Skip to main content
Journal of Biomedical Research logoLink to Journal of Biomedical Research
. 2026 Sep 28;40(5):571–574. doi: 10.7555/JBR.39.20250347

Triglyceride-glucose-uric acid (TyG-UA) index as a novel parameter associated with metabolic syndrome among adults: A cross-sectional study

Liong Boy Kurniawan 1,*, Uleng Bahrun 1, Mansyur Arif 1, Agussalim Bukhari 2, Andi Makbul Aman 3, Haerani Rasyid 3
PMCID: PMC13620448  PMID: 41349580

Dear Editor,

Metabolic syndrome (MS) is a condition that can cause cardiometabolic disorders, with its incidence increasing in recent decades. It is estimated that a quarter to a third of people worldwide have MS, particularly in developed countries[1]. Obesity, insulin resistance, hypertension, and dyslipidemia are common components of metabolic syndrome[2]. Several reports have shown a close relationship between hyperuricemia and MS in adolescents, adults, and the elderly[3–5]. Elevated levels of blood uric acid are linked to oxidative stress, endothelial dysfunction, hypertension, micro-inflammatory processes, and impaired insulin action, all of which can lead to atherosclerosis, diabetes, insulin resistance, hepatic steatosis, and MS[6–9]. High triglyceride levels are also associated with inflammatory conditions, including hypertension, cardiovascular disease, and diabetes[10–11]. Several research reports have shown the superiority of the triglyceride-glucose (TyG) index over the homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) in assessing the risk of MS[12–13]. Uric acid is a routinely examined laboratory biomarker and has been associated with MS. However, uric acid is still rarely used in various formulas for identifying MS. Therefore, we propose a novel parameter that incorporates serum uric acid levels into the TyG index formula, called the triglyceride-glucose-uric acid (TyG-UA) index, for identifying individuals with MS.

The present cross-sectional study was conducted from December 2024 to January 2025 at Hasanuddin University Hospital, Makassar, Indonesia. One hundred seventy-four adult volunteers older than 18 years without a history of diabetes mellitus (DM) were recruited. Participants with inflammatory or infectious conditions, as well as those on medications that affect lipids and uric acid, were excluded. Informed consent was obtained from all participants before their involvement. This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the Faculty of Medicine, Hasanuddin University (Approval Nos. 1097/UN4.6.4.5.31/PP36/2024 and UH24110978).

Fasting blood samples were collected from the participants' veins, followed by serum separation. ABX Pentra 400 (HORIBA ABX SAS, Montpellier, Occitanie, France) was used to measure glucose, uric acid, triglycerides, and lipid profiles, while insulin was assessed using a Cobas e411 (Roche Diagnostics GmbH, Mannheim, Baden-Württemberg, Germany). HOMA-IR and TyG index were calculated as previously described[12]. The TyG-UA index was calculated using the formula: ln[glucose (mg/dL) × triglycerides (mg/dL) × uric acid (mg/dL)/3]. The denominator of 3 was introduced to account for the incorporation of three biochemical components into the composite index. The International Diabetes Federation (IDF) criteria were employed to ascertain MS status as previously described[1].

Continuous variables were assessed for normality using the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test. The chi-square test was used to assess the differences in categorical data. The independent-samples t-test (for normally distributed data) or the Mann–Whitney U test (for non-normally distributed data) was used to examine the differences in numerical data. The area under the curve (AUC) from the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was employed to evaluate the ability of the HOMA-IR, TyG index, and TyG-UA index to identify MS. The optimal cut-off value was determined by maximizing the Youden index (sensitivity + specificity − 1). The statistical analysis was carried out using version 21.0 of the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) software.

The characteristics of both MS and non-MS participants are shown in Table 1. The TyG-UA index showed significant correlations with body mass index (BMI), waist circumference (WC), systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, low-density lipoprotein (LDL), high-density lipoprotein (HDL), triglyceride, fasting plasma glucose (FPG), insulin, and HOMA-IR, with correlation coefficients (r) of 0.324, 0.497, 0.360, 0.161, 0.486, −0.449, 0.754, 0.288, 0.364, and 0.406, respectively (all P < 0.05). Because triglycerides and glucose are components of the TyG-UA index, their correlations with the composite index should be interpreted cautiously because of mathematical coupling. The results of the ROC curve analysis for determining the ability of HOMA-IR, TyG index, and TyG-UA index to identify MS are shown in Fig. 1. The TyG-UA index (AUC = 0.842, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.766–0.918, cut-off = 9.8163, sensitivity = 75%, specificity = 83.10%) had a numerically higher AUC than the HOMA-IR (AUC = 0.739, 95% CI, 0.709–0.875, cut-off = 2.6504, sensitivity = 68.80%, specificity = 76.10%) and TyG index (AUC = 0.792, 95% CI 0.646–0.832, cut-off = 8.3717, sensitivity = 75%, specificity = 70.40%) in identifying MS.

Table 1. Basic profile of participants' characteristics.

Variables All (n = 174) Non-MS (n = 142) MS (n = 32) P

aCategorical variables are expressed as frequencies (percentages) and compared using the chi-square test. bNon-normally distributed variables are presented as median (minimum–maximum) and compared using the Mann–Whitney U test. cNormally distributed variables are presented as mean ± standard deviation and compared using the independent-samples t-test. Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index; DBP, diastolic blood pressure; FPG, fasting plasma glucose; HDL, high-density lipoprotein; HOMA-IR, homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance; LDL, low-density lipoprotein; MS, metabolic syndrome; SBP, systolic blood pressure; TyG index, triglyceride-glucose index; TyG-UA index, triglyceride-glucose-uric acid index; UA, uric acid; WC, waist circumference.

Sex, male [n (%)] 86 (49.50) 66 (46.50) 20 (62.50) 0.102a
Age (years) 30.50 (20.00–40.00) 30.00 (20.00–39.00) 31.50 (22.00–40.00) 0.545b
Body weight (kg) 69.91 ± 15.05 66.64 ± 12.67 84.45 ± 16.33 < 0.001c
Height (m) 1.62 ± 0.08 1.61 ± 0.08 1.65 ± 0.09 0.037c
BMI (kg/m2) 25.51 (16.98–47.61) 24.30 (16.98–40.43) 29.94 (22.64–47.61) < 0.001b
WC (cm) 85.93 ± 11.91 83.10 ± 10.45 98.50 ± 9.76 < 0.001c
SBP (mmHg) 120 (80–150) 120 (80–150) 130 (110–150) < 0.001b
DBP (mmHg) 80 (50–100) 80 (50–100) 80 (70–100) 0.001b
Total cholesterol (mg/dL) 192.98 ± 36.51 188.58 ± 33.58 218.50 ± 39.46 < 0.001c
LDL (mg/dL) 115.60 (46.30–185.00) 111.47 (46.30–181.00) 143.50 (65.00–185.00) < 0.001b
HDL (mg/dL) 44.00 (21.83–76.00) 45.00 (21.83–76.00) 37.00 (26.00–49.30) < 0.001b
Triglyceride (mg/dL) 108.44 ± 38.33 99.97 ± 31.99 146.03 ± 41.90 < 0.001c
FPG (mg/dL) 80.75 (56.50–119.80) 80.75 (56.50–112.80) 80.35 (60.00–119.80) 0.575b
Insulin (mIU/L) 10.88 (2.59–62.77) 9.87 (2.59–62.77) 16.40 (6.13–35.59) < 0.001b
UA (mg/dL) 5.07 (2.04–10.86) 4.96 (2.04–10.86) 6.16 (3.56–9.70) < 0.001b
HOMA-IR (unit) 2.09 (0.39–16.77) 1.85 (0.39–16.77) 3.48 (0.91–8.84) < 0.001b
TyG index (unit) 8.28 ± 0.39 8.20 ± 0.35 8.62 ± 0.38 < 0.001c
TyG-UA index (unit) 9.48 ± 0.56 9.36 ± 0.50 10.06 ± 0.47 < 0.001c

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves of triglyceride-glucose-uric acid (TyG-UA) index and others as determinants of metabolic syndrome (MS).

The TyG-UA index shows a numerically higher area under the curve than the homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) and the triglyceride-glucose (TyG) index.

