Advertisement

Determinants of Achieved LDL Cholesterol and “Non-HDL” Cholesterol in the Management of Dyslipidemias

Lipid Abnormalities and Cardiovascular Prevention (G De Backer, Section Editor)
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Topical Collection on Lipid Abnormalities and Cardiovascular Prevention

Abstract

Purpose of Review

The advent of combination therapy to provide LDL lowering beyond that achieved with statins necessitates the development of greater understanding of how drugs work together, what changes occur in key lipoprotein fractions, and what residual risk remains.

Recent Findings

Clinical trials of agents that, when added to statins, generate profound LDL lowering have been successful in reducing further the risk of cardiovascular disease. LDL cholesterol can be now decreased to unprecedented levels, so the focus of attention then shifts to other apolipoprotein B-containing, atherogenic lipoprotein classes such as lipoprotein(a) and remnants of the metabolism of triglyceride-rich particles. “Non-HDL cholesterol” is used increasingly (especially if measured in the non-fasting state) as a more comprehensive index of risk.

Summary

Metabolic studies reveal how current drugs act in combination to achieve profound lipid lowering. However, care is needed in interpreting achieved LDLc and non-HDLc levels in the emerging treatment paradigm.

Keywords

Lipoproteins CVD prevention Clinical trials Statin Ezetimibe PCSK9 inhibitors 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

Chris J. Packard reports grants/honoraria from the following pharmaceutical companies: Merck, Sharp & Dohme, Pfizer, Amgen, Sanofi, Regeneron, and Daiichi-Sankyo.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major Importance

