Effect of low-dose rabeprazole and omeprazole on gastric acidity: results of a double blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, three-way crossover study in healthy subjects

Ultrasonographic Assessment of Metoclopramide Administration Effectiveness in Accelerating Gastric Emptying Before Urgent Surgery in Patients with Insufficient NPO Time

Background

Aspiration is one of the important complications of general anesthesia, although infrequent as well as accompanying high morbidity and mortality. The volume of gastric content is considered as a risk factor in this regard. Therefore, it is normally mostly recommend to consider proper fasting time before induction of general anesthesia.

Objectives

This study was conducted to assess the effect of metoclopramide on reducing gastric contents in patients with incomplete fasting before induction of general anesthesia.

Methods

This quasi-experimental study was conducted on patients with urgent surgical indications with incomplete NPO time. Every other patient received metoclopramide or placebo. Patients in the intervention group received 10 mg (2 ml) of intravenous metoclopramide, and patients in the control group received 2 ml of distilled water as a placebo. Patients in both groups underwent ultrasonography before starting surgery by an expert radiologist to calculate gastric antral grade (GAG) and cross-sectional antral area (CSA). These measurements were then taken for the second time 30 minutes after intervention, before starting the surgery. The values were compared statistically.

Results

The data of 60 patients were analyzed, of which 30 were in each group. The mean age, body mass index, type of the last consumed food (solid or fluid), NPO time in the two groups were not significantly different (P value > 0.05). The number of patients in the metoclopramide group with higher GAG (P value = 0.001) and the mean CSA (P value = 0.004) before the intervention was more than the control group. The GAG and mean CSA after intervention were not significantly different between the two groups; but the mean difference of decrease in CSA in the metoclopramide group was more than the control group (4.3 vs. 0.99; P value = 0.001), and changes of GAG after intervention to lower levels in the metoclopramide group was more than the control group (P value < 0.05).

Conclusions

In the current study in which ultrasonographic indexes, including GAG and CSA, were assessed as a suboptimal gastric emptying test method, it was found that metoclopramide could accelerate gastric emptying compared to placebo in patients with incomplete fasting before induction of general anesthesia.

Interchangeable Use of Proton Pump Inhibitors Based on Relative Potency

Although proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are widely used, their relative potency and ideal dosing regimens remain unclear. We analyzed data from randomized clinical trials that performed pH testing in patients receiving solid-dose PPI formulations (omeprazole, esomeprazole, lansoprazole, pantoprazole, rabeprazole) for a minimum of 5 days. We used omeprazole equivalency and the surrogate biomarker, percentage time pH > 4 over a 24-hour period (pH4time), to compare PPI effectiveness for different PPIs given once, twice, or 3 times daily. We found that increasing strength of once-daily PPIs (9-64 mg omeprazole equivalents) increased pH4time linearly from approximately 10.0 to 15.6 hours; higher doses produced no further increase in pH4time. Increasing the frequency to twice-daily PPI increased pH4time linearly, from approximately 15.8 to 21.0 hours. Three-times daily PPIs performed similarly to twice-daily PPIs. The costs of PPIs varied greatly, but the cost variation was not directly related to potency. We conclude that PPIs can be used interchangeably based on potency. Using twice-daily PPIs is more effective in increasing efficacy increasing once-daily PPI dosage. Omeprazole and lansoprazole (30 mg) and 20 mg of esomeprazole rabeprazole are functionally equivalent.

Evaluation of a Proton Pump Inhibitor for Sleep Bruxism

Bruxism is a repetitive jaw-muscle activity characterized by clenching or grinding of the teeth and/or bracing or thrusting of the mandible. Recent advances have clarified the relationship between gastroesophageal reflux and sleep bruxism (SB). However, the influence of pharmacological elimination of gastric acid secretion on SB has not been confirmed. The authors aimed to assess the efficacy of a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) on SB and to examine the gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms and endoscopic findings of the upper GI tract in SB patients. The authors performed a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled crossover study at Kagoshima University Hospital. Twelve patients with polysomnography (PSG)–diagnosed SB underwent an assessment of GI symptoms using the frequency scale for the symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease (FSSG) and esophagogastroduodenoscopy. At baseline (i.e., before interventions), the mean frequencies of electromyography (EMG) bursts and rhythmic masticatory muscle activity (RMMA) episodes were 65.4 ± 49.0 bursts/h and 7.0 ± 4.8 episodes/h, respectively, and at least 1 RMMA episode with grinding noise was confirmed in all participants. The mean FSSG score was 8.4 ± 5.6, and 41.7% of patients were diagnosed with gastroesophageal reflux disease. Mild reflux esophagitis was confirmed in 6 patients. PSG, including EMG of the left masseter muscle and audio-video recording, was performed on days 4 and 5 of administration of 10 mg of the PPI (rabeprazole) or placebo. PPI administration yielded a significant reduction in the frequency of EMG bursts, RMMA episodes, and grinding noise. No significant differences were observed regarding the swallowing events and sleep variables. Since the clinical application of PPI for SB treatment should remain on hold at present, the results of this trial highlight the potential application of pharmacological gastroesophageal reflux disease treatment for SB patients. Larger scale studies are warranted to corroborate these findings. (UMIN Clinical Trials Registry: UMIN000004577).

Proton pump inhibitors drastically modify triosephosphate isomerase from Giardia lamblia at functional and structural levels, providing molecular leads in the design of new antigiardiasic drugs

BACKGROUND

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are extensively used in clinical practice because of their effectiveness and safety. Omeprazole is one of the best-selling drugs worldwide and, with other PPIs, has been proposed to be potential drugs for the treatment of several diseases. We demonstrated that omeprazole shows cytotoxic effects in Giardia and concomitantly inactivates giardial triosephosphate isomerase (GlTIM). Therefore, we evaluated the efficiency of commercially available PPIs to inactivate this enzyme.

METHODS

We assayed the effect of PPIs on the GlTIM WT, single Cys mutants, and the human counterpart, following enzyme activity, thermal stability, exposure of hydrophobic regions, and susceptibility to limited proteolysis.

RESULTS

PPIs efficiently inactivated GlTIM; however, rabeprazole was the best inactivating drug and was nearly ten times more effective. The mechanism of inactivation by PPIs was through the modification of the Cys 222 residue. Moreover, there are important changes at the structural level, the thermal stability of inactivated-GlTIM was drastically diminished and the structural rigidity was lost, as observed by the exposure of hydrophobic regions and their susceptibility to limited proteolysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results demonstrate that rabeprazole is the most potent PPI for GlTIM inactivation and that all PPIs tested have substantial abilities to alter GITIM at the structural level, causing serious damage.

GENERAL SIGNIFICANCE

This is the first report demonstrating the effectiveness of commercial PPIs on a glycolytic parasitic enzyme, with structural features well known. This study is a step forward in the use and understanding the implicated mechanisms of new antigiardiasic drugs safe in humans.

Controlling on-demand gastric acidity in obese subjects: a randomized, controlled trial comparing a single dose of 20 mg rabeprazole and 20 mg omeprazole

Background

Obesity is associated with a risk of gastroesophageal reflux disease. The pharmacodynamic efficacy of proton pump inhibitors has not been specifically evaluated in obese subjects. The aim of this study was to compare the antisecretory response to a single oral dose of 20 mg rabeprazole, 20 mg omeprazole and placebo in obese subjects.

Methods

Gastric pH was monitored for 24 hours on three separate occasions in eighteen H. pylori-negative, asymptomatic obese subjects. Subjects were given omeprazole, rabeprazole or placebo in a randomized order and in a double-blind fashion. The main analysis criterion was 24-h percent of time post dose with intragastric pH above 3; secondary criteria were percentage of time above pH 4, median pH, [H+] concentrations and nocturnal acid breakthrough (NAB). Results were analyzed using linear mixed models and Wilks test comparing variances.

Results

24-h median [IQ] percentages of time with gastric pH above 3 and 4 were higher with rabeprazole than omeprazole (46 [37–55] vs. 30 [15–55] %, 9 [5-11] % for placebo) but the differences did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.11 and 0.24, respectively). Median acid concentrations were significantly lower with rabeprazole than with omeprazole and placebo (22 [14–53] vs. 54 [19–130] and 95 [73–170] mmoles/l, p < 0.01) for all periods. The number of NAB was significantly lower with rabeprazole than with omeprazole (median 1 [1,2] vs. 2 [1-3], p = 0.04). Variances of 24-h data (pH above 3 and 4, median pH, [H+] concentrations) were significantly lower with rabeprazole than with omeprazole (p < 0.0001).

Conclusions

In asymptomatic obese subjects the gastric antisecretory response to a single dose of rabeprazole and omeprazole was strong and not significantly different between drugs despite a significantly more homogeneous response with rabeprazole.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrial.gov: NCT01136317

Rabeprazole and esomeprazole in mild-to-moderate erosive gastroesophageal reflux disease: A comparative study of efficacy and safety

Objective:

To compare the efficacy and safety of rabeprazole and esomeprazole in mild-to-moderate erosive gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD).

Materials and Methods:

A randomized, single-blinded, outdoor-based clinical study was conducted on 60 patients of mild-to-moderate erosive GERD. After baseline clinical assessment and investigations, rabeprazole (40 mg) was prescribed to 30 patients and esomeprazole (40 mg) to another 30 patients for 4 weeks. The efficacy variables were change in GERD symptom scoring, endoscopic findings, and Quality of Life in Reflux and Dyspepsia (QOLRAD) scoring over 4 weeks.

Result:

Heartburn, acid regurgitation, and overall GERD symptom scoring (P = 0.01) were significantly decreased with rabeprazole in comparison to esomeprazole. The comparative study of all five domains of the QOLARD questionnaire including overall scoring revealed a statistically significant improvement in the rabeprazole group. Endoscopic findings in the rabeprazole group showed an absolute improvement of 30% and relative improvement of 55% over esomeprazole. Both the drugs were well tolerated having no significant difference in the incidence of adverse effects.

Conclusion:

Rabeprazole (40 mg) is a better choice for mild-to-moderate GERD compared with esomeprazole (40 mg) because of its better efficacy and safety profile.

A randomized, double blinded, clinical trial to assess the efficacy and cost effectiveness of omeprazole compared to rabeprazole in the maintenance therapy of patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease

Background/Aims

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and cost efficiency of omeprazole 10 mg and rabeprazole 10 mg once daily for 24 weeks in the maintenance therapy.

Methods

This was a randomized, open-label study enrolling 279 patients with erosive esophagitis A or B (Los Angeles classification) and typical gastroesophageal reflux disease symptoms. Patients who showed complete endoscopic and symptomatic healing after 8 weeks of proton pump inhibitor treatment were randomly allocated to maintenance treatment with omeprazole 10 mg once daily or rabeprazole 10 mg once daily for 42 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of patients with symptomatic remission at 42 weeks.

Results

At the end of 42 weeks of maintenance therapy, 96.4% of omeprazole and 95.1% of rabeprazole treated patients remained symptom free (P > 0.05). Two drugs were also comparable with regard to the severity and frequency of reflux symptoms during the maintenance phase (P > 0.05). By the cost-minimization analysis, the mean total costs per patient for remaining symptom-free for 6 months were 241,775 won for omeprazole and 287,115 won for rabeprazole, respectively.

Conclusions

Omeprazole 10 mg appeared to have similar efficacy in maintaining symptomatic remission as rabeprazole 10 mg, but was superior to rabeprazole 10 mg in terms of cost efficiency in the maintenance therapy of gastroesophageal reflux disease symptoms.

A comparison of the acid-inhibitory effects of esomeprazole and rabeprazole in relation to pharmacokinetics and CYP2C19 polymorphism

BACKGROUND

Esomeprazole and rabeprazole are metabolised in the liver by means of the CYP2C19 enzyme, which has several functional genetic polymorphisms. Among Caucasians, 70% of the population has a fast metaboliser phenotype, 25-30% an intermediate and 2-5% a slow metaboliser phenotype. It is unknown whether different PPIs are affected to the same extent by these phenotypic differences.

AIM

To compare the acid-inhibitory effects of esomeprazole 40 mg and rabeprazole 20 mg in relation to CYP2C19 genotype and pharmacokinetics.

METHODS

Eighteen healthy Helicobacter pylori-negative Caucasian subjects with CYP2C19*2-*6 and *17 genotype were included in a randomised investigator-blinded crossover study with esomeprazole 40 mg and rabeprazole 20 mg. Intragastric 24-h pH-monitoring was performed on days 0, 1 and 5 of oral dosing.

RESULTS

Onset of acid inhibition during the first 4 h after administration did not differ significantly between PPIs. During the upright period, the proportion of time with pH >4 was significantly higher with esomeprazole compared to rabeprazole (52.2 vs. 40.3%, P = 0.003). At day 1 and 5, acid inhibition was significantly greater with esomeprazole than with rabeprazole (median intragastric pH: day 1: 3.7 vs. 3.0, P = 0.008; day 5: 4.7 vs. 3.8, P < 0.001; percentage of time pH >4: day 1: 45 vs. 39%, P = 0.054; day 5: 65 vs. 48%, P < 0.001). Differences in acid inhibition between wt/wt and wt/*2 genotype were significant for both PPIs.

CONCLUSIONS

Once-daily dosing with esomeprazole 40 mg provides a more effective and faster acid-inhibitory effect than rabeprazole 20 mg. The acid-inhibitory effect of esomeprazole and rabeprazole are both influenced by CYP2C19 polymorphism.

Relative potency of proton-pump inhibitors-comparison of effects on intragastric pH

AIM

Comparative potency of proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) is an important clinical issue. Most available trials have compared the different PPIs at one or a few selected specific dosages, making it difficult to derive quantitative equivalence dosages. Here we derived PPI dose equivalents based on a comprehensive assessment of dose-dependent effects on intragastric pH.

METHODS

All available clinical studies reporting the effects of PPIs on mean 24-h intragastric pH were sought from electronic databases including Medline. Studies included were restricted to those targeting the Caucasian population, and healthy volunteers or gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) patients. The dose-effect relationships for mean 24-h intragastric pH and for percentage of time with pH > 4 in 24 h were analyzed for each PPI using pharmacodynamic modeling with NONMEM and a model integrating all available data.

RESULTS

Fifty-seven studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Based on the mean 24-h gastric pH, the relative potencies of the five PPIs compared to omeprazole were 0.23, 0.90, 1.00, 1.60, and 1.82 for pantoprazole, lansoprazole, omeprazole, esomeprazole, and rabeprazole, respectively. Compared with healthy volunteers, patients with GERD needed a 1.9-fold higher dose and Helicobacter pylori-positive individuals needed only about 20% of the dose to achieve a given increase in mean 24-h intragastric pH.

CONCLUSION

The present meta-analysis provides quantitative estimates on clinical potency of individual PPIs that may be helpful when switching between PPIs and for assessing the cost-effectiveness of specific PPIs. However, our estimates must be viewed with caution because only a limited dose range has been tested and not exactly the same study conditions were applied for the different substances.

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

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

Can famotidine and omeprazole be combined on a once-daily basis?

OBJECTIVE

Prompt and long-standing acid control following once-daily administration of antisecretory drugs is desirable. The objective of this study was to determine whether co-administration of a well-characterized H2-receptor antagonist, famotidine, can be combined with the proton-pump inhibitor omeprazole.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Intragastric 24-h pH-metry was performed in healthy, Helicobacter pylori-negative volunteers on day 1 and after 8 days of daily administration of 20 mg omeprazole, 10 mg famotidine, or a combination of these in a three-way crossover design.

RESULTS

A combination of famotidine and omeprazole raised the gastric pH level to >4 in less than 1 h. The percentage of daytime with pH > 4 on day 1 was significantly higher with the combination of omeprazole and famotidine (median: 37%) than that with omeprazole alone (22%; p < 0.05). On day 8, daytime intragastric pH > 4 following treatment with omeprazole (median: 55%) or a combination of omeprazole and famotidine (61%) was superior (p < 0.05) to that with famotidine (21%). On day 1 treatment with both famotidine and the combination (famotidine and omeprazole) showed a significantly shorter time to reach a pH of 4 (medians: 93 and 63 min, respectively) compared with treatment with omeprazole alone (173 min; p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with treatment with omeprazole alone, on day 1 famotidine and omeprazole in combination improved the duration of and time to reach intragastric pH > 4. With regard to duration with pH > 4, the combination therapy was superior to famotidine alone on day 8. The rapid acid control with an H2-receptor antagonist may be combined with the long-lasting antisecretory effect of a proton-pump inhibitor.

Combined analysis of three crossover clinical pharmacology studies of effects of rabeprazole and esomeprazole on 24-h intragastric pH in healthy volunteers

AIM

To compare antisecretory effects of rabeprazole and esomeprazole after single and repeat dosing in Helicobacter pylori-negative healthy volunteers.

METHODS

Results were pooled from three smaller, open, crossover, randomized studies to obtain data from 80 subjects. The studies compared: (a) 5 days' dosing of 20 mg rabeprazole and esomeprazole (n = 24); (b) single doses of rabeprazole 20 mg and esomeprazole 40 mg (n = 27) and (c) 5 days' dosing of rabeprazole 10 mg and esomeprazole 20 mg (n = 29). Washout periods were > or =14 days. Intragastric pH was recorded continuously for 24 h on days 0, 1 and 5.

RESULTS

Single doses of rabeprazole 20 mg maintained 24-h intragastric pH >4 for longer than esomeprazole 20 mg (45% vs. 32%; P < 0.001); rabeprazole 20 mg and esomeprazole 40 mg were equivalent in their effects. After 5 days' dosing, rabeprazole 20 mg maintained pH >4 for longer than esomeprazole 20 mg (62% vs. 56%; P = 0.046); the reverse was true for esomeprazole 20 mg vs. rabeprazole 10 mg (56% vs. 48%; P = 0.035). In general, intragastric pH AUC during 0-5 h after dosing was higher after esomeprazole than rabeprazole, whereas the reverse was true during the night.

CONCLUSIONS

The order of effects on 24-h pH was: rabeprazole 10 mg < or = esomeprazole 20 mg < rabeprazole 20 mg = esomeprazole 40 mg. Esomeprazole acts faster, whereas rabeprazole's effect lasts longer.

Does Helicobacter pylori infection influence response rate or speed of symptom control in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease treated with rabeprazole?

OBJECTIVE

The findings of several studies suggest that proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) suppress gastric acid more effectively in Helicobacter pylori-infected (Hp +) than in non-infected (Hp -) patients, but there has been no evaluation of the short-term clinical response.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Results of the first week of treatment with rabeprazole in Hp+ and Hp- patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) were compared in a large prospective open-label, multicenter, cohort study in general and specialized practices. GERD patients were recruited on the basis of either typical symptoms alone or endoscopic results, assessed for H. pylori infection and treated with rabeprazole (20 mg). Heartburn and regurgitation symptoms were assessed daily during the first 7 days. Outcome parameters were calculated for both symptoms and compared between Hp+ and Hp- patients.

RESULTS

Data on 1548 patients (74.5% Hp-, 25.5% Hp + ) were available. Mean heartburn and regurgitation scores decreased during the first week. For both symptoms, more than 70% of the patients had "adequate" symptom relief at day 5, and more than 80% at day 7. "Complete" symptom relief was reached in more than 70% of patients. Mean onset of adequate symptom control was about 4 days. In Hp+ and Hp- patients there was no difference in response for any of the parameters.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients treated with rabeprazole in clinical practice, H. pylori infection or its absence has no effect on the speed or degree of GERD symptom relief. Infected patients and non-infected patients can therefore be treated with a similar dose. When treating heartburn with rabeprazole, physicians do not need to consider the patient's H. pylori status and most patients (>80%) have adequate symptom relief after just a few days of treatment.

Effects of single doses of rabeprazole 20 mg and esomeprazole 40 mg on 24-h intragastric pH in healthy subjects

OBJECTIVE

To compare antisecretory effects of single doses of rabeprazole and esomeprazole.

METHODS

Open, randomised, 2-way crossover, clinical pharmacology study. 24 healthy subjects (10 men; mean age 26.2 y) received a single dose of rabeprazole 20 mg or esomeprazole 40 mg, with a 14-day 'washout'. Intragastric pH was recorded continuously from 24 h before to 24 h after dosing.

