Genetics
Lp(a) increases by 16.5% after acute myocardial infarction and misses 17% of relatives with elevated concentrations when measured at admission (J Clin Lipidol 2026)
Original title: Temporal aspects and implications of the measurement of lipoprotein(a) in patients with acute myocardial infarction
This observational cohort measured plasma lipoprotein(a) in 173 patients at acute myocardial infarction admission and at a median 108-day follow-up. Median concentrations rose by 16.5% from 214 (166-276) nmol/L to 249 (185-323) nmol/L (P < .001), with a within-subject coefficient of variation of 11.4% ± 10.5%. Cascade testing missed 4 (17%) with elevated lipoprotein(a) if admission values were used. Repeat measurement during clinical stability is necessary for accurate risk stratification and family screening.
Original abstract
Background: Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a genetically mediated, causal risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.
Objective: We examined Lp(a) changes during and after acute myocardial infarction (AMI), their associations with the LPA genetic risk score (GRS), and within-subject variability in the clinically stable post-AMI period, as well as the efficiency of Lp(a) cascade testing of first-degree relatives.
Method: Plasma concentrations of Lp(a) were re-measured in 173 patients with AMI and elevated Lp(a) (≥75 nmol/L) at outpatient follow-up when clinically stable. Within-subject variability was assessed in 52 patients with ≥2 follow-up Lp(a) measurements. LPA GRS was determined using 41 LPA variants. Forty-four relatives from 23 probands with Lp(a) ≥200 nmol/L at the follow-up visit were tested for Lp(a).
Results: The median plasma concentrations of Lp(a) increased by 16.5% from 214 (166-276) nmol/L at admission for AMI to 249 (185-323) nmol/L (P < .001, follow-up:108 days); the 2 Lp(a) measurements were positively associated (r = 0.794, P < .001); the LPA GRS was only significantly associated with the Lp(a) concentrations at follow-up (P < .05). The within-subject CV of Lp(a) during follow-up was 11.4% ± 10.5%. The yield for detecting new cases among relatives was 0.52 (95%CI 0.37-0.67); 4 relatives (17%) with elevated Lp(a) would have been missed from not undertaking testing if Lp(a) concentration at the time of AMI was used for cascade testing.
Conclusion: Lp(a) levels may be underestimated at the time of AMI. Repeat measurement is required when stable for clinical decision making, including cascade testing of relatives of probands with high Lp(a).
cascade screeninggeneticsrisktesting
Summary written by lp-a.org from the published abstract; figures as published. Page updated 16 September 2026. Methods.