Lipoprotein(a) as a blood marker for large artery atherosclerosis stroke etiology: validation in a prospective cohort from a swiss stroke center.

BACKGROUND: Lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] serum levels are highly genetically determined and promote atherogenesis. High Lp(a) levels are associated with increased cardiovascular morbidity. Serum Lp(a) levels have recently been associated with large artery atherosclerosis (LAA) stroke. We aimed to externally validate this association in an independent cohort. METHODS: This study stems from the prospective multicentre CoRisk study (CoPeptin for Risk Stratification in Acute Stroke patients [NCT00878813]), conducted at the University Hospital Bern, Switzerland, between 2009 and 2011, in which Lp(a) plasma levels were measured within the first 24 hours after stroke onset. We assessed the association of Lp(a) with LAA stroke using multivariable logistic regression and performed interaction analyses to identify potential effect modifiers. RESULTS: Of 743 patients with ischaemic stroke, 105 (14%) had LAA stroke aetiology. Lp(a) levels were higher for LAA stroke than non-LAA stroke patients (23.0 nmol/l vs 16.3 nmol/l, p = 0.01). Multivariable regression revealed an independent association of log10and#xA0;Lp(a) with LAA stroke aetiology (aOR 1.47 [95% CI 1.03and#x2013;2.09], p = 0.03). The interaction analyses showed that Lp(a) was not associated with LAA stroke aetiology among patients with diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: In a well-characterised cohort of patients with ischaemic stroke, we validated the association of higher Lp(a) levels with LAA stroke aetiology, independent of traditional cardiovascular risk factors. These findings may inform randomised clinical trials investigating the effect of Lp(a) lowering agents on cardiovascular outcomes. The CoRisk (CoPeptin for Risk Stratification in Acute Patients) study is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov. REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT00878813.

Causal association of blood lipids with all-cause and cause-specific mortality risk: a Mendelian randomization study.

Dyslipidemia has long been implicated in elevating mortality risk; yet, the precise associations between lipid traits and mortality remained undisclosed. Our study aimed to explore the causal effects of lipid traits on both all-cause and cause-specific mortality. One-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) with linear and nonlinear assumptions was conducted in a cohort of 407,951 European participants from the UK Biobank. Six lipid traits, consisting of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), triglycerides, apolipoprotein A1 (ApoA1), apolipoprotein B (ApoB), and lipoprotein(a), were included to investigate the causal associations with mortality. Two-sample MR was performed to replicate the association between each lipid trait and all-cause mortality. Univariable MR results showed that genetically predicted higher ApoA1 was significantly associated with a decreased all-cause mortality risk (HR[95% CI]:0.93 [0.89-0.97], P value = 0.001), which was validated by the two-sample MR analysis. Higher lipoprotein(a) was associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality (1.03 [1.01-1.04], P value = 0.002). Multivariable MR confirmed the direct causal effects of ApoA1 and lipoprotein(a) on all-cause mortality. Meanwhile, nonlinear MR found no evidence for nonlinearity between lipids and all-cause mortality. Our examination into cause-specific mortality revealed a suggestive inverse association between ApoA1 and cancer mortality, a significant positive association between lipoprotein(a) and cardiovascular disease mortality, and a suggestive positive association between lipoprotein(a) and digestive disease mortality. High LDL-C was associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease mortality but a decreased risk of neurodegenerative disease mortality. The findings suggest that implementing interventions to raise ApoA1 and decrease lipoprotein(a) levels may improve overall health outcomes and mitigate cancer and digestive disease mortality.

Lipoprotein(a), C-Reactive Protein, and Cardiovascular Risk in Primary and Secondary Prevention Populations.

Importance: Elevated lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]) is a putative causal risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). There are conflicting data as to whether Lp(a) may increase cardiovascular risk only in the presence of concomitant inflammation. Objective: To investigate whether Lp(a) is associated with cardiovascular risk independent of high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) in both primary and secondary prevention populations. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study uses data from 3 distinct cohorts, 1 population-based cohort and 2 randomized clinical trials. Participants included individuals from the UK Biobank (data from 2006-2010) without prevalent ASCVD, participants in the FOURIER (TIMI 59) trial (data from 2013-2017) who had baseline Lp(a) and hs-CRP data, and participants in the SAVOR-TIMI 53 trial (data from 2010-2013) who had prevalent ASCVD and baseline values for Lp(a) and hs-CRP. The data analysis took place from November 2022 to November 2023. Exposure: Baseline plasma Lp(a), considered either as a continuous variable or dichotomized at 125 nmol/L. Main Outcomes and Measures: Risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction [MI], or ischemic stroke), the individual MACE components, and peripheral artery disease (PAD). Results: Among 357 220 individuals in the UK Biobank without prevalent ASCVD, 232 699 (65%) had low hs-CRP (<2 mg/L), and 124 521 (35%) had high hs-CRP (≥2 mg/L) values. In a Cox proportional hazard model adjusted for ASCVD risk factors, higher Lp(a) was associated with increased cardiovascular risk regardless of baseline hs-CRP value for MACE (hs-CRP ≥2 mg/L: hazard ratio [HR] per 50-nmol/L higher Lp[a], 1.05; 95% CI, 1.04-1.07; P < .001; for hs-CRP <2 mg/L: HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.04-1.07; P < .001; P = .80 for interaction), as well as MI, ischemic stroke, and PAD individually. Among 34 020 individuals in the FOURIER and SAVOR trials with baseline cardiometabolic disease, there were 17 643 (52%) with low and 16 377 (48%) with high baseline hs-CRP values. In Cox proportional hazard models using aggregated data from FOURIER and SAVOR, higher baseline Lp(a) was associated with increased cardiovascular risk regardless of baseline hs-CRP for MACE (hs-CRP ≥2 mg/L: HR per 50-nmol/L higher Lp[a], 1.02; 95% CI, 1.00-1.05; P = .04; hs-CRP <2 mg/L: HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.02-1.08; P < .001; P = .16 for interaction), MI, and PAD. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, higher levels of Lp(a) were associated with MACE, MI, and PAD in both primary and secondary prevention populations regardless of baseline hs-CRP value.

Association between serum lipoprotein(a) and mildly reduced eGFR: a cross-sectional study.

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD) and aortic stenosis. However, the data on the relationship between Lp(a) and mildly reduced estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) has been disputed. This study was conducted to assess the relationship between Lp(a) concentrations and mildly reduced eGFR in healthy subjects.This community-based, cross-sectional study enrolled 1,064 volunteers aged ≥ 40 years who lived in Yonghong Community, Zhonglou District, Changzhou, China, between December 2016 and December 2017. A mildly reduced eGFR was defined as eGFR between 60 and 90 mL/min/1.73m2. A standardized questionnaire and biochemical measurements were used to gather information about participants. The serum concentration of Lp(a) was determined using the latex-enhanced immunoturbidimetric test. Of the total study population, 34.8% (n = 370) were men, and the mean age was 66.8 ± 8.5 years. A significant association existed between Lp(a) levels and the risk of mildly reduced eGFR. Individuals with the highest tertile of Lp(a) had higher odds of mildly reduced eGFR after adjusting for various confounders (adjusted odds ratio [OR]: 1.80, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.24-2.60, P = 0.0025) compared to those with the lowest tertile of Lp(a). Multivariable logistic regression of studies in which Lp(a) was presented as continuous variables showed consistent results (adjusted OR: 1.23 for 1-SD increment of Ln-Lp(a), 95% CI: 1.05-1.43). Subgroup analyses showed that study characteristics such as age, sex, obesity, diabetes, and hypertension status did not significantly affect the association (P for all interactions > 0.05). These results suggest that higher serum Lp(a) level was an independent risk factor for mildly reduced eGFR.

Diagnostic value of serum dia in acute myocardial infarction and aortic dissection in athletic patients and those with optimal physical health

Objective: To explore the relationship between serum lipoprotein (a) levels and acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and aortic dissection in athletic patients and those with optimal physical health. Methods: This study involved 216 athletic patients admitted to a Chinese hospital for AMI who underwent Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) between 2018 and 2019. These patients, characterized by their athletic background and optimal physical health, were divided based on their serum lipoprotein (a) levels: 133 in the low-lipoprotein (a) group (<300 mg/L) and 83 in the high-lipoprotein (a) group (≥300 mg/L). Data including baseline demographics, laboratory tests, and details of interventional treatment were collected from medical records. All patients were followed up for two years post-discharge to record Major Adverse Cardiac Events (MACE). Factors influencing MACE were analyzed using univariate and multivariate logistic regression. Results: The low lipoprotein (a) group exhibited lower age, reduced Killip grades III-IV, lower LDL-C levels, and fewer diseased vessels than the high lipoprotein (a) group (P><0.05). The incidence of MACE was significantly lower in the low lipoprotein (a) group (5.3%, 7/133) compared to the high lipoprotein (a) group (27.87%, 51/183) (P><0.05). Univariate analysis identified significant differences in age, post-surgery β-blocker use, LDL-C levels, serum lipoprotein (a) levels, revascularization strategies, and the> <3 00 mg/L) and 83 in the high-lipoprotein (a) group (≥300 mg/L). Data including baseline demographics, laboratory tests, and details of interventional treatment were collected from medical records. All patients were followed up for two years post-discharge to record Major Adverse Cardiac Events (MACE). Factors influencing MACE were analyzed using univariate and multivariate logistic regression (AU)

Lepodisiran, an Extended-Duration Short Interfering RNA Targeting Lipoprotein(a): A Randomized Dose-Ascending Clinical Trial.

Importance: Epidemiological and genetic data have implicated lipoprotein(a) as a potentially modifiable risk factor for atherosclerotic disease and aortic stenosis, but there are no approved pharmacological treatments. Objectives: To assess the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and effects of lepodisiran on lipoprotein(a) concentrations after single doses of the drug; lepodisiran is a short interfering RNA directed at hepatic synthesis of apolipoprotein(a), an essential component necessary for assembly of lipoprotein(a) particles. Design, Setting, and Participants: A single ascending-dose trial conducted at 5 clinical research sites in the US and Singapore that enrolled 48 adults without cardiovascular disease and with lipoprotein(a) serum concentrations of 75 nmol/L or greater (or ≥30 mg/dL) between November 18, 2020, and December 7, 2021; the last follow-up visit occurred on November 9, 2022. Interventions: Participants were randomized to receive placebo or a single dose of lepodisiran (4 mg, 12 mg, 32 mg, 96 mg, 304 mg, or 608 mg) administered subcutaneously. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the safety and tolerability of the single ascending doses of lepodisiran. The secondary outcomes included plasma levels of lepodisiran for 168 days after dose administration and changes in fasting lipoprotein(a) serum concentrations through a maximum follow-up of 336 days (48 weeks). Results: Of the 48 participants enrolled (mean age, 46.8 [SD, 11.6] years; 35% were women), 1 serious adverse event occurred. The plasma concentrations of lepodisiran reached peak levels within 10.5 hours and were undetectable by 48 hours. The median baseline lipoprotein(a) concentration was 111 nmol/L (IQR, 78 to 134 nmol/L) in the placebo group, 78 nmol/L (IQR, 50 to 152 nmol/L) in the 4 mg of lepodisiran group, 97 nmol/L (IQR, 86 to 107 nmol/L) in the 12-mg dose group, 120 nmol/L (IQR, 110 to 188 nmol/L) in the 32-mg dose group, 167 nmol/L (IQR, 124 to 189 nmol/L) in the 96-mg dose group, 96 nmol/L (IQR, 72 to 132 nmol/L) in the 304-mg dose group, and 130 nmol/L (IQR, 87 to 151 nmol/L) in the 608-mg dose group. The maximal median change in lipoprotein(a) concentration was -5% (IQR, -16% to 11%) in the placebo group, -41% (IQR, -47% to -20%) in the 4 mg of lepodisiran group, -59% (IQR, -66% to -53%) in the 12-mg dose group, -76% (IQR, -76% to -75%) in the 32-mg dose group, -90% (IQR, -94% to -85%) in the 96-mg dose group, -96% (IQR, -98% to -95%) in the 304-mg dose group, and -97% (IQR, -98% to -96%) in the 608-mg dose group. At day 337, the median change in lipoprotein(a) concentration was -94% (IQR, -94% to -85%) in the 608 mg of lepodisiran group. Conclusions and Relevance: In this phase 1 study of 48 participants with elevated lipoprotein(a) levels, lepodisiran was well tolerated and produced dose-dependent, long-duration reductions in serum lipoprotein(a) concentrations. The findings support further study of lepodisiran. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04914546.

Concordance of a High Lipoprotein(a) Concentration Among Relatives.

