Pilot study: miscellaneous therapy is highly successful for Helicobacter pylori eradication

Meta-analysis: High-dose vs. low-dose metronidazole-containing therapies for Helicobacter pylori eradication treatment

Objective

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of high dose of metronidazole in the treatment of Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection.

Methods

Studies were identified from databases (Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov) searched from January 1990 to September 2017 using a battery of keywords. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of H. pylori treatment comparing the high-dose and low-dose metronidazole-containing therapies (high-dose and low-dose therapies). Two reviewers independently selected studies, extracted relevant data and assessed study quality. A meta-analysis was performed by using Review Manager 5.3. Dichotomous data were pooled to obtain the relative risk (RR) of the eradication rate, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

Results

Four randomized controlled trials, a total of 612 patients with a diagnosis of H. pylori infection were included. Overall the meta-analysis showed that both high-dose and low-dose therapies achieved similar efficacy of intention-to-treat (ITT) eradication rate 82% vs. 76%, RR 1.12 (95%CI: 0.96 to 1.30), P = 0.15, and adherence 94% vs. 94%, RR 1.00 (95%CI: 0.97 to 1.04), P = 0.81, but side effects were more likely in high-dose therapies [32% vs. 17%, RR 1.84 (95%CI: 1.17 to 2.88), P = 0.008]. In subgroup analysis, increasing the dose of metronidazole enhanced eradication rates in areas with high metronidazole resistance [74% vs 52%, RR 1.40 (95%CI: 1.08 to 1.82), P = 0.01] and in individuals with metronidazole-resistant strains [71% vs. 46%, RR 1.50 (95%CI: 1.02 to 2.19), P = 0.04].

Conclusions

Both high-dose and low-dose therapies can achieve similar eradication rates and adherence and generally low-dose therapies cause fewer side effects. In populations with high metronidazole resistance, high dose of metronidazole can increase the eradication rates of H. pylori infection.

Treatment of Helicobacter Pylori infection: optimization strategies in a high resistance era

INTRODUCTION

Treatment of Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection is paramount for the management of prevalent gastrointestinal disorders and in the prevention of gastric cancer. Due to increasing antimicrobial resistance, performance of standard triple therapies has now declined to unacceptably low levels.

AREAS COVERED

In this article: i) we critically revise optimization tools aiming to improve the outcome of standard treatments; ii) we provide updated evidence on the efficacy and rationale for the use of several non-bismuth quadruple regimens in clinical practice, recommended as preferred empirical therapies in areas of high clarithromycin resistance.

EXPERT OPINION

Prolonged (14-day) treatment duration may boost the efficacy of standard triple therapy by approximately 5%. Use of a high-dose PPI and/or new-generation PPIs, rabeprazole and esomeprazole, might improve eradication rates, particularly in regions where the CYP2C19 rapid metabolizer phenotype is prevalent. Adjunctive probiotics may be considered to improve treatment tolerability, though more data are required to better define their role in H. pylori eradication. Among non-bismuth quadruple regimens, both concomitant and sequential therapies are appropriate options for high-resistance settings; however, concomitant therapy appears to be less impaired by dual clarithromycin/metronidazole resistance. Hybrid therapy is a promising new alternative which seems not to be inferior to concomitant therapy.

Optimised empiric triple and concomitant therapy for Helicobacter pylori eradication in clinical practice: the OPTRICON study

BACKGROUND

Empiric triple therapy for Helicobacter pylori should be abandoned when clarithromycin resistance rate is >15-20%. Optimisation of triple therapy (high-dose acid suppression and 14-day duration) can increase eradication rates by 10%.

AIM

To compare the efficacy and safety of optimised triple (OPT-TRI) and nonbismuth quadruple concomitant (OPT-CON) therapies.

METHODS

Prospective multicentre study in 16 Spanish centres using triple therapy in clinical practice. In a 3-month two-phase fashion, the first 402 patients received an OPT-TRI therapy [esomeprazole (40 mg b.d.), amoxicillin (1 g b.d) and clarithromycin (500 mg b.d) for 14 days] and the last 375 patients an OPT-CON treatment [OPT-TRI therapy plus metronidazole (500 mg b.d)].

RESULTS

Seven-hundred seventy-seven consecutive patients were included (402 OPT-TRI, 375 OPT-CON). The OPT-CON therapy achieved significantly higher eradication rates in the per-protocol [82.3% (95% CI = 78-86%) vs. 93.8% (91-96%), P < 0.001] and intention-to-treat analysis [81.3% (78-86%) vs. 90.4% (87-93%), P < 0.001]. Adverse events (97% mild/moderate) were significantly more common with OPT-CON therapy (39% vs. 47%, P = 0.016), but full compliance with therapy was similar between groups (94% vs. 92%, P = 0.4). OPT-CON therapy was the only significant predictor of successful eradication (odds ratio, 2.24; 95% CI: 1.48-3.51, P < 0.001). The rate of participating centres achieving cure rates ≥ 90% favoured OPT-CON therapy (OPT-TRI 25% vs. OPT-CON 62%).

CONCLUSIONS

Empiric OPT-CON therapy achieved significantly higher cure rates (>90%) compared to OPT-TRI therapy. Addition of metronidazole to OPT-TRI therapy increased eradication rates by 10%, resulting in more mild adverse effects, but without impairing compliance with therapy.

Optimizing clarithromycin-containing therapy for Helicobacter pylori in the era of antibiotic resistance

The efficacy of triple therapy for Helicobacter pylori infection has dramatically declined over the last decade, largely related to increasing clarithromycin resistance rates. From a microbiological standpoint, bismuth quadruple therapy is the ideal replacement since it combines drugs for which resistance does not impair its efficacy. Nonetheless, several obstacles such as availability, complexity or tolerance prevent a general implementation of bismuth quadruple therapy, so non-bismuth quadruple regimens remain the best first-line treatment in clinical practice in many geographical areas. We review the rationale and efficacy of several optimization tools (increasing the length of duration, high-dose acid suppression, probiotics), which have been largely evaluated over the last 5 years to increase the effectiveness of standard triple therapy. Then, we update available evidence on the effectiveness of several non-bismuth quadruple therapies (sequential, concomitant, hybrid, miscellaneous therapy), which have gained interest lately. We also revise evidence on the efficacy of the aforementioned optimization tools for non-bismuth quadruples schemes and, finally we provide a novel regionalized therapeutic algorithm, based on novel formulas recently developed for predicting the outcome of non-bismuth quadruple regimens, upon local antibiotic resistance rates.

How antibiotic resistances could change Helicobacter pylori treatment: A matter of geography?

Therapeutic management of Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) remains an unsolved issue. Indeed, no therapeutic regimen is able to cure the infection in all treated patients, and in many the infection persists despite the administration of several consecutive standard therapies. Although antibiotic resistance reports describe alarming results, the outcome of therapeutic regimens does not seem to parallel this scenario in most cases, since a successful performance is often reached in more than 80% of cases. However, the phenomenon of increasing antibiotic resistance is being closely studied, and the results show controversial aspects even in the same geographic area. For the continents of Europe, America, Asia, Africa, and Oceania, minimal and maximal values of resistance to the main antibiotics (clarithromycin, amoxicillin, metronidazole, and levofloxacin) feature wide ranges in different countries. The real enigma is therefore linked to the several different therapeutic regimens, which show results that often do not parallel the in vitro findings even in the same areas. A first aspect to be emphasized is that some regimens are limited by their use in very small geographic districts. Moreover, not all therapeutic trials have considered bacterial and host factors affecting the therapeutic outcome. The additional use of probiotics may help to reduce adverse events, but their therapeutic impact is doubtful. In conclusion, the “ideal therapy”, paradoxically, appears to be a “utopia”, despite the unprecedented volume of studies in the field and the real breakthrough in medical practice made by the discovery and treatment of H. pylori. The ample discrepancies observed in the different areas do not encourage the development of therapeutic guidelines that could be valid worldwide. On these bases, one of the main challenges for the future might be identifying a successful solution to overcome antibiotic resistances. In this context, geography must be considered a relevant matter.