RESULTS

Mean intragastric pH was higher after esomeprazole than rabeprazole during 0-5 h after dosing (P=0.0001); the reverse was true from 14-24 h (P=0.0002). Mean % time pH>3 and >4 was greater after esomeprazole than rabeprazole during 0-14 h (P=0.041 and 0.044), but the reverse was true during 14-24 h (P=0.0005 and 0.001). In the 0-24 h interval as a whole, there was no difference between treatments in mean pH or % time pH>3 or >4.

CONCLUSION

Single-dose rabeprazole 20 mg was as effective as esomeprazole 40 mg in increasing intragastric pH and maintaining pH>3 and >4, despite the 2-fold difference in dose.

Rabeprazole test for the diagnosis of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease: Results of a study in a primary care setting

AIM: To determine the diagnostic value of the rabeprazole test in patients seen by general practitioners.

METHODS: Eighty-three patients with symptoms suggestive of GERD were enrolled by general practitioners in this multi-centre, randomized and double-blind study. All patients received either rabeprazole (20 mg bid) or a placebo for one week. The diagnosis of GERD was established on the presence of mucosal breaks at endoscopy and/or an abnormal esophageal 24-h pH test. The test was considered to be positive if patients reported at least a “clear improvement” of symptoms on a 7-point Likert scale.

RESULTS: The sensitivities of the test for rabeprazole and the placebo were 83% and 40%, respectively. The corresponding specificity, positive and negative predictive values were 45% and 67%, 71% and 71%, and 62% and 35%, respectively. A receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis confirmed that the best discriminatory cut-off corresponded to description of “clear improvement”.

CONCLUSION: The poor specificity of the proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) test does not support such an approach to establish a diagnosis of GERD in a primary care setting.

Long-term treatment of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease patients with frequent symptomatic relapses using rabeprazole: on-demand treatment compared with continuous treatment

BACKGROUND

On-demand treatment may be an alternative in the long-term treatment of non-severe gastro-oesophageal reflux disease in patients with frequent symptomatic relapses.

AIM

To compare the efficacy of on-demand treatment with rabeprazole 10 mg versus continuous treatment in the long-term treatment of patients with frequent symptomatic relapses of mild to moderate gastro-oesophageal reflux disease.

METHODS

This randomized, open-label study enrolled patients diagnosed with non-erosive reflux disease or oesophagitis grade 1 or 2 (Savary-Miller classification) reporting frequent symptomatic relapses (requiring > or =2 courses of antisecretory therapy during the previous year), whose intensity is rated at least moderate (>2 on a 5-point Likert scale). After a 4-week selection phase with rabeprazole 10 mg once daily, patients reporting symptom relief (Likert score < or =2) were randomized to receive either rabeprazole 10 mg continuous treatment or on-demand treatment for 6 months. The main evaluation criterion was the rate of symptom relief (scored on the Likert scale) after 6 months.

RESULTS

One hundred and seventy-six patients were enrolled in the 4-week selection phase (men, 53%; mean age, 49 years; non-erosive reflux disease, 36.4%; gastro-oesophageal reflux disease 1, 53.4%; gastro-oesophageal reflux disease 2, 10.2%). Rabeprazole relieved symptoms in 88.6% of patients. Of this group, 152 were randomized to the comparative phase to receive rabeprazole 10 mg continuous treatment (once daily) or on-demand treatment (continuous treatment, n = 81; on-demand treatment, n = 71). At month 6 (end point), the symptom relief rate was slightly higher for patients in the continuous treatment group compared with those in the on-demand treatment group: 86.4% versus 74.6%, respectively. This difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.065). For the overall quality of life score, there was no difference between the continuous treatment and on-demand treatment groups (86.25 and 84.94). Mean daily consumption of rabeprazole was significantly lower in the on-demand treatment group versus the continuous treatment group (0.31 tablets versus 0.96 tablets; P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

On-demand therapy with rabeprazole 10 mg provides an alternative to continuous therapy in patients with mild to moderate gastro-oesophageal reflux disease suffering from frequent symptomatic relapses.