Esomeprazole 20 mg vs. pantoprazole 20 mg for maintenance therapy of healed erosive oesophagitis: results from the EXPO study

Comparative Efficacy of P-CAB vs Proton Pump Inhibitors for Grade C/D Esophagitis: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Los Angeles grade C/D esophagitis is a severe manifestation of gastroesophageal reflux disease that require active treatment and close follow-up. Potassium competitive acid blockers (P-CAB) are promising alternatives to proton pump inhibitors (PPI). We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of P-CAB and PPI in healing grade C/D esophagitis to aid clinical decision-making.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Randomized controlled trials were eligible for inclusion if efficacy of P-CAB and PPI in healing grade C/D esophagitis was reported. Pooled risk ratios and risk difference with 95% credible intervals were used to summarize estimated effect of each comparison. The benefit of treatments was ranked using the surface under the cumulative probability ranking score.

RESULTS

Of 5,876 articles identified in the database, 24 studies were eligible. Studies included incorporated 3 P-CAB (vonoprazan, tegoprazan, and keverprazan) and 6 PPI (lansoprazole, esomeprazole, omeprazole, rabeprazole extended-release (ER), pantoprazole, and dexlansoprazole). Based on the failure to achieve mucosal healing, 20 mg of vonoprazan q.d. ranked the first among PPI in initial and maintained healing of grade C/D esophagitis (surface under the cumulative probability ranking score = 0.89 and 0.87, respectively). Vonoprazan had similar risk of incurring adverse events, severe adverse events, and withdrawal to drug when compared with PPI. For those who attempted lower maintenance treatment dose, 10 mg of vonoprazan q.d. was a reasonable choice, considering its moderate efficacy and safety.

DISCUSSION

Vonoprazan has considerable efficacy in initial and maintained healing of grade C/D esophagitis compared with PPI, with moderate short-term and long-term safety.

Randomised clinical trial: Efficacy and safety of on-demand vonoprazan versus placebo for non-erosive reflux disease

BACKGROUND

Non-erosive reflux disease (NERD) symptoms are often episodic, making on-demand treatment an attractive treatment approach.

AIMS

We compared the efficacy and safety of on-demand vonoprazan versus placebo in patients with NERD.

METHODS

Patients with NERD, defined as heartburn for ≥6 months and for ≥4/7 consecutive days with normal endoscopy, received once-daily vonoprazan 20 mg during a 4-week run-in period. Patients without heartburn during the last 7 days and with ≥80% study drug and diary compliance were randomised 1:1:1:1 to vonoprazan 10, 20, 40 mg or placebo on-demand for 6 weeks. The primary endpoint was the percentage of evaluable heartburn episodes completely relieved within 3 h of on-demand dosing and sustained for 24 h.

RESULTS

Of 458 patients in the run-in period, 207 entered the on-demand period. In the vonoprazan 10 mg group, 56.0% (201/359) of evaluable heartburn episodes met the criteria for complete and sustained relief; 60.6% (198/327) in the 20 mg group; and 70.0% (226/323) in the 40 mg group, compared with 27.3% (101/370) in the placebo group (p < 0.0001 versus placebo for each vonoprazan group). By 1 h post-dose, vonoprazan was associated with complete relief of significantly more heartburn episodes compared with placebo. No serious treatment-emergent adverse events were reported.

CONCLUSION

On-demand vonoprazan may be a potential alternative to continued daily acid suppression therapy for the relief of episodic heartburn in patients with NERD.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov: NCT04799158.

Patient journey in erosive oesophagitis: real-world perspectives from US physicians and patients

Objective

Management of erosive oesophagitis (EE) remains suboptimal, with many patients experiencing incomplete healing, ongoing symptoms, and relapse despite proton pump inhibitor (PPI) treatment. The Study of Acid-Related Disorders investigated patient burden of individuals with EE in a real-world setting.

Design

US gastroenterologists (GIs) or family physicians (FPs)/general practitioners (GPs) treating patients with EE completed a physician survey and enrolled up to four patients with EE for a patient survey, with prespecified data extracted from medical records.

Results

102 GIs and 149 FPs/GPs completed the survey; data were available for 73 patients (mean age at diagnosis, 45.4 years). Omeprazole was healthcare professional (HCP)-preferred first-line treatment (60.8% GIs; 56.4% FPs/GPs), and pantoprazole preferred second line (29.4% and 32.9%, respectively). Price and insurance coverage (both 55.5% HCPs) and familiarity (47.9%) key drivers for omeprazole; insurance coverage (52.0%), price (50.0%), familiarity (48.0%), initial symptom relief (46.0%), and safety (44.0%) key drivers for pantoprazole. Only 49.3% patients took medication as instructed all the time; 56.8% independently increased medication frequency some of the time. Despite treatment, 57.5% patients experienced heartburn and 30.1% regurgitation; heartburn was the most bothersome symptom. 58.9% patients believed that their symptoms could be better controlled; only 28.3% HCPs were very satisfied with current treatment options. 83.6% patients wanted long-lasting treatment options. Fast symptom relief for patients was a top priority for 66.1% HCPs, while 56.6% would welcome alternatives to PPIs.

Conclusion

This real-world multicentre study highlights the need for new, rapidly acting treatments in EE that reduce symptom burden, offer durable healing and provide symptom control.

Efficacy and Safety of Esomeprazole for the Treatment of Reflux Symptoms in Patients with Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background:

We investigated the efficacy of esomeprazole for the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) in a meta-analysis of clinical trials results.

Methods:

Medline, Embase, PubMed and Web of Science databases were systematically searched for suitable studies, and double-blind, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were involved. A meta-analysis of RCTs was performed to analyze the efficacy of esomeprazole on clinical outcomes that associated with the severity of GERD.

Results:

A total of 8 clinical trials were selected in our meta-analysis (N=4495, patients with GERD). Esomeprazole treatment yielded a significant improvement in clinical signs and symptoms of GERD compared to placebo group. Funnel plot and Egger test showed there was no significant bias in the publication. Cochrane collaboration tool and Jadad scale were used to indicate that all 8 RCTs were of high quality. The results of Galbraith radial plot showed that no study was the major source of heterogeneity. Esomeprazole treatment significantly decreased the relapse rates more than that of placebo group (RR = 0.729; 95% CI: 0.670 to 0.794; P<0.001). It seems to be lower rates of heartburn (RR = 0.747; 95%CI: 0.665–0.839; P <0.001) and epigastric pain (RR = 0.795; 95%CI: 0.679–0.932; P =0.005) in esomeprazole-treated group compared with the placebo group. Moreover, serious adverse events was less likely to happen after esomeprazole therapy (RR = 1.406, 95% CI: 1.030–1.918; P =0.032).

Conclusion:

Compared with the control group, esomeprazole is a promising therapeutic agent that improves the management of patients with GERD.

On-demand versus half-dose continuous therapy with esomeprazole for maintenance treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease: A randomized comparative study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

No consensus has been established regarding optimal long-term maintenance therapy in symptomatic gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). The aim of this study was to compare the efficacies of on-demand and continuous therapy with esomeprazole as maintenance treatments for GERD.

