Healing and relapse rates in gastroesophageal reflux disease treated with the newer proton-pump inhibitors lansoprazole, rabeprazole, and pantoprazole compared with omeprazole, ranitidine, and placebo: evidence from randomized clinical trials

BACKGROUND: The older proton pump inhibitor (PPI) omeprazole and the newer PPIs lansoprazole, rabeprazole, and pantoprazole are approved for the acute and maintenance treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). OBJECTIVE: On the basis of the results of randomized clinical trials, this study sought to estimate healing and relapse rates in acute and maintenance treatment of GERD with the newer PPIs compared with omeprazole, the histamine2-receptor antagonist ranitidine (the most frequent non-PPI comparator in studies of PPIs), and placebo. METHODS: A search of MEDLINE was conducted to identify randomized, controlled clinical trials that included a PPI in > or =1 treatment arm and assessed the healing of erosive esophagitis endoscopically. The primary outcome for studies of acute therapy was healing rate, and the primary outcome for studies of maintenance therapy was relapse rate. RESULTS: Fifty-three studies were identified, of which 38 involved acute therapy (12 excluded) and 15 maintenance therapy. None of the studies of pantoprazole met the inclusion criteria for maintenance therapy. The 8-week overall healing rate ratios in the comparison of newer PPIs with omeprazole 20 mg/d were as follows: lansoprazole 30 mg/d, 1.02 (95% CI, 0.98-1.06): rabeprazole 20 mg/d, 0.93 (95% CI, 0.87-1.00); and pantoprazole 40 mg/d, 0.98 (95% CI, 0.90-1.07). In the comparison of any PPI with ranitidine 300 mg/d, the ratios were as follows: lansoprazole, 1.62 (95% CI, 1.46-1.76); rabeprazole, 1.36 (95% CI, 1.20-1.54); pantoprazole, 1.60 (95% CI, 1.33-1.96); and omeprazole, 1.58 (95% CI, 1.41-1.78). Relapse rates over 1 year of treatment were similar between lansoprazole and rabeprazole. Compared with ranitidine, there were statistically significant differences in the rates of resolution of heartburn symptoms (P < 0.002), ulcer healing (P < 0.05), and relapse (P < 0.01). Similar results were seen in the comparison of PPIs with placebo in terms of rates of resolution of heartburn symptoms (P < 0.01), ulcer healing (P < 0.001), and relapse (P < 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, the newer PPIs were of similar efficacy to omeprazole in terms of heartburn control, healing rates, and relapse rates. All the PPIs were superior to ranitidine and placebo in healing erosive esophagitis and decreasing relapse rates.     

质子泵抑制剂导致的急性泛发性发疹性脓疱病:基于真实世界的药物警戒研究

  目的  探讨不同质子泵抑制剂(proton pump inhibitors, PPIs)与急性泛发性发疹性脓疱病(acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis, AGEP)的关联性及特点。  方法  检索2004年1月至2020年6月美国食品药品监督管理局不良事件报告系统(Food and Drug Administration's adverse events reporting system, FAERS)数据库中PPIs/AGEP相关报告,采用比例失衡测量法及贝叶斯法对不同PPIs导致的AGEP进行关联性分析,并比较其发病时间及预后。  结果  共检索到此期间PPIs导致的AGEP病例报告162例。应用的PPIs药物主要为奥美拉唑(33.95%,55/162),其次为埃索美拉唑(29.63%,48/162)、泮托拉唑(26.54%,43/162)。以泮托拉唑与AGEP的关联性最强,其次为奥美拉唑和兰索拉唑,埃索美拉唑与AGEP的关联性较弱。PPIs导致AGEP发病时间的中位数为6(2,12)d,60.00%~83.33%的患者于用药后10 d内发病(除雷贝拉唑外)。3例(1.86%)AGEP患者死亡,128例(79.50%)需住院治疗。以埃索美拉唑导致的AGEP患者住院比率最高(91.49%,43/47),其次为泮托拉唑(88.37%,38/43)、兰索拉唑(85.71%,12/44),奥美拉唑(61.82%,34/55)最低。  结论  基于对FAERS数据库的药物警戒研究,揭示不同PPIs导致AGEP的风险及特点,可为临床合理用药提供依据。     

In Vitro Study of the Variable Effects of Proton Pump Inhibitors on Voriconazole

Voriconazole is a broad-spectrum antifungal agent used for the treatment of severe fungal infections. Maintaining therapeutic concentrations of 1 to 5.5 μg/ml is currently recommended to maximize the exposure-response relationship of voriconazole. However, this is challenging, given the highly variable pharmacokinetics of the drug, which includes metabolism by cytochrome P450 (CYP450) isotypes CYP2C19, CYP3A4, and CYP2C9, through which common metabolic pathways for many medications take place and which are also expressed in different isoforms with various metabolic efficacies. Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are also metabolized through these enzymes, making them competitive inhibitors of voriconazole metabolism, and coadministration with voriconazole has been reported to increase total voriconazole exposure. We examined the effects of five PPIs (rabeprazole, pantoprazole, lansoprazole, omeprazole, and esomeprazole) on voriconazole concentrations using four sets of human liver microsomes (HLMs) of different CYP450 phenotypes. Overall, the use of voriconazole in combination with any PPI led to a significantly higher voriconazole yield compared to that achieved with voriconazole alone in both pooled HLMs (77% versus 59%; P < 0.001) and individual HLMs (86% versus 76%; P < 0.001). The mean percent change in the voriconazole yield from that at the baseline after PPI exposure in pooled microsomes ranged from 22% with pantoprazole to 51% with esomeprazole. Future studies are warranted to confirm whether and how the deliberate coadministration of voriconazole and PPIs can be used to boost voriconazole levels in patients with difficult-to-treat fungal infections.     

Combination drug therapy for gastroesophageal reflux disease

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the role of combination therapy with proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) and histamine(2) receptor antagonists in gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). DATA SOURCES: Clinical literature identified through MEDLINE (January 1966-August 2001). Key search terms included gastroesophageal reflux, benzimidazoles; omeprazole; lansoprazole; pantoprazole; rabeprazole; receptor antagonists, histamine(2); therapy, combination drug; therapy, combined modality; and combinations, drug. DATA SYNTHESIS: Approximately 80-90% of patients show healing of reflux esophagitis after 8 weeks of once-daily PPI therapy. Patients taking PPI therapy twice daily still have nocturnal acid breakthrough (periods of gastric pH <4 lasting for > or =60 min during the night) as much as 70% of the time. The clinical application of this finding has not been shown. One trial has shown that omeprazole in the morning plus ranitidine at bedtime is not as effective as omeprazole twice daily given before the morning and evening meals at controlling nocturnal acid breakthrough. Further, 1 small trial in healthy subjects without GERD showed that the addition of a 1-time dose of ranitidine at bedtime to a twice-daily regimen of omeprazole may decrease the occurrence of nocturnal acid breakthrough. However, the clinical significance of this finding is not clear. CONCLUSIONS: No studies in patients with GERD demonstrate that the addition of histamine(2) receptor antagonists to twice-daily PPI therapy provides any further benefit above that derived from PPIs alone. The parameter used to measure the efficacy of combination regimens for GERD thus far--nocturnal acid breakthrough--has not been proven to correlate with improvement of GERD symptoms in any controlled or prospective clinical trials. Further investigation is needed to determine optimal therapy in patients refractory to standard doses of PPIs.     

The proton-pump inhibitors: similarities and differences

OBJECTIVE: This paper examines the clinical pharmacology of the proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) and briefly reviews some comparative studies of these agents. BACKGROUND: PPIs have emerged as the treatment of choice for acid-related diseases, including gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and peptic ulcer disease. Although these drugs-omeprazole, lansoprazole, pantoprazole, and rabeprazole-share a common structure (all are substituted benzimidazoles) and mode of action (inhibition of H+,K+-adenosine triphosphatase [ATPase]), each differs somewhat in its clinical pharmacology. RESULTS: In comparative clinical trials found in MEDLINE, PPIs administered once daily produced endoscopic evidence of healing in >90% of patients with duodenal ulcer after 4 weeks of treatment, in >90% of those with gastric ulcer after 6 weeks of treatment, and in >90% of those with ulcerative or erosive GERD after 8 weeks of treatment. Maintenance therapy with daily doses of a PPI has been shown to be an effective means of preventing GERD relapse. PPIs also inhibit the growth of Helicobacter pylori, now recognized as an important factor in peptic ulcer disease, and, when administered in combination with antibiotics, provide the best treatment for eradication of the bacterium. Rabeprazole has a more rapid onset of H+,K+-ATPase inhibition than the other PPIs and, compared with omeprazole, a greater effect on intragastric pH after the first dose. Omeprazole and lansoprazole have a greater potential for drug-drug interactions than do pantoprazole and rabeprazole. CONCLUSION: Although the individual PPIs have similar efficacy in many cases, differences between them should be considered when choosing a treatment regimen.     

