Key result
Proteomics model outperforms clinical PREVENT for predicting MACE in metabolic syndrome, raising C-statistic to 0.73.
Why the study?
Does a proteomics-derived prediction model improve risk stratification for major adverse cardiovascular events compared to the clinical PREVENT model in individuals with metabolic syndrome?
Cohort (n=12,308)
Does a proteomics-derived prediction model improve risk stratification for major adverse cardiovascular events compared to the clinical PREVENT model in individuals with metabolic syndrome?
A proteomics-derived risk model significantly improves the prediction and reclassification of major adverse cardiovascular events in patients with metabolic syndrome compared to the standard PREVENT clinical model.
Traditional clinical models, designed for the general population, are insufficient for capturing the complex molecular pathology that drives major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) in individuals with metabolic syndrome (MetS). This study aimed to leverage large-scale proteomics to improve risk stratification in MetS and to investigate the potential causal effects of identified proteins using Mendelian Randomization (MR). We analyzed 2,911 plasma proteins in 12,308 MetS participants from the UK Biobank. A protein prediction model was constructed using the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator method to select MACE-associated proteins in the training set. The model’s predictive performance was evaluated in a validation set and compared to the clinical PREVENT model. To investigate whether these identified proteins have a causal relationship with MACE, we utilized cis -pQTLs as genetic instruments to perform a two-sample MR analysis. Over a median 14-year follow-up, 1,899 incident MACEs occurred. In the validation set, the protein model significantly outperformed the clinical PREVENT model (C-statistic: 0.730 vs. 0.673, P = 0.003). Crucially, among individuals classified as intermediate-risk by the PREVENT model, the protein score achieved a total net reclassification index of 0.44, driven by the correct reclassification of 64% of individuals who developed MACE. Time-dependent analysis revealed exceptional predictive accuracy for short-term heart failure risk (3-year AUC = 0.90), which was superior to long-term predictions. MR analysis against individual MACE components identified four proteins with causal evidence: genetically higher AGER (soluble RAGE) was associated with lower heart failure risk, and higher MMP-12 with lower stroke risk, whereas higher VAMP5 and NCAN were associated with increased coronary heart disease risk. A proteomics-derived model deconstructs the molecular heterogeneity of MACEs risk in individuals with MetS, significantly improving conventional models. Furthermore, integrating MR analysis distinguishes causal drivers from biomarkers, providing novel molecular insights to guide personalized prevention.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chen et al. (2026) conducted a cohort in Metabolic syndrome (n=12,308). Proteomics-based prediction model vs. Clinical PREVENT model was evaluated on Predictive performance for incident major adverse cardiovascular events (C-statistic) (p=0.003). A proteomics-based prediction model significantly outperformed the clinical PREVENT model for predicting major adverse cardiovascular events in metabolic syndrome (C-statistic: 0.730 vs. 0.673, P=0.003).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: