Lipoprotein(a) as a Predictor of Cardiovascular Risk in Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Systematic Review

Abstract

Background:

Despite advancements in treatment, coronary artery disease (CAD) remains a significant global health concern. Although lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is recognized as a crucial cardiovascular risk factor associated with increased risk, the prognostic value of using Lp(a) levels in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) who have undergone percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remains debatable. This review aimed to investigate the association between Lp(a) levels and recurrent ischemic events in patients with ACS undergoing PCI.

Methods:

This systematic review included studies with individuals aged ≥18 years diagnosed with ACS who underwent PCI and had Lp(a) measurements. The included studies were sourced from the PubMed database, with a focus on articles published between January 2020 and January 2025. Keywords related to Lp(a) and cardiovascular diseases were used in the search. Data extraction involved a review of titles and abstracts followed by quality assessment using the QUADAS-2 tool.

Results:

The final analysis included 10 studies with a combined population of 20,896 patients from diverse regions, including Japan, India, Egypt, China, and South Korea. Key findings indicate that elevated Lp(a) levels are significantly associated with adverse cardiovascular outcomes, including myocardial infarction and mortality, both in hospital and during long-term follow-up.

Conclusions:

This review highlights Lp(a) as a critical biomarker for predicting recurrent cardiovascular events in ACS patients post-PCI. The consistent correlation between elevated Lp(a) levels and adverse outcomes underscores the necessity of routine monitoring and targeted management of Lp(a) to mitigate residual cardiovascular risk.

Graphical abstract

Keywords

lipoprotein(a) / acute coronary syndrome / percutaneous coronary intervention / cardiovascular events

1. Introduction

Despite significant progress in invasive and medical treatments over the past three decades, coronary artery disease (CAD) remains a major contributor to global morbidity and mortality [1]. A significant risk factor for CAD is dyslipidemia. Research has demonstrated that reducing cardiovascular events after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) can be achieved by decreasing serum low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels through the use of statin medications [2]. Despite intensive statin therapy, a considerable proportion of patients continue to experience adverse cardiovascular outcomes including myocardial infarction (MI), in-stent thrombosis, and cardiovascular-related mortality. The issues of continuing risk have also been well established by a variety of randomized clinical trials; many existing patient populations treated with aggressive lipid-lowering strategies continue to experience the burden of cardiovascular complications [3, 4].

Traditional lipid-altering therapy, targeting LDL-C levels, including statin medications, has been shown to be inadequate, and conflicting studies have demonstrated that elevations in lipoproteins result in cardiovascular events [5, 6]. Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is an LDL-like particle generated in the liver, and its serum concentration is primarily driven by the number of kringle IV type 2 protein domain repeats. Most studies have demonstrated that elevated serum Lp(a) levels are associated with increased cardiovascular risk [7, 8]. Unfortunately, statin therapy is not effective in lowering Lp(a) levels [9]. There is substantial variation in the expression of Lp(a) across racial and ethnic populations. Most observational and epidemiological studies have focused primarily on Caucasians [10, 11]. Evidence is becoming increasingly consistent that proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors lower Lp(a) levels in a manner similar to that of cardiovascular risk. Currently, Lp(a) is considered a modifiable risk factor for cardiovascular conditions. This has led to some speculation that Lp(a) reduction could reduce remaining cardiovascular risk [1, 7, 12].

Globally, Lp(a) has been established as an indicator of cardiovascular disease. The continually-developing guidelines recommend checking Lp(a) only once to identify individuals at significant risk of cardiovascular disease. The prognostic significance of Lp(a) levels in patients with a history of cardiovascular events, especially in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS), remains unclear. Evidence continues to demonstrate conflicting results regarding the risk of Lp(a). Where Lp(a) has been predictive, there is evidence that Lp(a) does not retain the same predictive value for different facets of recurrent cardiovascular events. This study examined Lp(a) levels with respect to recurrent ischemic events in patients with ACS after PCI.

2. Material and Methods

2.1 Search Strategy

A comprehensive analysis was performed to examine the influence of Lp(a) levels on residual cardiovascular events in ACS patients undergoing PCI. The investigation utilized the PubMed database, focusing on the period from January 2020 to January 2025. We limited the search period to the last five years to focus on the most recently published evidence and contemporary PCI practice, though this restriction may have omitted relevant earlier work. The Advanced Search Builder was employed, with keyword searches limited to [Title OR Abstract]. The study included only English-language research articles to ensure consistency in data extraction and interpretation, though this represents a potential limitation regarding language bias. We used a combination of keywords and medical subject headings (MeSH) tailored to each database. The search terms incorporated were: ‘(Lipoprotein(a)) AND (Acute Coronary Syndrome) AND (Percutaneous Coronary Intervention) AND (Cardiovascular Disease)’.

2.2 Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

This systematic review considered original studies involving individuals aged 18 years or older diagnosed with ACS who underwent PCI and had Lp(a) measurements. Additional relevant literature was identified through reference checks of the selected studies. Exclusion criteria included studies with participants who had coronary artery bypass grafting, were critically ill requiring mechanical circulatory support or ventilation, did not successfully receive coronary artery stenting, or died before PCI. Furthermore, this review excluded case reports and series with few patients, review articles without original data, editorials, letters, and conference papers. References within chosen research were examined for other pertinent literature.

2.3 Data Extraction

The evaluation of titles and abstracts was performed by two authors (AM and OC). Subsequently, data were extracted from studies that met the inclusion and exclusion criteria in accordance with the survey specifications.

We incorporated relevant studies identified through a review of the reference lists of previously published review articles. Ten eligible research articles in their final form were selected for inclusion. In some cases, we opted to focus solely on the primary findings aligned with the objectives of this review.

2.4 Quality Assessment

Two authors (AM and TR) independently assessed the quality of the published interventions. A third author (HAS) ensured that any disagreements were resolved. To determine the possibility of bias in each of the included studies, the QUADAS-2 instrument was utilized to evaluate the population, technique, analysis, and reporting requirements of each study [13]. The tool comprises four main categories: flow and timing, reference standards, index tests, and patient selection. For each specific study, every category was evaluated as either “low”, “high”, or “unclear”. Then, the ratings for every domain were shown, along with a subjective judgment of the overall quality of the included studies.

3. Results

3.1 Study Selection and Studies Characteristics

After conducting a thorough search, we found 36 articles by January 2025. Following title and abstract screening, 15 articles were excluded, and 21 articles were retained for further analysis. After screening, we excluded 4 studies and were left with 17 to assess their full texts. This systematic review included ten studies. The process for selecting these studies is illustrated in Fig. 1. The total study population across these studies is 20,896 patients, with research conducted in various regions including Japan, India, Egypt, China, and South Korea. The studies highlight the significant implications of elevated Lp(a) levels on adverse cardiac outcomes, suggesting that monitoring and potentially lowering Lp(a) could be important in managing cardiovascular risk in these patients. We extracted data from ten eligible articles, all prospective studies, and summarized the information in Table 1 (Ref. [14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22]).

3.2 Quality Assessment

Fig. 2 shows the risk of bias across various domains in the included studies. Only one study (Liu et al. [22]) was flagged with a high risk of bias, primarily due to issues with patient selection. This raises concerns regarding the representativeness of the study population. Several other studies (Sami et al. [16], Wu et al. [21], and Amin et al. [15]) have shown concerns in different domains. Sami et al. [16] and Wu et al. [21] had concerns regarding the index test, while Amin et al. [15] had concerns regarding both the index test and reference standard. The remaining studies Liu et al. [20], Hu et al. [18], Saeki et al. [14], Zhu et al. [17], and Yoon et al. [19]) were generally judged to have a low risk of bias across all domains.

4. Discussion

4.1 Structure and Metabolism of Lp(a)

Lp(a) is a distinct lipoprotein, characterized by an LDL-like particle that is covalently linked to apolipoprotein(a) [apo(a)] via a disulfide bond with apolipoprotein B100 (apoB100). Lp(a) has a spherical shape, is 10% larger in diameter, and has approximately twice the molecular weight of LDL. Its primary protein is apoB, and it also contains varying amounts of albumin, apoC, and apoAIII. Its high carbohydrate content, particularly sialic acid, increases hydrated density [23, 24].

In contrast to LDL, the metabolism of Lp(a) is poorly understood and is largely controlled by genetic factors at the apo(a) locus, which confer high heritability and regulate hepatic apo(a) production. Lp(a) levels are also strongly affected by the liver’s synthesis of apoB100. It remains unknown where Lp(a) assembles from LDL and apo(a) and how it interacts with receptors in vivo [25, 26]. Although the exact mechanisms of clearance are unknown, its lipid and protein components may be eliminated by the hepatic scavenger receptor class B type I [25].

Essentially, the distinct structure, genetically determined plasma concentrations, and elusive assembly/clearance pathways of Lp(a) underscore the necessity of additional investigations to create treatments that reduce its cardiovascular hazards.

4.2 Pathophysiology of Lp(a)

The physiological role of Lp(a) is unknown [27], yet the structural resemblance between Lp(a) and plasminogen (PLG) insinuates that it may represent the mechanistic bridge linking cholesterol transport and the fibrinolytic system to favor wound healing and hemostasis [28]. Lp(a) probably transports cholesterol to the sites of injury for cell membrane repair and tissue regeneration [29, 30] and inhibits fibrinolysis to provide blood clot stability, thus preventing excessive bleeding [31, 32]. Nevertheless, these functions remain under scrutiny, as their mechanisms are not well understood [33].

Elevated levels of Lp(a) constitute a major independent risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD), favoring atherogenesis, thrombosis, and inflammation (Fig. 3) [34]. These Lp(a) species have been shown in vitroand in animal models to convene the atherosclerotic process via pathways that include the stimulation of smooth muscle cell proliferation, formation of foam cells, and production of interleukin (IL)-8 [35]. It interacts with extracellular matrix components, including fibrin, fibronectin, and proteoglycans, to present cholesterol at sites of vascular injury for reparative processes [36, 37].

Oxidized phospholipids (OxPls) in plasma are covalently bound to Lp(a), and both are biomarkers of CVD [38, 39]. Lp(a) must enter and accumulate inside the artery and aortic valve leaflet intima to cause CVD [40]. This is entered into the vessel walls at a comparatively slower rate than LDL but is accelerated by injury sites by two to three times in a rabbit model [41, 42]. Lp(a) strongly binds to exposed fibrin and glycosaminoglycans and hence, may accumulate in contrast to other lipoproteins that contain apoB, fostering the pathogenesis of progressive aortic stenosis and complications after bypass [43].

4.3 Factors Affecting the Level of Lp(a) in Different Populations

Data from the UK Biobank showed that race and ethnicity significantly influenced Lp(a) concentrations. The study revealed distinct median values across different ethnic groups: white individuals, 19 nmol/L; South Asians, 31 nmol/L; black individuals, 75 nmol/L; and Chinese individuals, 16 nmol/L [44, 45]. Consequently, Lp(a) could significantly explain the differences in CVD rates among various ethnic groups. Studies encompassing diverse ethnic groups have demonstrated that variations in the LPA gene accounted for 17–77% of the variability in Lp(a) concentrations. Of this variation, 80% was linked to the number of kringle domains within Lp(a). These results indicate that genetic components are the main factors influencing Lp(a) levels, with minimal effects of age and sex [44, 46].

