p < 0.001) were observed. LA did not change the amount of intermediate monocytes (CD14++CD16+) (5.3% vs. 5.1%). Two methods (MONET and Therasorb® LDL) did not influence the distribution of monocyte subpopulations. Interestingly, patients with LDL-C above 2.5 mmol/l prior LA showed increased amounts of intermediate monocytes. CONCLUSION: The distribution of monocyte populations is influenced by LA but depends on the distinct method of LA. Influences of LA were mainly observed in the content of classical and non-classical monocytes, whereas the intermediate monocyte population remained unaltered by LA.

Hypertriglyceridemia in an outpatient department--Significance as an atherosclerotic risk factor.

BACKGROUND: Although a relationship between elevated triglycerides (TG) and cardiovascular diseases is generally accepted, its extent is still discussed. This retrospective study analyzed the incidence of cardiovascular events (CVE) and pancreatitis as well as the therapeutic regimen in patients being treated for hypertriglyceridemia (HTG) at an outpatient department. METHODS: The cohort included 183 patients with mild and 49 patients with severe HTG; subgroups were formed and compared according to gender, presence of metabolic vascular syndrome (MVS) and lipid values. RESULTS: Patients in this study seem to have had CVE at younger age than reported event rates in the general population. TG levels, rates of CVE and pancreatitis were reduced in all groups during therapy, which could be linked to use of omega-3 fatty acids and fibrates. Patients with persisting severe HTG as a result of incompliance showed massive risk for pancreatitis. CONCLUSION: Although no significant association between TG levels and CVE could be established, the combination of HTG and other cardiovascular risk factors such as MVS seems to be especially dangerous. The lipid-lowering drug therapy appeared to be effective with respect to CVE and pancreatitis incidence.

An elevated lipoprotein(a) plasma level as a cardiovascular risk factor.

INTRODUCTION: The causal association of elevated lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) plasma levels with the increased cardiovascular risk is still controversial and presently there are no standard recommendations on managing of hyperLp(a)emia. Our retrospective analysis is aimed to explore the Lp(a) thresholds, the magnitude of various cardiovascular risk factors and their combinations. METHODS: The files of 544 outpatients from our Outpatient Department of Lipid Disorders were divided into quintiles with respect to Lp(a) levels and reviewed regarding age, gender, Body Mass Index, dyslipidemias, arterial hypertension, diabetes mellitus, smoking and incidence of vascular events in coronaries, carotids and lower extremities. Furthermore we built 15 small quantiles to identify the Lp(a) threshold more precisely. RESULTS: The incidence odds ratio for cardiovascular events rose from 2.65 in the 2nd quintile with Lp(a) 483-821 mg/L to 6.36 in the 5th quintile (Lp(a) ≥ 1495 mg/L). The relative risk of cardiovascular events was 0.08 in subjects with a Lp(a) level under 232 mg/l and 3.6 at Lp(a) ≥ 315 mg/L. The magnitude of the combination of elevated Lp (a) with arterial hypertension factor exceeded that of gender, age and combination of arterial hypertension with smoking. CONCLUSIONS: A Lp(a) plasma level of higher than about 300 mg/L seems to be a threshold for occurring of cardiovascular events. The combination of raised Lp(a) with arterial hypertension was found to be the most important cardiovascular risk factor. Lp(a) levels under 232 mg/L appeared to be a marker for good prognosis.

Homocysteine in lipoprotein apheresis patients--retrospective data analysis in apheresis center of a university hospital.

INTRODUCTION: There is an obvious contrast between the data from the epidemiological studies on hyperhomocysteinemia and the negative results of the homocysteine-lowering clinical trials. Moderate hyperhomocysteinemia might only be relevant in certain subgroups of subjects. The current study was focused on lipoprotein apheresis patients; the study goals were to determine the prevalence of hyperhomocysteinemia, to identify the association between homocysteine levels and cardiovascular events and to test the effects of lipoprotein apheresis and of the conventional homocysteine-lowering therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty patients from our Lipoprotein Apheresis Center (37 males, 23 females, age 63.1 ± 10.8 years) were included in the study. All patients' records were reviewed with respect to age, sex, BMI, dyslipidemias, arterial hypertension, diabetes mellitus and incidence of vascular events in coronaries, carotids and lower extremities. Homocysteine was measured before and immediately after the apheresis procedure. We also observed the effects of conventional homocysteine-lowering therapy. RESULTS: The prevalence of hyperhomocysteinemia was 50%. Homocysteine levels correlated positively with number of cardiovascular events (p < 0.03) and serum creatinine (p < 0.0001) and negatively with serum HDL-cholesterol (p < 0.03). Neither oral nor intravenous medication with vitamin B and folic acid showed a significant homocysteine lowering effect. The median relative change value of homocysteine after apheresis session was -12% but was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of hyperhomocysteinemia in lipoprotein apheresis patients is high. Neither apheresis nor more conventional methods appear to markedly influence homocysteine serum levels.

Cardiovascular events in patients with increased lipoprotein (a) - retrospective data analysis in an outpatient department of lipid disorders.

INTRODUCTION: The role of lipoprotein (a) (Lp(a)) in atherogenesis has been previously demonstrated in several trials reporting various and sometimes contradictory findings. Our retrospective study analyzed the incidence of cardiovascular events in patients with Lp(a) plasma level of more than 250 mg/l, which has been defined as a threshold in previous publications. METHODS: The files of 303 patients with Lp(a) of more than 250 mg/l were divided into 5 groups categorized by Lp(a) level increase and reviewed regarding age, sex, BMI, dyslipidemias, arterial hypertension, diabetes mellitus, family history of cardiovascular events, fatty liver and incidence of vascular events in coronaries, carotids and lower extremities. RESULTS: No significant differences were observed with respect to sex, age, BMI, dyslipidemias, diabetes mellitus, arterial hypertension and hepatic steatosis. The likely occurrence of at least one event was 2.77 times more in the fourth (Lp(a) 1235 +/- 82 mg/l) and 6.2 times more in the fifth (Lp(a) 2068 +/- 471 mg/l) than in the first group (Lp(a) 322 +/- 48 mg/l). The 5 groups differed with respect to average "events per patient" (p < 0.001). The magnitude of increased Lp (a) exceeded that of other risk factors. CONCLUSION: A substantially (more than 1100 mg/l) elevated Lp(a) plasma level seems to be an important predictor for the occurrence of cardiovascular events. It makes sense in clinical practice to consider patients exhibiting this elevation as having a high cardiovascular risk. In case of progression of atherosclerotic complications the patients should be assigned for lipid apheresis.

The health status of Russian-speaking immigrants in Germany.

INTRODUCTION: Germany developed today into a country of immigration, which creates an additional burden for the social security system and results in a new challenge for the healthcare. In the last 17 years more than two million "Russia Germans" have been repatriated and about two hundred thousand Jewish refugees have resettled in Germany from the former Soviet Union. Nevertheless relevant data concerning migration-related public health care are very scare. METHODS: Search of PubMed and Journals extracts combined with the own researches, analysing the health status indices of the Russian-speaking immigrants in Germany. RESULTS: Both repatriates of German origin and Jewish refugees demonstrated higher prevalence of impaired lipid metabolism in comparison with native population. 42 % of the 503,040 HBsAg (hepatitis B s-Antigen) carriers in Germany were migrants. The Jewish refugees demonstrated the highest rates of depression and anxiety and the highest levels of awakening cortisol. On the other side German resettlers showed lower cardiovascular as well as all-cause death rates compared to the native Germans. CONCLUSION: The development of adequate health care programmes to address migratory aspects as well as the establishment of quality standards will realistically enhance the capability of responding rapidly to migrant health aspects and help to tackle inequalities in health.