ReviewCurrent cardiology reports2025
Coronary Artery Calcium Scoring in the Context of Widespread Lipoprotein(a) Testing: Clinical Considerations and Implications for Lipid-Lowering Therapies.
Review in Current cardiology reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Evolving Role of Coronary Artery Imaging in Assessing Cardiovascular Risk from Lipoprotein(a).Current atherosclerosis reports · 2026Review
- Use of Coronary Artery Calcium Scoring in Individuals With Elevated Lipoprotein(a): A Multicohort Study.Journal of the American College of Cardiology · 2026Article
- Association Between Lipoprotein(a) Testing, Lipid-Lowering Therapy Intensification, and Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Goal Attainment: Findings From the Veterans Affairs Health System.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2026Article
- A multi-method study on GPs' perspectives on Lipoprotein(a) as an actionable cardiovascular risk factor.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Lipoprotein(a) in clinical practice: Risk stratification and therapeutic strategies.European journal of clinical investigation · 2026Review
- Inconsistent association between lipoprotein(a) and coronary artery calcium.European journal of preventive cardiology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewThis review evaluates the interplay between lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] and coronary artery calcium (CAC) for risk prediction and preventive therapy selection, with a special emphasis on scenarios where these measures are discordant, particularly in otherwise intermediate-risk, primary prevention patients. RECENT
findingsObservational studies and meta-analyses indicate a nuanced relationship between elevated Lp(a) levels and CAC burden and progression. Elevated Lp(a) is associated with an increased risk of CAC presence and progression; although, there is notable variability across studies. CAC predicts a similarly elevated risk in patients with low and high Lp(a). Joint elevation of Lp(a) and CAC is associated with a very high-risk patient subset. Elevated Lp(a) should prompt consideration of CAC testing for further risk stratification. In the future, we anticipate that an elevated CAC score could prompt consideration of testing for Lp(a) in select patients, as identifying or confirming elevated Lp(a) may help guide the use of dedicated Lp(a)-lowering therapies in very high-risk primary prevention populations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39932648What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.