Tegoprazan-based versus esomeprazole-based triple therapy plus bismuth for first-line Helicobacter pylori eradication: A nationwide, multicenter, double-blind, double-dummy, randomized controlled trial.

IF 7.3 3区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Zhiqiang Song, Weihong Wang, Peng Li, Xiuli Zuo, Yin Zhu, Ye Chen, Xiaolan Zhang, Bin Lyu, Rong Lin, Yiqi Du, Cheng Lan, Hao Wu, Weixing Chen, Yanqing Ye, Huizhen Fan, Aijun Liao, Honghui Chen, Chengxia Liu, Zhenyu Zhang, Wen Wang, Zhimin Suo, Xiaoan Li, Qin Du, Xing Li, Feng Pan, Jianhua Tang, Min Xu, Xiongxiang Liu, Pengyuan Zheng, Huixin Chen, Ling Du, Jiayin Lu, Chun Feng, Wensheng Pan, Hong Wang, Zhirong Zeng, Jinhai Wang, Shengxiang Lyu, Dunju Liu, Shiming Yang, Liangping Li, Liya Zhou
{"title":"Tegoprazan-based versus esomeprazole-based triple therapy plus bismuth for first-line Helicobacter pylori eradication: A nationwide, multicenter, double-blind, double-dummy, randomized controlled trial.","authors":"Zhiqiang Song, Weihong Wang, Peng Li, Xiuli Zuo, Yin Zhu, Ye Chen, Xiaolan Zhang, Bin Lyu, Rong Lin, Yiqi Du, Cheng Lan, Hao Wu, Weixing Chen, Yanqing Ye, Huizhen Fan, Aijun Liao, Honghui Chen, Chengxia Liu, Zhenyu Zhang, Wen Wang, Zhimin Suo, Xiaoan Li, Qin Du, Xing Li, Feng Pan, Jianhua Tang, Min Xu, Xiongxiang Liu, Pengyuan Zheng, Huixin Chen, Ling Du, Jiayin Lu, Chun Feng, Wensheng Pan, Hong Wang, Zhirong Zeng, Jinhai Wang, Shengxiang Lyu, Dunju Liu, Shiming Yang, Liangping Li, Liya Zhou","doi":"10.1097/CM9.0000000000003780","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Although triple therapy plus bismuth (TTPB), comprising a proton pump inhibitor (PPI), two antibiotics, and bismuth, is widely used to eradicate Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori), eradication rates have been suboptimal. Potassium-competitive acid blockers (P-CABs) offer stronger and more stable gastric acid inhibition compared to PPIs. This study aimed to compare the efficacy, safety, and compliance of tegoprazan-based TTPB (TACB) vs. esomeprazole-based TTPB (EACB) in treatment-naïve patients with H. pylori infection.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this nationwide, multicenter, double-blind, double-dummy, randomized controlled trial conducted from October 2022 to September 2023 across 41 centers in China, 561 eligible patients with H. pylori infection were randomized (1:1) to receive either TACB (tegoprazan 50 mg, amoxicillin 1000 mg, clarithromycin 500 mg, and bismuth 220 mg) or EACB (esomeprazole 20 mg, amoxicillin 1000 mg, clarithromycin 500 mg, and bismuth 220 mg), all administered twice daily for 14 days. H. pylori eradication was assessed using the 13C-urea breath test at 4-8 weeks post-treatment. The primary endpoint was eradication rate based on the full analysis set (FAS). Statistical analysis included the chi-squared tests, with a predefined non-inferiority margin of -10%.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the FAS population, eradication rates were 93.5% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 89.9-96.1%) in the TACB group and 86.4% (95% CI: 81.9-90.2%) in the EACB group. The between-group difference was 7.0% (95% CI: 2.1-12.0%), indicating that tegoprazan-based TTPB was non-inferior to esomeprazole-based TTPB. Furthermore, superiority tests found a significantly higher eradication rate in tegoprazan group compared with esomeprazole group (P = 0.006). Similar results were observed in the per-protocol set. The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was comparable between groups (75.5% in TACB vs. 73.4% in EACB), with most events being mild and transient. Compliance was high in both groups (98.4% vs. 98.8%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>TACB was non-inferior to EACB in H. pylori eradication efficacy, with similar safety and compliance profiles in Chinese treatment-naïve patients.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05577468.</p>","PeriodicalId":10183,"journal":{"name":"Chinese Medical Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chinese Medical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/CM9.0000000000003780","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Although triple therapy plus bismuth (TTPB), comprising a proton pump inhibitor (PPI), two antibiotics, and bismuth, is widely used to eradicate Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori), eradication rates have been suboptimal. Potassium-competitive acid blockers (P-CABs) offer stronger and more stable gastric acid inhibition compared to PPIs. This study aimed to compare the efficacy, safety, and compliance of tegoprazan-based TTPB (TACB) vs. esomeprazole-based TTPB (EACB) in treatment-naïve patients with H. pylori infection.

