Testing
Nearly a quarter of a Dubai multiethnic cohort has high-risk Lp(a), independent of LDL-C, study of 746 (Int J Cardiol 2026)
Original title: Prevalence and distribution of lipoprotein(a) levels in a multiethnic population in Dubai: Implications for cardiovascular risk stratification
Single-center multiethnic cohort of 746 consecutive patients at Mediclinic Parkview Hospital, Dubai, UAE, characterising Lp(a) prevalence and distribution across ethnicities and testing its independence from LDL-C. Positive Lp(a) (75 nmol/L or more) was present in 30.2%, with 13.4% at high-risk (105 nmol/L or more) and 9.9% at very-high-risk (above 190 nmol/L) levels. South Asians (32.4%) and White/Europeans (32.1%) had the highest prevalence and East Asians the lowest (21.6%) but highest median level (200.5 nmol/L). There was no correlation between Lp(a) and treated LDL-C in patients on optimal lipid-lowering therapy (Spearman's rho 0.07, p=0.38). The authors conclude elevated Lp(a) is highly prevalent in this Dubai multiethnic cohort, with nearly a quarter at high or severe risk entirely independent of LDL-C, a hidden burden not captured by standard lipid panels, supporting regional Lp(a) screening.
Original abstract
Background And Aims: Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a genetically determined, independent risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), unaffected by conventional lipid-lowering therapy. This study assessed the prevalence of elevated Lp(a) in a large, multiethnic cohort in Dubai, United Arab Emirates (UAE), analyzed its distribution across ethnicities, and evaluated its independence from low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C).
Methods: In a single-center multiethnic cohort study, 746 consecutive patients from Mediclinic Parkview Hospital, Dubai, were included. Serum Lp(a) was measured using a standardized immunoturbidometric assay. Positive Lp(a) was defined as ≥75 nmol/L. Levels were stratified by ethnic subgroups and categorized based on ESC/EAS quartiles and risk thresholds (≥105 nmol/L for high risk; >190 nmol/L for very high risk). The correlation between Lp(a) and directly measured LDL-C was assessed using Spearman's rank correlation in both patients receiving optimal lipid-lowering therapy and in those not receiving therapy.
Results: The prevalence of positive Lp(a) levels (≥75 nmol/L) was 30.2 %. At higher thresholds, 13.4 % had high-risk levels (≥105 nmol/L) and 9.9 % had very high-risk levels (>190 nmol/L). Ethnic variations were notable: South Asians (32.4 %) and White/Europeans (32.1 %) had the highest prevalence, while East Asians had the lowest (21.6 %) but the highest median level (200.5 nmol/L). Crucially, there was no correlation between Lp(a) and treated LDL-C in patients on optimal lipid-lowering therapy (Spearman's rho = 0.07, p = 0.38).
Conclusion: We identified a high prevalence of elevated Lp(a) in a multiethnic cohort in Dubai, with nearly a quarter at high or severe risk. This risk is entirely independent of LDL-C, revealing a significant hidden burden not captured by standard lipid panels. These findings support integrating Lp(a) screening into regional cardiovascular prevention protocols.
Summary written by lp-a.org from the published abstract; figures as published. Page updated 17 August 2026. Methods.