Repeated lipoprotein apheresis and immune response: Effects on different immune cell populations

BACKGROUND Atherosclerosis is considered a chronic inflammation of arterial vessels with the involvement of several immune cells causing severe cardiovascular diseases. Lipoprotein apheresis (LA) improves cardiovascular conditions of patients with severely disturbed lipid metabolism. In this context, little is known about the impact of LA on various immune cell populations, especially over time. METHODS Immune cells of 18 LA-naïve patients starting weekly LA treatment were analyzed before and after four apheresis cycles over the course of 24 weeks by flow cytometry. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS An acute lowering effect of LA on T cell and natural killer (NK) cell subpopulations expressing CD69 was observed. The non-classical and intermediate monocyte subsets as well as HLA-DR$^{+}$ 6-sulfo LacNAc$^{+}$ monocytes were significantly reduced during the apheresis procedure. We conclude that LA has the capacity to alter various immune cell subsets. However, LA has mainly short-term effects than long-term consequences on proportions of immune cells

The Potential of Electrical Stimulation and Smart Textiles for Patients with Diabetes Mellitus

Diabetes mellitus is one of the most frequent diseases in the general population. Electrical stimulation is a treatment modality based on the transmission of electrical pulses into the body that has been widely used for improving wound healing and for managing acute and chronic pain. Here, we discuss recent advancements in electroceuticals and haptic/smart devices for quality of life and present in which patients and how electrical stimulation may prove to be useful for the treatment of diabetes-related complications

Clinical improvement of Long-COVID is associated with reduction in autoantibodies, lipids, and inflammation following therapeutic apheresis

In the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic, we are witnessing an unprecedented wave of post-infectious complications. Most prominently, millions of patients with Long-Covid complain about chronic fatigue and severe post-exertional malaise. Therapeutic apheresis has been suggested as an efficient treatment option for alleviating and mitigating symptoms in this desperate group of patients. However, little is known about the mechanisms and biomarkers correlating with treatment outcomes. Here, we have analyzed in different cohorts of Long-Covid patients specific biomarkers before and after therapeutic apheresis. In patients that reported a significant improvement following two cycles of therapeutic apheresis, there was a significant reduction in neurotransmitter autoantibodies, lipids, and inflammatory markers. Furthermore, we observed a 70% reduction in fibrinogen, and following apheresis, erythrocyte rouleaux formation and fibrin fibers largely disappeared as demonstrated by dark field microscopy. This is the first study demonstrating a pattern of specific biomarkers with clinical symptoms in this patient group. It may therefore form the basis for a more objective monitoring and a clinical score for the treatment of Long-Covid and other postinfectious syndromes

Why Some Patients Undergoing Lipoprotein Apheresis Therapy Develop New Cardiovascular Events?

Lipoprotein apheresis (LA) is an effective tool to reduce cardiovascular events (CVEs) in high-risk patients with elevations of low density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) and/or Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)). All patients included into this retrospective analysis had experienced CVEs before the start of the LA therapy. We compared personal and lab data in two groups: CVEx/0 (n 60) with no new events during LA therapy, CVEx/1+ (n 48) with at least one new event. Patients of Group CVEx/1+ were about 5 years older when they had started the extracorporeal therapy, and they experienced more CVEs prior to that timepoint. There was a positive correlation between the number of CVEs before and during LA therapy. No differences were seen with respect to lipid concentrations, even after a correction of LDL-C concentrations for the LDL-C transported with Lp(a) particles. LA sessions effectively reduced both LDL-C and Lp(a). Lp(a) levels measured before LA sessions were lower than those measured initially. It appeared difficult to reach the target values for LDL-C published in the ESC/EAS Guideline in 2019, although all patients were maximally treated including drugs when tolerated. In conclusion, it will be important to initiate an LA therapy earlier, at least after a second CVE and at a younger age

LIPOPROTEIN APHERESIS: YESTERDAY, TODAY, TOMORROW. REVIEW

The first attempts to treat patients with homozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (HCH) were performed in the 60ies and 70ies using a total plasma exchange. Later on, more specific lipoprotein apheresis (LA) methods have been developed – the replacement with foreign proteins was no longer necessary. It could be demonstrated that LA is life-saving in these patients, lipid-lowering drugs were shown to be much less effective than in other HCH patients. A severe HCH became an accepted indication for LA when cardiovascular events appeared. An elevation of Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is an internationally accepted independent atherogenic risk factor. Thus, an increasing number of patients with high Lp(a) concentrations suffering from life-threatening cardiovascular events like a myocardial infarction or a stroke started to be treated extracorporeally. Russian specific PocardR anti-Lp(a) columns are produced, their position within the LA methods is discussed. In the future, an antisense oligonucleotide against apolipoprotein(a) will represent another therapeutic option

