Lipoprotein(a): Evidence for Role as a Causal Risk Factor in Cardiovascular Disease and Emerging Therapies

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is an established risk factor for multiple cardiovascular diseases. Several lines of evidence including mechanistic, epidemiologic, and genetic studies support the role of Lp(a) as a causal risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and aortic stenosis/calcific aortic valve disease (AS/CAVD). Limited therapies currently exist for the management of risk associated with elevated Lp(a), but several targeted therapies are currently in various stages of clinical development. In this review, we detail evidence supporting Lp(a) as a causal risk factor for ASCVD and AS/CAVD, and discuss approaches to managing Lp(a)-associated risk

Lipoprotein(a): Evidence for Role as a Causal Risk Factor in Cardiovascular Disease and Emerging Therapies

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is an established risk factor for multiple cardiovascular diseases. Several lines of evidence including mechanistic, epidemiologic, and genetic studies support the role of Lp(a) as a causal risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and aortic stenosis/calcific aortic valve disease (AS/CAVD). Limited therapies currently exist for the management of risk associated with elevated Lp(a), but several targeted therapies are currently in various stages of clinical development. In this review, we detail evidence supporting Lp(a) as a causal risk factor for ASCVD and AS/CAVD, and discuss approaches to managing Lp(a)-associated risk

Traditional phytoremedies for the treatment of vitiligo in Udhampur, J&K, India

The present study was conducted in Udhampur district of J&K, India to document the traditional knowledge regarding the treatment of vitiligo. Information was collected through questionnaires and interviews from 83 informants. Use–value (UV) and disease consensus index (DCI) were calculated to evaluate the plant knowledge and the degree of consensus for a remedy, respectively. A total of 65 plants from 42 families and 61 genera were reported by the informants. The most number of plants used for curing vitiligo belonged to families Asteraceae, Rutaceae, Fabaceae and Lamiaceae. Invariably, all these families are rich source of psoralen used in photochemotherapy of skin disorders. The most used life–form were herbs (49.2%) and trees (36.9%) easily accessible to the patient from the nearby wild (58.5%). The prominently used (high DCI) plants for curing vitiligo were Psoralea corylifolia, Phyllanthus emblica, Ficus carica, Acacia catechu etc. As psoralen was the main component present in most of these species, pharmacological studies may further be carried out to verify the presence of psoralen and other phytochemicals present in these species used for curing vitiligo

Lipoprotein(a) Testing Trends in a Large Academic Health System in the United States

Background Despite its high prevalence and clinical significance, clinical measurement of lipoprotein(a) is rare but has not been systematically quantified. We assessed the prevalence of lipoprotein(a) testing overall, in those with various cardiovascular disease (CVD) conditions and in those undergoing cardiac testing across 6 academic medical centers associated with the University of California, in total and by year from 2012 to 2021. Methods and Results In this observational study, data from the University of California Health Data Warehouse on the number of individuals with unique lipoprotein(a) testing, unique CVD diagnoses (using International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision [ICD-10], codes), and other unique cardiac testing were collected. The proportion of total individuals, the proportion of individuals with a given CVD diagnosis, and the proportion of individuals with a given cardiac test and lipoprotein(a) testing any time during the study period were calculated. From 2012 to 2021, there were 5 553 654 unique adults evaluated in the University of California health system, of whom 18 972 (0.3%) had lipoprotein(a) testing. In general, those with lipoprotein(a) testing were more likely to be older, men, and White race, with a greater burden of CVD. Lipoprotein(a) testing was performed in 6469 individuals with ischemic heart disease (2.9%), 836 with aortic stenosis (3.1%), 4623 with family history of CVD (3.3%), 1202 with stroke (1.7%), and 612 with coronary artery calcification (6.1%). For most conditions, the prevalence of testing in the same year as the diagnosis of CVD was relatively stable, with a small upward trend over time. Lipoprotein(a) testing was performed in 10 753 individuals (1.8%) who had lipid panels, with higher rates with more specialized testing, including coronary computed tomography angiography (6.8%) and apolipoprotein B (63.0%). Conclusions Lipoprotein(a) testing persists at low rates, even among those with diagnosed CVD, and remained relatively stable over the study period

Lipoprotein(a) Testing Trends in a Large Academic Health System in the United States

Background Despite its high prevalence and clinical significance, clinical measurement of lipoprotein(a) is rare but has not been systematically quantified. We assessed the prevalence of lipoprotein(a) testing overall, in those with various cardiovascular disease (CVD) conditions and in those undergoing cardiac testing across 6 academic medical centers associated with the University of California, in total and by year from 2012 to 2021. Methods and Results In this observational study, data from the University of California Health Data Warehouse on the number of individuals with unique lipoprotein(a) testing, unique CVD diagnoses (using International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision [ICD‐10], codes), and other unique cardiac testing were collected. The proportion of total individuals, the proportion of individuals with a given CVD diagnosis, and the proportion of individuals with a given cardiac test and lipoprotein(a) testing any time during the study period were calculated. From 2012 to 2021, there were 5 553 654 unique adults evaluated in the University of California health system, of whom 18 972 (0.3%) had lipoprotein(a) testing. In general, those with lipoprotein(a) testing were more likely to be older, men, and White race, with a greater burden of CVD. Lipoprotein(a) testing was performed in 6469 individuals with ischemic heart disease (2.9%), 836 with aortic stenosis (3.1%), 4623 with family history of CVD (3.3%), 1202 with stroke (1.7%), and 612 with coronary artery calcification (6.1%). For most conditions, the prevalence of testing in the same year as the diagnosis of CVD was relatively stable, with a small upward trend over time. Lipoprotein(a) testing was performed in 10 753 individuals (1.8%) who had lipid panels, with higher rates with more specialized testing, including coronary computed tomography angiography (6.8%) and apolipoprotein B (63.0%). Conclusions Lipoprotein(a) testing persists at low rates, even among those with diagnosed CVD, and remained relatively stable over the study period

