Testing
Coronary disease risk rises at Lp(a) levels below the standard 50 mg/dL threshold, an EPIC-Norfolk study of 623 cases and 948 controls across two assays (J Lipid Res 2016)
Original title: Population and assay thresholds for the predictive value of lipoprotein (a) for coronary artery disease: the EPIC-Norfolk Prospective Population Study
This case-control study within the EPIC-Norfolk Prospective Population Study compared two Lp(a) assays (Randox and UCSD) in 623 coronary artery disease (CAD) cases and 948 controls to test the predictive value and population-specific thresholds of Lp(a). The two assays were strongly correlated (Spearman's coefficients 0.905 for men, 0.915 for women, 0.909 combined, P<0.001), yet their 80th-percentile cutoffs differed: 36 mg/dL for Randox versus 24 mg/dL for UCSD. Despite these different absolute cutoffs, Lp(a) was significantly associated with CAD risk for both assays, with odds ratios of 2.18 (1.58-3.01) for Randox and 2.35 (1.70-3.26) for UCSD comparing the top versus bottom Lp(a) quintile. The findings show CAD risk rises at Lp(a) levels below the commonly used 50 mg/dL threshold, suggesting Lp(a) thresholds may need to be population- and assay-specific until measurement is standardised.
Original abstract
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) <50 versus ∼50 mg/dl, which represents the 80th percentile in northern European subjects. Randox and UCSD Lp(a) levels were strongly correlated; Spearman's correlation coefficients for men, women, and sexes combined were 0.905, 0.915, and 0.909, respectively (P< 0.001 for each). The >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.
Summary written by lp-a.org from the published abstract; figures as published. Page updated 18 August 2026. Methods.