Use of cystatin C to inform metformin eligibility among adult veterans with diabetes.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Aims
Recommendations for metformin use are dependent on eGFR category: eGFR >45 ml/min/1.73 m2 - "first-line agent"; eGFR 30-44 - "use with caution"; eGFR<30 - "do not use". Misclassification of metformin eligibility by creatinine-based MDRD GFR estimates (eGFRcr) may contribute to its misuse. We investigated the impact of cystatin c estimates of GFR (eGFRcys) on metformin eligibility.Methods
In a consecutive cohort of 550 Veterans with diabetes, metformin use and eligibility were assessed by eGFR category, using eGFRcr and eGFRcys. Discrepancy in eligibility was defined as cases where eGFRcr and eGFRcys categories (<30, 30-44, 45-60, and >60 ml/min/1.73 m2) differed with an absolute difference in eGFR of >5 ml/min/1.73 m2. We modeled predictors of metformin use and eGFR category discrepancy with multivariable relative risk regression and multinomial logistic regression.Results
Subjects were 95% male, median age 68, and racially diverse (45% White, 22% Black, 11% Asian, 22% unknown). Metformin use decreased with severity of eGFRcr category, from 63% in eGFRcr >60 to 3% in eGFRcr <30. eGFRcys reclassified 20% of Veterans into different eGFR categories. Factors associated with a more severe eGFRcys category compared to eGFRcr were older age (aOR = 2.21 per decade, 1.44-1.82), higher BMI (aOR = 1.04 per kg/m2, 1.01-1.08) and albuminuria >30 mg/g (aOR = 1.81, 1.20-2.73).Conclusions
Metformin use is low among Veterans with CKD. eGFRcys may serve as a confirmatory estimate of kidney function to allow safe use of metformin among patients with CKD, particularly among older individuals and those with albuminuria.
SUBMITTER: Tuot DS
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5464411 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundRecent studies suggest that metformin use may be associated with improved infectious disease-related outcomes, whereas other papers suggest potentially worse outcomes in serious bacterial infections. Our purpose was to examine the association of prior outpatient prescription of metformin on 30- and 90-day mortality for older veterans with pre-existing diabetes hospitalized with pneumonia.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study using national Department of Veterans Affairs data of patients ≥65 years with a prior history of diabetes who were hospitalized with pneumonia over a 10-year period (fiscal years 2002-2012.) For our primary analysis, we created a propensity score and matched metformin users to nonusers 1:1.ResultsWe identified 34 759 patients who met the inclusion criteria, 20.3% of whom were prescribed metformin. Unadjusted 30-day mortality was 9.6% for those who received metformin versus 13.9% in nonusers (P < .003), and 90-day mortality was 15.8% for those who received metformin versus 23.0% for nonusers (P < .0001). For the propensity score model, we matched 6899 metformin users to 6899 nonusers. After propensity matching, both 30-day (relative risk [RR]: .86; 95% confidence interval [CI]: .78-.95) and 90-day (RR: .85; 95% CI: .79-.92) mortality was significantly lower for metformin users.ConclusionsPrior receipt of metformin was associated with significantly lower mortality after adjusting for potential confounders. Additional research is needed to examine the safety and potential benefits of metformin use in patients with respiratory infections.
| S-EPMC10319762 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the association between metformin treatment and the risk of neurodegenerative disease (ND) among elderly adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).Design/setting/participantsThis retrospective longitudinal cohort study examined the effects of the length of metformin exposure on ND among elderly US veterans with T2DM and insulin treatment using the Veterans Affairs electronic medical record database.Primary and secondary outcome measuresThe primary clinical outcome was defined as diagnosis of ND including dementia, Alzheimer's disease (AD), Parkinson's disease (PD), Huntington's disease (HD) and mild cognitive impairment during the follow-up period. The secondary clinical outcomes were separately measured by AD, PD, HD, dementia and mild cognitive impairment.ResultAdjusted by propensity score weight, a total of 5528 patients (mean age, 63.2±10.9 years; male, 98%; white, 60%) with a median follow-up of 5.2 years were selected. Those with ND or other mental disorders at baseline or who were on insulin for less than two-thirds of the study period were excluded. The incidence rate of ND was 11.48 per 1000 person-years among patients with metformin treatment, compared with 25.45 per 1000 person-years for those without metformin. Compared with no metformin use, 2-4 years and >4 years of metformin exposure were significantly associated with lower risk of ND (adjusted HR (aHR)=0.62, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.85; aHR=0.19, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.31, respectively), while metformin exposure in the first 2 years showed no significant influence.ConclusionWe conclude that long-term metformin therapy (>2 years) was associated with lower incidence of ND among elderly veterans with T2DM. We need to conduct a study with more representative population and more robust method for causal inferences. Further investigation into the mechanism involved is needed along with randomised trials to confirm a potential neuroprotective effect of metformin.
| S-EPMC6677947 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo determine whether metformin is associated with a lower incidence of dementia than sulfonylureas.MethodsThis was a retrospective cohort study of US veterans ≥65 years of age with type 2 diabetes who were new users of metformin or a sulfonylurea and had no dementia. Follow-up began after 2 years of therapy. To account for confounding by indication, we developed a propensity score (PS) and used inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) methods. Cox proportional hazards models estimated the hazard ratio (HR) of incident dementia.ResultsWe identified 17,200 new users of metformin and 11,440 new users of sulfonylureas. Mean age was 73.5 years and mean HbA1c was 6.8%. Over an average follow-up of 5 years, 4,906 cases of dementia were diagnosed. Due to effect modification by age, all analyses were conducted using a piecewise model for age. Crude hazard ratio [HR] for any dementia in metformin vs sulfonylurea users was 0.67 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.61-0.73) and 0.78 (95% CI 0.72-0.83) for those <75 years of age and ≥75 years of age, respectively. After PS IPTW adjustment, results remained significant in veterans <75 years of age (HR 0.89; 95% CI 0.79-0.99), but not for those ≥75 years of age (HR 0.96; 95% CI 0.87-1.05). A lower risk of dementia was also seen in the subset of younger veterans who had HbA1C values ≥7% (HR 0.76; 95% CI 0.63-0.91), had good renal function (HR 0.86; 95% CI 0.76-0.97), and were white (HR 0.87; 95% CI 0.77-0.99).ConclusionsAfter accounting for confounding by indication, metformin was associated with a lower risk of subsequent dementia than sulfonylurea use in veterans <75 years of age. Further work is needed to identify which patients may benefit from metformin for the prevention of dementia.
| S-EPMC5664297 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundChronic inflammation is important in the development of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and certain oral antidiabetic medications have anti-inflammatory properties. The purpose of this study was to determine if use of thiazolidinediones or metformin was associated with a reduced risk of requiring medical or surgical treatment for BPH compared to sulfonylureas among diabetic men.MethodsWe constructed a retrospective cohort of 192,457 male veterans newly prescribed either rosiglitazone, pioglitazone, metformin, or a sulfonylurea. We used Cox proportional hazard regression to assess the association between thiazolidinedione or metformin use and the risk of requiring medical or surgical treatment for BPH compared to sulfonylurea use. New BPH treatment was defined by either a new prescription for a α-1 blocker or 5α-reductase inhibitors or a surgical procedure indicated for severe BPH.ResultsIn 259,995 person-years of follow up we identified 14,690 new treatments for BPH. After adjusting for covariates including age, HbA1c, and body mass index, we found no association between rosiglitazone (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.02, 95% CI 0.86, 1.20), pioglitazone (aHR 0.79, 95% CI 0.45, 1.38), or metformin use (aHR 0.99, 95% CI 0.94, 1.03) and risk of new medical or surgical treatment for BPH compared to sulfonylureas. Analyses ignoring prescriptions for non-selective α-1 blockers (terazosin, doxazosin, prazosin) from our BPH case definition (n = 11,079), yielded similar results.ConclusionsIn this large cohort, we observed no association between the use of thiazolidinediones or metformin and new medical or surgical treatment for BPH compared to sulfonylureas.
