Pantoprazole provides rapid and sustained symptomatic relief in patients treated for erosive oesophagitis

The Benefits of Combination Therapy with Esomeprazole and Rebamipide in Symptom Improvement in Reflux Esophagitis: An International Multicenter Study

Background/Aims

To investigate the effects of esomeprazole and rebamipide combination therapy on symptomatic improvement in patients with reflux esophagitis.

Methods

A total of 501 patients with reflux esophagitis were randomized into one of the following two treatment regimens: 40 mg esomeprazole plus 300 mg rebamipide daily (combination therapy group) or 40 mg esomeprazole daily (monotherapy group). We used a symptom questionnaire that evaluated heartburn, acid regurgitation, and four upper gastrointestinal symptoms. The primary efficacy end point was the mean decrease in the total symptom score.

Results

The mean decreases in the total symptom score at 4 weeks were estimated to be -18.1±13.8 in the combination therapy group and -15.1±11.9 in the monotherapy group (p=0.011). Changes in reflux symptoms from baseline after 4 weeks of treatment were -8.4±6.6 in the combination therapy group and -6.8±5.9 in the monotherapy group (p=0.009).

Conclusions

Over a 4-week treatment course, esomeprazole and rebamipide combination therapy was more effective in decreasing the symptoms of reflux esophagitis than esomeprazole monotherapy.

Efficacy of proton pump inhibitors and H2 blocker in the treatment of symptomatic gastroesophageal reflux disease in infants

Purpose

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) occurs in pediatric patients when reflux of gastric contents presents with troublesome symptoms. The present study compared the effects of omeprazole and ranitidine for the treatment of symptomatic GERD in infants of 2-12 months.

Methods

This study was a clinical randomized double-blind trial and parallel-group comparison of omeprazole and ranitidine performed at Children Training Hospital in Tabriz, Iran. Patients received a standard treatment for 2 weeks. After 2 weeks, the patients with persistent symptoms were enrolled in this randomized study.

Results

We enrolled 76 patients in the present study and excluded 16 patients. Thirty patients each were included in group A (ranitidine) and in group B (omeprazole). GERD symptom score for groups A and B was 47.17±5.62 and 51.93±5.42, respectively, with a P value of 0.54, before the treatment and 2.47±0.58 and 2.43±1.15, respectively, after the treatment (P=0.98). No statistically significant differences were found between ranitidine and omeprazole in their efficacy for the treatment of GERD.

Conclusion

The safety and efficacy of ranitidine and omeprazole have been demonstrated in infants. Both groups of infants showed a statistically significant decrease in the score of clinical variables after the treatment.

Eight weeks of esomeprazole therapy reduces symptom relapse, compared with 4 weeks, in patients with Los Angeles grade A or B erosive esophagitis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

There is disagreement over the ideal duration of initial proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy for gastroesophageal reflux disease, and whether prolonged therapy increases healing of the esophagitis and prevents symptom relapse. We performed a multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled study to compare the efficacies of 4 weeks vs 8 weeks of PPI therapy in reducing reflux symptoms and preventing symptom relapse in patients with Los Angeles grade A or B erosive esophagitis.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with symptomatic Los Angeles grade A or B erosive esophagitis were assigned randomly to groups given daily esomeprazole (40 mg) for 4 weeks (n = 207) or 8 weeks (n = 201) as their initial treatment. Patients with complete symptom resolution were switched to on-demand therapy until the end of week 20. All patients underwent follow-up endoscopy at the end of week 20. Symptom relapse was defined as 2 or more episodes of troublesome reflux symptoms per week or ingestion of PPI for more than 7 days within 4 weeks, owing to reflux symptoms.

RESULTS

The 4-week and 8-week groups had comparable rates of complete symptom resolution (77.9% vs 82.1%). However, the cumulative 12-week incidence of symptom relapse was higher for the 4-week group than for the 8-week group (62.5% vs 47.8%; difference, 14.7%; 95% confidence interval, 3.7%-25.7%; P = .009). No significant difference was observed between groups in the proportions of patients with sustained healing at the end of week 20 (49.6% vs 40.9%; P = .160).