Importance: Lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]) concentrations are a highly heritable and potential causal risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Recent consensus statements by the European Atherosclerosis Society and American Heart Association recommend screening of relatives of individuals with high Lp(a) concentrations, but the expected yield of this approach has not been quantified in large populations. Objective: To measure the prevalence of high Lp(a) concentrations among first- and second-degree relatives of individuals with high Lp(a) concentrations compared with unrelated participants. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cross-sectional analysis, pairs of first-degree (n = 19 899) and second-degree (n = 9715) relatives with measured Lp(a) levels from the UK Biobank study and random pairs of unrelated individuals (n = 184 764) were compared. Data for this study were collected from March 2006 to August 2010 and analyzed from December 2021 to August 2023. Exposure: Serum Lp(a) levels, with a high Lp(a) level defined as at least 125 nmol/L. Main Outcome and Measure: Concordance of clinically relevant high Lp(a) levels in first- and second-degree relatives of index participants with high Lp(a) levels. Results: A total of 52 418 participants were included in the analysis (mean [SD] age, 57.3 [8.0] years; 29 825 [56.9%] women). Levels of Lp(a) were correlated among pairs of first-degree (Spearman ρ = 0.45; P < .001) and second-degree (Spearman ρ = 0.22; P < .001) relatives. A total of 1607 of 3420 (47.0% [95% CI, 45.3%-48.7%]) first-degree and 514 of 1614 (31.8% [95% CI, 29.6%-34.2%]) second-degree relatives of index participants with high Lp(a) levels also had elevated concentrations compared with 4974 of 30 258 (16.4% [95% CI, 16.0%-16.9%]) pairs of unrelated individuals. The concordance in high Lp(a) levels was generally consistent among subgroups (eg, those with prior ASCVD, postmenopausal women, and statin users). The odds ratios for relatives to have high Lp(a) levels if their index relative had a high Lp(a) level compared with those whose index relatives did not have high Lp(a) levels were 7.4 (95% CI, 6.8-8.1) for first-degree relatives and 3.0 (95% CI, 2.7-3.4) for second-degree relatives. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cross-sectional study suggest that the yield of cascade screening of first-degree relatives of individuals with high Lp(a) levels is over 40%. These findings support recent recommendations to use this approach to identify additional individuals at ASCVD risk based on Lp(a) concentrations.

Reducing saturated fat intake lowers LDL-C but increases Lp(a) levels in African Americans: the GET-READI feeding trial.

Reducing dietary saturated fatty acids (SFA) intake results in a clinically significant lowering of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) across ethnicities. In contrast, dietary SFA's role in modulating emerging cardiovascular risk factors in different ethnicities remains poorly understood. Elevated levels of lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)], an independent cardiovascular risk factor, disproportionally affect individuals of African descent. Here, we assessed the responses in Lp(a) levels to dietary SFA reduction in 166 African Americans enrolled in GET-READI (The Gene-Environment Trial on Response in African Americans to Dietary Intervention), a randomized controlled feeding trial. Participants were fed two diets in random order for 5 weeks each: 1) an average American diet (AAD) (37% total fat: 16% SFA), and 2) a diet similar to the Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension (DASH) diet (25% total fat: 6% SFA). The participants' mean age was 35 years, 70% were women, the mean BMI was 28 kg/m2, and the mean LDL-C was 116 mg/dl. Compared to the AAD diet, LDL-C was reduced by the DASH-type diet (mean change: -12 mg/dl) as were total cholesterol (-16 mg/dl), HDL-C (-5 mg/dl), apoA-1 (-9 mg/dl) and apoB-100 (-5 mg/dl) (all P < 0.0001). In contrast, Lp(a) levels increased following the DASH-type diet compared with AAD (median: 58 vs. 44 mg/dl, P < 0.0001). In conclusion, in a large cohort of African Americans, reductions in SFA intake significantly increased Lp(a) levels while reducing LDL-C. Future studies are warranted to elucidate the mechanism(s) underlying the SFA reduction-induced increase in Lp(a) levels and its role in cardiovascular risk across populations.

Lack of significant associations between single nucleotide polymorphisms in LPAL2-LPA genetic region and all cancer incidence and mortality in Japanese population: The Japan public health center-based prospective study.

