P

Pia R. Kamstrup

University of Copenhagen

ORCID: 0000-0002-7627-6762

Publishes on Lipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health, Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins, Cancer, Lipids, and Metabolism. 86 papers and 8.9k citations.

86Publications
8.9kTotal Citations

Is this you? Claim your profile.

Add your photo, update your bio, and get notified when your ranking changes.

Top publicationsby citations

Genetically Elevated Lipoprotein(a) and Increased Risk of Myocardial Infarction
Pia R. Kamstrup|JAMA|2009
Cited by 1.3k

CONTEXT: High levels of lipoprotein(a) are associated with increased risk of myocardial infarction (MI). OBJECTIVE: To assess whether genetic data are consistent with this association being causal. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Three studies of white individuals from Copenhagen, Denmark, were used: the Copenhagen City Heart Study (CCHS), a prospective general population study with 16 years of follow-up (1991-2007, n = 8637, 599 MI events); the Copenhagen General Population Study (CGPS), a cross-sectional general population study (2003-2006, n = 29 388, 994 MI events); and the Copenhagen Ischemic Heart Disease Study (CIHDS), a case-control study (1991-2004, n = 2461, 1231 MI events). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Plasma lipoprotein(a) levels, lipoprotein(a) kringle IV type 2 (KIV-2) size polymorphism genotype, and MIs recorded from 1976 through July 2007 for all participants. RESULTS: In the CCHS, multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for MI for elevated lipoprotein(a) levels were 1.2 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.9-1.6; events/10,000 person-years, 59) for levels between the 22nd and 66th percentile, 1.6 (95% CI, 1.1-2.2; events/10,000 person-years, 75) for the 67th to 89th percentile, 1.9 (95% CI, 1.2-3.0; events/10,000 person-years, 84) for the 90th to 95th percentile, and 2.6 (95% CI, 1.6-4.1; events/10,000 person-years, 108) for levels greater than the 95th percentile, respectively, vs levels less than the 22nd percentile (events/10,000 person-years, 55) (trend P < .001). Numbers of KIV-2 repeats (sum of repeats on both alleles) ranged from 6 to 99 and on analysis of variance explained 21% and 27% of all variation in plasma lipoprotein(a) levels in the CCHS and CGPS, respectively. Mean lipoprotein(a) levels were 56, 31, 20, and 15 mg/dL for the first, second, third, and fourth quartiles of KIV-2 repeats in the CCHS, respectively (trend P < .001); corresponding values in the CGPS were 60, 34, 22, and 19 mg/dL (trend P < .001). In the CCHS, multivariable-adjusted HRs for MI were 1.5 (95% CI, 1.2-1.9; events/10,000 person-years, 75), 1.3 (95% CI, 1.0-1.6; events/10,000 person-years, 66), and 1.1 (95% CI, 0.9-1.4; events/10,000 person-years, 57) for individuals in the first, second, and third quartiles, respectively, as compared with individuals in the fourth quartile of KIV-2 repeats (events/10,000 person-years, 51) (trend P < .001). Corresponding odds ratios were 1.3 (95% CI, 1.1-1.5), 1.1 (95% CI, 0.9-1.3), and 0.9 (95% CI, 0.8-1.1) in the CGPS (trend P = .005), and 1.4 (95% CI, 1.1-1.7), 1.2 (95% CI, 1.0-1.6), and 1.3 (95% CI, 1.0-1.6) in the CIHDS (trend P = .01). Genetically elevated lipoprotein(a) was associated with an HR of 1.22 (95% CI, 1.09-1.37) per doubling of lipoprotein(a) level on instrumental variable analysis, while the corresponding value for plasma lipoprotein(a) levels on Cox regression was 1.08 (95% CI, 1.03-1.12). CONCLUSION: These data are consistent with a causal association between elevated lipoprotein(a) levels and increased risk of MI.

Genetic Associations with Valvular Calcification and Aortic Stenosis
George Thanassoulis, Catherine Y. Campbell, David S. Owens et al.|New England Journal of Medicine|2013
Cited by 968Open Access

BACKGROUND: Limited information is available regarding genetic contributions to valvular calcification, which is an important precursor of clinical valve disease. METHODS: We determined genomewide associations with the presence of aortic-valve calcification (among 6942 participants) and mitral annular calcification (among 3795 participants), as detected by computed tomographic (CT) scanning; the study population for this analysis included persons of white European ancestry from three cohorts participating in the Cohorts for Heart and Aging Research in Genomic Epidemiology consortium (discovery population). Findings were replicated in independent cohorts of persons with either CT-detected valvular calcification or clinical aortic stenosis. RESULTS: One SNP in the lipoprotein(a) (LPA) locus (rs10455872) reached genomewide significance for the presence of aortic-valve calcification (odds ratio per allele, 2.05; P=9.0×10(-10)), a finding that was replicated in additional white European, African-American, and Hispanic-American cohorts (P<0.05 for all comparisons). Genetically determined Lp(a) levels, as predicted by LPA genotype, were also associated with aortic-valve calcification, supporting a causal role for Lp(a). In prospective analyses, LPA genotype was associated with incident aortic stenosis (hazard ratio per allele, 1.68; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.32 to 2.15) and aortic-valve replacement (hazard ratio, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.05 to 2.27) in a large Swedish cohort; the association with incident aortic stenosis was also replicated in an independent Danish cohort. Two SNPs (rs17659543 and rs13415097) near the proinflammatory gene IL1F9 achieved genomewide significance for mitral annular calcification (P=1.5×10(-8) and P=1.8×10(-8), respectively), but the findings were not replicated consistently. CONCLUSIONS: Genetic variation in the LPA locus, mediated by Lp(a) levels, is associated with aortic-valve calcification across multiple ethnic groups and with incident clinical aortic stenosis. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and others.).

Fasting is not routinely required for determination of a lipid profile: clinical and laboratory implications including flagging at desirable concentration cut-points—a joint consensus statement from the European Atherosclerosis Society and European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine
Børge G. Nordestgaard, Anne Langsted, Samia Mora et al.|European Heart Journal|2016
Cited by 828Open Access

AIMS: To critically evaluate the clinical implications of the use of non-fasting rather than fasting lipid profiles and to provide guidance for the laboratory reporting of abnormal non-fasting or fasting lipid profiles. METHODS AND RESULTS: Extensive observational data, in which random non-fasting lipid profiles have been compared with those determined under fasting conditions, indicate that the maximal mean changes at 1-6 h after habitual meals are not clinically significant [+0.3 mmol/L (26 mg/dL) for triglycerides; -0.2 mmol/L (8 mg/dL) for total cholesterol; -0.2 mmol/L (8 mg/dL) for LDL cholesterol; +0.2 mmol/L (8 mg/dL) for calculated remnant cholesterol; -0.2 mmol/L (8 mg/dL) for calculated non-HDL cholesterol]; concentrations of HDL cholesterol, apolipoprotein A1, apolipoprotein B, and lipoprotein(a) are not affected by fasting/non-fasting status. In addition, non-fasting and fasting concentrations vary similarly over time and are comparable in the prediction of cardiovascular disease. To improve patient compliance with lipid testing, we therefore recommend the routine use of non-fasting lipid profiles, while fasting sampling may be considered when non-fasting triglycerides >5 mmol/L (440 mg/dL). For non-fasting samples, laboratory reports should flag abnormal concentrations as triglycerides ≥2 mmol/L (175 mg/dL), total cholesterol ≥5 mmol/L (190 mg/dL), LDL cholesterol ≥3 mmol/L (115 mg/dL), calculated remnant cholesterol ≥0.9 mmol/L (35 mg/dL), calculated non-HDL cholesterol ≥3.9 mmol/L (150 mg/dL), HDL cholesterol ≤1 mmol/L (40 mg/dL), apolipoprotein A1 ≤1.25 g/L (125 mg/dL), apolipoprotein B ≥1.0 g/L (100 mg/dL), and lipoprotein(a) ≥50 mg/dL (80th percentile); for fasting samples, abnormal concentrations correspond to triglycerides ≥1.7 mmol/L (150 mg/dL). Life-threatening concentrations require separate referral when triglycerides >10 mmol/L (880 mg/dL) for the risk of pancreatitis, LDL cholesterol >13 mmol/L (500 mg/dL) for homozygous familial hypercholesterolaemia, LDL cholesterol >5 mmol/L (190 mg/dL) for heterozygous familial hypercholesterolaemia, and lipoprotein(a) >150 mg/dL (99th percentile) for very high cardiovascular risk. CONCLUSION: We recommend that non-fasting blood samples be routinely used for the assessment of plasma lipid profiles. Laboratory reports should flag abnormal values on the basis of desirable concentration cut-points. Non-fasting and fasting measurements should be complementary but not mutually exclusive.