Randomized comparison of two rescue therapies for Helicobacter pylori infection

Should Metronidazole Be Included in Second-Line Treatment After Standard Triple Therapy for Helicobacter pylori?: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Although standard triple therapy remains the first-line eradication treatment for H. pylori worldwide, it is unclear whether metronidazole should be included empirically in second-line eradication treatments. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of metronidazole-containing regimens with that of metronidazole-free regimens after failure of first-line eradication using standard triple therapy.

METHODS

PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and the Igaku-Chuo-Zasshi database were searched to identify RCTs eligible for inclusion in this systematic review and meta-analysis. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated.

RESULTS

Thirteen eligible RCTs were included, with a total of 2039 patients assigned to metronidazole-containing (975 patients) or metronidazole-free (1064 patients) regimens. Metronidazole-containing regimens had significantly lower eradication failure rates than regimens without metronidazole (OR 0.55; 95% CI, 0.39-0.78). Subgroup analysis based on the regional risk of metronidazole resistance demonstrated that metronidazole-containing regimens had lower eradication failure rates not only in low-risk regions but also in high-risk regions (OR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.11-0.74 and OR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.49-0.91, respectively).

CONCLUSION

After failure of standard triple therapy, secondary eradication treatment regimens containing metronidazole demonstrate higher eradication rates than those without metronidazole.

The Efficacy and Safety of Regimens for Helicobacter pylori Eradication Treatment in China: A Systemic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

With Helicobacter pylori's increasing antibiotic resistance, evidence of more effective treatments is lacking in China, where H. pylori prevalence is nearly 50%. Thus, we performed a network meta-analysis to compare therapeutic regimens.

METHODS

Data extracted from eligible randomized controlled trials from January 2000 to September 2021 were entered into a Bayesian hierarchical random-effects model to evaluate the efficacy and safety of H. pylori eradication regimens.

RESULTS

This study included 101 trials involving 21,745 patients. Vonoprazan-bismuth-containing quadruple therapy (VBQT) ranked the highest [surfaces under cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA), 83.64%], followed by high-dose amoxicillin dual therapy (HDDT) [SUCRA, 79.70%, odds ratio (OR)=1.31, 95% credible interval (CrI) (0.36, 4.72)] and proton pump inhibitor-based bismuth-containing quadruple therapy (BQT) [SUCRA, 63.59%, OR=1.59, 95% CrI (0.48, 5.24)]. HDDT [OR=2.47, 95% CrI (1.51, 4.06)], BQT [OR=2.04, 95% CrI (1.69, 2.47)], concomitant quadruple nonbismuth therapy (CT) [OR=1.93, 95% CrI (1.19, 3.15)], and sequential therapy (ST) [OR=1.86, 95% CrI (1.50, 2.32)] had higher eradication rates than standard triple therapy (TT). ST (SUCRA, 82.52%) and VBQT (SUCRA, 83.89%) had the highest eradication rate before and after 2010 in the effectiveness ranking, respectively. Furthermore, the H. pylori eradication rate of patients receiving 14-day BQT treatment was higher than that of 10-day BQT regimen [OR=2.55, 95% CI (1.84, 3.53)] and 7-day BQT regimen [OR=3.64, 95% CI (2.64, 5.01)].

CONCLUSIONS

The TT regimen was not an optimal choice in China for H. pylori eradication; VBQT, HDDT, and BQT showed better efficacy. After 2010, there is a trend toward significance that VBQT provided a higher H. pylori eradication rate in China, but with only 1 randomized controlled trial. Thus, more supportive real-world data are needed to confirm its effectiveness.

Tetracycline-levofloxacin versus amoxicillin-levofloxacin quadruple therapies in the second-line treatment of Helicobacter pylori infection

BACKGROUND

The Maastricht V/Florence Consensus Report recommends amoxicillin-fluoroquinolone triple or quadruple therapy as a second-line treatment for Helicobacter pylori infection. An important caveat of amoxicillin-fluoroquinolone rescue therapy is poor eradication efficacy in the presence of fluoroquinolone resistance. The study aimed to investigate the efficacies of tetracycline-levofloxacin (TL) quadruple therapy and amoxicillin-levofloxacin (AL) quadruple therapy in the second-line treatment of H. pylori infection.

METHODS

Consecutive H. pylori-infected subjects after the failure of first-line therapies were randomly allocated to receive either TL quadruple therapy (tetracycline 500 mg QID, levofloxacin 500 mg QD, esomeprazole 40 mg BID, and tripotassium dicitrato bismuthate 300 mg QID) or AL quadruple therapy (amoxicillin 500 mg QID, levofloxacin 500 mg QD, esomeprazole 40 mg BID, and tripotassium dicitrato bismuthate 300 mg QID) for 10 days. Post-treatment H. pylori status was assessed 6 weeks after the end of therapy.

RESULTS

The study was early terminated after an interim analysis. In the TL quadruple group, 50 out of 56 patients (89.3%) had successful eradication of H. pylori infection. Cure of H. pylori infection was achieved only in 39 of 52 patients (69.6%) receiving AL quadruple therapy. Intention-to-treat analysis showed that TL quadruple therapy achieved a markedly higher eradication rate than AL quadruple therapy (95% confidence interval: 4.8% to 34.6%; p = 0.010). Further analysis revealed that TL quadruple therapy had a high eradication rate for both levofloxacin-susceptible and resistant strains (100% and 88.9%). In contrast, AL quadruple therapy yielded a high eradication for levofloxacin-susceptible strains (90.9%) but a poor eradication efficacy for levofloxacin-resistant strains (50.0%). The two therapies exhibited comparable frequencies of adverse events (37.5% vs 21.4%) and drug adherence (98.2% vs 94.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

Ten-day TL quadruple therapy is more effective than AL quadruple therapy in the second-line treatment of H. pylori infection in a population with high levofloxacin resistance.

Systematic review: Would susceptibility-guided treatment achieve acceptable cure rates for second-line Helicobacter pylori therapy as currently practiced?

BACKGROUND

Susceptibility-guided treatment has been proposed as a way to improve Helicobacter pylori eradication rates. Evidence on its efficacy for rescue therapy is very scarce. The aim of this study was to indirectly assess the applicability and effectiveness of susceptibility-guided treatment by evaluating (a) the rate of acceptance of endoscopy, (b) its success in detecting resistances, and (c) infection cure rates in patients harboring strains found to be susceptible to the antibiotics administered in clinical trials in which the efficacy of second-line treatments was reported.

METHODS

A systematic review of studies evaluating second-line H pylori treatment was carried out in multiple databases. Studies reporting antibiotic susceptibility evaluation and/or cure rates in patients harboring sensitive and resistant strains were selected. Data were extracted in duplicate.

RESULTS

The systematic review identified 36 eligible studies. Acceptance was evaluated in only one study of 60 patients, of whom only 38 agreed to endoscopy. Among the 2890 patients who received endoscopy and culture, resistances were finally determined in 86.5%. Cure rate was 72.5% in the 113 patients harboring a clarithromycin-susceptible strain after previous clarithromycin treatment, 93.5% in the 765 patients harboring a metronidazole-susceptible strain, and 83.8% in the 192 patients harboring a levofloxacin-susceptible strain. No studies with repeated administration of levofloxacin or metronidazole were found.

CONCLUSION

Even if the culture shows a clarithromycin-sensitive strain, repeating clarithromycin after a first failure should be discouraged. Susceptibility-guided treatment alone did not achieve adequate cure rates for rescue therapies. Additional measures are needed to design rescue treatments that consistently achieve excellent cure rates.

Second-line rescue treatment of Helicobacter pylori infection: Where are we now?

At present, the best rescue therapy for Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection following failure of first-line eradication remains unclear. The Maastricht V/Florence Consensus Report recommends bismuth quadruple therapy, or fluoroquinolone-amoxicillin triple/quadruple therapy as the second-line therapy for H. pylori infection. Meta-analyses have shown that bismuth quadruple therapy and levofloxacin-amoxicillin triple therapy have comparable eradication rates, while the former has more adverse effects than the latter. There are no significant differences between the eradication rates of levofloxacin-amoxicillin triple and quadruple therapies. However, the eradication rates of both levofloxacin-containing treatments are suboptimal. An important caveat of levofloxacin-amoxicillin triple or quadruple therapy is poor eradication efficacy in the presence of fluoroquinolone resistance. High-dose dual therapy is an emerging second-line therapy and has an eradication efficacy comparable with levofloxacin-amoxicillin triple therapy. Recently, a 10-d tetracycline-levofloxacin (TL) quadruple therapy comprised of a proton pump inhibitor, bismuth, tetracycline and levofloxacin has been developed, which achieves a markedly higher eradication rate compared with levofloxacin-amoxicillin triple therapy (98% vs 69%) in patients with failure of standard triple, bismuth quadruple or non-bismuth quadruple therapy. The present article reviews current second-line anti-H. pylori regimens and treatment algorisms. In conclusion, bismuth quadruple therapy, levofloxacin-amoxicillin triple/quadruple therapy, high-dose dual therapy and TL quadruple therapy can be used as second-line treatment for H. pylori infection. Current evidence suggests that 10-d TL quadruple therapy is a simple and effective regimen, and has the potential to become a universal rescue treatment following eradication failure by all first-line eradication regimens for H. pylori infection.

Prevalence of Helicobacter pylori resistance after failure of first-line therapy. A systematic review

There are no systematic data on the rates of antibiotic resistance after the failure of a first eradication treatment. The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence of secondary resistance to antibiotics by conducting a systematic review of studies evaluating the secondary resistance of Helicobacter pylori. We identified 31 studies (2,787 patients). Resistance was determined in 1,764 patients. A percentage of 99.1 of patients received clarithromycin as first-line treatment and 58.7% developed resistance. A percentage of 24.3 received metronidazole and 89.7% developed resistance. Secondary resistance to amoxicillin was extremely rare. Secondary resistance after first-line treatment was very common. These findings support the recommendation not to repeat clarithromycin or metronidazole after the failure of a first eradication treatment.

Ten-Day Quadruple Therapy Comprising Proton Pump Inhibitor, Bismuth, Tetracycline, and Levofloxacin is More Effective than Standard Levofloxacin Triple Therapy in the Second-Line Treatment of Helicobacter pylori Infection: A Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVES

Proton pump inhibitor (PPI)-amoxicillin-fluoroquinolone triple therapy is recommended as a second-line treatment of Helicobacter pylori infection in the Maastricht V/Florence Consensus Report. However, the eradication rate of this standard salvage treatment is suboptimal. The objective of this study is to compare the efficacy of esomeprazole-bismuth-tetracycline-levofloxacin therapy (TL quadruple therapy) and esomeprazole-amoxicillin-levofloxacin triple therapy (AL triple therapy) in rescue treatment for H. pylori infection.

METHODS

Consecutive H. pylori-infected subjects after failure of first-line therapies were randomly allocated to receive either TL quadruple therapy (esomeprazole 40 mg b.d., bismuth 120 mg q.d.s., tetracycline 500 mg q.d.s., and levofloxacin 500 mg o.d.) or AL triple therapy (esomeprazole 40 mg b.d., amoxicillin 500 mg q.d.s., and levofloxacin 500 mg o.d.) for 10 days. H. pylori status was assessed 6 weeks after the end of treatment.

RESULTS

The study was stopped after an interim analysis. Of 50 patients in the TL quadruple therapy, 49 (98.0%) had successful eradication of H. pylori infection. Cure of H. pylori infection was achieved in 36 of 52 patients (69.2%) receiving AL triple therapy. Intention-to-treat analysis demonstrated that TL quadruple therapy achieved a markedly higher eradication rate than AL triple therapy (difference: 28.8%; 95% confidence interval: 15.7% to 41.9%; P<0.001). Per-protocol analysis yielded a similar result (97.8% vs. 68.6%; P<0.001). The two treatment groups exhibited comparable frequencies of overall adverse events (22.0% vs. 11.5%) and drug compliance (90.0% vs. 98.1%). The subgroup analysis showed that TL quadruple therapy was superior to AL triple therapy in patients with failure of either standard triple therapy (100% vs. 75.0%; P=0.010) or non-bismuth quadruple therapy (95.0% vs. 52.6%; P=0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

Ten-day PPI-bismuth-tetracycline-levofloxacin quadruple therapy is a good option for rescue treatment of H. pylori infection following failure of standard triple or non-bismuth quadruple therapy.