Acid-suppressive effects of rabeprazole, omeprazole, and lansoprazole at reduced and standard doses: a crossover comparative study in homozygous extensive metabolizers of cytochrome P450 2C19

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: To improve clinical outcomes of the initial therapy for gastroesophageal reflux disease, intragastric pH should be above 4.0 for more than 20 hours a day (83.3%) and nocturnal gastric acid breakthrough, defined as 60 continuous minutes of intragastric pH below 4.0 at night, should be inhibited. A "step-down" therapy sometimes fails because of insufficient acid suppression. Therefore we compared the acid-suppressive effects of proton pump inhibitors. METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized, open-label, 8-way crossover study. In 9 healthy Helicobacter pylori-negative cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2C19 homozygous extensive metabolizers, intragastric pH was measured for 24 hours on day 7 of treatment with rabeprazole, omeprazole, and lansoprazole orally administered once daily at reduced and standard doses. RESULTS: Compared with baseline data (7% [range, 5%-20%]), the median values of the 24-hour percent of time that intragastric pH was above 4.0 significantly increased but did not exceed 83.3% under any of the 7 regimens, which were as follows: 10 mg rabeprazole (51% [range, 28%-78%], P < .01), 20 mg rabeprazole (59% [range, 36%-83%], P < .01), 10 mg omeprazole (26% [range, 4%-33%], P < .05), 20 mg omeprazole (48% [range, 31%-73%], P < .01), 40 mg omeprazole (62% [range, 47%-87%], P < .01), 15 mg lansoprazole (34% [range, 5%-51%], P < .05), and 30 mg lansoprazole (56% [range, 20%-76%], P < .05). Significant differences were observed among 10, 20, and 40 mg omeprazole (10 mg versus 20 mg, P < .01; 10 mg versus 40 mg, P < .01; and 20 mg versus 40 mg, P < .05) and between 15 and 30 mg lansoprazole (P < .01), whereas no significant difference was observed between 10 and 20 mg rabeprazole. Nocturnal gastric acid breakthrough was observed under all regimens. CONCLUSIONS: Rabeprazole, omeprazole, and lansoprazole, given once daily at standard doses, cannot be expected to achieve ideal acid suppression for the initial therapy for gastroesophageal reflux disease in Helicobacter-negative CYP2C19 homozygous extensive metabolizers. Rabeprazole 10 mg may be appropriate for step-down therapy.     

Appropriate choice of proton pump inhibitor therapy in the prevention and management of NSAID-related gastrointestinal damage

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are associated with gastrointestinal adverse effects, ranging from dyspepsia and peptic ulcer disease to more serious complications such as haemorrhage or perforation. NSAID-induced gastrointestinal toxicity is a significant medical problem worldwide. Misoprostol is effective in reducing NSAID-induced mucosal damage, but patient compliance is limited by poor tolerance. Histamine receptor antagonists are relatively effective against duodenal ulcers but offer no significant protection against gastric ulcers. Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), such as pantoprazole, omeprazole and lansoprazole, have been shown to be effective in preventing the development of gastric and duodenal ulcers in high-risk patients taking NSAIDs. PPI therapy is also beneficial in healing NSAID-induced ulcers and preventing their recurrence in patients requiring ongoing NSAID therapy. PPIs have an excellent safety profile, and pantoprazole--with its low potential for drug-drug interactions--is particularly suitable for administration to elderly patients who often require concomitant treatment with other medications.     

In vitro activities of rabeprazole, a novel proton pump inhibitor, and its thioether derivative alone and in combination with other antimicrobials against recent clinical isolates of Helicobacter pylori

The MICs of rabeprazole sodium (RPZ), a newly developed benzimidazole proton pump inhibitor (PPI), against 133 clinical Helicobacter pylori strains revealed a higher degree of activity than the another two PPIs, lansoprazole and omeprazole. Time-kill curve assays of RPZ, when combined with amoxicillin, clarithromycin, or metronidazole, disclosed that synergistic effects were demonstrated in combination with each antibiotic examined. Moreover, no apparent antagonistic effect appeared among all of the strains tested.     

A review of the clinical and economic impact of using esomeprazole or lansoprazole for the treatment of erosive esophagitis

BACKGROUND: The use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) for the treatment of erosive esophagitis has had a major impact on the prescribing budgets of primary care organizations in the United Kingdom. Assessments of the clinical and economic effectiveness of PPIs would provide useful tools for decision-making. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to review the available preclinical and clinical studies comparing esomeprazole with lansoprazole in the healing and maintenance of erosive esophagitis, and to compare the budgeting impact of the 2 strategies. Comparative tolerability was also reviewed. METHODS: MEDLINE (1966-September 2002) and EMBASE (1980-September 2002) were searched for abstracts and articles reporting comparative studies of esomeprazole and lansoprazole. The search terms used were gastroesophageal reflux disease, reflux esophagitis, and proton pump inhibitor; all comparisons of esomeprazole and lansoprazole at any dose were considered. The database search was supplemented based on the authors' familiarity with the literature. RESULTS: The comparative studies that were identified fell into 4 categories: (1) intragastric acid suppression studies; (2) randomized controlled trials in the healing of erosive esophagitis; (3) randomized controlled trials in the maintenance of erosive esophagitis; and (4) health economic analyses. Based on these studies, when healing doses (esomeprazole 40 mg once daily, lansoprazole 30 mg once daily) and low doses (20 and 15 mg once daily, respectively) were compared, esomeprazole was more efficacious than lansoprazole in suppressing acid in the intragastric compartment (both comparisons, P < 0.05). More patients with erosive esophagitis experienced healing at 4 and 8 weeks with esomeprazole 40 mg once daily than with lansoprazole 30 mg once daily (P < 0.001 at 4 and 8 weeks). At 6 months, remission was maintained in more patients receiving esomeprazole 20 mg once daily than in those receiving lansoprazole 15 mg once daily (P < 0.001). No significant differences in tolerability were noted in clinical trials that directly compared the 2 PPIs. When the cost-effectiveness of esomeprazole treatment was compared with that of lansoprazole treatment in the healing and maintenance of erosive esophagitis, the greater efficacy of esomeprazole translated into potential cost savings and better outcomes. CONCLUSION: The currently available comparative data for esomeprazole and lansoprazole indicate clinical and cost-effectiveness advantages for esomeprazole in the healing and maintenance of erosive esophagitis compared with lansoprazole.     

Lansoprazole versus omeprazole for duodenal ulcer healing and prevention of relapse: a randomized, multicenter, double-masked trial.

The aim of this randomized, multicenter, double-masked, parallel-group study was to compare the efficacy of lansoprazole with that of omeprazole monotherapy in duodenal ulcer healing and prevention of relapse. A total of 251 patients with duodenal ulcer were treated with either lansoprazole 30 mg/d (n = 167) or omeprazole 40 mg/d (n = 84). Patients with healed ulcers were then randomly allocated to 12 months of maintenance therapy with lansoprazole 15 mg/d (n = 74), lansoprazole 30 mg/d (n = 71), or omeprazole 20 mg/d (n = 73). Healing rates at 4 weeks (intent-to-treat analysis) were 93.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 90.2% to 97.6%) with lansoprazole and 97.5% (95% CI, 93.7% to 100%) with omeprazole; there were no significant differences between groups. Endoscopic relapse rates after 6 months were 4.5% (95% CI, 0% to 10.6%) with lansoprazole 15 mg, 0% with lansoprazole 30 mg, and 6.3% (95% CI, 1.5% to 12.5%) with omeprazole 20 mg, compared with 3.3% (95% CI, 0% to 8.2%), 0%, and 3.5% (95% CI, 0% to 8.8%), respectively, at 12 months. Again, there were no significant differences between groups. The incidence of adverse events during acute treatment was 6.0% and 7.1% in the lansoprazole and omeprazole groups, respectively; during maintenance therapy, the incidences were 12.2% (lansoprazole 15 mg), 5.6% (lansoprazole 30 mg), and 11.0% (omeprazole 20 mg). Within treatment groups, pain was significantly ameliorated after the acute phase but not after maintenance therapy (P < 0.05); no differences were observed between groups. Gastrin values increased significantly after acute therapy (P < 0.05), persisted at these increased levels during maintenance therapy, and returned to normal after 6-month follow-up. Both lansoprazole and omeprazole were highly effective and well tolerated in the treatment of duodenal ulcer; relapse rates were similar for all doses studied. Thus no additional benefit is to be gained from using a proton-pump inhibitor at a dose > 15 mg lansoprazole to prevent relapse.     

Diarrhea Caused by Proton Pump Inhibitor Administration: Comparisons Among Lansoprazole,Rabeprazole, and Omeprazole

BackgroundThe number of patients who require treatment with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) is increasing in Japan. One of their adverse effects is diarrhea.ObjectivesWe investigated the incidence of diarrhea caused by 3 different PPIs: lansoprazole, rabeprazole, and omeprazole.MethodsPatients using PPIs for >1 month were enrolled. Enrolled patients recorded daily stool frequency, stool consistency using the Bristol Stool Scale Form, and impaired quality of life caused by diarrhea for 1 month. Their attending physicians described the types and dosages, and duration of PPI administration, as well as other necessary information.ResultsA total of 255 patients participated. Mean age of the patients was 70.7 years old. During the 1-month observation period, 3.5% of the patients complained of diarrhea. There was no significant difference for the incidence of diarrhea among the 3 types of PPIs. Furthermore, no correlations between diarrhea and length and dosage of PPI administration were found.ConclusionsThe incidence of diarrhea in patients receiving long-term therapy did not differ among 3 different PPIs. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: UMIN ID 000005300.     

In vitro and in vivo evaluation of drug–drug interaction between dabigatran and proton pump inhibitors

To quantify the drug–drug interactions between dabigatran etexilate (DE) and proton pump inhibitors (PPI) and in particular the role of P‐gp activity modulation. In the first part of the study, efflux ratios of DE were evaluated using the caco‐2 cell line in the presence of pantoprazole, omeprazole, rabeprazole, lansoprazole and ciclosporin A (positive control). The two PPI that reduced the efflux ratio of dabigatran to the greatest and least extent, respectively, were used during the second part of the study, comprising a single‐centre, randomised, open‐label study with an incomplete Latin square design. Nine healthy volunteers received DE (150 mg) alone, DE (150 mg) with the first PPI and DE (150 mg) with the second PPI in randomised sequence. Dabigatran plasma concentration and thrombin time were measured in blood samples withdrawn at 11 time points after each treatment. Models were built using a nonlinear mixed‐effect modelling approach. Omeprazole and rabeprazole were the two PPI that reduced the efflux ratio of DE least and most, respectively. The PK model was based on an inverse Gaussian absorption process with one compartment. The relationship between dabigatran concentration and thrombin time was considered linear. Some PK profiles had dramatically low concentration values due to poor absorption. These profiles were clustered using a between subject model mixture with interoccasion variability. The concomitant administration of PPI did not significantly change dabigatran pharmacokinetics. DE is subject to high absorption variability, precluding evaluation of the effect of PPI on its pharmacokinetics.     

Lessons from two cases of anaphylaxis to proton pump inhibitors

What is known and Objective: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), which are widely used for the treatment of peptic ulcers and gastroesophageal diseases, reduce both basal and stimulated gastric acid secretion by inhibiting the parietal cell enzyme H(+)‐K(+)‐adenosine triphosphatase. There have been several reports of hypersensitivity reactions to PPIs but anaphylaxis is very rare. We report on two cases of anaphylaxis to PPIs. Case summary: Our two interesting and instructive cases of anaphylaxis to PPIs relate to the orally disintegrating form of lansoprazole and omeprazole. The first patient had taken esomeprazole 20 mg/day for 1 month without any side effects before experiencing anaphylaxis to lansoprazole. To our knowledge, this is the first report of anaphylaxis to the orally disintegrating form of lansoprazole. In the second case, the patient was misdiagnosed with penicillin allergy which she suffered from earlier. What is new and Conclusion: Physicians need to be more aware of the possibility of hypersensitivity to PPIs.     

