ArticleBMC medicine2026
CardioMetAge estimates cardiometabolic aging and predicts disease outcomes.
Article in BMC medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundExisting aging clocks, designed to quantify biological aging, primarily capture systemic changes and may overlook alterations crucial for cardiometabolic diseases (CMDs).
methodsIn this study, we developed the CardioMetAge model, an aging clock tailored to predict CMD-related outcomes. Trained in the NHANES-III, the model was applied to the continuous NHANES and UK Biobank. Its associations with cardiometabolic mortality, disease incidence, and transitions between disease states were examined, and its performance in predicting 10-year CMD incidence was also evaluated. We further investigated associations of proteomic pathways, lifestyle factors, and socioeconomic status with CardioMetAge, as well as the impact of caloric restriction intervention on its change.
resultsThe final CardioMetAge was constructed as a linear combination of chronological age and 12 common clinical biomarkers. Its age deviation (CardioMetAgeDev) showed stronger associations with CMD mortality (HR per SD [95% CI]: 1.87 [1.83, 1.91]), CMD incidence (1.35 [1.33, 1.37]), and disease progression, including transitions from no CMD to first CMD (1.34 [1.32, 1.35]) and from first CMD to cardiometabolic multimorbidity (1.25 [1.21, 1.30]), compared with deviations of PhenoAge and other traditional biological age models. CardioMetAge also consistently outperformed these models in predicting 10-year CMD incidence. Our findings also highlighted the biological determinants of cardiometabolic aging, with proteomic analyses linking CardioMetAgeDev to inflammatory activation and metabolic disorders. Analysis of modifiable factors revealed that lifestyle and socioeconomic status were associated with CMD risks, partly via CardioMetAgeDev (mediation proportions: 34.5% and 10.7%, respectively). Additionally, two-year caloric restriction slowed the progression of CardioMetAge by 1.23 years (95% CI: [0.61, 1.84]) relative to the ad libitum control.
conclusionsCardioMetAge outperformed existing aging clocks in ease of use and in predicting CMD-related outcomes. It provides valuable insights into the mechanisms of cardiometabolic aging and holds potential for clinical monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness of interventions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.