Variation in First-line Type 2 Diabetes Treatment due to eGFR and Provider Preferences: A Novel Statistical Analysis

Christina X Ji,Saul Blecker,Michael Oberst,Ming-Chieh Shih,Leora I Horwitz,David Sontag

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.09.19.24313155

2025-01-12

Abstract:Introduction: The decision between metformin and a DPP-4 inhibitor or sulfonylurea for first-line type 2 diabetes treatment relies on many factors, including estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), history of heart failure, age, sex, and even provider preferences. This study evaluates variation in this treatment decision across two factors: eGFR and provider preferences. Research Design and Methods: Using health insurance claims data, we defined a cohort based on observation prior to first-line treatment, availability of eGFR results, and no type 1 or gestational diabetes (n=10,643). We performed a chi-squared test to verify the association between eGFR and treatment. The cohort was then restricted to providers with at least 10 patients (n=2,271 patients). We conducted a novel statistical analysis to assess variation across providers. We fitted two models to predict treatment--one using only patient characteristics (age, eGFR, sex, history of heart failure, and treatment date) and another using both patient characteristics and provider-specific random effects. With these models, we performed a generalized likelihood ratio test (GLRT) to assess whether including provider-specific random effects improved fit. Results: The chi-squared test confirmed significant association between treatment and eGFR (p < 0.0001). The GLRT in our novel statistical analysis found significant variation existed across providers even after accounting for patient characteristics (p < 0.0001). Visualizations of the observed treatment decisions and treatment policy models show that most of this variation across providers occurred at low eGFR levels, where the level of kidney damage at which metformin should be contraindicated is unclear. Conclusions: While some variation in first-line type 2 diabetes treatment was associated with eGFR, some variation may be due to provider preferences that cannot be explained by treatment guidelines. Further studies can elucidate whether such variation across providers is appropriate. Our approach can be applied to other treatment decisions to improve diabetes management.