Efficacy of omeprazole plus two antimicrobials for the eradication of Helicobacter pylori in a Turkish population

Clarithromycin Versus Metronidazole in First-Line Helicobacter Pylori Triple Eradication Therapy Based on Resistance to Antimicrobial Agents: Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

International treatment guidelines for Helicobacter pylori infection recommend a proton pump inhibitor (PPI)/amoxicillin/clarithromycin (CAM) regimen (PAC) or PPI/amoxicillin/metronidazole (MNZ) regimen (PAM) as first-line therapy based on culture and sensitivity testing. As incidence rates of antimicrobial agent-resistant strains are changing year by year, it is important to reevaluate the efficacy of eradication regimens. We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of PAC and PAM based on different locations categorized by the reported incidence of CAM- and MNZ-resistant strains.

METHODS

Randomized control trials (RCTs) comparing eradication rates between PAC and PAM first-line treatment up to December 2018 were included. We divided RCTs into four groups based on resistance to CAM (< 15% or ≥ 15%) and MNZ (< 15% or ≥ 15%).

RESULTS

A total of 27 studies (4825 patients) were included. Overall eradication rates between PAC and PAM were similar (74.8% and 72.5%, relative risk (RR): 1.13, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.91-1.39, P = 0.27) in the intention-to-treat analysis. In areas with low MNZ- and high CAM-resistance rates, PAM had a significantly higher eradication rate than PAC (92.5% vs. 70.8%, RR: 0.29, 95% CI: 0.13-0.68). In areas with high MNZ- and low CAM-resistance rates, the eradication rate with PAC was only 72.9%.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall eradication rates with PAC and PAM were equivalent worldwide. In low MNZ-resistance areas, PAM may be recommended as first-line therapy. However, the efficacy of PAC may be insufficient, irrespective of susceptibility to CAM.

Systematic review and meta-analysis: triple therapy combining a proton-pump inhibitor, amoxicillin and metronidazole for Helicobacter pylori first-line treatment

BACKGROUND

Due to clarithromycin resistance, the current efficacy of Helicobacter pylori first-line triple therapies including clarithromycin is low. It seems reasonable to explore alternative clarithromycin-free therapies.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of triple therapy including a proton-pump inhibitor (PPI), amoxicillin and metronidazole (PAM) as first-line H. pylori therapy by systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

Studies evaluating PAM in adult patients were included. Meta-analyses comparing PAM with other treatments were performed. The primary endpoint was the ITT eradication rate for H. pylori first-line treatment. In addition, sensitivity analyses ascertained the effects of treatment schedule, dosage and duration on cure rates.

RESULTS

Ninety-four studies (8061 patients) were included. Meta-analyses comparing PAM versus clarithromycin-including triple therapies showed a significant difference in favour of PPI, amoxicillin and clarithromycin (PAC) (70% versus 77.1%; OR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.56-0.88) and PPI, metronidazole and clarithromycin (PMC) therapy (66.4% versus 77.7%; OR = 0.55, 95% CI = 0.39-0.76). Sensitivity analyses showed a similar efficacy of PAM versus PAC when drugs were administered for 14 days (80% versus 84%; OR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.44-1.12). There were not enough studies to perform further comparisons. Number of antibiotic doses (P = 0.012), length of treatment (P < 0.001) and use of high metronidazole doses (P = 0.021) were related to higher cure rates in the sensitivity analysis including observational studies.

CONCLUSIONS

PAM was less efficacious than clarithromycin-including triple therapies. However, its efficacy was similar to that of PAC when drugs were administered for 14 days, although ITT cure rates did not reach 90%. Use of 14 day, thrice daily and high-metronidazole-dose PAM treatments markedly increased the cure rate.

