MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract 4369873: <i>LPA</i> -Targeted siRNAs Lower Lp(a) by Over 90%: A Meta-Analysis of Olpasiran, Lepodisiran, and Zerlasiran

2025· article· en· W4415794328 on OpenAlexaff
Arveen Shokravi, Sohat Sharma

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdverse effectSmall interfering RNAApolipoprotein BConfidence intervalClinical trialRelative riskMeta-analysisDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Elevated lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a genetically determined, independent risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Currently, no approved therapies specifically target Lp(a) reduction. Small-interfering RNA (siRNA) therapeutics—such as olpasiran, lepodisiran, and zerlasiran—are promising investigational agents designed to address this therapeutic gap. These agents selectively target LPA mRNA in hepatocytes, suppressing apolipoprotein(a) synthesis and reducing circulating Lp(a) concentrations.. Research Question: What is the pooled efficacy and safety profile of siRNA agents that target LPA mRNA? Methods: A systematic search of MEDLINE and EMBASE was conducted through June 2025 to identify trials evaluating siRNA therapies that directly silence LPA mRNA. Outcomes of interest included percent changes in Lp(a), apolipoprotein B (ApoB), and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), along with adverse event rates compared to placebo. To ensure cross-trial consistency, efficacy endpoints were extracted from assessments conducted between weeks 34 and 36, using data from the highest siRNA dose per study. Forest plots display mean differences with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). Heterogeneity was quantified using the I 2 statistic, and adverse events were summarized as absolute risk differences due to low event rates in control groups. Results: Three phase 2 trials met the inclusion criteria. siRNA therapy achieved a significant pooled mean reduction in Lp(a) of −94.46% [95% CI −102.92 to −86.01], with substantial heterogeneity (I 2 = 89.7%). siRNA therapies decreased ApoB by −15.95% [95% CI −19.36 to −12.54] and LDL-C by −19.70% [95% CI −26.22 to −13.19], both without significant heterogeneity (I 2 = 0%). Adverse events occurred more frequently in the siRNA group, with a pooled absolute risk difference of 26.0% [95% CI −13.0 to 64.0] compared to placebo; however, this finding demonstrated high heterogeneity (I 2 = 97.1%), and the confidence interval crossed the null. Conclusions: siRNA therapeutics targeting LPA mRNA demonstrate substantial efficacy, lowering Lp(a) levels by over 90% with concurrent reductions in ApoB and LDL-C. Ongoing phase 3 trials will be pivotal in further characterizing their safety profile and determining the extent to which these promising lipid changes translate into cardiovascular risk reduction.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.069

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0170.032
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.262 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health→French-language works237,207→