Empirical versus tailored therapy based on genotypic resistance detection for Helicobacter pylori eradication: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 4.2 3区 医学
Therapeutic Advances in Gastroenterology Pub Date : 2023-08-31 eCollection Date: 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1177/17562848231196357
Meng Li, Xiaolei Wang, Wenting Meng, Yun Dai, Weihong Wang
{"title":"Empirical <i>versus</i> tailored therapy based on genotypic resistance detection for <i>Helicobacter pylori</i> eradication: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Meng Li, Xiaolei Wang, Wenting Meng, Yun Dai, Weihong Wang","doi":"10.1177/17562848231196357","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The eradication rate of <i>Helicobacter pylori</i> infection with empirical therapy has decreased due to increased drug resistance. The latest guidelines recommend genotypic resistance-guided therapy, but its clinical efficacy remains unclear.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The purpose of our study was to evaluate whether tailored therapy based on genotypic resistance is superior to empirical therapy for <i>H. pylori</i> infection.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing tailored therapy based on genotypic resistance with empirical therapy was performed.</p><p><strong>Sources and methods: </strong>We retrieved relevant studies from PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. The primary outcome was <i>H. pylori</i> eradication rate and the adverse events (AEs) was the secondary outcome. A random-effect model was applied to compare pooled risk ratios (RRs) with related 95% confidence intervals (CIs).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 12 qualified RCTs containing 3940 patients were identified in our systematic review and meta-analysis. The pooled eradication rates of tailored therapy based on the detection of genotypic resistance were consistently higher than those in the empirical treatment group, with no statistical significance. In triple therapy, the eradication rate was significantly higher in the tailored group than in the empirical group by intention-to-treat analysis (ITT) and per-protocol analysis (PP) analysis (<i>p</i> < 0.0001, RR: 1.20; 95% CI: 1.12-1.29; <i>p</i> < 0.0001, RR: 1.20; 95% CI: 1.15-1.25). In quadruple therapy, the eradication rate was higher in the empirical group (<i>p</i> = 0.001, RR: 0.93; 95% CI: 0.89-0.97; <i>p</i> = 0.009, RR: 0.95; 95% CI: 0.92-0.99). And this result was true for both bismuth quadruple therapy (BQT) and non-BQT. Regarding total AEs, the pooled rate was 34% in the tailored group and 37% in the empirical group, and no difference between the two groups was found (<i>p</i> = 0.17, RR: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.74-1.06).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In conclusion, tailored therapy based on molecular methods may offer better efficacy than empirical triple therapy, but it may not be superior to empirical quadruple therapy in eradicating <i>H. pylori</i> infection. Larger and more individualized RCTs are needed to aid clinical decision-making.</p><p><strong>Registration prospero: </strong>CRD42023408688.</p>","PeriodicalId":23022,"journal":{"name":"Therapeutic Advances in Gastroenterology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/7b/54/10.1177_17562848231196357.PMC10475236.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Therapeutic Advances in Gastroenterology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17562848231196357","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The eradication rate of Helicobacter pylori infection with empirical therapy has decreased due to increased drug resistance. The latest guidelines recommend genotypic resistance-guided therapy, but its clinical efficacy remains unclear.

Objectives: The purpose of our study was to evaluate whether tailored therapy based on genotypic resistance is superior to empirical therapy for H. pylori infection.

Design: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing tailored therapy based on genotypic resistance with empirical therapy was performed.

Sources and methods: We retrieved relevant studies from PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. The primary outcome was H. pylori eradication rate and the adverse events (AEs) was the secondary outcome. A random-effect model was applied to compare pooled risk ratios (RRs) with related 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

Results: A total of 12 qualified RCTs containing 3940 patients were identified in our systematic review and meta-analysis. The pooled eradication rates of tailored therapy based on the detection of genotypic resistance were consistently higher than those in the empirical treatment group, with no statistical significance. In triple therapy, the eradication rate was significantly higher in the tailored group than in the empirical group by intention-to-treat analysis (ITT) and per-protocol analysis (PP) analysis (p < 0.0001, RR: 1.20; 95% CI: 1.12-1.29; p < 0.0001, RR: 1.20; 95% CI: 1.15-1.25). In quadruple therapy, the eradication rate was higher in the empirical group (p = 0.001, RR: 0.93; 95% CI: 0.89-0.97; p = 0.009, RR: 0.95; 95% CI: 0.92-0.99). And this result was true for both bismuth quadruple therapy (BQT) and non-BQT. Regarding total AEs, the pooled rate was 34% in the tailored group and 37% in the empirical group, and no difference between the two groups was found (p = 0.17, RR: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.74-1.06).

Conclusion: In conclusion, tailored therapy based on molecular methods may offer better efficacy than empirical triple therapy, but it may not be superior to empirical quadruple therapy in eradicating H. pylori infection. Larger and more individualized RCTs are needed to aid clinical decision-making.

Registration prospero: CRD42023408688.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

基于基因型耐药性检测的根除幽门螺旋杆菌的经验疗法与定制疗法:系统综述和荟萃分析。
背景:由于耐药性的增加,通过经验疗法根除幽门螺旋杆菌感染的比率有所下降。最新指南建议采用基因型耐药性指导疗法,但其临床疗效仍不明确:我们的研究旨在评估基于基因型耐药性的定制疗法在治疗幽门螺杆菌感染方面是否优于经验疗法:设计:对比较基于基因型耐药性的定制疗法和经验疗法的随机对照试验(RCT)进行系统回顾和荟萃分析:我们从 PubMed、Embase 和 Cochrane 图书馆检索了相关研究。主要结果是幽门螺杆菌根除率,次要结果是不良事件(AEs)。采用随机效应模型比较汇总风险比(RRs)及相关的95%置信区间(CIs):我们的系统综述和荟萃分析共确定了 12 项合格的 RCT,包含 3940 名患者。基于基因型耐药性检测的定制疗法的总根除率一直高于经验疗法组,但无统计学意义。在三联疗法中,通过意向治疗分析(ITT)和每方案分析(PP),定制治疗组的根除率明显高于经验治疗组(p p p = 0.001,RR:0.93;95% CI:0.89-0.97;p = 0.009,RR:0.95;95% CI:0.92-0.99)。这一结果对四联铋疗法(BQT)和非四联铋疗法均适用。关于总的AEs,定制组的总AEs发生率为34%,经验组为37%,两组之间没有差异(P = 0.17,RR:0.88;95% CI:0.74-1.06):总之,基于分子方法的定制疗法可能比经验性三联疗法具有更好的疗效,但在根除幽门螺杆菌感染方面可能并不优于经验性四联疗法。需要进行更大规模、更个性化的 RCT 研究,以帮助临床决策:CRD42023408688。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Therapeutic Advances in Gastroenterology
Therapeutic Advances in Gastroenterology Medicine-Gastroenterology
自引率
2.40%
发文量
103
期刊介绍: Therapeutic Advances in Gastroenterology is an open access journal which delivers the highest quality peer-reviewed original research articles, reviews, and scholarly comment on pioneering efforts and innovative studies in the medical treatment of gastrointestinal and hepatic disorders. The journal has a strong clinical and pharmacological focus and is aimed at an international audience of clinicians and researchers in gastroenterology and related disciplines, providing an online forum for rapid dissemination of recent research and perspectives in this area. The editors welcome original research articles across all areas of gastroenterology and hepatology. The journal publishes original research articles and review articles primarily. Original research manuscripts may include laboratory, animal or human/clinical studies – all phases. Letters to the Editor and Case Reports will also be considered.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信