METHODS

Patients with upper gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy-proven GERD who received initial proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy for 8 weeks were randomized to an on-demand group (esomeprazole 40 mg) or a continuous group (esomeprazole 20 mg). Intensities and frequencies of heartburn and acid regurgitation were assessed using a 6-point Likert scale (0 = no symptoms; 5 = very severe symptoms) and a 6-point frequency scale (0 = none; 5 = symptoms for > 5 days per week) at baseline (start of maintenance treatment) and after 12 weeks of treatment. Alleviation of symptoms was quantified using percentages of patients with a Likert scale or frequency scale of 0 or 1.

RESULTS

Of the 88 patients enrolled, 8 patients were excluded due to follow-up loss in early period of this study, and finally, 39 in the on-demand group and 41 in the continuous group were analyzed. No significant intergroup difference was found between Likert scale or frequency scale of heartburn or regurgitation at baseline. Percentages of symptom alleviations in the on-demand and continuous groups for intensity of heartburn were 56.4%/48.8% at baseline (P = .523) and 82.1%/87.8% at 12 weeks (P = .471), for frequency of heartburn were 61.5%/46.3% at baseline (P = .173) and 76.9%/87.8% at 12 weeks (P = .200), for intensity of regurgitation was 53.8%/43.9% at baseline (P = .374) and 82.1%/87.8% at 12 weeks (P = .471), and for frequency of regurgitation was 61.5%/56.1% at the baseline (P = .621) and 82.1%/82.9% at 12 weeks (P = .918), respectively. Furthermore, no significant intergroup difference was found for convenience of medication or subjective satisfaction.

CONCLUSIONS

Intensities and frequencies of heartburn and regurgitation responded well to maintenance treatment in patients in the on-demand and continuous groups. On-demand therapy with esomeprazole 40 mg appears to be sufficient for maintenance treatment in GERD patients.

Advantages and Disadvantages of Long-term Proton Pump Inhibitor Use

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) potently inhibit gastric acid secretion and are widely used for treatment of acid-related diseases including gastroesophageal reflux disease and secondary prevention of aspirin/NSAID-induced ulcers. Although clinically important adverse effects of PPIs can occur, just as with other drugs, those are not frequently observed during or after administration. Thus, PPIs are regarded as relatively safe and considered to be clinically beneficial. Recently, PPIs have become frequently administered to patients with functional gastrointestinal diseases or primary prevention of drug-related gastroduodenal damage, even though their beneficial effects for those conditions have not been fully confirmed. PPIs tend to be given for conditions in which the necessity of the drug has not been clarified, thus otherwise rare adverse effects are presented as clinically relevant. Although several PPI-related adverse effects have been reported, their clinical relevance is not yet clear, since the evidence reported in those studies is not at a high enough level, as the majority are based on retrospective observational studies and the reported hazard ratios are low. It is important to administer PPIs only for patients who will gain a substantial clinical benefit and to continue to investigate their adverse effects with high quality prospective studies.

Efficacy of vonoprazan for 24-week maintenance therapy of patients with healed reflux esophagitis refractory to proton pump inhibitors

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy of a potassium-competitive acid blocker (P-CAB), vonoprazan, for the maintenance therapy of healed reflux esophagitis (RE). A total of 60 patients were enrolled in this open-label, single-center, prospective study. All patients were diagnosed with RE with a frequency scale for the symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease (FSSG) total score ≥8 following treatment with standard proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) for a minimum of 8 weeks. Standard PPI treatment was switched to vonoprazan 20 mg once daily for 4 weeks. A total of 52 patients, who had no endoscopic evidence of erosive esophagitis following vonoprazan treatment, received maintenance therapy with vonoprazan 10 mg once daily for 24 weeks. Symptoms were evaluated using the FSSG and Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale (GSRS). Upper gastrointestinal endoscopies were performed following 24 weeks of maintenance therapy. The primary endpoint was to determine the proportion of patients who exhibited maintenance of healed RE refractory to PPIs following 24 weeks of maintenance therapy with vonoprazan 10 mg once daily. Secondary endpoints included evaluation of the proportion of patients with symptomatic non-relapse at 24 weeks. Maintenance therapy with vonoprazan 10 mg once daily prevented relapse of esophageal mucosal breaks in 37/43 (86.0%) patients at 24 weeks. However, the number of patients with symptomatic relapse was 1 (1.9%) and 4 (7.7%) at 4 and 8 weeks, respectively. A total of 4 patients were withdrawn due to loss to follow-up. At the end of the 24-week maintenance period, the symptomatic non-relapse rate for acid reflux-associated and dysmotility symptom FSSG scores were 86.5 and 80.8%, respectively. Furthermore, the symptomatic non-relapse rate for reflux, abdominal pain, indigestion, diarrhea, and constipation GSRS scores at 24 weeks were 86.5, 80.8, 75.0, 71.2 and 76.9%, respectively. No serious adverse events were reported during the study. The mean gastrin level was 1,059 pg/ml. In conclusion, the results of the present study indicate that vonoprazan 10 mg once daily is effective for 24-week maintenance therapy of healed RE refractory to PPIs.

Deprescribing versus continuation of chronic proton pump inhibitor use in adults

BACKGROUND

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are a class of medications that reduce acid secretion and are used for treating many conditions such as gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), dyspepsia, reflux esophagitis, peptic ulcer disease, and hypersecretory conditions (e.g. Zollinger-Ellison syndrome), and as part of the eradication therapy for Helicobacter pylori bacteria. However, approximately 25% to 70% of people are prescribed a PPI inappropriately. Chronic PPI use without reassessment contributes to polypharmacy and puts people at risk of experiencing drug interactions and adverse events (e.g. Clostridium difficile infection, pneumonia, hypomagnesaemia, and fractures).

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effects (benefits and harms) associated with deprescribing long-term PPI therapy in adults, compared to chronic daily use (28 days or greater).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2016, Issue 10), MEDLINE, Embase, clinicaltrials.gov, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP). The last date of search was November 2016. We handsearched the reference lists of relevant studies. We screened 2357 articles (2317 identified through search strategy, 40 through other resources). Of these articles, we assessed 89 for eligibility.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomized trials comparing at least one deprescribing modality (e.g. stopping PPI or reducing PPI) with a control consisting of no change in continuous daily PPI use in adult chronic users. Outcomes of interest were: change in gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms, drug burden/PPI use, cost/resource use, negative and positive drug withdrawal events, and participant satisfaction.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently reviewed and extracted data and completed the risk of bias assessment. A third review author independently confirmed risk of bias assessment. We used Review Manager 5 software for data analysis. We contacted study authors if there was missing information.

MAIN RESULTS

The review included six trials (n = 1758). Trial participants were aged 48 to 57 years, except for one trial that had a mean age of 73 years. All participants were from the outpatient setting and had either nonerosive reflux disease or milder grades of esophagitis (LA grade A or B). Five trials investigated on-demand deprescribing and one trial examined abrupt discontinuation. There was low quality evidence that on-demand use of PPI may increase risk of 'lack of symptom control' compared with continuous PPI use (risk ratio (RR) 1.71, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.31 to 2.21), thereby favoring continuous PPI use (five trials, n = 1653). There was a clinically significant reduction in 'drug burden', measured as PPI pill use per week with on-demand therapy (mean difference (MD) -3.79, 95% CI -4.73 to -2.84), favoring deprescribing based on moderate quality evidence (four trials, n = 1152). There was also low quality evidence that on-demand PPI use may be associated with reduced participant satisfaction compared with continuous PPI use. None of the included studies reported cost/resource use or positive drug withdrawal effects.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In people with mild GERD, on-demand deprescribing may lead to an increase in GI symptoms (e.g. dyspepsia, regurgitation) and probably a reduction in pill burden. There was a decline in participant satisfaction, although heterogeneity was high. There were insufficient data to make a conclusion regarding long-term benefits and harms of PPI discontinuation, although two trials (one on-demand trial and one abrupt discontinuation trial) reported endoscopic findings in their intervention groups at study end.

The Indications, Applications, and Risks of Proton Pump Inhibitors

BACKGROUND

Proton pump inhibitors (PPI) are the most effective drugs for inhibiting gastric acid secretion. They have been in clinical use for more than 25 years, In 2014, 3.475 billion daily defined doses (DDD) of PPI were prescribed in Germany. This high number alone calls for a critical analysis of the spectrum of indications for PPI and their potential adverse effects.

METHODS

This review is based on pertinent publications retrieved by a selective search in the PubMed and Cochrane Library databases, with particular emphasis on randomized, prospective multicenter trials, cohort studies, case-control studies, and meta-analyses.

RESULTS

The inhibition of gastric acid secretion with PPI is successfully used for the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease and of gastric and duodenal ulcers, for the secondary prevention of gastroduodenal lesions that have arisen under treatment with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and acetylsalicylic acid, and for the prevention of recurrent hemorrhage from ulcers after successful endoscopic hemostasis. PPI are given along with practically all antibiotic regimens for the eradication of Helicobacter pylori infection. The number of prescriptions for PPI has risen linearly over the past 25 years. As there has been no broadening of indications, one may well ask whether the current, extensive use of PPI is justified. There is evidence that patients taking PPI are at greater risk for fractures. Moreover, the vitamin B12 level should be checked occasionally in all patients taking PPI.

CONCLUSION

PPI are among the more effective drugs for the treatment of diseases associated with gastric acid. In view of their cost and potential adverse effects, they should only be prescribed for scientifically validated indications.

Randomized, multicenter study: on-demand versus continuous maintenance treatment with esomeprazole in patients with non-erosive gastroesophageal reflux disease

Background

Most patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease experience symptomatic relapse after stopping acid-suppressive medication. The aim of this study was to compare willingness to continue treatment with esomeprazole on-demand versus continuous maintenance therapy for symptom control in patients with non-erosive reflux disease (NERD) after 6 months.

Methods

This multicenter, open-label, randomized, parallel-group study enrolled adults with NERD who were heartburn-free after 4 weeks’ treatment with esomeprazole 20 mg daily. Patients received esomeprazole 20 mg daily continuously or on-demand for 6 months. The primary variable was discontinuation due to unsatisfactory treatment. On-demand treatment was considered non-inferior if the upper limit of the one-sided 95 % confidence interval (CI) for the difference between treatments was <10 %.

Results

Of 877 patients enrolled, 598 were randomized to maintenance treatment (continuous: n = 297; on-demand: n = 301). Discontinuation due to unsatisfactory treatment was 6.3 % for on-demand and 9.8 % for continuous treatment (difference −3.5 % [90 % CI: −7.1 %, 0.2 %]). In total, 82.1 and 86.2 % of patients taking on-demand and continuous therapy, respectively, were satisfied with the treatment of heartburn and regurgitation symptoms, a secondary variable (P = NS). Mean study drug consumption was 0.41 and 0.91 tablets/day, respectively. Overall, 5 % of the on-demand group developed reflux esophagitis versus none in the continuous group (P < 0.0001). The Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale Reflux dimension was also improved for continuous versus on-demand treatment. Esomeprazole was well tolerated.

Conclusions

In terms of willingness to continue treatment, on-demand treatment with esomeprazole 20 mg was non-inferior to continuous maintenance treatment and reduced medication usage in patients with NERD who had achieved symptom control with initial esomeprazole treatment.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier (NCT number): NCT02670642; Date of registration: December 2015.

Multi-indication Pharmacotherapeutic Multicriteria Decision Analytic Model for the Comparative Formulary Inclusion of Proton Pump Inhibitors in Qatar

PURPOSE

The formulary inclusion of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) in the government hospital health services in Qatar is not comparative or restricted. Requests to include a PPI in the formulary are typically accepted if evidence of efficacy and tolerability is presented. There are no literature reports of a PPI scoring model that is based on comparatively weighted multiple indications and no reports of PPI selection in Qatar or the Middle East. This study aims to compare first-line use of the PPIs that exist in Qatar. The economic effect of the study recommendations was also quantified.

METHODS

A comparative, evidence-based multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) model was constructed to follow the multiple indications and pharmacotherapeutic criteria of PPIs. Literature and an expert panel informed the selection criteria of PPIs. Input from the relevant local clinician population steered the relative weighting of selection criteria. Comparatively scored PPIs, exceeding a defined score threshold, were recommended for selection.

FINDINGS

Weighted model scores were successfully developed, with 95% CI and 5% margin of error. The model comprised 7 main criteria and 38 subcriteria. Main criteria are indication, dosage frequency, treatment duration, best published evidence, available formulations, drug interactions, and pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties. Most weight was achieved for the indications selection criteria. Esomeprazole and rabeprazole were suggested as formulary options, followed by lansoprazole for nonformulary use. The estimated effect of the study recommendations was up to a 15.3% reduction in the annual PPI expenditure. Robustness of study conclusions against variabilities in study inputs was confirmed via sensitivity analyses.

IMPLICATIONS

The implementation of a locally developed PPI-specific comparative MCDA scoring model, which is multiweighted indication and criteria based, into the Qatari formulary selection practices is a successful evidence-based cost-cutting exercise. Esomeprazole and rabeprazole should be the first-line choice from among the PPIs available at the Qatari government hospital health services.

Is the use of esomeprazole in gastroesophageal reflux disease a cost-effective option in Poland?

OBJECTIVES

To compare the cost-effectiveness of therapy of gastroesophageal reflux disease with esomeprazole and other proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) in Poland.

MATERIALS & METHODS

Studies comparing esomeprazole with other PPIs in the treatment of erosive esophagitis, non-erosive reflux disease and gastroesophageal reflux disease maintenance therapy were systematically reviewed. 9 randomized clinical trials were selected, meta-analyses were conducted. Cost data derived from Polish Ministry of Health and Pharmacies in Wroclaw.

RESULTS

In the treatment of erosive esophagitis esomeprazole was significantly more effective than other PPIs. Both for 4- and 8-week therapy respective incremental cost-effectiveness ratio values were acceptably low. Differences in effectiveness of non-erosive reflux disease therapy were not significant. The replacement of pantoprazole 20 mg with more effective esomeprazole 20 mg in the 6-month maintenance therapy was associated with a substantially high incremental cost-effectiveness ratio.

The role of endoscopy in the management of GERD

We recommend that uncomplicated GERD be diagnosed on the basis of typical symptoms without the use of diagnostic testing, including EGD. We recommend EGD for patients who have symptoms suggesting complicated GERD or alarm symptoms. We recommend that EGD not be routinely performed solely for the assessment of extraesophageal GERD symptoms. We recommend that endoscopic findings of reflux esophagitis be classified according to an accepted grading scale or described in detail. We suggest that repeat EGD be performed in patients with severe erosive esophagitis after at least an 8-week course of PPI therapy to exclude underlying BE or dysplasia. 44BB We recommend against obtaining tissue samples from endoscopically normal tissue to diagnose GERD or exclude BE in adults. We suggest that endoscopy be considered in patients with multiple risk factors for Barrett’s esophagus. We recommend that tissue samples be obtained to confirm endoscopically suspected Barrett’s esophagus. We suggest that endoscopic antireflux therapy be considered for selected patients with uncomplicated GERD after careful discussion with the patient regarding potential adverse effects, benefits, and other available therapeutic options.

Unmet Needs in the Treatment of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a highly prevalent gastrointestinal disorder. Proton pump inhibitors have profoundly revolutionized the treatment of GERD. However, several areas of unmet need persist despite marked improvements in the therapeutic management of GERD. These include the advanced grades of erosive esophagitis, nonerosive reflux disease, maintenance treatment of erosive esophagitis, refractory GERD, postprandial heartburn, atypical and extraesophageal manifestations of GERD, Barrett’s esophagus, chronic protein pump inhibitor treatment, and post-bariatric surgery GERD. Consequently, any future development of novel therapeutic modalities for GERD (medical, endoscopic, or surgical), would likely focus on the aforementioned areas of unmet need.

Management of reflux esophagitis: does the choice of proton pump inhibitor matter?

BACKGROUND

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are the treatment of choice for reflux esophagitis (RE). The effectiveness of PPIs throughout RE management, from healing to maintenance, has not been fully studied.

AIM

To compare esomeprazole with lansoprazole or pantoprazole for RE management using a management model.

METHODS

Data from six studies comparing esomeprazole with lansoprazole or pantoprazole for healing (4-8 weeks) or maintenance of healing (6 months) of RE were incorporated into hypothetical management models to determine the proportion of patients in endoscopic remission after sequential healing and maintenance therapy, assuming that patients received the same PPI throughout. The number needed to treat (NNT) to achieve one more patient in remission with esomeprazole vs. other PPIs was estimated. The hypothetical model was validated using results from the EXPO study, which compared esomeprazole with pantoprazole for RE healing and maintenance.

RESULTS

Overall, esomeprazole 40 mg produced higher rates of healing (life-table estimates) than lansoprazole 30 mg (82.4-92.6% vs. 77.5-88.8%; p < 0.01) or pantoprazole 40 mg (95.5% vs. 92.0%; p < 0.001) and higher rates of endoscopic and symptomatic remission at 6 months than lansoprazole (83.0-84.8% vs. 74.0-75.9%; p < 0.001; life-table estimates) or pantoprazole (70.9% vs. 59.6%; p < 0.0001; observed rates). In the hypothetical management model, the NNT for esomeprazole was 9 vs. lansoprazole and 8 vs. pantoprazole. The actual NNT for esomeprazole vs. pantoprazole in the EXPO study was 9 (95% confidence interval: 6; 16).

CONCLUSIONS

In this management model, esomeprazole was more effective than either lansoprazole or pantoprazole for maintaining remission after sequential healing and 6 months' maintenance therapy for RE.

Pharmacokinetic evaluation of esomeprazole for the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease

INTRODUCTION

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are widely used for the treatment of acid-related diseases such as gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). They are recommended by the American College of Gastroenterology for healing erosive esophagitis (EO) and as long-term treatment in patients with healed EO. The available PPIs differ somewhat in their pharmacokinetics and clinical properties, but whether these differences are of clinical relevance is a matter of debate. Some safety concerns have been raised with the use of PPIs, mostly an increased incidence of infectious diseases such as community-acquired pneumonia or Clostridium difficile diarrhea.

AREAS COVERED

This article explores the results of clinical studies on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of esomeprazole , as well as on its clinical efficacy to manage patients with GERD.

EXPERT OPINION

GERD is a public health concern as its worldwide incidence and associated complications are increasing alongside the exponentially increasing problem of obesity. PPIs are the first pharmacological option because of their efficacy and overall positive risk-to-benefit ratio. Improved efficacy with the use of stereospecific isomers of PPIs, such as esomeprazole, has not yet been convincingly demonstrated. Nevertheless, because of individual experience with former treatment, some patients may report better symptom control when treated with a specific PPI rather than with others.

Managing peptic ulcer and gastroesophageal reflux disease in elderly Chinese patients--focus on esomeprazole

Peptic ulcer disease (PUD) and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) are not uncommon in elderly patients. Clinical presentations of these acid-related disorders may be atypical in the geriatric population. Older individuals are at increased risk for poor outcomes in complicated PUD and for development of GERD complications. Multiple risk factors (eg, Helicobacter pylori [HP], use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs [NSAIDs], aspirin) contribute to the development of PUD. Recent data has shown that HP-negative, NSAID-negative idiopathic peptic ulcers are on the rise and carry a higher risk of recurrent ulcer bleeding and mortality. Effective management of PUD in the geriatric population relies on identification and modification of treatable risk factors. Elderly patients with GERD often require long-term acid suppressive therapy. Proton pump inhibitors (PPI) including esomeprazole are effective in the treatment of reflux esophagitis, maintenance of GERD symptomatic control, and management of PUD as well as its complications. Potential safety concerns of long-term PPI use have been reported in the literature. Clinicians should balance the risks and benefits before committing elderly patients to long-term PPI therapy.

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.

Healing erosive esophagitis with a proton pump inhibitor: the more the merrier?

Patients with erosive esophagitis (EE) account for 30% of patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease; only a minority of these patients fail to achieve healing on treatment with a proton pump inhibitor (PPI), once-daily, for 8 weeks. For those patients with EE who have failed to heal on a PPI, given once-daily, current practice is to double the PPI dose although there is little published evidence to support this. In this issue of the American Journal of Gastroenterology, authors from Japan have demonstrated that double-dose PPI produced higher healing rates when given as a split, twice-daily dose than as a once-daily dose for patients with EE who had failed initial therapy with rabeprazole 10 mg once-daily. Quadruple-dose PPI, given as a split dose, did not increase the healing rates but did produce better symptom control, albeit limited, compared with double-dose PPI, given twice-daily. Because subjects, initially, received a lower PPI dose than that generally indicated for EE (rabeprazole 20 mg daily), this study does not provide the eagerly awaited justification for double-dose PPI therapy in patients with EE who have failed standard-dose PPI once-daily. However, it does demonstrate the clinical advantage of a split-dose regimen (AM and PM), compared with a once-daily regimen, when doubling the dose of a PPI for patients with residual EE after initial therapy.

New pharmacologic approaches in gastroesophageal reflux disease

This article highlights current and emerging pharmacological treatments for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), opportunities for improving medical treatment, the extent to which improvements may be achieved with current therapy, and where new therapies may be required. These issues are discussed in the context of current thinking on the pathogenesis of GERD and its various manifestations and on the pharmacologic basis of current treatments.

The 12-month safety profile of dexlansoprazole, a proton pump inhibitor with a dual delayed release formulation, in patients with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease

BACKGROUND

Dexlansoprazole MR is a Dual Delayed Release formulation of dexlansoprazole, an enantiomer of lansoprazole, designed to extend the duration of acid suppression.

AIM

To assess the 12-month safety of dexlansoprazole MR in patients with symptomatic gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GERD).

METHODS

In this randomised open-label study, patients received dexlansoprazole MR 60 or 90 mg once-daily for 12 months. Safety was evaluated at months 1, 3, 6, 9 and 12/final visit through physical examinations, laboratory evaluations, endoscopies, gastric biopsies, fasting serum gastrin values and adverse events (AEs).

RESULTS

Of 591 patients receiving dexlansoprazole MR 60 and 90 mg, 71% and 65%, respectively, experienced ≥1 treatment-emergent AE; the most frequent AE was upper respiratory infection (14% and 13% in the 60- and 90-mg groups). Thirty patients experienced ≥1 serious AE; a majority of serious AEs were unrelated to study drug. No clinically meaningful change in any clinical laboratory parameters was noted. As expected, serum gastrin values rose with dexlansoprazole therapy; increases were not dose related. No clinically concerning trends were identified in gastric pathology results; no endocrine cell hyperplasia, adenocarcinoma, or lymphoma were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Twelve-month treatment with dexlansoprazole MR 60 and 90 mg was well tolerated by GERD patients in this study (Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT00255190).

Intragastric acidity during administration of generic omeprazole or esomeprazole - a randomised, two-way crossover study including CYP2C19 genotyping

BACKGROUND

Generic omeprazole has been approved in many countries for the treatment of acid-related gastrointestinal disorders. However, clinical studies comparing generic to original proton pump inhibitors are limited.

AIMS

To compare the effect of generic omeprazole 20 mg/day with esomeprazole 20 mg/day on intragastric acidity and to investigate the influence of the CYP2C19 metabolizer status.

METHODS

In this randomised, single-blinded, two-way crossover study, 24 healthy Helicobacter pylori-negative subjects, received generic omeprazole (Omep; Hexal AG, Holzkirchen, Germany) 20 mg once daily or esomeprazole 20 mg once daily for five consecutive days. Twenty-four-hour intragastric pH was recorded on day 5 of each treatment. CYP2C19 status was determined by polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism.

RESULTS

Over all, there were no statistically significant differences between generic omeprazole and esomeprazole with respect to median intragastric pH (3.5 and 3.9, P = 0.07), the total hours with intragastric pH >4 (10.4 and 11.3, P = 0.29), and during upright (9.6 and 9.1, P = 0.77) or supine (2.2 and 2.2, P = 0.94) position. However, in CYP2C19 rapid metabolizers, esomeprazole was superior to omeprazole, with the percentage of time with intragastric pH >3.0 and pH >3.5 being higher with esomeprazole than with generic omeprazole [Δ = 9% (P = 0.026) and Δ = 8% (P = 0.046), respectively].

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, generic omeprazole 20 mg appears to provide a similar intragastric acid control when compared with esomeprazole 20 mg. However, esomeprazole might be advantageous in subjects with a rapid CYP2C19 metabolizer status.

New pharmacologic approaches in gastroesophageal reflux disease

This article highlights current and emerging pharmacological treatments for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), opportunities for improving medical treatment, the extent to which improvements may be achieved with current therapy, and where new therapies may be required. These issues are discussed in the context of current thinking on the pathogenesis of GERD and its various manifestations and on the pharmacologic basis of current treatments.

Prevention of relapse of healed reflux esophagitis is related to the duration of intragastric pH > 4

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are the preferred treatment for maintenance of healed reflux esophagitis (RE). However, little is known regarding the relationship between prevention of RE relapse and degree of gastric acid suppression. The aim of this review was to examine this relationship in further detail. Data from four comparative studies on maintenance PPI therapy for prevention of relapse of RE were combined with data from two pharmacodynamic studies of duration of intragastric pH >4 during the 24-hour period on day 5 of PPI dosing in healthy subjects. A log-linear model was fitted to the data using the method of maximum likelihood. Variability in relapse rates and pH data was taken into account using a binomial and normal likelihood function, respectively. Pharmacodynamic studies resulted in a wide range of acid-suppressive effect, and based on corresponding maintenance of RE healing rates with different PPIs and doses, an inverse (non-linear) statistically significant relationship between percentage of time with pH >4 and maintenance of RE healing was identified (P<0.001). These findings indicate that long-term maintenance of healed RE is related to the extent of acid suppression in a 24-hour period.

Changes of gastric histology in patients with erosive oesophagitis receiving long-term lansoprazole maintenance therapy

BACKGROUND

Changes in gastric histology associated with long-term maintenance therapy with lansoprazole for erosive oesophagitis have not been well described.

AIM

To evaluate the effect on gastric histology of long-term dose-titrated lansoprazole administered as maintenance therapy for up to 82 months in patients with erosive oesophagitis.

METHODS

Sequential gastric biopsy specimens were obtained for evaluation of histological changes and Helicobacter pylori infection status.

RESULTS

Active and chronic inflammation improved from baseline to final visit in a majority of patients receiving long-term therapy with lansoprazole, irrespective of baseline H. pylori infection status. Reductions in active inflammation in the gastric body and antrum were seen in 53% (17/32) and 67% (20/30) of H. pylori-positive patients, respectively, and in 88% (7/8) and 86% (12/14) of H. pylori-negative patients, respectively. Reductions in chronic inflammation in the gastric body and antrum were seen in 38% (12/32) and 47% (15/32) of H. pylori-positive patients, respectively, and in 58% (70/121) and 57% (68/120) of H. pylori-negative patients, respectively. No clinically meaningful increases in hyperplasia, dysplasia, neoplasia, intestinal metaplasia or atrophy were observed during the follow-up period.

CONCLUSIONS

Lansoprazole administered as maintenance therapy for up to 6 years in patients with erosive oesophagitis demonstrated gastric mucosal safety and was well tolerated.

Pantoprazole: a proton pump inhibitor

Pantoprazole is a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) that binds irreversibly and specifically to the proton pump, thereby reducing gastric acid secretion. Pantoprazole has a relatively long duration of action compared with other PPIs, and a lower propensity to become activated in slightly acidic body compartments. To date, no drug-drug interactions have been identified with pantoprazole in numerous interaction studies. Overall, in the short-term (8-10 weeks) initial treatment of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (a condition that occurs when the reflux of gastric contents causes troublesome symptoms and/or complications) and long-term (6-24 months) maintenance therapy, oral pantoprazole 20 or 40 mg/day demonstrated similar efficacy to omeprazole, lansoprazole and esomeprazole and greater efficacy than histamine type 2 receptor antagonists. Pantoprazole is also effective in treating and preventing NSAID-related gastric and gastroduodenal injury. The optimal adult oral dose for gastric acid-related disorders is pantoprazole 40 mg once daily. Although data are limited, pantoprazole 20 or 40 mg/day was effective and well tolerated in the treatment of acid-related disorders in children and adolescents. Pantoprazole was also well tolerated in adults with acid-related disorders in short- and long-term studies. Thus, pantoprazole is a valuable agent for the management of acid-related disorders.

Maintenance therapy of gastroesophageal reflux disease

The aims of treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) are to cure mucosal breaks, control symptoms, and prevent complications (e.g. stricture, Barrett's esophagus, and esophageal adenocarcinoma). Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are known to be the best drugs to cure esophagitis; however, a highrecurrence rate of about 80% was described after the completion of initial therapy. Regretfully, not so many physicians perform maintenance therapy in clinical practice. Histamine H2 receptor antagonists have an insufficient effect in maintenance therapy compared with PPIs; therefore, they could be prescribed for mild reflux esophagitis. Several clinical trials have been conducted to investigate the efficacy of continuous PPI administration maintenance therapy for GERD. Among these trials, recent large-scale studies showed that esomeprazole was equal to or superior to other kinds of PPIs. On the other hand, on-demand PPI studies have been conducted, mainly in patients with nonerosive reflux disease or uninvestigated GERD;however, this strategy was less effective than continuous therapy in many studies. Because on-demand therapy is less expensive, it is worth confirming this strategy in further studies. Studies of maintenance therapy with investigations conducted for as long a period as 5 years have described that PPI maintenance therapy could be considered as effective, safe, and well tolerated.

The pharmacology of esomeprazole and its role in gastric acid related diseases

Esomeprazole (S-isomer of omeprazole) demonstrates a better pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profile than the racemic product omeprazole. Esomeprazole's pharmacological activity of gastric acid secretion is through proton pump inhibition. The pharmacokinetic properties provide for an enhanced pharmacological effect. Esomeprazole is rapidly absorbed and the extent of absorption is higher resulting in higher systemic absorption of esomeprazole (bioavailability), which coupled with reduced clearance results in greater systemic exposure. This pharmacodynamic profile then provides for a prolongation of inhibition of gastric acid output and correlates well with its more beneficial therapeutic efficacy over omeprazole and some of the other proton-pump inhibitors. It has been well proven as an effective agent in the treatment of gastro-esophagitis reflux disease, (reflux esophagitis and non-erosive reflux disease), NSAID-induced gastric-intestinal symptoms and ulcers, Helicobacter pylori infection and Zollinger-Ellison syndrome. Esomeprazole has a good tolerability profile and a low potential for drug interaction.

Clinical trial: efficacy and safety of dexlansoprazole MR 60 and 90 mg in healed erosive oesophagitis - maintenance of healing and symptom relief

BACKGROUND

Dexlansoprazole MR, a modified-release formulation of dexlansoprazole, an enantiomer of lansoprazole, effectively heals erosive oesophagitis.

AIM

To assess dexlansoprazole MR in maintaining healed erosive oesophagitis.

METHODS

Patients (n = 451) with erosive oesophagitis healed in either of two dexlansoprazole MR healing trials randomly received dexlansoprazole MR 60 or 90 mg or placebo once daily in this double-blind trial. The percentage of patients who maintained healing at month 6 was analysed using life table and crude rate methods. Secondary endpoints were percentages of nights and of 24-h days without heartburn based on daily diaries.

RESULTS

Dexlansoprazole MR 60 and 90 mg were superior to placebo for maintaining healing (P < 0.0025). Maintenance rates were 87% and 82% for the 60 and 90 mg doses, respectively, vs. 26% for placebo (life table), and 66% and 65% vs. 14%, respectively (crude rate). Both doses were superior to placebo for the percentage of 24-h heartburn-free days (60 mg, 96%; 90 mg, 94%; placebo, 19%) and nights (98%, 97%, and 50%, respectively). Diarrhoea, flatulence, gastritis (symptoms) and abdominal pain occurred more frequently with dexlansoprazole MR than placebo, but were not dose-related.

CONCLUSION

Dexlansoprazole MR effectively maintained healed erosive oesophagitis and symptom relief compared with placebo, and was well tolerated.

Long-term efficacy of lansoprazole in preventing relapse of erosive reflux esophagitis

In a phase III study of lansoprazole treatment, patients with healed or unhealed erosive esophagitis entered a titrated open-label treatment period and received lansoprazole for <or=6 years to assess long-term maintenance therapy. Doses were adjusted depending on symptom response. Endoscopy was performed yearly. One hundred ninety-five subjects received lansoprazole for <1 to 72 months; most received daily doses of <or=30 mg. Lansoprazole maintained erosive esophagitis remission in 75% of subjects receiving treatment for <or=72 months, with 39 subjects experiencing 50 recurrences. Most subjects (94-95%) had no or mild symptoms of day or night heartburn at study end, and 77% were asymptomatic at first erosive esophagitis recurrence. The most common treatment-related adverse events included diarrhea (10%), headache (8%), and abdominal pain (6%), and were mild or moderate in severity. Long-term lansoprazole is effective and well tolerated when used to maintain erosive esophagitis remission for <or=6 years.

The clinical safety of long-term lansoprazole for the maintenance of healed erosive oesophagitis

BACKGROUND

The clinical safety of long-term lansoprazole therapy for the maintenance of healed erosive oesophagitis has not been extensively studied in clinical trials.

AIM

To assess the long-term clinical safety of dose-titrated lansoprazole as maintenance therapy for up to 82 months in subjects with healed erosive oesophagitis.

METHODS

Clinical safety was assessed by monitoring adverse events (AEs), laboratory data including serum gastrin levels, and endoscopy.

RESULTS

Mean duration (+/- s.d.) of lansoprazole treatment during the titrated open-label period was 56 +/- 24 months (range <1-82 months). Overall, 189 of 195 (97%) subjects experienced a total of 2825 treatment-emergent AEs. Most AEs occurred during the first year of treatment, were mild-to-moderate in severity and resolved while on treatment. Of 155 serious AEs (in 74 subjects), only two (colitis and rectal haemorrhage in one subject) were considered treatment-related. Sixty-nine of 195 subjects (35%) experienced 187 treatment-related AEs, with diarrhoea (10%), headache (8%) and abdominal pain (6%) being the most common. Gastrin levels > or = 400 pg/mL were seen in 9% of subjects; hypergastrinemia was not associated with gastro-intestinal AEs or nodules/polyps.

CONCLUSIONS

Lansoprazole maintenance therapy for up to 6 years is safe and well tolerated in subjects with healed erosive oesophagitis.

Clinical trial: factors associated with freedom from relapse of heartburn in patients with healed reflux oesophagitis--results from the maintenance phase of the EXPO study

BACKGROUND

Ability to predict freedom from heartburn relapse during maintenance therapy for healed reflux oesophagitis may facilitate optimal treatment choices for individual patients.