CONCLUSIONS

Prolonging PPI therapy from 4 weeks to 8 weeks does not appear to increase the rate of complete symptom resolution in patients with mild erosive esophagitis. However, 8 weeks of PPI therapy reduces symptom relapse, compared with 4 weeks, in patients with Los Angeles grade A or B erosive esophagitis. ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT01874535.

Indirect comparison of randomised controlled trials: comparative efficacy of dexlansoprazole vs. esomeprazole in the treatment of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease

BACKGROUND

Dexlansoprazole is a new proton pump inhibitor (PPI) with a dual delayed-release system. Both dexlansoprazole and esomeprazole are an enantiomer of lansoprazole and omeprazole respectively. However, there is no head-to-head trial data or indirect comparison analyses between dexlansoprazole and esomeprazole.

AIM

To compare the efficacy of dexlansoprazole with esomeprazole in healing erosive oesophagitis (EO), the maintenance of healed EO and the treatment of non-erosive reflux disease (NERD).

METHODS

Randomised Controlled Trials (RCTs) comparing dexlansoprazole or esomeprazole with either placebo or another PPI were systematically reviewed. Random-effect meta-analyses and adjusted indirect comparisons were conducted to compare the treatment effect of dexlansoprazole and esomeprazole using a common comparator. The relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated.

RESULTS

The indirect comparisons revealed significant differences in symptom control of heartburn in patients with NERD at 4 weeks. Dexlansoprazole 30 mg was more effective than esomeprazole 20 mg or 40 mg (RR: 2.01, 95% CI: 1.15-3.51; RR: 2.17, 95% CI: 1.39-3.38). However, there were no statistically significant differences between the two drugs in EO healing and maintenance of healed EO. Comparison of symptom control in healed EO was not able to be made due to different definitions used in the RCTs.

CONCLUSIONS

Adjusted indirect comparisons based on currently available RCT data suggested significantly better treatment effect in symptom control of heartburn in patients with NERD for dexlansoprazole against esomeprazole. No statistically significant differences were found in other EO outcomes. However, these study findings need to be interpreted with caution due to small number of studies and other limitations.

Comparison of the efficacy and safety of pantoprazole magnesium and pantoprazole sodium in the treatment of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease: a randomized, double-blind, controlled, multicentre trial

BACKGROUND

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are well established as first-line agents for the treatment of moderate-to-severe gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD). Although all PPIs heal oesophageal lesions and provide symptomatic relief, breakthrough symptoms may occur as acidity levels rebound. Pantoprazole magnesium (pantoprazole-Mg) has a longer elimination half-life than pantoprazole sodium (pantoprazole-Na), resulting in prolonged drug exposure.

OBJECTIVE

This study compares the clinical efficacy and safety of once-daily pantoprazole-Mg 40 mg with that of once-daily pantoprazole-Na 40 mg in the management of GORD.

METHODS

This was a randomized, double-blind, controlled, multicentre study of non-inferiority design in outpatients with GORD. The study was conducted in 53 centres in Germany from 12 May 2003 to 18 September 2003. Male or female outpatients (aged ≥18 years) with endoscopically confirmed GORD stage I-III (according to the Savary-Miller classification modified by Siewert) were enrolled. Using a computer-generated randomization list, patients were randomized to treatment with pantoprazole-Mg 40 mg plus placebo or pantoprazole-Na 40 mg plus placebo, both given once daily for 4 or 8 weeks depending on healing of oesophagitis. The primary objective was endoscopic healing at 8 weeks.

RESULTS

The intent-to-treat (ITT) group consisted of 636 patients (322 receiving pantoprazole-Mg and 314 receiving pantoprazole-Na). Endoscopically confirmed healing of reflux oesophagitis after 8 weeks occurred in 87.3% (95% CI 83.1, 90.7) of patients receiving pantoprazole-Mg and 85.0% (95% CI 80.6, 88.8) of patients receiving pantoprazole-Na (ITT population). The lower bound of the 95% CI for the between-group treatment difference was -1.3, which was within the predefined margin of non-inferiority of -10% to 0%. Healing rates after 4 weeks were superior in the pantoprazole-Mg group (72.7% [95% CI 67.5, 77.5]) compared with the pantoprazole-Na group (66.2% [95% CI 60.7, 71.5]), and the one-sided (lower bound) of the 95% CI for the difference between healing rates for the two treatments was within the predefined non-inferiority margin of -10% to 0%. Both treatments had a similar effect on GORD healing in subgroups of patients based on baseline oesophagitis grade and Helicobacter pylori status. Pantoprazole-Mg had similar efficacy to pantoprazole-Na in relieving a broad range of GORD-related symptoms across the course of the study, although symptomatic relief at 4 weeks was numerically higher in the pantoprazole-Mg group than in the pantoprazole-Na group (statistical analyses were not performed). Both treatments were well tolerated; most adverse events were of mild or moderate severity and unrelated to the study medication, and there were no unexpected safety concerns.

CONCLUSION

Pantoprazole-Mg is clinically as effective and well tolerated as pantoprazole-Na in the treatment of GORD stages I-III, demonstrating non-inferiority for oesophageal healing at 8 weeks and superior healing rates at 4 weeks associated with high levels of symptomatic relief.

Response of regurgitation to proton pump inhibitor therapy in clinical trials of gastroesophageal reflux disease

OBJECTIVES

The typical symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) are heartburn and regurgitation. Extensive analysis has characterized heartburn and its responsiveness to proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy, but regurgitation has received relatively little attention. This study aimed to evaluate the response of regurgitation to PPI therapy in GERD trials.

METHODS

Studies were identified by systematic searches in PubMed and Embase, as well as searching congress abstracts and the reference lists of Cochrane reviews.

RESULTS

Regurgitation was not an entry criterion or the primary end point in any of the 31 clinical trials reporting the response of regurgitation to PPI treatment in GERD. The definitions of regurgitation and responsiveness varied among trials and over half used investigator assessment of response. Owing to these inconsistencies, no meta-analysis was attempted. In seven placebo-controlled trials of PPI therapy, the therapeutic gain for regurgitation response averaged 17% relative to placebo and was >20% less than that observed for heartburn. Studies comparing PPIs with histamine-2 receptor antagonists or prokinetics found the comparator drug response similar to the placebo response rates seen in the placebo-controlled trials.

CONCLUSIONS

The therapeutic gain with PPIs over placebo or comparator agents for the relief of regurgitation is modest, and considerably lower than for heartburn. Thus, regurgitation is likely to be an important factor for determining incomplete response to PPI treatment in GERD. Future trials would benefit from using regurgitation as a primary end point, applying an unambiguous definition of the symptom and of a positive treatment response, and using a validated patient-reported instrument for regurgitation assessment.

Efficacy and safety of pantoprazole delayed-release granules for oral suspension in a placebo-controlled treatment-withdrawal study in infants 1-11 months old with symptomatic GERD

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to assess the efficacy of pantoprazole in infants with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Infants ages 1 through 11 months with GERD symptoms after 2 weeks of conservative treatment received open-label (OL) pantoprazole 1.2 mg x kg(-1) x day(-1) for 4 weeks followed by a 4-week randomized, double-blind (DB), placebo-controlled, withdrawal phase. The primary endpoint was withdrawal due to lack of efficacy in the DB phase. Mean weekly GERD symptom scores (WGSSs) were calculated from daily assessments of 5 GERD symptoms. Safety was assessed.

RESULTS

One hundred twenty-eight patients entered OL treatment, and 106 made up the DB modified intent-to-treat population. Mean age was 5.1 months (82% full-term, 64% male). One third of patients had a GERD diagnostic test before OL study entry. WGSSs at week 4 were similar between groups. WGSSs decreased significantly from baseline during OL therapy (P < 0.001), when all patients received pantoprazole. The decrease in WGSSs was maintained during the DB phase in both treatment groups. There was no difference in withdrawal rates due to lack of efficacy (pantoprazole 6/52; placebo 6/54) or time to withdrawal during the DB phase. The greatest between-group difference in WGSS was slightly worse with placebo at week 5 (P = 0.09), mainly due to episodes of arching back (P = 0.028). No between-group differences in adverse event frequency were noted. Serious adverse events in 8 patients were considered unrelated to treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Pantoprazole significantly improved GERD symptom scores and was well tolerated. However, during the DB treatment phase, there were no significant differences noted between pantoprazole and placebo in withdrawal rates due to lack of efficacy.

Long-term management of gastroesophageal reflux disease with pantoprazole

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a chronic, relapsing disease that can progress to major complications. Affected patients have poorer health-related quality of life than the general population. As GERD requires continued therapy to prevent relapse and complications, most patients with erosive esophagitis require long-term acid suppressive treatment. Thus GERD results in a significant cost burden and poor health-related quality of life. The effective treatment of GERD provides symptom resolution and high rates of remission in erosive esophagitis, lowers the incidence of GERD complications, improves health-related quality of life, and reduces the cost of this disease. Proton pump inhibitors are accepted as the most effective initial and maintenance treatment for GERD. Oral pantoprazole is a safe, well tolerated and effective initial and maintenance treatment for patients with nonerosive GERD or erosive esophagitis. Oral pantoprazole has greater efficacy than histamine H(2)-receptor antagonists and generally similar efficacy to other proton pump inhibitors for the initial and maintenance treatment of GERD. In addition, oral pantoprazole has been shown to improve the quality of life of patients with GERD and is associated with high levels of patient satisfaction with therapy. GERD appears to be more common and more severe in the elderly, and pantoprazole has shown to be an effective treatment for this at-risk population.

The Montreal definition and classification of gastroesophageal reflux disease: a global evidence-based consensus

OBJECTIVES

A globally acceptable definition and classification of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is desirable for research and clinical practice. The aim of this initiative was to develop a consensus definition and classification that would be useful for patients, physicians, and regulatory agencies.

METHODS

A modified Delphi process was employed to reach consensus using repeated iterative voting. A series of statements was developed by a working group of five experts after a systematic review of the literature in three databases (Embase, Cochrane trials register, Medline). Over a period of 2 yr, the statements were developed, modified, and approved through four rounds of voting. The voting group consisted of 44 experts from 18 countries. The final vote was conducted on a 6-point scale and consensus was defined a priori as agreement by two-thirds of the participants.

RESULTS

The level of agreement strengthened throughout the process with two-thirds of the participants agreeing with 86%, 88%, 94%, and 100% of statements at each vote, respectively. At the final vote, 94% of the final 51 statements were approved by 90% of the Consensus Group, and 90% of statements were accepted with strong agreement or minor reservation. GERD was defined as a condition that develops when the reflux of stomach contents causes troublesome symptoms and/or complications. The disease was subclassified into esophageal and extraesophageal syndromes. Novel aspects of the new definition include a patient-centered approach that is independent of endoscopic findings, subclassification of the disease into discrete syndromes, and the recognition of laryngitis, cough, asthma, and dental erosions as possible GERD syndromes. It also proposes a new definition for suspected and proven Barrett's esophagus.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence-based global consensus definitions are possible despite differences in terminology and language, prevalence, and manifestations of the disease in different countries. A global consensus definition for GERD may simplify disease management, allow collaborative research, and make studies more generalizable, assisting patients, physicians, and regulatory agencies.