ArticleJACC. Advances2026
Lp(a) Has Specific Effects on Coronary Artery Disease Independent of LDL-C: A Mendelian Randomization Study.
Article in JACC. Advances, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMendelian randomization studies suggest a causal effect of lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) on atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Noncardiovascular effects (eg, diabetes risk) are inadequately investigated.
objectivesIn this noninterventional phenome-wide association study designed to better understand the potential causal role of Lp(a), direct causal phenotypic effects of exposure to Lp(a) were estimated. Also, the association between LPA null allele rs41272114 with type 2 diabetes was assessed, and ancestry-specific Lp(a) thresholds were determined.
methodsIn the UK Biobank (n = 425,677 adults, 55% female), we studied 1,456 phenotypes spanning 18 classes using 4 ancestry-specific polygenic risk scores and false discovery rate multiple testing correction. Network deconvolution Mendelian randomization was leveraged to separate direct from indirect (ie, associations via mediating variables) causal phenotypic effects and account for confounding, reverse causation, and bidirectionality.
resultsLp(a) was significantly associated with 80 phenotypes across 7 classes. Higher Lp(a) exposure had significant direct causal effects, independent of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, on coronary artery disease (OR: 1.36; 95% CI: 1.21-1.54) and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c; β = 0.099; 95% CI: 0.051-0.15) only. Very low Lp(a) exposure was not associated with type 2 diabetes (OR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.64-1.31) or HbA1c (β = -0.016; 95% CI: -0.062 to 0.030). Among European and African ancestries, 86 (77th percentile) and 93 (59th percentile) nmol/L optimally discriminated myocardial infarction risk, respectively.
conclusionsIncreasing Lp(a) exposure had direct, independent causal effects on coronary artery disease and HbA1c only; very low Lp(a) exposure is suggested to not be causally associated with type 2 diabetes. The optimal European and African ancestry threshold to stratify cardiovascular risk is comparable, and below 125/105 nmol/L in current U.S./European medical professional society guidelines.
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.