Dataset Information

Efficacy of Seven-Day Potassium-Competitive Acid Blocker-Based First-Line Helicobacter Pylori Eradication Therapy Administered with Bismuth.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

To determine the efficacy of a potassium-competitive acid blocker (P-CAB)-based first-line eradication therapy with bismuth compared with that of proton pump inhibitor-based first-line therapy with bismuth.

Materials and methods

Eradication-naive H. pylori-infected patients were consecutively enrolled from January to November 2020. Before approval of the P-CAB-based eradication therapy, twice daily administration of a regimen containing lansoprazole 30 mg, amoxicillin 1 g, clarithromycin 500 mg, and bismuth potassium citrate 300 mg was prescribed for 7 days. After approval, lansoprazole was replaced with tegoprazan (50 mg). Clarithromycin resistance was examined in patients who underwent gastroscopic biopsy at our center. Efficacy was assessed via the ¹³C-urea breath test.

Results

Of the 381 eradication-naive patients, eradication was successful in 88.3% (151/171) treated with tegoprazan and 82.8% (140/169) treated with lansoprazole in per-protocol analysis (p=0.151). In intention-to-treat analysis, eradication rates were 78.8% (152/193) in the tegoprazan and 74.5% (140/188) in the lansoprazole group (p=0.323). Clarithromycin resistance was observed in 30 (20.1%) of the 148 patients (74 from each group), and only four of the 16 clarithromycin-resistant patients in the tegoprazan group achieved successful eradication. Clarithromycin resistance [odds ratio (OR)=42.1, 95% confidence intervals (CIs)=12.6-141.0] and poor patient compliance (OR=17.1, 95% CIs=1.6-189.1) were independent risk factors for eradication failure.

Conclusion

In eradication-naive patients, eradication success rates for 7-day first-line triple therapy regimen exceeded 82% with bismuth administration. In clarithromycin-resistant patients, neither tegoprazan 50 mg nor lansoprazole 30 mg achieved acceptable eradication rates when administered twice daily for 7 days.

SUBMITTER: Kim JY

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8298865 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background:The efficacy and applicability of molecular testing to guide the selection of antibiotics in triple Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) eradication regimens have not been reported. We tested a 7-day, genotypic resistance-guided triple H. pylori eradication therapy in a high-resistance setting. Methods:Consecutive dyspeptic patients with H. pylori infection were prospectively enrolled. Genotypic resistances to clarithromycin (23SrRNA mutations) and fluoroquinolones (gyrA mutations) were determined from gastric biopsy specimens using a commercially available molecular assay (GenoTypeâ HelicoDR). A tailored genotypic resistance-guided 7-day triple therapy comprised esomeprazole, amoxicillin, and either clarithromycin (wild-type 23SrRNA), levofloxacin (23SrRNA mutated/wild-type gyrA) or rifabutin (both 23SrRNA/gyrA mutated). H. pylori eradication was confirmed by 13C-urea breath test. Results:Of 148 subjects screened, 51 patients were enrolled (male/female: 27/24, mean age: 50.7±11.4 years, treatment-naïve/-experienced: 32/19). The molecular kit was easily implemented, allowing for rapid (within 24 h) and relatively inexpensive determination of H. pylori resistance (clarithromycin: 47.1%, fluoroquinolones: 15.7%, dual clarithromycin/fluoroquinolones: 7.8%). For patients who received clarithromycin-, levofloxacin- and rifabutin-containing triple therapy, the respective eradication rates were 24/27, 20/20, and 2/4 by intention-to-treat (ITT); and 24/24, 19/19 and 2/3 by per-protocol (PP) analysis. Overall eradication rates were 90.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] 77.8-96.3%) by ITT and 97.8% (95%CI 87-99.8%) by PP analysis, showing no significant difference between treatment-naïve and -experienced patients (ITT: 87.5% vs. 94.7%, P=0.64; PP: 96.4% vs. 100%, respectively, P=1.00). Conclusions:Regardless of prior treatment history, a genotypic resistance-guided 7-day triple therapy, based on a simple molecular assay, achieved a high H. pylori eradication rate.

