ReviewFrontiers in pharmacology2026
Lipoprotein(a) in the statin era: from risk marker to therapeutic target.
Review in Frontiers in pharmacology, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a predominantly genetically determined lipoprotein whose concentration is generally stable over time, although clinically relevant within-person variation can occur. Elevated concentrations affect about one in five people. It has emerged as one of the most important causal contributors to the residual cardiovascular risk that persists despite effective LDL-cholesterol lowering in the statin era, and it is also causally implicated in calcific aortic valve stenosis. For decades Lp(a) was measurable yet effectively untreatable, because conventional lipid-lowering therapies do not reduce it to a clinically meaningful degree. Two practical obstacles further constrain its clinical use. Analytical standardization is incomplete: mass and molar units are not interchangeable, and some immunoassays are biased by apolipoprotein(a) isoform size. Real-world screening rates also remain very low, despite a guideline consensus on once-in-a-lifetime testing. This picture is now changing rapidly. RNA-targeted agents, comprising antisense oligonucleotides and small interfering RNAs, together with a first oral small-molecule inhibitor, lower Lp(a) by about 65% to more than 95%, differing in mechanism, route of administration, dosing interval and durability. Two questions remain open: how large an absolute reduction is needed for clinical benefit (the threshold hypothesis), and whether lowering Lp(a) reduces major adverse cardiovascular events at all. Several cardiovascular outcomes trials are now testing these questions directly. They include Lp(a)HORIZON, OCEAN(a)-Outcomes, and ACCLAIM-Lp(a), together with a dedicated aortic-valve trial, and the first readouts are anticipated. Framing Lp(a) as the residual cardiovascular risk target of the statin era, this review integrates measurement, screening, risk stratification, current management, and emerging targeted therapies into a single clinical and pharmacological roadmap for the outcomes-trial era.
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.