  1. 1.
    Stone NJ, Robinson JG, Lichtenstein AH, Bairey Merz CN, Blum CB, Eckel RH, et al. 2013 ACC/AHA guideline on the treatment of blood cholesterol to reduce atherosclerotic cardiovascular risk in adults: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. Circulation. 2014;129:S1–45.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Piepoli MF, Hoes AW, Agewall S, et al. European guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2016;23:Np1-np96.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    •• Ference BA, Ginsberg HN, Graham I, et al. Low-density lipoproteins cause atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. 1. Evidence from genetic, epidemiologic, and clinical studies. A consensus statement from the European Atherosclerosis Society Consensus Panel. Eur Heart J. 2017;38:2459–72. A seminal overview that brings together evidence from multiple fields of investigation to support the causal role of LDL in atherogenesis. This is a very useful resource to counteract the claims of those who question the benefits of focusing on lipoproteins as targets for therapy. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    • Varbo A, Nordestgaard BG. Remnant lipoproteins. Curr Opin Lipidol. 2017;28:300–7. An insightful review of methods of measuring remnant lipoproteins and their association with risk of CHD . CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    • Vitali C, Khetarpal SA, Rader DJ. HDL cholesterol metabolism and the risk of CHD: new insights from human genetics. Curr Cardiol Rep. 2017;19:132. This article offers an excellent overview of where we are in understanding HDL and its relationship to cardiovascular disease. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lincoff AM, Nicholls SJ, Riesmeyer JS, Barter PJ, Brewer HB, Fox KAA, et al. Evacetrapib and cardiovascular outcomes in high-risk vascular disease. N Engl J Med. 2017;376:1933–42.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hovingh GK, Boekholdt SM, Stroes ES. Very low LDL-cholesterol concentrations achieved: which target is next? Lancet. 2017;390:1930–1.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Yusuf S, Lonn E, Pais P, Bosch J, López-Jaramillo P, Zhu J, et al. Blood pressure and cholesterol lowering in persons without cardiovascular disease. N Engl J Med. 2016;374:2032–43.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    •• Sabatine MS, Giugliano RP, Keech AC, FOURIER Steering Committee and Investigators, et al. Evolocumab and clinical outcomes in patients with cardiovascular disease. N Engl J Med. 2017;376:1713–22. The landmark first outcome trial of a PCSK9 inhibitor showing incremental risk reduction when evolocumab is added to statin therapy. LDLc levels on combination therapy were the lowest yet seen in an outcome trial. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    •• Ference BA, Cannon CP, Landmesser U, et al. Reduction of low density lipoprotein-cholesterol and cardiovascular events with proprotein convertase subtilisin-kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors and statins: an analysis of FOURIER, SPIRE, and the Cholesterol Treatment Trialists Collaboration. Eur Heart J. 2017;  https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehx450. This analysis shows the importance of treatment duration in assessing the observed risk reduction. The headline relative risk reduction in short trials (e.g., 2 years follow-up) does not reveal the full effect.
  11. 11.
    Varbo A, Benn M, Tybjaerg-Hansen A, et al. Remnant cholesterol as a causal risk factor for ischemic heart disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;61:427–36.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dallinga-Thie GM, Kroon J, Boren J, et al. Triglyceride-rich lipoproteins and remnants: targets for therapy? Curr Cardiol Rep. 2016;18:67.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11886-016-0745-6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nordestgaard B, Varbo A. Triglycerides and cardiovascular disease. Lancet. 2014;384:626–35.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Joshi PH, Khokhar AA, Massaro JM, Lipoprotein Investigators Collaborative (LIC) Study Group, et al. Remnant lipoprotein cholesterol and incident coronary heart disease: the Jackson Heart and Framingham Offspring Cohort Studies. J Am Heart Assoc. 2016;5:e002765.  https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.115.002765.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lamon-Fava S, Diffenderfer MR, Marcovina SM. Lipoprotein(a) metabolism. Curr Opin Lipidol. 2014;25:189–93.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tsimikas S. A test in context: lipoprotein(a): diagnosis, prognosis, controversies, and emerging therapies. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;69:692–711.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    • Saleheen D, Haycock PC, Zhao W, et al. Apolipoprotein(a) isoform size, lipoprotein(a) concentration, and coronary artery disease: a Mendelian randomisation analysis. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2017;5:524–33. A comprehensive examination of the relationship of Lp(a) and its characteristic protein apo(a) to risk of CHD. Both apo(a) size and Lp(a) concentration are important. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Erqou S, Thompson A, Di Angelantonio E, et al. Apolipoprotein(a) isoforms and the risk of vascular disease: systematic review of 40 studies involving 58,000 participants. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;11(55):2160–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    •• Watts G, Chan D, Dent R, Somaratne R, Wasserman S, Scott R, et al. Factorial effects of evolocumab and atorvastatin on lipoprotein metabolism. Circulation. 2016;135:338–51. Elegant study of the mechanism of action of a PCSK9 inhibitor when given as monotherapy or combined with statin. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    •• Reyes-Soffer G, Pavlyha M, Ngai C, et al. Effects of PCSK9 inhibition with alirocumab on lipoprotein secretion and production in healthy humans. Circulation. 2016;135:352–62. A contemporaneous, equally elegant study of the mechanism of action of a PCSK9 inhibitor in man using stable isotope tracers. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    •• Raal FJ, Giugliano RP, Sabatine MS, et al. PCSK9 inhibition-mediated reduction in Lp(a) with evolocumab: an analysis of 10 clinical trials and the LDL receptor’s role. J Lipid Res. 2016;57:1086–96. As well as an excellent overview of the clinical trial findings on Lp(a) lowering, this paper investigates potential mechanisms of action of these powerful new agents. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Chan DC, Barrett PH, Watts GF. Recent explanatory trials of the mode of action of drug therapies on lipoprotein metabolism. Curr Opin Lipidol. 2016;27:550–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Caslake MJ, Packard CJ. Phenotypes, genotypes and response to statin therapy. Curr Opin Lipidol. 2004;15:387–92.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sudhop T, Lütjohann D, Kodal A, Igel M, Tribble DL, Shah S, et al. Inhibition of intestinal cholesterol absorption by ezetimibe in humans. Circulation. 2002;106:1943–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Tremblay AJ, Lamarche B, Cohn JS, Hogue JC, Couture P. Effect of ezetimibe on the in vivo kinetics of apoB-48 and apoB-100 in men with primary hypercholesterolemia. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2006;26:1101–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Abifadel M, Elbitar S, El Khoury P, et al. Living the PCSK9 adventure: from the identification of a new gene in familial hypercholesterolemia towards a potential new class of anticholesterol drugs. Curr Atheroscler Rep. 2014;16:439.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Norata GD, Tavori H, Pirillo A, Fazio S, Catapano AL. Biology of proprotein convertase subtilisin kexin 9: beyond low-density lipoprotein cholesterol lowering. Cardiovasc Res. 2016;112:429–42.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Packard CJ. Unpacking and understanding the impact of proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitors on apolipoprotein B metabolism. Circulation. 2017;135:363–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Dadu RT, Ballantyne CM. Lipid lowering with PCSK9 inhibitors. Nat Rev Cardiol. 2014;11:563–75.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Robinson JG, Farnier M, Krempf M, Bergeron J, Luc G, Averna M, et al. Efficacy and safety of alirocumab in reducing lipids and cardiovascular events. N Engl J Med. 2015;372:1489–99.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Sabatine MS, Giugliano RP, Wiviott SD, Raal FJ, Blom DJ, Robinson J, et al. Efficacy and safety of evolocumab in reducing lipids and cardiovascular events. N Engl J Med. 2015;372:1500–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Robinson JG, Rosenson RS, Farnier M, Chaudhari U, Sasiela WJ, Merlet L, et al. Safety of very low low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels with alirocumab: pooled data from randomized trials. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;69:471–82.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Raal FJ, Dent R, Stefanutti C, Descamps O, Masana L, Lira A, et al. Long-term safety, tolerability, and efficacy of evolocumab in patients with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia. J Clin Lipidol. 2017;11:1448–57.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Stein EA, Lane M, Laskarzewski P. Comparison of statins in hypertriglyceridemia. Am J Cardiol. 1998;81(4A):66B–9B.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Stein EA, Somaratne R, Djedjos C, Liu T, Elliott M, Wasserman S, et al. PCSK9 inhibition-mediated reduction in triglyceride with evolocumab is related to baseline triglyceride levels: an analysis from 1791 patients. JACC. 2016;67:1866. (abstract)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    • Lawler PR, Akinkuolie AO, Harada P, Glynn RJ, Chasman DI, Ridker PM, et al. Residual risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular events in relation to reductions in very-low-density lipoproteins. J Am Heart Assoc. 2017;6:e007402.  https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.117.007402. An important investigation into lipoprotein-associated residual risk when LDLc is reduced to low levels. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Toth PP, Sattar N, Blom DJ, Martin SS, Jones SR, Monsalvo ML, et al. Effect of evolocumab on lipoprotein particles. Am J Cardiol. 2018;121:308–14.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    •• Bowman L, Hopewell JC, Chen F, et al. Effects of anacetrapib in patients with atherosclerotic vascular disease. HPS3/TIMI55–REVEAL Collaborative Group. N Engl J Med. 2017;377:1217–27. This is the latest (last?) definitive outcome trial of cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibition. It shows a moderate risk reduction that can be accounted for by the change in apoB-containing lipoproteins. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Thompson A, Di Angelantonio E, Sarwar N, et al. CETP genetics association of cholesteryl ester transfer protein genotypes with CETP mass and activity, lipid levels, and coronary risk. JAMA. 2008;299:2777–88.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    •• Ference BA, Kastelein JJP, Ginsberg HN, et al. Association of genetic variants related to CETP inhibitors and statins with lipoprotein levels and cardiovascular risk. JAMA. 2017;318:947–56. This report of Mendelian randomization studies reveals a level of complexity in examining the risk reduction attributable to LDLc change. An important distinction is made between situations where LDLc and apoB are reduced “concordantly” or in discordance. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Krauss RM, Wojnooski KJ, Orr J, et al. Changes in lipoprotein subfraction concentration and composition in healthy individuals treated with the cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibitor anacetrapib. J Lipid Res. 2012;53:540–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Millar JS, Reyes-Soffer G, Jumes P, Dunbar RL, deGoma EM, Baer AL, et al. Anacetrapib lowers LDL by increasing ApoB clearance in mildly hypercholesterolemic subjects. J Clin Invest. 2016;126:1603–4.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Ference BA, Majeed F, Penumetcha R, Flack JM, Brook RD. Effect of naturally random allocation to lower low-density lipoprotein cholesterol on the risk of coronary heart disease mediated by polymorphisms in NPC1L1, HMGCR, or both: a 2 × 2 factorial Mendelian randomization study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;65:1552–61.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Baigent C, Blackwell L, Emberson J, et al. Efficacy and safety of more intensive lowering of LDL cholesterol: a meta-analysis of data from 170,000 participants in 26 randomised trials. Lancet. 2010;376:1670–81.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Landmesser U, Chapman MJ, Stock JK, Amarenco P, Belch JJF, Borén J, et al. 2017 Update of ESC/EAS Task Force on practical clinical guidance for proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibition in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease or in familial hypercholesterolaemia. Eur Heart J. 2017;39:1131–43.  https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehx549.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Lloyd-Jones DM, Morris PB, Ballantyne CM, Birtcher KK, Daly DD Jr, DePalma S, et al. 2017 Focused Update of the 2016 ACC expert consensus decision pathway on the role of non-statin therapies for LDL-cholesterol lowering in the management of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk: a report of the American College of Cardiology Task Force on expert consensus decision pathways. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;70:1785–822.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    • Nordestgaard BG, Langsted A, Mora S, European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS) and the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) Joint Consensus Initiative, et al. 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. Eur Heart J. 2016;37:1944–58. A joint report from experts in atherosclerosis and laboratory medicine stating that it is no longer required to have subjects fast before measuring a lipid profile. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    •• Sathiyakumar V, Park J, Golozar A, Lazo M, Quispe R, Guallar E, et al. Fasting versus nonfasting and low density lipoprotein cholesterol accuracy. Circulation. 2018;137:10–9. This paper is a leading example of a number of reports highlighting the shortcomings of traditional LDLc determination using the Friedewald equation. It offers a more accurate, customized-to-the-patient, method of calculation. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Whelton SP, Meeusen JW, Donato LJ, Jaffe AS, Saenger A, Sokoll LJ, et al. Evaluating the atherogenic burden of individuals with a Friedewald-estimated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol <70 mg/dL compared with a novel low-density lipoprotein estimation method. J Clin Lipidol. 2017;11:1065–72.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Jacobson TA, Ito MK, Maki KC, Orringer CE, Bays HE, Jones PH, et al. National lipid association recommendations for patient-centered management of dyslipidemia: part 1—full report. J Clin Lipidol. 2015;9:129–69.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Cardiovascular disease: risk assessment and reduction, including lipid modification 2016: www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg181 (last accessed Jan 2018).