Subclinical left ventricular dysfunction in COVID-19

Background: Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) is associated with cardiovascular injury, but left ventricular (LV) function is largely preserved. We aimed to evaluate for subclinical LV dysfunction in patients with COVID-19 through myocardial strain analysis. Methods: We performed a single-center retrospective cohort study of all patients hospitalized with COVID-19 who underwent echocardiography. Traditional echocardiographic and global longitudinal strain (GLS) values were compared with prior and subsequent echocardiograms. Results: Among 96 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 with complete echocardiograms, 67 (70%) had adequate image quality for strain analysis. The cohort was predominantly male (63%) and 18% had prevalent cardiovascular disease (CVD). Echocardiograms were largely normal with median [IQR] LV ejection fraction (EF) 62% [56%, 68%]. However, median GLS was abnormal in 91% (−13.5% [−15.0%, −10.8%]). When stratified by CVD, both groups had abnormal GLS, but presence of CVD was associated with worse median GLS (-11.6% [−13.4%, −7.2%] vs −13.9% [−15.0%, −11.3%], p = 0.03). There was no difference in EF or GLS when stratified by symptoms or need for intensive care. Compared to pre-COVID-19 echocardiograms, EF was unchanged, but median GLS was significantly worse (−15% [−16%, −14%] vs −12% [−14%, −10%], p = 0.003). Serial echocardiograms showed no significant changes in GLS or EF overall, however patients who died had stable or worsening GLS, while those who survived to discharge home showed improved GLS. Conclusions: Patients with COVID-19 had evidence of subclinical cardiac dysfunction manifested by reduced GLS despite preserved EF. These findings were observed regardless of history of CVD, presence of COVID-19 symptoms, or severity of illness

State-of-the-Art Review: Evidence on Red Meat Consumption and Hypertension Outcomes.

Hypertension (HTN) is a well-established risk factor for cardiovascular diseases (CVDs), including ischemic heart disease, stroke, heart failure, and atrial fibrillation. The prevalence of HTN, as well as mortality rates attributable to HTN, continue to increase, particularly in the United States and among Black populations. The risk of HTN involves a complex interaction of genetics and modifiable risk factors, including dietary patterns. In this regard, there is accumulating evidence that links dietary intake of red meat with a higher risk of poorly controlled blood pressure and HTN. However, research on this topic contains significant methodological limitations, which are described in the review. The report provided below also summarizes the available research reports, with an emphasis on processed red meat consumption and how different dietary patterns among certain populations may contribute to HTN-related health disparities. Finally, this review outlines potential mechanisms and provides recommendations for providers to counsel patients with evidence-based nutritional approaches regarding red meat and the risk of HTN, as well as CVD morbidity and mortality

Aspirin and Cardiovascular Risk in Individuals With Elevated Lipoprotein(a): The Multi‐Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis

Background Effective therapies for reducing cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk in people with elevated lipoprotein(a) are lacking, especially for primary prevention. Because of the potential association of lipoprotein(a) with thrombosis, we evaluated the relationship between aspirin use and CVD events in people with elevated lipoprotein(a). Methods and Results We used data from the MESA (Multi‐Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis), a prospective cohort study of individuals free of baseline cardiovascular disease. Due to potential confounding by indication, we matched aspirin users to nonusers using a propensity score based on CVD risk factors. We then evaluated the association between aspirin use and coronary heart disease (CHD) events (CHD death, nonfatal myocardial infarction) stratified by baseline lipoprotein(a) level (threshold of 50 mg/dL) using Cox proportional hazards models with adjustment for CVD risk factors. After propensity matching, the study cohort included 2183 participants, including 1234 (57%) with baseline aspirin use and 423 (19%) with lipoprotein(a) >50 mg/dL. Participants with lipoprotein(a) >50 mg/dL had a higher burden of CVD risk factors, more frequent aspirin use (61.7% versus 55.3%, P=0.02), and higher rate of incident CHD events (13.7% versus 8.9%, P50 mg/dL and aspirin use had similar CHD risk as those with lipoprotein(a) ≤50 mg/dL regardless of aspirin use. Conclusions Aspirin use was associated with a significantly lower risk for CHD events in participants with lipoprotein(a) >50 mg/dL without baseline CVD. The results of this observational propensity‐matched study require confirmation in studies with randomization of aspirin use