New observational research from the EASD meeting analyzes cardiovascular risk in adults with a BMI of 25 to 26.9, highlighting the need for clinical trials.
On September 27, 2026, the medical community received new observational data regarding cardiovascular health and weight management. Researchers at the European Association for the Study of Diabetes meeting in Milan presented a large analysis of adults. The report argues that some individuals with a body mass index between 25 and 26.9 may face significant cardiovascular risks. These risks are reportedly comparable to those of people who currently qualify for GLP-1 weight-loss medications.
The findings suggest a potential argument for expanding the current prescribing criteria. The research team noted that clinical trials are needed to determine whether treatment would actually reduce risk in this group. Right now, the data only establishes an observational association rather than a proven treatment outcome. This distinction is critical for anyone trying to navigate the changing landscape of metabolic health.
To understand the findings from Milan, we must look beyond body weight alone. A central point of the research is that cardiovascular health involves complex internal markers. The research team focused specifically on two health indicators. They looked at remnant cholesterol and low-grade inflammation in adults.
Remnant cholesterol refers to the cholesterol content found in specific fat-carrying particles in your blood. High levels of this cholesterol can contribute to arterial plaque over time. Low-grade inflammation is an immune response that can slowly damage blood vessels. The combination of these two factors creates an environment where coronary heart disease is more likely to develop.
Many adults monitor their weight but remain unaware of their underlying metabolic markers. Our bodies regulate health through an intricate mix of nutrition, movement, stress and sleep. The analysis suggests that a body mass index between 25 and 26.9 might not tell the whole story. Individuals in this range with high inflammation and remnant cholesterol can still face significant cardiovascular challenges.
"For years, I watched smart, capable people blame themselves when standard diet advice failed them. They would cut calories drastically, run themselves into the ground and inevitably regain the weight. It was heartbreaking to see. I realized we were treating a complex biological and psychological system like a simple math problem."
"That was the turning point when I knew we had to focus on metabolic health and habits rather than just restriction." This exact shift in perspective is what makes the new observational data so compelling. It reinforces the idea that true health management goes far beyond a simple scale reading.
Mainstream news outlets often portray any new GLP-1 study as an immediate reason to change prescribing habits. You might see sensational claims that millions of additional people should instantly start taking these medications for heart protection. The reality of this specific presentation is much more measured. An observational association does not show that medication prevents events in this particular group.
The researchers analyzed existing population data to find health patterns. They did not randomly assign GLP-1 treatments to people with a body mass index between 25 and 26.9. Because the study did not test the medication on this demographic, it cannot prove that the drugs would actively reduce their risk of coronary heart disease. The estimates reported are simply relative risk comparisons between different groups.
Dr. Karen Hvid of Copenhagen University Hospital in Herlev led the research team. Dr. Hvid stated that the findings make a case for extending the indication to this group. However, she also clearly noted that clinical trials are now needed. We must wait for those trials before drawing permanent conclusions about new treatment criteria.
It is also important to separate this observational study from previous randomized clinical trials. The SELECT trial previously reported a 20 percent lower risk of heart disease with semaglutide. However, that trial focused on adults with overweight or obesity who already had established cardiovascular disease. The new Milan analysis looks at people with no prior coronary heart disease.
The scale of the observational data provides a robust look at population health trends over time. The analysis combined records from the prospective UK Biobank and the Copenhagen General Population Study. It covered a total of 313,145 adults who had no diabetes or coronary heart disease at the start. The median age of the participants was 58, and approximately half of the study population was female.
Participants were followed for extensive periods to track their cardiovascular outcomes. The follow-up lasted more than 10 years for the participants. Specifically, it reached up to 18 years in the Copenhagen study and 15 years in the UK Biobank. During that extensive observation window, 23,134 individuals developed coronary heart disease.
The report notes that current weight-loss eligibility for semaglutide and tirzepatide typically requires a body mass index of at least 30. Alternatively, individuals can qualify with an index of at least 27 plus a weight-related condition. About two-thirds of the study participants, totaling 204,850 people, met this current indication. More than 90 percent of those who did not meet the criteria fell into the 25 to 26.9 range.
Within that slightly lower range, the presence of specific risk markers was notable. The data showed that 44 percent in the Copenhagen cohort and 48 percent in the UK Biobank had high remnant cholesterol, low-grade inflammation or both. This indicates that a large portion of this group carries hidden cardiovascular risks.
The reported risk was 41 percent higher in the Copenhagen cohort for those with both markers compared to healthy peers. In the UK Biobank, the reported risk was 47 percent higher for those with both markers. It is crucial to remember that these numbers are purely observational risk comparisons. They do not represent a guaranteed reduction in risk achievable through medication.
The scientific community will need rigorous clinical trials to confirm whether GLP-1 medications can safely protect this specific group. Observational associations are an excellent starting point for research. They highlight areas where current medical guidelines might be lacking. However, we must see controlled studies that measure actual outcomes when the medication is administered to people without established heart disease.
The SELECT trial enrolled 17,604 adults aged 45 or older with established cardiovascular disease. We would need a similarly robust trial for adults with a body mass index of 25 to 26.9. Until those trials are completed and peer-reviewed, the current prescribing criteria will remain the standard. Patients should not assume that securing a prescription will automatically solve their underlying health risks.
If you are concerned about your cardiovascular health, the best step is to have a comprehensive blood panel done. Discuss your remnant cholesterol and inflammation markers directly with a qualified physician. Understanding how treatment guidelines function requires patience and reliance on solid data.
We also need to continue examining how these medications interact with appetite and daily habits. Keeping an eye on psychiatric safety reviews and long-term heart outcomes will give us a clearer picture in the coming years. Science moves methodically, and waiting for verified clinical trial results is always the smartest approach to sustainable health.
WeightRestart shares research-led guidance on weight loss, metabolism, nutrition, strength, appetite, sleep and recovery. Our goal is to make complex health information clear, practical and useful for people building progress they can maintain.
Learn how to build a weight-management approach around better information, realistic expectations and habits you can keep using.
read the blog