  52. 52.
    Packard C, Shepherd J. Lipoprotein heterogeneity and apolipoprotein B metabolism. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 1997;17:3542–56.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Nordestgaard BG. Triglyceride-rich lipoproteins and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: new insights from epidemiology, genetics, and biology. Circ Res. 2016;118:547–63.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Yeang C, Witztum JL, Tsimikas S. ‘LDL-C’ = LDL-C + Lp(a)-C: implications of achieved ultra-low LDL-C levels in the proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 era of potent LDL-C lowering. Curr Opin Lipidol. 2015;26:169–78.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Knopp RH, Gitter H, Truitt T, Bays H, Manion CV, Lipka LJ, et al. Effects of ezetimibe, a new cholesterol absorption inhibitor, on plasma lipids in patients with primary hypercholesterolemia. Eur Heart J. 2003;24:729–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    • Giugliano RP, Wiviott SD, Blazing MA, et al. Long-term safety and efficacy of achieving very low levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol: a pre-specified analysis of the IMPROVE-IT trial. JAMA Cardiol. 2017;2:547–55. Important findings regarding the safety of very low LDLc levels. No cause for concern in terms of treatment-emergent side effects was seen on ezetimibe. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    • Giugliano RP, Pedersen TR, Park JG, FOURIER Investigators, et al. Clinical efficacy and safety of achieving very low LDL-cholesterol concentrations with the PCSK9 inhibitor evolocumab: a prespecified secondary analysis of the FOURIER trial. Lancet. 2017;390:1962–71. Important findings regarding the safety of very low LDLc levels. No cause for concern in terms of treatment-emergent side effects was seen on evolocumab. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Kastelein JJ, Hovingh GK, Langslet G, Baccara-Dinet MT, Gipe DA, Chaudhari U, et al. J. Efficacy and safety of the proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 monoclonal antibody alirocumab vs placebo in patients with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia. Clin Lipidol. 2017;11:195–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Thedrez A, Blom DJ, Ramin-Mangata S, Blanchard V, Croyal M, Chemello K, et al. Homozygous familial hypercholesterolemia patients with identical mutations variably express the LDLR (low-density lipoprotein receptor): implications for the efficacy of evolocumab. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2017;  https://doi.org/10.1161/ATVBAHA.117.310217.
  60. 60.
    Jones PH, Davidson MH, Stein EA, Bays HE, McKenney J, Miller E, et al. Comparison of the efficacy and safety of rosuvastatin versus atorvastatin, simvastatin, and pravastatin across doses (STELLAR* trial). Am J Cardiol. 2003;92:152–60.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Ridker PM, Mora S, Rose L, on behalf of the JUPITER Study Group. Percent reduction in LDL cholesterol following high-intensity statin therapy: potential implications for guidelines and for the prescription of emerging lipid-lowering drugs. Eur Heart J. 2016;37:1373–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Albert MA, Glynn RJ, Fonseca FAH, et al. Race, ethnicity, and the efficacy of rosuvastatin in primary prevention: the justification for the use of statins in prevention: an Intervention Trial Evaluating Rosuvastatin (JUPITER) trial. Am Heart J. 2011;162:106–14.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Chasman DI, Giulianini F, MacFadyen J, Barratt BJ, Nyberg F, Ridker PM. Genetic determinants of statin-induced low-density-lipoprotein cholesterol reduction. The justification for the use of statins in prevention: an intervention trial evaluating Rosuvastatin (JUPITER) trial. Circ Cardiovasc Genet. 2012:257–64.Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Collins R, Reith C, Emberson J, Armitage J, Baigent C, Blackwell L, et al. Interpretation of the evidence for the efficacy and safety of statin therapy. Lancet. 2016;388:2532–61.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Mega JL, Stitziel NO, Smith JG, Chasman DI, Caulfield MJ, Devlin JJ, et al. Genetic risk, coronary heart disease events, and the clinical benefit of statin therapy: an analysis of primary and secondary prevention trials. Lancet. 2015;385:2264–71.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Natarajan P, Young R, Stitziel NO, Padmanabhan S, Baber U, Mehran R, et al. Polygenic risk score identifies subgroup with higher burden of atherosclerosis and greater relative benefit from statin therapy in the primary prevention setting. Circulation. 2017;135:2091–101.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Parhofer KG. New approaches to address dyslipidemia. Curr Opin Lipidol. 2017;28:452–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Cardiovascular and Medical SciencesUniversity of GlasgowGlasgowUK

Personalised recommendations