Background: Familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) is an autosomal dominant trait characterized by elevated LDL-C concentrations and is associated with an increased risk of premature atherosclerosis. Progranulin (PGRN) is a multifunctional protein that is known to have various anti-atherogenic effects. To date, the use of serum PGRN in patients with FH has not been studied. Methods: In total, 81 untreated patients with heterozygous FH (HeFH) and 32 healthy control subjects were included in this study. Serum PGRN, sICAM-1, sVCAM-1, oxLDL and TNFα concentrations were determined by ELISA. Lipoprotein subfractions were detected by Lipoprint. We diagnosed FH using the Dutch Lipid Clinic Network criteria. Results: We could not find a significant difference between the PGRN concentrations of the HeFH patients and controls (37.66 ± 9.75 vs. 38.43 ± 7.74 ng/mL, ns.). We found significant positive correlations between triglyceride, TNFα, sVCAM-1, the ratio of small HDL subfraction and PGRN, while significant negative correlations were found between the ratio of large HDL subfraction and PGRN both in the whole study population and in FH patients. PGRN was predicted by sVCAM-1, logTNFα and the ratio of small HDL subfraction. Conclusions: The strong correlations between HDL subfractions, inflammatory markers and PGRN suggest that PGRN may exert its anti-atherogenic effect in HeFH through the alteration of HDL composition and the amelioration of inflammation rather than through decreasing oxidative stress.

Background/Objectives: The clinical presentation of homozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (HoFH) and severe heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (sHeFH) often demonstrates substantial overlap, as low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels may fall within similar ranges in both conditions. Methods: In this single-center 10-year retrospective study at the University of Debrecen, Hungary, we present the clinical characteristics of patients with 6 HoFH and 6 sHeFH diagnosed by genetic testing, discuss the diagnostic limitations encountered in clinical practice, and outline the key components of therapeutic management. Results: The mean age at diagnosis was lower in the HoFH group (31.83 ± 19.5 vs. 41.83 ± 15.9 years). The differences in total cholesterol (13.48 ± 7.4 vs. 11.02 ± 3.5 mmol/L) and LDL-C levels (10.89 ± 6.6 vs. 8.58 ± 3.26 mmol/L) between the groups were not statistically significant. Interestingly, vascular complications were more frequent in sHeFH group as well (4 vs. 1 patients). In neither the HoFH nor the sHeFH group were we able to achieve the target LDL-C levels, due in part to the specific features of the reimbursement system, patient and parental preferences, the extremely high baseline LDL-C levels, and certain genetic characteristics. Conclusions: Our findings highlight the importance of genetic testing-based personalized therapy in these specific patient subpopulations. We emphasize that serum LDL-C alone is insufficient to distinguish between HoFH and sHeFH patients, and that therapeutic challenges should be anticipated in both groups arising partly from limited patient adherence as well as from financial constraints.