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

How effectively will PCSK9 inhibitors allow retrieval of freedom from apheresis in cardiovascular high risk patients? - Estimates form a large single center

Lipoprotein apheresis (LA) has been the last-resort therapeutic option in patients suffering from limited pharmaceutical options to lower highly elevated low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels. Facing the introduction of the proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexine type 9 (PCSK-9) inhibitors, it has been speculated that they might replace LA to a large extend. Given an efficacy of approx. 55-65% to lower LDL-C it is important to analyze whether this might be realistic i) for potential candidates in apheresis sites and ii) for the future structures of the sites themselves. We performed a review of our own single center, one of the largest apheresis centers in Germany to answer these questions. Therefore we analyzed all actively treated apheresis patients and identified those with the primary indication of LDL-C elevation. In a next step we used pre-apheresis LDL-C values to calculate expected LDL-C under three given models of PCSK9 inhibitor efficacy. Including other aspects such as the accompanying presence of elevated lipoprotein(a), we identified 11-17 patients among 29 patients undergoing treatment for insufficiently treated LDL-C (38-58%). In the total cohort of 112 patients this reflects 10-15% of all patients that might potentially stop apheresis therapy due to the availability of PCSK9 inhibitor therapy, which is in clear contrast to speculations on the future perspective of apheresis therapy

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

Low rate of infectious complications following immunoadsorption therapy without regular substitution of intravenous immunoglobulins

INTRODUCTION: Immunoadsorption (IA) is increasingly used instead of plasma exchange due to lower risk of side effects and a higher selectivity. As a consequence of the reduction of immunoglobulins (Ig), the rate of infectious complications might increase in those patients. We therefore aimed to investigate the infection rate following IA without intravenous IG (IVIG) substitution in our apheresis center, where patients do not receive IVIG on a regular basis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of the IA treatments performed between 2010 and 2015 without IVIG substitution and collected data on patient age, diagnosis, number of IA treatments, serum levels of Ig, total protein, albumin, C-reactive protein (CRP) and infectious complications that occurred within 2 months after the IA treatment cycle. RESULTS: A total number of 52 patients (27 females) received at least 5 IA sessions using the following adsorbers: TheraSorb™-Ig (n = 3), TheraSorb™-Ig flex (n = 44), TheraSorb™ Ig pro (n = 1) and TheraSorb™-IgE (n = 5). The median number of treatment sessions was 8.8 [range 5-16], the median IgG reduction was 82 [11-99] %. Serum albumin was decreased by 8%. The median CRP levels remained normal until the end of therapy and within 2 months after that (3.10 and 4.30 mg/L respectively). Only 4 patients had infections (7.7%). Three of them received additional immunosuppressive therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Immunoadsorption leads to a significant reduction of IgG. CRP as inflammatory marker is not affected. Even without substitution of IVIG the complication rate directly linked with IA is low and questionable

The development of lipoprotein apheresis in Saxony in the last years

Methods Three hundred thirty-nine patients (230 men, 109 women) treated with lipoprotein apheresis in Saxony, Germany, in 2018 are described in terms of age, lipid pattern, risk factors, cardiovascular events, medication, and number of new admissions since 2014, and the data are compared with figures from 2010 to 2013. Results Patients were treated by 45.5 physicians in 16 lipoprotein apheresis centers. With about 10 patients per 100 000 inhabitants, the number of patients treated with lipoprotein apheresis in Saxony is twice as high as in Germany as a whole. The median treatment time was 3 years. Almost all patients had hypertension; type 2 diabetes mellitus was seen significantly more often in patients with low Lipoprotein(a). Cardiovascular events occurred in almost all patients before initiation of lipoprotein apheresis, under apheresis therapy the cardiovascular events rate was very low in this high-risk group. For some cardiovascular regions even no events could be observed. Conclusions The importance of lipoprotein apheresis in Saxony had been increasing from 2010 to 2018