Comparative risk of pneumonia and acute exacerbation between P-CAB and PPI use in patients with COPD and GERD.

IF 4.7 3区 医学 Q1 PRIMARY HEALTH CARE
SooBeen Park, Seoung Ju Park, Hyuk Soon Choi, Hankil Lee, Jae Hyun Kim, Ha-Lim Jeon
{"title":"Comparative risk of pneumonia and acute exacerbation between P-CAB and PPI use in patients with COPD and GERD.","authors":"SooBeen Park, Seoung Ju Park, Hyuk Soon Choi, Hankil Lee, Jae Hyun Kim, Ha-Lim Jeon","doi":"10.1038/s41533-026-00523-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Potassium-competitive acid blockers (P-CABs) are newer gastric acid suppressants used to treat gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), but evidence regarding their respiratory safety compared with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) remains limited. We conducted a target trial emulation study using the Korean National Health Insurance database. Patients aged ≥40 years with COPD who initiated P-CAB or PPI for GERD between 2019 and 2022 were included. Follow-up continued from treatment initiation until the earliest occurrence of the outcome, treatment discontinuation, switching to another drug class, death, or the end of the study period. The outcome was the occurrence of pneumonia or moderate-to-severe COPD exacerbations. Propensity score matching (1:3) was applied, and hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using Cox proportional hazards models. Among the 560,987 eligible patients, 4671 P-CAB users and 14,013 PPI users were included after matching. P-CAB was not significantly associated with the risk of respiratory events compared with PPI, but a trend toward lower risks for pneumonia (aHR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.54-1.07) and severe exacerbations (aHR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.32-1.14) was observed. In patients with a Charlson Comorbidity Index ≤1, the risk of severe exacerbations was significantly lower (aHR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.11-0.88). P-CABs showed lower risks of pneumonia and severe exacerbations compared with PPIs, although the differences were not statistically significant. Further long-term studies across diverse patient subgroups are warranted.</p>","PeriodicalId":19470,"journal":{"name":"NPJ Primary Care Respiratory Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13434559/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"NPJ Primary Care Respiratory Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41533-026-00523-4","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PRIMARY HEALTH CARE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Potassium-competitive acid blockers (P-CABs) are newer gastric acid suppressants used to treat gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), but evidence regarding their respiratory safety compared with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) remains limited. We conducted a target trial emulation study using the Korean National Health Insurance database. Patients aged ≥40 years with COPD who initiated P-CAB or PPI for GERD between 2019 and 2022 were included. Follow-up continued from treatment initiation until the earliest occurrence of the outcome, treatment discontinuation, switching to another drug class, death, or the end of the study period. The outcome was the occurrence of pneumonia or moderate-to-severe COPD exacerbations. Propensity score matching (1:3) was applied, and hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using Cox proportional hazards models. Among the 560,987 eligible patients, 4671 P-CAB users and 14,013 PPI users were included after matching. P-CAB was not significantly associated with the risk of respiratory events compared with PPI, but a trend toward lower risks for pneumonia (aHR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.54-1.07) and severe exacerbations (aHR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.32-1.14) was observed. In patients with a Charlson Comorbidity Index ≤1, the risk of severe exacerbations was significantly lower (aHR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.11-0.88). P-CABs showed lower risks of pneumonia and severe exacerbations compared with PPIs, although the differences were not statistically significant. Further long-term studies across diverse patient subgroups are warranted.

慢性阻塞性肺病和胃食管反流患者使用P-CAB和PPI之间肺炎和急性加重的比较风险
钾竞争酸阻滞剂(P-CABs)是一种较新的胃酸抑制剂,用于治疗胃食管反流病(GERD),但与质子泵抑制剂(PPIs)相比,慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)患者呼吸安全性的证据仍然有限。我们使用韩国国民健康保险数据库进行了目标试验模拟研究。年龄≥40岁的COPD患者在2019年至2022年期间开始使用P-CAB或PPI治疗GERD。随访从治疗开始一直持续到最早出现结果、治疗停止、切换到另一种药物类别、死亡或研究期结束。结果是肺炎或中度至重度COPD恶化的发生。采用倾向评分匹配(1:3),使用Cox比例风险模型估计95%置信区间(ci)的风险比(hr)。在560,987例符合条件的患者中,匹配后纳入了4671例P-CAB使用者和14,013例PPI使用者。与PPI相比,P-CAB与呼吸事件的风险没有显著相关性,但观察到肺炎(aHR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.54-1.07)和严重恶化(aHR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.32-1.14)的风险降低趋势。在Charlson合病指数≤1的患者中,严重恶化的风险显著降低(aHR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.11-0.88)。与PPIs相比,p - cab显示肺炎和严重恶化的风险较低,尽管差异无统计学意义。对不同患者亚组进行进一步的长期研究是有必要的。
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
NPJ Primary Care Respiratory Medicine
NPJ Primary Care Respiratory Medicine PRIMARY HEALTH CARE-RESPIRATORY SYSTEM
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
6.50%
发文量
49
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊介绍: npj Primary Care Respiratory Medicine is an open access, online-only, multidisciplinary journal dedicated to publishing high-quality research in all areas of the primary care management of respiratory and respiratory-related allergic diseases. Papers published by the journal represent important advances of significance to specialists within the fields of primary care and respiratory medicine. We are particularly interested in receiving papers in relation to the following aspects of respiratory medicine, respiratory-related allergic diseases and tobacco control: epidemiology prevention clinical care service delivery and organisation of healthcare (including implementation science) global health.
×
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
小红书