In the present investigation, the TyG index was modified by incorporating uric acid to create a new index, termed the TyG-UA index. One of the reasons for including uric acid in the index is the presence of various studies and reviews that demonstrate correlations between high levels of plasma uric acid and various cardiometabolic disorders, including MS[14–16]. According to Maloberti et al[14], MS risk increased by 1.6 times for each 1 mg/dL elevation in blood uric acid level. A study conducted in a population aged > 50 years in Taiwan, China reported a 2.48-fold higher MS risk in participants with high plasma uric acid levels than in those with low levels[5].

In the current study, we demonstrated that the TyG-UA index showed a numerically higher AUC than the TyG index and HOMA-IR in identifying MS. This finding suggests that incorporating uric acid into the TyG index enhances the index's ability to identify the condition of MS. The TyG-UA index combines three parameters: triglycerides, blood glucose, and uric acid, all of which are associated with pro-inflammatory conditions. This modification was intended to improve the discriminatory ability of the TyG index, which only combines two pro-inflammatory parameters. The pathophysiological explanation of uric acid's role (concerning MS components) in identifying MS is described below.

Adipose tissue is one of the tissues proven to play an active role in producing uric acid. Research in mice shows that adipose tissue expresses xanthine oxidoreductase, essential for converting purines into uric acid, thereby enhancing uric acid production in obese mice[17]. Uric acid can cause oxidative stress in pancreatic islet cells, leading to impaired insulin secretory function, and in hepatocyte cells, leading to hepatic insulin resistance[18]. Oxidative stress due to uric acid can also cause reactive oxygen species (ROS) formation, which can interfere with insulin signaling in target organs, resulting in insulin resistance[19]. Increased uric acid levels cause a decrease in nitric oxide (NO) and trigger renin-angiotensin system (RAS) activity, which leads to vasoconstriction. These processes will cause blood vessel remodeling and an increase in blood pressure[20]. Experiments using hepatocyte cell cultures showed that uric acid can trigger hepatocyte lipogenesis and lead to increased triglyceride production[21].

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first instance where uric acid parameters have been combined with triglycerides and glucose into one index termed the TyG-UA index. This index showed a higher AUC than the HOMA-IR and TyG index in identifying MS. As a cross-sectional study, it has the inherent inability to elucidate the causal relationships between variables. Since this was a single-center study, future research in diverse populations is required to confirm these findings. Potential confounding by demographic factors, particularly sex, could not be fully excluded and should be examined in larger studies. In conclusion, the novel TyG-UA index showed promising discriminatory ability for identifying MS and had a numerically higher AUC than HOMA-IR and the TyG index in this study. Larger, multicenter prospective studies are needed to validate its performance and determine whether it provides incremental value over established indices.

Yours sincerely,

Liong Boy Kurniawan1,✉, Uleng Bahrun1, Mansyur Arif1, Agussalim Bukhari2, Andi Makbul Aman3, Haerani Rasyid3

1Department of Clinical Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Hasanuddin,

Makassar, South Sulawesi 90245,

Indonesia;

2Department of Clinical Nutrition, Faculty of Medicine, University of Hasanuddin,

Makassar, South Sulawesi 90245,

Indonesia;

3Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Hasanuddin,

Makassar, South Sulawesi 90245,

Indonesia.

✉Corresponding author: Liong Boy Kurniawan. E-mail: liongboykurniawan@yahoo.com, ORCID: 0000-0002-2633-0441.

Footnotes

CLC number: R589, Ducument code: B

The authors reported no conflict of interests.

