Association of lipoprotein(a) levels with recurrent events in patients with coronary artery disease. Issue 16 (7th May 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Liu, Hui-Hui; Cao, Ye-Xuan; Jin, Jing-Lu; Zhang, Hui-Wen; Hua, Qi; Li, Yan-Fang; Guo, Yuan-Lin; Zhu, Cheng-Gang; Wu, Na-Qiong; Gao, Ying; Xu, Rui-Xia; Hong, Li-Feng; Li, Jian-Jun
• Is Part Of: Heart. Volume 106:Issue 16(2020)
• Page Start: 1228
• Page End: 1235
• Publication Date: 2020-05-07
• Subjects: Lipoproteins and hyperlipidaemia -- coronary artery disease -- cardiac risk factors and prevention; Heart -- Diseases -- Treatment -- Periodicals; Cardiology -- Periodicals; 616.12
• DOI: 10.1136/heartjnl-2020-316586
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1355-6037

Abstract

Abstract : Objective: Whether lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is a predictor for recurrent cardiovascular events (RCVEs) in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) has not been established. This study, hence, aimed to examine the potential impact of Lp(a) on RCVEs in a real-world, large cohort of patients with the first cardiovascular event (CVE). Methods: In this multicentre, prospective study, 7562 patients with angiography-diagnosed CAD who had experienced a first CVE were consecutively enrolled. Lp(a) concentrations of all subjects were measured at admission and the participants were categorised according to Lp(a) tertiles. All patients were followed-up for the occurrence of RCVEs including cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction and stroke. Results: During a mean follow-up of 61.45±19.57 months, 680 (9.0%) RCVEs occurred. The results showed that events group had significantly higher Lp(a) levels than non-events group (20.58 vs 14.95 mg/dL, p<0.001). Kaplan-Meier analysis indicated that Lp(a) tertile 2 (p=0.001) and tertile 3 (p<0.001) groups had significantly lower cumulative event-free survival rates compared with tertile 1 group. Moreover, multivariate Cox regression analysis further revealed that Lp(a) was independently associated with RCVEs risk (HR: 2.01, 95% CI: 1.44 to 2.80, p<0.001). Moreover, adding Lp(a) to the SMART risk score model led to a slight but significant improvement in C-statistic (∆C-statistic: 0.018 (95% CI: 0.011 to 0.034), p=0.002), net reclassification (6.8%, 95% CI: 0.5% to 10.9%, p=0.040) and integrated discrimination (0.3%, 95% CI: 0.1% to 0.7%, p<0.001). Conclusions: Circulating Lp(a) concentration was indeed a useful predictor for the risk of RCVEs in real-world treated patients with CAD, providing additional information concerning the future clinical application of Lp(a).