RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Metformin: We need to either put it in our drinking water or rethink how we study it
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2021.09.15.21263634
DO 10.1101/2021.09.15.21263634
A1 Mike Powell
A1 Callahan Clark
A1 Anton Alyakin
A1 Joshua T Vogelstein
A1 Brian Hart
YR 2021
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/09/21/2021.09.15.21263634.abstract
AB Objectives To expose the potential impact of residual confounding in common observational study designs investigating metformin using a type 2 diabetes cohort; to propose a more robust study design for future observational studies of metformin.Design Retrospective cohort studies using a prevalent user design conducted in two distinct cohorts: individuals with type 2 diabetes and individuals with prediabetes.Setting Insurance claims database for Medicare Advantage beneficiaries in the United States, 2018-2019. An identical analysis of commercial insurance beneficiaries appears in the supplement.Participants 404,765 individuals with type 2 diabetes, 81,791 individuals with prediabetes.Main outcome measures Total inpatient admission days in 2019, total medical spend (excluding prescription drugs) in 2019. Each of these measures is treated as a binary outcome: greater than zero inpatient days and top 10% medical spend.Results We implement a common observational study design and observe a strong metformin effect estimate associated with reduced inpatient admissions and reduced medical expenditures; we also implement a more robust study design that suggests any estimated effect is attributable to residual confounding related to individuals’ overall health.Conclusions Common observational study designs examining metformin in a type 2 diabetes population are likely impacted by significant residual confounding. By additionally considering numerous negative control outcomes and a complementary prediabetes cohort, the study design proposed here demonstrates efficacy at exposing residual confounding related to overall health, nullifying the claim derived from a standard study design.Trial registration Preregistration available at https://osf.io/qf49p.Competing Interest StatementAll authors have completed the Unified Competing Interest form (available on request from the corresponding author) and declare: Mike Powell serves in the United States Army and did not receive any support specifically tied to this work; Drs. Clark and Hart are full-time employees of OptumLabs, the research arm of UnitedHealth Group, and own stock in the company. They participated in this research as part of their paid employment activities. Anton Alyakin received support from the D3M program of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) unrelated to this manuscript. Joshua Vogelstein received support from Microsoft Research and Fast Grants (part of the Emergent Ventures Program at The Mercatus Center at George Mason University) unrelated to this manuscript. The authors report no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work.Funding StatementMike Powell serves in the United States Army and did not receive any support specifically tied to this work; Drs. Clark and Hart are full-time employees of OptumLabs, the research arm of UnitedHealth Group, and own stock in the company. They participated in this research as part of their paid employment activities. Anton Alyakin received support from the D3M program of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) unrelated to this manuscript. Joshua Vogelstein received support from Microsoft Research and Fast Grants (part of the Emergent Ventures Program at The Mercatus Center at George Mason University) unrelated to this manuscript.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The UnitedHealth Group Office of Human Research Affairs approved this project and provided the following determination (OHRA Certificate of Action #: 2021-0039) based on the secondary use of de-identified claims data: "The research was determined to qualify as negligible risk and is permissible under exempt category 4 (ii). The research was determined to be exempt as the activities did not identify subjects directly or through identifiers via the claims data in a research database, subjects were not contacted, and investigators will not re-identify subjects."All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesThe data are proprietary and are not available for public use, but under certain circumstances, the data may be made available to approved auditors under a data use agreement to confirm the findings of the current study.