Rabeprazole, 20 mg once daily or 10 mg twice daily, is equivalent to omeprazole, 20 mg once daily, in the healing of erosive gastrooesophageal reflux disease

BACKGROUND: Proton pump inhibitors are the most potent pharmacologic inhibitors of gastric acid secretion currently available, and have proven effective in the treatment of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GERD). The object of this study was to compare the efficacy and tolerability of a new proton pump inhibitor, rabeprazole at two different dosages, with that of omeprazole in the healing of erosive GERD. METHODS: Rabeprazole 20 mg once daily (QD) and 10 mg twice daily (BID) were compared with omeprazole 20 mg QD in a double-blind, multicentre, parallel group study involving 310 patients with erosive GERD. The primary efficacy endpoint was oesophageal mucosal healing determined by endoscopy. Secondary endpoints included reduction in symptoms and improvements in quality-of-life scores. RESULTS: The healing rates between both rabeprazole groups and the omeprazole group were equivalent in both the per-protocol and intent-to-treat populations. In the per-protocol population, rabeprazole 20 mg was noted to have a numerical trend toward more rapid daytime heartburn relief. However, by 4 and 8 weeks of treatment, no significant differences were found between groups for secondary endpoints, adverse events, or laboratory abnormalities including elevation of serum gastrin levels. CONCLUSIONS: Rabeprazole 20 mg in two different dosing schedules is as effective as omeprazole 20 mg QD with regard to efficacy and tolerability in patients with erosive GERD.     

Rabeprazole Versus Omeprazole in Preventing Relapse of Erosive or Ulcerative Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a chronic condition, with 50–80% of patients experiencing recurrence within one year of completing initial treatment. In patients with erosive GERD, proton-pump inhibitors (PPI) provide faster healing and symptom relief than do H₂-receptor antagonists and have become the treatment of choice. Rabeprazole is a new PPI with demonstrated efficacy in both the acute and maintenance treatment of erosive GERD. The primary objective was to compare efficacy and tolerability of rabeprazole and omeprazole in preventing relapse of healed erosive GERD. Secondary objectives included comparison of efficacy in preventing GERD relapse symptoms and in maintaining quality of life. In this multicenter, double-blind, parallel-group study, 243 patients with healed erosive GERD were randomised to receive rabeprazole 10 mg once daily in the morning (QAM) (N = 82); rabeprazole 20 mg QAM (N = 78); or omeprazole 20 mg QAM (N = 83). Endoscopies were performed at weeks 13, 26, 39 (if clinically indicated), and 52, or when symptoms suggested recurrence. Corpus biopsies were performed at each endoscopy, and antral biopsies were performed at study entry and exit. Rabeprazole 10 mg and 20 mg QAM were equivalent to omeprazole 20 mg QAM for all efficacy parameters. At week 52, relapse rates in the intent-to-treat populations were 5%, 4%, and 5% for rabeprazole 10 mg and 20 mg and omeprazole 20 mg, respectively. All treatments were well tolerated. In conclusion, both rabeprazole 10 mg and 20 mg QAM are equivalent to omeprazole 20 mg QAM in preventing recurrence of erosive GERD.     

REVIEW: Efficacy of Rabeprazole Once Daily for Acid-Related Disorders

Proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) have revolutionized the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and peptic ulcer. To evaluate the efficacy of the new PPI rabeprazole, 12 controlled clinical trials were conducted worldwide—three for each indication (erosive or ulcerative GERD healing, long-term GERD healing maintenance, duodenal ulcer healing, and gastric ulcer healing). Rabeprazole was compared to placebo, the H₂-receptor antagonist ranitidine, and the PPI omeprazole. Treatment duration ranged from 4 weeks for duodenal ulcer to 6 weeks for gastric ulcer, 8 weeks for GERD healing, and 1 year for maintenance of GERD healing. Rabeprazole was as effective as omeprazole for each indication and significantly more effective than ranitidine for healing of GERD (87% vs 66%) and duodenal ulcer (83% vs 73%). Rabeprazole was also superior to ranitidine in providing symptom relief, particularly in GERD.     

