Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31350625›Full record

ReviewCurrent atherosclerosis reports2019

Looking at Lp(a) and Related Cardiovascular Risk: from Scientific Evidence and Clinical Practice.

Thomas M Stulnig, Claudia Morozzi, Roman Reindl-Schwaighofer, Claudia Stefanutti

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current atherosclerosis reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Thomas M StulnigClinical Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism - Department of Medicine III - Medical University of Vienna, Universitätsring 1, 1010, Wien, Austria.
Claudia MorozziDepartment of Molecular Medicine, Lipid Clinic and Atherosclerosis Prevention Centre -"Sapienza" University of Rome, Extracorporeal Therapeutic Techniques Unit, Regional Centre for Rare Diseases, Immunohematology and Transfusion Medicine, "Umberto I" Hospital, Rome, Italy.
Roman Reindl-SchwaighoferDivision of Nephrology and Dialysis, Department of Medicine III, Medical University of Vienna, Spitalgasse 23, 1090, Wien, Austria.
Claudia StefanuttiDepartment of Molecular Medicine, Lipid Clinic and Atherosclerosis Prevention Centre -"Sapienza" University of Rome, Extracorporeal Therapeutic Techniques Unit, Regional Centre for Rare Diseases, Immunohematology and Transfusion Medicine, "Umberto I" Hospital, Rome, Italy. claudia.stefanutti@uniroma1.it.
Medical University of Vienna · ATPoliclinico Umberto I · ITSapienza University of Rome · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewA considerable body of data from genetic and epidemiological studies strongly support a causal relationship between high lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] levels, and the development of atherosclerosis and cardiovascular disease. This relationship is continuous, unrelated to Lp(a) threshold, and independent of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) and high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol levels. Unfortunately, the mechanism(s) through which Lp(a) promotes atherosclerosis are not clarified yet. Suggested hypotheses include: an increased Lp(a)-associated cholesterol entrapment in the arterial intima followed by inflammatory cell recruitment, abnormal upload of proinflammatory oxidized phospholipids, impaired fibrinolysis by inhibition of plasminogen activation, and enhanced coagulation, through inhibition of the tissue factor pathway inhibitor. This review is aimed at summarizing the available evidence on the topic. RECENT

findingsThere are two clinical forms, isolated hyperlipidemia(a) [HyperLp(a)] with acceptable LDL-C levels (< 70 mg/dL), and combined elevation of Lp(a) and LDL-C in plasma. To date, no drugs that selectively decrease Lp(a) are available. Some novel lipid-lowering drugs can lower Lp(a) levels, but to a limited extent, as their main effect is aimed at decreasing LDL-C levels. Significant Lp(a) lowering effects were obtained with nicotinic acid at high doses. However, adverse effects apart, nicotinic acid is no longer prescribed and available in Europe for clinical use, after European Agency of Medicines (EMA) ban. The only effective therapeutic option for now is Lipoprotein Apheresis (LA), albeit with some limitations. Lastly, it is to be acknowledged that the body of evidence confirming that reducing plasma isolated elevation of Lp(a) brings cardiovascular benefit is still insufficient. However, the growing bulk of clinical, genetic, mechanistic, and epidemiological available evidence strongly suggests that Lp(a) is likely to be the smoking gun.

Indexed as

AdultAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedAtherosclerosisBlood Component RemovalCholesterol, LDLHumansHypolipidemic AgentsLipoprotein(a)Middle AgedNiacinOligonucleotides, AntisenseRisk FactorsUbiquinonealirocumabAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedCholesterol, LDLcoenzyme Q10Hypolipidemic AgentsLipoprotein(a)NiacinOligonucleotides, AntisenseUbiquinoneApolipoprotein (a)AtherogenesisCardiovascular riskGeneticsLipoprotein (a)Thrombosis

Identifiers

PMID31350625
OpenAlexW2966628948

What OpenQuestion holds

Texttitle and abstract
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.