Project description:BackgroundBismuth quadruple therapy is currently consensus recommendation for first-line Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) treatment; however, the optimal duration is unknown. We compared the efficacy of 10-day bismuth quadruple therapy with that of 14-day bismuth quadruple therapy for first-line eradication.MethodsFor our multicentre, parallel randomised, open-label, and non-inferiority study, we recruited H. pylori treatment-naïve patients from one medical centre and one teaching hospital in Taiwan. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive 10-day (PBMT-10) or 14-day (PBMT-14) bismuth quadruple therapy. The primary outcome was the eradication rate as determined by intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) analyses. The eradication rates between the two groups were compared using a one-sided α value of 0.025 and a non-inferiority margin of 7%. The secondary outcomes were the rate of adverse effects. The trial is registered with ClincialTrials.gov (NCT04527055).FindingsFrom August 3, 2020 to April 28, 2023, 313 H. pylori treatment-naïve patients (PBMT-10 = 157; PBMT-14 = 156) were enrolled. 35 patients were excluded from PP analyses. The eradication rates (95% CI) for PBMT-10 and PBMT-14 were respectively 92.4% (88.2%-96.5%) and 92.9% (88.9%-97.0%) by ITT analyses, and 97.9% (95.5%-100.0%) and 99.3% (97.8%-100.0%) by PP analyses. The eradication rates for PBMT-10 were non-inferior to those for PBMT-14 (absolute difference [lower boundary of the one-sided 97.5% CI] -0.6% [-6.7%], PNI = 0.020 in ITT analyses, -1.4% [-5.8%], PNI = 0.007 in PP analyses). The rates of overall adverse effects (54.1% versus 57.1%, P = 0.604) were similar between the two groups; nevertheless, the rates of dizziness (18.5% versus 34.0%, P = 0.003) and vomiting (4.5% versus 12.8%, P = 0.008) were lower in PBMT-10 than in PBMT-14.InterpretationThe 10-day bismuth quadruple therapy was non-inferior to the 14-day therapy as a first-line treatment for eradicating H. pylori infection and had no different rates of overall adverse effects, but less serious adverse events in terms of dizziness and vomiting.FundingThe National Science and Technology Council and Ministry of Health and Welfare, Taiwan.

Project description:Background and aimsPotassium-Competitive Acid Blockers (P-CABs) have been used in Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) eradication therapies in recent years. However, the efficacy and safety of P-CABs compared to Proton-Pump Inhibitors (PPIs) in this setting remain controversial.MethodsThe efficacy and safety of P-CABs and PPIs for H. pylori eradication were compared in a meta-analysis based on a systematic literature search of major electronic databases for relevant Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs).ResultsSeven studies and 1,168 patients were included. The pooled eradication rate determined by Intention-To-Treat (ITT) analysis was 90.2% for P-CAB-based and 75.5% for PPI-based triple therapy (pooled RR [95% CI] = 1.17 [1.08-1.28], p < 0.001). The Per-Protocol (PP) analysis also demonstrated significant superiority of P-CABs (pooled eradication rate = 92.4% vs. 77.8%; pooled RR [95% CI] = 1.14 [1.03-1.26], p < 0.01). In a subgroup evaluation, P-CABs were significantly better than PPIs as a first-line eradication therapy, in both the ITT analysis (pooled eradication rate = 91.8% vs. 76.4%; pooled RR [95% CI] = 1.18 [1.10-1.28], p < 0.0001) and the PP analysis (pooled eradication rate = 93.0% vs. 78.6%; pooled RR [95% CI] = 1.13 [1.02-1.26], p < 0.05). However, P-CABs were not superior to PPIs when administered as salvage therapy, as determined in the ITT (75.0% vs. 66.0%, pooled RR [95% CI] = 1.11 [0.69-1.78], p = 0.66) and PP (85.7% vs. 70.0%, pooled RR [95% CI] = 1.20 [0.82-1.75], p = 0.34) analyses. In a subgroup analysis limited to Japanese patients, both the ITT analysis (pooled eradication rate = 89.6% vs. 73.9%; RR [95% CI] = 1.21 [1.14-1.29], p < 0.01) and the PP analysis (pooled eradication rate = 92.0% vs. 75.7%; RR [95% CI] = 1.18 [1.06-1.32], p < 0.01) showed that P-CABs were significantly superior compared to PPIs as triple eradication therapy. However, in the subgroup analysis of patients from other countries, there was no significant difference in either the ITT analysis (pooled eradication rate = 93.8% vs. 85.2%; RR [95% CI] = 1.10 [0.99-1.22], p = 0.07) or PP analysis (pooled eradication rate = 95.0% vs. 90.8%; RR [95% CI] = 1.05 [0.98-1.14], p = 0.17). The incidence of adverse events associated with the two regimens did not significantly differ (P-CABs vs. PPIs: 33.6% vs. 40.0%; RR [95% CI] = 0.84 [0.71‒1.00], p = 0.05). The incidence of serious adverse events and dropout rate due to adverse events also did not differ (p = 0.44 and p = 0.67, respectively).ConclusionsThe efficacy of P-CAB-based triple therapy is superior to that of PPI-based triple therapy as a first-line approach to H. pylori eradication, particularly in Japanese patients. As salvage therapy, the efficacy of the two treatments did not significantly differ. The tolerability of P-CAB-based and PPI-based triple therapy was comparable, as was the incidence of adverse events.