Skip to main content
. 2020 Apr 23;43(7):1462–1470. doi: 10.2337/dc19-2391

Table 2.

Rates and aHRs (95% CIs) for lactic acidosis hospitalizations among patients with reduced GFR who used metformin vs. sulfonylureas in weighted cohort

Metformin Sulfonylureas
Number at risk matched weighted 24,542 24,662
 Primary outcome: lactic acidosis hospitalization 193 180
  Person-years 46,197 48,748
  Unadjusted rate/1,000 person-years (95% CI) 4.18 (3.63, 4.81) 3.69 (3.19, 4.27)
  aHRb (95% CI) 1.21 (0.99, 1.48) Reference
 Laboratory-confirmed lactic acid hospitalization 84 75
  Person-years 46,283 48,860
  Unadjusted rate/1,000 person-years (95% CI) 1.81 (1.46, 2.24) 1.54 (1.23, 1.93)
  aHRb (95% CI) 1.25 (0.92, 1.70) Reference
 Primary discharge diagnosis of lactic acidosis hospitalization 122 121
  Person-years 46,250 48,785
  Unadjusted rate/1,000 person-years (95% CI) 2.63 (2.20, 3.14) 2.49 (2.08, 2.97)
  aHRb (95% CI) 1.11 (0.87, 1.44) Reference
Sensitivity analysis: requiring lactate ≥5 mmol/L
 Number at risk matched weighted 24,542 24,662
  Composite lactic acidosis hospitalizations 146 140
  Person-years 46,238 48,769
  Unadjusted rate/1,000 person-years (95% CI) 3.16 (2.69, 3.72) 2.89 (2.45, 3.41)
  aHRb (95% CI) 1.15 (0.91, 1.46) Reference
Sensitivity analysis: population with second reduced eGFR
 Number at risk matched weighted 3,851 3,872
  Composite lactic acidosis hospitalizations 22 27
  Person-years 7,160 8,487
  Unadjusted rate/1,000 person-years (95% CI) 3.07 (2.02, 4.64) 3.17 (2.18, 4.60)
  aHRb (95% CI) 1.09 (0.64, 1.84) Reference
Sensitivity analysis: excluding Medicare Advantage
 Number at risk matched weighteda 20,787 20,893
  Composite lactic acidosis hospitalizations 163 154
  Person-years 37,216 39,507
  Unadjusted rate/1,000 person-years (95% CI) 3.89 (3.33, 4.56) 4.37 (3.75, 5.10)
  aHR (95% CI)b 1.18 (0.94, 1.47) Reference
a

Primary analysis considers patients persistent on regimen until they do not have oral antidiabetic medications for 90 days.

b

Cox proportional hazards model for time to event. Adjusted for mean-centered metformin dose, demographics, clinical information derived from the electronic health record, comorbidities, use of medications, and health care utilization (see Supplementary Table 1). All continuous variables were modeled as restricted cubic splines.