Safety of Metformin in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is commonly associated with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Metformin is a valuable treatment for T2DM, and may offer additional benefits in COPD. However, due to its rare association with lactic acidosis, its safety in COPD is uncertain. We retrospectively identified patients with T2DM who had been admitted to hospital for COPD exacerbations. We compared those who were taking metformin with those who were not, with respect to their lactate concentration (primary endpoint) and survival (secondary endpoint). The study cohort (n = 130) had a mean (±standard deviation) age of 73.0 ± 9.8 years and 47 (36%) were female. Arterial blood gases were recorded in 120 cases: 88 (73%) were hypoxemic, 45 (38%) were in respiratory failure and 33 (28%) had respiratory acidosis. The 51 patients (39%) in the metformin group had a median (interquartile range) lactate concentration of 1.45 mmol/L (1.10-2.05) versus 1.10 mmol/L (0.80-1.50) in the non-metformin group (p = 0.012). Median survival was 5.2 years (95% CI 4.5-5.8) versus 1.9 years (1.1-2.6), respectively (hazard ratio 0.57; 95% CI 0.35-0.94). This remained significant in a multivariate model adjusted for measurable confounders. In conclusion, among patients with COPD at high risk for lactate accumulation, metformin therapy was associated with a minor elevation of lactate concentration of doubtful clinical significance. Metformin was associated with a survival benefit, but this must be interpreted cautiously due to possible effects from unmeasured confounders. Viewed collectively, the results suggest that COPD should not present a barrier to the investigational or clinical use of metformin.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".