References

  • 1.Martemucci G, Fracchiolla G, Muraglia M, et al Metabolic syndrome: A narrative review from the oxidative stress to the management of related diseases. Antioxidants (Basel) 2023;12(12):2091. doi: 10.3390/antiox12122091. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Fahed G, Aoun L, Bou Zerdan M, et al Metabolic syndrome: Updates on pathophysiology and management in 2021. Int J Mol Sci. 2022;23(2):786. doi: 10.3390/ijms23020786. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Foster C, Smith L, Alemzadeh R Excess serum uric acid is associated with metabolic syndrome in obese adolescent patients. J Diabetes Metab Disord. 2020;19(1):535–543. doi: 10.1007/s40200-020-00507-2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Bowden RG, Richardson KA, Richardson LT Uric acid and metabolic syndrome: Findings from national health and nutrition examination survey. Front Med (Lausanne) 2022;9:1039230. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2022.1039230. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Lin C, Tsai PA, Wang C, et al The association between uric acid and metabolic syndrome in a middle-aged and elderly Taiwanese population: A community-based cross-sectional study. Healthcare (Basel) 2024;12(1):113. doi: 10.3390/healthcare12010113. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Billiet L, Doaty S, Katz JD, et al Review of hyperuricemia as new marker for metabolic syndrome. ISRN Rheumatol. 2014;2014(1):852954. doi: 10.1155/2014/852954. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Aktas G, Khalid A, Kurtkulagi O, et al Poorly controlled hypertension is associated with elevated serum uric acid to HDL-cholesterol ratio: A cross-sectional cohort study. Postgrad Med. 2022;134(3):297–302. doi: 10.1080/00325481.2022.2039007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Kurniawan LB, Mulyamin W, Santoso A, et al Serum uric acid levels predict high hs-CRP levels in non-diabetic adult. Pol Ann Med. 2023;30(2):96–101. doi: 10.29089/paom/161969. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Kosekli MA, Kurtkulagii O, Kahveci G, et al The association between serum uric acid to high density lipoprotein-cholesterol ratio and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: The abund study. Rev Assoc Med Bras (1992) 2021;67(4):549–554. doi: 10.1590/1806-9282.20201005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Kurtkulagi O, Aktas G, Taslamacioglu Duman T, et al Correlation between serum triglyceride to HDL cholesterol ratio and blood pressure in patients with primary hypertension. Precis Med Sci. 2022;11(3):100–105. doi: 10.1002/prm2.12080. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Barrera Echegoyen FX, Szeto A, Mendez AJ, et al The nature and characteristics of hypertriglyceridemia in a large cohort with type 2 diabetes. J Diabetes Complications. 2023;37(2):108387. doi: 10.1016/j.jdiacomp.2022.108387. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Adams-Huet B, Zubirán R, Remaley AT, et al The triglyceride-glucose index is superior to homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance in predicting metabolic syndrome in an adult population in the United States. J Clin Lipidol. 2024;18(4):e518–e524. doi: 10.1016/j.jacl.2024.04.130. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Wan H, Cao H, Ning P Superiority of the triglyceride glucose index over the homeostasis model in predicting metabolic syndrome based on NHANES data analysis. Sci Rep. 2024;14(1):15499. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-66692-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Maloberti A, Tognola C, Garofani I, et al Uric acid and metabolic syndrome: Importance of hyperuricemia cut-off. Int J Cardiol. 2024;417:132527. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2024.132527. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Copur S, Demiray A, Kanbay M Uric acid in metabolic syndrome: Does uric acid have a definitive role? Eur J Intern Med. 2022;103:4–12. doi: 10.1016/j.ejim.2022.04.022. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Soltani Z, Rasheed K, Kapusta DR, et al Potential role of uric acid in metabolic syndrome, hypertension, kidney injury, and cardiovascular diseases: Is it time for reappraisal? Curr Hypertens Rep. 2013;15(3):175–181. doi: 10.1007/s11906-013-0344-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Tsushima Y, Nishizawa H, Tochino Y, et al Uric acid secretion from adipose tissue and its increase in obesity. J Biol Chem. 2013;288(38):27138–27149. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M113.485094. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Johnson RJ, Nakagawa T, Sanchez-Lozada LG, et al Sugar, uric acid, and the etiology of diabetes and obesity. Diabetes. 2013;62(10):3307–3315. doi: 10.2337/db12-1814. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Wardhana W, Rudijanto A Effect of uric acid on blood glucose levels. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30333276/ Acta Med Indones. 2018;50(3):253–256. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Borghi C, Agnoletti D, Cicero AFG, et al Uric acid and hypertension: A review of evidence and future perspectives for the management of cardiovascular risk. Hypertension. 2022;79(9):1927–1936. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.122.17956. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Choi YJ, Shin HS, Choi HS, et al Uric acid induces fat accumulation via generation of endoplasmic reticulum stress and SREBP-1c activation in hepatocytes. Lab Invest. 2014;94(10):1114–1125. doi: 10.1038/labinvest.2014.98. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Biomedical Research are provided here courtesy of Nanjing Medical University Press

RESOURCES