BACKGROUND: High lipoprotein (a) level is an established cardiovascular risk, but its association with non-cardiovascular diseases, especially cancer, is controversial. Serum lipoprotein (a) levels vary widely by genetic backgrounds and are largely determined by the genetic variations of apolipoprotein (a) gene, LPA. In this study, we investigate the association between SNPs in LPA region and cancer incidence and mortality in Japanese. METHODS: A genetic cohort study was conducted utilizing the data from 9923 participants in the Japan Public Health Center-based Prospective Study (JPHC Study). Twenty-five SNPs in the LPAL2-LPA region were selected from the genome-wide genotyped data. Cox regression analysis adjusted for the covariates and competing risks of death from other causes, were used to estimate the relative risk (hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI)) of overall and site-specific cancer incidence and mortality, for each SNP. RESULTS: No significant association was found between SNPs in the LPAL2-LPA region and cancer incidence or mortality (overall/site-specific cancer). In men, however, HRs for stomach cancer incidence of 18SNPs were estimated higher than 1.5 (e.g., 2.15 for rs13202636, model free, 95%CI: 1.28-3.62) and those for stomach cancer mortality of 2SNPs (rs9365171, rs1367211) were estimated 2.13 (recessive, 95%CI:1.04-4.37) and 1.61 (additive, 95%CI: 1.00-2.59). Additionally, the minor allele for SNP rs3798220 showed increased death risk from colorectal cancer (CRC) in men (HR: 3.29, 95% CI:1.59 - 6.81) and decreased CRC incidence risk in women (HR: 0.46, 95%CI: 0.22-0.94). Minor allele carrier of any of 4SNPs could have risk of prostate cancer incidence (e.g., rs9365171 dominant, HR: 1.71, 95%CI: 1.06-2.77). CONCLUSIONS: None of the 25 SNPs in the LPAL2-LPA region was found to be significantly associated with cancer incidence or mortality. Considering the possible association between SNPs in LPAL2-LPA region and colorectal, prostate and stomach cancer incidence or mortality, further analysis using different cohorts is warranted.

Prognostic impacts of diabetes status and lipoprotein(a) levels in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: a prospective cohort study.

OBJECTS: This study aimed to investigate the impact of lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] levels on the prognosis of Chinese patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), and to explore if the impact may differ in the diabetes mellitus (DM) and nonDM groups. METHODS: Between March 2017 and January 2020, 1543 patients with STEMI who underwent emergency percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) were prospectively recruited. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause death, MI recurrence (reMI), and stroke, known as major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Analyses involving the Kaplan-Meier curve, Cox regression, and restricted cubic spline (RCS) were conducted. RESULTS: During the 1446-day follow-up period, 275 patients (17.8%) experienced MACEs, including 141 with DM (20.8%) and 134 (15.5%) without DM. As for the DM group, patients with Lp(a) ≥ 50 mg/dL showed an apparently higher MACE risk compared to those with Lp(a) < 10 mg/dL (adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 1.85, 95% confidence interval [CI]:1.10-3.11, P = 0.021). The RCS curve indicates that the HR for MACE appeared to increase linearly with Lp(a) levels exceeding 16.9 mg/dL. However, no similar associations were obtained in the nonDM group, with an adjusted HR value of 0.57 (Lp(a) ≥ 50 mg/dL vs. < 10 mg/dL: 95% CI 0.32-1.05, P = 0.071). Besides, compared to patients without DM and Lp(a) ≥ 30 mg/dL, the MACE risk of patients in the other three groups (nonDM with Lp(a) < 30 mg/dL, DM with Lp(a) < 30 mg/dL, and DM with Lp(a) ≥ 30 mg/dL) increased to 1.67-fold (95% CI 1.11-2.50, P = 0.013), 1.53-fold (95% CI 1.02-2.31, P = 0.041), and 2.08-fold (95% CI 1.33-3.26, P = 0.001), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this contemporary STEMI population, high Lp(a) levels were linked to an increased MACE risk, and very high Lp(a) levels (≥ 50 mg/dL) significantly indicated poor outcomes in patients with DM, while not for those without DM. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov NCT: 03593928.

High lipoprotein(a) levels and mitral valve disease: A systematic review.

AIMS: The role of lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] as a possibly causal risk factor for atherosclerotic artery disease and aortic valve stenosis has been well established. However, the information available on the association between Lp(a) levels and mitral valve disease is limited and controversial. The main objective of the present study was to assess the association between Lp(a) levels and mitral valve disease. DATA SYNTHESIS: This systematic review was performed according to PRISMA guidelines (PROSPERO CRD42022379044). A literature search was performed to detect studies that evaluated the association between Lp(a) levels or single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) related to high levels of Lp(a) and mitral valve disease, including mitral valve calcification and valve dysfunction. Eight studies including 1,011,520 individuals were considered eligible for this research. The studies that evaluated the association between Lp(a) levels and prevalent mitral valve calcification found predominantly positive results. Similar findings were reported in two studies that evaluated the SNPs related to high levels of Lp(a). Only two studies evaluated the association of Lp(a) and mitral valve dysfunction, showing contradictory results. CONCLUSIONS: This research showed disparate results regarding the association between Lp(a) levels and mitral valve disease. The association between Lp(a) levels and mitral valve calcification seems more robust and is in line with the findings already demonstrated in aortic valve disease. New studies should be developed to clarify this topic.

Relationship Between Lipoprotein(a) Levels and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Postmenopausal Women: A Systematic Review.

Elevated lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] levels are independently associated with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, although this association is less explored in postmenopausal women. The main objective of this systematic review was to analyze the association between elevated Lp(a) levels and cardiovascular outcomes in posmenopausal women. Studies that evaluated this association were searched in the current literature. Ten studies including 157.690 women were considered eligible for this study. In total, 4 prospective cohorts, 3 cross-sectional studies, 2 nested case-control studies, and one post-hoc analysis from a randomized clinical trial were analyzed. The included studies showed different results regarding the association between Lp(a) levels and cardiovascular outcomes: a positive association (4 studies), no association (2 studies), or different results depending on the subgroups or outcomes evaluated (4 studies). The results were robust when evaluating coronary events. The reduction in coronary events attributed to a hormone replacement therapy-associated decrease in Lp(a) levels was controversial.

High levels of lipoprotein(a) - assessment and treatment. / Høyt nivå av lipoprotein(a) ­ utredning og behandling.

Approximately 5 % of the population have highly elevated levels of lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)), which is a genetically determined risk factor for cardiovascular disease. Measuring lipoprotein(a) can improve cardiovascular risk stratification and have consequences for preventive measures. Treatment is targeted at reducing modifiable cardiovascular risk factors, but Lp(a)-lowering drugs are being trialled. This article reviews the management of lipoprotein(a) in clinical practice.

Impact of lipoprotein(a) levels on primary patency after endovascular therapy for femoropopliteal lesions.

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a risk factor for peripheral artery disease (PAD). However, the relationship between Lp(a) levels and clinical events after endovascular therapy (EVT) for the femoropopliteal artery in PAD patients remains unclear. Thus, this study aimed to assess the impact of Lp(a) levels on primary patency after EVT for de novo femoropopliteal lesions in PAD patients. A retrospective analysis was conducted on 109 patients who underwent EVT for de novo femoropopliteal lesions, and Lp(a) levels were measured before EVT between June 2016 and December 2019. Patients were divided into low Lp(a) [Lp(a) < 30 mg/dL; 78 patients] and high Lp(a) [Lp(a) ≥ 30 mg/dL; 31 patients] groups. The main outcome was primary patency following EVT. Loss of primary patency was defined as a peak systolic velocity ratio > 2.4 on a duplex scan or > 50% stenosis on angiography. Cox proportional hazards analysis was performed to determine whether high Lp(a) levels were independently associated with loss of primary patency. The mean follow-up duration was 28 months. The rates of primary patency were 83 and 76% at 1 year and 75 and 58% at 2 years in the low and high Lp(a) groups, respectively (P = 0.02). After multivariate analysis, High Lp(a)[Lp(a) ≥ 30 mg/dL] (hazard ratio 2.44; 95% CI 1.10-5.44; P = 0.03) and female sex (hazard ratio 2.65; 95% CI 1.27-5.51; P < 0.01) were independent predictors of loss of primary patency. Lp(a) levels might be associated with primary patency after EVT for de novo femoropopliteal lesions.

Predictive value of lipoprotein(a) for assessing the prevalence and severity of lower-extremity peripheral artery disease among patients with acute coronary syndrome.

