Dataset Information

Omeprazole-Domperidone Fixed Dose Combination vs Omeprazole Monotherapy: A Phase 4, Open-Label, Comparative, Parallel Randomized Controlled Study in Mild to Moderate Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease.

ABSTRACT: AIM:To compare the efficacy and safety of omeprazole-domperidone combination vs omeprazole monotherapy in gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). METHODS:In a comparative, randomized controlled, phase 4 study, outpatients with GERD were randomly allocated to either group 1 (omeprazole 20 mg + domperidone 30 mg) or group 2 (omeprazole 20 mg) in an equal ratio; 2 capsules daily in the morning were administered for 8 weeks. RESULTS:Sixty patients were enrolled. Esophagitis reversal was observed in 92% patients in group 1 vs 65.2% in group 2. Approximately, 83.3% patients in group 1 vs 43.3% patients in group 2 demonstrated full cupping of reflux symptoms at 8 weeks. Combined therapy resulted in significantly longer period of heartburn-free days (23 vs 12 days on omeprazole). There were no safety concerns. CONCLUSIONS:Omeprazole-domperidone combination was more effective than omeprazole alone in providing complete cupping of reflux symptoms and healing of esophagitis in patients with GERD. Both the treatments were well tolerated with few reports of adverse events. TRIAL REGISTRATION:This trial is registered with http://clinicaltrials.gov, number NCT02140073.

SUBMITTER: Marakhouski KY

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5457029 | biostudies-literature | 2017

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Omeprazole-Domperidone Fixed Dose Combination vs Omeprazole Monotherapy: A Phase 4, Open-Label, Comparative, Parallel Randomized Controlled Study in Mild to Moderate Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease.

Marakhouski K Y KY Karaseva G A GA Ulasivich D N DN Marakhouski Y Kh YK

Clinical medicine insights. Gastroenterology 20170531

<h4>Aim</h4>To compare the efficacy and safety of omeprazole-domperidone combination vs omeprazole monotherapy in gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD).<h4>Methods</h4>In a comparative, randomized controlled, phase 4 study, outpatients with GERD were randomly allocated to either group 1 (omeprazole 20 mg + domperidone 30 mg) or group 2 (omeprazole 20 mg) in an equal ratio; 2 capsules daily in the morning were administered for 8 weeks.<h4>Results</h4>Sixty patients were enrolled. Esophagitis rev ...[more]

PMID: 28607547

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background and objectiveOmeprazole is a proton pump inhibitor that is used in acid suppression therapy in infants. Infants cannot swallow the oral tablets or capsules. Since, infants require a non-standard dose of omeprazole, the granules or tablets are often crushed or suspended in water or sodium bicarbonate, which may destroy the enteric coating. In this study we explore the efficacy and pharmacokinetics of rectally administered omeprazole in infants with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) due to esophageal atresia (EA) or congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH) and compare these with orally administered omeprazole.MethodsInfants (6-12 weeks postnatal and bodyweight > 3 kg) with EA or CDH and GERD were randomized to receive a single dose of 1 mg/kg omeprazole rectally or orally. The primary outcome was the percentage of infants for whom omeprazole was effective according to predefined criteria for 24-h intraesophageal pH. Secondary outcomes were the percentages of time that gastric pH was < 3 or < 4, as well as the pharmacokinetic parameters.ResultsSeventeen infants, 4 with EA and 13 with CDH, were included. The proportion of infants for whom omeprazole was effective was 56% (5 of 9 infants) after rectal administration and 50% (4 of 8 infants) after oral administration. The total reflux time in minutes and percentages and the number of reflux episodes of pH < 4 decreased statistically significantly after both rectal and oral omeprazole administration. Rectal and oral administration of omeprazole resulted in similar serum exposure.ConclusionsA single rectal omeprazole dose (1 mg/kg) results in consistent increases in intraesophageal and gastric pH in infants with EA- or CDH-related GERD, similar to an oral dose. Considering the challenges with existing oral formulations, rectal omeprazole presents as an innovative, promising alternative for infants with pathological GERD.Clinical trial registerClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00226044.