Optimum duration of regimens for Helicobacter pylori eradication

BACKGROUND

The optimal duration for Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) eradication therapy is controversial, with recommendations ranging from 7 to 14 days. Several systematic reviews have attempted to address this issue but have given conflicting results and limited their analysis to proton pump inhibitor (PPI), two antibiotics (PPI triple) therapy. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the optimal duration of multiple H. pylori eradication regimens.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective was to assess the relative effectiveness of different durations (7, 10 or 14 days) of a variety of regimens for eradicating H. pylori. The primary outcome was H. pylori persistence. The secondary outcome was adverse events.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL were searched up to December 2011 to identify eligible randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We also searched the proceedings of six conferences from 1995 to 2011, dissertations and theses, and grey literature. There were no language restrictions applied to any search.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Only parallel group RCTs assessing the efficacy of one to two weeks duration of first line H. pylori eradication regimens in adults were eligible. Within each regimen, the same combinations of drugs at the same dose were compared over different durations. Studies with at least two arms comparing 7, 10, or 14 days were eligible. Enrolled participants needed to be diagnosed with at least one positive test for H. pylori on the basis of a rapid urease test (RUT), histology, culture, urea breath test (UBT), or a stool antigen test (HpSA) before treatment. Eligible trials needed to confirm eradication of H. pylori as their primary outcome at least 28 days after completion of eradication treatment. Trials using only serology or a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) to determine H. pylori infection or eradication were excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Study eligibility and data extraction were performed by two independent review authors. Data analyses were performed within each type of intervention, for both primary and secondary outcomes. The relative risk (RR) and number needed to treat (NNT)/number needed to harm (NNTH) according to duration of therapy were calculated using the outcomes of H. pylori persistence and adverse events. A random-effects model was used. Subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses were planned a priori.

MAIN RESULTS

In total, 75 studies met the inclusion criteria. Eight types of regimens were reported with at least two comparative eligible durations. They included: PPI + two antibiotics triple therapy (n = 59), PPI bismuth-based quadruple therapy (n = 6), PPI + three antibiotics quadruple therapy (n = 1), PPI dual therapy (n = 2), histamine H2-receptor antagonist (H₂RA) bismuth quadruple therapy (n = 3), H₂RA bismuth-based triple therapy (n = 2), H₂RA + two antibiotics triple therapy (n = 3), and bismuth + two antibiotics triple therapy (n = 2). Some studies provided data for more than one regimen or more than two durations.For the PPI triple therapy, 59 studies with five regimens were reported: PPI + clarithromycin + amoxicillin (PCA); PPI + clarithromycin + a nitroimidazole (PCN); PPI + amoxicillin + nitroimidazole (PAN); PPI + amoxicillin + a quinolone (PAQ); and PPI + amoxicillin + a nitrofuran (PANi). Regardless of type and dose of antibiotics, increased duration of PPI triple therapy from 7 to 14 days significantly increased the H. pylori eradication rate (45 studies, 72.9% versus 81.9%), the RR for H. pylori persistence was 0.66 (95% CI 0.60 to 0.74), NNT was 11 (95% CI 9 to 14). Significant effects were seen in the subgroup of PCA (34 studies, RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.75; NNT 12, 95% CI 9 to 16); PAN (10 studies, RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.86; NNT = 11, 95% CI 8 to 25); and in PAQ (2 studies, RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.83; NNT 3, 95% CI 2 to 10); but not in PCN triple therapy (4 studies, RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.07). Significantly increased eradication rates were also seen for PPI triple therapy with 10 versus 7 days (24 studies, 79.9% versus 75.7%; RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.89; NNT 21, 95% CI 15 to 38) and 14 versus 10 days (12 studies, 84.4% versus 78.5%; RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.90; NNT 17, 95% CI 11 to 46); especially in the subgroup of PAC for 10 versus 7 days (17 studies, RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.91) and for 14 versus 10 days (10 studies, RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.91). A trend towards increased H. pylori eradication rates was seen with increased duration of PCN for 10 versus 7 days, and of PAN for 10 versus 7 days and 14 versus 10 days, though this was not statistical significant. The proportion of patients with adverse events, defined by authors, was marginally significantly increased only between 7 days and 14 days (15.5% versus 19.4%; RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.37; NNTH 31, 95% CI 18 to 104) but not for other duration comparisons. The proportion of patients discontinuing treatment due to adverse events was not significantly different between treatment durations.Only limited data were reported for different durations of regimens other than PPI triple therapy. No significant difference of the eradication rate was seen for all regimens according to different durations except for H₂RA bismuth quadruple therapy, where a significantly higher eradication rate was seen for 14 days versus 7 days, however only one study reported outcome data.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Increasing the duration of PPI-based triple therapy increases H. pylori eradication rates. For PCA, prolonging treatment duration from 7 to 10 or from 10 to 14 days is associated with a significantly higher eradication rate. The optimal duration of therapy for PCA and PAN is at least 14 days. More data are needed to confirm if there is any benefit of increasing the duration of therapy for PCN therapy. Information is limited for regimens other than PPI triple therapy; more studies are needed to draw meaningful conclusions for optimal duration of other H. pylori eradication regimens.

Empiric quadruple vs. triple therapy for primary treatment of Helicobacter pylori infection: Systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy and tolerability

OBJECTIVES

Recent treatment guidelines recommend two first-line therapies for Helicobacter pylori infection: proton pump inhibitor (PPI), bismuth, tetracycline, and metronidazole (quadruple therapy) or PPI, clarithromycin, and amoxicillin (triple therapy). We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and tolerability of these regimens as first-line treatment of H. pylori.

METHODS

A search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Google Scholar, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ACP Journal Club, the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness, Cochrane Methodology Register, Health Technology Assessment Database, and abstracts from prominent gastrointestinal scientific meetings was carried out. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing bismuth quadruple therapy to clarithromycin triple therapy were selected for meta-analysis. Two independent reviewers extracted data, using standardized data forms. Meta-analysis was carried out with the metan command in Stata 10.1. Funnel plots and subgroup analyses were carried out.

RESULTS

Nine RCTs (N=1,679) were included. Although dosing regimens of clarithromycin triple therapy were quite consistent between trials, dosing regimens varied considerably for bismuth quadruple therapy. Bismuth quadruple therapy achieved eradication in 78.3% of patients, whereas clarithromycin triple therapy achieved an eradication rate of 77.0% (risk ratio (RR)=1.002, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.936-1.073). There was moderate heterogeneity and no evidence for significant publication bias. Subgroup analyses by study location, treatment duration, and study population did not account for the heterogeneity. There were no statistically significant differences in side effects yielded by quadruple vs. clarithromycin triple therapy (RR=1.04, 95% CI: 1.04-1.14).

CONCLUSIONS

Quadruple and triple therapies yielded similar eradication rates as primary therapy for H. pylori infection. Both therapies yielded suboptimal eradication rates. Patient compliance and side effects are similar for quadruple and triple therapies.

The efficacy of bismuth containing quadruple therapy as a first-line treatment option for Helicobacter pylori

BACKGROUND

Helicobacter pylori eradication rates have tended to decrease recently, mostly due to increasing antibiotic-resistance. The present study aimed to compare the efficacy of bismuth-based quadruple regimen with proton pump inhibitor-based triple regimen for eradication of H. pylori.

METHODS

Consecutive H. pylori-positive patients with non-ulcer dyspepsia were randomized into one of two regimens: (i) bismuth subsalicylate 300 mg q.i.d., lansoprazole 30 mg b.i.d., tetracycline 500 mg q.i.d. and metronidazole 500 mg t.i.d. (BLTM group) for 14 days; (ii) lansoprazole 30 mg b.i.d., amoxicillin 1 g b.i.d and clarithromycin 500 mg b.i.d. (LAC) for 14 days. Gastroscopy and (14)C-Urea breath test (UBT) were performed before enrollment, and UBT only was repeated for 6 weeks after treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 240 patients were randomized into groups and 212 of them completed the protocols. The 'intention-to-treat' (ITT) and 'per protocol' (PP) H. pylori eradication rates were 70% (95%CI 61-78) and 82.3% (95%CI 74-89) in the BLTM group, and 57.5% (95%CI 48-66) and 62.7% (95%CI 53-71) in the LAC group. The BLTM treatment achieved a significantly better eradication rate compared with LAC treatment in PP analysis (82.3% vs. 62.7%, P = 0.002). Mild to severe side-effects, which were more frequent in the BLTM group, were reported in 18.2% of the patients.

CONCLUSION

The bismuth-based quadruple regimen achieved a better eradication rate compared with proton pump inhibitor-based triple regimens as a first-line eradication option for H. pylori in our population.

Eradication of Helicobacter pylori with triple therapy: an epidemiologic analysis of trends in Turkey over 10 years

BACKGROUND

There is increasing concern about the efficacy of current regimens for the eradication of Helicobacter pylori.

OBJECTIVES

This study examined rates of H. pylori eradication with a commonly used triple-therapy regimen consisting of a proton pump inhibitor (PPI), clarithromycin, and amoxicillin in trials performed in Turkey from 1996 to 2005. It also investigated the relationship between eradication rates and the duration of treatment (7, 10, or 14 days), choice of PPI, and indication for treatment (dyspepsia or peptic ulcer).

