ArticleJournal of the American College of Cardiology2026
Use of Coronary Artery Calcium Scoring in Individuals With Elevated Lipoprotein(a): A Multicohort Study.
Article in Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prevention of atherosclerotic coronary artery disease in tactical athletes.American journal of preventive cardiology · 2026Review
- The Evolving Role of Coronary Artery Imaging in Assessing Cardiovascular Risk from Lipoprotein(a).Current atherosclerosis reports · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe utility of coronary artery calcium (CAC) scoring in individuals with elevated lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk assessment is currently unclear given the propensity of Lp(a) toward noncalcified plaque.
objectivesThe authors aimed to evaluate the interaction between elevated Lp(a) (>50 mg/dL) and CAC score, and the association of Lp(a) with ASCVD risk across strata of CAC.
methodsA pooled cohort of participants without known ASCVD from 4 U.S.-based prospective cohort studies with baseline Lp(a) and CAC measurements was used. The association between elevated Lp(a) across CAC strata and incident ASCVD (myocardial infarction, stroke, coronary revascularization) was evaluated in multivariable Cox regression models.
resultsThe study included 11,319 participants (mean age 56 years, 54% women) with 1,569 incident ASCVD events over 14.8 year mean follow-up. Lp(a) >50 mg/dL (HR: 1.24; 95% CI: 1.09-1.41) and CAC >0 (HR: 2.44; 95% CI: 2.14-2.77) were independently associated with ASCVD risk (P interaction = 0.80). Among individuals with CAC = 0, ASCVD incidence rates were low overall, but higher with Lp(a) >50 mg/dL vs ≤50 mg/dL (4.9 vs 3.8/1,000 person-years, HR: 1.28; 95% CI: 1.01-1.60). Among those with CAC >0, increased risk was again noted with elevated Lp(a) (21.2 vs 18.2/1,000 person-years, HR: 3.03; 95% CI: 2.52-3.64). Similar results were observed when examining further CAC strata with the greatest risk noted with both CAC ≥300 and Lp(a) >50 mg/dL (HR: 6.12; 95% CI: 4.80-7.81). Consistent results were noted by age and sex with greater absolute risk in general among individuals >50 years of age and men.
conclusionsElevated Lp(a) is associated with higher relative risk across CAC strata, including CAC of 0. Among individuals with CAC of 0, absolute event rates remain low even when Lp(a) is elevated. CAC scoring remains a powerful tool for risk assessment among individuals with elevated Lp(a).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.