AIM

To determine factors predicting freedom from heartburn relapse during maintenance proton pump inhibitor therapy in patients with healed reflux oesophagitis.

METHODS

This post-hoc analysis used data from the maintenance phase of the EXPO study (AstraZeneca study code: SH-NEG-0008); 2766 patients with healed reflux oesophagitis and resolved heartburn received once-daily esomeprazole 20 mg or pantoprazole 20 mg for 6 months. Multiple logistic regression analysis determined factors associated with freedom from heartburn relapse.

RESULTS

Heartburn relapse rates were lower with esomeprazole than pantoprazole in all subgroups analysed. Esomeprazole treatment was the factor most strongly associated with freedom from heartburn relapse (odds ratio 2.08; P < 0.0001). Other factors significantly associated with freedom from heartburn relapse were Helicobacter pylori infection, greater age, non-obesity, absence of epigastric pain at baseline, pre-treatment nonsevere heartburn and GERD symptom duration < or =5 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Several factors predict freedom from heartburn relapse during maintenance proton pump inhibitor therapy for healed reflux oesophagitis, the strongest being choice of proton pump inhibitor. These findings outline the importance of optimizing acid control and identifying predictors of relapse for effective long-term symptom management in reflux oesophagitis patients.

Impact of PPIs on patient focused symptomatology in GERD

About half of patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) have a normal endoscopy, so symptom assessment is the only appropriate outcome measure for these persons. Symptom assessment is also of great importance in persons with erosive esophagitis. There is currently no fully validated questionnaire to compare symptom response to treatment of patients with GERD. The aim of this review is to consider ReQuest^™ assessment tool to evaluate esophageal, supra-esophageal, and infra-esophageal symptoms, as well as any modification of the patient’s quality of life. The ReQuest^™ may be combined with the Los Angeles classification of esophagitis (LA A–D), to include the normal endoscopic finding in normal endoscopy reflux disease. The ReQuest^™ score declines rapidly towards normal with patient treatment with a proton pump inhibitor. A proportion of patients need more than the usual 8 weeks of therapy. For example, in GERD patients with Los Angeles B–D, the ReQuest^™ score falls more with pantoprazole 40 mg than with esomoprazole 40 mg after 12 weeks of therapy. Now that the simplified ReQuest in Practice^™ is available, this validated brief questionnaire has potential as an instrument for use in GERD patients seen in everyday clinical practice.

Esomeprazole: a proton pump inhibitor

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are the most potent inhibitors of gastric acid secretion available, and they are effective for treating all acid-related disorders. Esomeprazole is one of several most recent PPIs that became available to the market in 2001. Esomeprazole is indicated for the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease in adults and children, risk reduction of NSAIDs-associated gastric ulcer, Helicobacter pylori eradication and control of pathological hypersecretory conditions associated with Zollinger-Ellison syndrome. Esomeprazole is available in both oral and intravenous formulations. A number of studies have compared esomeprazole with other PPIs. While differences supporting esomeprazole have been reported, the magnitude of differences has been variable and of uncertain clinical importance. Cost plays a major role in prescribing patterns of PPIs.

Effect of increasing esomeprazole and pantoprazole doses on acid control in patients with symptoms of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease: a randomized, dose-response study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

In patients with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD), dose escalation or drug switching may be considered in those with symptoms that persist despite standard-dose proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy. This study set out to assess whether increasing the dosage of oral esomeprazole and pantoprazole improves acid control in GORD patients, and to compare the pharmacodynamic efficacy of esomeprazole and pantoprazole administered at different dosages.

METHODS

This was an open-label, randomized, six-way crossover study that included Helicobacter pylori-negative GORD patients (aged 20-60 years) with <30% of time with intragastric pH>4. Patients were treated with oral once-daily esomeprazole 20 mg, 40 mg and 80 mg, and pantoprazole 20 mg, 40 mg and 80 mg, for 5 days. The main outcome measures were time with intragastric pH>4 over 24 hours, median pH over 24 hours and area under the hydrogen ion versus time curve on day 5 for each treatment period.

RESULTS

Dose escalation with both PPIs improved acid control. The proportion of time with intragastric pH>4 (day 5) was 46.7% with esomeprazole 20 mg/day, 58.6% with esomeprazole 40 mg/day, and 65.8% with esomeprazole 80 mg/day; the corresponding percentages with pantoprazole were 28.6%, 36.9% and 44.9%, respectively. On a milligram-per-milligram basis, esomeprazole provided greater acid control than pantoprazole (p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Dose escalation with oral esomeprazole and pantoprazole improves acid control in patients with GORD, although esomeprazole provides significantly greater acid control on a milligram-per-milligram basis.

Stereoselective disposition of proton pump inhibitors

It is estimated that about half of all therapeutic agents are chiral, but most of these drugs are administered in the form of the racemic mixture, i.e. a 50/50 mixture of its enantiomers. However, chirality is one of the main features of biology, and many of the processes essential for life are stereoselective, implying that two enantiomers may work differently from each other in a physiological environment. Thus, receptors or metabolizing enzymes would recognize one of the ligand enantiomers in favour of the other. With one exception, all presently marketed proton pump inhibitors (PPIs)--omeprazole, lansoprazole, pantoprazole and rabeprazole--used for the treatment of gastric acid-related diseases are racemic mixtures. The exception is esomeprazole, the S-enantiomer of omeprazole, which is the only PPI developed as a single enantiomer drug. The development of esomeprazole (an alkaline salt thereof, e.g. magnesium or sodium) was based on unique metabolic properties that clearly differentiated esomeprazole from omeprazole, the racemate. At comparable doses, these properties led to several clinical advantages, for example higher bioavailability in the majority of patients, i.e. the extensive metabolizers (EMs; 97% in Caucasian and 80-85% in Asian populations), lower exposure in poor metabolizers (PMs; 3% in Caucasian and 15-20% in Asian populations) and lower interindividual variation. For the other, i.e. racemic, PPIs there are some data available on the characteristics of the individual enantiomers, and we have therefore undertaken to analyse the current literature with the purpose of evaluating the potential benefits of developing single enantiomer drugs from lansoprazole, pantoprazole and rabeprazole. For lansoprazole, the plasma concentrations of the S-enantiomer are lower than those of the R-enantiomer in both EMs and PMs, and, consequently, the variability in the population or between EMs and PMs is not likely to decrease with either of the lansoprazole enantiomers. Furthermore, plasma protein binding differs between the two lansoprazole enantiomers, in that the amount of the free S-enantiomer is two-fold higher than that of the R-enantiomer. This will counteract the difference seen in total plasma concentrations of the enantiomers. Also, studies using expressed human cytochrome P450 isoenzymes show that the metabolism of one enantiomer is significantly affected by the presence of the other, which is likely to result in different pharmacokinetics when administering a single enantiomer. For pantoprazole, there is a negligible difference in plasma concentrations between the two enantiomers in EMs, while the difference is substantial in PMs. The difference in AUC between PMs and EMs would decrease to some extent, but in the majority of the population the variability and efficacy would not be altered with a single enantiomer of pantoprazole. The metabolism of the enantiomers of rabeprazole displays stereoselectivity comparable to that of lansoprazole, i.e. the exposure of the R-enantiomer is higher than that of the S-enantiomer in EMs as well as in PMs, which, by analogy to lansoprazole, makes them less suitable for development of a single enantiomer drug. Furthermore, the chiral stability of the rabeprazole enantiomers may be an issue because of significant degradation of rabeprazole to its sulfide analogue, which is subject to non-stereoselective metabolic regeneration of a mixture of the two enantiomers. In conclusion, in contrast to esomeprazole, the S-enantiomer of omeprazole, minimal if any clinical advantages would be expected in developing any of the enantiomers of lansoprazole, pantoprazole, or rabeprazole as compared with their racemates.