| S-EPMC4364420 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMetformin has been associated with improved colorectal cancer survival, but investigations are limited by small numbers of patients and confounding by diabetic severity. We examined the association between metformin use and overall survival (OS) in patients with diabetes and colorectal cancer in a large population of U.S. veterans, while adjusting for measures of diabetic severity.MethodsPatients diagnosed with colorectal cancer from January 2001 to December 2008 were identified from the Veterans Affairs Central Cancer Registry. Multivariable models were used to examine the adjusted association of OS with diabetes and use of antidiabetic medications.ResultsThere were 21,352 patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer identified (n = 16,355 nondiabetic patients, n = 2,038 diabetic patients on metformin, n = 2,136 diabetic patients on medications other than metformin, n = 823 diabetic patients not on antidiabetic medication). Diabetic patients had a significantly worse OS than nondiabetic patients, but metformin users had only a 10% increase in death (HRadj 1.10; 95% CI, 1.03-1.17, P = 0.004), as compared with 22% for users of other antidiabetic medications (HRadj 1.22; 95% CI, 1.15-1.29, P < 0.0001). Among colorectal cancer patients with diabetes, metformin users had a 13% improved OS versus patients taking other antidiabetic medications (HRadj 0.87; 95% CI, 0.79-0.95, P = 0.003), while diabetic patients not on any antidiabetic medications did not differ with respect to OS (HRadj 1.02; 95% CI, 0.90-1.15, P = 0.76).ConclusionsAmong diabetics with colorectal cancer, metformin use is associated with improved survival, despite adjustments for diabetes severity and other risk factors.ImpactThese data lend further support to the conduct of randomized studies of possible anticancer effects of metformin among patients with colorectal cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 25(10); 1418-25. ©2016 AACR.
| S-EPMC5050110 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe effect of metformin use on survival among patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is controversial. Furthermore, there are no data on African American patients. To address these, we analyzed data from the United States Veterans Health Administration (VHA).MethodsA population-based retrospective cohort study evaluating overall survival among 3,811 patients with PDAC with preexisting diabetes mellitus, diagnosed with PDAC within the VHA between 1998 and 2013. We calculated HRs and 95% confidence intervals (CI) using multivariable adjusted time-varying Cox proportional hazards regression to control for immortal time bias and confounders.ResultsMetformin use was not associated with overall survival in the complete analyses (HR = 1.05; 95% CI, 0.92-1.14; P = 0.28). However, among patients who were metformin naïve at the time of PDAC diagnosis (N = 1,158), metformin use was associated with improved overall survival in non-Hispanic white patients (HR = 0.78; 95% CI, 0.61-0.99; P = 0.04), but not African American patients (HR = 1.20; 95% CI, 0.75-1.93; P = 0.45). The survival benefit among non-Hispanic whites was limited to patients with metastatic disease (HR = 0.67; 95% CI, 0.44-1.01; P = 0.06). Among African American patients with metastatic disease, HR was 1.30 (95% CI, 0.77-2.53; P = 0.28). There was a suggestion of heterogeneity by race in patients with metastatic disease (P heterogeneity = 0.05).ConclusionsWe observed no associations between metformin use and survival in patients with PDAC, but there appears to be a survival benefit among non-Hispanic white patients who were metformin naïve at the time of PDAC diagnosis.ImpactIf confirmed in other studies, our findings suggest that metformin as an adjunctive treatment for PDAC may not improve survival among African American patients.
| S-EPMC9448292 | biostudies-literature
Project description:People with elevated, non-diabetic, levels of blood glucose are at risk of progressing to clinical type 2 diabetes and are commonly termed 'prediabetic'. The term prediabetes usually refers to high-normal fasting plasma glucose (impaired fasting glucose) and/or plasma glucose 2 h following a 75 g oral glucose tolerance test (impaired glucose tolerance). Current US guidelines consider high-normal HbA1c to also represent a prediabetic state. Individuals with prediabetic levels of dysglycaemia are already at elevated risk of damage to the microvasculature and macrovasculature, resembling the long-term complications of diabetes. Halting or reversing the progressive decline in insulin sensitivity and ?-cell function holds the key to achieving prevention of type 2 diabetes in at-risk subjects. Lifestyle interventions aimed at inducing weight loss, pharmacologic treatments (metformin, thiazolidinediones, acarbose, basal insulin and drugs for weight loss) and bariatric surgery have all been shown to reduce the risk of progression to type 2 diabetes in prediabetic subjects. However, lifestyle interventions are difficult for patients to maintain and the weight loss achieved tends to be regained over time. Metformin enhances the action of insulin in liver and skeletal muscle, and its efficacy for delaying or preventing the onset of diabetes has been proven in large, well-designed, randomised trials, such as the Diabetes Prevention Program and other studies. Decades of clinical use have demonstrated that metformin is generally well-tolerated and safe. We have reviewed in detail the evidence base supporting the therapeutic use of metformin for diabetes prevention.
| S-EPMC4498279 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Metformin is a commonly used oral antidiabetic agent that has been associated with decreased cancer risk. However, data regarding the association between metformin use and the risk of meningioma are unavailable.We conducted a matched case-control analysis using data from the U.K.-based Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) to analyse diabetes status, duration of diabetes, glycemic control, and use of metformin, sulfonylureas, and insulin in relation to the risk of meningioma. We conducted conditional logistic regression analyses to determine relative risks, estimated as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and adjusted for body mass index, smoking, history of arterial hypertension, myocardial infarction, and use of estrogens (among women).We identified 2,027 meningioma cases and 20,269 controls. For diabetes there was the suggestion of an inverse association with meningioma (OR = 0.89; 95%CI = 0.74-1.07), which was driven by an inverse relation among women (OR = 0.78; 95%CI = 0.62-0.98), in whom we also noted a suggestive inverse association with duration of diabetes (p-value for trend = 0.071). For metformin there was a suggestive positive relation, particularly after matching on duration of diabetes and HbA1c level (OR = 1.64; 95%CI = 0.89-3.04). Sulfonylureas showed no clear association (OR = 0.91; 95%CI = 0.46-1.80). For insulin there was the suggestion of an inverse relation, in particular when comparing a high vs. low number of prescriptions (OR = 0.58; 95%CI = 0.18-1.83).Further studies are needed to solidify a possible inverse association between diabetes and meningioma risk and to clarify the role of antidiabetics in this context.
| S-EPMC5510861 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ContextPrediabetes is prevalent and significantly increases lifetime risk of progression to type 2 diabetes. This review summarizes the evidence surrounding metformin use for type 2 diabetes prevention.Evidence acquisitionArticles published between 1998 and 2017 examining metformin use for the primary indication of diabetes prevention available on MEDLINE.Evidence synthesisForty articles met inclusion criteria and were summarized into four general categories: (1) RCTs of metformin use for diabetes prevention (n=7 and n=2 follow-up analyses); (2) observational analyses examining metformin use in heterogeneous subgroups of patients with prediabetes (n=9 from the Diabetes Prevention Program, n=1 from the biguanides and the prevention of the risk of obesity [BIGPRO] trial); (3) observational analyses examining cost effectiveness of metformin use for diabetes prevention (n=11 from the Diabetes Prevention Program, n=1 from the Indian Diabetes Prevention Program); and (4) real-world assessments of metformin eligibility or use for diabetes prevention (n=9). Metformin was associated with reduced relative risk of incident diabetes, with the strongest evidence for use in those at highest risk (i.e., aged <60 years, BMI ≥35, and women with histories of gestational diabetes). Metformin was also deemed cost effective in 11 economic analyses. Recent studies highlighted low rates of metformin use for diabetes prevention in real-world settings.ConclusionsTwo decades of evidence support metformin use for diabetes prevention among higher-risk patients. However, metformin is not widely used in real-world practice, and enhancing the translation of this evidence to real-world practice has important implications for patients, providers, and payers.
| S-EPMC6613947 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundObservational studies have associated metformin use with lower colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence but few studies have examined metformin's influence on CRC survival. We examined the relationships among metformin use, diabetes, and survival in postmenopausal women with CRC in the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) clinical trials and observational study.Methods2066 postmenopausal women with CRC were followed for a median of 4.1 years, with 589 deaths after CRC diagnosis from all causes and 414 deaths directly attributed to CRC. CRC-specific survival was compared among women with diabetes with metformin use (n=84); women with diabetes with no metformin use (n=128); and women without diabetes (n=1854). Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate associations among metformin use, diabetes and survival after CRC. Strategies to adjust for potential confounders included: multivariate adjustment with known predictors of colorectal cancer survival and construction of a propensity score for the likelihood of receiving metformin, with model stratification by propensity score quintile.ResultsAfter adjusting for age and stage, CRC specific survival in women with diabetes with metformin use was not significantly different compared to that in women with diabetes with no metformin use (HR 0.75; 95% CI 0.40-1.38, p=0.67) and to women without diabetes (HR 1.00; 95% CI 0.61-1.66, p=0.99). Following propensity score adjustment, the HR for CRC-specific survival in women with diabetes with metformin use compared to non-users was 0.78 (95% CI 0.38-1.55, p=0.47) and for overall survival was 0.86 (95% CI 0.49-1.52; p=0.60).ConclusionsIn postmenopausal women with CRC and DM, no statistically significant difference was seen in CRC specific survival in those who used metformin compared to non-users. Analyses in larger populations of colorectal cancer patients are warranted.
| S-EPMC3769471 | biostudies-literature