Several additional factors have been found to influence Lp(a) levels. Research has shown that Lp(a) concentrations can fluctuate in response to various forms of physical stress, such as sepsis, severe burns, acute coronary syndrome, and rheumatological conditions [47]. However, the nature of these changes remains controversial. Research indicates that Lp(a) levels decrease markedly during stress, whereas others report no change or even an elevation in Lp(a) levels under stressful conditions [39].

Research has indicated that Lp(a) levels increase in women following menopause. A comprehensive analysis of 15 investigations revealed that premenopausal women had lower Lp(a) concentrations compared to their postmenopausal counterparts, with an average difference of 3.77 mg/dL between the two groups. Interestingly, three studies examining Lp(a) plasma levels before and after bilateral oophorectomy found no significant change [48]. Additionally, studies suggest that hormone replacement therapy may reduce plasma Lp(a) levels [49]. The relationship between sex hormones and Lp(a) is intricate. Nonetheless, recent data show that Lp(a) levels increase after menopause and may be partially responsible for the increase in cardiovascular disease seen in women post-menopause [50].

The potential effect of aging on Lp(a) levels in blood plasma is not well understood. Limited studies suggest that aging may be associated with increased Lp(a). Studies assessing Lp(a) levels in different age groups have shown that Lp(a) levels are higher in older individuals [7, 51]. Furthermore, studies concerning Lp(a) levels in children have shown that Lp(a) levels can vary considerably, and a single value may lead to considerable underestimation of risk. Therefore, researchers suggest the repeated measurement of Lp(a) in adulthood rather than a single value for more appropriate treatment management [10, 52].

Research on the effects of diet and certain nutrients on Lp(a) has produced conflicting results. In two studies, Lp(a) increased with carbohydrate substitution for saturated fats, whereas other studies showed little to no effect. Similarly, replacing fats with monounsaturated or polyunsaturated fats has produced inconsistent results. Collectively, these findings indicate that dietary changes have only a modest influence on Lp(a), and often in a direction opposite to that observed for LDL-C concentrations [53]. Fig. 4 summarizes the factors affecting Lp(a) levels in various populations.

4.4 Elevated Lipoprotein(a) Levels and Cardiovascular Outcomes: Insights From Recent PCI Studies

Reports examining Lp(a) levels in relation to cardiovascular events have shown the profound repercussions Lp(a) has on clinical outcomes in different cohorts of patients undergoing PCI. Each of these reports has provided insights into the potential clinical implications of Lp(a) levels, covering both in-hospital impact and long-term prognostic implications. There were similarities and divergences in study design and patient populations across reports; however, all efforts have demonstrated Lp(a) as a significant independent risk factor for cardiovascular events.

Sami et al. [16] focused on patients with ST-Elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary PCI. They found that patients with Lp(a) levels \ge30 mg/dL had significantly worse cardiac function. This was evidenced by lower left ventricular ejection fractions (average 45.67% vs. 51.02% in those with lower Lp(a) levels) and higher rates of acute cardiac failure, reinfarction, and in-hospital mortality. Notably, they identified a cut-off value of 24.55 mg/dL for Lp(a), which demonstrated high sensitivity (90.9%) and specificity (91.7%) in predicting adverse outcomes.

In contrast, Liu et al. [20] examined a cohort of 4078 patients with stable CAD over a nearly five-year follow-up period. Their findings revealed a substantial 2.1-fold increase in cardiovascular event rates among patients with elevated Lp(a) levels (\ge30 mg/dL). Specifically, higher Lp(a) levels were associated with an increased hazard of cardiovascular death (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.9) and stroke (HR = 2.0). This study also demonstrated that adding Lp(a) levels to established risk prediction models significantly improved their accuracies.

Wu et al. [21] and Hu et al. [18] both investigated patients with ACS. Wu et al. [21] discovered that patients with ACS with Lp(a) levels \ge30 mg/dL had increased odds of severe coronary lesions and adverse in-hospital outcomes. Hu et al. [18], on the other hand, focused on the combined effect of Lp(a) and GRACE scores. They observed that patients with both high Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) scores and high Lp(a) levels experienced nearly double the risk of cardiovascular events (HR = 1.94) compared to those with lower Lp(a) levels.

Saeki et al. [14] uniquely explored the dynamic changes in Lp(a) levels in 377 ACS patients post-PCI. They identified a biphasic pattern in which Lp(a) levels initially decreased, followed by a subsequent increase. Importantly, they found that a greater early reduction in Lp(a) levels was associated with a higher incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Zhu et al. [17] investigated the impact of statin treatment on Lp(a) levels in 488 patients with CAD. Their study revealed that an increase in Lp(a) levels of more than 10.1 mg/dL after statin therapy was associated with a significantly increased risk of MACE (HR = 2.29).

Further support for the role of Lp(a) as an independent risk factor came from studies by Amin et al. [15], Yoon et al. [19], and Liu et al. [22]. Amin et al. [15] reported a striking HR of 4.29 for high Lp(a) levels in predicting adverse outcomes, even in patients with well-controlled LDL cholesterol levels. Yoon et al. [19] corroborated these findings in a similar patient population with an 18-month follow-up. Liu et al. [22] also indicated that the high Lp(a) levels independently predict adverse cardiac events.

In conclusion, the combined findings from the evaluated studies strongly support the role of elevated Lp(a) as an independent predictor of cardiovascular risk across a spectrum of clinical settings. This collective evidence advocates for more routine Lp(a) measurement in clinical practice and highlights the need for further research to develop standardized measurement protocols and targeted interventions to mitigate the risk associated with high Lp(a) levels.

4.5 Lipoprotein(a) and Residual Inflammatory Risk (RIR)

Lp(a) is gaining recognition not only as a standalone risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease but also as a major player in the RIR [54]. Recent evidence highlights the interconnected roles of Lp(a) and chronic inflammation in atherosclerosis progression and residual cardiovascular risk, even among patients undergoing optimal lipid-lowering therapy. In their comprehensive review, Di Fusco et al. [55] elucidated how elevated Lp(a) levels (>125 nmol/L or 50 mg/dL) contribute to pro-inflammatory, pro-atherosclerotic, and pro-thrombotic effects through mechanisms such as oxidized phospholipid-mediated monocyte activation, upregulation of endothelial adhesion molecules (e.g., intercellular adhesion molecule-1 [ICAM-1]), and inhibition of fibrinolysis via competition with plasminogen. The authors also explored shared biological pathways with systemic inflammation, as indicated by biomarkers such as high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (>2 mg/L), and advocated for integrated diagnostic and therapeutic strategies, including PCSK9 inhibitors, gene-silencing agents, and anti-inflammatory agents such as colchicine to mitigate these risks. This perspective supports the pursuit of personalized approaches to further reduce the burden of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease in populations with high Lp(a) levels.

Lp(a) exhibits a range of detrimental properties, including proinflammatory, proatherosclerotic, and prothrombotic properties. The mechanism by which Lp(a) promotes atherosclerosis involves its penetration into the arterial walls (Fig. 3) [56]. Once there, OxPls induce apoptosis, contributing to the development of plaques prone to rupture. Lp(a) directly promotes inflammation within the arterial wall by inducing monocyte transmigration through blood vessel linings and activating endothelial cells. Inflammation is triggered by the increased number of adhesion molecules (e.g., ICAM-1), and production of the enzyme 6-phophofructo-2-kinase/fructose-2,6-biphosphatase (PFKFB3) [39, 57]. Additionally, specific regions within the apo(a) structure, known as kringle IV (KIV) domains, interact with the beta2-integrin protein Mac-1. This interaction activates s nuclear factor-kappa B (NF-\kappaB), a key regulator of inflammation, ultimately boosting the production of molecules that encourage monocyte adhesion and infiltration into the arterial wall [58]. These inflammatory effects are directly proportional to Lp(a) concentration in the blood, with levels exceeding 125 nmol/L (50 mg/dL), signifying a substantially elevated cardiovascular risk [32].

Addressing the inflammatory aspect of Lp(a) risk is a rapidly developing field. Although statins, commonly used to lower cholesterol, have little effect on Lp(a) concentration, PCSK9 inhibitors provide modest reduction [55]. The most striking therapeutic progress, however, has been observed with the previously mentioned RNA-targeted treatments. Beyond its Lp(a)-lowering capabilities, pelacarsen has also shown evidence of decreasing inflammatory activity and the movement of circulating monocytes across the endothelium [59]. While more extensive investigations are needed to confirm the clinical relevance of these anti-inflammatory actions, they point to a possible double advantage of these novel therapies: they lower Lp(a) levels and simultaneously dampen the associated inflammatory cascade.

4.6 Future Treatment of Lipoprotein(a) Beyond Statins

Existing therapies for the management of elevated Lp(a) are of particular interest because, although statins are beneficial in reducing LDL-C levels, there is no evidence that statins reduce Lp(a) levels. In addition, options for therapy are limited to niacin, which can lower Lp(a), but has side effects; and cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibitors with inconsistent evidence. Current developments in lipid reduction include the advent of PCSK9 inhibitors. PCSK9 inhibitors work by blocking the natural degradation of LDL-C receptors, preventing their destruction by binding to PCSK9 [36, 60]. Antibodies targeting PCSK9 can also decrease Lp(a) concentrations by more than 27% [61]. A new PCSK9 inhibitor, inclisiran, which suppresses gene transcription, demonstrated an average Lp(a) reduction of 14%–22% during phase III clinical studies [62, 63]. Another option, mipomersen, also lowers Lp(a); however, similar to niacin, it presents a notable side effect profile [36]. The procedure known as Lp(a) apheresis is the most potent treatment for familial hypercholesterolemia. This method markedly diminishes both LDL-C and Lp(a), achieving reductions of 60–70% per session, and has been shown to improve cardiovascular outcomes [64]. Germany has approved its use for patients with elevated Lp(a) and progressive CVD, with the German Lipoprotein Apheresis Registry (GLAR) offering robust data supporting its effectiveness [65]. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has permitted Lp(a) apheresis for individuals experiencing documented CVD progression and whose Lp(a) levels exceed 60 mg/dL [66].

The therapeutic landscape for Lp(a) is poised for transformation through the use of emerging RNA-targeted therapies. Antisense oligonucleotides (ASOs) and small interfering RNAs (siRNAs) hold great promise. These agents act on RNA molecules to control gene expression, ultimately influencing protein production and significantly reducing Lp(a) levels [36, 67]. ASOs, exemplified by IONIS-APO(a)Rx and pelacarsen, work by suppressing the synthesis of apo(a), achieving substantial Lp(a) reductions of up to 80% in clinical trials [59]. Pelacarsen has demonstrated notable efficacy in phase II trials, exhibiting infrequent and mild adverse effects, typically limited to reactions at the injection site [68]. A phase III trial, known as Lp(a)-HORIZON, is currently in progress to assess pelacarsen’s ability to reduce cardiovascular events [55, 69]. siRNAs, including OLp(a)siran and SLN360, provide a similarly dramatic Lp(a) reduction of up to 90% by targeting Lp(a) mRNA [70]. Phase I and II studies of Olp(a)siran have proven its capacity to induce sustained decreases in Lp(a) concentrations [71, 72, 73]. SLN360 displayed comparable potential in early phase I trials, producing dose-related Lp(a) lowering and exhibiting a favorable tolerability profile [74]. These innovative RNA-based treatments offer the potential to specifically and effectively manage elevated Lp(a) levels, potentially leading to a reduction in cardiovascular risk.

4.7 Limitations and Strengths

Our systematic review has certain limitations that deserve careful analytical attention. First, demographic constitution provides a major limitation; since many of the studies included predominantly Asian populations, generalization to other ethnic groups cannot be safely assumed, given that there are well-documented ethnic disparities in Lp(a) levels and cardiovascular risk profiles.

Another major drawback is the heterogeneity of the methodology. The Lp(a) cut-off values employed were, for the most part, different in the studies included, ranging from 24.55 mg/dL to 50 mg/dL, making direct comparisons rather difficult. Another confounding factor in these studies is the measurement of Lp(a) levels. Some studies measured Lp(a) levels at baseline, others measured post-PCI changes, whereas Saeki et al. [14] measured dynamic changes over time, which may represent different pathophysiological processes.

Among the limitations inherent in the study design is the retrospective nature of many studies. This may have led to selection bias and incomplete data collection. The heterogeneity of outcome measures presents considerable issues: some of them defined MACE differently, while follow-up varied from just hospitalization duration to 7.4 years post-inclusion. Hence, it is difficult to establish consistent prognostic thresholds.

The sample sizes showed a wide variation in number, from 70 to 12,064 patients. This could hamper the statistical interpretation of smaller studies and favor larger studies. In addition, most studies did not use an established protocol for measuring Lp(a), thereby bearing possibilities for analytical variability affecting the true validity of the association supposedly verified.

Confounding variables were not controlled in a consistent manner across studies; some studies adjusted for traditional cardiovascular risk factors, while others provided minimal adjustment for significant covariates, such as inflammatory markers, renal function, or genetic factors, which may impact both Lp(a) levels and cardiovascular outcomes.

The strength of our review lies in the synthesis of this varied evidence. By examining a wide range of studies, we highlight a crucial pattern: Lp(a) consistently emerges as a valuable prognostic indicator. This collective evidence provides a compelling argument for the standardization of Lp(a) measurement in clinical practice. It emphasizes the need for clear, universally accepted cut-off points to identify individuals at increased risk. Ultimately, our findings inform future research directions and emphasize the potential for Lp(a)-targeted interventions to improve cardiovascular risk prediction beyond conventional methods.

5. Conclusion

This study underscores the critical role of Lp(a) as a potent biomarker for predicting recurrent cardiovascular events in patients with ACS who have undergone PCI. The constant correlation between high Lp(a) levels and negative outcomes underscores the need for regular monitoring and focused Lp(a) management to reduce residual cardiovascular risk, even in the face of limitations in ethnic diversity and methodological variation. This involves prioritizing high-risk populations (e.g., those with Lp(a) >50 mg/dL and high GRACE scores) for new treatments, such as pelacarsen, and standardizing the units to nmol/L.

Availability of Data and Materials

All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article.

References

[1] Bottardi A, Prado GFA, Lunardi M, Fezzi S, Pesarini G, Tavella D, et al. Clinical Updates in Coronary Artery Disease: A Comprehensive Review. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2024; 13: 4600. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13164600.

[2] Wu HP, Yang FC, Lin HD, Cai CZ, Chuang MJ, Chiang KF, et al. Association between statin therapy and long-term clinical outcomes in patients with stable coronary disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Scientific Reports. 2024; 14: 12674. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-63598-4.

[3] Sud M, Han L, Koh M, Abdel-Qadir H, Austin PC, Farkouh ME, et al. Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol and Adverse Cardiovascular Events After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2020; 76: 1440–1450. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2020.07.033.

[4] Dimitriadis K, Theofilis P, Iliakis P, Pyrpyris N, Dri E, Sakalidis A, et al. Management of dyslipidemia in coronary artery disease: the present and the future. Coronary Artery Disease. 2024; 35: 516–524. https://doi.org/10.1097/MCA.0000000000001375.

[5] Gier C, Gilchrist I, Fordham M, Riordan L, Milchan E, Patel N, et al. The role of structured inpatient lipid protocols in optimizing non-statin lipid lowering therapy: a review and single-center experience. Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine. 2024; 11: 1284562. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2024.1284562.

[6] Penson PE, Pirro M, Banach M. LDL-C: lower is better for longer-even at low risk. BMC Medicine. 2020; 18: 320. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-020-01792-7.

[7] Duarte Lau F, Giugliano RP. Lipoprotein(a) and its Significance in Cardiovascular Disease: A Review. JAMA Cardiology. 2022; 7: 760–769. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamacardio.2022.0987.

[8] Kamstrup PR. Lipoprotein(a) and Cardiovascular Disease. Clinical Chemistry. 2021; 67: 154–166. https://doi.org/10.1093/clinchem/hvaa247.

[9] García-Fernández-Bravo I, Torres-Do-Rego A, López-Farré A, Galeano-Valle F, Demelo-Rodriguez P, Alvarez-Sala-Walther LA. Undertreatment or Overtreatment With Statins: Where Are We? Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine. 2022; 9: 808712. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2022.808712.

[10] Tasdighi E, Adhikari R, Almaadawy O, Leucker TM, Blaha MJ. LP(a): Structure, Genetics, Associated Cardiovascular Risk, and Emerging Therapeutics. Annual Review of Pharmacology and Toxicology. 2024; 64: 135–157. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-pharmtox-031023-100609.

[11] Ruscica M, Sirtori CR, Corsini A, Watts GF, Sahebkar A. Lipoprotein(a): Knowns, unknowns and uncertainties. Pharmacological Research. 2021; 173: 105812. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.phrs.2021.105812.

[12] Ruscica M, Greco MF, Ferri N, Corsini A. Lipoprotein(a) and PCSK9 inhibition: clinical evidence. European Heart Journal Supplements: Journal of the European Society of Cardiology. 2020; 22: L53–L56. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/suaa135.

[13] Whiting PF, Rutjes AWS, Westwood ME, Mallett S, Deeks JJ, Reitsma JB, et al. QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2011; 155: 529–536. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-155-8-201110180-00009.

[14] Saeki Y, Sawaguchi J, Akita S, Takamura TA, Fujibayashi K, Wakasa M, et al. Initial decrease in the lipoprotein(a) level is a novel prognostic biomarker in patients with acute coronary syndrome. World Journal of Cardiology. 2024; 16: 329–338. https://doi.org/10.4330/wjc.v16.i6.329.

[15] Amin N, Devasia T, Kamath SU, Paramasivam G, Shetty PN, Singh A, et al. Association between Lipoprotein(a) concentration and adverse cardiac events in patients with coronary artery disease: An observational cohort study. Indian Heart Journal. 2024; 76: 197–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ihj.2024.06.001.

[16] Sami M, Khalil TS, Abdou W, Samy NI. Association between Lipoprotein (A) and In-Hospital Outcomes in Patients with Acute ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction Undergoing Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention. Egyptian Journal of Hospital Medicine. 2023; 92.

[17] Zhu L, Fang Y, Gao B, Jin X, Zheng J, He Y, et al. Effect of an increase in Lp(a) following statin therapy on cardiovascular prognosis in secondary prevention population of coronary artery disease. BMC Cardiovascular Disorders. 2022; 22: 474. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12872-022-02932-y.

[18] Hu C, Liu J, Han H, Sun Y, Cheng Y, Liu Y, et al. A Synergistic Effect of Lp(a) and GRACE Score on Cardiovascular Risk in Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Cohort Study From China. Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine. 2021; 8: 637366. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2021.637366.

[19] Yoon YH, Ahn JM, Kang DY, Lee PH, Kang SJ, Park DW, et al. Association of Lipoprotein(a) With Recurrent Ischemic Events Following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention. JACC. Cardiovascular Interventions. 2021; 14: 2059–2068. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2021.07.042.

[20] Liu HH, Cao YX, Jin JL, Zhang HW, Hua Q, Li YF, et al. Predicting Cardiovascular Outcomes by Baseline Lipoprotein(a) Concentrations: A Large Cohort and Long-Term Follow-up Study on Real-World Patients Receiving Percutaneous Coronary Intervention. Journal of the American Heart Association. 2020; 9: e014581. https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.119.014581.

[21] Wu B, Zhao H, Liu C, Lu H, Liu R, Long J, et al. Association of lipoprotein (a) and in-hospital outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Postgraduate Medicine. 2021; 133: 195–201. https://doi.org/10.1080/00325481.2020.1845517.

[22] Liu Y, Zeng Z, Yu X, Li T, Yao Y, Chen R, et al. Impact of lipoprotein(a) on long-term outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with reduced low-density lipoprotein cholesterol. Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine. 2020; 21: 147–153. https://doi.org/10.31083/j.rcm.2020.01.5101.

[23] Feingold KR. Lipid and Lipoprotein Metabolism. Endocrinology and Metabolism Clinics of North America. 2022; 51: 437–458. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecl.2022.02.008.

[24] Coassin S, Kronenberg F. Lipoprotein(a) beyond the kringle IV repeat polymorphism: The complexity of genetic variation in the LPA gene. Atherosclerosis. 2022; 349: 17–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2022.04.003.

[25] Lampsas S, Xenou M, Oikonomou E, Pantelidis P, Lysandrou A, Sarantos S, et al. Lipoprotein(a) in Atherosclerotic Diseases: From Pathophysiology to Diagnosis and Treatment. Molecules (Basel, Switzerland). 2023; 28: 969. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules28030969.

[26] Genovesi S, Giussani M, Lieti G, Orlando A, Patti I, Parati G. Evidence and Uncertainties on Lipoprotein(a) as a Marker of Cardiovascular Health Risk in Children and Adolescents. Biomedicines. 2023; 11: 1661. https://doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines11061661.

[27] Reyes-Soffer G, Ginsberg HN, Berglund L, Duell PB, Heffron SP, Kamstrup PR, et al. Lipoprotein(a): A Genetically Determined, Causal, and Prevalent Risk Factor for Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association. Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology. 2022; 42: e48–e60. https://doi.org/10.1161/ATV.0000000000000147.

[28] Dai W, Castleberry M, Zheng Z. Tale of two systems: the intertwining duality of fibrinolysis and lipoprotein metabolism. Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis: JTH. 2023; 21: 2679–2696. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtha.2023.08.004.

[29] Roy D, Tedeschi A. The Role of Lipids, Lipid Metabolism and Ectopic Lipid Accumulation in Axon Growth, Regeneration and Repair after CNS Injury and Disease. Cells. 2021; 10: 1078. https://doi.org/10.3390/cells10051078.

[30] Jebari-Benslaiman S, Galicia-García U, Larrea-Sebal A, Olaetxea JR, Alloza I, Vandenbroeck K, et al. Pathophysiology of Atherosclerosis. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2022; 23: 3346. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms23063346.

[31] Rodriguez M, Zheng Z. Connecting impaired fibrinolysis and dyslipidemia. Research and Practice in Thrombosis and Haemostasis. 2024; 8: 102394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rpth.2024.102394.

[32] Kronenberg F, Mora S, Stroes ESG, Ference BA, Arsenault BJ, Berglund L, et al. Lipoprotein(a) in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and aortic stenosis: a European Atherosclerosis Society consensus statement. European Heart Journal. 2022; 43: 3925–3946. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehac361.

[33] Bhatia HS, Becker RC, Leibundgut G, Patel M, Lacaze P, Tonkin A, et al. Lipoprotein(a), platelet function and cardiovascular disease. Nature Reviews. Cardiology. 2024; 21: 299–311. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41569-023-00947-2.

[34] Pan H, Hu K, Wu Q, Tu Y, Guo Z. Lp (a) and inflammation: a new insight into atherosclerosis. Clinical and Translational Discovery. 2023; 3: e247. https://doi.org/10.1002/ctd2.247.

[35] Singh S, Changkija S, Mudgal R, Ravichandiran V. Bioactive components to inhibit foam cell formation in atherosclerosis. Molecular Biology Reports. 2022; 49: 2487–2501. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11033-021-07039-9.

[36] Vinci P, Di Girolamo FG, Panizon E, Tosoni LM, Cerrato C, Pellicori F, et al. Lipoprotein (a) as a risk factor for cardiovascular diseases: pathophysiology and treatment perspectives. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2023; 20: 6721. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20186721.

[37] Rybicka M, Seroka A, Obrębski M, Chwiejczak J, Górny A, Kościan J, et al. Lipoprotein (a)-gaining clinical importance as a cardiovascular risk factor. Current state of medical knowledge. Prospects in Pharmaceutical Sciences. 2024; 22: 102–113. https://doi.org/10.56782/pps.212.

[38] Pantazi D, Tellis C, Tselepis AD. Oxidized phospholipids and lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A₂ (Lp-PLA₂) in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: An update. BioFactors (Oxford, England). 2022; 48: 1257–1270. https://doi.org/10.1002/biof.1890.

[39] Boffa MB, Koschinsky ML. Oxidized phospholipids as a unifying theory for lipoprotein(a) and cardiovascular disease. Nature Reviews. Cardiology. 2019; 16: 305–318. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41569-018-0153-2.

[40] Hu J, Lei H, Liu L, Xu D. Lipoprotein(a), a Lethal Player in Calcific Aortic Valve Disease. Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology. 2022; 10: 812368. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcell.2022.812368.

[41] He PP, Jiang T, OuYang XP, Liang YQ, Zou JQ, Wang Y, et al. Lipoprotein lipase: Biosynthesis, regulatory factors, and its role in atherosclerosis and other diseases. Clinica Chimica Acta; International Journal of Clinical Chemistry. 2018; 480: 126–137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cca.2018.02.006.

[42] Poznyak AV, Nikiforov NG, Markin AM, Kashirskikh DA, Myasoedova VA, Gerasimova EV, et al. Overview of OxLDL and Its Impact on Cardiovascular Health: Focus on Atherosclerosis. Frontiers in Pharmacology. 2021; 11: 613780. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2020.613780.

[43] Jawi MM, Frohlich J, Chan SY. Lipoprotein(a) the Insurgent: A New Insight into the Structure, Function, Metabolism, Pathogenicity, and Medications Affecting Lipoprotein(a) Molecule. Journal of Lipids. 2020; 2020: 3491764. https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/3491764.

[44] Reyes-Soffer G. The impact of race and ethnicity on lipoprotein(a) levels and cardiovascular risk. Current Opinion in Lipidology. 2021; 32: 163–166. https://doi.org/10.1097/MOL.0000000000000753.

[45] Patel AP, Wang M, Pirruccello JP, Ellinor PT, Ng K, Kathiresan S, et al. Lp(a) (Lipoprotein[a]) Concentrations and Incident Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease: New Insights From a Large National Biobank. Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology. 2021; 41: 465–474. https://doi.org/10.1161/ATVBAHA.120.315291.

[46] Lee SR, Prasad A, Choi YS, Xing C, Clopton P, Witztum JL, et al. LPA Gene, Ethnicity, and Cardiovascular Events. Circulation. 2017; 135: 251–263. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.116.024611.

[47] Vavuranakis MA, Jones SR, Ziogos E, Blaha MJ, Williams MS, Foran P, et al. The Trajectory of Lipoprotein(a) During the Peri- and Early Postinfarction Period and the Impact of Proprotein Convertase Subtilisin/Kexin Type 9 Inhibition. The American Journal of Cardiology. 2022; 171: 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2022.01.058.

[48] Anagnostis P, Antza C, Trakatelli C, Lambrinoudaki I, Goulis DG, Kotsis V. The effect of menopause on lipoprotein (a) concentrations: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Maturitas. 2023; 167: 39–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.maturitas.2022.09.012.

[49] Anagnostis P, Galanis P, Chatzistergiou V, Stevenson JC, Godsland IF, Lambrinoudaki I, et al. The effect of hormone replacement therapy and tibolone on lipoprotein (a) concentrations in postmenopausal women: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Maturitas. 2017; 99: 27–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.maturitas.2017.02.009.

[50] El Khoudary SR, Aggarwal B, Beckie TM, Hodis HN, Johnson AE, Langer RD, et al. Menopause Transition and Cardiovascular Disease Risk: Implications for Timing of Early Prevention: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2020; 142: e506–e532. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIR.0000000000000912.

[51] Lin L, Deng KQ, Chen Z, Lei F, Qin JJ, Huang X, et al. Lipoprotein(a) distribution and its association with carotid arteriopathy in the Chinese population. Atherosclerosis. 2023; 372: 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2023.03.007.

[52] de Boer LM, Hof MH, Wiegman A, Stroobants AK, Kastelein JJP, Hutten BA. Lipoprotein(a) levels from childhood to adulthood: Data in nearly 3,000 children who visited a pediatric lipid clinic. Atherosclerosis. 2022; 349: 227–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2022.03.004.

[53] Enkhmaa B, Petersen KS, Kris-Etherton PM, Berglund L. Diet and Lp(a): Does Dietary Change Modify Residual Cardiovascular Risk Conferred by Lp(a)? Nutrients. 2020; 12: 2024. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu12072024.

[54] Alfaddagh A, Martin SS, Leucker TM, Michos ED, Blaha MJ, Lowenstein CJ, et al. Inflammation and cardiovascular disease: From mechanisms to therapeutics. American Journal of Preventive Cardiology. 2020; 4: 100130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajpc.2020.100130.

[55] Di Fusco SA, Maggioni AP, Scicchitano P, Zuin M, D’Elia E, Colivicchi F. Lipoprotein (a), Inflammation, and Atherosclerosis. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2023; 12: 2529. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm12072529.

[56] Enas EA, Varkey B, Dharmarajan TS, Pare G, Bahl VK. Lipoprotein(a): An independent, genetic, and causal factor for cardiovascular disease and acute myocardial infarction. Indian Heart Journal. 2019; 71: 99–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ihj.2019.03.004.

[57] Schnitzler JG, Hoogeveen RM, Ali L, Prange KHM, Waissi F, van Weeghel M, et al. Atherogenic Lipoprotein(a) Increases Vascular Glycolysis, Thereby Facilitating Inflammation and Leukocyte Extravasation. Circulation Research. 2020; 126: 1346–1359. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.119.316206.

[58] Sotiriou SN, Orlova VV, Al-Fakhri N, Ihanus E, Economopoulou M, Isermann B, et al. Lipoprotein(a) in atherosclerotic plaques recruits inflammatory cells through interaction with Mac-1 integrin. FASEB Journal: Official Publication of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology. 2006; 20: 559–561. https://doi.org/10.1096/fj.05-4857fje.

[59] Tsimikas S, Karwatowska-Prokopczuk E, Gouni-Berthold I, Tardif JC, Baum SJ, Steinhagen-Thiessen E, et al. Lipoprotein(a) Reduction in Persons with Cardiovascular Disease. The New England Journal of Medicine. 2020; 382: 244–255. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1905239.

[60] Nurmohamed NS, Ditmarsch M, Kastelein JJP. Cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibitors: from high-density lipoprotein cholesterol to low-density lipoprotein cholesterol lowering agents? Cardiovascular Research. 2022; 118: 2919–2931. https://doi.org/10.1093/cvr/cvab350.

[61] Farmakis I, Doundoulakis I, Pagiantza A, Zafeiropoulos S, Antza C, Karvounis H, et al. Lipoprotein(a) Reduction With Proprotein Convertase Subtilisin/Kexin Type 9 Inhibitors: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Journal of Cardiovascular Pharmacology. 2021; 77: 397–407. https://doi.org/10.1097/FJC.0000000000000963.

[62] Raal FJ, Kallend D, Ray KK, Turner T, Koenig W, Wright RS, et al. Inclisiran for the Treatment of Heterozygous Familial Hypercholesterolemia. The New England Journal of Medicine. 2020; 382: 1520–1530. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1913805.

[63] Ray KK, Wright RS, Kallend D, Koenig W, Leiter LA, Raal FJ, et al. Two Phase 3 Trials of Inclisiran in Patients with Elevated LDL Cholesterol. The New England Journal of Medicine. 2020; 382: 1507–1519. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1912387.

[64] Franchini M, Capuzzo E, Liumbruno GM. Lipoprotein apheresis for the treatment of elevated circulating levels of lipoprotein(a): a critical literature review. Blood Transfusion = Trasfusione Del Sangue. 2016; 14: 413–418. https://doi.org/10.2450/2015.0163-15.

[65] Schettler VJJ, Neumann CL, Peter C, Zimmermann T, Julius U, Hohenstein B, et al. Lipoprotein apheresis is an optimal therapeutic option to reduce increased Lp(a) levels. Clinical Research in Cardiology Supplements. 2019; 14: 33–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11789-019-00094-4.

[66] Julius U, Tselmin S, Schatz U, Fischer S, Birkenfeld AL, Bornstein SR. Actual situation of lipoprotein apheresis in patients with elevated lipoprotein(a) levels. Atherosclerosis. Supplements. 2019; 40: 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atherosclerosissup.2019.08.043.

[67] Tsimikas S. A Test in Context: Lipoprotein(a): Diagnosis, Prognosis, Controversies, and Emerging Therapies. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2017; 69: 692–711. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2016.11.042.

[68] Korneva VA, Kuznetsova TY, Julius U. Modern Approaches to Lower Lipoprotein(a) Concentrations and Consequences for Cardiovascular Diseases. Biomedicines. 2021; 9: 1271. https://doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines9091271.

[69] Manzato M, Wright RS, Jaffe AS, Vasile VC. Lipoprotein (a): Underrecognized Risk with a Promising Future. Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine. 2024; 25: 393. https://doi.org/10.31083/j.rcm2511393.

[70] Nurmohamed NS, Kraaijenhof JM, Stroes ESG. Lp(a): a New Pathway to Target? Current Atherosclerosis Reports. 2022; 24: 831–838. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11883-022-01060-4.

[71] Koren MJ, Moriarty PM, Baum SJ, Neutel J, Hernandez-Illas M, Weintraub HS, et al. Preclinical development and phase 1 trial of a novel siRNA targeting lipoprotein(a). Nature Medicine. 2022; 28: 96–103. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-021-01634-w.

[72] O’Donoghue ML, Rosenson RS, Gencer B, López JAG, Lepor NE, Baum SJ, et al. Small Interfering RNA to Reduce Lipoprotein(a) in Cardiovascular Disease. The New England Journal of Medicine. 2022; 387: 1855–1864. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2211023.

[73] O’Donoghue ML, G López JA, Knusel B, Gencer B, Wang H, Wu Y, et al. Study design and rationale for the Olpasiran trials of Cardiovascular Events And lipoproteiN(a) reduction-DOSE finding study (OCEAN(a)-DOSE). American Heart Journal. 2022; 251: 61–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ahj.2022.05.004.

[74] Nissen SE, Wolski K, Balog C, Swerdlow DI, Scrimgeour AC, Rambaran C, et al. Single Ascending Dose Study of a Short Interfering RNA Targeting Lipoprotein(a) Production in Individuals With Elevated Plasma Lipoprotein(a) Levels. JAMA. 2022; 327: 1679–1687. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2022.5050.