Esomeprazole in acute and maintenance treatment of reflux oesophagitis: a multicentre prospective study

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of esomeprazole 40 mg once daily (q.d.) in healing reflux oesophagitis at 4 and 8 weeks, and the efficacy of esomeprazole 20 mg q.d. for 12 weeks in the maintenance of remission.

METHODS

A total of 235 patients with endoscopically proven reflux oesophagitis were enrolled in this study, which consisted of two phases (healing and maintenance therapy). Patients who showed complete endoscopic and symptomatic healing at the end of 4 or 8 weeks were switched to maintenance treatment with esomeprazole 20 mg q.d. for 12 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was healing of reflux oesophagitis at week 8. Secondary assessments included the proportion of patients with symptomatic relapse in the maintenance phase.

RESULTS

At the end of week 8, 88% (95% life-table confidence intervals [CI]: 84%, 92%) of patients were healed endoscopically and 90.6% of the patients were asymptomatic. Patient age, gender and Helicobacter pylori status had no effect on the efficacy of treatment. During the 12-week maintenance treatment phase, symptomatic relapse ratios were 0.5%, 2.2%, and 0%, for the first, second, and third 4-week periods, respectively. The proportions of patients satisfied with treatment were 95% and 99.4% at the end of acute and maintenance treatment, respectively. The most common adverse effects were headache, upper respiratory tract infection and abdominal pain.

CONCLUSIONS

Esomeprazole is effective in the healing of reflux oesophagitis, the resolution of heartburn, and in maintaining symptomatic remission. The effectiveness of esomeprazole in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease is not affected by the presence of H. pylori.

Effect of esomeprazole on symptom relief and improvement of quality of life in gastroesophageal reflux disease patients

AIM: To compare the efficacy and safety of esomeprazole with omeprazole on symptom relief and improvement of quality of life in gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) patients.

METHODS: A prospective, randomized controlled study was designed. A total of 78 GERD patients diagnosed with endoscope and/or their 24 h esophageal pH monitored were randomized into esomeprazole treatment group and omeprazole treatment group (39 patients each group). Patients in the two groups received standard doses of esomeprazole (20 mg, twice a day, po) or double doses of omeprazole (20 mg, twice a day, po) for 8 wk. Symptom relief, efficiency, cure rate and quality of life were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS: Seven-six patients completed the 8-week therapy. One patient in each group was dropped out because of running counter to the RE testing procedure. Symptoms of the two groups at weeks 4 and 8 were significantly improved. Symptoms of patients in the esomeprazole group were much better improved than those in the omeprazole group (P < 0.01). There was a significant difference in remission of heartburn and chest pain between the two groups (78.3% vs 45.5%, 64.3% vs 37.5%, P < 0.05). However, there was no significant difference in remission of acid regurgitation and dysphagia between the two groups. There was a significant difference in the efficiency and cure rate at weeks 4 and 8 between the two groups (4 wk: 88.8% vs 59.3%, 80.0% vs 51.9%, P < 0.05; 8 wk: 96.0% vs 70.4%, 88.0% vs 63.1%, P < 0.05). The quality of life, cure rate, vitality (VT) and social function (SF) were much better improved in the esomeprazole group than in the omeprazole group (92.5 ± 5.7 vs 85.3 ± 7.1, 85.2 ± 4.6 vs 76.8 ± 6.5, P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION: Standard doses of esomeprazole have better effects on improving heartburn and chest pain, cure rate, VT and SF in GERD patients than double doses of omeprazole.

Pantoprazole: a proton pump inhibitor with oral and intravenous formulations

Proton pump inhibitors (PPI) are a significant part of therapy for most acid-related diseases including gastroesophageal reflux disease, peptic ulcer disease and acute gastrointestinal bleeding. Pantoprazole is one of several available proton pump inhibitor agents and provides dose-dependent control of gastric acid secretion. Pantoprazole has indications in gastroesophageal reflux disease and peptic ulcer disease, along with indications as co-therapy in the eradication of Helicobacter pylori infection and in the control of the acid secretion associated with the Zollinger-Ellison syndrome, as well as in NSAID ulcer prevention. Pantoprazole is available in both oral and intravenous formulations. It is effective across all age groups, although only indicated in adults (and adolescents in Europe). It has been approved for use in over 100 countries and has been used for over 13 years. Pantoprazole has an excellent safety profile and a low potential for drug-drug interactions. While still widely prescribed, pantoprazole and the other branded proton pump inhibitors are under considerable market pressure from the less expensive but similarly effective generic and over-the-counter formulations of omeprazole.

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.

Efficacy of pantoprazole 20 mg daily compared with esomeprazole 20 mg daily in the maintenance of healed gastroesophageal reflux disease: a randomized, double-blind comparative trial - the EMANCIPATE study

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and tolerability of pantoprazole 20 mg once daily with that of esomeprazole 20 mg once daily for 6 months as maintenance therapy in patients with previously healed gastroesophageal reflux disease.

METHODS

In an initial open-label acute phase, outpatients with endoscopically confirmed gastroesophageal reflux disease (Los Angeles grades A-D) received pantoprazole 40 mg once daily for 4 or 8 weeks. Those healed (defined as the absence of esophagitis, and 'no' or 'mild' heartburn and acid regurgitation) were randomized in the double-blind manner for maintenance therapy with pantoprazole 20 mg once daily or esomeprazole 20 mg once daily for 6 months.

RESULTS

In the acute healing phase, 1452 patients were recruited to receive pantoprazole 40 mg once daily. Healing success was 91% (intent-to-treat analysis). A total of 1303 patients entered the maintenance phase of the study. Pantoprazole 20 mg once daily and esomeprazole 20 mg once daily were equally effective at maintaining patients in remission; 84 and 85% of pantoprazole and esomeprazole recipients remained in combined endoscopic and symptomatic remission at 6 months (intent-to-treat analysis). The confidence interval of the difference was (-5.7; +infinity), showing that pantoprazole is as effective as esomeprazole with a noninferiority margin of 5.8%. Combined endoscopic and symptomatic remission was independent of Helicobacter pylori status. Both treatments were well tolerated and safe.

CONCLUSION

Treatment with pantoprazole 20 mg once daily or esomeprazole 20 mg once daily provides similarly effective and well-tolerated maintenance of previously healed gastroesophageal reflux disease irrespective of baseline H. pylori status.