Loading
Life sciences · Journal article
Biomedicines · October 16, 2026
No summary has been generated for this record yet. What follows is drawn from its source metadata only.
Journal article.
No findings were extractable from the material analysed.
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
The source did not state who this applies to in practice.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
This record has not been graded across any dimension yet. Treat the label above as provisional and read the source.
What is missing. This record has no bottom line, key findings, reported figures, evidence dimensions. That is a gap in the analysis, not a judgement about the study.
Objectives: The aim was to identify metabolic subtypes within metabolically unhealthy obesity (MUO) using integrated metabolomics and hematology data and evaluate their differential risks for cardiovascular–kidney–metabolic (CKM)-related outcomes. Methods: Among 62,341 obese UK Biobank participants (43,577 MUO; 18,764 non-MUO), least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression selected 67 biomarkers from 96 metabolites and serological parameters, followed by K-means clustering. Cox proportional hazards models assessed subtype-specific associations with incident CKM-related outcomes over a median 14.81-year follow-up. Results: Four metabolic subtypes were identified within MUO, characterized by distinct amino acid, renal, and lipid profiles. Subtype-specific associations with CKM-related outcomes differed substantially. Compared with non-MUO participants, Subtype II and Subtype IV were associated with higher coronary heart disease risk (HR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.11–1.61 and HR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.15–1.64, respectively), Subtype IV was associated with lower atrial fibrillation risk (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.60–0.90), Subtype III with higher heart failure risk (HR, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.10–1.82), and Subtype I with higher chronic kidney disease risk (HR, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.22–1.91). Conclusions: Integrated metabolomic and hematologic profiling identified variation in the metabolic profiles of individuals with MUO. The four subtypes showed different patterns of association with CKM-related outcomes, suggesting that MUO encompasses diverse metabolic profiles that may not be fully captured by conventional metabolic syndrome criteria.