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a reliable lipid marker for atherosclerosis. However, the clinical relevance of Lp(a) to lower-extremity peripheral artery disease (LE-PAD) and coronary artery disease (CAD) in the same patient has not been investigated. Patients who received primary percutaneous coronary intervention for the acute coronary syndrome (ACS) were enrolled. Patients who received hemodialysis, required multidisciplinary treatments, or had incomplete medical history were excluded. A total of 175 patients were divided into two groups according to whether they had LE-PAD (n = 21) or did not (n = 154), and three multivariable logistic regression models were used to assess if Lp(a) level is associated with LE-PAD prevalence. In addition, serum Lp(a) levels were compared among three groups according to the severity of LE-PAD (none, unilateral, or bilateral) and CAD. Serum Lp(a) levels were significantly higher in patients with LE-PAD than in those without (31.0 mg/dL vs. 13.5 mg/dL, p = 0.002). After adjusting for confounding factors, higher Lp(a) levels were independently associated with the prevalence of LE-PAD in all three models (p < 0.001 for all). With respect to LE-PAD severity, serum Lp(a) levels were significantly higher in the bilateral LE-PAD groups than in the group with no LE-PAD (p = 0.005 for all), whereas Lp(a) was not associated with CAD severity. Though Lp(a) levels are associated with the prevalence and severity of LE-PAD, are not associated with the severity of CAD among patients with ACS.

The nonlinear correlation between lipoprotein (a) and the prevalence of aortic valve calcification in patients with new-onset acute myocardial infarction.

BACKGROUND: Growing studies show that lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] is related to calcified aortic valve diseases in general population, while the relationship between Lp(a) and aortic valve calcification (AVC) in patients with new-onset acute myocardial infarction (AMI) remains unclear. Therefore, this study was to evaluate the correlation between Lp(a) and AVC in patients with new-onset AMI. METHODS: This cross-sectional study included 410 patients with new-onset AMI who were hospitalised in Zhongda Hospital affiliated to Southeast University from January 1, 2020 to December 31, 2021. Multivariable logistic regression, subgroup analysis, generalised additive model, threshold and saturation effect and receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve were used to explore the association between Lp(a) and AVC. RESULTS: Patients with AVC had higher levels of Lp(a) than those without AVC. Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that higher Lp(a) was still associated with higher risk of AVC after adjusting for confounding factors, and this correlation was robust in most subgroups and sensitivity analyses (p < 0.05). Additionally, the generalised additive model showed that there was a nonlinear correlation between Lp(a) and AVC (P for nonlinearity = 0.037). Threshold and saturation effect analysis indicated that when Lp(a) < 840 mg/L, it was positively correlated with the prevalence of AVC (p < 0.05), but when Lp(a) ≥ 840 mg/L, this correlation no longer existed. Besides, ROC curve analysis demonstrated that Lp(a) had a good diagnostic performance for AVC. CONCLUSION: Lp(a) was independently associated with the prevalence of AVC in patients with new-onset AMI.

Circulating lipoprotein(a) levels and health outcomes: Phenome-wide Mendelian randomization and disease-trajectory analyses.

BACKGROUND: Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a risk factor for atherosclerotic and valvular diseases, but its possible role in other diseases has not yet been established. We conducted phenome-wide Mendelian randomization and disease-trajectory analyses to assess any associations of circulating Lp(a) levels with a broad range of diseases. METHODS: A weighted polygenic risk score was constructed using independent genetic variants in the LPA gene and with an established effect on Lp(a) levels. The PheWAS analysis included 1081 phenotype outcomes ascertained among 385,917 White participants of the UK Biobank. Novel findings were investigated in MR analysis using data from the FinnGen consortium. Disease-trajectory and comorbidity analyses were further conducted to explore the sequential patterns of multiple morbidities related to high circulating Lp(a) levels. RESULTS: PheWAS revealed statistically significant associations of higher circulating Lp(a) levels with increased risk of a large number of circulatory system diseases (including various cardiac diseases, peripheral vascular disease, hypertension, and valvular and cerebrovascular diseases) as well as some endocrine/metabolic diseases (including hyperlipidemia, hypercholesterolemia, disorders of lipoid metabolism, and type 2 diabetes), genitourinary system diseases (renal failure), and hematologic diseases (including different types of anemia). Two-sample MR analysis supported the association between Lp(a) and risk of anemia, showed a suggestive association with type 2 diabetes, but found no association with renal failure. Disease-trajectory and comorbidity analyses identified 3 major sequential patterns of multiple morbidities, mainly in the cardiovascular, metabolic, and mental disorders, related to high circulating Lp(a) levels. CONCLUSIONS: Genetically predicted higher circulating Lp(a) levels were associated with increased risk of many circulatory system diseases and anemia. Additionally, this study identified three major sequential patterns of multiple morbidities related to high Lp(a).

