Objectives The purpose of this study was to determine whether elevated lipoprotein(a) levels and corresponding LPA risk genotypes (rs10455872, rs3798220, kringle IV type 2 repeat polymorphism) ...prospectively associate with increased risk of aortic valve stenosis (AVS). Background The etiologic basis of AVS is unclear. Recent data implicate an LPA genetic variant (rs10455872), associated with Lp(a) levels, in calcific AVS. Methods We combined data from 2 prospective general population studies, the Copenhagen City Heart Study (1991 to 2011; n = 10,803) and the Copenhagen General Population Study (2003 to 2011; n = 66,877), following up 77,680 Danish participants for as long as 20 years, during which time 454 were diagnosed with AVS. We conducted observational and genetic instrumental variable analyses in a Mendelian randomization study design. Results Elevated Lp(a) levels were associated with multivariable adjusted hazard ratios for AVS of 1.2 (95% confidence interval CI: 0.8 to 1.7) for 22nd to 66th percentile levels (5 to 19 mg/dl), 1.6 (95% CI: 1.1 to 2.4) for 67th to 89th percentile levels (20 to 64 mg/dl), 2.0 (95% CI: 1.2 to 3.4) for 90th to 95th percentile levels (65 to 90 mg/dl), and 2.9 (95% CI: 1.8 to 4.9) for levels greater than 95th percentile (>90 mg/dl), versus levels less than the 22nd percentile (<5 mg/dl; trend, p < 0.001). Lp(a) levels were elevated among carriers of rs10455872 and rs3798220 minor alleles, and of low number of KIV-2 repeats (trend, all p < 0.001). Combining all genotypes, instrumental variable analysis yielded a genetic relative risk for AVS of 1.6 (95% CI: 1.2 to 2.1) for a 10-fold Lp(a) increase, comparable to the observational hazard ratio of 1.4 (95% CI: 1.2 to 1.7) for a 10-fold increase in Lp(a) plasma levels. Conclusions Elevated Lp(a) levels and corresponding genotypes were associated with increased risk of AVS in the general population, with levels >90 mg/dl predicting a threefold increased risk.
High levels of lipoprotein(a) are associated with increased risk of myocardial infarction (MI).
To assess whether genetic data are consistent with this association being causal.
Three studies of ...white individuals from Copenhagen, Denmark, were used: the Copenhagen City Heart Study (CCHS), a prospective general population study with 16 years of follow-up (1991-2007, n = 8637, 599 MI events); the Copenhagen General Population Study (CGPS), a cross-sectional general population study (2003-2006, n = 29 388, 994 MI events); and the Copenhagen Ischemic Heart Disease Study (CIHDS), a case-control study (1991-2004, n = 2461, 1231 MI events).
Plasma lipoprotein(a) levels, lipoprotein(a) kringle IV type 2 (KIV-2) size polymorphism genotype, and MIs recorded from 1976 through July 2007 for all participants.
In the CCHS, multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for MI for elevated lipoprotein(a) levels were 1.2 (95% confidence interval CI, 0.9-1.6; events/10,000 person-years, 59) for levels between the 22nd and 66th percentile, 1.6 (95% CI, 1.1-2.2; events/10,000 person-years, 75) for the 67th to 89th percentile, 1.9 (95% CI, 1.2-3.0; events/10,000 person-years, 84) for the 90th to 95th percentile, and 2.6 (95% CI, 1.6-4.1; events/10,000 person-years, 108) for levels greater than the 95th percentile, respectively, vs levels less than the 22nd percentile (events/10,000 person-years, 55) (trend P < .001). Numbers of KIV-2 repeats (sum of repeats on both alleles) ranged from 6 to 99 and on analysis of variance explained 21% and 27% of all variation in plasma lipoprotein(a) levels in the CCHS and CGPS, respectively. Mean lipoprotein(a) levels were 56, 31, 20, and 15 mg/dL for the first, second, third, and fourth quartiles of KIV-2 repeats in the CCHS, respectively (trend P < .001); corresponding values in the CGPS were 60, 34, 22, and 19 mg/dL (trend P < .001). In the CCHS, multivariable-adjusted HRs for MI were 1.5 (95% CI, 1.2-1.9; events/10,000 person-years, 75), 1.3 (95% CI, 1.0-1.6; events/10,000 person-years, 66), and 1.1 (95% CI, 0.9-1.4; events/10,000 person-years, 57) for individuals in the first, second, and third quartiles, respectively, as compared with individuals in the fourth quartile of KIV-2 repeats (events/10,000 person-years, 51) (trend P < .001). Corresponding odds ratios were 1.3 (95% CI, 1.1-1.5), 1.1 (95% CI, 0.9-1.3), and 0.9 (95% CI, 0.8-1.1) in the CGPS (trend P = .005), and 1.4 (95% CI, 1.1-1.7), 1.2 (95% CI, 1.0-1.6), and 1.3 (95% CI, 1.0-1.6) in the CIHDS (trend P = .01). Genetically elevated lipoprotein(a) was associated with an HR of 1.22 (95% CI, 1.09-1.37) per doubling of lipoprotein(a) level on instrumental variable analysis, while the corresponding value for plasma lipoprotein(a) levels on Cox regression was 1.08 (95% CI, 1.03-1.12).
These data are consistent with a causal association between elevated lipoprotein(a) levels and increased risk of MI.
High Lp(a) (lipoproteina) cause cardiovascular disease (CVD) in a primary prevention setting; however, it is debated whether high Lp(a) lead to recurrent CVD events. We tested the latter hypothesis ...and estimated the Lp(a)-lowering needed for 5 years to reduce CVD events in a secondary prevention setting. Approach and Results: From the CGPS (Copenhagen General Population Study; 2003-2015) of 58 527 individuals with measurements of Lp(a), 2527 aged 20 to 79 with a history of CVD were studied. The primary end point was major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE). We also studied 1115 individuals with CVD from the CCHS (Copenhagen City Heart Study; 1991-1994) and the CIHDS (Copenhagen Ischemic Heart Disease Study; 1991-1993). During a median follow-up of 5 years (range, 0-13), 493 individuals (20%) experienced a MACE in the CGPS. MACE incidence rates per 1000 person-years were 29 (95% CI, 25-34) for individuals with Lp(a)<10 mg/dL, 35 (30-41) for 10 to 49 mg/dL, 42 (34-51) for 50 to 99 mg/dL, and 54 (42-70) for ≥100 mg/dL. Compared with individuals with Lp(a)<10 mg/dL (18 nmol/L), the multifactorially adjusted MACE incidence rate ratios were 1.28 (95% CI, 1.03-1.58) for 10 to 49 mg/dL (18-104 nmol/L), 1.44 (1.12-1.85) for 50 to 99 mg/dL (105-213 nmol/L), and 2.14 (1.57-2.92) for ≥100 mg/dL (214 nmol/L). Independent confirmation was obtained in individuals from the CCHS and CIHDS. To achieve 20% and 40% MACE risk reduction in secondary prevention, we estimated that plasma Lp(a) should be lowered by 50 mg/dL (95% CI, 27-138; 105 nmol/L 55-297) and 99 mg/dL (95% CI, 54-273; 212 nmol/L 114-592) for 5 years.
High concentrations of Lp(a) are associated with high risk of recurrent CVD in individuals from the general population. This study suggests that Lp(a)-lowering by 50 mg/dL (105 nmol/L) short-term (ie, 5 years) may reduce CVD by 20% in a secondary prevention setting.
Objectives The study tested whether extreme lipoprotein(a) levels and/or corresponding LPA risk genotypes improve myocardial infarction (MI) and coronary heart disease (CHD) risk prediction beyond ...conventional risk factors. Background Elevated lipoprotein(a) levels cause MI and CHD. Levels are primarily determined by variation in the LPA gene. Methods We followed 8,720 Danish participants in a general population study from 1991 to 1994 through 2011 without losses to follow-up. During this period, 730 and 1,683 first-time MI and CHD events occurred. Using predefined cutpoints for extreme lipoprotein(a) levels and/or corresponding LPA risk genotypes (kringle IV type 2 KIV-2) repeat polymorphism, rs3798220, and rs10455872 single nucleotide polymorphisms), we calculated net reclassification indices from <10% to 10% to 19.9% to ≥20% absolute 10-year MI and CHD risk. Results For individuals with lipoprotein(a) levels ≥80th percentile (≥47 mg/dl), 23% (p < 0.001) of MI events and 12% (p < 0.001) of CHD events were reclassified correctly, while no events were reclassified incorrectly for either endpoint. As some incorrect reclassification of individuals with no events occurred, addition of lipoprotein(a) levels ≥80th percentile overall yielded net reclassification indices of +16% (95% confidence interval: 8% to 24%) and +3% (−1% to 8%) for MI and CHD, respectively. Corresponding net reclassification indices for number of KIV-2 repeats ≤21st percentile were +12% (5% to 19%) and +4% (0% to 8%), for rs3798220 carrier status +15% (−14% to 44%) and +10% (−10% to 30%), and for rs10455872 carrier status +16% (6% to 26%) and +2% (−1% to 6%). Considering only individuals at 10% to 19.9% absolute 10-year MI and CHD risk, addition of extreme lipoprotein(a) levels or corresponding LPA risk genotypes improved risk prediction even further. Conclusions Extreme lipoprotein(a) levels or corresponding LPA KIV-2/rs10455872 risk genotypes substantially improved MI and CHD risk prediction.
With the current focus on lipoprotein(a) as a likely causal risk factor for cardiovascular disease and new drugs potentially on the market to lower lipoprotein(a) levels, the safety of lowering ...lipoprotein(a) to low levels becomes increasingly important. We tested whether low levels of lipoprotein(a) and corresponding LPA genotypes associate with major disease groups including cancers and infectious disease.
