Ranitidine for erosive oesophagitis: a double-blind, placebo-controlled study

A multicentre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ranitidine 150 mg and 300 mg in 342 patients with erosive oesophagitis. Treatment was given four times daily, and continued for 12 weeks or until healing (that is, normal or only erythematous mucosa). Erosive oesophagitis healing rates, as determined by endoscopy, were significantly greater in ranitidine-treated patients by 4 weeks compared with those of placebo-treated patients. By 12 weeks, erosive oesophagitis healing rates were 83 and 81% for ranitidine-treated patients (150 and 300 mg, respectively) and 58% for placebo-treated patients (P less than or equal to 0.001, ranitidine vs. placebo). Symptomatic relief was achieved within 24 hours after starting either dosage of ranitidine. Heartburn frequency (P less than 0.001) and severity (P less than 0.001), as well as antacid consumed per week (P less than 0.001), were reduced in both ranitidine groups in comparison with placebo. Healing rates and symptom relief were similar in the two ranitidine groups. Both dosages of ranitidine were well tolerated. Ranitidine (150 mg) given four times daily appears to be as effective as 300 mg ranitidine given four times daily in patients with moderate to severe oesophageal erosions.     

Acute treatment of reflux oesophagitis: a multicentre trial to compare 150 mg ranitidine b.d. with 300 mg ranitidine q.d.s.

H2-receptor antagonists administered in conventional dosage regimens fail to heal a significant proportion of patients with moderate or severe reflux oesophagitis. We have compared the effects of a higher dose of ranitidine (300 mg q.d.s.) with the currently recommended dosage regimen (150 mg b.d.) in 138 patients suffering from reflux oesophagitis. After 4 weeks of treatment 29% of patients who received 150 mg ranitidine b.d., and 63% of patients who received 300 mg ranitidine q.d.s. had complete endoscopic healing of their lesions (P less than 0.0001). After 8 weeks these proportions had increased to 54% and 75%, respectively (P less than 0.01). After 4 weeks of treatment, compete symptomatic relief had been achieved in 46% of patients who received 150 mg ranitidine b.d. and in 67% of patients who received 300 mg ranitidine q.d.s. (P less than 0.05). After 8 weeks these proportions were 64% and 84%, respectively (P less than 0.05). Both dosage schedules were well-tolerated. We conclude that more rapid symptom relief and healing in reflux oesophagitis can be achieved with 300 mg ranitidine q.d.s. than with 150 mg ranitidine b.d.     

Managing heartburn at the 'base' of the GERD 'iceberg': effervescent ranitidine 150 mg b.d. provides faster and better heartburn relief than antacids

BACKGROUND: Many individuals with heartburn self-medicate with antacids for relief of their symptoms. AIM: To compare efficacy of effervescent ranitidine to as-needed calcium carbonate antacids in subjects who self-treat heartburn. METHODS: A total of 155 subjects with frequent antacid-responsive heartburn were randomized to receive effervescent ranitidine 150 mg tablets b.d., or as-needed calcium carbonate 750 mg for 12 weeks. Endoscopic oesophagitis severity and mucosal histology were assessed at baseline, and at weeks 6 and 12. Heartburn frequency, severity, and antacid consumption were recorded daily, and quality of life was assessed at baseline, and at weeks 6 and 12. RESULTS: Heartburn frequency and severity were significantly decreased after 1 day of ranitidine (P < 0.02). By week 6, ranitidine had significantly decreased rescue antacid consumption (7.3 tablets, P < 0.001) vs. antacids (14.1 tablets). Endoscopic oesophagitis healing (相似文献   

Acute treatment of reflux oesophagitis: a multicentre study to compare 150 mg ranitidine twice daily with 300 mg ranitidine at bedtime

