Key result
Severe Metabolic–Diabetic phenotype in RA linked to ~4.1-fold higher odds of prevalent CVD.
Why the study?
Cardiovascular disease is a major cause of morbidity and premature mortality in rheumatoid arthritis, but whether multidimensional cardiometabolic, inflammatory, renal, behavioral, and psychosocial factors define distinct cardiovascular risk phenotypes remains unclear.
Do multidimensional cardiometabolic, inflammatory, renal, behavioral, and psychosocial factors define distinct cardiovascular risk phenotypes associated with prevalent cardiovascular disease in adults with rheumatoid arthritis?
Cross-Sectional (n=3,252)
Yes
Do multidimensional cardiometabolic, inflammatory, renal, behavioral, and psychosocial factors define distinct cardiovascular risk phenotypes associated with prevalent cardiovascular disease in adults with rheumatoid arthritis?
In adults with rheumatoid arthritis, unsupervised clustering of metabolic, inflammatory, renal, behavioral, and psychosocial factors identifies six distinct phenotypes with significantly different burdens of prevalent cardiovascular disease.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Severe metabolic-diabetic RA phenotype linked to highest CVD odds; hypothesis-generating for targeted stratification, needs prospective validation.
Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a major cause of morbidity and premature mortality in people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Whether multidimensional cardiometabolic, inflammatory, renal, behavioral, and psychosocial factors define distinct cardiovascular risk phenotypes in RA remains unclear. This study aimed to identify data-driven phenotypes and evaluate their associations with prevalent CVD. We analyzed 3,252 adults aged≥20 years with self-reported RA from the 2005–2018 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). Unsupervised partitioning around medoids (PAM) clustering using Gower distance identified distinct data-driven cardiovascular-risk profiles. Cluster validity was assessed using silhouette analysis and internal train–test validation. Survey-weighted binary logistic regression evaluated associations between phenotype membership and prevalent CVD. Six clinically interpretable data-driven phenotypes were identified with varying CVD prevalence: Severe Metabolic–Diabetic (40.3%), Aging Diabetic–Hypertensive (34.9%), Non-Diabetic Intermediate (20.2%), Mild Metabolic (14.8%), Cardiometabolic (10.4%), and Smoking-Predominant (19.4%). Compared with the Cardiometabolic phenotype, the Severe Metabolic–Diabetic phenotype exhibited the highest odds of prevalent CVD (aOR 4.11, 95%CI:2.56–6.59), followed by the Aging Diabetic–Hypertensive phenotype (aOR 3.38, 95%CI:2.22–5.15). Higher odds of prevalent CVD were also observed in the Smoking-Predominant (aOR 1.99, 95% CI: 1.26–3.13) and Non-Diabetic Intermediate (aOR 1.77, 95% CI: 1.10–2.84) phenotypes. The six-cluster solution demonstrated moderate separation and strong internal correspondence across training and testing sets, while the phenotype-informed model showed moderate discrimination for prevalent CVD (AUC = 0.72). Among adults with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), distinct data-driven phenotypes were identified based on combined patterns of metabolic, inflammatory, renal, behavioral, and psychosocial factors, with differing burdens of prevalent cardiovascular disease (CVD). Phenotype-based approaches may provide a comprehensive framework for characterizing multidimensional cardiovascular risk in RA.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jahan et al. (2026) conducted a cross-sectional in Rheumatoid arthritis (n=3,252). Severe Metabolic–Diabetic phenotype (and other data-driven cardiovascular-risk phenotypes) vs. Cardiometabolic phenotype was evaluated on Prevalent cardiovascular disease (CVD) (aOR 4.11, 95% CI 2.56–6.59). The Severe Metabolic–Diabetic phenotype in rheumatoid arthritis had the highest odds of prevalent CVD vs the Cardiometabolic phenotype (40.3% vs 10.4%; aOR 4.11, 95% CI 2.56–6.59).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: