Lipoprotein(a) plasma levels are not associated with survival after acute coronary syndromes: An observational cohort study.
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2020
2020
Historique:
received:
17
10
2019
accepted:
10
12
2019
entrez:
10
1
2020
pubmed:
10
1
2020
medline:
21
4
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is associated with coronary artery disease in population studies, however studies on its predictive value in patients with cardiovascular disease, in particular after acute coronary syndromes (ACS), are conflicting. The aim of this study was to investigate whether Lp(a) is associated with survival after ACS. We analyzed Lp(a) measurement in 1,245 patients who underwent coronary angiography for ACS. The median follow-up for cardiovascular and all-cause mortality was 5.0 (IQR 3.2-8.0) years. 655 (52.6%) presented with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), 424 (34.1%) with Non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) and 166 (13.3%) underwent coronary angiography for unstable angina. Cardiovascular mortality was 9.1% and all-cause mortality was 15.7%. Patients were stratified into four groups to their Lp(a) levels. (≤15mg/dL, >15-30mg/dL, >30-60mg/dL, and >60mg/dL). Multivessel disease was significantly more common in patients with Lp(a)>60mg/dL (p<0.05). Increased levels of Lp(a) were not associated with cardiovascular mortality (HR compared with Lp(a) ≤15mg/dL were 1.2, 1.2, and 1.0, respectively; p = 0.69) and not with all-cause mortality (HR compared with Lp(a) ≤15mg/dL were 1.2, 1.2, and 1.2, respectively; p = 0.46). Lp(a) levels at time of ACS were neither associated with cardiovascular nor with all-cause mortality. Although Lp(a) has been shown to be associated with incidence of coronary artery disease, this study does not support any role of Lp(a) as a risk factor for mortality after ACS. This should be taken into account for development of outcome studies for agents targeting Lp(a) plasma levels.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is associated with coronary artery disease in population studies, however studies on its predictive value in patients with cardiovascular disease, in particular after acute coronary syndromes (ACS), are conflicting. The aim of this study was to investigate whether Lp(a) is associated with survival after ACS.
METHODS AND RESULTS
We analyzed Lp(a) measurement in 1,245 patients who underwent coronary angiography for ACS. The median follow-up for cardiovascular and all-cause mortality was 5.0 (IQR 3.2-8.0) years. 655 (52.6%) presented with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), 424 (34.1%) with Non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) and 166 (13.3%) underwent coronary angiography for unstable angina. Cardiovascular mortality was 9.1% and all-cause mortality was 15.7%. Patients were stratified into four groups to their Lp(a) levels. (≤15mg/dL, >15-30mg/dL, >30-60mg/dL, and >60mg/dL). Multivessel disease was significantly more common in patients with Lp(a)>60mg/dL (p<0.05). Increased levels of Lp(a) were not associated with cardiovascular mortality (HR compared with Lp(a) ≤15mg/dL were 1.2, 1.2, and 1.0, respectively; p = 0.69) and not with all-cause mortality (HR compared with Lp(a) ≤15mg/dL were 1.2, 1.2, and 1.2, respectively; p = 0.46).
CONCLUSIONS
Lp(a) levels at time of ACS were neither associated with cardiovascular nor with all-cause mortality. Although Lp(a) has been shown to be associated with incidence of coronary artery disease, this study does not support any role of Lp(a) as a risk factor for mortality after ACS. This should be taken into account for development of outcome studies for agents targeting Lp(a) plasma levels.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31917789
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0227054
pii: PONE-D-19-29041
pmc: PMC6952077
doi:
Substances chimiques
Lipoprotein(a)
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Observational Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0227054Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
Lancet. 2018 Oct 13;392(10155):1311-1320
pubmed: 30293769
Science. 1989 Nov 17;246(4932):904-10
pubmed: 2530631
J Lipid Res. 2016 Oct;57(10):1751-1757
pubmed: 26889050
Eur Heart J. 2010 Dec;31(23):2844-53
pubmed: 20965889
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017 Feb 14;69(6):692-711
pubmed: 28183512
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014 Feb 18;63(6):520-7
pubmed: 24161323
Scand J Clin Lab Invest. 1995 Apr;55(2):171-80
pubmed: 7667610
Atherosclerosis. 2019 Oct;289:206-213
pubmed: 31493849
Circulation. 2019 Mar 19;139(12):1483-1492
pubmed: 30586750
N Engl J Med. 2017 May 4;376(18):1713-1722
pubmed: 28304224
Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2017 Jul;5(7):534-543
pubmed: 28566218
Lancet. 2016 Nov 5;388(10057):2239-2253
pubmed: 27665230
J Clin Lipidol. 2018 Nov - Dec;12(6):1358-1366
pubmed: 30316749
Circulation. 2000 Sep 5;102(10):1082-5
pubmed: 10973834
J Lipid Res. 2017 Oct;58(10):2008-2016
pubmed: 28798072
N Engl J Med. 2009 Dec 24;361(26):2518-28
pubmed: 20032323
J Lipid Res. 2016 Nov;57(11):1953-1975
pubmed: 27677946
JAMA Cardiol. 2018 Feb 1;3(2):164-168
pubmed: 29071331
Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2013 Nov;1(3):170-2
pubmed: 24622358
Circulation. 2018 Mar 20;137(12):e67-e492
pubmed: 29386200
J Lipid Res. 2016 Apr;57(4):526-37
pubmed: 26637278
Eur J Clin Invest. 2006 Feb;36(2):91-7
pubmed: 16436090
JAMA. 2011 Feb 23;305(8):822-3
pubmed: 21343582