Table 3.

Odds ratio of having a PDC of at least 0.80 in patients with type 2 diabetes in primary care practices in Germany

Variable	Model without interaction variable		Model with interaction variable
	Odds ratio (95% CI)	P-value	Odds ratio (95% CI)	P-value
Exenatide once weekly vs liraglutide once daily	1.78 (1.62–1.96)	<0.0001	1.45 (1.18–1.77)	0.0003
Age, years
51–60 vs ≤50	1.10 (1.03–1.18)	0.0081	1.07 (0.99–1.16)	0.0738
61–70 vs ≤50	1.11 (1.03–1.19)	0.0058	1.04 (0.96–1.13)	0.3163
>70 vs ≤50	0.94 (0.87–1.02)	0.1360	0.89 (0.82–0.98)	0.0134
Exenatide/liraglutide × age 51–60 yearsa	–	–	1.13 (0.94–1.36)	0.1866
Exenatide/liraglutide × age 61–70 yearsa	–	–	1.37 (1.14–1.64)	0.0008
Exenatide/liraglutide × age >70 yearsa	–	–	1.30 (1.07–1.59)	0.0099
Metformin + sulfonylurea vs metformin	1.30 (1.20–1.42)	<0.0001	1.30 (1.20–1.42)	<0.0001
Metformin + DPP-4i vs metformin	1.16 (1.05–1.28)	0.0042	1.16 (1.05–1.28)	0.0041
Metformin + insulin vs metformin	1.48 (1.38–1.58)	<0.0001	1.48 (1.39–1.58)	<0.0001
Insulin vs metformin	0.85 (0.76–0.95)	0.0060	0.85 (0.76–0.96)	0.0066
DPP-4i vs metformin	0.76 (0.65–0.89)	0.0005	0.76 (0.65–0.89)	0.0005
GLP-1RA monotherapy vs metformin	0.34 (0.30–0.38)	<0.0001	0.34 (0.30–0.38)	<0.0001
Other combinations vs metformin	0.93 (0.84–1.04)	0.1881	0.93 (0.83–1.03)	0.1732
Model fitness:
Pseudo-R2	0.041	–	0.041	–
AIC	36,278	–	36,271	–
BIC	36,396	–	36,413	–

Note:

^aReference group: exenatide/liraglutide × age ≤50 years.

Abbreviations: AIC, Akaike information criterion; BIC, Bayesian information criterion; CI, confidence interval; DPP-4i, dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor; GLP-1RA, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist; PDC, proportion of days covered.