Acid-Suppressive Efficacy of a Reduced Dosage of Rabeprazole: Comparison of 10 Mg Twice Daily Rabeprazole with 20 Mg Twice Daily Rabeprazole, 30 Mg Twice Daily Lansoprazole,and 20 Mg Twice Daily Omeprazole by 24-Hr Intragastric pH-metry

Rabeprazole achieves more potent acid suppression than other proton pump inhibitors. Therefore it is administered at reduced as well as high dosages in eradication therapy for Helicobacter pylori; however, there is incomplete assessment of the efficacy of a reduced dosage of rabeprazole as might be employed in therapy.In this study, we evaluated acid-suppressive efficacy of a reduced dosage of rabeprazole on day 7 by 24-hr pH-metry in 10 healthy male cytochrome P-450 2C19 extensive metabolizers without Helicobacter pylori infection and compared the results with those of high dosages of rabeprazole, lansoprazole, and omeprazole. Median intragastric pH value, pH >3 holding time ratio (pH>3HT), pH>4HT, pH>5HT, pH>6HT, and pH>7HT for 24 hr with rabeprazole, 10 mg twice daily, were not significantly different from those of rabeprazole, 20 mg twice daily, lansoprazole, 30 mg twice daily, and omeprazole, 20 mg twice daily. In conclusion, for acid-suppressive efficacy, a reduced dosage of rabeprazole is comparable to high dosages of rabeprazole, lansoprazole, and omeprazole.     

Comparison of the efficacy of rabeprazole 10 mg and omeprazole 20 mg for the healing rapidity of peptic ulcer diseases

AIM: Rabeprazole has been known to inhibit H(+)/K(+)-ATPase more rapidly than omeprazole, the prototype proton pump inhibitor (PPI). The aim of this study was to demonstrate equivalence between low-dose rabeprazole 10 mg and omeprazole 20 mg for the healing rapidity of active peptic ulcer and for improvement of symptoms. Also, the effect of CYP2C19 genotypes on ulcer healing rapidity was investigated. METHODS: A total of 112 patients with active peptic ulcer were randomized to receive either rabeprazole 10 mg q.d. or omeprazole 20 mg q.d. for 6 weeks. The remaining ratios (%) and complete healing of the ulcer were determined by endoscopy at 1 week and 6 weeks of treatment. The severity of ulcer pain was also investigated during treatment. CYP2C19 genotype was determined by the polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism (PCR-RFLP) method. RESULTS: The remaining ratio of peptic ulcers after 1 week and the complete healing rate after 6 weeks in the rabeprazole versus omeprazole group were 45.5% versus 50.3% (P = 0.475) and 80.6% versus 87.0% (P = 0.423), respectively. CYP2C19 genotypes had no effect on the remaining ratio of peptic ulcers after 1 week and the healing rate of peptic ulcers after 6 weeks in both groups. The proportions of patients with symptom improvement or resolution were comparable between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Low-dose rabeprazole 10 mg has a similar efficacy for the healing rapidity of active peptic ulcer disease and symptom improvement compared with standard-dose omeprazole 20 mg.     

Symptom relief in patients with reflux esophagitis: comparative study of omeprazole, lansoprazole, and rabeprazole

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Rabeprazole has a faster onset of antisecretory activity than omeprazole and lansoprazole. The aim of the present study was to clarify whether there is any difference in the speed of symptom relief in patients with reflux esophagitis following the administration of these three proton pump inhibitors (PPI). METHODS: Eighty-five patients with erosive reflux esophagitis were randomized to receive 8 weeks of 20 mg of omeprazole (n = 30), 30 mg of lansoprazole (n = 25), or 20 mg of rabeprazole (n = 30) once a morning. Daily changes in heartburn and acid reflux symptoms in the first 7 days 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 administered rabeprazole decreased more rapidly than those given the other PPI. Complete heartburn remission also occurred more rapidly in patients administered rabeprazole (compared with omeprazole: P = 0.035, compared with lansoprazole: P = 0.038 by log-rank test). No differences were seen in the rate of endoscopic healing of reflux esophagitis at 8 weeks between the three treatment regimens. CONCLUSION: Rabeprazole may be more effective than omeprazole and lansoprazole for the rapid relief of heartburn symptoms in patients with reflux esophagitis.     

Efficacy and safety of esomeprazole compared with omeprazole in GERD patients with erosive esophagitis: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE: In patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), esomeprazole, the S-isomer of omeprazole, has demonstrated pharmacological and clinical benefits beyond those seen with the racemic parent compound. This study was designed to further evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of esomeprazole relative to that of omeprazole in healing erosive esophagitis and resolving accompanying symptoms of GERD. METHODS: Esomeprazole 40 mg was compared with omeprazole 20 mg once daily in 2425 patients with erosive esophagitis (Helicobacter pylori negative by serology) in an 8-wk, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study conducted in 163 centers throughout the US. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of patients with healed esophagitis at wk 8. Secondary endpoints were the proportion of patients healed at wk 4, resolution of heartburn at wk 4, time to first resolution and sustained resolution of heartburn, and proportion of heartburn-free days and nights. Safety and tolerability were also assessed. RESULTS: Significantly more patients were healed with esomeprazole versus omeprazole at wk 8 (93.7% vs 84.2%, p < 0.001; life table estimates, intention-to-treat analysis). Healing rates at wk 4 were 81.7% and 68.7%, respectively. Esomeprazole was superior to omeprazole for all secondary measures and had a similar safety profile. The most common adverse events in both treatment groups were headache, diarrhea, and nausea. CONCLUSIONS: Esomeprazole demonstrates significantly greater efficacy than omeprazole in the treatment of GERD patients with erosive esophagitis. The tolerability and safety of esomeprazole are comparable to that of omeprazole. (Am     

Randomized, double-blind, comparative study of dexrabeprazole 10 mg versus rabeprazole 20 mg in the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease

AIM：TO compare the efficacy and safety of dexrabe-prazole 10 mg versus rabeprazole 20 mg in the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease （GERD）.
METHODS： This was a randomized, double-blind clinical study. Fifty patients with GERD were randomly assigned to receive dexrabeprazole 10 mg or rabeprazole 20 mg once daily. Efficacy was assessed by evaluating improvement in visual analog scale （VAS） scores of heart-burn and regurgitation and safety was assessed by recording incidence of any adverse drug reactions. Laboratory investigations and upper gastro-intestinal endoscopy was conducted at baseline and after 28 d of therapy.
RESULTS： A total of 50 patients （n = 25 in dexrabeprazole group and rabeprazole group each） completed the study. There were no significant differences in the baseline characteristics between the two groups. The VAS score （mean 4. SD） of heartburn and regurgitation in dexrabeprazole （64.8±5.1 and 64 ± 8.1, respectively） and rabeprazole （64.4 ± 8.7 and 57.6 ± 9.7, respectively） groups significantly reduced （P 〈 0.0001） to 30 ± 11.5, 24 ± 10 and 32 ± 9.5, 29.2±11.9, respectively on d 28. A significantly higher （P = 0.002） proportion of patients showed ≥ 50% improvement in regurgitation with dexrabeprazole 10 mg （96%） compared to rabeprazole 20 mg （60%）. Onset of symptom improvement was significantly earlier with dexrabeprazole than with rabeprazole （1.8 ± 0.8 d vs 2.6 ± 1.4 d; P 〈0.05）. The incidences of esophagitis in the dexrabeprazole group and rabeprazole group before therapy were 84% and 92%, respectively （P = 0.38）. The incidence of improvement/healing of esophagitis after therapy was more （P = 0,036） in the dexrabeprazole group （95.2%） compared to the rabeprazole group （65.2%）. No adverse drug reaction was seen in either group.
CONCLUSION： In the treatment of GERD, efficacy of dexrabeprazole 10 mg is better than rabeprazole 20 mg, with regards to improvement/healing of endoscopic lesions and relief fro     

Rabeprazole is equivalent to omeprazole in the treatment of erosive gastro-oesophageal reflux disease: A randomised, double-blind, comparative study of rabeprazole and omeprazole 20 mg in acute treatment of reflux oesophagitis, followed by a maintenance open-label, low-dose therapy with rabeprazole

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown similar effects of rabeprazole and omeprazole, when used at the same dose in the treatment of reflux oesophagitis. However, such studies have been conducted as superiority studies but interpreted as equivalence ones. AIM: To properly assess the comparative efficacy of rabeprazole and omeprazole in inducing complete endoscopic healing and symptom relief in patients with reflux oesophagitis. METHODS: Patients (n=560) with Savary-Miller grade I-III reflux oesophagitis were randomised in a double-blind, double-dummy fashion to rabeprazole or omeprazole 20 mg once daily for 4-8 weeks. Then, patients endoscopically healed and symptomatically relieved were openly maintained with rabeprazole 10 mg or 2x10 mg once daily (in the event of clinical and/or endoscopic relapse) for a maximum of 48 weeks. RESULTS: After 4-8 weeks of treatment, healing (primary end-point) was observed in 228/233 (97.9%) patients in the rabeprazole group and in 231/237 (97.5%) in the omeprazole one (equivalence effect demonstrated by p<0.0001 at Blackwelder test and an upper confidence limit at 97.5% of 0.023). However, rabeprazole was faster in inducing heartburn relief than omeprazole (2.8+/-0.2 versus 4.7+/-0.5 days of therapy to reach the first day with satisfactory heartburn relief, p=0.0045 at log-rank test). In the maintenance phase, 15.2% of patients had an endoscopic and/or clinical relapse. CONCLUSION: Rabeprazole is equivalent to omeprazole in healing reflux oesophagitis, but shows a faster activity on reflux symptoms in the early treatment phase.     

A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind, 8-Week Comparative Trial of Low-Dose Esomeprazole (20 mg) and Standard-Dose Omeprazole (20 mg) in Patients with Erosive Esophagitis

The objective of this trial was to compare the efficacy of esomeprazole, 20 mg, with that of omeprazole, 20 mg, in patients with erosive esophagitis (EE). In this multicenter, double-blind, parallel-group trial, 1176 patients with EE confirmed by endoscopy (Helicobacter pylori-negative by serology) were randomized to once-daily treatment with 20 mg esomeprazole or 20 mg omeprazole for 8 weeks. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with healed EE through week 8. Secondary outcomes included diary and investigator assessments of heartburn symptoms. Cumulative life-table healing rates at week 8 were similarly high for 20 mg esomeprazole (90.6%; 95% confidence interval, 88.1%–93%) and 20 mg omeprazole (88.3%; 95% confidence interval, 85.5%–91.0%). The two treatments were comparable for other secondary measures and had similar tolerability profiles.     

The effects of rabeprazole on parietal cells and enterochromaffin-like cells in rats: a comparison with omeprazole

Background. We investigated the effects of rabe-prazole compared with those of omeprazole on enterochromaffin-like cells and parietal cells in rats. Methods. Rabeprazole or omeprazole was administered for 7 days by intraperitoneal injection (100 mg/kg or 20 mg/kg once a day) and the serum gastrin concentration, the antral density of G cells and D cells, fundic histamine content, fundic H⁺, K⁺-ATPase mRNA level, and parietal cell morphology were determined. Results. Both rabeprazole and omeprazole inhibited gastric acid secretion and increased the intragastric pH to over 6.5, as well as causing a marked increase in the serum gastrin concentration. The serum gastrin level was lower with rabeprazole treatment than with omeprazole treatment at both doses. Also, the antral G-cell density was higher with omeprazole than with rabeprazole, while the increase in both the histamine content and the H⁺, K⁺-ATPase mRNA level in the fundic mucosa was higher with omeprazole treatment at both doses, with the difference being significant at 100 mg/kg. Ultrastructural examination indicated that the stimulation of parietal cells by omeprazole was stronger than that by rabeprazole. Conclusions. Rabeprazole treatment does not drive enterochromaffin-like cells and parietal cells as strongly as omeprazole treatment despite its potent acid suppressive effect, suggesting that it represents a new generation of proton pump inhibitors. Received: March 16, 2001 / Accepted: August 10, 2001     

Rabeprazole in Treatment of Acid Peptic Diseases (Results of Three Placebo-Controlled Dose-Response Clinical Trials in Duodenal Ulcer, Gastric Ulcer, and Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease (GERD))

Rabeprazole, a new proton pump inhibitor, wasstudied in patients with acid-pepticrelated diseases(duodenal ulcer, gastric ulcer, GERD) in threeplacebo-controlled, double-blind, randomized clinicaltrials. Men and women over the age of 18 were enrolledif the presence of an active duodenal or gastric ulceror erosive or ulcerative esophagitis was confirmed onupper gastrointestinal endoscopy. Patients were randomly allocated to either placebo orrabeprazole 20 mg or 40 mg in the duodenal and gastriculcer protocols or to placebo or rabeprazole 10 mg, 20mg, or 40 mg in the GERD protocol. All doses ofrabeprazole in all three studies were statisticallysignificantly superior to placebo in healingacid-related lesions. There were no treatmentdifferences between the rabeprazole doses in healingactive peptic lesions. The incidence of positive [¹³C]ureabreath test for H. pylori was 53% in patients withduodenal or gastric ulcers. H. pylori status was noteffected by treatment with rabeprazole.     

Rabeprazole vsesomeprazole in non-erosive gastro-esophagea reflux disease： A randomized, double-blind study in urban Asia

AIM: Gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD) is becoming increasingly common in Asia. Data on the efficacy of proton pump inhibitors in patients with non-erosive GERD (NERD) in Asia is lacking. This double-blind study compared the efficacy and safety of rabeprazole with esomeprazole in relief of symptoms in patients with NERD. METHODS: One hundred and thirty-four patients with reflux symptoms of NERD and normal endoscopy were randomized to receive rabeprazole 10 mg or esomeprazole 20 mg once daily for 4 wk. Symptoms were recorded in a diary and changes in severity of symptoms noted. RESULTS: At 4 wk of treatment, rabeprazole 10 mg and esomeprazole 20 mg were comparable with regards to the primary endpoint of time to achieve 24-h symptom-free interval for heartburn 8.5 d vs 9 d and regurgitation 6 d vs 7.5 d. Rabeprazole and esomeprazole were also similarly efficacious in term of patient's global evaluation with 96% of patients on rabeprazole and 87.9% of patients on esomeprazole, reporting that symptoms improved (P= NS). Satisfactory relief of day- and night-time symptoms was achieved in 98% of patients receiving rabeprazole and 81.4% of patients receiving esomeprazole. Adverse events were comparable in both groups (P = NS). CONCLUSION: Rabeprazole 10 mg has a similar efficacy and safety profile in Asians with NERD as esomeprazole 20 mg. Further study is necessary to investigate whether the small differences between the two drugs seen in this study are related to the improved pharmacodynamic properties of rabeprazole. Both drugs were well tolerated.     

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.     

Comparison of pantoprazole 20 mg to ranitidine 150 mg b.i.d. in the treatment of mild gastroesophageal reflux disease

BACKGROUND: Despite a high prevalence of mild gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), few studies investigated efficacy and safety of proton pump inhibitors in this indication. This randomized double-blind study compares pantoprazole to ranitidine in GERD 0 and I, i.e. reflux without esophagitis or with confined lesions only. METHODS: Patients received either pantoprazole 20 mg o.a.d. or ranitidine 150 mg b.i.d. Outcome was assessed after 2 and 4 weeks. Primary criterion was relief of leading symptoms, i.e. heartburn, acid eructation and pain on swallowing, after 4 weeks of treatment. RESULTS: According to the per-protocol (PP) analysis, 69% (100/144) and 80% (115/144) of patients in the pantoprazole group were relieved of leading symptoms after 2 and 4 weeks, respectively. The rates in the ranitidine group were 47% (62/133) and 65% (86/133). Thus, superiority of pantoprazole could be proven. Quality-of-life parameters improved more in the pantoprazole group and patients' assessment of treatment was more favorable. Analysis for Helicobacter pylori status showed infection to lead to higher symptom relief rates. Both study medications were well tolerated. CONCLUSION: Pantoprazole 20 mg demonstrated superior efficacy with faster relief of reflux symptoms and similar tolerability compared to ranitidine 150 mg in the treatment of mild GERD.     

Evaluation of efficacy,safety and tolerability rabeprazole in treatment of acid-peptic diseases

BACKGROUND: Rabeprazole, a substituted benzimidazole, represents a new generation of proton pump inhibitors that has recently been approved by the FDA and European Union for treatment of acid-related diseases. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and tolerability of rabeprazole 20 mg in actual conditions of use in everyday clinical practice on subjects with diagnosis of erosive gastroesophageal reflux disease and/or gastric and/or duodenal ulcer. PATIENTS/METHODS: A total of 171 outpatients (55% men, 45% women) with a mean age of 42.5 years were enrolled in this trial. The majority of subjects (81.0%) were Caucasians. Patients with endoscopically confirmed erosive/ulcerative gastroesophageal reflux disease (Savary-Miller classification), duodenal ulcer and/or benign gastric ulcer were eligible to receive rabeprazole 20 mg once daily for 4 to 8 weeks, depending on the diagnosis and at investigators' discretion. Patients were requested to record their symptoms in a diary card in a daily basis. RESULTS: One hundred and sixty two patients completed the study in accordance with the protocol. Reflux esophagitis was diagnosed in 78 (48.1%) patients, duodenal ulcer in 39 (24.1%) and gastric ulcer in 24 (14.8%). Eleven (6.8%) patients presented reflux esophagitis associated with duodenal ulcer and 7 (4.3%) associated with gastric ulcer. Finally, 3 (1.9%) presented both gastric and duodenal ulcer. Fifty-three percentage of patients were free of symptoms on the first day of treatment and 89.5% after a week. The healing rate was 84.4% for patients with reflux esophagitis, 90.6% for duodenal ulcer and 90.9% for gastric ulcer. The adverse effects were minimal and transitory. CONCLUSIONS: Rabeprazole is highly effective and well tolerated in acute healing of reflux esophagitis and peptic ulcers. In addition, it provides fast symptoms relief.     

A randomized, prospective, comparative, multicenter study of rabeprazole and ranitidine in the treatment of reflux esophagitis]

BACKGROUND/AIMS: This study was done to evaluate the efficacy of rabeprazole (proton-pump-inhibitor) and ranitidine (H(2)-receptor antagonist) in the symptom relief and treatment of erosive esophagitis diagnosed by endoscopy. METHODS: A total of 110 patients with typical gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) symptoms were enrolled in this multicenter study. They were randomized into rabeprazole group (53 patients) and ranitidine group (57 patients) respectively. The patients in rabeprazole group were given 10 mg of rabeprazole and ranitidine group received 300 mg of ranitidine before breakfast and dinner for 8 weeks. After the end of treatment, we evaluated the endoscopic healing rate of reflux esophagitis and symptomatic improvement. RESULTS: After 8 weeks of treatment, rabeprazole group showed significantly higher complete endoscopic cure rate than ranitidine group (86.8% [46/53] vs. 57.9% [33/57], p=0.001) and higher symptomatic improvement of heartburn (91.2% [31/34] vs. 76.2% [32/42], p=0.085), especially in the first 7 days (76.7% vs. 45.3%, p=0.008). Also, rabeprazole group showed significantly higher improvement of regurgitation symptom than ranitidine group (100% [35/35] vs. 83% [39/47], p=0.009). Both group showed no differences in the improvement of chest pain and globus sensation. All the adverse events (rabeprazole group 4 events vs. ranitidine group 3 events) were mild and there was no abnormality in laboratory test. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with GERD, rabeprazole 10 mg b.i.d. is superior to ranitidine 300 mg b.i.d. in healing of reflux esophagitis and resolving typical GERD symptoms. Rabeprazole is an effective and well-tolerated drug for GERD treatment.     

Rabeprazole in nonerosive gastroesophageal reflux disease: a randomized placebo-controlled trial

OBJECTIVES: Clinical results to date suggest that antisecretory therapy may be less effective in providing symptom relief for patients with nonerosive gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) than for patients with erosive disease. This study was carried out to assess the efficacy and rapidity of once-daily rabeprazole (10 mg or 20 mg) in relieving symptoms in endoscopically negative patients with moderately severe GERD symptoms and to evaluate the safety of these doses over 4 wk. METHODS: This placebo-controlled, double blind study enrolled 203 men and women with moderately severe symptoms of GERD. After a 2-wk, single-blind placebo run-in phase, patients were randomized to receive 10 mg or 20 mg of rabeprazole or placebo once daily for 4 wk. RESULTS: Rabeprazole rapidly and effectively relieved heartburn, with significant improvements on day 1 of dosing. It also improved most other GERD-related symptoms, including regurgitation, belching, bloating, early satiety, and nausea. Both rabeprazole doses were significantly superior to the placebo with respect to time to the first 24-h heartburn-free interval (2.5 and 4.5 days for 10 mg and 20 mg of rabeprazole, respectively, vs 21.5 days for the placebo) and first daytime or nighttime heartburn-free interval (1.5-3 days for rabeprazole groups vs 12.5-15 days for the placebo), as well as to percentage of time patients were heartburn-free and free of antacid use. Both rabeprazole doses were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Based on these findings and prior studies, rabeprazole reliably relieves GI symptoms equally well in both nonerosive GERD and erosive GERD.     

Rabeprazole for the prevention of pathologic and symptomatic relapse of erosive or ulcerative gastroesophageal reflux disease. Rebeprazole Study Group

OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the effectiveness and safety profile of 10 and 20 mg of rabeprazole, a new proton pump inhibitor, once daily versus placebo in preventing endoscopic and symptomatic relapse for up to 1 yr among patients with healed erosive or ulcerative gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). METHODS: The 52-wk trial used a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group design in which 209 men and women were assigned to 10 or 20 mg of rabeprazole once daily in the morning or placebo. RESULTS: Both rabeprazole doses were significantly superior to placebo in preventing endoscopic relapse (p < 0.001), and 20 mg was significantly more effective than 10 mg (p < 0.04). Both doses were also significantly superior to placebo in reducing the frequency and severity of heartburn relapse (p < 0.001). When adjusted for differences in exposure to study medication, no significant differences were found in the incidence of adverse events. No clinically significant changes were found regarding clinical laboratory parameters, vital signs, electrocardiograms, ophthalmological evaluations, body weight, serum gastrin, and enterochromaffin-like cell histology. CONCLUSIONS: Once-daily therapy with 10 or 20 mg of rabeprazole effectively prevents pathological and symptomatic GERD relapse. The 20-mg dose is significantly more effective than the 10-mg dose in preventing endoscopic recurrence. Treatment was well tolerated, and no clinically significant safety findings emerged. Our findings support rabeprazole's efficacy in preventing GERD recurrence with excellent tolerability and a short-term favorable safety profile.     

Effect of rabeprazole and omeprazole on the onset of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease symptom relief during the first seven days of treatment

Objective. Gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD) symptoms have a significant impact on patients’ well-being. Onset of symptom relief is therefore an important consideration in GORD treatment. The primary objective was to compare the efficacy of rabeprazole (20?mg) and omeprazole (20?mg) regarding onset of heartburn control during the first 7 days of treatment in patients with erosive oesophagitis. Secondary objectives included maintenance of sustained heartburn control, control of other GORD symptoms (e.g. acid regurgitation, epigastric pain, dysphagia), effect on quality of life, patient satisfaction with treatment, and adverse events. Material and methods. In this multicentre, randomized, parallel-group, double-blind, comparative study, performed in Europe and Iceland, patients with endoscopically confirmed erosive oesophagitis were randomized to receive once-daily treatment with rabeprazole 20?mg (n=358) or omeprazole 20?mg (n=359) for 7 days. Symptoms were recorded (scored on a 5-point Likert scale) twice daily by the patients on their diary cards. Results. Median time to reach heartburn control was 1.5 days for both the rabeprazole and omeprazole groups (p<0.43). The results were similar between treatments for other study parameters. Both treatments were well tolerated. Conclusions. Unlike previous studies, no significant differences were found between treatments with rabeprazole (20?mg) and omeprazole (20?mg) in this study. Further studies are needed to evaluate the potential benefit of fast-acting proton-pump inhibitors, such as rabeprazole, with respect to onset of symptom control in erosive GORD.