Esomeprazole-induced healing of gastroesophageal reflux disease is unrelated to the genotype of CYP2C19: evidence from clinical and pharmacokinetic data

BACKGROUND: The clinical outcome of acid-related disorders treated by proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) might be dependent on the polymorphically expressed cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2C19, which is involved in PPI metabolism. We tested whether esomeprazole-induced healing of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is related to CYP2C19 genotype. METHODS: Two hundred five patients with GERD (Los Angeles classification grade A or B) were included in a case-control study according to endoscopic outcome (healed versus unhealed group, matched for confounders) after treatment with 40 mg esomeprazole daily for 4 weeks. The frequency of CYP2C19 genotypes was determined as the primary outcome measure for both groups. In a second trial plasma levels of esomeprazole and corresponding CYP2C19 and CYP3A4 metabolites (5-hydroxyomeprazole and omeprazole sulfone) were monitored in 10 CYP2C19 wild-type patients with GERD after the first and last doses (day 7) of 40 mg esomeprazole daily to calculate metabolic ratios. RESULTS: CYP2C19 wild-type (n = 148) and heterozygous (n = 51) or homozygous variant (n = 6) patients did not differ with respect to baseline characteristics. The frequency distribution of CYP2C19 genotypes was not different between patients with complete (75/100) and incomplete (73/105) healing (P = .65). When a single esomeprazole dose and multiple dosing were compared, the low contribution of CYP2C19 to the elimination of esomeprazole decreased further by 50%. In contrast, the CYP3A4-dependent formation of omeprazole sulfone increased by 40%, and consequently, the metabolic ratio of omeprazole sulfone to 5-hydroxyomeprazole was elevated from 7.9 to 19.3 (P = .0004). CONCLUSION: In contrast to other PPIs, esomeprazole-induced healing of GERD is unrelated to the CYP2C19 genotype, which can be explained by the metabolic shift toward the CYP3A4-mediated pathway.     

An overview of proton pump inhibitors.

SUMMARY: Proton pump inhibitors are the standard of treatment for acid-related disorders. These disorders include gastroesophageal reflux disease and its complications (i.e., erosive esophagitis and Barrett's esophagus), peptic ulcer disease, Zollinger-Ellison syndrome, and idiopathic hypersecretion. Proton pump inhibitors are also successfully used for the treatment of Helicobacter pylori infection and upper gastrointestinal bleeding.There are currently five proton pump inhibitors approved by the Food and Drug Administration and available in the United States. These are omeprazole (Prilosec), lansoprazole (Prevacid), rabeprazole (Aciphex), pantoprazole (Protonix), and esomeprazole (Nexium). This review discusses the history of proton pump inhibitors and compares and evaluates the pharmacology including mechanism of action, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, administration, dosage, and drug interactions. Information regarding therapeutic indications, clinical efficacy, short- and long-term side effects, and cost is also presented. A case presentation offers an analysis of the use of proton pump inhibitors in individualized patient care.     

Efficacy of esomeprazole in patients with acid-peptic disorders.

Esomeprazole (Nexium) is a new proton pump inhibitor that provides more effective acid control compared with other proton pump inhibitors. In patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease, standard doses of esomeprazole maintain intragastric pH above 4 for significantly longer periods compared with standard doses of other proton pump inhibitors after 5 days of treatment. Esomeprazole is approved for the treatment of symptomatic gastroesophageal reflux disease, the healing of erosive esophagitis, and maintenance of healing. In clinical trials, esomeprazole 40 mg once daily for up to 8 weeks provided higher rates of healing of erosive esophagitis and a greater proportion of patients with sustained resolution of heartburn, than either omeprazole 20 mg or lansoprazole 30 mg once daily. For the maintenance of healing, esomeprazole 20 mg once daily provided significantly higher rates of maintained healing of erosive esophagitis after 6 months of treatment compared with lansoprazole 15 mg once daily. Esomeprazole is also approved for use as part of a triple-drug therapy regimen in combination with amoxicillin and clarithromycin for the eradication of Helicobacter pylori in patients with duodenal ulcer disease. The side effect profile of esomeprazole is similar to that of omeprazole. Many patients with acid-related disorders may benefit from the more rapid symptom relief, higher rates of healing of erosive esophagitis, and improved maintenance of healing that can be achieved with esomeprazole.     

