All we need to know about lipoprotein(a).

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)], a genetically determined macromolecular complex, is independently and causally associated with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and calcific aortic stenosis via proposed proinflammatory, prothrombotic, and proatherogenic mechanisms. While Lp(a) measurement standardization issues are being resolved, several guidelines now support testing Lp(a) at least once in each adult's lifetime for ASCVD risk prediction which can foster implementation of more aggressive primary or secondary prevention therapies. Currently, there are several emerging targeted Lp(a) lowering therapies in active clinical investigation for safety and cardiovascular benefit among both primary and secondary prevention populations. First degree relatives of patients with high Lp(a) should be encouraged to undergo cascade screening. Primary prevention patients with high Lp(a) should consider obtaining a coronary calcium score for further risk estimation and to guide further ASCVD risk factor management including consideration of low dose aspirin therapy. Secondary prevention patients with high Lp(a) levels should consider adding PCSK9 inhibition to statin therapy.

Associations of Cumulative Perceived Stress with Cardiovascular Risk Factors and Outcomes: Findings from The Dallas Heart Study.

Background: Data remain sparse regarding the impact of chronic stress on cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors and outcomes. Prior work has been limited by incomplete assessments of perceived stress and focus on single stress domains. We evaluated the association between a composite measure of perceived stress and CVD risk factors and outcomes. Methods: Participants from the Dallas Heart Study phase 2 (2007-2009) without prevalent CVD who completed questionnaire assessments of perceived stress were included (n=2685). Individual perceived stress subcomponents (generalized stress, psychosocial, financial, and neighborhood stress) were standardized and integrated into a single cumulative stress score (CSS) with equal weighting for each component. Associations between CSS and demographics, psychosocial variables and cardiac risk factors were assessed in univariable and multivariable analyses. Cox proportional hazards models were used to determine associations of the CSS with atherosclerotic CVD (ASCVD) and Global CVD (ASCVD, heart failure, and atrial fibrillation) after adjustment for demographics and traditional risk factors. Results: Median age of the study population was 48 years, 55% were female, 49% Black and 15% Hispanic/Latinx. CSS was higher among participants who were younger, female, Black or Hispanic, and those with lower income and educational attainment (p<.0001 for each). Higher CSS was associated with self-report of racial/ethnic discrimination, lack of health insurance and last medical contact > one year previously (p<.0001 for each). In multivariable regression models adjusting for age, gender, race/ethnicity, income and education, higher CSS associated with hypertension, smoking, and higher body mass index, waist circumference Hemoglobin A1C, hs-CRP and sedentary time (p< 0.01 for each). Over a median follow-up of 12.4 years, higher CSS associated with ASCVD (adjusted HR 1.22 per SD, 95% CI 1.01-1.47) and Global CVD (HR 1.20, 95% CI 1.03-1.40). No interactions were seen between CSS, demographic factors, and outcomes. Conclusion: Composite multidimensional assessments of perceived stress may help to identify individuals at risk for CVD who may be targeted for stress mitigation or enhanced prevention strategies. These approaches may be best focused on vulnerable populations, given the higher burden of stress in women, Black and Hispanic individuals, and those with lower income and education. WHAT IS NEW?: A novel measure of cumulative stress was created that integrates generalized, psychosocial, financial, and neighborhood perceived stress.Cumulative stress was higher among women, Black and Hispanic participants, younger individuals and persons with lower income and educational attainment and was associated with adverse health behaviors and increased burden of cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors.In a diverse cohort, higher cumulative stress associated with incident CVD after adjustment for demographics and traditional risk factors. No interactions were seen based on demographic factors. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Although associations of chronic stress with CVD were similar across demographic subgroups, the higher burden of stress among younger individuals, women, Black and Hispanic participants, and those with lower SES suggests that CVD risk associated with higher stress affects marginalized groups disproportionately.Cumulative Stress is associated with modifiable risk factors and health behaviors. Future studies should explore targeting behavioral modification and risk factor reduction programs, as well as stress reduction strategies, to individuals with high cumulative stress.Additional research is needed to uncover mechanisms that underly the association between chronic stress and cardiovascular disease.

Gender in cardiovascular medicine: chest pain and coronary artery disease.

Ischaemic heart disease (IHD) remains the leading cause of morbidity and mortality among women and men yet women are more often underdiagnosed, have a delay in diagnosis, and/or receive suboptimal treatment. An implicit gender-bias with regard to lack of recognition of sex-related differences in presentation of IHD may, in part, explain these differences in women compared with men. Indeed, existing knowledge demonstrates that angina does not commonly relate to obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD). Emerging knowledge supports an inclusive approach to chest pain symptoms in women, as well as a more thoughtful consideration of percutaneous coronary intervention for angina in stable obstructive CAD, to avoid chasing our tails. Emerging knowledge regarding the cardiac autonomic nervous system and visceral pain pathways in patients with and without obstructive CAD offers explanatory mechanisms for angina. Interdisciplinary investigation approaches that involve cardiologists, biobehavioural specialists, and anaesthesia/pain specialists to improve angina treatment should be pursued.