A randomized, double-blind, clinical trial was undertaken to compare 150 mg ranitidine b.d. with 300 mg ranitidine nocte in the treatment of reflux oesophagitis. Endoscopy data were evaluable for 336 patients after 8 weeks of treatment. At this time 75% of patients who received 150 mg ranitidine b.d., and 73% of those who received 300 mg nocte, had healed or showed endoscopic improvement to grade I oesophagitis. At 12 weeks these rates had increased to 89 and 88%, respectively. Oesophageal biopsies from 258 patients at 8 weeks showed histological improvement in 44 and 47% of those treated with 150 mg ranitidine b.d. and 300 mg ranitidine nocte, respectively. After 12 weeks histological improvement was apparent in 57 and 54% of biopsies from each group, respectively. Symptom severity and frequency was reduced to a similar extent by both treatments. Adverse events were reported by 15 patients. A 300-mg bedtime dose of ranitidine was found to be a well-tolerated, effective alternative to twice daily treatment in reflux oesophagitis.     

Prevention of erosive oesophagitis relapse with pantoprazole

AIM: To compare the safety and efficacy of pantoprazole and ranitidine in maintaining erosive oesophagitis healing. METHODS: Gastro-oesophageal reflux disease patients (349) with endoscopically documented healed erosive oesophagitis (grade 0 or 1) were randomly assigned to receive pantoprazole (10, 20 or 40 mg/q.d.s.) or ranitidine (150 mg/b.d.). Erosive oesophagitis status was assessed endoscopically at months 1, 3, 6 and 12 or when relapse symptoms appeared (relapse = reappearance of erosive oesophagitis grade 2 within 12 months). Symptom-free days were also assessed. RESULTS: Pantoprazole 20- and 40-mg were significantly more effective than ranitidine in maintaining healing regardless of initial erosive oesophagitis grade. Response was dose-related. After 12 months 78, 55, 46 and 21% of patients remained healed (40-, 20-, 10-mg pantoprazole and ranitidine). Pantoprazole 40-mg produced significantly more symptom-free days (83%) than ranitidine (58%). Heartburn-free days/nights were significantly higher with pantoprazole 40-mg (92 and 93%) than ranitidine (73 and 77%). The most frequent reason for discontinuation, unsatisfactory efficacy, occurred most often with ranitidine (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Once-daily pantoprazole therapy prevented relapse of healed erosive oesophagitis more effectively than ranitidine and with fewer heartburn days. Response to pantoprazole was dose-related. Pantoprazole 40-mg was the most effective regimen and consistent in maintaining erosive oesophagitis healing with a good safety and tolerability profile.     

Ranitidine: differential effects on gastric bleeding and mucosal damage induced by aspirin

This study investigated the influence of ranitidine on mucosal injury and gastric bleeding in 20 normal volunteers taking 600 mg aspirin q.d.s. This study was a double-blind placebo controlled crossover study comparing ranitidine, as 150 mg b.d., 300 mg q.d.s. and 600 mg b.d. with placebo. Gastric mucosal injury was assessed at unsedated endoscopy by counting haemorrhagic and non-haemorrhagic erosions; bleeding was measured in gastric washings. Aspirin alone increased mucosal injury from 0 to 11.4 erosions (mean, P < 0.01) and bleeding from 1.77 to 9.11 microliters blood/10 min (mean P < 0.001). Ranitidine prophylaxis reduced bleeding to 5.34, 3.18 and 3.47 microliters/10 min with 150 mg b.d., 300 mg q.d.s. and 600 mg b.d. respectively (overall effect of ranitidine P < 0.001) and also reduced haemorrhagic erosions though it had no effect on the total number of erosions. Ranitidine is effective at reducing aspirin-induced gastric bleeding and whilst not reducing aspirin-induced gastric erosions, it does reduce the number that appear haemorrhagic. Ranitidine may have a role in the prophylaxis of aspirin-induced gastric bleeding.     

Twenty-four-hour intragastric acidity in duodenal ulcer patients during dosing with placebo, and 150 mg ranitidine twice or four times daily

Twenty-four-hour intragastric acidity was measured in 10 patients with a past history of duodenal ulcer on the fourth day of dosing with placebo, and either 150 mg ranitidine given twice or four times daily. The order of the treatments was randomized and a double-blind design was employed. Ranitidine (150 mg) b.d. decreased median integrated 24-h intragastric acidity by 65.1%, nocturnal acidity by 89.1%, and daytime acidity by 54.6% (all P less than 0.01 compared to placebo). The corresponding decreases with 150 mg ranitidine q.d.s. were 62.3, 89.9 and 48.8%, respectively (all P less than 0.01) compared to placebo). There were no significant differences between the two dosage regimens of ranitidine (P greater than 0.05). This study shows that giving extra doses of 150 mg ranitidine during the day does not increase the degree of suppression of intragastric acidity.     

Randomized, placebo-controlled comparison of famotidine 20 mg b.d. or 40 mg b.d. in patients with erosive oesophagitis

Methods: this US multicentre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel group study determined the effects of two twice daily oral famotidine regimens on symptom relief and healing of erosive oesophagitis in patients with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. Three hundred and eighteen patients were enrolled: 66 received placebo, 125 received famotidine 20 mg b.d., and 127 received famotidine 40 mg b.d. Patients maintained diaries of their symptoms. Endoscopy was performed at weeks 0 and 6, and again at week 12 if healing had not occurred. Results: healing at 6 and 12 weeks was (respectively) 48% (P < 0.01 vs. placebo) and 69% (P? 0.01 vs.placebo) for famotidine 40 mg b.d.; 32% and 54% (P? 0.01 vs. placebo) for famotidine 20 mg b.d., and 18% and 29% for placebo. At both 6 and 12 weeks the healing rates of famotidine 40 mg b.d. were significantly greater than placebo and famotidine 20 mg b.d. Compared to placebo, famotidine produced more frequent global symptom improvement and more rapid heartburn relief. There were no significant differences among treatment groups in the incidence of clinical or laboratory adverse events. Conclusions: famotidine 40 mg b.d. was a better regimen than famotidine 20 mg b.d. or placebo. The clinical efficacy paralleled the previously documented effect of the famotidine regimens on decrease of oesophageal acid exposure.     

The effect of combined therapy with ranitidine and pirenzepine in the treatment of reflux oesophagitis

The combination of a histamine H2-receptor antagonist and a muscarinic receptor antagonist has been reported to result in greater suppression of intragastric acidity than either agent alone. The present randomized, double-blind, multicentre trial compared the effects of the oral combination of 150 mg ranitidine b.d. plus 50 mg pirenzepine b.d. with 150 mg ranitidine b.d. plus placebo pirenzepine b.d. in the treatment of patients with reflux oesophagitis. All 157 patients had symptoms of gastro-oesophageal reflux with endoscopically confirmed oesophageal erosions (Savary and Miller grades I-III). After four weeks of treatment, healing rates were 32/75 (43%) in the combined treatment group and 34/76 (45%) in the group receiving ranitidine alone. After eight weeks, the cumulative healing rates had increased to 48/72 (67%) and 51/75 (68%), respectively. More patients receiving ranitidine plus pirenzepine had complete relief of day- and night-time heartburn after four weeks compared with those receiving ranitidine alone (day: 59% vs. 38%, P = 0.02; night: 69% vs. 52%, P = 0.04). After eight weeks, symptom relief was comparable in both groups. Clinical adverse effects were reported by nine patients receiving ranitidine and by 19 patients receiving the combination. It is concluded that combining ranitidine with pirenzepine does not aid the healing of reflux oesophagitis but does improve symptom relief at four weeks.     

Two different dose regimens of cisapride in the treatment of reflux oesophagitis: a double-blind comparison with ranitidine

We conducted a double-blind study comparing two dosage regimens of a prokinetic drug, cisapride (10 mg q.d.s. and 20 mg b.d.), with a low dose of a H₂ receptor antagonist (150 mg ranitidine b.d.) in the treatment of 155 patients with reflux oesophagitis as determined by endoscopy. The active treatment took 8 to 12 weeks depending on whether complete healing was found at endoscopy. Improvement in oesophagitis grades from baseline to endpoint was observed in 68% of patients in the 10 mg cisapride q.d.s. group, 83 % in the cisapride 20 mg b.d. group and 81% in the ranitidine group (N.S.). At endpoint, the percentages of endoscopically cured patients with initial grades I or II were 52% for 10 mg cisapride q.d.s., 71% for 20 mg cisapride b.d. and 80% for ranitidine (N.S.). The proportional improvement of the overall reflux symptom score (60%) also showed no significant difference between the three groups. In the treatment of mild reflux oesophagitis (grades I and II) similar results can be expected from 20 mg cisapride b.d. and 150 mg ranitidine b.d. As the results of the two dosage regimens of cisapride were not different, the 20 mg twice daily regimen is preferred because it will improve patient compliance. It is concluded that in reflux oesophagitis grades I and II, the efficacy of 20 mg cisapride b.d. and 150 mg ranitidine b.d. are broadly similar.     

The eflects of 300 mg ranitidine at night, twice daily and four times daily on intragastric acidity in normal subjects

The aim of this study was to compare to placebo the effects of 300 mg ranitidine nocte, b.d. and q.d. on intragastric acidity. The study was performed on healthy male subjects and intragastric acidity measured by radiotelemetry. All active treatments significantly decreased 24-hr acidity, with a median suppression of 61.0% with 300 mg ranitidine nocte, 77.7% with 300 mg b.d. and 78.0% with 300 mg q.d.s. There was no significant difference between the effects of two higher dose regimens: although the 300 mg q.d.s. suppressed daytime acidity more than 300 mg b.d. (88.9%vs. 77.8%), it suppressed nocturnal acidity less effectively (65.5%) than either 300 mg nocte (92.9%) or 300 mg b.d. (90.0%). These data suggest that only modest additional therapeutic acid inhibition can be achieved by increasing the dose of ranitidine above 600 mg daily.     

A comparison of lansoprazole and ranitidine in the treatment of erosive oesophagitis

Background: Lansoprazole is a new proton pump inhibitor which produces prolonged decrease of gastric acidity. The aim of this study was to compare lansoprazole to a standard dose of ranitidine in the treatment of patients with reflux oesophagitis. Methods: Two hundred and forty-seven patients with erosive oesophagitis were randomly assigned to 8 weeks of treatment with either 30 mg lansoprazole once daily or 150 mg ranitidine twice daily. Results: Two hundred and forty-two patients were included in the analysis. Lansoprazole (30 mg) daily, healed oesophagitis in 92.1% of patients after 8 weeks of treatment. This was significantly superior to 150 mg ranitidine b.d.s. which healed oesophagitis in 69.9% of patients (P < 0.001). Relief of reflux symptoms was superior with lansoprazole to that with ranitidine. Both lansoprazole and ranitidine were well tolerated with no serious drug-related adverse events noted. Conclusion: Lansoprazole, 30 mg once daily, is highly effective and safe in the short-term treatment of erosive oesophagitis.     

Omeprazole is superior to ranitidine plus metoclopramide in the short-term treatment of erosive oesophagitis

Histamine H₂-receptor antagonists are moderately effective in symptomatic treatment and healing of erosive oesophagitis, but they are not as effective as the proton pump inhibitor omeprazole. In some studies prokinetic agents seem to increase the effectiveness of H₂-antagonists, but no study comparing the efficacy of omeprazole to H₂-antagonists plus prokinetic agents has been performed. The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and tolerability of 20 mg omeprazole daily with 150 mg ranitidine b.d.s. plus the prokinetic agent 10 mg metoclopramide q.d.s. in patients with erosive oesophagitis. After both 4 and 8 weeks of treatment, omeprazole healed the mucosa in significantly more patients than did ranitidine plus metoclopramide. Omeprazole also provided significantly greater relief from daytime heartburn, nighttime heartburn, and acid regurgitation, and was associated with decreased concomitant antacid use. Although the overall incidence of adverse events was similar in the two treatment groups, a significantly higher number of treatment-related adverse events and more treatment-related withdrawals from the study occurred in the ranitidine plus metoclopramide treatment group. Omeprazole is more effective and better tolerated than the combination of standard dose ranitidine plus metoclopramide for patients with erosive oesophagitis.     

Pantoprazole maintenance therapy prevents relapse of erosive oesophagitis

OBJECTIVES: To compare the safety and efficacy of pantoprazole with ranitidine for the maintenance of endoscopically documented healed (grade 0 or 1) erosive oesophagitis. METHODS: Patients (371) were randomly assigned to receive pantoprazole 10, 20 or 40 mg or ranitidine 150 mg. Endoscopies were performed after 1, 3, 6 and 12 months or when symptoms suggesting relapse (grade = 2) developed. Gastric biopsies were obtained at baseline and on at least one postbaseline visit. Symptom-free days and Gelusil use were assessed. RESULTS: Pantoprazole was significantly (P < 0.001) more effective in maintaining erosive oesophagitis healing. After 12 months, 33%, 40%, 68% and 82% of patients remained healed for the ranitidine and pantoprazole 10, 20 and 40 mg groups, respectively. Daytime and night-time heartburn were eliminated in > 90% of days for the pantoprazole 40 mg group. Gelusil use was significantly lower with pantoprazole 20 and 40 mg than with ranitidine (P < 0.02) during the first 9 months. CONCLUSIONS: Twelve months of maintenance therapy with pantoprazole (10-40 mg once daily) was superior to ranitidine (150 mg twice daily) in maintaining erosive oesophagitis healing. Pantoprazole 40 mg provided the most consistent efficacy and was well tolerated.     

Ranitidine bismuth citrate plus clarithromycin is effective for healing duodenal ulcers, eradicating H. pylori and reducing ulcer recurrence. RBC H. pylori Study Group [see comments]

AIM: To compare the efficacy of the coadministration of ranitidine bismuth citrate plus the antibiotic clarithromycin, with ranitidine bismuth citrate alone or clarithromycin alone for the healing of duodenal ulcers, eradication of H. pylori and the reduction of ulcer recurrence. METHODS: This two-phase, randomized, double-blind, placebo- controlled, multicentre study consisted of a 4-week treatment phase followed by a 24-week post-treatment observation phase. Patients with an active duodenal ulcer were treated with either ranitidine bismuth citrate 400 mg b.d. for 4 weeks plus clarithromycin 500 mg t.d.s. for the first 2 weeks; ranitidine bismuth citrate 400 mg b.d. for 4 weeks plus placebo t.d.s. for first 2 weeks; placebo b.d. for 4 weeks plus clarithromycin 500 mg t.d.s. for the first 2 weeks; or placebo b.d. for 4 weeks plus placebo t.d.s. for the first 2 weeks. RESULTS: Ulcer healing rates after 4 weeks of treatment were highest with ranitidine bismuth citrate plus clarithromycin (82%) followed by ranitidine bismuth citrate alone (74%; P = 0.373), clarithromycin alone (73%; P = 0.33) and placebo (52%; P = 0.007). Ranitidine bismuth citrate plus clarithromycin provided significantly better ulcer symptom relief compared with clarithromycin alone or placebo (P < 0.05). The coadministration of ranitidine bismuth citrate plus clarithromycin resulted in significantly higher H. pylori eradication rates 4 weeks post-treatment (82%) than did treatment with either ranitidine bismuth citrate alone (0%; P < 0.001), clarithromycin alone (36%; P = 0.008) or placebo (0%; P < 0.001). Ulcer recurrence rates 24 weeks post-treatment were lower following treatment with ranitidine bismuth citrate plus clarithromycin (21%) compared with ranitidine bismuth citrate alone (86%; P < 0.001), clarithromycin alone (40%; P = 0.062) or placebo (88%; P = 0.006). All treatments were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: The coadministration of ranitidine bismuth citrate plus clarithromycin is a simple, well-tolerated and effective treatment for active H. pylori- associated duodenal ulcer disease. This treatment regimen effectively heals duodenal ulcers, provides effective symptom relief, eradicates H. pylori infection and reduces the rate of ulcer recurrence. The eradication of H. pylori infection in patients with recently healed duodenal ulcers is associated with a significant reduction in the rate of ulcer recurrence.     

Ranitidine and cimetidine in the healing of duodenal ulcer: meta-analysis of comparative clinical trials

All available ranitidine and cimetidine comparative trials in acute duodenal ulcer disease were examined: of the 44 trials, 36 favoured ranitidine, and there was an overall difference in ulcer healing of 7%. Further stratification enabled examination of trials with common attributes: the most frequent endoscopic assessment was at 4 weeks to compare ranitidine 150 mg twice daily with cimetidine 1 g day-1 or 400 mg b.d. Twenty of these trials had sufficient data to permit pooling. Ranitidine was favoured in 18/20 trials and in three the differences achieved statistical significance. Results of the trials were combined using meta-analysis to calculate differences in ulcer healing. Most studies had sample sizes that were insufficient to detect clinically-important differences; the power to detect a 20% difference was less than 80% in 15/20 trials, and for a 10% difference was less than 80% in all but one trial. Fifteen trials compared ranitidine 150 mg b.d. with cimetidine 1 g day-1: healing after 4 weeks therapy was overall 6% greater for ranitidine. This was statistically significant (P less than 0.05) and the combined total number of patients had a power of 83% to detect this difference. In five trials the dose of cimetidine used was 400 mg b.d.: the 12% difference in healing in favour of ranitidine 150 mg b.d. was statistically significant, and the combined trials had a power of 95% to detect this difference. Ranitidine 150 mg twice daily heals significantly more duodenal ulcers after 4 weeks of therapy than either cimetidine 400 mg b.d. or cimetidine 1 g day-1.     

Omepmazole or high-dose ranitidine in the treatment of patients with reflux oesophagitis not responding to ''standard doses''of H2-receptor antagonists

Ninety-eight patients (26 females), who presented with erosive and/or ulcerative oesophagitis, despite at least a 3-month period of treatment with standard doses of cimetidine (greater than or equal to 1200 mg daily) or ranitidine (greater than or equal to 300 mg daily), were included in a double-blind, randomized trial to compare omeprazole (40 mg o.m.) with a high dose of ranitidine (300 mg b.d.). The treatment was given for 4-12 weeks; endoscopy assessment and laboratory screening were performed on entry to the trial and thereafter every fourth week. Endoscopic healing was defined as complete epithelialization of all macroscopic erosions or ulcers in the squamous epithelium. An 'intention-to-treat' analysis of the clinical data revealed omeprazole to be superior to ranitidine: 63% of those patients who were given omeprazole were healed endoscopically after a 4-week period of treatment, compared with only 17% of those given ranitidine. This difference in healing rate persisted during the 12-week study period (90% vs 47% after 12 weeks; P less than 0.0001). Reflux symptoms were more rapidly and completely relieved with omeprazole: heartburn resolved completely in 86% of patients treated with omeprazole for 4 weeks compared with 32% in the ranitidine group (P less than 0.0001). The mean basal gastrin concentrations increased only in those given omeprazole from 18.9 pmol/L at pre-entry to a mean value of 31.7 pmol/L on the last day of omeprazole administration. In ranitidine-treated patients no significant increase in basal gastrin concentration was observed. Both drugs were well tolerated with few adverse events, which were mainly mild and transient. These results demonstrate the superiority of omeprazole over a high dose of ranitidine in the treatment of resistant reflux oesophagitis.     

A comparison of two doses of nizatidine versus placebo in the treatment of reflux oesophagitis

Three-hundred and twenty-five patients with endoscopically verified oesophagitis entered a double-blind, randomized multicentre study that compared 300 mg nizatidine b.d., 300 mg nocte and placebo. The 6- and 12-week treatment responses were studied. Healing was defined as complete epithelialization of all oesophageal lesions. The healing rates were 40% in the 300 mg nizatidine b.d. group, 30% in the 300 mg nocte group and 26% in the placebo group at 6 weeks. The corresponding figures after 12 weeks of treatment were 50%, 44% and 34%, respectively. The healing rates were significantly different (P less than 0.05) between the high-dose nizatidine group and placebo only, both at 6 and 12 weeks. Despite a trend at both 6 and 12 weeks in favour of 300 mg nizatidine nocte compared to placebo, this was not significantly different. The most important factor for the outcome, apart from the treatment group, was the pre-entry severity of oesophagitis. The differences observed between treatment groups in healing rates, symptomatic relief, and antacid consumption appear to result mainly from the patients with moderate and severe oesophagitis upon entry. Nizatidine (300 mg) b.d. appeared to be safe and effective in the treatment of reflux oesophagitis.     

Comparison of the efficacy of pantoprazole vs. nizatidine in the treatment of erosive oesophagitis: a randomized,active-controlled,double-blind study

BACKGROUND: Pantoprazole is a proton pump inhibitor approved for the treatment of erosive oesophagitis and gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. AIM: To compare the efficacy and safety of pantoprazole vs. nizatidine for the treatment of symptomatic gastro-oesophageal reflux disease and endoscopically documented erosive oesophagitis (grade > or = 2). METHODS: A multicentre, double-blind, randomized, active-controlled study (221 patients) was performed to compare 20 and 40 mg pantoprazole daily with nizatidine 150 mg b.d. (maximum, 8 weeks). The primary end-point was endoscopic healing of erosive oesophagitis (grade 1 or 0). The secondary end-point was symptomatic improvement. RESULTS: Healing averaged 61%, 64% and 22% for pantoprazole 20 mg, pantoprazole 40 mg and nizatidine 150 mg, respectively, at 4 weeks, and 79%, 83% and 41% at 8 weeks (P < 0.05, differences between groups at both points). Starting on day 1 of symptom assessment, significantly fewer pantoprazole-treated patients reported night-time heartburn and regurgitation compared with nizatidine-treated patients. Symptoms of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease were completely eliminated in 68% and 65% of patients in the pantoprazole 20-mg and 40-mg groups and in 28% of patients in the nizatidine group at study completion. The difference between each pantoprazole group and the nizatidine group was significant (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Pantoprazole, at single daily doses of 20 mg and 40 mg for up to 8 weeks, provides more rapid relief of symptoms and superior healing of erosive oesophagitis than nizatidine 150 mg b.d., and is well tolerated.     

Esomeprazole 20 mg vs. pantoprazole 20 mg for maintenance therapy of healed erosive oesophagitis: results from the EXPO study

BACKGROUND: Following initial healing of erosive oesophagitis, most patients require maintenance therapy to prevent relapse. AIM: To compare endoscopic and symptomatic remission rates over 6 months' maintenance therapy with esomeprazole or pantoprazole (both 20 mg once daily) in patients with healed erosive oesophagitis. METHODS: Patients with symptoms of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease and endoscopically confirmed erosive oesophagitis at baseline were randomized to receive esomeprazole 40 mg or pantoprazole 40 mg for up to 8 weeks. Patients with healed erosive oesophagitis and free of moderate/severe heartburn and acid regurgitation at 4 weeks or, if necessary, 8 weeks entered the 6-month maintenance therapy phase of the study. RESULTS: A total of 2766 patients (63% men; mean age 50 years) received esomeprazole 20 mg (n = 1377) or pantoprazole 20 mg (n = 1389) and comprised the intention-to-treat population. Following 6 months of treatment, the proportion of patients in endoscopic and symptomatic remission was significantly greater for those receiving esomeprazole 20 mg (87.0%) than pantoprazole 20 mg (74.9%, log-rank test P < 0.0001). Esomeprazole 20 mg produced a higher proportion of patients free of moderate to severe gastro-oesophageal reflux disease symptoms and fewer discontinuations because of symptoms than pantoprazole 20 mg (92.2% vs. 88.5%, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Esomeprazole 20 mg is more effective than pantoprazole 20 mg for maintenance therapy following initial healing of erosive oesophagitis and relief of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease symptoms.