Dataset Information

Vonoprazan prevents ulcer recurrence during long-term NSAID therapy: randomised, lansoprazole-controlled non-inferiority and single-blind extension study.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To assess the non-inferiority of vonoprazan to lansoprazole for secondary prevention of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)-induced peptic ulcer (PU) and the safety of vonoprazan during extended use.

Design

A phase 3, 24-week, multicenter, randomised, double-blind (DB), active-controlled study, followed by a phase 3, ≥28 week, multicenter, single-blind, parallel-group extension study (EXT) in outpatients (n=642) receiving long-term NSAID therapy who are at risk of PU recurrence. The patients received vonoprazan (10 mg or 20 mg) or lansoprazole 15 mg once daily. For DB, non-inferiority of the proportion of patients with recurrent PU within 24 weeks was analysed by Farrington and Manning test (significance level 2.5%, non-inferiority margin 8.3%; primary endpoint), recurrent PU within 12 weeks, bleeding and time-to-event of PU (secondary endpoint) and treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). For EXT, TEAEs (primary endpoint), recurrent PU and safety (secondary) were assessed up to 104 weeks for patients in the extension study.

Results

The non-inferiority of vonoprazan 10 mg and 20 mg to lansoprazole 15 mg was verified (percentage difference -2.2%,95% CI -6.2% to 1.8%, p<0.001; -2.1%,95% CI -6.1% to 2.0%, p<0.001, respectively). The proportion of patients with endoscopically confirmed recurrent PU within 24 weeks was 3.3%, 3.4% and 5.5%, for vonoprazan 10 mg, 20 mg and lansoprazole 15 mg, respectively. No significant safety concerns were identified.

Conclusion

The non-inferiority of vonoprazan (10 and 20 mg) was verified in patients receiving long-term NSAIDs in DB; it was effective and well tolerated in EXT for longer than 1 year, with a safety profile similar to lansoprazole (15 mg).

Trial registration numbers

NCT01452750, NCT01456260; Results.

SUBMITTER: Mizokami Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5969369 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:To compare vonoprazan 10 and 20 mg vs lansoprazole 15 mg as maintenance therapy in healed erosive esophagitis (EE).A total of 607 patients aged ? 20 years, with endoscopically-confirmed healed EE following 8 wk of treatment with vonoprazan 20 mg once daily, were randomized 1:1:1 to receive lansoprazole 15 mg (n = 201), vonoprazan 10 mg (n = 202), or vonoprazan 20 mg (n = 204), once daily. The primary endpoint of the study was the rate of endoscopically-confirmed EE recurrence during a 24-wk maintenance period. The secondary endpoint was the EE recurrence rate at Week 12 during maintenance treatment. Additional efficacy endpoints included the incidence of heartburn and acid reflux, and the EE healing rate 4 wk after the initiation of maintenance treatment. Safety endpoints comprised adverse events (AEs), vital signs, electrocardiogram findings, clinical laboratory results, serum gastrin and pepsinogen?I/II levels, and gastric mucosa histopathology results.Rates of EE recurrence during the 24-wk maintenance period were 16.8%, 5.1%, and 2.0% with lansoprazole 15 mg, vonoprazan 10 mg, and vonoprazan 20 mg, respectively. Vonoprazan was shown to be non-inferior to lansoprazole 15 mg (P < 0.0001 for both doses). In a post-hoc analysis, EE recurrence at Week 24 was significantly reduced with vonoprazan at both the 10 mg and the 20 mg dose vs lansoprazole 15 mg (5.1% vs 16.8%, P = 0.0002, and 2.0% vs 16.8%, P < 0.0001, respectively); by contrast, the EE recurrence rate did not differ significantly between the two doses of vonoprazan (P = 0.1090). The safety profiles of vonoprazan 10 and 20 mg were similar to that of lansoprazole 15 mg in patients with healed EE. Treatment-related AEs were reported in 11.4%, 10.4%, and 10.3% of patients in the lansoprazole 15 mg, vonoprazan 10 mg, and vonoprazan 20 mg arms, respectively.Our findings confirm the non-inferiority of vonoprazan 10 and 20 mg to lansoprazole 15 mg as maintenance therapy for patients with healed EE.

Project description:BackgroundStocks of yellow fever vaccine are insufficient to cover exceptional demands for outbreak response. Fractional dosing has shown efficacy, but evidence is limited to the 17DD substrain vaccine. We assessed the immunogenicity and safety of one-fifth fractional dose compared with standard dose of four WHO-prequalified yellow fever vaccines produced from three substrains.MethodsWe did this randomised, double-blind, non-inferiority trial at research centres in Mbarara, Uganda, and Kilifi, Kenya. Eligible participants were aged 18-59 years, had no contraindications for vaccination, were not pregnant or lactating, had no history of yellow fever vaccination or infection, and did not require yellow fever vaccination for travel. Eligible participants were recruited from communities and randomly assigned to one of eight groups, corresponding to the four vaccines at standard or fractional dose. The vaccine was administered subcutaneously by nurses who were not masked to treatment, but participants and other study personnel were masked to vaccine allocation. The primary outcome was proportion of participants with seroconversion 28 days after vaccination. Seroconversion was defined as post-vaccination neutralising antibody titres at least 4 times pre-vaccination measurement measured by 50% plaque reduction neutralisation test (PRNT50). We defined non-inferiority as less than 10% decrease in seroconversion in fractional compared with standard dose groups 28 days after vaccination. The primary outcome was measured in the per-protocol population, and safety analyses included all vaccinated participants. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02991495.FindingsBetween Nov 6, 2017, and Feb 21, 2018, 1029 participants were assessed for inclusion. 69 people were ineligible, and 960 participants were enrolled and randomly assigned to vaccine manufacturer and dose (120 to Bio-Manguinhos-Fiocruz standard dose, 120 to Bio-Manguinhos-Fiocruz fractional dose, 120 to Chumakov Institute of Poliomyelitis and Viral Encephalitides standard dose, 120 to Chumakov Institute of Poliomyelitis and Viral Encephalitides fractional dose, 120 to Institut Pasteur Dakar standard dose, 120 to Institut Pasteur Dakar fractional dose, 120 to Sanofi Pasteur standard dose, and 120 to Sanofi Pasteur fractional dose). 49 participants had detectable PRNT50 at baseline and 11 had missing PRNT50 results at baseline or 28 days. 900 were included in the per-protocol analysis. 959 participants were included in the safety analysis. The absolute difference in seroconversion between fractional and standard doses by vaccine was 1·71% (95% CI -2·60 to 5·28) for Bio-Manguinhos-Fiocruz, -0·90% (-4·24 to 3·13) for Chumakov Institute of Poliomyelitis and Viral Encephalitides, 1·82% (-2·75 to 5·39) for Institut Pasteur Dakar, and 0·0% (-3·32 to 3·29) for Sanofi Pasteur. Fractional doses from all four vaccines met the non-inferiority criterion. The most common treatment-related adverse events were headache (22·2%), fatigue (13·7%), myalgia (13·3%) and self-reported fever (9·0%). There were no study-vaccine related serious adverse events.InterpretationFractional doses of all WHO-prequalified yellow fever vaccines were non-inferior to the standard dose in inducing seroconversion 28 days after vaccination, with no major safety concerns. These results support the use of fractional dosage in the general adult population for outbreak response in situations of vaccine shortage.FundingThe study was funded by Médecins Sans Frontières Foundation, Wellcome Trust (grant no. 092654), and the UK Department for International Development. Vaccines were donated in kind.