Home › Research › Drug development
Integrative Multimodal Subtyping, Risk of Incident Mild Cognitive Impairment, and Differential Cardiometabolic Treatment Effects: A Prospective Cohort Study in the All of Us Research Program
Zhao Y, Marder K, Wang Y.. medRxiv, 2026-02-11
Topic: Drug trials: efficacy and safety
Results Four distinct subtypes were identified: I low-risk healthy aging, II behavioral/social vulnerability, III cardiometabolic–depressive multimorbidity, and IV mixed social-medical vulnerability profiles. Compared with Subtype I, Subtype III demonstrated the highest risk of incident MCI (HR: 3.69, 95% CI: 3.14–4.33), followed by Subtype IV and Subtype II. In treatment effect analyses, antihypertensive use was associated with a modest prolongation of MCI-free survival overall (time ratio:1.04, 95% CI: 1.03–1.06), with the largest benefit observed in Subtype III (time ratio: 1.14, 95% CI: 1.09–1.19). Non–GLP antidiabetic therapies were similarly associated with modest overall delay, with significant benefits in Subtypes I and III. GLP-class therapies were not associated with overall delay but showed a significant association in Subtype III.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Zhao, Y., Marder, K., & Wang, Y. (2026). Integrative Multimodal Subtyping, Risk of Incident Mild Cognitive Impairment, and Differential Cardiometabolic Treatment Effects: A Prospective Cohort Study in the All of Us Research Program. medRxiv. https://doi.org/10.64898/2026.02.10.26345240
Vancouver
Zhao Y, Marder K, Wang Y. Integrative Multimodal Subtyping, Risk of Incident Mild Cognitive Impairment, and Differential Cardiometabolic Treatment Effects: A Prospective Cohort Study in the All of Us Research Program. medRxiv. 2026. doi:10.64898/2026.02.10.26345240.
BibTeX
@article{zhao2026-758b6681,
author = {Zhao, Y. and Marder, K. and Wang, Y.},
title = {{Integrative Multimodal Subtyping, Risk of Incident Mild Cognitive Impairment, and Differential Cardiometabolic Treatment Effects: A Prospective Cohort Study in the All of Us Research Program}},
journal = {medRxiv},
year = {2026},
doi = {10.64898/2026.02.10.26345240},
url = {https://doi.org/10.64898/2026.02.10.26345240}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Results Four distinct subtypes were identified: I low-risk healthy aging, II behavioral/social vulnerability, III cardiometabolic–depressive multimorbidity, and IV mixed social-medical vulnerability profiles.
- Compared with Subtype I, Subtype III demonstrated the highest risk of incident MCI (HR: 3.69, 95% CI: 3.14–4.33), followed by Subtype IV and Subtype II.
- In treatment effect analyses, antihypertensive use was associated with a modest prolongation of MCI-free survival overall (time ratio:1.04, 95% CI: 1.03–1.06), with the largest benefit observed in Subtype III (time ratio: 1.14, 95% CI: 1.09–1.19).
- Non–GLP antidiabetic therapies were similarly associated with modest overall delay, with significant benefits in Subtypes I and III.
- GLP-class therapies were not associated with overall delay but showed a significant association in Subtype III.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Treatments →
Study details
- Study designcohort study
- Effect sizeHR: 3.69
- Evidence strengthModerate
How this study scored 16/100
Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed. It scored 40 on the same rubric, but non-peer-reviewed sources are capped at 16, so it shows as 16. Scored zero for sample size, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 25 of the 62 points we could judge it on, which is 40 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 2 / 10 | Tier 4 — not a peer-reviewed journal (medRxiv) |
| Journal's citation record | 0 / 4 | Not a journal article, so the journal's record does not count |
| Study design | 7 / 12 | A cohort study following people over time |
| Strength of evidence | 3 / 5 | Rated “moderate” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 4 / 10 | Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed. Hosted on a preprint server. |
| How recent | 5 / 5 | 2026 — within 1 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 3 / 3 | Effect reported with a statistic (interval, p-value, ratio or similar) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multi-centre collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 1 / 2 | Not in PubMed, but has a DOI |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 25 / 62 | Scored on 12 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 25 of the 62 points we could judge it on is 40 out of 100. |
| Total | 40 / 100 | Capped to 16 because this is not a peer-reviewed article. |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Related studies in Drug development
Also tagged “metabolic-syndrome”
304 studies in the library carry the topic tag “metabolic-syndrome”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 304 tagged studies.