We included 109 440 individuals from the Copenhagen General Population Study. For main World Health Organization International Classification of Diseases 10th edition chapter diseases, the only concordant association of low levels of lipoprotein(a) plasma levels and corresponding LPA genotypes with risk of disease was with low risk of diseases of the circulatory system. Furthermore, no concordant association of low levels of lipoprotein(a) plasma levels and corresponding LPA genotypes with the risk of any cancer (i.e. cancer subtypes combined) or infectious disease was seen. The hazard ratio for the risk of any cancer was 1.06 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.97-1.15 for the first vs. the fourth quartile of lipoprotein(a), 1.02 (0.97-1.07) for the fourth vs. the first quartile of KIV-2 number of repeats, and 1.01 (0.96-1.07) for rs10455872 non-carriers vs. carriers. The corresponding hazard ratios for the risk of hospitalization for infection were 1.05 (95% CI: 0.99-1.10), 1.02 (0.98-1.07), and 0.97 (0.93-1.03), respectively.
In a large, contemporary, general population cohort, apart from the well-established association with cardiovascular disease, low levels of lipoprotein(a) and corresponding LPA genotypes did not concordantly associate with any major disease groups including cancers and infections. There is no safety signal from our results to indicate that low levels of lipoprotein(a) are harmful.
Serological assays for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are needed to support clinical diagnosis and epidemiological investigations. Recently, assays for large-scale ...detection of total antibodies (Ab), immunoglobulin G (IgG), and IgM against SARS-CoV-2 antigens have been developed, but there are limited data on the diagnostic accuracy of these assays. This study was a Danish national collaboration and evaluated 15 commercial and one in-house anti-SARS-CoV-2 assays in 16 laboratories. Sensitivity was evaluated using 150 samples from individuals with asymptomatic, mild, or moderate COVID-19, nonhospitalized or hospitalized, confirmed by nucleic acid amplification tests (NAAT); samples were collected 13 to 73 days either from symptom onset or from positive NAAT (patients without symptoms). Specificity and cross-reactivity were evaluated in samples collected prior to the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic from >586 blood donors and patients with autoimmune diseases, cytomegalovirus or Epstein-Barr virus infections, and acute viral infections. A specificity of ≥99% was achieved by all total-Ab and IgG assays except one, DiaSorin Liaison XL IgG (97.2%). Sensitivities in descending order were Wantai ELISA total Ab (96.7%), CUH-NOVO in-house ELISA total Ab (96.0%), Ortho Vitros total Ab (95.3%), YHLO iFlash IgG (94.0%), Ortho Vitros IgG (93.3%), Siemens Atellica total Ab (93.2%), Roche Elecsys total Ab (92.7%), Abbott Architect IgG (90.0%), Abbott Alinity IgG (median 88.0%), DiaSorin Liaison XL IgG (median 84.6%), Siemens Vista total Ab (81.0%), Euroimmun/ELISA IgG (78.0%), and Snibe Maglumi IgG (median 78.0%). However, confidence intervals overlapped for several assays. The IgM results were variable, with the Wantai IgM ELISA showing the highest sensitivity (82.7%) and specificity (99%). The rate of seropositivity increased with time from symptom onset and symptom severity.
Abstract The aim of this review is to summarize present evidence of a causal association of lipoprotein(a) with risk of ischemic heart disease (IHD). Evidence for causality includes reproducible ...associations of a proposed risk factor with risk of disease in epidemiological studies, evidence from in vitro and animal studies in support of pathophysiological effects of the risk factor, and preferably evidence from randomized clinical trials documenting reduced morbidity in response to interventions targeting the risk factor. Elevated and in particular extreme lipoprotein(a) levels have in prospective studies repeatedly been associated with increased risk of IHD, although results from early studies are inconsistent. Data from in vitro and animal studies implicate lipoprotein(a), consisting of a low density lipoprotein particle covalently bound to the plasminogen-like glycoprotein apolipoprotein(a), in both atherosclerosis and thrombosis, including accumulation of lipoprotein(a) in atherosclerotic plaques and attenuation of t-PA mediated plasminogen activation. No randomized clinical trial of the effect of lowering lipoprotein(a) levels on IHD prevention has ever been conducted. Lacking evidence from randomized clinical trials, genetic studies, such as Mendelian randomization studies, can also support claims of causality. Levels of lipoprotein(a) are primarily determined by variation in the LPA gene coding for the apolipoprotein(a) moiety of lipoprotein(a), and genetic epidemiologic studies have documented association of LPA copy number variants, influencing levels of lipoprotein(a), with risk of IHD. In conclusion, results from epidemiologic, in vitro, animal, and genetic epidemiologic studies support a causal association of lipoprotein(a) with risk of IHD, while results from randomized clinical trials are presently lacking.
PDF
