Double-blind multicentre comparison of omeprazole and ranitidine in the treatment of reflux oesophagitis

The Discrepancy Between Subjective and Objective Clinical Endpoints in Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease

Therapeutic outcome in gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is commonly determined by both subjective and objective clinical endpoints. Clinicians frequently use symptom improvement as a key benchmark of clinical success, in conjunction with normalization of objective parameters such as esophageal acid exposure and inflammation. However, GERD therapeutic trials have demonstrated that a substantial number of patients rendered asymptomatic, whether through medical, surgical, or endoscopic intervention, continue to have persistent abnormal esophageal acid exposure and erosive esophagitis. The opposite has also been demonstrated in therapeutic trials, where patients remained symptomatic despite normalization of esophageal acid exposure and complete resolution of esophageal inflammation. Moreover, there is no substantive evidence that symptomatic response to antireflux treatment requires complete esophageal mucosal healing or normalization of esophageal acid exposure. Thus, it appears that a certain level of improvement in objective parameters is needed to translate into meaningful changes in symptoms and health-related quality of life of GERD patients. This supports the need to reconsider the commonly used "hard" clinical endpoints to evaluate therapeutic trials in GERD.

Pharmacologic treatment of GERD: Where we are now, and where are we going?

The introduction of acid inhibition in clinical practice has revolutionized the management of acid-related diseases, leading to the virtual abolition of elective surgery for ulcer disease and relegating antireflux surgery to patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) not adequately managed by medical therapy. Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are the antisecretory drugs of choice for the treatment of reflux disease. However, these drugs still leave some unmet clinical needs in GERD. PPI-refractoriness is common, and persistent symptoms are observed in up to 40-55% of daily PPI users. Potassium-competitive acid blockers (P-CABs) clearly overcome many of the drawbacks and limitations of PPIs, achieving rapid, potent, and prolonged acid suppression, offering the opportunity to address many of the unmet needs. In recent years, it has been increasingly recognized that impaired mucosal integrity is involved in the pathogenesis of GERD. As a consequence, esophageal mucosal protection has emerged as a new, promising therapeutic avenue. When P-CABS are used as add-on medications to standard treatment, a growing body of evidence suggests a significant additional benefit, especially in the relief of symptoms not responding to PPI therapy. On the contrary, reflux inhibitors are considered a promise unfulfilled, and prokinetic agents should only be used on a case-by-case basis.

The Clinician's Guide to Proton-Pump Inhibitor Discontinuation

There is increasing concern among patients and health care providers about the associations between PPI use and a multitude of potential adverse outcomes. Therefore, clinicians need to have a rational approach both to identifying PPI users who may not have an ongoing indication for their use and on how to encourage discontinuation of unnecessary PPI use. In this paper, we will provide a detailed review of the specific indications where the benefits of ongoing PPI use is of questionable value and will review the evidence on how to maximize the likelihood of being able to successfully discontinue PPI use while minimizing symptom recurrence.

Comparison of a Dimethicone/Antacid (Asilone Gel) with an Alginate/Antacid (Gaviscon Liquid) in the Management of Reflux Oesophagitis

Fifty-three patients with symptomatic reflux oesophagitis were entered into a single centre randomized study comparing the effects of a dimethicone/antacid (Asilone Gel) and an alginate/antacid (Gaviscon liquid) on symptoms and endoscopic changes over an 8-week period. Both treatments significantly improved heartburn, acid regurgitation and flatulence. Dimethicone/antacid but not alginate/antacid, produced a significant improvement in oesophagitis, oesophageal ulceration and histological grade of inflammation over the 8-week treatment period so that 14 patients treated with dimethicone/antacid and 10 with alginate/antacid had normal endoscopic oesophageal appearances at the end of the study. The difference in improvement between the two patient groups did not reach significance however, except for dimethicone/antacid improving histological changes (P less than 0.05). These findings suggest that dimethicone/antacid and alginate/antacid are equally effective in treating symptomatic reflux oesophagitis although dimethicone/antacid may have an advantage in improving oesophageal histological appearances.

Deprescribing versus continuation of chronic proton pump inhibitor use in adults

BACKGROUND

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are a class of medications that reduce acid secretion and are used for treating many conditions such as gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), dyspepsia, reflux esophagitis, peptic ulcer disease, and hypersecretory conditions (e.g. Zollinger-Ellison syndrome), and as part of the eradication therapy for Helicobacter pylori bacteria. However, approximately 25% to 70% of people are prescribed a PPI inappropriately. Chronic PPI use without reassessment contributes to polypharmacy and puts people at risk of experiencing drug interactions and adverse events (e.g. Clostridium difficile infection, pneumonia, hypomagnesaemia, and fractures).

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effects (benefits and harms) associated with deprescribing long-term PPI therapy in adults, compared to chronic daily use (28 days or greater).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2016, Issue 10), MEDLINE, Embase, clinicaltrials.gov, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP). The last date of search was November 2016. We handsearched the reference lists of relevant studies. We screened 2357 articles (2317 identified through search strategy, 40 through other resources). Of these articles, we assessed 89 for eligibility.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomized trials comparing at least one deprescribing modality (e.g. stopping PPI or reducing PPI) with a control consisting of no change in continuous daily PPI use in adult chronic users. Outcomes of interest were: change in gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms, drug burden/PPI use, cost/resource use, negative and positive drug withdrawal events, and participant satisfaction.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently reviewed and extracted data and completed the risk of bias assessment. A third review author independently confirmed risk of bias assessment. We used Review Manager 5 software for data analysis. We contacted study authors if there was missing information.

MAIN RESULTS

The review included six trials (n = 1758). Trial participants were aged 48 to 57 years, except for one trial that had a mean age of 73 years. All participants were from the outpatient setting and had either nonerosive reflux disease or milder grades of esophagitis (LA grade A or B). Five trials investigated on-demand deprescribing and one trial examined abrupt discontinuation. There was low quality evidence that on-demand use of PPI may increase risk of 'lack of symptom control' compared with continuous PPI use (risk ratio (RR) 1.71, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.31 to 2.21), thereby favoring continuous PPI use (five trials, n = 1653). There was a clinically significant reduction in 'drug burden', measured as PPI pill use per week with on-demand therapy (mean difference (MD) -3.79, 95% CI -4.73 to -2.84), favoring deprescribing based on moderate quality evidence (four trials, n = 1152). There was also low quality evidence that on-demand PPI use may be associated with reduced participant satisfaction compared with continuous PPI use. None of the included studies reported cost/resource use or positive drug withdrawal effects.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In people with mild GERD, on-demand deprescribing may lead to an increase in GI symptoms (e.g. dyspepsia, regurgitation) and probably a reduction in pill burden. There was a decline in participant satisfaction, although heterogeneity was high. There were insufficient data to make a conclusion regarding long-term benefits and harms of PPI discontinuation, although two trials (one on-demand trial and one abrupt discontinuation trial) reported endoscopic findings in their intervention groups at study end.

The Indications, Applications, and Risks of Proton Pump Inhibitors

BACKGROUND

Proton pump inhibitors (PPI) are the most effective drugs for inhibiting gastric acid secretion. They have been in clinical use for more than 25 years, In 2014, 3.475 billion daily defined doses (DDD) of PPI were prescribed in Germany. This high number alone calls for a critical analysis of the spectrum of indications for PPI and their potential adverse effects.

METHODS

This review is based on pertinent publications retrieved by a selective search in the PubMed and Cochrane Library databases, with particular emphasis on randomized, prospective multicenter trials, cohort studies, case-control studies, and meta-analyses.

RESULTS

The inhibition of gastric acid secretion with PPI is successfully used for the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease and of gastric and duodenal ulcers, for the secondary prevention of gastroduodenal lesions that have arisen under treatment with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and acetylsalicylic acid, and for the prevention of recurrent hemorrhage from ulcers after successful endoscopic hemostasis. PPI are given along with practically all antibiotic regimens for the eradication of Helicobacter pylori infection. The number of prescriptions for PPI has risen linearly over the past 25 years. As there has been no broadening of indications, one may well ask whether the current, extensive use of PPI is justified. There is evidence that patients taking PPI are at greater risk for fractures. Moreover, the vitamin B12 level should be checked occasionally in all patients taking PPI.

CONCLUSION

PPI are among the more effective drugs for the treatment of diseases associated with gastric acid. In view of their cost and potential adverse effects, they should only be prescribed for scientifically validated indications.

Potential costs of inappropriate use of proton pump inhibitors

BACKGROUND

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are commonly overused in hospitalized patients. The objectives of this study were to determine the extent of their inappropriate initiation in patients with low risk for gastrointestinal hemorrhage, factors associated with their continuation on discharge and potential cost of this trend.

METHODS

Retrospective examination of patients with low risk for gastrointestinal hemorrhage admitted to a tertiary-care teaching hospital over a 3-month period who received esomeprazole. The following information was collected: age, gender, PPI status (de novo or continued) and admitting diagnoses. Additional information collected from the de novo subgroup included indication for PPI, number of days on PPI and continuation of the drug on discharge. The cost of the medication was obtained from pharmacy records.

RESULTS

Four hundred nine patients were admitted during the study period and 204 (49.9%) received PPI de novo. Among these, 155 patients (76%) had an inappropriate indication for PPI. Of these, 62 (40%) patients were continued on PPI on discharge. Older age was a significant predictor of continuation of PPI at discharge. The estimated cost of the inpatient and outpatient inappropriate use of PPI was $12,272 and $59,272, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

PPIs are overused in the majority of hospitalized patients with low risk for gastrointestinal bleeding and this practice gets perpetuated at discharge, especially in older patients. The cost of this phenomenon is alarming.

Clinical characteristics and effectiveness of lansoprazole in Japanese patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease and dyspepsia

BACKGROUND

Patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) frequently have symptoms of dyspepsia in addition to reflux symptoms. Treatment options for dyspepsia are not standardized. The aim of this study was to clarify the therapeutic effect of lansoprazole on dyspepsia in Japanese patients with GERD.

METHODS

GERD patients with dyspepsia were enrolled and treated with lansoprazole 15 or 30 mg once daily for 4 weeks. Reflux and dyspeptic symptoms were assessed by questionnaires before treatment, and 2 and 4 weeks after the start of lansoprazole treatment.

RESULTS

In the effectiveness analysis set (n = 12,653), heartburn was reported by 91.6 % of patients at study enrollment. Postprandial fullness was the most frequently reported dyspepsia symptom at the start of the study, reported by 79.0 % of enrolled patients. After 4 weeks of lansoprazole treatment, heartburn symptoms were improved in 75.7 % of patients and symptoms of postprandial fullness were improved in 68.7 % of patients. The therapeutic effect of low and high doses of lansoprazole on dyspepsia, as well as on reflux symptoms, was approximately 10 % higher in patients with endoscopy-confirmed erosive esophagitis (60.1-82.2 %), than in patients with non-erosive reflux diseases (53.0-73.3 %). Lansoprazole was well tolerated.

CONCLUSION

In this large-scale clinical study, lansoprazole effectively relieved dyspepsia in addition to reflux symptoms in patients with GERD.

WITHDRAWN: Medical treatments in the short term management of reflux oesophagitis

BACKGROUND

Oesophagitis arises when reflux of acid from the stomach into the oesophagus causes mucosal inflammation. It is a common problem and a systematic review on the optimum treatment would be useful.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), H2 receptor antagonists (H2RAs), prokinetic therapy, sucralfate and placebo in healing oesophagitis or curing reflux symptoms or both. To compare adverse effects with the different treatments.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and the National Research Register until December 2004 and reference lists of articles. We also contacted manufacturers and researchers in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials assessing the healing of oesophagitis or reflux symptoms or both. Treatment involving PPIs, H2RAs, prokinetics, sucralfate and combinations either in comparison to another treatment regimen or to placebo for 2 and 12 weeks.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviews independently assessed trial quality and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 134 trials involving 35,978 oesophagitis participants. Five RCTs evaluated standard dose of PPI versus placebo in 965 participants. There was a statistically significant benefit of taking standard dose PPI therapy compared to placebo in healing of oesophagitis (RR = 0.22; 95% CI 0.15 to 0.31). Ten RCTs reported on the outcome for H2RA versus placebo evaluating 1241 participants. There was statistically significant benefit of taking H2RA compared to placebo in healing of oesophagitis (RR 0.74,95% CI = 0.66 to 0.84). Three RCTs evaluated prokinetic therapy versus placebo in 198 participants. There was no statistically significant benefit of taking prokinetic therapy compared to placebo in healing of oesophagitis (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.10). Twenty six RCTs reported the outcome for PPI versus H2RA or H2RA plus prokinetics, evaluating 4032 participants. There was statistically significant benefit of taking PPI therapy compared to H2RA or H2RA plus prokinetics in healing of oesophagitis (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.59).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

PPI therapy is the most effective therapy in oesophagitis but H2RA therapy is also superior to placebo. There is a paucity of evidence on prokinetic therapy but no evidence that it is superior to placebo.

Observational comparative trial of the efficacy of proton pump inhibitors versus histamine-2 receptor antagonists for uninvestigated dyspepsia

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

It is still controversial which drugs, proton pump inhibitors (PPI) or histamine-2 receptor antagonists (H2RA), are more effective for dyspepsia in the Japanese population.

METHODS

Patients with uninvestigated dyspepsia (n = 104; male/female 41/63) were treated with either rabeprazole 10 mg o.d. (n = 62) or lafutidine 10 mg b.i.d. (n = 42) for 4 weeks. Questionnaires (modified Frequency Scale for the Symptoms of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease [mFSSG] and quality of life [QOL], SF-8) were administered before and after therapy. The mFSSG was classified into a total score (Q-T), reflux score (Q-R), dyspepsia score (Q-D) and pain score (Q-P). The SF-8 had a physical component summary (PCS) and mental component summary (MCS). The predominant type of symptom was reflux (R-S), pain (P-S) or dysmotility (D-S).

RESULTS

R-S was 19.2%, P-S 48.1%, D-S 24.0% and overlap 8.7%. In the R-S, Q-T and Q-R significantly improved with rabeprazole, but neither scale improved with lafutidine. MCS significantly improved with rabeprazole. In P-S, Q-T, Q-R, Q-D and Q-P significantly improved with both drugs. PCS significantly improved with both, whereas the MCS significant improved with rabeprazole. In D-S, Q-R and Q-D significant improved with rabeprazole, but neither improved with lafutidine. QOL did not improve with either. With overlap, neither scale nor the QOL reached a significant difference.

CONCLUSION

Both PPI and H2RA have a positive effect on P-S, but H(2)RA therapy is limited for R-S and D-S, whereas PPI therapy is generally effective. Therefore, careful prescription based on symptoms is important.

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.

Characteristics affecting health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in Japanese patients with reflux oesophagitis and the effect of lansoprazole on HRQOL

OBJECTIVES

A survey of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in the Japanese general population has suggested that HRQOL is affected by sex and age. We investigated whether there is any effect of baseline patients' characteristics on HRQOL of patients with reflux oesophagitis (RE), and its changes with lansoprazole (LPZ) treatment.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This was a post hoc analysis of an open-label, multicentre, post-marketing, observational study which investigated the effect of LPZ (15 or 30 mg/day for 8 weeks) on HRQOL in patients with RE. At baseline, and after 4 and 8 weeks of treatment, HRQOL was assessed using a Japanese version of the 8-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-8) and a newly-developed RE-specific questionnaire (RESQ). Stratified analysis of changes in HRQOL scores according to baseline patient characteristics such as sex, age and baseline severity of typical RE symptoms was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 8,757 patients were included in the efficacy analysis. At baseline, physical component summary scores from the SF-8 were lower in older patients (>/=60 years) than in younger patients (<60 years), and mental component summary scores were lower in younger patients than in older patients. These scores significantly improved after LPZ treatment regardless of sex and age. HRQOL scores were lower in patients with more severe typical RE symptoms at baseline. After LPZ treatment, HRQOL scores significantly improved to similar levels irrespective of the severity of the typical RE symptom at baseline.

CONCLUSIONS

This post hoc analysis suggests that sex, age and severity of typical RE symptoms affect HRQOL in patients with RE in Japan, and such factors do not affect the improvement of HRQOL with LPZ treatment. The present study suggests a positive impact of LPZ; however, it is difficult to estimate the degree of improvement in HRQOL that may have arisen from symptomatic relief as part of the natural history of the disease from the study. Our results may overestimate the efficacy of LPZ. Further well-controlled clinical studies are needed to confirm the efficacy of LPZ on HRQOL in patients with RE.

The demographic characteristics and health-related quality of life in a large cohort of reflux esophagitis patients in Japan with reference to the effect of lansoprazole: the REQUEST study

BACKGROUND

Patients with reflux esophagitis (RE) in Western countries have impaired health-related quality of life (HRQOL). However, few data are available concerning HRQOL in Asian patients with RE.

AIM

To determine the demographic characteristics, HRQOL, and the impact of lansoprazole treatment in a large cohort of RE patients in Japan.

METHODS

Patients with RE were enrolled. Lansoprazole was administered for 8 weeks and HRQOL assessed using the SF-8 and a newly developed questionnaire for RE-specific HRQOL (RESQ) at baseline and after 4 and 8 weeks of treatment.

RESULTS

Among enrolled patients, 2320 patients with the Los Angeles classification grade A to D esophagitis at enrollment to the study were analyzed. A higher proportion of older women was observed (in the group of patients aged >or=60 years, 61.3% were women). Prevalence of obesity was 4.7%. At baseline, HRQOL scores of RE patients were well below the mean for the Japanese general population in all domains of the SF-8. After 8 weeks of treatment with lansoprazole, these scores significantly improved to the levels of the general population (P < 0.01). Scores of RESQ also significantly improved (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Demographically, RE patients in Japan differ from those in Western countries with an increased proportion in older women and lower prevalence of obesity. RE has a marked negative impact on HRQOL, which is significantly improved by treatment with lansoprazole.

The role and limitations of H2-receptor antagonists in the treatment of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease

Gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GERD) occurs in up to 44% of adults in the USA. Most individuals do not seek medical help, self-medicating with antacids. Manifestations of GERD range from symptoms without oesophagitis, which constitute the bulk of patients who self-medicate, to active oesophagitis and then to complications such as stricture and ulceration. It is the more severe cases who tend to come to the gastroenterologist, but it must be remembered that reflux symptoms are probably around 5-10 times more common than actual oesophagitis. Since acid in the refluxate is responsible for the bulk of the symptoms and mucosal damage, antacids are often used for quick relief--which of course may not be sustained. More prolonged suppression of acid secretion, such as by a histamine H2-receptor antagonist (H2RA) or a proton pump inhibitor (PPI), is required to give long-lasting symptomatic relief and heal any inflammatory change. H2-receptor antagonists inhibit acid secretion with an effect that lasts for 4-8 h with a single dose, decreasing stimulated acid secretion by around 70%. When treating oesophagitis, the H2RAs suffer from the disadvantage of their relatively short duration of action (compared with PPIs), development of tolerance, and incomplete inhibition of acid secretion in response to a meal. Therefore, it is not easy for the H2RAs to achieve optimum conditions for healing the more severe forms of oesophagitis--even very high doses may fail. In mild GERD the H2RAs have been shown to be effective in relieving symptoms.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

The role of proton pump inhibitors in the treatment of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease

Efficacy (healing, symptom relief) and cost-effectiveness are the principal reasons for the rapidly increasing use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) for the management of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease.

EFFICACY

Mean healing rates pooled from clinical trials are as follows: on omeprazole (OME) 20 mg vs. H2-receptor antagonist. H2RA (cimetidine (CIM) 1.6 g or ranitidine (RAN) 300 mg) (eight studies) at 4 weeks, 67% vs. 37%: at 8 weeks, 81% vs. 49%: on lansoprazole (LAN) 30 mg vs. H2RA (three studies), 83% vs. 47% and 91% vs. 63% at 4 and 8 weeks, respectively. The benefit is greatest in severe disease because the H2RAs are disproportionately less effective. Heartburn is more rapidly relieved and in a higher proportion: at 4 weeks, on OME 20 mg vs. H2RA. 77% vs. 47% and on LAN 30 mg vs. H2RA, 81% vs. 46%. Both PPIs are effective in H2RA-refractory disease, approximately 80% healing occurring in 8 weeks. Relapse rates after healing vary from 25% to 85% at 6 months. Maintenance therapy sustains remissions: relapse at 1 year is, on OME 20 mg vs. RAN 300 mg (2 studies), 12% vs. 79%, and 28% vs. 55% (and 38% on OME 10 mg); on LAN 30 mg vs. 10 mg vs. RAN 600 mg, 20% vs. 31% vs. 68%. The effectiveness of the lower dose allows for dose titration.

COST EFFECTIVENESS

The higher drug costs for the PPIs are offset by their higher efficacy, making their use cost effective, particularly in severe disease. Efficacy and cost effectiveness are likely to further expand the use of PPIs at the expense of H2RAs as increasing numbers of patients with milder disease are treated.

Disease-specific cost savings of treating nighttime versus daytime gastroesophageal reflux disease in an employed population

OBJECTIVE

The extent to which proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) can offset direct medical costs by reducing symptoms related to gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) in order to improve work productivity is not well understood. This study aimed to evaluate the economic impact of treating GERD with PPIs versus no treatment, from an employer's perspective.

STUDY DESIGN

An economic model was developed to simulate symptom reduction and breakthrough symptoms as well as associated costs over 1 year among a population of 100,000 with a 20% GERD prevalence rate. Medical costs, including GERD-related office visits, hospitalisations and procedures, were delineated by symptom severity. Indirect costs represented the monetised work productivity loss. PPI treatment costs $2/day (standard dose).

RESULTS

The GERD burden was substantial ($62,500,000). Treatment yielded $32,600,000 in savings ($1,630 saved/patient/year), mostly from reducing indirect costs. Treatment produced greater savings among nighttime GERD patients throughout the PPI cost range ($1-$5/day). Savings dropped if the price of standard doses of PPI exceeded $3.92/day for the treatment of daytime GERD patients.

The lessons learned from randomized clinical trials of GERD

Despite the huge number of randomized controlled clinical trials published on gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, the translation of the information gathered into clinical practice is rather limited. The aim of this article is to summarize the results of pivotal randomized controlled clinical trials and review articles on reflux disease and evaluate to what extent their results can be applied to current clinical practice. We reviewed the most relevant randomized controlled clinical trials and reviews since the publication of the first randomized controlled clinical trial on reflux oesophagitis (1978) to date. Six areas were explored, namely: (1) diagnostic "entry" criteria, (2) efficacy parameters, (3) duration of therapy, (4) degree of antisecretory effect, (5) placebo effect, (6) follow-up data. Gastro-oesophageal reflux disease is now the most frequent upper GI disorder treated by gastroenterologists in Europe and North America. There is still a dearth of information regarding the natural history of the disease. The types of information generated through randomized controlled clinical trials have had only limited applicability to routine clinical practice. In the future, large cooperative databases accumulating the clinical histories of a great variety of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease patients may help to provide us with the much needed insights into the natural history of this common disorder.

Medical treatments in the short term management of reflux oesophagitis

BACKGROUND

Oesophagitis arises when reflux of acid from the stomach into the oesophagus causes mucosal inflammation. It is a common problem and a systematic review on the optimum treatment would be useful.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), H2 receptor antagonists (H2RAs), prokinetic therapy, sucralfate and placebo in healing oesophagitis or curing reflux symptoms or both. To compare adverse effects with the different treatments.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and the National Research Register until December 2004 and reference lists of articles. We also contacted manufacturers and researchers in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials assessing the healing of oesophagitis or reflux symptoms or both. Treatment involving PPIs, H2RAs, prokinetics, sucralfate and combinations either in comparison to another treatment regimen or to placebo for 2 and 12 weeks.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviews independently assessed trial quality and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 134 trials involving 35,978 oesophagitis participants. Five RCTs evaluated standard dose of PPI versus placebo in 965 participants. There was a statistically significant benefit of taking standard dose PPI therapy compared to placebo in healing of oesophagitis (RR = 0.22; 95% CI 0.15 to 0.31). Ten RCTs reported on the outcome for H2RA versus placebo evaluating 1241 participants. There was statistically significant benefit of taking H2RA compared to placebo in healing of oesophagitis (RR 0.74,95% CI = 0.66 to 0.84). Three RCTs evaluated prokinetic therapy versus placebo in 198 participants. There was no statistically significant benefit of taking prokinetic therapy compared to placebo in healing of oesophagitis (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.10). Twenty six RCTs reported the outcome for PPI versus H2RA or H2RA plus prokinetics, evaluating 4032 participants. There was statistically significant benefit of taking PPI therapy compared to H2RA or H2RA plus prokinetics in healing of oesophagitis (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.59).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

PPI therapy is the most effective therapy in oesophagitis but H2RA therapy is also superior to placebo. There is a paucity of evidence on prokinetic therapy but no evidence that it is superior to placebo.

The place of famotidine in anti-ulcer therapy

Famotidine now presents physicians in the USA and many European countries with a third option when considering H2-antagonist therapy. A dose of 40 mg in the evening decreases nocturnal gastric acidity for 10-12 hours, leaving daytime-stimulated acidity virtually unaffected. This single evening dosage regimen produces effective healing of gastric and duodenal ulceration; maintenance of healing can then be achieved satisfactorily with 20 mg in the evening. In extensive clinical studies, the adverse effect profile of famotidine is similar to placebo. Famotidine has no known drug interactions and there are no identified mechanisms by which it might be expected to produce them. Circulating plasma hormone concentrations in man are not affected by famotidine and no antiandrogenic properties have been observed in animal studies. Future potential uses of famotidine may include the treatment of haemorrhage from peptic ulcers and the healing of oesophageal ulceration.

Idiopathic gastric acid hypersecretion: treatment implications for refractory acid/peptic disorders

Although in most patients with duodenal ulcer disease the ulcer heals after 8 weeks of treatment with standard doses of H2 blockers or other agents, in about 10% the ulcer does not heal. These patients are considered 'refractory' to treatment. Reasons often cited for non-healing include poor patient compliance, cigarette smoking, and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) use. Gastric acid hypersecretion also appears to be an important factor in non-healing with standard doses of antisecretory agents. We have defined idiopathic gastric acid hypersecretion as a basal acid output of greater than 10 mmol/h in the absence of an elevated fasting serum gastrin level (or a negative secretin test if gastrin level greater than 100 pg/ml) to exclude persons with Zollinger-Ellison syndrome. Among the acid/peptic-related disorders in which idiopathic gastric acid hypersecretion should be considered are refractory duodenal ulcer, refractory gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (especially patients with oesophagitis), postbleeding duodenal ulcer, and certain rare disorders such as hereditary angioedema. Some children with atypical abdominal pain may also be hypersecretors of gastric acid. Once identified, patients with refractory duodenal ulcer or gastro-oesophageal reflux disease are treated with incremental doses of ranitidine titrated against the level of gastric acid secretion that remains during therapy. Ranitidine was selected to avoid the dose-related antiandrogenic effects and potential hepatic cytochrome P450 system-related drug interactions that may occur with cimetidine. In most cases of refractory duodenal ulcer, doubling the standard dose of ranitidine (to 300 mg b.d.) is sufficient to achieve symptomatic relief and mucosal healing. Higher doses appear to be necessary for refractory oesophagitis. To date, no side effects have been associated with high doses of ranitidine (up to 1800 mg/day) for periods of longer than 6 months. Idiopathic gastric acid hypersecretion is an important factor in explaining why not all patients respond to a 'standard' ulcer-healing dose of H2 blocker, and it provides a rationale for use of higher-dose therapy as a safe and effective alternative to omeprazole or to combination drug therapy in refractory acid/peptic disease.

Gastro-oesophageal reflux disease

Gastro-oesophageal reflux disease refers to reflux of gastric contents into the oesophagus leading to oesophagitis, reflux symptoms sufficient to impair quality of life, or long-term complications. Transient relaxation of the lower oesophageal sphincter is believed to be the primary mechanism of the disease although the underlying cause remains uncertain. Obesity and smoking are weakly associated with the disease and genetic factors might be important. A negative association with Helicobacter pylori exists, but eradication of H pylori does not seem to cause reflux disease. Diagnosis is imprecise as there is no gold standard. Reflux symptoms are helpful in diagnosis but they lack sensitivity. Ambulatory oesophageal pH monitoring also seems to be insensitive despite high specificity. Empirical acid suppression with a proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) has reasonable sensitivity but poor specificity. Some evidence suggests that once patients develop the disease, severity is determined early and patients seem to continue with that phenotype long term. Unfortunately, most patients do not respond to life-style advice and require further therapy. H2 receptor antagonists and PPIs are better than placebo in oesophagitis, with a number needed to treat of five and two, respectively. In non-erosive reflux disease, acid suppression is better than placebo but the response rate is lower. Most patients need long-term treatment because the disease usually relapses. The role of endoscopic therapy is uncertain. Anti-reflux surgery is probably as effective as PPI therapy although there is a low operative mortality and morbidity.

Head-to-head comparison of H2-receptor antagonists and proton pump inhibitors in the treatment of erosive esophagitis: a meta-analysis

AIM

To systematically evaluate the efficacy of H(2)-receptor antagonists (H(2)RAs) and proton pump inhibitors in healing erosive esophagitis (EE).

METHODS

A meta-analysis was performed. A literature search was conducted in PubMed, Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases to include randomized controlled head-to-head comparative trials evaluating the efficacy of H(2)RAs or proton pump inhibitors in healing EE. Relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated under a random-effects model.

RESULTS

RRs of cumulative healing rates for each comparison at 8 wk were: high dose vs standard dose H(2)RAs, 1.17 (95%CI, 1.02-1.33); standard dose proton pump inhibitors vs standard dose H(2)RAs, 1.59 (95%CI, 1.44-1.75); standard dose other proton pump inhibitors vs standard dose omeprazole, 1.06 (95%CI, 0.98-1.06). Proton pump inhibitors produced consistently greater healing rates than H(2)RAs of all doses across all grades of esophagitis, including patients refractory to H(2)RAs. Healing rates achieved with standard dose omeprazole were similar to those with other proton pump inhibitors in all grades of esophagitis.

CONCLUSION

H(2)RAs are less effective for treating patients with erosive esophagitis, especially in those with severe forms of esophagitis. Standard dose proton pump inhibitors are significantly more effective than H(2)RAs in healing esophagitis of all grades. Proton pump inhibitors given at the recommended dose are equally effective for healing esophagitis.

Efficacy of famotidine and omeprazole in healing symptoms of non-erosive gastro-oesophageal reflux disease: randomized-controlled study of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease

BACKGROUND

The epidemiology and pathophysiology of non-erosive gastro-oesophageal reflux disease differs from erosive gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. There is a possibility that non-erosive gastro-oesophageal reflux disease treatment requires a different regimen/approach but it is not yet acknowledged.

AIM

To investigate the efficacy of famotidine and omeprazole in the treatment of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, especially non-erosive gastro-oesophageal reflux disease.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A randomized, open-label trial was conducted. Fifty-four gastro-oesophageal reflux disease patients were assigned to treatment with famotidine at a dosage of 20 mg twice daily; or omeprazole, 20 mg once daily, for a period of 8 weeks. The Short Form-36 Health Survey and Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale administered at baseline and after 8 weeks of treatment as well as a symptom questionnaire were conducted daily.

RESULTS

Short Form-36 revealed that gastro-oesophageal reflux disease has severe impact on health-related quality of life. Thirty-nine subjects (77%) were endoscopically diagnosed as non-erosive gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. The mean Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale abdominal pain, and indigestion score of non-erosive gastro-oesophageal reflux disease significantly improved in famotidine-treated patients (P < 0.05), but not in the omeprazole. There was no significant change regarding improved heartburn symptoms of non-erosive gastro-oesophageal reflux disease between treatments in the daytime or night-time.

CONCLUSION

Famotidine and omeprazole were both effective in improving symptoms of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, particularly non-erosive gastro-oesophageal reflux disease.

Relationship between symptom response and oesophageal acid exposure after medical and surgical treatment for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease

BACKGROUND

The relationship between symptom severity and objective evidence of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD) after medical and surgical treatment has recently been questioned. This study aimed to compare the symptomatic and physiological response (as measured by pHmetry) to the treatment of GORD by proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and by laparoscopic antireflux surgery, and to examine the relationship between the patient's subjective and objective response to treatment of GORD.

METHODS

Seventy patients underwent 24-h oesophageal pH measurement and DeMeester symptom assessment (for heartburn and regurgitation, grade 0-3) while off medical treatment, while taking PPIs and after laparoscopic fundoplication.

RESULTS

The median percentage total time with oesophageal pH < 4 off treatment, during medical treatment and after fundoplication was 9.5, 4.3 and 0.5 per cent respectively. After medical treatment 30 patients became asymptomatic although 18 of these still had pathological reflux on pH testing. Of the 19 patients who remained symptomatic after surgery only two had pathological acid reflux.

CONCLUSION

The symptomatic response of patients to either PPIs or antireflux surgery is a poor indicator of successful treatment in terms of reduced lower oesophageal acid exposure. A high proportion of patients whose symptoms are improved by PPIs still have pathological levels of acid reflux. Conversely, most patients who complain of reflux symptoms after antireflux surgery have no evidence of residual reflux on pHmetry.

Dysphagia in patients with erosive esophagitis: prevalence, severity, and response to proton pump inhibitor treatment

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Dysphagia is considered an alarm symptom, raising the question of stricture or malignancy. We sought to determine the prevalence and severity of dysphagia in patients with uncomplicated erosive esophagitis and its response to therapy.

METHODS

A total of 11,945 patients with endoscopically confirmed erosive esophagitis (Los Angeles grades A-D) participated in 5 double-blind, randomized, clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of up to 8 weeks of treatment with either once-daily esomeprazole 40 mg (n = 5068), esomeprazole 20 mg (n = 1243), omeprazole 20 mg (n = 3018), or lansoprazole 30 mg (n = 2616). The severity of dysphagia (4-point scale) was rated at baseline and at week 4. Esophagitis was classified as mild (grade A or B) or severe (grade C or D).

RESULTS

At baseline, 4449 of 11,945 patients (37%) had dysphagia-43% of patients with severe esophagitis, and 35% of patients with mild esophagitis (odds ratio, 1.39; 95% confidence interval, 1.27-1.51, P < 0.001). Dysphagia resolved in 83% of patients after 4 weeks of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) treatment. Resolution of dysphagia was associated with a mean healing rate of 90% across all treatments. Seventeen percent of patients reported persistent dysphagia, and in these patients the healing rates were decreased significantly (mean 72%; P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Dysphagia is common in patients with erosive esophagitis but is not a reliable clinical predictor of severe erosive esophagitis. Dysphagia resolved with PPI therapy in most cases, but persistent dysphagia may indicate failed healing.

Management of gastroesophageal reflux disease

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a chronic condition requiring long-term treatment. Simple lifestyle modifications are the first methods employed by patients and, because of their low cost and simplicity, should be continued even when more potent therapies are initiated. Potent acid-suppressive therapy is currently the most important and successful medical therapy. Whereas healing of the esophageal mucosa is achieved with a single dose of any proton pump inhibitor (PPI) in more than 80% of cases, symptoms are more difficult to control. Patients with persistent symptoms on therapy should be tested (preferably with combined multichannel intraluminal impedance and pH) for association of symptoms with acid, nonacid, or no GER. Long-term follow-up studies indicate that PPIs are efficacious, tolerable, and safe medication. So far, promotility agents have shown limited efficacy, and their side-effect profile outweighs their benefits. Antireflux surgery in carefully selected patients (ie, young, typical GERD symptoms, abnormal pH study, and good response to PPI) is as effective as PPI therapy and should be offered to these patients as an alternative to medication. Still, patients should be informed about the risks of antireflux surgery (ie, risk of postoperative dysphagia; decreased ability to belch, possibly leading to bloating; increased flatulence). Endoscopic antireflux procedures are recommended only in selected patients and given the relative short experience with these techniques, patients treated with endoscopic procedures should be enrolled in a rigorous follow-up program.

Noncardiac chest pain: evaluation and treatment

Noncardiac chest pain is a heterogeneous condition for which diagnosis and treatment are challenging. Research is needed to streamline evaluation to minimize unnecessary invasive testing and costs. Chest pain clinics to assess chest pain patients are popular in the United States and may be of value in reassuring patients and reducing presentation to hospital; however, recently this has been contended [111]. Options for the effective treatment of NCCP are dependent on the risk of an adverse outcome and the cost-effectiveness of the management algorithm that is followed. Most (64%) of those presenting to the emergency department with chest pain are classified as having NCCP [112,113]. GERD is probably the most important cause and application of a test of acid suppression with a high-dose PPI for 1 to 2 weeks seems to be a useful diagnostic tool. In those patients with GERD-related NCCP, short-term and potentially long-term therapy with a PPI (commonly higher than standard dose) is required to alleviate symptoms. Esophageal dysmotility is relatively uncommon in patients with NCCP and evaluation by esophageal manometry might be limited to rule out achalasia. Chest wall syndromes are common but probably often missed. Many patients with NCCP have psychologic or psychiatric abnormalities, as either the cause or an effect of the chest pain, but diagnosis here depends on techniques not applied easily in the acute situation. Pain modulators seem to offer significant improvement in chest pain symptoms for non-GERD-related NCCP. Finally, trials of management strategies to deal with this problem are required urgently, because the earlier discharge of patients with NCCP may exacerbate the problem. Fig. 2 provides a flow chart for diagnosis and treatment of NCCP.

A rational approach to uninvestigated dyspepsia in primary care: review of the literature

In this paper the rationale and limitations of the four most important approach strategies to dyspepsia in primary care (empiric treatment, prompt endoscopy, "test-and-scope", and "test-and-treat") are analysed. It is concluded that in the absence of alarm symptoms, a "test-and-treat" approach is currently the most rational approach provided that three conditions are met: (1) a highly accurate test should be used, (2) the prevalence of Helicobacter pylori in the population should not be too low, and (3) an effective anti-H pylori regimen should be prescribed taking sufficient time to instruct and motivate the patient.

Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of long-term management strategies for heartburn

OBJECTIVES

To compare the expected costs and outcomes of seven alternative long-term primary care strategies for the management of patients with moderate-to-severe heartburn over a 1-year period.

METHODS

A decision-analytic model was developed to estimate costs and effects (weeks with heartburn symptoms and quality adjusted life years [QALYs]) for each strategy. Meta-analyses were used to synthesize acute treatment and maintenance studies and physician surveys to collect information on patient management. The impact of uncertainty on the base case results was assessed using probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Probability distributions were defined for key model parameters and techniques of Monte Carlo simulation were used to draw values from these distributions. Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves (CEACs) conditional on the monetary value decision makers are willing to pay for a symptom-free day or QALY were created for each strategy.

RESULTS

In the base case, no strategy was strictly dominated by any other strategy. However, two strategies (maintenance H2-receptor antagonists H2RA] and step-down proton pump inhibitor PPI]) were dominated through principles of extended dominance. The least costly and least effective strategy was intermittent H2RA, while maintenance PPI was the most costly and most effective.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis showed that the best way of managing patients with heartburn depends on how much society is willing to pay to achieve health improvements. Based on the commonly quoted threshold of US 50,000 dollars per QALY, the optimal primary care strategy for managing patients with moderate-to-severe heartburn symptoms is to treat the symptoms with a PPI followed by maintenance therapy with an H2RA to prevent symptomatic recurrence.

Over-the-counter H(2)-receptor antagonists do not compromise intragastric pH control with proton pump inhibitors

BACKGROUND

Proton pump inhibitors effectively suppress intragastric acid. Nocturnal acid breakthrough occurs on any dosing regimen of oral proton pump inhibitors. Histamine(2)-receptor antagonists (H(2)RA) suppress intragastric acidity independently of meals and help to control nocturnal acid breakthrough. Because proton pump inhibitors require an acid intragastric milieu for activation, nocturnal dosing of H(2)RA might decrease the effect of proton pump inhibitors taken in the morning by decreasing their gastric-acid-driven activation.

AIM

Assess intragastric acid control on omeprazole, 20 mg, taken every morning, after variable dosing of over-the-counter famotidine, 10 mg.

METHODS

Twelve Helicobacter pylori-negative, healthy volunteers received omeprazole, 20 mg, every morning before breakfast for 15 days. Baseline studies on omeprazole, 20 mg, in the morning, were done on day 7. On nights between days 8-9, 11-12 and 14-15, famotidine, 10 mg at bedtime, and 10 mg at bedtime and/or at 05.30 h, was given in a three-way, crossover, double-blind randomized design. Intragastric pH monitoring was performed on days 9, 12 and 15, starting at 08.00 h.

RESULTS

Percentage times intragastric pH < 4 on omeprazole, 20 mg, in the morning of the day after receiving famotidine, 10 mg, at bedtime (58.6 +/- 4.8); at 05.30 h (54.1 +/- 5.1); or at bedtime and at 05.30 h (54.3 +/- 5.0) did not differ significantly (P=0.65) from percentage times intragastric pH on day 7 of omeprazole, 20 mg, in the morning (49.5 +/- 5.1).

CONCLUSION

Concerns over inhibition of next-day daytime proton-pump inhibitor effect should not preclude use of nocturnal H(2)RAs in patients with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease.

The clinical and economic impact of competing management strategies for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease

BACKGROUND

Gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a common disorder in the primary care setting. Traditional management strategies consist of sequentially intensive therapeutic trials followed by invasive diagnostic testing for nonresponders. A high dose proton pump inhibitor trial (the "proton pump inhibitor test") has been shown to be an accurate diagnostic alternative, and may be an efficient initial approach to patients with GERD symptoms.

AIM

To examine the clinical, economic and policy implications of alternative management strategies for GERD.

METHODS

Decision analysis was used to calculate the clinical and economic outcomes of competing management strategies. The traditional strategy incorporates sequential therapeutic trials with more intensive therapy ("step-up" approach) followed by sequential invasive diagnostic testing of nonresponders. The "proton pump inhibitor test" strategy includes an initial "proton pump inhibitor test" (7 days of omeprazole; 40 mg AM + 20 mg PM daily) followed by less intensive therapeutic trials in those testing positive ("step-down" approach) with sequential invasive diagnostic testing as needed. Cost estimates were based on Medicare reimbursement and average wholesale drug prices. Probability estimates were derived from a systematic review of the published medical literature. Model results are reported as the average and incremental cost-per-symptom free patient and cost-per-quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained.

RESULTS

The average cost per patient was 1045 US dollars for the traditional step-up management strategy, compared to 1172 US dollars for the "proton pump inhibitor test" and step-down strategy. The percentage of patients who were symptom-free at 1 year was 50% for the traditional management strategy compared to 75% for the "proton pump inhibitor test" strategy. The "proton pump inhibitor test" strategy results in QALY gains of 0.01-0.05 depending on the utility estimate employed. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for the "proton pump inhibitor test" strategy is 510 US dollars per additional symptomatic cure over 1 year, and between 2822-10,160 US dollars per QALY gained. The traditional management strategy resulted in a greater than 5-fold increase in the utilization of upper endoscopy, which was partially offset by a 47% reduction in the use of ambulatory 24-h oesophageal pH monitoring. The reduced effectiveness of the traditional management strategy may be attributed in part to a 118% increase in the use of "high-dose" H2RAs while reducing the use of standard dose proton pump inhibitors by only 42% and "high-dose" proton pump inhibitors by 57%.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the results of this analysis, strategies utilizing the initial PPI test followed by a "step-down" approach may result in improved symptom relief and quality of life over 1 year, and more appropriate utilization of invasive diagnostic testing at a small marginal increase in total costs. These findings warrant a prospective trial comparing these competing management strategies.

Guidelines for evaluation and treatment of gastroesophageal reflux in infants and children: recommendations of the North American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition

Gastroesophageal reflux (GER), defined as passage of gastric contents into the esophagus, and GER disease (GERD), defined as symptoms or complications of GER, are common pediatric problems encountered by both primary and specialty medical providers. Clinical manifestations of GERD in children include vomiting, poor weight gain, dysphagia, abdominal or substernal pain, esophagitis and respiratory disorders. The GER Guideline Committee of the North American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition has formulated a clinical practice guideline for the management of pediatric GER. The GER Guideline Committee, consisting of a primary care pediatrician, two clinical epidemiologists (who also practice primary care pediatrics) and five pediatric gastroenterologists, based its recommendations on an integration of a comprehensive and systematic review of the medical literature combined with expert opinion. Consensus was achieved through Nominal Group Technique, a structured quantitative method. The Committee examined the value of diagnostic tests and treatment modalities commonly used for the management of GERD, and how those interventions can be applied to clinical situations in the infant and older child. The guideline provides recommendations for management by the primary care provider, including evaluation, initial treatment, follow-up management and indications for consultation by a specialist. The guideline also provides recommendations for management by the pediatric gastroenterologist. This document represents the official recommendations of the North American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition on the evaluation and treatment of gastroesophageal reflux in infants and children. The American Academy of Pediatrics has also endorsed these recommendations. The recommendations are summarized in a synopsis within the article. This review and recommendations are a general guideline and are not intended as a substitute for clinical judgment or as a protocol for the management of all patients with this problem.

Effects of CYP2C19 genotypic differences in the metabolism of omeprazole and rabeprazole on intragastric pH

BACKGROUND

Omeprazole is mainly metabolized in the liver by CYP2C19, a genetically determined enzyme, whereas rabeprazole is mainly reduced non-enzymatically and partially metabolized by CYP2C19. The therapeutic effects of rabeprazole are therefore assumed to be less affected by an individual's CYP2C19 status.

AIM

To investigate the acid inhibitory effects and plasma levels of omeprazole and rabeprazole with reference to different CYP2C19 genotypes.

METHODS

Fifteen healthy volunteers took a daily dose of 20 mg of omeprazole or rabeprazole for 8 days. On post-dose days 1 and 8, 24-h profiles of intragastric pH were recorded and plasma concentrations of omeprazole, rabeprazole and their metabolites were determined.

RESULTS

After single and repeated doses of omeprazole, the intragastric pH values and plasma concentrations of omeprazole and its metabolites were significantly dependent on the CYP2C19 genotype. Significant differences in the same kinetic and dynamic parameters were also observed after single doses of rabeprazole. Although the plasma levels of rabeprazole differed among the different CYP2C19 genotype groups after repeated doses, no significant differences in intragastric pH values were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

The acid inhibitory effects of omeprazole and rabeprazole are significantly dependent on the CYP2C19 genotype status, as well as on their intrinsic pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic characteristics and dosing schemes.

Pharmacokinetics of orally administered omeprazole in children. International Pediatric Omeprazole Pharmacokinetic Group

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to examine the pharmacokinetics of orally administered omeprazole in children.

METHODS

Plasma concentrations of omeprazole were measured at steady state over a 6-h period after administration of the drug. Patients were a subset of those in a multicenter study to determine the dose, safety, efficacy, and tolerability of omeprazole in the treatment of erosive reflux esophagitis in children. Children were 1-16 yr of age, with erosive esophagitis and pathological acid reflux on 24 h-intraesophageal pH study. The "healing dose" of omeprazole was that at which subsequent intraesophageal pH study normalized. Children remained on this dose for 3 months, and during this period the pharmacokinetics were measured.

RESULTS

A total of 57 children were enrolled in the overall healing phase of the study. Pharmacokinetic study was optional for subjects and was performed in 25 of the 57 enrolled. The doses of omeprazole required were substantially higher doses per kilogram of body weight than in adults. Values of the pharmacokinetic parameters of omeprazole were generally within the ranges previously reported in adults. However, the plasma levels, area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC), plasma half-life (t(1/2)), and maximal plasma concentration (Cmax), were lower in the younger age group, when the AUC and Cmax were normalized to a dose of 1 mg/kg. Furthermore, within the group as a whole, these values showed a gradation from lowest in the children 1-6 yr of age to higher in the older age groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The pharmacokinetics of omeprazole in children showed a trend toward higher metabolic capacity with decreasing age, being highest at 1-6 yr of age. This may explain the need for higher doses of omeprazole on a per kilogram basis, not only in children overall compared with adults but, in many cases, particularly in younger children.

What is heartburn worth? A cost-utility analysis of management strategies

OBJECTIVE

To determine the best treatment strategy for the management of patients presenting with symptoms consistent with uncomplicated heartburn.

METHODS

We performed a cost-utility analysis of 4 alternatives: empirical proton pump inhibitor, empirical histamine2-receptor antagonist, and diagnostic strategies consisting of either esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) or an upper gastrointestinal series before treatment. The time horizon of the model was 1 year. The base case analysis assumed a cohort of otherwise healthy 45-year-old individuals in a primary care practice.

MAIN RESULTS

Empirical treatment with a proton pump inhibitor was projected to provide the greatest quality-adjusted survival for the cohort. Empirical treatment with a histamine2 receptor antagonist was projected to be the least costly of the alternatives. The marginal cost-effectiveness of using a proton pump inhibitor over a histamine2-receptor antagonist was approximately $10,400 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained in the base case analysis and was less than $50,000 per QALY as long as the utility for heartburn was less than 0.95. Both diagnostic strategies were dominated by proton pump inhibitor alternative.

CONCLUSIONS

Empirical treatment seems to be the optimal initial management strategy for patients with heartburn, but the choice between a proton pump inhibitor or histamine2-receptor antagonist depends on the impact of heartburn on quality of life.

Helicobacter pylori infection inhibits reflux esophagitis by inducing atrophic gastritis

OBJECTIVE

Although it is widely accepted that Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection is an important cause of atrophic gastritis, few studies have examined the relationship between H. pylori-induced atrophic gastritis and the occurrence of reflux esophagitis. The present study was aimed to examine the relationship between H. pylori infection, atrophic gastritis, and reflux esophagitis in Japan.

METHODS

A total of 175 patients with reflux esophagitis were compared with sex- and age-matched 175 control subjects. Diagnosis of H. pylori infection was made by gastric mucosal biopsy, rapid urease test, and serum IgG antibodies. Severity of atrophic gastritis was assessed by histology and serum pepsinogen I/II ratio.

RESULTS

H. pylori infection was found in 59 (33.7%) patients with reflux esophagitis, whereas it was found in 126 (72.0%) control subjects. The grade of atrophic gastritis was significantly lower in the former than in the latter. Among the H. pylori-positive patients, atrophic gastritis was milder in the patients with reflux esophagitis than in the patients without it.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that most cases of reflux esophagitis in Japan occur in the absence of H. pylori infection and atrophic gastritis, and it may also tend to occur in patients with milder gastritis even in the presence of H. pylori infection. Therefore, H. pylori infection may be an inhibitory factor of reflux esophagitis through inducing atrophic gastritis and concomitant hypoacidity.

Overview of medical therapy for gastroesophageal reflux disease

There appears to be a hierarchy in the efficacy of therapies that are directed against GERD. A summary of this hierarchy, including therapies [table: see text] not approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, is presented in Table 4. The individual practitioner must evaluate the appropriate point at which to place each patient on this hierarchy. Whether it is best to begin with the drug with the highest efficacy and step-down as possible for maintenance, never to step down, or to start with a less efficacious therapy and step up must also be individualized because there are no clear data to support a universal approach to all or even most GERD patients.

Standard-dose lansoprazole is more effective than high-dose ranitidine in achieving endoscopic healing and symptom relief in patients with moderately severe reflux oesophagitis. The Dutch Lansoprazole Study Group

BACKGROUND

In the treatment of reflux oesophagitis, H2-receptor antagonists are still widely used in spite of the apparent higher efficacy of proton pump inhibitors. In an attempt to compensate for the lower efficacy, H2-receptor antagonists are now increasingly being used at a higher dose.

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether or not standard-dose lansoprazole (30 mg o.d.) is more effective than high-dose ranitidine (300 mg b.d.) in moderately severe reflux oesophagitis (grades II-III).

METHODS

Lansoprazole or ranitidine was given to 133 patients for 4-8 weeks in a double-blind, randomized, parallel group, multicentre trial.

RESULTS

The percentage of patients with endoscopically-verified healing was significantly higher on lansoprazole than on ranitidine both after 4 weeks (79% vs. 42%) and 8 weeks (91% vs. 66%), though smoking had a negative impact on oesophagitis healing with lansoprazole. Heartburn, retrosternal pain and belching improved significantly better with lansoprazole than with ranitidine, as did the patient-rated overall symptom severity. Relief of heartburn appeared somewhat faster with ranitidine, but was more pronounced with lansoprazole. The number of patients with adverse events was similar in both treatment groups.

CONCLUSION

Standard-dose lansoprazole is better than high-dose ranitidine in moderately severe reflux oesophagitis.