Methods: In this nationwide, multicenter, double-blind, double-dummy, randomized controlled trial conducted from October 2022 to September 2023 across 41 centers in China, 561 eligible patients with H. pylori infection were randomized (1:1) to receive either TACB (tegoprazan 50 mg, amoxicillin 1000 mg, clarithromycin 500 mg, and bismuth 220 mg) or EACB (esomeprazole 20 mg, amoxicillin 1000 mg, clarithromycin 500 mg, and bismuth 220 mg), all administered twice daily for 14 days. H. pylori eradication was assessed using the 13C-urea breath test at 4-8 weeks post-treatment. The primary endpoint was eradication rate based on the full analysis set (FAS). Statistical analysis included the chi-squared tests, with a predefined non-inferiority margin of -10%.

Results: In the FAS population, eradication rates were 93.5% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 89.9-96.1%) in the TACB group and 86.4% (95% CI: 81.9-90.2%) in the EACB group. The between-group difference was 7.0% (95% CI: 2.1-12.0%), indicating that tegoprazan-based TTPB was non-inferior to esomeprazole-based TTPB. Furthermore, superiority tests found a significantly higher eradication rate in tegoprazan group compared with esomeprazole group (P = 0.006). Similar results were observed in the per-protocol set. The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was comparable between groups (75.5% in TACB vs. 73.4% in EACB), with most events being mild and transient. Compliance was high in both groups (98.4% vs. 98.8%).

Conclusion: TACB was non-inferior to EACB in H. pylori eradication efficacy, with similar safety and compliance profiles in Chinese treatment-naïve patients.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05577468.

替戈拉赞与艾索美拉唑三联疗法加铋治疗一线幽门螺杆菌根除:一项全国性、多中心、双盲、双假、随机对照试验
背景:虽然三联疗法加铋(TTPB),包括质子泵抑制剂(PPI),两种抗生素和铋,被广泛用于根除幽门螺杆菌(H. pylori),但根除率并不理想。与PPIs相比,钾竞争酸阻滞剂(P-CABs)具有更强、更稳定的胃酸抑制作用。本研究旨在比较替戈拉赞为基础的TTPB (TACB)与埃索美拉唑为基础的TTPB (EACB)在treatment-naïve幽门螺杆菌感染患者中的疗效、安全性和依从性。方法:在这项于2022年10月至2023年9月在中国41个中心进行的全国性、多中心、双盲、双假、随机对照试验中,561名符合条件的幽门螺杆菌感染患者被随机(1:1)分为TACB组(替戈拉散50 mg、阿莫西林1000 mg、克拉霉素500 mg、铋220 mg)或EACB组(埃索美拉唑20 mg、阿莫西林1000 mg、克拉霉素500 mg、铋220 mg),每天两次,持续14天。治疗后4-8周采用13c -尿素呼气试验评估幽门螺杆菌根除情况。主要终点是基于全分析集(FAS)的根除率。统计分析包括卡方检验,预定义的非劣效性裕度为-10%。结果:在FAS群体中,TACB组根除率为93.5%(95%可信区间[CI]: 81.9 ~ 90.2%), EACB组根除率为86.4%(95%可信区间[CI]: 81.9 ~ 90.2%)。组间差异为7.0% (95% CI: 2.1-12.0%),表明替戈拉桑为基础的TTPB不劣于埃索美拉唑为基础的TTPB。优势检验发现替戈拉赞组的根除率显著高于埃索美拉唑组(P = 0.006)。在每个协议集中观察到类似的结果。治疗后出现的不良事件发生率在两组间比较(TACB组为75.5%,EACB组为73.4%),大多数不良事件是轻微的和短暂的。两组患者的依从性均较高(98.4%比98.8%)。结论:TACB与EACB根除幽门螺杆菌的疗效不差,在中国treatment-naïve患者中具有相似的安全性和依从性。试验注册:ClinicalTrials.gov标识符:NCT05577468。
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
Chinese Medical Journal
Chinese Medical Journal 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
9.80
自引率
4.90%
发文量
19245
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: The Chinese Medical Journal (CMJ) is published semimonthly in English by the Chinese Medical Association, and is a peer reviewed general medical journal for all doctors, researchers, and health workers regardless of their medical specialty or type of employment. Established in 1887, it is the oldest medical periodical in China and is distributed worldwide. The journal functions as a window into China’s medical sciences and reflects the advances and progress in China’s medical sciences and technology. It serves the objective of international academic exchange. The journal includes Original Articles, Editorial, Review Articles, Medical Progress, Brief Reports, Case Reports, Viewpoint, Clinical Exchange, Letter,and News,etc. CMJ is abstracted or indexed in many databases including Biological Abstracts, Chemical Abstracts, Index Medicus/Medline, Science Citation Index (SCI), Current Contents, Cancerlit, Health Plan & Administration, Embase, Social Scisearch, Aidsline, Toxline, Biocommercial Abstracts, Arts and Humanities Search, Nuclear Science Abstracts, Water Resources Abstracts, Cab Abstracts, Occupation Safety & Health, etc. In 2007, the impact factor of the journal by SCI is 0.636, and the total citation is 2315.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信