A Randomized Control Trial Comparing 2 Levofloxacin-Containing Second-Line Therapies for Helicobacter pylori Eradication

Summary of Trial Design.Lengthy exposure to quinolone-containing triple therapy in Helicobacter pylori eradication leads to the development of drug resistance. Sequential therapy with a quinolone and metronidazole -containing regimen appears to be an effective treatment option. This randomized controlled trial aimed to compare the efficacy of 5-plus 5 days' levofloxacin and metronidazole-containing sequential therapy (EALM) with that of 10-day levofloxacin-containing triple therapy (EAL) in second-line H pylori eradication treatment.One hundred and sixty-four patients who had failed the H pylori eradication attempts using the standard triple therapy (proton pump inhibitor bid, clarithromycin 500 mg bid, amoxicillin 1 g bid × 7 days) were randomly assigned to either an EALM therapy group (n = 82; esomeprazole 40 mg bid and amoxicillin 1 g bid for 5 days, followed by esomeprazole 40 mg bid, levofloxacin 500 mg qd, and metronidazole 500 mg tid, for 5 days) or a 10-day EAL therapy group (n = 82; levofloxacin 500 mg qd, amoxicillin 1 g bid, and esomeprazole 40 mg bid). One patient was lost to follow-up in each group. Follow-up for H pylori status was performed 4 to 8 weeks later.Eradication rates for the EALM and EAL groups were 90.2% (74/82, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 83.7%-96.8%) and 80.5% (66/82, 95% CI = 71.7%-89.2%, P = 0.077) in the intention-to-treat analysis; and 91.4% (74/81, 95% CI = 85.1%-97.6%) and 81.5% (66/81, 95% CI = 72.8%-90.1%, P = 0.067) in the per-protocol analysis. The adverse events for the EALM and EAL groups were 23.5% versus 11.1%, P = 0.038 but were all very mild and were well tolerated except for 1 patient with poor compliance. The compliances were 98.8% and 100%, respectively, between the 2 groups. An antibiotic resistance to levofloxacin was the clinical factor influencing the efficacy of H. pylori eradication therapy in the EAL group, and dual resistance to levofloxacin and metronidazole in the EALM group.Levofloxacin and metronidazole-containing sequential therapy achieved a >90% eradication rate as a second-line H pylori therapy. Dual antibiotic resistance to levofloxacin and metronidazole was the clinical factor influencing the efficacy of H pylori eradication therapy in the sequential therapy (ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT02596620).

Third-line rescue therapy with bismuth-containing quadruple regimen after failure of two treatments (with clarithromycin and levofloxacin) for H. pylori infection

BACKGROUND

Helicobacter pylori eradication therapy with a proton pump inhibitor (PPI), clarithromycin, and amoxicillin fails in >20 % of cases. A rescue therapy with PPI-amoxicillin-levofloxacin still fails in >20 % of patients.

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of a bismuth-containing quadruple regimen in patients with two consecutive eradication failures.

METHODS

Prospective multicenter study of patients in whom 1st treatment with PPI-clarithromycin-amoxicillin and 2nd with PPI-amoxicillin-levofloxacin had failed. A 3rd eradication regimen with a 7- to 14-day PPI (standard dose b.i.d.), bismuth subcitrate (120 mg q.i.d. or 240 mg b.i.d.), tetracycline (from 250 mg t.i.d. to 500 mg q.i.d.) and metronidazole (from 250 mg t.i.d. to 500 mg q.i.d.). Eradication was confirmed by (13)C-urea-breath-test 4-8 weeks after therapy. Compliance was determined through questioning and recovery of empty medication envelopes. Adverse effects were evaluated by means of a questionnaire.

RESULTS

Two hundred patients (mean age 50 years, 55 % females, 20 % peptic ulcer/80 % uninvestigated-functional dyspepsia) were initially included, and two were lost to follow-up. In all, 97 % of patients complied with the protocol. Per-protocol and intention-to-treat eradication rates were 67 % (95 % CI 60-74 %) and 65 % (58-72 %). Adverse effects were reported in 22 % of patients, the most common being nausea (12 %), abdominal pain (11 %), metallic taste (8.5 %), and diarrhea (8 %), none of them severe.

CONCLUSION

A bismuth-containing quadruple regimen is an acceptable third-line strategy and a safe alternative after two previous H. pylori eradication failures with standard clarithromycin- and levofloxacin-containing triple therapies.

A review of rescue regimens after clarithromycin-containing triple therapy failure (for Helicobacter pylori eradication)

INTRODUCTION

Helicobacter pylori infection is generally treated with therapies that include a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) and, at least, two antibiotics being clarithromycin one of the most used. Antibiotic resistance, mainly to clarithromycin, seems to be increasing in many geographical areas, and this factor is considered a main cause leading to a treatment failure when the later therapies contain this antibiotic again. As clarithromycin is a key antibiotic in the eradication of H. pylori, the election of the rescue treatment is a matter of debate.

AREAS COVERED

The aim of this study is to systematically review the efficacy of the second-line rescue therapies after the failure of a first-line clarithromycin-containing regimen, and to link this information with the previous first-line treatment. Also, authors performed meta-analyses and inverse variance analyses with studies that met the inclusion criteria: first-line treatment must specify type and dosage; diagnosis and eradication confirmation must be performed by generally accepted tests; and second-line treatment must not be assigned depending on the antibiotic susceptibility or resistance.

EXPERT OPINION

In a routine clinical practice setting, the most adequate second-line treatment consists in a 10-day regimen of levofloxacin- amoxicillin-PPI given twice daily, unless regional or new data show high quinolone resistance. Other good options are the bismuth quadruple regimen and a metronidazole-amoxicillin-PPI therapy.

The efficacy of second-line anti-Helicobacter pylori therapy using an extended 14-day levofloxacin/amoxicillin/proton-pump inhibitor treatment--a pilot study

BACKGROUND

Large meta-analyses of second-line Helicobacter pylori eradication with fluoroquinolone triple therapy have shown that neither 7-day nor 10-day therapy provides 90% or better treatment success. Reports describing second-line H. pylori eradication using 14-day fluoroquinolone-containing triple therapy are few. Current study aimed to determine the efficacy of a 14-day levofloxacin/amoxicillin/proton-pump inhibitor regimen as second-line therapy and the clinical factors influencing the outcome.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One-hundred and one patients who failed H. pylori eradication using the standard triple therapy for 7 days were randomly assigned to either a levofloxacin/amoxicillin/esomeprazole group (levofloxacin 500 mg once daily, amoxicillin 1 g twice daily, and esomeprazole 40 mg twice daily for 14 days) or a esomeprazole/metronidazole/bismuth salt/tetracycline group (esomeprazole 40 mg twice daily, metronidazole 250 mg four times daily, tripotassium dicitrate bismuthate 300 mg four times daily, and tetracycline 500 mg four times daily for 14 days). Follow-up to assess treatment response consisted of either endoscopy or a urea breath test, which were carried out 8 weeks later.

RESULTS

Eradication rates attained by levofloxacin/amoxicillin/esomeprazole and esomeprazole/metronidazole/bismuth salt/tetracycline treatments in the per-protocol analysis were 44/47 (93.6%; 95% CI = 86-99.8) and 43/47 (91.8%; 95% CI = 83.2-98.5). In the intention-to-treat analysis, these were 43/47 (86.3%; 95% CI = 76.5-96.1) in the LAE group (four lost to follow-up) and 43/50 (86%; 95% CI = 76-96) in the EMBT groups. The observed adverse events were 25.5% and 38.5% among the two groups. There was 100% drug compliance among the levofloxacin/amoxicillin/esomeprazole group. Levofloxacin-resistant strains occurred at a frequency of 32.3%. H. pylori eradication rates for the levofloxacin-susceptible strains and levofloxacin-resistant strains were 92% (11/12) and 33% (1/3) in the per-protocol analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

A 14-day levofloxacin/amoxicillin/esomeprazole triple therapy approach provides a >90% per-protocol report card with the caveat that this approach is markedly less effective in the presence of fluoroquinolone resistance. Levofloxacin-resistant strains are increasing in Taiwan.

Randomized comparison of two non-bismuth-containing second-line rescue therapies for Helicobacter pylori

BACKGROUND

 Classical second-line anti-Helicobacter pylori includes proton-pump inhibitor, tetracycline, metronidazole, and bismuth salts, but alternative therapies are required owing to the restricted availability of the latter. Levofloxacin-containing triple therapy is recommended but is expensive. Besides, quinolone resistance in an endemic tuberculosis infection area like Taiwan is concerned. The low in vitro antibiotic resistance to amoxicillin and tetracycline in Taiwanese H. pylori strains implies that in vivo esomeprazole/amoxicillin/tetracycline (EAT) second-line rescue therapy may be effective. This study compared the efficacy of esomeprazole/amoxicillin/levofloxacin (EAL) and EAT second-line eradication therapies and determines the clinical factors influencing the efficacy of salvage regimens.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One hundred and twenty-eight patients who failed H. pylori eradication using the standard triple therapy for 7 days are randomly assigned to either EAL group (esomeprazole 40 mg twice daily, amoxicillin 1 g twice daily, and levofloxacin 500 mg once daily) for 7 days or EAT group (esomeprazole 40 mg twice daily, amoxicillin 1 g twice daily, tetracycline 500 mg four times daily) for 14 days. Follow-up endoscopy or urea breath test was performed 8 weeks later to assess treatment response.

