Does elevated Lipoprotein (a) measured by different assays predict coronary artery disease risk in a population cohort?
Coronary artery disease risk is present at lower Lp(a) levels than the currently suggested optimal level of <50 mg/dl, highlighting the need for population- and assay-specific thresholds.
Variable agreement exists between different lipoprotein (a) Lp(a) measurement methods, but their clinical relevance remains unclear. The predictive value of Lp(a) measured by two different assays Randox and University of California, San Diego (UCSD) was determined in 623 coronary artery disease (CAD) cases and 948 controls in a case-control study within the EPIC-Norfolk Prospective Population Study. Participants were divided into sex-specific quintiles, and by Lp(a) 80th percentile cutoff values, however, were 36 mg/dl and 24 mg/dl for the Randox and UCSD assays, respectively. Despite this, Lp(a) levels were significantly associated with CAD risk, with odds ratios of 2.18 (1.58-3.01) and 2.35 (1.70-3.26) for people in the top versus bottom Lp(a) quintile for the Randox and UCSD assays, respectively. This study demonstrates that CAD risk is present at lower Lp(a) levels than the currently suggested optimal Lp(a) level of <50 mg/dl. Appropriate thresholds may need to be population and assay specific until Lp(a) assays are standardized and Lp(a) thresholds are evaluated broadly across all populations at risk for CVD and aortic stenosis.
Verbeek et al. (Mon,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: