Symptom relief in gastroesophageal reflux disease: a randomized, controlled comparison of pantoprazole and nizatidine in a mixed patient population with erosive esophagitis or endoscopy-negative reflux disease.

OBJECTIVES: Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) in primary care practice presents symptomatically, and resources to distinguish promptly between erosive esophagitis and endoscopy-negative reflux disease (ENRD) are limited. It is therefore important to determine the roles of proton pump inhibitors and histamine-2-receptor antagonists for first-line symptom-based therapy in patients with erosive esophagitis and ENRD. The aim of this study was to compare pantoprazole 40 mg once daily versus nizatidine 150 mg b.i.d. in a mixed GERD patient population with ENRD or erosive esophagitis (Savary-Miller grades 1-3). METHODS: A 4-wk randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, multicenter study conducted in Canada. Eligible patients had experienced GERD symptoms > or = 4 times weekly for > 6 months. Patients were randomized to pantoprazole 40 mg once daily or nizatidine 150 mg b.i.d.. Endoscopy was performed before randomization and after 4 wk of therapy. RESULTS: Of 220 patients randomized to therapy, 208 were available for a modified intent-to-treat analysis. Erosive esophagitis was present in 125 patients; 35 patients were Helicobacter pylori positive. There was complete symptom relief after 7 days of therapy in 14% of patients on nizatidine and in 40% of those on pantoprazole (p < 0.0001), and after 28 days of treatment in 36% and 63% of patients, respectively (p < 0.0001). After 28 days of treatment, adequate heartburn control was reported by 58% of the nizatidine group and in 88% of the pantoprazole (p < 0.0001); erosive esophagitis healing rates were 44% for nizatidine and 79% for pantoprazole (p < 0.001). Rescue antacid was needed by a greater number of patients using nizatidine than of those using pantoprazole (p < 0.001). H. pylori infection was associated with an increased probability of erosive esophagitis healing. CONCLUSIONS: Pantoprazole once daily was superior to nizatidine b.i.d. in producing complete heartburn relief in a mixed population of GERD patients and in achieving erosion healing. The proportions of patients with complete symptom relief were greater with pantoprazole after 7 days of therapy than with nizatidine after 28 days. The present study data suggest that pantoprazole is a highly effective first-line therapy for the management of gastroesophageal reflux disease in a primary care practice setting.     

Healing and relapse of severe peptic esophagitis after treatment with omeprazole

We have studied the response of erosive or ulcerative esophagitis to treatment with omeprazole and its subsequent relapse on cessation of therapy in 196 patients. In the first phase of the study omeprazole (20 or 40 mg daily) was compared with placebo in 64 patients. After 4 wk there was endoscopic healing in 81% (25 of 31) of omeprazole-treated patients and in only 6% (2 of 32) of placebo-treated patients. Endoscopic healing of esophagitis was accompanied by symptom relief and histologic healing of ulceration. In the second (dose finding) phase a further 132 patients were randomized to omeprazole (20 or 40 mg daily) and endoscopic healing was assessed. In patients with the mildest grade of ulcerative esophagitis (grade 2), healing occurred at 4 wk in 87% receiving 20 mg and in 97% receiving 40 mg. In patients with grade 3 esophagitis, 67% (20 mg) and 88% (40 mg) were healed. Less than half the patients with grade 4 esophagitis (Barrett's ulcers or confluent ulceration) healed with either 20 mg (48%) or 40 mg (44%). Regression analysis in the 164 omeprazole-treated patients showed no evidence that healing was influenced by factors other than severity of esophagitis at entry and omeprazole dose. In phase 3 of the study the rate of endoscopic relapse was determined in 107 endoscopically healed patients after stopping omeprazole. Erosive or ulcerative esophagitis recurred in 88 of 107 (82%) by 6 mo. Neither initial dose, grade of esophagitis, nor smoking was shown to influence relapse rate. Omeprazole is a highly effective treatment for peptic esophagitis. The 40-mg/day dosage produces endoscopic healing slightly more quickly than the 20-mg/day dosage, and the initial endoscopic gradings are of prognostic value. Relapse occurs rapidly when treatment is stopped.     

Two doses of omeprazole versus placebo in symptomatic erosive esophagitis: the U.S. Multicenter Study.

Two hundred thirty patients with reflux symptoms and endoscopically proven erosive esophagitis were enrolled from 15 U.S. centers into a randomized, double-blind, dose-ranging study comparing placebo with omeprazole, 20 or 40 mg given once daily in the morning. Esophagitis grade 2 was present in 44% of patients, grade 3 in 37% of patients, and grade 4 in 19% of patients. Endpoints, defined as complete relief of heartburn and complete esophageal mucosal healing, were assessed after 4 and 8 weeks of treatment. Both omeprazole doses were significantly superior to placebo in complete endoscopic healing. After 8 weeks of treatment, 73.5% of patients in the 20-mg omeprazole group and 74.7% in the 40-mg omeprazole group, compared with 14.0% in the placebo group, had complete healing of the esophageal mucosa. At the end of the study, complete relief of daytime heartburn was obtained in 79.5% of patients in the 20-mg omeprazole group, 81.6% in the 40-mg omeprazole group, and 37.2% in the placebo group (P less than or equal to 0.05). Complete relief of nighttime heartburn was noted by 79.5% of patients in the 20-mg omeprazole group, 85.1% in the 40-mg omeprazole group, and 34.9% in the placebo group (P less than or equal to 0.05). The median time to complete relief of daytime and nighttime heartburn occurred earlier in the 40-mg group than in the 20-mg group (9 vs. 17 days and 9 vs. 20 days, respectively); however, these differences were not statistically significant. Relief of acid regurgitation and dysphagia also occurred earlier in the 40-mg group. Omeprazole was well tolerated in this group of patients. No unexpected adverse experiences occurred. The results of this study confirm those of six multicenter, international trials in which omeprazole in doses of 20-60 mg provided a degree of esophageal mucosal healing and complete relief of reflux symptoms superior to any other medical treatment.     

Assessment of effectiveness of different dosage regimens of pantoprazole in controlling symptoms and healing esophageal lesions of patients with mild erosive esophagitis

BACKGROUND: Gastroesophageal reflux disease is a very common affection, and esophageal involvement is particularly frequent. The means to effectively control symptoms and improve esophageal inflammation in these patients is to reduce esophageal acid exposure. For this purpose, we use gastric proton pump inhibitor, that can suppress gastric acid secretion. AIM: To compare the effectiveness of two different pantoprazole dosage regimens (20 and 40 mg/day), in controlling symptoms and healing esophageal lesions of patients with mild erosive esophagitis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Fifty-seven patients with endoscopically confirmed mild erosive esophagitis characterized as non-confluent erosions in the distal esophagus, were randomly to be treated either with pantoprazole 20 mg/day (group I, 28 patients) or 40 mg/day (group II, 29 patients) over a period of 4 weeks. After treatment completion, the patients were assessed for clinical and endoscopic outcome, i.e., absence of erosions in distal esophagus and improvement of gastroesophageal reflux symptoms. RESULTS: At the end of the treatment, 73.1% of the patients in group I and 85.7% of the patients in group II had endoscopic improvement. We also observed, that 88.5% of the patients in group I and 92.9% of the patients in group II had complete elimination of heartburn and regurgitation. CONCLUSION: Pantoprazole dosage regimens of 20 mg/day and 40 mg/day provide equivalent effectiveness in controlling symptoms and healing esophageal lesions of mild esophagitis.     

Esomeprazole once daily for 6 months is effective therapy for maintaining healed erosive esophagitis and for controlling gastroesophageal reflux disease symptoms: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of efficacy and safety

OBJECTIVE: Esomeprazole, the S-isomer of omeprazole, achieves a significantly greater healing rate and symptom resolution of erosive esophagitis than that achieved by omeprazole. The objective of this study is to assess the efficacy of the new proton pump inhibitor esomeprazole in preventing relapse over a prolonged period in patients with healed erosive esophagitis. METHODS: A total of 318 gastroesophageal reflux patients whose erosive esophagitis was healed in a comparative study of esomeprazole 40 mg, 20 mg, or omeprazole 20 mg, were randomized to maintenance therapy with once daily esomeprazole 40 mg, 20 mg, or 10 mg, or placebo in a U.S., double-blind multicenter trial. RESULTS: After 6 months, healing was maintained (cumulative life table rates) in 93.6% (95% CI 87.4-99.7) of patients treated with esomeprazole 40 mg, 93.2% (95% CI 87.4-99.0) treated with esomeprazole 20 mg, and 57.1% (95% CI 45.2-69) treated with esomeprazole 10 mg; p < 0.001 vs placebo (29.1%; 95% CI 17.7-40.3). Of patients relapsing, mean time to first recurrence of esophagitis increased with dose, from 34 days (placebo) to 78 days (10 mg), 115 days (20 mg), and 163 days (40 mg). Patients treated with esomeprazole had less frequent and less severe heartburn than those treated with placebo. At month 6, more than 70% of patients being treated with esomeprazole remained symptom-free. CONCLUSIONS: Esomeprazole is effective and well tolerated in the maintenance of a healing erosive esophagitis. Esomeprazole 40 mg and 20 mg maintain healing in over 90% of patients while providing effective control of heartburn symptoms.     

Comparative study of omeprazole, lansoprazole, pantoprazole and esomeprazole for symptom relief in patients with reflux esophagitis

AIM： To clarify whether there is any difference in the symptom relief in patients with reflux esophagitis following the administration of four Proton pump inhibitors （PPIs）. METHODS： Two hundred and seventy-four patients with erosive reflux esophagitis were randomized to receive 8 wk of 20 mg omeprazole （n = 68）, 30 mg of lansoprazole （n = 69）, 40 mg of pantoprazole （n = 69）, 40 mg of esomeprazole （n = 68） once a day in the morning. Daily changes in heartburn and acid reflux symptoms in the first 7 d of administration were assessed using a six-point scale （0： none; 1： mild; 2： mild-moderate; 3： moderate; 4： moderate-severe; 5： severe）. RESULTS： The mean heartburn score in patients treated with esomeprazole more rapidly decreased than those receiving other PPI. Complete resolution of heartburn was also more rapid in patients treated with esomeprazole for 5 d compared with omeprazole （P = 0.0018, P = 0.0098, P = 0.0027, P = 0.0137, P = 0.0069, respectively）, lansoprazole （P = 0.0020, P = 0.0046, P = 0.0037, P = 0.0016, P = 0.0076, respectively）, and pantoprazole （P = 0.0006, P = 0.0005, P = 0.0009, P = 0.0031, P = 0.0119, respectively）. There were no significant differences between the four groups in the rate of endoscopic healing of reflux esophagitis at week 8. CONCLUSION： Esomeprazole may be more effective than omeprazole, lansoprazole, and pantoprazole for the rapid relief of heartburn symptoms and acid reflux symptoms in patients with reflux esophagitis.     

Pantoprazole versus lansoprazole in French patients with reflux esophagitis

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of pantoprazole 40 mg and lansoprazole 30 mg given for 4 to 8 weeks on endoscopic healing and symptom relief in grade II-III reflux esophagitis patients (according to Savary-Miller classification).METHODS: Four hundred and sixty one patients were included (pantoprazole n=226, lansoprazole n=235) in this prospective, randomized, multicenter double-blind study. Endoscopic control was performed at 4 weeks and at 8 weeks if esophagitis was not healed. RESULTS: In the intention-to-treat analysis, the healing rates at 4 weeks were 81 and 80% in the pantoprazole and lansoprazole groups, respectively (NS), 90 and 86% at 8 weeks (NS). In the per-protocol analysis, the healing rates at 4 weeks were 86% in the 2 groups and at 8 weeks 97% in the pantoprazole group and 93% in the lansoprazole group (NS). The heartburn relief rates at day 14 were 88% and 86% in the pantoprazole and lansoprazole groups, respectively. Only esophagitis grade at entry was shown to be a predictive factor for healing at 4 weeks (P<0.0001). CONCLUSION: This study showed that pantoprazole 40 mg once daily is as effective and well tolerated as lansoprazole 30 mg once daily in the treatment of grade II-III acute reflux esophagitis.     

Nizatidine versus Placebo in Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: A 12-Week, Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind Study

Two doses of nizatidine (150 mg bid and 300 mg hs), an H2-receptor antagonist, were compared with placebo in a 12-wk, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel study in 466 patients with endoscopically documented gastroesophageal reflux disease. Antacid tablets were given concomitantly as needed for pain. Compared with placebo, nizatidine 150 mg twice daily was highly effective in rapidly reducing the severity of heartburn, regardless of esophagitis severity at entry. Significantly greater complete mucosal healing of esophagitis occurred after 6 wk of therapy with nizatidine 150 mg bid (vs. nizatidine 300 mg hs or placebo) only in patients with erosive esophagitis [16/68 (24%) vs. 8/65 (12%)] and erosive and ulcerative esophagitis combined [21/99 (21%) vs. 10/94 (11%)]. At wk 12, healing with nizatidine 150 mg bid was also significantly greater than placebo in erosive [19/68 (28%) vs. 9/65 (14%)], ulcerative [10/31 (32%) vs. 3/29 (10%)], and erosive and ulcerative esophagitis combined [29/99 (29%) vs. 12/94 (13%)]. These results show that twice-daily therapy with nizatidine 150 mg is very effective at relieving heartburn, and can also heal erosive and ulcerative esophagitis. Nizatidine 300 mg hs was not effective in healing esophagitis, compared with placebo.     

A Placebo-Controlled Dose-Ranging Study of Lansoprazole in the Management of Reflux Esophagitis

Objective : We compared the efficacy of three different doses of the proton pump inhibitor lansoprazole in the management of reflux esophagitis. Methods : Two hundred ninety-two patients with endoscopically confirmed reflux esophagitis were enrolled in a double-blind, multicenter study and were randomized to lansoprazole 15, 30, or 60 mg or placebo administered once daily for 8 wk. Results : Healing rates after 4 wk of lansoprazole 15, 30, and 60 mg/d were 67.6%, 81.3%, and 80.6%, respectively. These were all significantly superior (   p < 0.001  ) to placebo, which produced endoscopic healing in only 32.8% of the patients after 4 wk. The 4-wk healing rates with lansoprazole 30 or 60 mg were significantly higher than that with lansoprazole 15 mg (   p < 0.05  ), confirming a dose-response effect. Cumulative healing rates after 8 wk of treatment were 52.5% with placebo and 90.0%, 95.4%, and 94.4% with lansoprazole 15, 30, and 60 mg, respectively (   p < 0.001  for all doses of lansoprazole vs placebo). Lansoprazole was also significantly superior to placebo in relieving symptoms in patients with reflux esophagitis. Lansoprazole was well tolerated, and no serious treatment-related adverse events were encountered. Up to 3 months after discontinuation of treatment, all lansoprazole-treated groups had more patients free of endoscopic evidence of esophagitis than the group treated with placebo. Conclusions : Lansoprazole was safe and effective for the treatment of reflux esophagitis in this trial. This study indicates that the optimum daily dose of lansoprazole for reflux esophagitis is 30 mg.     

Effect of pantoprazole in older patients with erosive esophagitis

Several studies suggest that older adults with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) are more likely to develop complications, including erosive esophagitis, but it is unclear whether erosive esophagitis is more difficult to treat in older patients. The purpose of this study was to determine if adults > or = 65 years with erosive esophagitis are more difficult to treat than younger adults. The study was a post hoc analysis of two double-blind, randomized, multicenter trials of patients with erosive esophagitis. Patients received pantoprazole 40 mg once daily, nizatidine 150 mg twice daily or placebo. Patients were evaluated for endoscopic healing at 4 and 8 weeks. Patients recorded typical reflux symptoms using a daily diary to note presence or absence of symptoms. Results showed that 44, 13 and 11 patients > or = 65 years and 210, 69, and 71 patients < 65 received pantoprazole 40 mg daily, nizatidine 150 mg twice daily, or placebo, respectively. Eighty-six percent (86%[76%, 97% CI]) of older and 83% (78%, 88% CI) of younger pantoprazole-treated patients were healed at 8 weeks; 46% (19%, 73% CI) and 35% (24%, 46% CI) of nizatidine-treated and 27% (1%, 54% CI) and 34% (23%, 45% CI) of placebo-treated were healed at 8 weeks. Median time to persistent absence of GERD-related symptoms was similar for older and younger patients treated with pantoprazole. We conclude that older patients with erosive esophagitis do not appear to have more difficult-to-treat disease. Erosive esophagitis is effectively healed and GERD symptoms are controlled in older patients using pantoprazole 40 mg daily.     

A Pilot Study of Efficacy and Safety of Continuous Intravenous Infusion of Pantoprazole in the Treatment of Severe Erosive Esophagitis

Background and objectives Reflux esophagitis is a common disease. Erosive reflux esophagitis is a more advanced stage of reflux esophagitis. Although death from reflux disease is uncommon, significant morbidity and mortality from complications, such as esophageal ulcer, stricture, and cancer, are not uncommon. Proton pump inhibitors are the popular medication for reflux esophagitis. The objective of this study was to determine the efficacy and safety of continuous intravenous infusion of pantoprazole in the treatment of severe erosive esophagitis. Methods From February 2005 to November 2006, all patients with grade 4 erosive reflux esophagitis were screened for the study. Eligible patients were randomized into two groups. Each patient in the study group received intravenous pantoprazole 80 mg loading dose over 5 min, followed by 8 mg/h intravenous infusion for 72 h, then 40 mg orally once a day for 4 days. Each patient in the control group received 40 mg pantoprazole intravenously once a day for 72 h, then orally once a day for 4 days. A second endoscopic gastrointestinal examination (EGD) was performed on treatment days 6–8 (±1 day if day 7 was on a weekend) to document any healing of esophagitis in either the study or the control group. Results In the study group, severe erosive esophagitis healed completely in three patients and significantly in the other three by the time of the second endoscopy. In the control group, severe erosive esophagitis healed partially in five patients, and no improvement was seen at all in one patient by the time of second endoscopy. The difference in the intervention between those two groups was statistically different (P = 0.015). There were no significant complications in either group. Conclusions Severe erosive esophagitis can be completely healed in a few days if pantoprazole is given intravenously and continuously for 72 h. It is safe to give pantoprazole intravenously and continuously for treatment of severe erosive esophagitis.     

40 mg pantoprazole and 40 mg esomeprazole are equivalent in the healing of esophageal lesions and relief from gastroesophageal reflux disease-related symptoms

BACKGROUND: Proton pump inhibitors are regarded as the most effective class of acid suppressive medication for gastroesophageal reflux disease treatment. There is considerable interest regarding the dose equivalence between various proton pump inhibitors. GOALS: To compare the efficacy of pantoprazole and esomeprazole with regard to healing and relief from gastroesophageal reflux disease-related symptoms. STUDY: Multicenter, randomized, double-blind study. Patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease grades B/C (Los Angeles classification) received 40 mg pantoprazole daily (n = 113) or 40 mg esomeprazole daily (n = 114). Healing (endoscopy) and relief from gastroesophageal reflux disease-related symptoms (direct questioning) were assessed at first and final visit (after 4, 6, 8, or 10 weeks of treatment). RESULTS: Overall healing in both treatment groups was 88% of patients (intention-to-treat population), 95% (pantoprazole), and 90% (esomeprazole) (per-protocol population); statistically, this indicates "at least equivalence" between treatments. Overall relief from gastroesophageal reflux disease-related symptoms was similar for pantoprazole (55%) and esomeprazole (51%, per-protoco). No correlation between healing and symptom relief was seen. The majority of reported adverse events were assessed as "not related" to the study drug. Pantoprazole and esomeprazole have comparably good safety and tolerability. CONCLUSION: In patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease, 40 mg pantoprazole daily and 40 mg esomeprazole daily are equally effective for healing of esophageal lesions and relieving gastroesophageal reflux disease-related symptoms.     

Ranitidine is Effective Therapy for Erosive Esophagitis

Two ranitidine dosages were compared for the treatment of erosive esophagitis in a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, parallel-group, placebo-controlled study. Adults with endoscopically verified erosive esophagitis were treated with either ranitidine 150 mg four times daily (n = 106), ranitidine 300 mg four times daily (n = 106), or placebo (n = 116) for up to 12 wk. Patients were also encouraged to adhere to lifestyle modifications (e.g., to elevate the head of bed, etc). Erosive esophagitis healing, determined by endoscopy, was achieved in 69% and 62% of ranitidine-treated patients by 8 wk and in 79% and 74% by 12 wk (150 mg and 300 mg, respectively) compared with 28% of placebo-treated patients by 8 wk and 40% by 12 wk ( p < 0.001 ranitidine vs. placebo). Onset of heartburn relief occurred within 24 h of initiating either ranitidine dosage, and relief was maintained throughout the 12-wk study. Both ranitidine dosages displayed safety profiles similar to that of placebo. We conclude that ranitidine 150 mg or 300 mg administered four times daily is effective for healing erosive esophagitis and relieving its symptoms.     

Comparison of four proton pump inhibitors for the short-term treatment of esophagitis in elderly patients

AIM: To compare efficacy and tolerability of four proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) commonly used in the short-term therapy of esophagitis in elderly patients.METHODS: A total of 320 patients over 65 years with endoscopically diagnosed esophagitis were randomly assigned to one of the following treatments for 8 wk: (1) omeprazole 20 mg/d; (2) lansoprazole 30 mg/d; (3) pantoprazole 40 mg/d, or (4) rabeprazole 20 mg/d. Major symptoms, compliance, and adverse events were recorded. After 8 wk, endoscopy and clinical evaluation were repeated.RESULTS: Per protocol and intention to treat healing rates of esophagitis were: omeprazole = 81.0% and 75.0%, lansoprazole = 90.7% (P = 0.143 vs omeprazole) and 85.0%, pantoprazole = 93.5% (P = 0.04 vs omeprazole) and 90.0% (P = 0.02 vs omeprazole), rabeprazole = 94.6% (P = 0.02 vs omeprazole) and 88.8% (P = 0.04 vs omeprazole). Dividing patients according to the grades of esophagitis, omeprazole was significantly less effective than the three other PPIs in healing grade 1 esophagitis (healing rates: 81.8% vs 100%, 100% and 100%, respectively, P = 0.012). Pantoprazole and rabeprazole (100%) were more effective vs omeprazole (89.6%, P = 0.0001)and lansoprazole (82.4%, P = 0.0001) in decreasing heartburn. Pantoprazole and rabeprazole (92.2% and 90.1%, respectively) were also more effective vs lansoprazole (75.0%, P < 0.05) in decreasing acid regurgitation. Finally, pantoprazole and rabeprazole (95.2% and 100%) were also more effective vs lansoprazole (82.6%, P < 0.05) in decreasing epigastric pain.CONCLUSION: In elderly patients, pantoprazole and rabeprazole were significantly more effective than omeprazole in healing esophagitis and than omeprazole or lansoprazole in improving symptoms. H pylori infection did not influence the healing rates of esophagitis after a short-term treatment with PPI.     

Panum (pantoprazole) effectiveness in the treatment of patients with GERD

There are demonstrated results of a prospective comparative study on clinical efficacy and tolerability of Panum (INN: pantoprazole) under the sponsorship of"Unique Pharmaceutical Laboratories (India)". Were evaluated the results of a 28-day course of treatment of 30 patients with GERD, including those with severe reflux esophagitis (erosive and ulcerative), who received 40 mg of pantoprazole as monotherapy. Was found an algorithm with an intermediate control efficacy to individualizing the approach to therapy. As a result 16,7% of patients with severe reflux esophagitis required increasing the dose of pantoprazole to 80 mg/day in two divided doses, and the rest (83,3%) patients to achieve clinical and endoscopic remission of GERD was sufficient single dose of 40 mg of the drug. The results of this study indicated the efficacy and safety of the Panum drug in the treatment of GERD, including its complicated forms.     

Efficacy of omeprazole for the treatment of symptomatic acid reflux disease without esophagitis

BACKGROUND: Up to three quarters of patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) have symptoms, such as heartburn, but no macroscopic evidence of erosive esophagitis, making symptomatic GERD a common clinical problem in the primary care setting. OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of omeprazole, 20 mg once daily; omeprazole, 10 mg once daily; and placebo in the treatment of symptomatic GERD without erosive esophagitis. METHODS: Patients with a history of heartburn (> or =12 months) and episodes of moderate to severe heartburn on 4 or more of the 7 days before endoscopy were eligible to participate in this 4-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. The absence of erosive esophagitis was established through endoscopy. Eligible patients were randomized to 1 of 3 treatment groups: omeprazole, 20 mg once daily; omeprazole, 10 mg once daily; or placebo. Patients were assessed at weeks 2 and 4. The efficacy of omeprazole for the treatment of heartburn was determined mainly through the following diary card data: daily resolution of heartburn and complete resolution of heartburn every day during 1 week of treatment. The efficacy of omeprazole for the treatment of acid regurgitation, dysphagia, epigastric pain, and nausea was also assessed. RESULTS: Of 359 randomized patients, 355 were included in the statistical analysis (intention-to-treat population). Daily proportions of patients with no heartburn were consistently greater in the 20-mg omeprazole group (62%, day 7; 74%, day 27) than in the 10-mg omeprazole group (41%, day 7; 49%, day 27) or the placebo group (14%, day 7; 23%; day 27). Complete resolution of heartburn every day during the last treatment week was significantly (P< or =.002) higher in the 20-mg omeprazole group (48%) than in the 10-mg omeprazole (27%) or placebo (5%) group. Omeprazole was significantly (P< or =.003) more effective than placebo for the treatment of acid regurgitation, dysphagia, epigastric pain, and nausea. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with symptomatic GERD require profound acid suppression to achieve symptomatic relief. Omeprazole, 20 mg once daily, was superior to omeprazole, 10 mg once daily, and to placebo in providing early and sustained resolution of heartburn, as well as treatment of other troublesome GERD symptoms.     

Treatment of Reflux Esophagitis Resistant to H2-Receptor Antagonists with Lansoprazole, a New H+/K+-ATPase Inhibitor: A Controlled, Double-Blind Study

This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, 8-wk study compared the new H⁺/K⁺-ATPase inhibitor, lansoprazole, 30 mg daily, to ranitidine 150 mg bid for treatment of erosive reflux esophagitis resistant to his-tamine-2 receptor antagonists (H2RA). Patients were evaluated after 2, 4, 6, and 8 wk of treatment by symptom assessment and endoscopy. Healing rates for lansoprazole were 71%, 80%, 88%, and 89% at 2, 4, 6, and 8 wk, respectively, compared to 21%, 33%, 45%, and 38% for ranitidine ( p < 0.001 at all points). Lansoprazole was significantly more effective than ranitidine for relief of heartburn and reduction of antacid tablet use. Increases in serum gastrin concentrations between the baseline and the 8-wk visit were greater in lansoprazole-treated than in ranitidine treated patients. Lansoprazole was safe and well tolerated. In patients with erosive reflux esophagitis resistant to standard doses of H2RA, lansoprazole 30 mg/day is more effective than continuation of an H2RA (ranitidine 150 mg bid) for healing of esophagitis and improvement of symptoms.     

A randomized,double-blind,placebo-controlled clinical study of the histamine H<Subscript>2</Subscript>-receptor antagonist famotidine in Japanese patients with nonerosive reflux disease

BACKGROUND: To investigate whether histamine H2-receptor antagonists are sufficient to treat heartburn in nonerosive reflux disease in Japanese, who produce less gastric acid than Westerners, the efficacy of famotidine in Japanese nonerosive reflux disease patients was studied in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel group-comparative, multicenter study. METHODS: The Los Angeles classification system with Japanese modifications was used to assess the severity of nonerosive reflux disease. Famotidine (10-or 20-mg doses) or placebo was administered to patients twice daily for 8 weeks. Heartburn symptoms were recorded daily by patients. RESULTS: A total of 528 patients participated in the study. The percentage of days without heartburn, the primary end point of the efficacy evaluation, was 62% for 40 mg and 59% for 20 mg of famotidine, and 55% for placebo, with a statistically significant difference between the 40-mg dose and placebo (P = 0.001; significance level, 0.025 one-sided). Famotidine at both doses provided immediate relief from heartburn, and relief persisted throughout the 8-week study with the 40-mg dose. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate that famotidine relieves heartburn symptoms in Japanese nonerosive reflux disease patients.     

Dose-range finding study with the proton pump inhibitor pantoprazole in acute duodenal ulcer patients.

Pantoprazole is a newly developed benzimidazole derivative with strong inhibitory actions on gastric acid secretion by blocking H(+)-K(+)-ATPase. This randomized double-blind multicenter trial investigated the efficacy of 20 mg, 40 mg and 80 mg pantoprazole o.m. on ulcer healing and symptomatic relief in 219 out-patients with endoscopically assessed acute duodenal ulcer. After 2 weeks complete ulcer healing was achieved in 58%, 89% and 82% of the patients with 20 mg, 40 mg and 80 mg pantoprazole o.m., respectively. After 4 weeks, corresponding figures were 93%, 99% and 100%; the difference of the healing rates between the 20 mg and 40 mg groups at 2 weeks was statistically significant (p < 0.0001). A rapid pain relief was achieved in all treatment groups: 72% of the 20 mg group, 89% of the 40 mg group, and 84% of the 80 mg group were pain-free after 2 weeks. The difference between 20 mg and 40 mg was statistically significant (p < 0.05). Pantoprazole was well tolerated. Adverse events occurred in 13 patients; headache, skin alterations, and diarrhea were reported most frequently. Severity and frequency of adverse events did not reveal any dose-dependence. In conclusion, pantoprazole provides fast healing of acute duodenal ulcer as well as rapid improvement of ulcer symptoms. For further clinical trials in peptic ulcer disease a daily dose of pantoprazole 40 mg o.m. is recommended.     

Efficacy of pantoprazole 20 mg daily compared with esomeprazole 20 mg daily in the maintenance of healed gastroesophageal reflux disease: a randomized, double-blind comparative trial - the EMANCIPATE study

OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy and tolerability of pantoprazole 20 mg once daily with that of esomeprazole 20 mg once daily for 6 months as maintenance therapy in patients with previously healed gastroesophageal reflux disease. METHODS: In an initial open-label acute phase, outpatients with endoscopically confirmed gastroesophageal reflux disease (Los Angeles grades A-D) received pantoprazole 40 mg once daily for 4 or 8 weeks. Those healed (defined as the absence of esophagitis, and 'no' or 'mild' heartburn and acid regurgitation) were randomized in the double-blind manner for maintenance therapy with pantoprazole 20 mg once daily or esomeprazole 20 mg once daily for 6 months. RESULTS: In the acute healing phase, 1452 patients were recruited to receive pantoprazole 40 mg once daily. Healing success was 91% (intent-to-treat analysis). A total of 1303 patients entered the maintenance phase of the study. Pantoprazole 20 mg once daily and esomeprazole 20 mg once daily were equally effective at maintaining patients in remission; 84 and 85% of pantoprazole and esomeprazole recipients remained in combined endoscopic and symptomatic remission at 6 months (intent-to-treat analysis). The confidence interval of the difference was (-5.7; +infinity), showing that pantoprazole is as effective as esomeprazole with a noninferiority margin of 5.8%. Combined endoscopic and symptomatic remission was independent of Helicobacter pylori status. Both treatments were well tolerated and safe. CONCLUSION: Treatment with pantoprazole 20 mg once daily or esomeprazole 20 mg once daily provides similarly effective and well-tolerated maintenance of previously healed gastroesophageal reflux disease irrespective of baseline H. pylori status.