Observational studyClinical rheumatology2026
Metabolic syndrome predicts cardiovascular and all-cause adverse outcomes in patients with chronic inflammatory arthritis.
Observational study in Clinical rheumatology, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesChronic inflammatory arthritis (CIA), including rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and ankylosing spondylitis (AS), is associated with elevated cardiovascular risk. Metabolic syndrome (MetS) is prevalent among these patients and may contribute to adverse clinical outcomes. This study aimed to investigate whether MetS independently predicts cardiovascular and all-cause adverse events in patients with CIA and to evaluate the dose-response relationship between the number of MetS components and prognosis.
methodIn this prospective observational study, 811 patients with CIA were enrolled between January 2016 and December 2020. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance baseline covariates between patients with and without MetS. Primary and secondary endpoints were composite cardiovascular death/hospitalization and all-cause death/hospitalization, respectively. Cox proportional hazards regression models and Kaplan-Meier survival analyses were employed to evaluate the associations between MetS status and study outcomes.
resultsMetS was present in 35.0% of patients. During a median follow-up of 39 months, cardiovascular events occurred significantly more frequently in patients with MetS compared to those without (18.4% vs. 7.7%, p = 0.002). All-cause events were also higher in the MetS group (37.8% vs. 19.9%, p < 0.001). MetS independently predicted cardiovascular (adjusted HR = 4.12, 95% CI: 2.11-8.07, p < 0.001) and all-cause outcomes (adjusted HR = 2.81, 95% CI: 1.79-4.41, p < 0.001). Each additional MetS component was associated with a 1.68-fold increased risk of cardiovascular outcomes (95% CI: 1.24-2.51, p < 0.001).
conclusionsMetS is an independent risk factor for cardiovascular and all-cause adverse outcomes in patients with CIA. Key Points • MetS independently predicts both cardiovascular and all-cause adverse outcomes in patients with CIA after propensity score matching. • A dose-response relationship was identified, with each additional MetS component conferring higher cardiovascular risk.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42010210What 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.