Coronary disease & ACSSecondary analysis
Balance of non–Lp(a) Apolipoprotein B (apoB) and Lp(a) with Coronary Plaque Phenotypes and MACE: Insights from PROSPECT II and CASABLANCA
- Secondary analysis of the PROSPECT II study
- Near-infrared spectroscopy-intravascular ultrasound (NIRS-IVUS)
- exploratory external cohort (CASABLANCA)
Authors' conclusion
Non-Lp(a) apoB and Lp(a) demonstrate distinct associations with coronary plaque burden and vulnerability.
Study context
- Population
- Patients with recent MI
- Participants
- 854 patients
- Comparison
- Non-Lp(a) apoB, Lp(a) and non-Lp(a) apoB/Lp(a) ratio vs coronary plaque burden and vulnerability
Primary result
As reported in the abstract
Plaque burden and vulnerability
Odds ratio (95% CI)P value
Lower non-Lp(a) apoB/Lp(a) ratio tertileplaque burden ≥70%
1.47(1.04–2.07)
P = 0.029Lower non-Lp(a) apoB/Lp(a) ratio tertilecomposite: plaque burden ≥70% and maxLCBI4mm ≥324.7
1.62(1.12–2.33)
P = 0.011- Higher non-Lp(a) apoB · plaque percentage volume; independent association
- β 0.19 (95% CI 0.05–0.33); P = 0.009
Further findings
CASABLANCA external cohort
- Lower ratios identified an Lp(a)- and oxidized phospholipid-enriched phenotype and were associated with higher unadjusted CV risk
- exploratory
Original publication
Balance of non–Lp(a) apoB and Lp(a) with Coronary Plaque Phenotypes and MACE: Insights from PROSPECT II and CASABLANCA. Eur J Prev Cardiol. Published 26 September 2026. doi:10.1093/eurjpc/zwag512
Summarised from the published abstract; every number is checked against it