Is ranitidine therapy sufficient for healing peptic ulcers associated with non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory drug use?

Long-term use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) increases the risk of serious gastroduodenal events. To minimise these risks, patients often require concomitant acid-suppressive therapy. We conducted a literature review of clinical trials examining use of ranitidine 150 mg twice daily to heal gastroduodenal ulcers (GU) in NSAID recipients. Seven studies were identified. After 8 weeks' treatment with ranitidine, GU healing rates ranged from 50% to 74% and rates of duodenal ulcer (DU) healing ranged from 81% to 84%. Ranitidine was more effective when NSAIDs were discontinued (healing rates reaching 95% and 100%, respectively). The ulcer healing rate with sucralfate was similar to that of ranitidine. However, proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy was associated with significantly greater rates of both GU and DU healing than ranitidine; 8-week GU rates were 92% and 88% with esomeprazole 40 mg and 20 mg, respectively (vs. 74% with ranitidine, p < 0.01). For omeprazole, 8-week healing rates were 87% with omeprazole 40 mg and 84% with omeprazole 20 mg (vs. 64% for ranitidine, p < 0.001), and for lansoprazole the corresponding values were 73-74% and 66-69% for the 30 mg and 15 mg doses, respectively (vs. 50-53% for ranitidine, p < 0.05). In the PPI study reporting DU healing the values were 92% for omeprazole 20 mg (vs. 81% for ranitidine, p < 0.05) and 88% for omeprazole 40 mg (p = 0.17 vs. ranitidine). NSAID-associated GU are more likely to heal when patients receive concomitant treatment with a PPI rather than ranitidine.     

Comparison of an increased dosage regimen of rabeprazole versus a concomitant dosage regimen of famotidine with rabeprazole for nocturnal gastric acid inhibition in relation to cytochrome P450 2C19 genotypes

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: A concomitant dosage regimen of a histamine 2 receptor antagonist with a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) effectively decreases the incidence of nocturnal acid breakthrough, which is one of the problems encountered when acid-related diseases are treated with a PPI alone. We compared the effectiveness of an increased dosage regimen of rabeprazole with that of a concomitant dosage regimen of rabeprazole with famotidine, relative to cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2C19 genotype status, on nocturnal acid inhibition. METHODS: Fifteen Helicobacter pylori-negative volunteers, consisting of 5 homozygous extensive metabolizers (EMs), 6 heterozygous EMs, and 4 poor metabolizers (PMs) of CYP2C19, took 20 mg rabeprazole, 40 mg rabeprazole, and 20 mg rabeprazole plus 20 mg famotidine at bedtime (at 10 PM) for 8 days. The subjects then underwent 24-hour intragastric pH monitoring on day 8. RESULTS: For the 20-mg rabeprazole, 40-mg rabeprazole, and concomitant dosage regimens, the median percent times and ranges when nocturnal intragastric pH values were lower than 4.0 were 78.8% (47.5%-98.0%), 45.3% (29.0%-52.2%), and 15.5% (0.0%-40.8%), respectively, for homozygous EMs; 51.0% (7.0%-91.6%), 41.3% (33.0%-59.0%), and 18.5% (8.4%-31.9%), respectively, for heterozygous EMs; and 4.5% (2.0%-31.2%), 9.5% (0.0%-31.1%), and 9.3% (0.0%-14.7%), respectively, for PMs. Although significant differences in acid inhibition between the different CYP2C19 genotypes were observed when rabeprazole alone was given (P = .016 for 20 mg rabeprazole and P = .023 for 40 mg rabeprazole), such differences were not observed when famotidine was concomitantly given (P = .206). CONCLUSIONS: The combination regimen of famotidine plus rabeprazole is more effective for nocturnal acid inhibition in homozygous and heterozygous EMs than the increased dosage regimen of rabeprazole. This concomitant therapy could be a rescue regimen for patients with nocturnal acid breakthrough refractory to a standard PPI therapy who are likely to be CYP2C19 EMs.