Explore the vast range of titles available.

ObjectiveTo establish the non-inferior efficacy of vonoprazan versus lansoprazole in the treatment of Asian patients with erosive oesophagitis (EO).DesignIn this phase III, double-blind, multicentre study, patients with endoscopically confirmed EO were randomised 1:1 to receive vonoprazan 20 mg or lansoprazole 30 mg, once daily for up to 8 weeks. The primary endpoint was EO healing rate at 8 weeks. The secondary endpoints were EO healing rates at 2 and 4 weeks. Safety endpoints included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs).ResultsIn the vonoprazan (n=238) and lansoprazole (n=230) arms, 8-week EO healing rates were 92.4% and 91.3%, respectively (difference 1.1% (95% CI –3.822% to 6.087%)). The respective 2-week EO healing rates were 75.0% and 67.8% (difference 7.2% (95% CI –1.054% to 15.371%)), and the respective 4-week EO healing rates were 85.3% and 83.5% (difference 1.8% (95% CI –4.763% to 8.395%)). In patients with baseline Los Angeles classification grade C/D, 2-week, 4-week and 8-week EO healing rates were higher with vonoprazan versus lansoprazole (2 weeks: 62.2% vs 51.5%, difference 10.6% (95% CI –5.708% to 27.002%); 4 weeks: 73.3% vs 67.2%, difference 6.2% (95% CI –8.884 to 21.223); and 8 weeks: 84.0% vs 80.6%, difference 3.4% (95% CI –9.187% to 15.993%)). Overall, EO healing rates appeared higher with vonoprazan versus lansoprazole. TEAE rates were 38.1% and 36.6% in the vonoprazan and lansoprazole group, respectively.ConclusionOur findings demonstrate the non-inferior efficacy of vonoprazan versus lansoprazole in terms of EO healing rate at 8 weeks in this population. Safety outcomes were similar in the two treatment arms.Trial registration number NCT02388724.

Whether proton-pump inhibitors are beneficial or harmful for stress ulcer prophylaxis in critically ill patients undergoing invasive ventilation is unclear. In this international, randomized trial, we assigned critically ill adults who were undergoing invasive ventilation to receive intravenous pantoprazole (at a dose of 40 mg daily) or matching placebo. The primary efficacy outcome was clinically important upper gastrointestinal bleeding in the intensive care unit (ICU) at 90 days, and the primary safety outcome was death from any cause at 90 days. Multiplicity-adjusted secondary outcomes included ventilator-associated pneumonia, infection, and patient-important bleeding. A total of 4821 patients underwent randomization in 68 ICUs. Clinically important upper gastrointestinal bleeding occurred in 25 of 2385 patients (1.0%) receiving pantoprazole and in 84 of 2377 patients (3.5%) receiving placebo (hazard ratio, 0.30; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.19 to 0.47; P<0.001). At 90 days, death was reported in 696 of 2390 patients (29.1%) in the pantoprazole group and in 734 of 2379 patients (30.9%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.04; P = 0.25). Patient-important bleeding was reduced with pantoprazole; all other secondary outcomes were similar in the two groups. Among patients undergoing invasive ventilation, pantoprazole resulted in a significantly lower risk of clinically important upper gastrointestinal bleeding than placebo, with no significant effect on mortality. (Funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and others; REVISE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03374800.).

Abstract Background Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) reduce the bioavailability of several anticancer drugs. The impact of PPIs co-administered with cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibitors is controversial. We aimed to clarify whether the concomitant use of PPIs impacts palbociclib and abemaciclib effectiveness in breast cancer treatment. Patients and Methods This multicenter, retrospective, observational study, conducted across 4 medical institutions in Japan, consecutively included patients with endocrine-resistant metastatic breast cancer, receiving palbociclib or abemaciclib between December 2017 and August 2022. Propensity score-matched analyses were performed. Treatment efficacy and safety with and without PPIs were compared. Progression-free survival and overall survival were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using a log-rank test. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to estimate the hazard ratio. Results The study included 240 patients. After 1:1 matching, 112 patients were treated with and without PPIs. The median progression-free survival period was 1.2 years in the PPI group and 1.3 years in the non-PPI group (hazard ratio, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.70-2.02). The median overall survival period was 3.6 years in the PPI group, whereas it was not reached in the non-PPI group (hazard ratio, 1.23; 95% CI, 0.61-2.47). Consistent results were obtained for subgroups receiving palbociclib (n = 177) and abemaciclib (n = 63) without propensity score matching. Adverse event incidence and severity were similar in both groups. Conclusion The effectiveness of cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors is unlikely to be affected by concomitant PPI use. Future prospective pharmacokinetic studies are warranted. The impact of the co-administration of proton pump inhibitors with cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibitors remains controversial. This study clarified whether the concomitant use of proton pump inhibitors impacts the effectiveness of palbociclib and abemaciclib in patients with breast cancer.

Background and aimsThis study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of vonoprazan and tetracycline (VT) dual therapy as first-line treatment for Helicobacter pylori infection in patients with penicillin allergy.MethodsIn this randomised controlled trial, treatment-naïve adults with H. pylori infection and penicillin allergy were randomised 1:1 to receive either open-label VT dual therapy (vonoprazan 20 mg two times per day+tetracycline 500 mg three times a day) or bismuth quadruple therapy (BQT; lansoprazole 30 mg two times per day+colloidal bismuth 150 mg three times a day+tetracycline 500 mg three times a day+metronidazole 400 mg three times a day) for 14 days. The primary outcome was non-inferiority in eradication rates in the VT dual group compared with the BQT group. Secondary outcomes included assessing adverse effects.Results300 patients were randomised. The eradication rates in the VT group and the BQT group were: 92.0% (138/150, 95% CI 86.1% to 95.6%) and 89.3% (134/150, 95% CI 83.0% to 93.6%) in intention-to-treat analysis (difference 2.7%; 95% CI −4.6% to 10.0%; non-inferiority p=0.000); 94.5% (138/146, 95% CI 89.1% to 97.4%) and 93.1% (134/144, 95% CI 87.3% to 96.4%) in modified intention-to-treat analysis (difference 1.5%; 95% CI −4.9% to 8.0%; non-inferiority p=0.001); 95.1% (135/142, 95% CI 89.7% to 97.8%) and 97.7% (128/131, 95% CI 92.9% to 99.4%) in per-protocol analysis (difference 2.6%; 95% CI −2.9% to 8.3%; non-inferiority p=0.000). The treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were significantly lower in the VT group (14.0% vs 48.0%, p=0.000), with fewer treatment discontinuations due to TEAEs (2.0% vs 8.7%, p=0.010).ConclusionsVT dual therapy demonstrated efficacy and safety as a first-line treatment for H. pylori infection in the penicillin-allergic population, with comparable efficacy and a lower incidence of TEAEs compared with traditional BQT.Trial registration numberChiCTR2300074693.

Present guidelines are conflicting for patients at high risk of both cardiovascular and gastrointestinal events who continue to require non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). We hypothesised that a cyclooxygenase-2-selective NSAID plus proton-pump inhibitor is superior to a non-selective NSAID plus proton-pump inhibitor for prevention of recurrent ulcer bleeding in concomitant users of aspirin with previous ulcer bleeding. For this industry-independent, double-blind, double-dummy, randomised trial done in one academic hospital in Hong Kong, we screened patients with arthritis and cardiothrombotic diseases who were presenting with upper gastrointestinal bleeding, were on NSAIDs, and require concomitant aspirin. After ulcer healing, an independent staff member randomly assigned (1:1) patients who were negative for Helicobacter pylori with a computer-generated list of random numbers to receive oral administrations of either celecoxib 100 mg twice per day plus esomeprazole 20 mg once per day or naproxen 500 mg twice per day plus esomeprazole 20 mg once per day for 18 months. All patients resumed aspirin 80 mg once per day. Both patients and investigators were masked to their treatments. The primary endpoint was recurrent upper gastrointestinal bleeding within 18 months. The primary endpoint and secondary safety endpoints were analysed in the modified intention-to-treat population. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00153660. Between May 24, 2005, and Nov 28, 2012, we enrolled 514 patients, assigning 257 patients to each study group, all of whom were included in the intention-to-treat population. Recurrent upper gastrointestinal bleeding occurred in 14 patients in the celecoxib group (nine gastric ulcers and five duodenal ulcers) and 31 patients in the naproxen group (25 gastric ulcers, three duodenal ulcers, one gastric ulcer and duodenal ulcer, and two bleeding erosions). The cumulative incidence of recurrent bleeding in 18 months was 5·6% (95% CI 3·3–9·2) in the celecoxib group and 12·3% (8·8–17·1) in the naproxen group (p=0·008; crude hazard ratio 0·44, 95% CI 0·23–0·82; p=0·010). Excluding patients who reached study endpoints, 21 (8%) patients in the celecoxib group and 17 (7%) patients in the naproxen group had adverse events leading to discontinuation of treatment. No treatment-related deaths occurred during the study. In patients at high risk of both cardiovascular and gastrointestinal events who require concomitant aspirin and NSAID, celecoxib plus proton-pump inhibitor is the preferred treatment to reduce the risk of recurrent upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Naproxen should be avoided despite its perceived cardiovascular safety. The Research Grant Council of Hong Kong.

