MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4318619576 · doi:10.9778/cmajo.20210207

Comparative effectiveness of metformin versus sulfonylureas on kidney function decline or death among patients with reduced kidney function: a retrospective cohort study

2023· article· en· W4318619576 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Adriana M. Hung, Amber J. Hackstadt, Marie R. Griffin, Carlos G. Grijalva, Robert A. Greevy, Christianne L. Roumie

Bibliographic record

VenueCMAJ Open · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteSanofiClinical Science Research and DevelopmentAgency for Healthcare Research and QualityNational Institutes of HealthPfizerCenters for Disease Control and PreventionU.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
KeywordsMedicineHazard ratioRenal functionRetrospective cohort studyMetforminKidney diseaseInternal medicineCohortProportional hazards modelType 2 diabetesCohort studyVeterans AffairsDiabetes mellitusConfidence intervalEndocrinologyInsulin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Diabetes often causes kidney disease. In this study, we sought to evaluate if metformin use was associated with death or kidney events in patients with diabetes and concurrent reduced kidney function. Methods: We used data from the Veterans Health Administration, Medicare and National Death Index databases to assemble a national retrospective cohort of veterans who were using metformin or sulfonylureas from 2001 through 2016 and who began follow-up at an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of less than 60 mL/min/1.73 m2. The primary composite outcome was a kidney event (i.e., 40% decline in eGFR or end-stage renal disease) or death. The secondary outcome was a kidney event (eGFR decline or end-stage renal disease). We weighted the cohort using propensity scores and used Cox proportional models to estimate the cause-specific hazard of outcomes and of treatment nonpersistence as a competing risk. We stratified follow-up into 2 periods, namely the first 360 days from the start of follow-up, and 361 days and beyond. Results: In the first 360 days, the propensity score–weighted cohort included 24 883 patients who used metformin and 24 998 who used sulfonylureas. There were 33.5 (95% confidence interval [CI] 30.9–36.3) and 43.0 (95% CI 40.1–46.0) deaths or kidney events per 1000 person-years for patients who used metformin or sulfonylureas, respectively (hazard ratio [HR] 0.78, 95% CI 0.71–0.85). For the secondary outcome of kidney events, the HR was 0.94 (95% CI 0.67–1.33). In the second period from 361 days onward, the primary outcome event rate was 26.5 (95% CI 24.7–28.5) per 1000 person-years for those who used metformin, compared with 36.3 (95% CI 34.2–38.6) per 1000 person-years for those who used sulfonylureas (HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.67–0.79). Results were consistent for kidney events alone (HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.59–0.91). Interpretation: Metformin use for 361 days or longer after reaching an eGFR of less than 60 mL/min/1.73 m2 was associated with decreased likelihood of kidney events or death in patients with diabetes, compared with use of sulfonylureas. Metformin provided end-organ protection, in addition to glucose control.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.281 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCMAJ OpenSame topicDiabetes Treatment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207