Perfil lipoproteico por espectroscopia nuclear magnética en pacientes con insuficiencia cardiaca crónica comparado con controles emparejados / 1H-magnetic resonance spectroscopy lipoprotein profile in patients with chronic heart failure versus matched controls

Introducción y objetivos El fenotipado avanzado de lipoproteínas es mejor predictor del riesgo aterosclerótico que el colesterol. El perfil de lipoproteínas en la insuficiencia cardiaca (IC) no está completamente caracterizado. Nuestro objetivo fue describir el perfil de lipoproteínas en IC crónica en comparación con una población de control emparejada. Métodos Estudio transversal entre mayo 2006 y abril 2014, que incluyó pacientes ambulatorios con IC crónica. Las concentraciones de lípidos y el tamaño de las principales fracciones de lipoproteínas (lipoproteínas de alta densidad [HDL], lipoproteínas de baja densidad [LDL] y lipoproteínas de muy alta densidad) y concentración de sus subfracciones (grandes, medianas y pequeñas) se evaluaron mediante espectroscopia de resonancia magnética. Resultados 429 pacientes con IC crónica se compararon con 428 controles. Los pacientes con IC crónica presentaron menor colesterol total y menor concentración de partículas de LDL (1.115 frente a 1.352 nmol/L; p <0,001) y HDL (25,7 frente a 27,9μmol/L; p <0,001), esta última mediada principalmente por la reducción de la subfracción pequeña de HDL (15,2 frente a 18,6μmol/L; p <0,001). El tamaño medio de las partículas lipoproteínas de muy alta densidad, LDL y HDL fue significativamente mayor en los pacientes con IC. Todas las diferencias relacionadas con la partícula HDL persistieron después del ajuste por clase funcional o índice de masa corporal. Encontramos fuertes correlaciones negativas entre biomarcadores cardiacos (fracción aminoterminal del propéptido natriurético cerebral y interleucina-1 tipo de receptor 1) con concentraciones de LDL y HDL, sus subfracciones pequeñas y el tamaño de la partícula HDL. Conclusione Los pacientes con IC crónica difieren significativamente en su perfil de lipoproteínas en comparación con controles emparejados. Se necesitan más investigaciones para comprender mejor la relevancia patogénica de esta diferencia (AU)

Introduction and objectives Advanced lipoprotein phenotyping is a better predictor of atherosclerotic cardiovascular risk than cholesterol concentration alone. Lipoprotein profiling in heart failure (HF) is incompletely characterized. We aimed to describe the lipoprotein profile in patients with chronic HF compared with a matched control population. Methods This cross-sectional study was performed from May 2006 to April 2014 and included ambulatory patients with chronic HF. Lipid concentrations and the size of main lipoprotein fractions (high-density lipoprotein [HDL], low-density lipoprotein [LDL], and very low-density lipoprotein) and the particle concentration of their 3 subfractions (large, medium and small) were assessed using 1H magnetic resonance spectroscopy. Results The 429 included patients with chronic HF were compared with 428 matched controls. Patients with chronic HF had lower total cholesterol and lower mean LDL (1115 vs 1352 nmol/L; P<.001) and HDL (25.7 vs 27.9μmol/L; P <.001) particle concentrations, with this last difference being mediated by a significantly lower concentration of the small subfraction of HDL (15.2 vs 18.6μmol/L; P <.001). Mean very low-density lipoprotein, LDL, and HDL particle size was significantly higher in patients with HF vs controls. All HDL-related differences from controls persisted after adjustment for New York Heart Association functional class or body mass index. We found strong negative correlations of known cardiac biomarkers (N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide and interleukin-1 receptor-like 1) with total and small LDL and HDL fractions and HDL particle size. Conclusions Patients with chronic HF significantly differ in their lipoprotein profile compared with unaffected controls. Further research is needed to better understand the pathogenic relevance of this difference (AU)