In a randomized trial comparing the proton-pump inhibitor pantoprazole with placebo in the ICU, there was no significant difference in the rate of death at 90 days or in a combined end point of clinically meaningful events, which included gastrointestinal bleeding and pneumonia.

ObjectiveWe aim to compare the effects of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and histamine-2 receptor antagonists (H2RAs) on the gut microbiota through longitudinal analysis.DesignHealthy volunteers were randomly assigned to receive either PPI (n=23) or H2RA (n=26) daily for seven consecutive days. We collected oral (saliva) and faecal samples before and after the intervention for metagenomic next-generation sequencing. We analysed intervention-induced alterations in the oral and gut microbiome including microbial abundance and growth rates, oral-to-gut transmissions, and compared differences between the PPI and H2RA groups.ResultsBoth interventions disrupted the gut microbiota, with PPIs demonstrating more pronounced effects. PPI usage led to a significantly higher extent of oral-to-gut transmission and promoted the growth of specific oral microbes in the gut. This led to a significant increase in both the number and total abundance of oral species present in the gut, including the identification of known disease-associated species like Fusobacterium nucleatum and Streptococcus anginosus. Overall, gut microbiome-based machine learning classifiers could accurately distinguish PPI from non-PPI users, achieving an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0.924, in contrast to an AUROC of 0.509 for H2RA versus non-H2RA users.ConclusionOur study provides evidence that PPIs have a greater impact on the gut microbiome and oral-to-gut transmission than H2RAs, shedding light on the mechanism underlying the higher risk of certain diseases associated with prolonged PPI use.Trial registration numberChiCTR2300072310.

BackgroundCough is a common, disabling symptom of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF), which may be exacerbated by acid reflux. Inhibiting gastric acid secretion could potentially reduce cough. This study aimed to determine the feasibility of a larger, multicentre trial of omeprazole for cough in IPF, to assess safety and to quantify cough.MethodsSingle-centre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled pilot trial of the proton pump inhibitor (PPI) omeprazole (20 mg twice daily for 3 months) in patients with IPF. Primary objectives were to assess feasibility and acceptability of trial procedures. The primary clinical outcome was cough frequency.ResultsForty-five participants were randomised (23 to omeprazole, 22 to placebo), with 40 (20 in each group) having cough monitoring before and after treatment. 280 patients were screened to yield these numbers, with barriers to discontinuing antacids the single biggest reason for non-recruitment. Recruitment averaged 1.5 participants per month. Geometric mean cough frequency at the end of treatment, adjusted for baseline, was 39.1% lower (95% CI 66.0% lower to 9.3% higher) in the omeprazole group compared with placebo. Omeprazole was well tolerated and adverse event profiles were similar in both groups, although there was a small excess of lower respiratory tract infection and a small fall in forced expiratory volume and forced vital capacity associated with omeprazole.ConclusionsA large randomised controlled trial of PPIs for cough in IPF appears feasible and justified but should address barriers to randomisation and incorporate safety assessments in relation to respiratory infection and changes in lung function.

Oesophageal adenocarcinoma is the sixth most common cause of cancer death worldwide and Barrett's oesophagus is the biggest risk factor. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of high-dose esomeprazole proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) and aspirin for improving outcomes in patients with Barrett's oesophagus. The Aspirin and Esomeprazole Chemoprevention in Barrett's metaplasia Trial had a 2 × 2 factorial design and was done at 84 centres in the UK and one in Canada. Patients with Barrett's oesophagus of 1 cm or more were randomised 1:1:1:1 using a computer-generated schedule held in a central trials unit to receive high-dose (40 mg twice-daily) or low-dose (20 mg once-daily) PPI, with or without aspirin (300 mg per day in the UK, 325 mg per day in Canada) for at least 8 years, in an unblinded manner. Reporting pathologists were masked to treatment allocation. The primary composite endpoint was time to all-cause mortality, oesophageal adenocarcinoma, or high-grade dysplasia, which was analysed with accelerated failure time modelling adjusted for minimisation factors (age, Barrett's oesophagus length, intestinal metaplasia) in all patients in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with EudraCT, number 2004-003836-77. Between March 10, 2005, and March 1, 2009, 2557 patients were recruited. 705 patients were assigned to low-dose PPI and no aspirin, 704 to high-dose PPI and no aspirin, 571 to low-dose PPI and aspirin, and 577 to high-dose PPI and aspirin. Median follow-up and treatment duration was 8·9 years (IQR 8·2–9·8), and we collected 20 095 follow-up years and 99·9% of planned data. 313 primary events occurred. High-dose PPI (139 events in 1270 patients) was superior to low-dose PPI (174 events in 1265 patients; time ratio [TR] 1·27, 95% CI 1·01–1·58, p=0·038). Aspirin (127 events in 1138 patients) was not significantly better than no aspirin (154 events in 1142 patients; TR 1·24, 0·98–1·57, p=0·068). If patients using non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs were censored at the time of first use, aspirin was significantly better than no aspirin (TR 1·29, 1·01–1·66, p=0·043; n=2236). Combining high-dose PPI with aspirin had the strongest effect compared with low-dose PPI without aspirin (TR 1·59, 1·14–2·23, p=0·0068). The numbers needed to treat were 34 for PPI and 43 for aspirin. Only 28 (1%) participants reported study-treatment-related serious adverse events. High-dose PPI and aspirin chemoprevention therapy, especially in combination, significantly and safely improved outcomes in patients with Barrett's oesophagus. Cancer Research UK, AstraZeneca, Wellcome Trust, and Health Technology Assessment.

•PROTECT-HBR is a multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial comparing Potassium-competitive acid blocker (P-CAB) and proton pump inhibitor (PPI).•Patient at high risk of gastrointestinal(GI) bleeding receiving chronic antithrombotic therapy were enrolled•The primary endpoint is a composite of upper GI clinical events at 12 months.•Over 1500 patients have been randomized at 32 sites across South Korea over 2 years. Concomitant use of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) is recommended in patients receiving chronic antithrombotic therapy who are at high risk of gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding. However, long-term safety and efficacy of chronic PPI use have been concerned. Potassium-competitive acid blocker (P-CAB) is a novel class of acid suppressants, providing more acid stability, rapid onset of action, less variability with CYP2C19 polymorphisms, and longer duration of action than PPI. The PROTECT-HBR trial is a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group clinical trial. Approximately 3320 patients with known cardiac or vascular disease receiving antithrombotic drugs (either antiplatelet or anticoagulant agents) and who are at high risk of GI bleeding will be randomized to P-CAB (tegoprazan 50mg once daily) or PPI (rabeprazole 20mg once daily) for up to 12 months. The primary endpoint is a composite outcome of upper GI clinical events, including overt or occult GI bleeding, symptomatic gastroduodenal ulcers or erosions, obstruction, or perforation, at 12 months. Secondary endpoints also included cardiovascular events and safety outcomes. As of December 2024, approximately 1460 patients were enrolled from 32 participating sites in South Korea. The complete enrollment is anticipated at the mid- or late-term of 2025, and the primary results will be available by 2027. PROTECT-HBR is a large-scale, multicenter, clinical trial, which will provide a pivotal comparison of the efficacy and safety of novel P-CAB, tegoprazan with those of PPI, rabeprazole in patients with documented cardiac or vascular disease receiving chronic antithrombotic drugs and at high risk of GI bleeding. Potassium-Competitive Acid Blocker versus pROton-Pump Inhibitor for GastroproTECTion Strategies In Patients at High GastroIntestinal Bleeding Risk Receiving Antithrombotic Therapy (PROTECT-HBR): NCT04416581.