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

Efficacy and safety of proton pump inhibitors versus vonoprazan in treatment of erosive esophagitis: A PRISMA-compliant systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) and vonoprazan are recommended as first-line therapies for erosive esophagitis (EE). However, it is uncertain how the magnitude of efficacy and safety of first-line therapy, the choice of individual PPIs or vonoprazan in the treatment of EE remains controversial. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of vonoprazan and PPIs in healing esophageal mucosal injury in patients with EE.

METHODS

Relevant databases were searched to collect randomized controlled trials of proton pump inhibitors and vonoprazan in the treatment of reflux esophagitis up to December 2021. Studies on standard-dose PPIs or vonoprazan that were published in Chinese or English and assessed healing effects in EE were included in the analysis. Stata16.0 was used to conduct a network Meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 41 literatures were included with 11,592 enrolled patients. For the endoscopic cure rate, all the PPIs and vonoprazan significantly improve compared to Placebo; Based on the surface under the cumulative ranking curve, Ilaprazole ranked first, followed by esomeprazole, vonoprazan, pantoprazole, lansoprazole, omeprazole, rabeprazole and placebo therapy ranked the last. For the rate of adverse events, there was no significant difference among all the PPIs, vonoprazan, and placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

Ilaprazole, esomeprazole and vonoprazan have more advantages in mucosal erosion healing, there was no significant difference in the comparative safety among all interventions.

Network Meta-analysis Comparing Vonoprazan and Proton Pump Inhibitors for Heartburn Symptoms in Erosive Esophagitis

GOALS

This systematic review and network meta-analysis aimed to assess the relative efficacy of vonoprazan and proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) on early heartburn symptom resolution in patients with erosive esophagitis.

BACKGROUND

Limited available data directly compare the efficacy of vonoprazan, a first-in-class potassium-competitive acid blocker, with PPIs in erosive esophagitis.

STUDY

We conducted a systematic literature review (in MEDLINE and CENTRAL) and subsequent network meta-analysis according to Cochrane and PRISMA guidelines. Double-blind, randomized controlled trials in adults with erosive esophagitis treated with vonoprazan or a PPI were included in the analysis. Primary outcomes were heartburn symptom resolution rate on Day 1 and Day 7. The study was performed with all available data, using a random effects model within a Bayesian framework.

RESULTS

Overall, 10 randomized controlled trials were included in the network meta-analysis. For heartburn resolution rate on Day 1 (9 of 10 trials), vonoprazan 20 mg once daily (QD) was superior to placebo (median odds ratio=16.75, 95% credible interval: 2.16-207.80). Point estimates numerically favored vonoprazan 20 mg QD over other comparators. For heartburn resolution rate on Day 7 (10 of 10 trials), vonoprazan 20 mg QD was superior to placebo and other comparators except rabeprazole 20 mg QD. Point estimates numerically favored vonoprazan 20 mg QD over rabeprazole 20 mg QD.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, vonoprazan 20 mg QD was equally effective in heartburn resolution on Day 1, and equally or more effective on Day 7 versus PPIs in adults with erosive esophagitis.

The early therapeutic response at 2 weeks is a crucial predictor of proton pump inhibitor-refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease

BACKGROUND

In recent years, the prevalence of proton pump inhibitor (PPI)-refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) has been increasing, posing a clinical obstacle to improving the management of GERD patients. The ability of known predictive factors to explain therapeutic response to PPI remains insufficient. Therefore, we examined whether the addition of early therapeutic response to PPI as an explanatory variable may increase the predictive power for PPI-refractory GERD.

METHODS

The severity and therapeutic response of GERD symptoms to PPI were evaluated using the GastroEsophageal Reflux and Dyspepsia Therapeutic Efficacy and Satisfaction Test (GERD-TEST) questionnaire at baseline and at 2 and 4 weeks after treatment. The relevance of the therapeutic effect of PPI at 2 weeks compared to that at 4 weeks was examined in 301 patients with GERD. Independent predictive factors for refractory GERD at 4 weeks of PPI therapy were examined in 182 patients. The effect of various clinical factors, including the early response to PPI, was assessed using multiple regression analysis.

RESULTS

The number of PPI-therapy responders increased significantly with the duration of treatment (p < 0.0001). The response to PPI therapy at 2 weeks was significantly correlated with that at 4 weeks (p < 0.0001). Multiple regression analysis revealed that the therapeutic response to PPI at 2 weeks was by far the strongest predictor of the therapeutic effect at 4 weeks among all clinical factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Medication change for PPI-refractory GERD at 2 weeks may be an efficacious therapeutic strategy to improve patients' quality of life.

Relationship Between Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease and Endoscopic Finding "Iodine-Unstained Streak"

Background

Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) with iodine stain is a useful and diffused method for diagnosing esophageal cancer. We can perform the procedure easily with endoscopic system which does not comprise image-enhanced endoscopy. Several studies advocated that iodine-unstained streaks are a characteristic finding of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). However, there are only a few reports about the subject. In this study, we investigated the usefulness of iodine chromoendoscopy for GERD consultation.

Methods

The study was conducted with 154 GERD cases in which EGD with iodine stain to the esophagus was performed. For the 154 cases, we analyzed the existence of reflux esophagitis finding and iodine-unstained streaks. In 47 GERD cases (proton pump inhibitor (PPI): 45 cases, histamine H2-receptor antagonist (H2-RA): two cases) where medication was started after EGD, we examined predictive factors of the symptom improvement such as sex, age, weight, reflux esophagitis finding, and iodine-unstained streak.

Results

An iodine-unstained streak was observed in 50/154 cases (32.5%). For 50 cases with iodine-unstained streak, there were only 24/50 cases (48.0%) that had both reflux esophagitis findings (≥ Los Angeles classification: grade M) and an iodine-unstained streak. For 47 cases in which medication was started, 34 cases showed improvement in their symptoms, and 13 cases did not show improvement. An iodine-unstained streak was observed more often in “Improved” group rather than in “Not improved” group (P < 0.01). When we supposed an iodine-unstained streak to be the predictive factor of the medication effect for GERD, sensitivity was 61.8% and specificity was 84.6%.

Conclusions

No erosion was often found in the GERD cases without reflux esophagitis, and iodine-unstained streak was observed more often in “Improved” group rather than in “Not improved” group. We think that iodine-unstained streak can be useful for diagnosing of GERD and predictive factor of the medication effect.

Randomised clinical trial: vonoprazan versus lansoprazole for the initial relief of heartburn in patients with erosive oesophagitis

BACKGROUND

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are widely used to treat gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD). However, the onset of action is considered slow and PPIs cannot completely block acid secretion at night. A new potassium-competitive acid blocker (P-CAB) can rapidly block acid secretion. However, whether this P-CAB can relieve GORD symptoms quickly and adequately soon after starting treatment is unknown.

AIM

To determine how rapidly vonoprazan and lansoprazole provide heartburn relief.

METHODS

Patients (n = 32) with endoscopically confirmed erosive oesophagitis who experienced heartburn at least once a week were randomised in a double-blind manner to receive either daily vonoprazan (20 mg) or lansoprazole (30 mg) before breakfast for 14 days. Day time and night time heartburn were assessed daily throughout the study using a five-point Likert scale. The primary endpoint was the first day of complete day and night heartburn relief for at least seven consecutive days. The ethics committees of the participating institutions approved the study protocol.

RESULTS

Heartburn was relieved sooner with vonoprazan than with lansoprazole (P < 0.05, log-rank test). Heartburn was completely relieved in 31.3% and 12.5% of patients on day 1 with vonoprazan and lansoprazole, respectively. Significantly more patients achieved complete nocturnal heartburn relief with vonoprazan than lansoprazole (P < 0.01). Both regimens were well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

Complete sustained heartburn relief was achieved sooner with vonoprazan than with lansoprazole during the first week of therapy. (UMIN000018776).

Advantages and Disadvantages of Long-term Proton Pump Inhibitor Use

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) potently inhibit gastric acid secretion and are widely used for treatment of acid-related diseases including gastroesophageal reflux disease and secondary prevention of aspirin/NSAID-induced ulcers. Although clinically important adverse effects of PPIs can occur, just as with other drugs, those are not frequently observed during or after administration. Thus, PPIs are regarded as relatively safe and considered to be clinically beneficial. Recently, PPIs have become frequently administered to patients with functional gastrointestinal diseases or primary prevention of drug-related gastroduodenal damage, even though their beneficial effects for those conditions have not been fully confirmed. PPIs tend to be given for conditions in which the necessity of the drug has not been clarified, thus otherwise rare adverse effects are presented as clinically relevant. Although several PPI-related adverse effects have been reported, their clinical relevance is not yet clear, since the evidence reported in those studies is not at a high enough level, as the majority are based on retrospective observational studies and the reported hazard ratios are low. It is important to administer PPIs only for patients who will gain a substantial clinical benefit and to continue to investigate their adverse effects with high quality prospective studies.

Comparative effectiveness and acceptability of the FDA-licensed proton pump inhibitors for erosive esophagitis: A PRISMA-compliant network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This study compared the effectiveness and acceptability of all Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-recommended dose proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) in erosive esophagitis (EE): Dexlansoprazole 60 mg, Esomeprazole 40 mg, Esomeprazole 20 mg, Pantoprazole 40 mg, Lansoprazole 30 mg, Rabeprazole 20 mg, Omeprazole 20 mg.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library. Totally, 25 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) met study selection criteria and were incorporated in this network meta-analysis (NMA) study.

RESULTS

For the NMA, eligible RCTs of adults with EE verified by endoscopic examination were randomly assigned to the licensed PPIs at least 4 weeks of continuous therapy. The primary efficacy outcome was the endoscopic healing rates at 4 and 8 weeks. Heartburn relief rates were a secondary efficacy outcome. The rates of withdrawal were analyzed as a safety outcome. In comparison to the common comparator omeprazole 20 mg, esomeprazole 40 mg provided significantly healing rates at 4 weeks [odds ratio (OR), 1.46 (95% confidence interval, 95% CI, 1.24-1.71)] and 8 weeks [1.58 (1.29-1.92)], and improved the heartburn relief rates [1.29 (1.07-1.56)]. In comparison to lansoprazole 30 mg, esomeprazole 40 mg provided significantly healing rates at 4 weeks [1.30 (1.10-1.53)] and 8 weeks [1.37 (1.13-1.67)], and improved the heartburn relief rates [1.29 (1.03-1.62)]. In terms of acceptability, only dexlansoprazole 60 mg had significantly more all-cause discontinuation than omeprazole 20 mg [1.54 (1.03-2.29)], pantoprazole 40 mg [1.68 (1.08-2.63)], and lansoprazole 30 mg [1.38 (1.02-1.88)].

CONCLUSION

The standard-dose esomeprazole 40 mg had more superiority in mucosal erosion healing and heartburn relief. Esomeprazole 40 mg, pantoprazole 40 mg, esomeprazole 20 mg, and lansoprazole 30 mg showed more benefits in effectiveness and acceptability than other interventions.

Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Relief in Patients Treated with Rabeprazole 20 mg versus Omeprazole 20 mg: A Meta-Analysis

Background. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been conducted comparing the efficacy of rabeprazole 20 mg or omeprazole 20 mg once daily for patients with erosive gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Until now, no study has synthesized all available data examining this issue. Method. Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane central register of controlled trials were searched (through December 2012). Eligible RCTs recruited adults with erosive GERD and reported endoscopic and symptomatic relief rates at the last point of follow-up. The effect of rabeprazole versus omeprazole was reported as relative risk (RR) of relief with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Results. The search identified 605 citations, and six RCTs containing 1,895 patients were eligible. Endoscopic relief rates were not significantly different between rabeprazole 20 mg and omeprazole 20 mg in treatment trials of up to 8 weeks. Heartburn relief rates were significantly different between the two groups for 8-week treatment trials. Adverse events were not significantly different between the two groups for 8-week treatment trials. Conclusion. These data suggest that rabeprazole demonstrates a clinical advantage over omeprazole in symptomatic relief but no significant difference in endoscopic relief of erosive GERD for up to 8 weeks of treatment. Rabeprazole and omeprazole were both tolerated by GERD patients.

Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Relief in Patients Treated with Rabeprazole 20 mg versus Omeprazole 20 mg: A Meta-Analysis

Background. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been conducted comparing the efficacy of rabeprazole 20 mg or omeprazole 20 mg once daily for patients with erosive gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Until now, no study has synthesized all available data examining this issue. Method. Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane central register of controlled trials were searched (through December 2012). Eligible RCTs recruited adults with erosive GERD and reported endoscopic and symptomatic relief rates at the last point of follow-up. The effect of rabeprazole versus omeprazole was reported as relative risk (RR) of relief with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Results. The search identified 605 citations, and six RCTs containing 1,895 patients were eligible. Endoscopic relief rates were not significantly different between rabeprazole 20 mg and omeprazole 20 mg in treatment trials of up to 8 weeks. Heartburn relief rates were significantly different between the two groups for 8-week treatment trials. Adverse events were not significantly different between the two groups for 8-week treatment trials. Conclusion. These data suggest that rabeprazole demonstrates a clinical advantage over omeprazole in symptomatic relief but no significant difference in endoscopic relief of erosive GERD for up to 8 weeks of treatment. Rabeprazole and omeprazole were both tolerated by GERD patients.

Does BMI affect the clinical efficacy of proton pump inhibitor therapy in GERD? The case for rabeprazole

BACKGROUND

Increased BMI is associated with a higher risk of gastroesophageal reflux disease.

AIMS

To investigate whether overweight/obesity (BMI≥25 kg/m(2)) affects rabeprazole clinical efficacy versus omeprazole in patients with erosive esophagitis (EE).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Post-hoc analysis of EE healing rate and symptom response stratified by patient BMI was performed on data from a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, 4-to-8-week trial comparing EE healing with rabeprazole (20 mg daily) and omeprazole (20 mg daily). Analysis of variance, two-sample t-test, Blackwelder's test for equivalence, log-rank, and Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel tests were used to analyze comparisons.

RESULTS

In the two BMI groups (<25 kg/m(2) and ≥25 kg/m(2) respectively), rabeprazole and omeprazole were equally effective for mucosal healing regardless of patient's BMI (N=542, P>0.05). However, in overweight/obese patients, rabeprazole was significantly faster than omeprazole in inducing heartburn relief during the first treatment week (P<0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Results of this study show that the clinical efficacy of rabeprazole is maintained in overweight/obese patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease and suggest that this subgroup of patients may derive, from rabeprazole, even greater benefit than lean patients.

Short and long-term PPI treatment for GERD. Do we need more-potent anti-secretory drugs?

Because the reflux of the acidic gastric content into the esophagus plays a major role in the pathogenesis of symptoms of GERD and lesions of erosive esophagitis, acid suppression with a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) is currently the mainstay of anti-reflux therapy. There is a strong correlation between the degree of acid suppression provided by a given drug and its efficacy. The superiority of PPIs over other drugs (antacids, prokinetics and H(2)-receptor antagonists) has now been established beyond doubt, both for short- and long-term treatment. However, there are still some unmet therapeutic needs in GERD; hence, patients with non-erosive reflux disease (NERD) are less responsive to PPIs than those with erosive esophagitis. Moreover, the efficacy of PPIs in patients with atypical symptoms is frequently limited to the relief of associated heartburn or regurgitation. With respect to safety, although most studies on short- and long-term PPI use have provided reassuring data, recent reports have drawn attention to potential side effects or drug-drug interference. Better healing rates in the most severe forms of esophagitis, or a faster onset of symptom relief, may require optimization of acid suppressive therapy with regard to the daily course of acid secretion, especially during the night. Different pharmacological approaches can be considered, with the ultimate goals of achieving faster, stronger and more-sustained acid inhibition. How a better pharmacological profile may translate into clinical benefit should now be tested in appropriate, controlled studies.

Impact of oesophagitis classification in evaluating healing of erosive oesophagitis after therapy with proton pump inhibitors: a pooled analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The results of clinical trials with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are usually based on the Hetzel-Dent (HD), Savary-Miller (SM), or Los Angeles (LA) classifications to describe the severity and assess the healing of erosive oesophagitis. However, it is not known whether these classifications are comparable. The aim of this study was to review systematically the literature to compare the healing rates of erosive oesophagitis with PPIs in clinical trials assessed by the HD, SM, or LA classifications.

METHODS

A recursive, English language literature search in PubMed and Cochrane databases to December 2006 was performed. Double-blind randomized control trials comparing a PPI with another PPI, an H2-RA or placebo using endoscopic assessment of the healing of oesophagitis by the HD, SM or LA, or their modified classifications at 4 or 8 weeks, were included in the study. The healing rates on treatment with the same PPI(s), and same endoscopic grade(s) were pooled and compared between different classifications using Fisher's exact test or chi2 test where appropriate.

RESULTS

Forty-seven studies from 965 potential citations met inclusion criteria. Seventy-eight PPI arms were identified, with 27 using HD, 29 using SM, and 22 using LA for five marketed PPIs. There was insufficient data for rabeprazole and esomeprazole (week 4 only) to compare because they were evaluated by only one classification. When data from all PPIs were pooled, regardless of baseline oesophagitis grades, the LA healing rate was significantly higher than SM and HD at both 4 and 8 weeks (74, 71, and 68% at 4 weeks and 89, 84, and 83% at 8 weeks, respectively). The distribution of different grades in study population was available only for pantoprazole where it was not significantly different between LA and SM subgroups. When analyzing data for PPI and dose, the LA classification showed a higher healing rate for omeprazole 20 mg/day and pantoprazole 40 mg/day (significant at 8 weeks), whereas healing by SM classification was significantly higher for omeprazole 40 mg/day (no data for LA) and lansoprazole 30 mg/day at 4 and 8 weeks. The healing rate by individual oesophagitis grade was not always available or robust enough for meaningful analysis. However, a difference between classifications remained.

CONCLUSION

There is a significant, but not always consistent, difference in oesophagitis healing rates with the same PPI(s) reported by the LA, SM, or HD classifications. The possible difference between grading classifications should be considered when interpreting or comparing healing rates for oesophagitis from different studies.

Rabeprazole: a review of its use in the management of gastric acid-related diseases in adults

Rabeprazole (Aciphex, Alfence, Pariet) is a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) used for the treatment of adults with conditions requiring a reduction of gastric acid secretion such as erosive or ulcerative gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD), non-erosive reflux disease (NERD), duodenal and gastric ulcers, and pathological hypersecretory conditions including Zollinger-Ellison syndrome (ZES). It is also used as part of combination therapy for the eradication of Helicobacter pylori, a pathogen frequently implicated in the development of gastric and duodenal ulcers. Rabeprazole has a well established efficacy and safety profile in the treatment of gastric acid-related diseases. Rabeprazole is a useful, well tolerated and cost-effective option for the treatment of GORD, NERD, peptic ulcer and other gastric acid-related diseases (including ZES), and provides an appropriate alternative to other currently available PPIs, with the added benefits of having a consistent efficacy profile and low drug interaction potential due to its predominantly nonenzymatic metabolism.

Body mass index and the efficacy of acid-mediating agents for GERD

In studies of the association between obesity and gastroesophageal reflux, one subject that has received very little attention is the effect excess body mass may have on the effectiveness of acid-mediating agents. The lack of systematic research may reflect the perceived high clinical efficacy of drugs like proton pump inhibitors. Both proton pump inhibitors and histamine type 2 receptor antagonists have low rates of significant adverse events; if there are differences in the side effect profiles based on BMI, it is unlikely such associations would be detected. Also, while the metabolism of many drugs can be affected by body mass, it is not clear that such a relationship exists with acid-mediating agents. Nevertheless, there is evidence that body mass index may indeed be associated with the efficacy of proton pump inhibitors and histamine type 2 receptor antagonists. This review will examine that evidence and consider some of the possible pharmacokinetic effects that might relate to body mass index.

Proton pump inhibitors: an update of their clinical use and pharmacokinetics

BACKGROUND

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) represent drugs of first choice for treating peptic ulcer, Helicobacter pylori infection, gastrooesophageal reflux disease, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)-induced gastrointestinal lesions (complications), and Zollinger-Ellison syndrome.

RESULTS

The available agents (omeprazole/esomeprazole, lansoprazole, pantoprazole, and rabeprazole) differ somewhat in their pharmacokinetic properties (e.g., time-/dose-dependent bioavailability, metabolic pattern, interaction potential, genetic variability). For all PPIs, there is a clear relationship between drug exposure (area under the plasma concentration/time curve) and the pharmacodynamic response (inhibition of acid secretion). Furthermore, clinical outcome (e.g., healing and eradication rates) depends on maintaining intragastric pH values above certain threshold levels. Thus, any changes in drug disposition will subsequently be translated directly into clinical efficiency so that extensive metabolizers of CYP2C19 will demonstrate a higher rate of therapeutic nonresponse.

CONCLUSIONS

This update of pharmacokinetic, pharmacodynamic, and clinical data will provide the necessary guide by which to select between the various PPIs that differ-based on pharmacodynamic assessments-in their relative potencies (e.g., higher doses are needed for pantoprazole and lansoprazole compared with rabeprazole). Despite their well-documented clinical efficacy and safety, there is still a certain number of patients who are refractory to treatment with PPIs (nonresponder), which will leave sufficient space for future drug development and clinical research.

Rabeprazole: a second-generation proton pump inhibitor in the treatment of acid-related disease

Rabeprazole is a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) presenting a very advantageous pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic profile over older PPIs. In particular, this drug has a very fast onset of action, due to a short activation time and a very high pKa, and may therefore be defined as a 'second generation' PPI. The aim of this article is to provide an update on the pharmacology and clinical profile of rabeprazole and its use in acid-related disorders, with a particular focus on its role in gastroesophageal reflux disease; in the treatment and prevention of duodenal and gastric ulcers and Zollinger-Ellison syndrome; in the therapy of the extraesophageal manifestations of gastroesophageal reflux disease (in particular the respiratory and ear, nose and throat ones); and in the eradication of Helicobacter pylori.

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.

Acid-suppressive effects of rabeprazole: comparing 10mg and 20mg twice daily in Japanese Helicobacter pylori-negative and -positive CYP2C19 extensive metabolisers

BACKGROUND

Rabeprazole 10mg b.i.d. is often administered as therapy for eradication of Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) and is also proposed as therapy for refractory gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. However, there has not been a comprehensive assessment of its acid-suppressive effects.

AIMS

To compare the acid-suppressive effects of rabeprazole 10mg b.i.d. with 20mg b.i.d. considering H. pylori status.

SUBJECTS

Thirteen H. pylori-negative and eleven H. pylori-positive Japanese CYP2C19 extensive metabolisers (<35 years).

METHODS

Intragastric pH was measured for 24h three times in a randomised manner; on day 7 of the repeated administration of rabeprazole 10mg b.i.d. or 20mg b.i.d., or a placebo.

RESULTS

In median intragastric pH value and percent time of pH>3.0, >4.0, >5.0, >6.0, and >7.0 for 24h, no significant differences were observed between the two doses in either H. pylori-negative or H. pylori-positive subjects. At either dose, these parameters were significantly higher in H. pylori-positive subjects than in H. pylori-negative subjects. Nocturnal acid breakthrough occurred in seven and two of the thirteen H. pylori-negative subjects and one and two of the eleven H. pylori-positive subjects at each dose, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The effects of rabeprazole 10mg b.i.d. were equal to those of 20mg b.i.d. in H. pylori-positive subjects; whereas in H. pylori-negative subjects, 20mg b.i.d. was superior for prevention of nocturnal acid breakthrough.

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.