Evidence Hub

Association between cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic syndrome, lifestyle, and all-cause and cause-specific mortality: a prospective cohort study

Mingming Wang, Yanan Qiao, Rui-Jin Lin, Yong-Fu Yu, Min Zhao, M. Standl, C. Magnussen, B. Xi

EClinicalMedicine, 2025

319,291 participants · 15 citations

Abstract

Summary Background Cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic (CKM) syndrome is reported to be associated with increased all-cause and CVD-specific mortality. However, the association between CKM and cancer-specific mortality, as well as the modifying or joint effects of healthy lifestyle on mortality remain unclear. Methods In this prospective cohort study, we enrolled participants aged 37–73 years from the UK Biobank. Individuals with missing data on CKM status, lifestyle factors or potential confounders at baseline (between March 2006 and July 2010) were excluded. Followed-up was conducted until November 30, 2022. CKM stages (0-4) were defined per the American Heart Association criteria. A healthy lifestyle score (adequate physical activity, no current smoking, healthy sleep, and healthy diet) was categorized into unfavourable (0–1), intermediate (2–3), and favourable (4) groups. Outcomes included all-cause and cause-specific mortality (due to cardiovascular disease [CVD], cancer, and other causes). Cox proportional hazards models and Fine–Gray proportional subdistribution hazards models were used to assess associations with all-cause and cause-specific mortality, respectively. Findings A total of 319,291 participants were included. Over a median follow-up of 13.7 years (interquartile ranges 13.0–14.3), 27,267 deaths occurred (5558 CVDs [20.4%], 13,566 cancers [49.8%], 8143 other-causes [29.8%]). Compared with CKM Stage 0, Stages 2–4 were associated with progressively higher risks…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 319,291 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free