Lipoprotein(a) serum concentrations in children in relation to body mass index, age and sex.

BACKGROUND: Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is an inherited risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Limited data exist on Lp(a) values in children. We aimed to evaluate whether Lp(a) concentrations in youth are influenced by BMI. METHODS: 756 blood samples of 248 children with obesity and 264 matched healthy children aged 5 and 18 years, enrolled in the population-based LIFE Child (German civilization diseases cohort) study, were analyzed. Repeat measurements were available in 154 children (1-4 follow ups, ~1 year apart). RESULTS: The median Lp(a) concentration in the total cohort (n = 512) at first visit was 9.7 mg/dL (IQR 4.0-28.3). Lp(a) concentrations between 30-50 mg/dL were observed in 11.5%, while 12.5% exhibited Lp(a) ≧50 mg/dL. There was no association of Lp(a) with body mass index (BMI) (ß = 0.004, P = 0.49). Lp(a) levels did not correlate with age or sex, while Lp(a) was associated positively with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (ß = 0.05, P < 0.0001). The Lp(a) risk category remained stable in 94% of all children in repeated measurements. CONCLUSIONS: The data showed no association of Lp(a) levels in children with BMI, age or sex. Measurement of Lp(a) in youth may be useful to identify children at increased lifetime risk for ASCVD. IMPACT: In youth, Lp(a) levels are not affected by age, sex and BMI. Lp(a) risk categories remain stable over time in repeated measurements in children. Measurement of Lp(a) in children may be useful as an additional factor to identify children at increased lifetime risk for ASCVD and for reverse family screening.

LDL cholesterol target attainment in cardiovascular high- and very-high-risk patients with statin intolerance: a simulation study.

The inability to tolerate sufficient doses of statins, statin intolerance (SI), contributes to the non-achievement of guideline-recommended low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) treatment targets. Patients with SI require alternative lipid-lowering therapies (LLT). We conducted a simulation study on LDL-C target achievement with oral LLT (ezetimibe, bempedoic acid) in patients with SI, using representative data of 2.06 million German outpatients. SI was defined using literature-informed definitions based on electronic medical records (EMR). Among n = 130,778 patients with hypercholesterolaemia, available LDL-C measurement, and high or very-high cardiovascular risk, 8.6% met the definition of SI. Among patients with SI, 7.7% achieved the LDL-C target at baseline. After simulation of the stepwise addition of treatment with ezetimibe and bempedoic acid, 22.6 and 52.0% achieved the LDL-C target, respectively. The median achieved LDL-C was 80 and 62 mg/dL, the corresponding reductions from baseline were 20.0 and 38.0%, respectively. A higher proportion of patients classified as high risk achieved the target compared to those at very-high risk (58.1 vs. 49.9%). In conclusion, in patients with increased cardiovascular risk meeting the definition of SI based on EMR, combination LLT with ezetimibe and bempedoic acid has the potential to substantially increase the proportion of patients achieving clinically relevant LDL-C reductions.

Trends and consequences of lipoprotein(a) testing: Cross-sectional and longitudinal health insurance claims database analyses.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is associated with an increased risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Our goal was to characterize patients undergoing Lp(a) testing and to assess the impact of Lp(a) testing on treatment changes and subsequent ASCVD events. METHODS: A cross-sectional and a longitudinal claims data analysis were performed on 4 million patient records in Germany. Patients were followed up for a maximum of 4 years. RESULTS: In 2015 and 2018, 0.25% and 0.34% of patients were tested, respectively. Testing was more frequent in younger women in the overall population, and in men in the ASCVD population. Patients tested for Lp(a) had more comorbidities and higher ASCVD risk compared to matched control patients. ASCVD hospitalizations were more frequent prior to the first Lp(a) test (5.55 vs 1.42 per 100/person-years). The mortality rate of the Lp(a)-tested cohort and the control group was similar. Mortality was lower in patients with prior ASCVD and Lp(a) testing compared to matched controls with prior ASCVD and no Lp(a) test (2.30 vs 3.64 per 100/person-years, p <0.001). Patients with Lp(a) test received more laboratory examinations and cardiovascular medications and had more visits with specialized physicians. CONCLUSIONS: Lp(a) testing is rarely performed even in patients with very high cardiovascular risk. Patients tested for Lp(a) have more comorbidities and a higher ASCVD risk. Lp(a) testing is associated with more intensive preventive treatment and with positive effects on clinical outcomes and survival. The data support the value of Lp(a) measurements to characterize ASCVD risk and to improve ASCVD prevention.