The multicenter real-world report of the efficacies of 14-day esomeprazole-based and rabeprazole-based high-dose dual therapy in first-line Helicobacter pylori eradication in Taiwan

IF 4.5 2区 医学 Q2 IMMUNOLOGY
{"title":"The multicenter real-world report of the efficacies of 14-day esomeprazole-based and rabeprazole-based high-dose dual therapy in first-line Helicobacter pylori eradication in Taiwan","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.jmii.2024.02.009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>High-dose dual therapy (HDDT) using proton-pump inhibitors (PPI) and amoxicillin attracted attention for its simplicity and lower adverse event profile. Besides, vonoprazan is not available worldwide. This real-world study aims to compare the efficacy of esomeprazole-based and rabeprazole-based HDDT regimens and to identify clinical factors influencing outcomes.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A retrospective study enrolled 346 <em>Helicobacter pylori</em>-infected naïve patients from January 2016 to August 2023. Patients were assigned to either a 14-day esomeprazole-based HDDT (EA-14; esomeprazole 40 mg t.i.d. and amoxicillin 750 mg q.i.d. for 14 days, n = 173) or a 14-day rabeprazole-based HDDT (RA-14; rabeprazole 20 mg and amoxicillin 750 mg q.i.d. for 14 days, n = 173).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Five patients from the EA-14 group and 10 from the RA-14 group were lost to follow-up, resulting in 168 and 163 patients for the per-protocol (PP) analysis, respectively. Eradication rates for the EA-14 and RA-14 groups were 90.2% and 80.9% (P = 0.014) in intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis; and 92.9% and 85.9% (P = 0.039) in PP analysis. Adverse event rates were similar between the two groups (11.9% vs 11.7%, P = 0.944). In multiple logistic regression analysis, age≧60 was associated with eradication failure (P = 0.046) and a trend of significance for smoking (P = 0.060) in the EA-14 group but not in the RA-14 group. A trend of significance was also observed for eradication regimens (EA-14 vs RA-14) (P = 0.071).</p><p>The antibiotic resistance rates were amoxicillin (2.3%), clarithromycin (14.7%), metronidazole (40.3%), and dual resistance to clarithromycin and metronidazole (7.0%).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Esomeprazole-based HDDT achieved over 90% eradication rates but rabeprazole-based HDDT, which failed.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":56117,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Microbiology Immunology and Infection","volume":"57 4","pages":"Pages 601-608"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S168411822400046X/pdfft?md5=4638e74156369d0757b9d92ac88058ba&pid=1-s2.0-S168411822400046X-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Microbiology Immunology and Infection","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S168411822400046X","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"IMMUNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

High-dose dual therapy (HDDT) using proton-pump inhibitors (PPI) and amoxicillin attracted attention for its simplicity and lower adverse event profile. Besides, vonoprazan is not available worldwide. This real-world study aims to compare the efficacy of esomeprazole-based and rabeprazole-based HDDT regimens and to identify clinical factors influencing outcomes.

Methods

A retrospective study enrolled 346 Helicobacter pylori-infected naïve patients from January 2016 to August 2023. Patients were assigned to either a 14-day esomeprazole-based HDDT (EA-14; esomeprazole 40 mg t.i.d. and amoxicillin 750 mg q.i.d. for 14 days, n = 173) or a 14-day rabeprazole-based HDDT (RA-14; rabeprazole 20 mg and amoxicillin 750 mg q.i.d. for 14 days, n = 173).

Results

Five patients from the EA-14 group and 10 from the RA-14 group were lost to follow-up, resulting in 168 and 163 patients for the per-protocol (PP) analysis, respectively. Eradication rates for the EA-14 and RA-14 groups were 90.2% and 80.9% (P = 0.014) in intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis; and 92.9% and 85.9% (P = 0.039) in PP analysis. Adverse event rates were similar between the two groups (11.9% vs 11.7%, P = 0.944). In multiple logistic regression analysis, age≧60 was associated with eradication failure (P = 0.046) and a trend of significance for smoking (P = 0.060) in the EA-14 group but not in the RA-14 group. A trend of significance was also observed for eradication regimens (EA-14 vs RA-14) (P = 0.071).

The antibiotic resistance rates were amoxicillin (2.3%), clarithromycin (14.7%), metronidazole (40.3%), and dual resistance to clarithromycin and metronidazole (7.0%).

Conclusions

Esomeprazole-based HDDT achieved over 90% eradication rates but rabeprazole-based HDDT, which failed.

台湾多中心真实世界报告:基于埃索美拉唑和雷贝拉唑的 14 天大剂量双重疗法在一线根除幽门螺杆菌中的疗效。
背景:使用质子泵抑制剂(PPI)和阿莫西林的大剂量双重疗法(HDDT)因其简便、不良反应少而备受关注。此外,Vonoprazan 并非全球通用。这项真实世界研究旨在比较以埃索美拉唑为基础的 HDDT 方案和以雷贝拉唑为基础的 HDDT 方案的疗效,并确定影响疗效的临床因素:一项回顾性研究在2016年1月至2023年8月期间招募了346名幽门螺杆菌感染的新患者。患者被分配接受为期14天的基于埃索美拉唑的HDDT(EA-14;埃索美拉唑40 mg t.i.d.和阿莫西林750 mg q.i.d.,共14天,n = 173)或为期14天的基于雷贝拉唑的HDDT(RA-14;雷贝拉唑20 mg和阿莫西林750 mg q.i.d.,共14天,n = 173):EA-14组和RA-14组分别有5名和10名患者失去随访,因此按方案(PP)分析的患者分别为168名和163名。在意向治疗(ITT)分析中,EA-14组和RA-14组的根除率分别为90.2%和80.9%(P = 0.014);在PP分析中,EA-14组和RA-14组的根除率分别为92.9%和85.9%(P = 0.039)。两组的不良事件发生率相似(11.9% vs 11.7%,P = 0.944)。在多重逻辑回归分析中,EA-14 组年龄≧60 与根除失败相关(P = 0.046),吸烟与根除失败呈显著性趋势(P = 0.060),而 RA-14 组与吸烟无关。根除方案(EA-14 与 RA-14)也有显著性趋势(P = 0.071)。抗生素耐药率为阿莫西林(2.3%)、克拉霉素(14.7%)、甲硝唑(40.3%)以及克拉霉素和甲硝唑双重耐药(7.0%):结论:以埃索美拉唑为基础的HDDT的根除率超过90%,但以雷贝拉唑为基础的HDDT却失败了。
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
Journal of Microbiology Immunology and Infection
Journal of Microbiology Immunology and Infection IMMUNOLOGY-INFECTIOUS DISEASES
CiteScore
15.90
自引率
5.40%
发文量
159
审稿时长
67 days
期刊介绍: Journal of Microbiology Immunology and Infection is an open access journal, committed to disseminating information on the latest trends and advances in microbiology, immunology, infectious diseases and parasitology. Article types considered include perspectives, review articles, original articles, brief reports and correspondence. With the aim of promoting effective and accurate scientific information, an expert panel of referees constitutes the backbone of the peer-review process in evaluating the quality and content of manuscripts submitted for publication.
×
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