RESULTS

The eradication rates of EAL and EAT groups were 78.1 versus 75.0%, p = .676 (in intention-to-treat analysis) and 80.3 versus 80%, p = .0964 (per-protocol analysis). Both groups exhibited similar drug compliance (95.3 vs 96.9%, p = .952) but more adverse events in the EAT group (6.3 vs 12.5%, p = .225).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite low in vitro drug resistances to amoxicillin and tetracycline, the efficacy of 14-day EAT regimens attained an unacceptable report card of 75% eradication rates in intention-to-treat analysis and was not even superior to the 7-day EAL regimen. Drug-drug interaction between combined antibiotics should be considered other than in vivo drug resistances.

Rescue Therapy for Helicobacter pylori Infection 2012

Helicobacter pylori infection is the main cause of gastritis, gastroduodenal ulcer disease, and gastric cancer. After 30 years of experience in H. pylori treatment, however, the ideal regimen to treat this infection has still to be found. Nowadays, apart from having to know well first-line eradication regimens, we must also be prepared to face treatment failures. In designing a treatment strategy, we should not only focus on the results of primary therapy alone but also on the final-overall-eradication rate. The choice of a "rescue" treatment depends on which treatment is used initially. If a first-line clarithromycin-based regimen was used, a second-line metronidazole-based treatment (quadruple therapy) may be used afterwards, and then a levofloxacin-based combination would be a third-line "rescue" option. Alternatively, it has recently been suggested that levofloxacin-based "rescue" therapy constitutes an encouraging 2nd-line strategy, representing an alternative to quadruple therapy in patients with previous PPI-clarithromycin-amoxicillin failure, with the advantage of efficacy, simplicity and safety. In this case, quadruple regimen may be reserved as a 3rd-line "rescue" option. Even after two consecutive failures, several studies have demonstrated that H. pylori eradication can finally be achieved in almost all patients if several "rescue" therapies are consecutively given.

Randomized comparison of two nonbismuth-containing rescue therapies for Helicobacter pylori

INTRODUCTION

A triple therapy consisting of proton pump inhibitor, amoxicillin and metronidazole or tetracycline has been recommended as the second-line regimen for Helicobacter pylori eradication if bismuth is not available. This study compared the efficacy of esomeprazole/amoxicillin/levofloxacin (EAL) and esomeprazole/amoxicillin/metronidazole (EAM) as second-line therapy for H pylori eradication.

METHODS

From April 2008 to September 2009, 90 patients who failed H pylori eradication using the standard triple therapy were randomized to receive either EAL (40 mg esomeprazole twice daily, 1 g amoxicillin twice daily and 500 mg levofloxacin once daily for 7 days) or EAM (40 mg esomeprazole twice daily, 1 g amoxicillin twice daily and 250 mg metronidazole 4 times daily for 14 days). The primary outcome variables were the rates of eradication, adverse events and compliance.

RESULTS

Our results demonstrated no differences in the eradication rates of the EAL and EAM groups in intention-to-treat analysis (68.9% versus 84.4%, respectively, P = 0.134) and per-protocol analysis (75.6% versus 88.4%, respectively, P = 0.160). Both groups exhibited similar drug compliance (EAL 95.6% versus EAM 100%, P = 0.494) and adverse events (EAL 13.3% versus EAM 8.9%, P = 0.739).

CONCLUSIONS

The 14-day EAM regimen was not inferior to the 7-day EAL regimen for second-line anti-H Pylori therapy in Taiwan. It may be an option in hospitals where bismuth salts are not available. However, regional metronidazole resistance rate and extended length of levofloxacin-base therapy should be considered.

Helicobacter pylori infection: a randomized, controlled study comparing 2 rescue therapies after failure of standard triple therapies

Antibiotic resistance to amoxicillin in second-line eradication therapy for Helicobacter pylori infection is much less frequent than resistance to metronidazole. We conducted a randomized, controlled study to compare the efficacies of standard quadruple rescue therapy and a new therapy with amoxicillin replacing metronidazole for patients failing first-line eradication treatment. We randomly assigned 120 patients who failed H. pylori eradication using a proton pump inhibitor plus clarithromycin and amoxicillin to undergo a 1-week rescue therapy with esomeprazole, bismuth subcitrate, and tetracycline plus either metronidazole (EBTM group, n = 62) or amoxicillin (EBTA group, n = 58). We used follow-up endoscopy 8 weeks after the end of treatment to assess the treatment response. We also examined and analyzed antibiotic resistances and CYP2C19 genotypes. Intention-to-treat analysis demonstrated that the EBTA group had a significantly lower eradication rate than the EBTM group (62% vs. 81%, respectively, p = 0.02). Per-protocol analysis showed similar results (64% vs. 83%, p = 0.01). However, the EBTA group had less frequency of adverse events than the EBTM group (19% vs. 44%, p < 0.01). Both groups had good drug compliance (both 97%). Antibiotic susceptibility tests showed that the frequency of amoxicillin-resistant strains was much less than that of metronidazole-resistant strains (0% vs. 54%, respectively), and there were no significant differences between H. pylori eradication rates and antibiotic resistances. In conclusion, EBTA quadruple therapy demonstrated a lower eradication rate than standard EBTM therapy in second-line rescue treatment. The discrepancy between in vitro antibiotic susceptibility and in vivo eradication response is probably due to drug interactions between combined antibiotics or some unknown causes, and should not be neglected in H. pylori therapy.

Sequential and concomitant therapy with four drugs is equally effective for eradication of H pylori infection

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Sequential therapy with a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) and amoxicillin followed by a PPI, clarithromycin, and an imidazole agent reportedly have a better rate of curing Helicobacter pylori infection than PPI, amoxicillin, and clarithromycin triple therapy. The concomitant administration of these 4 drugs (concomitant therapy) is also an effective treatment strategy. We compared the efficacies of sequential and concomitant therapy and analyzed the effects of antibiotic resistance in patients with H pylori infection.

METHODS

In a randomized trial of 232 H pylori-infected patients from 3 hospitals in Kaohsiung, Taiwan, patients were given 10 days of sequential (n = 115) or concomitant (n = 117) therapy. H pylori status was confirmed by endoscopy or urea breath test.

RESULTS

Intention-to-treat analysis demonstrated similar eradication rates for sequential (92.3%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 87.5%-97.1%) and concomitant therapy (93.0%; 95% CI, 88.3%-97.7%)(P = .83). Per-protocol eradication results were similar for sequential (93.1%; 95% CI, 90.7%-95.5%) and concomitant therapy (93.0%; 95% CI, 88.3%-97.7%) (P = .99). Univariate analysis showed that compliance and resistance to clarithromycin were independent determinants of eradication. Dual resistance did not influence the level of eradication in the concomitant group, but significantly affected that of the sequential therapy group. Clarithromycin resistance was less frequent than expected.

CONCLUSIONS

Sequential or concomitant therapy with a PPI, amoxicillin, clarithromycin, and an imidazole agent are equally effective and safe for eradication of H pylori infection. Resistance to clarithromycin, compliance, and adverse events reduced the level of eradication. Concomitant therapy may be more suitable for patients with dual resistance to antibiotics.

Second-line rescue therapy of helicobacter pylori infection

Helicobacter pylori infection is the main known cause of gastritis, gastroduodenal ulcer disease and gastric cancer. After more than 20 years of experience in H. pylori treatment, however, the ideal regimen to treat this infection has still to be found. Nowadays, apart from having to know well first-line eradication regimens, we must also be prepared to face treatment failures. Therefore, in designing a treatment strategy we should not focus on the results of primary therapy alone, but also on the final (overall) eradication rate. The choice of a 'rescue' treatment depends on which treatment is used initially. If a first-line clarithromycin-based regimen was used, a second-line metronidazole-based treatment (quadruple therapy) may be used afterwards, and then a levofloxacin-based combination would be a third-line 'rescue' option. Alternatively, it has recently been suggested that levofloxacin-based 'rescue' therapy constitutes an encouraging second-line strategy, representing an alternative to quadruple therapy in patients with previous PPI-clarithromycin-amoxicillin failure, with the advantage of efficacy, simplicity and safety. In this case, quadruple regimen may be reserved as a third-line 'rescue' option. Finally, rifabutin-based 'rescue' therapy constitutes an encouraging empirical fourth-line strategy after multiple previous eradication failures with key antibiotics such as amoxicillin, clarithromycin, metronidazole, tetracycline, and levofloxacin. Even after two consecutive failures, several studies have demonstrated that H. pylori eradication can finally be achieved in almost all patients if several 'rescue' therapies are consecutively given. Therefore, the attitude in H. pylori eradication therapy failure, even after two or more unsuccessful attempts, should be to fight and not to surrender.

“Rescue” regimens after Helicobacter pylori treatment failure

Helicobacter pylori (H pylori) infection is the main cause of gastritis, gastroduodenal ulcer disease, and gastric cancer. After more than 20 years of experience in H pylori treatment, in my opinion, the ideal regimen to treat this infection is still to be found. Currently, apart from having to know first-line eradication regimens well, we must also be prepared to face treatment failures. Therefore, in designing a treatment strategy we should not focus on the results of primary therapy alone, but also on the final (overall) eradication rate. The choice of a “rescue” treatment depends on which treatment is used initially. If a clarithromycin-based regimen was used initially, a subsequent metronidazole-based treatment (quadruple therapy) may be used afterwards, and then a levofloxacin-based combination would be a third “rescue” option. Alternatively, it has recently been suggested that levofloxacin-based rescue therapy constitutes an encouraging second-line strategy, representing an alternative to quadruple therapy in patients with previous PPI-clarithromycin-amoxicillin failure, with the advantage of efficacy, simplicity and safety. In this case, a quadruple regimen may be reserved as a third-line rescue option. Finally, rifabutin-based rescue therapy constitutes an encouraging empirical fourth-line strategy after multiple previous eradication failures with key antibiotics such as amoxicillin, clarithromycin, metronidazole, tetracycline, and levofloxacin. Even after two consecutive failures, several studies have demonstrated that H pylori eradication can finally be achieved in almost all patients if several rescue therapies are consecutively given. Therefore, the attitude in H pylori eradication therapy failure, even after two or more unsuccessful attempts, should be to fight and not to surrender.

Quadruple rescue therapy for Helicobacter pylori infection after two treatment failures

BACKGROUND

A standard third-line therapy for Helicobacter pylori infection is lacking, and antimicrobial sensitivity data for patients who failed eradication therapy are often unavailable in clinical practice. We therefore designed the prospective study to assess the efficacy of levofloxacin, amoxicillin, bismuth and rabeprazole quadruple therapy as a third-line treatment for H. pylori infection.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From September 2005 to August 2007, 37 consecutive H. pylori-infected patients who had failed standard first-line and second-line treatments underwent a 10-day quadruple therapy comprising rabeprazole (20 mg b.i.d.), bismuth subcitrate (300 mg q.d.s.), amoxicillin (500 mg q.d.s.) and levofloxacin (500 mg o.d.). Follow-up endoscopy with rapid urease test, histological examination and culture was performed at 6 weeks after the end of treatment to evaluate the response to therapy.

RESULTS

Helicobacter pylori was successfully eradicated in 31 out of 37 patients (84% by both intention-to-treat analysis and per-protocol analysis). All patients complied with the eradication therapies, and only seven patients (19%) complained of mild-to-moderate adverse events. Amoxicillin- and levofloxacin-resistant strains were observed in 17% and 22% of the patients, respectively. There were no significant differences between H. pylori eradication rates and antibiotic resistances.

CONCLUSIONS

The 10-day levofloxacin- and amoxicillin-based quadruple therapy is well tolerated and achieves a high eradication rate as a third-line empirical treatment for H. pylori infection.

Treatment of Helicobacter pylori

Since the discovery of Helicobacter pylori in the early 1980s many treatment regimes have been developed to effectively treat this infection. International guidelines have allowed consensus on the best management and improved eradication rates. In recent years, increasing antimicrobial resistance has resulted in falling eradication rates with standard therapies. In this article, we review the most recent studies and guidelines in the treatment of H. pylori. Currently, the first-line treatment remains clarithromycin, amoxicillin or metronidazole and proton pump inhibitor twice daily, but a number of recent studies have shown low eradication rates with this treatment. Increased duration of therapy has been recommended to overcome the falling eradication rates. However, conflicting findings have been reported on the benefits of extending the length of traditional therapy. Sequential therapy may be an effective alternative to standard triple therapy in regions of increased antimicrobial resistance. Probiotics reduce side-effects from traditional regimens and may improve eradication rates. A quinolone-based second-line triple therapy appears to be effective and well tolerated. Bismuth-based quadruple therapy is also an effective alternative if available. In the future, regional antimicrobial resistance and eradication rates will determine the best treatment for H. pylori.