Project description:Background:A recent study shows that dual antiplatelet therapy with clopidogrel plus aspirin is superior to aspirin monotherapy for minor stroke, which is defined as a National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS)score of ?3. However, acute mild-moderate ischaemic stroke (4?NIHSS?10) still needs aggressive antiplatelet intervention to prevent deterioration and recurrence of stroke. The efficacy and safety of dual antiplatelet therapy versus aspirin monotherapy in the population are not clear. A multicentre clinical trial is designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of clopidogrel plus aspirin therapy versus aspirin monotherapy within 48?hours of symptom onset of mild-moderate ischaemic stroke. Methods/Design:The study is a randomised, open-label, multicentre, prospective trial with a target enrolment of 2700 patients from 60 centres in Northeast China. A treatment allocation identification number to each enrolled patient will be provided by a random number generator. The follow-up time for the clopidogrel plus aspirin and aspirin monotherapy groups is 90 days. The primary efficacy endpoint is a stroke progression event, which is defined as ?4?point increase in the NIHSS score in 48?hours. The second efficacy endpoints include new ischaemic stroke within 90 days, change in the NIHSS score within 14?days, modified Rankin Scale score on day 90 and other vascular or death events within 90 days. The safety endpoints include mucocutaneous haemorrhage, organ haemorrhage and intracranial haemorrhage, adverse events and severe adverse events. ?2 test, t-test (or Mann-Whitney test), survival analysis and Cox proportional hazards models will be conducted. The findings of the study may provide an important evidence for clinical practice for these patients. Discussion:The trial will be conducted under a rational design and will provide valuable evidence on the appropriate treatment for this population. Ethics and dissemination:The study was reviewed and approved by the Ethics Committee of the General Hospital of Shen-Yang Military Region (no K(2016) 6). Trial registration number:NCT02869009; Pre-results.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Results from a phase 2a study indicated that treatment with the novel ?7 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor agonist ABT-126 25 mg once daily (QD) was associated with a trend for improvement in cognition in subjects with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's dementia (AD). A phase 2b program was designed to evaluate a broader dose range of ABT-126 as monotherapy in subjects with mild-to-moderate AD. The program consisted of a double-blind, placebo and active controlled study of ABT-126 (dose range 25-75 mg) and an open-label extension study (75 mg). METHODS:The randomized double-blind study enrolled 438 subjects (Mini-Mental Status Examination score of 10-24, inclusive) not currently taking acetylcholinesterase inhibitors or memantine. Subjects received 24 weeks of ABT-126 25 mg QD (n?=?77), ABT-126 50 mg QD (n?=?108), ABT-126 75 mg QD (n?=?73), donepezil 10 mg QD (n?=?76), or placebo (n?=?104). The primary endpoint was the change from baseline to week 24 in the 11-item Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive subscale (ADAS-Cog) total score. Subjects completing the double-blind study could enroll in the 28-week open-label extension study. Adverse events (AEs) and other safety parameters were monitored in both studies. RESULTS:A total of 367 patients (83.8 %) completed the double-blind study and 349 (79.7 %) entered the open-label study. Compared with placebo, donepezil significantly improved ADAS-Cog 11-item total scores from baseline to week 24 (-2.29?±?0.95; one-sided P?=?0.008). No ABT-126 dose demonstrated a statistically significant improvement vs placebo at week 24 in the ADAS-Cog total score: ABT-126 25 mg, -0.47?±?0.94 (P?=?0.309); ABT-126 50 mg, -0.87?±?0.85 (P?=?0.153); and ABT-126 75 mg, -1.08?±?0.94 (P?=?0.127). Rates of serious AEs and discontinuations due to AEs were similar across treatment groups. The most frequently reported AEs in both studies were constipation, fall, and headache. No clinically meaningful changes were observed in other parameters. CONCLUSIONS:In the double-blind trial, donepezil significantly improved ADAS-Cog scores but no statistically significant improvement was seen with any ABT-126 dose. ABT-126 had an acceptable safety profile in subjects with mild-to-moderate AD in both studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01527916 , Registered 3 February 2012 (randomized trial). ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01676935 . Registered 29 August 2012 (open-label extension study).

Dataset Information

Omeprazole-Domperidone Fixed Dose Combination vs Omeprazole Monotherapy: A Phase 4, Open-Label, Comparative, Parallel Randomized Controlled Study in Mild to Moderate Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease.

Publications

Omeprazole-Domperidone Fixed Dose Combination vs Omeprazole Monotherapy: A Phase 4, Open-Label, Comparative, Parallel Randomized Controlled Study in Mild to Moderate Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets