Safety and Efficacy of Metformin for Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension. A U.S-Based Real-World Data Retrospective Multicenter Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Idiopathic intracranial hypertension (IIH) remains a challenging condition to manage, with limited therapeutic options. This study investigated the potential of metformin as a novel treatment for IIH, exploring its effects on disease outcomes and safety profile. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the TriNetX database, analyzing data from 2009 to August 2024. Patients diagnosed with IIH were included, with exclusions for other causes of elevated intracranial pressure and pre-existing diabetes. Propensity score matching was employed to balance cohorts according to age, sex, race, ethnicity, Hemoglobin A1C, and baseline body mass index (BMI) at the time of metformin initiation. Outcomes were assessed at various follow-up points up to 24 months. Results: Our study initially comprised 1,268 patients in the metformin group and 49,262 in the control group, with notable disparities in several parameters. Post-matching, both cohorts were refined to 1,267 patients each after matching with metformin group. Metformin-treated patients showed significantly lower risks of papilledema, headache, and refractory IIH status at all follow-up points (p<0.0001). The metformin group also had reduced rates of therapeutic spinal punctures and acetazolamide continuation. BMI reductions were more pronounced in the metformin group, with significant differences observed from 6 months onward (p<0.0001). Notably, metformin's beneficial effects persisted independently of BMI changes. The safety profile of metformin was favorable, with no significant differences in adverse events compared to the control group which did not receive metformin during the study timeframe. Conclusions: Our study provides evidence for metformin's potential as a disease-modifying therapeutic approach in IIH, demonstrating improvements across multiple outcomes. The benefits appear to extend beyond weight loss, suggesting complex mechanisms of action. These findings warrant further investigation through prospective clinical trials to establish metformin's role in IIH management and explore its underlying therapeutic mechanisms.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".