METHODS

This was a retrospective epidemiologic analysis. Articles concerning H. pylori eradication in Turkey that were published in peer-reviewed national and international journals were identified through searches of MEDLINE using the terms Helicobacter, eradication, and Turkey, and of the Turkish Medical Index using the terms Helicobacter and eradication. Abstracts from the Turkish Gastroenterology Congress from 1996 through 2005 were searched manually. Open-label trials, controlled trials, treatment arms, and case series that included a triple-therapy regimen consisting of standard doses of any PPI (omeprazole 20 mg BID, lansoprazole 30 mg BID, pantoprazole 40 mg BID, or esomeprazole 40 mg BID) with clarithromycin 500 mg BID and amoxicillin 1 g BID for 7 to 14 days were selected for analysis. Trials including patients who had undergone a previous attempt at eradication of H. pylori were excluded.

RESULTS

Of 138 trials or treatment arms identified, 94 met the criteria for inclusion (3637 subjects). The pooled eradication rate was 68.8% (95% CI, 67.3-70.3). A marked decrease in eradication was noted after 2000. Pooled eradication rates each year from 1996 through 2005 were 79.4%, 83.7%, 81.8%, 81.8%, 75.1%, 61.3%, 65.6%, 65.1%, 55.3%, and 61.1%, respectively. Eradication rates were not affected by the duration of treatment, choice of PPI, or indication for treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Rates of H. pylori eradication with the triple-therapy regimen decreased in Turkey over the 10-year period studied. In an era of increasing clarithromycin use, the effectiveness of this regimen for H. pylori eradication appears to require reassessment.

The efficacy, safety and tolerability of pantoprazole-based one-week triple therapy in H. pylori eradication and duodenal ulcer healing

OBJECTIVE

Recently, proton pump inhibitor (PPI)-based triple therapy has been recommended as a first line treatment in the eradication of Helicobacter pylori. The aim of this open, multicentre trial was to investigate the efficacy, safety, tolerability and the ulcer healing rate of a triple regimen consisting of pantoprazole 40 mg, clarithromycin 500 mg and amoxicillin 1000 mg twice daily for 7 days, in the eradication of H. pylori in patients with duodenal ulcer in Turkey.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

H. pylori infection was assessed by histological examination and rapid urease test at baseline and 4 weeks after the completion of the therapy. Seventy-seven patients were enrolled, 5 were excluded due to various reasons and 72 completed the entire course of the trial.

RESULTS

H. pylori eradication was confirmed in 49 of these patients; the eradication rate was 68% by per-protocol analysis and 63.6% by intention-to-treat analysis. The ulcers were completely healed in 61 patients (85%) at the second endoscopic examination. Drug compliance was excellent (97.3%) and there were no serious adverse events.

CONCLUSION

Pantoprazole-based 1-week triple therapy was well tolerated and the ulcer healing rate was high (85%). Relatively low H. pylori eradication rates may be attributed to rising antibiotic resistance over recent years. A large scale, comparative study with other PPI-based regimens is warranted based on the results of this open study with the pantoprazole-based regimen.

A systematic comparison of triple therapies for treatment of Helicobacter pylori infection with proton pump inhibitor/ ranitidine bismuth citrate plus clarithromycin and either amoxicillin or a nitroimidazole

BACKGROUND

Triple therapies with proton pump inhibitor/ranitidine bismuth citrate (RBC), clarithromycin (C) and either amoxicillin (A) or a nitroimidazole (I) are widely accepted as treatment for Helicobacter pylori infection. However, it is not clear which of these antibiotic combinations should be preferred.

AIM

To evaluate whether there is a difference in efficacy between triple therapies with proton pump inhibitor/RBC, clarithromycin and either amoxicillin or a nitroimidazole.

METHODS

The literature was examined for randomized trials comparing proton pump inhibitor/RBC-C-A and proton pump inhibitor/RBC-C-I. Studies were grouped according to the type of acid inhibitor used (proton pump inhibitor or RBC) and differences between pooled cure rates were calculated.

RESULTS

Forty-seven studies were identified: seven using RBC, 39 using proton pump inhibitor, one using both. RBC-C-I was somewhat superior to RBC-C-A, although this difference only reached statistical significance in intention-to-treat analysis. Overall, proton pump inhibitor-C-I and proton pump inhibitor-C-A were equally effective, but in nitroimidazole-susceptible strains, proton pump inhibitor-C-I performed better, in nitroimidazole-resistant strains, proton pump inhibitor-C-A performed better. No serious side-effects were reported and pooled drop-out rates were equal.

CONCLUSIONS

In general, proton pump inhibitor-C-I and proton pump inhibitor-C-A are equally effective and therefore other factors such as local prevalence of resistant strains, cost of therapy and options for second-line treatment should determine which regimen should be preferred. When using RBC, the RBC-C-I combination is somewhat superior to RBC-C-A.