Review of the clinical development of fexuprazan for gastroesophageal reflux-related disease

Potassium-competitive Acid Blockers: Current Clinical Use and Future Developments

PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW

Acid suppression with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) represents the standard of care in the treatment of acid-related diseases. However, despite their effectiveness, PPIs display some intrinsic limitations, which underlie the unmet clinical needs that have been identified over the past decades. The aims of this review are to summarize the current status and future development of the new class of antisecretory drugs (potassium-competitive acid blockers, P-CABs) that have recently been introduced into medical practice.

RECENT FINDINGS

Over the past decades, clinical needs unmet by the current acid suppressants have been recognized, especially in the management of patients with GERD, Helicobacter pylori infection and NSAID-related peptic ulcer. The failure to address these needs is mainly due to their inability to achieve a consistent acid suppression in all patients and, particularly, to control nighttime acidity. It was then realized that an extended duration of acid suppression would exert additional benefits. The available data with P-CABs show that they are able to address these unmet clinical needs. Four different P-CABs (vonoprazan, tegoprazan, fexuprazan and keverprazan) are currently available. However, only two of them are approved outside Asia. Vonoprazan is available in North, Central and South America while tegoprazan is marketed only in Latin American countries. Two other compounds (namely linazapran glurate and zestaprazan) are presently under clinical development. While clinical trials on GERD have been performed with all P-CABs, only vonoprazan and tegoprazan have been investigated as components of Helicobacter pylori eradication regimens. The available data show that-in the above two clinical indications-P-CABs provide similar or better efficacy in comparison with PPIs. Their safety in the short-term overlaps that of PPIs, but data from long-term treatment are needed.

Safety of potassium-competitive acid blockers in the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease

INTRODUCTION

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are the first-line treatment for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). However, due to their intrinsic limitations, there are still unmet clinical needs that have fostered the development of potassium-competitive acid blockers (P-CABs). Currently, four different drugs (vonoprazan, tegoprazan, fexuprazan, and keverprazan) are marketed in some Asian countries, whereas only vonoprazan and tegoprazan are available in Western countries (USA and Brazil or Mexico, respectively).

AREAS COVERED

This review summarizes the current knowledge on P-CABs acute and long-term safety in GERD treatment compared to that of PPIs. Full-text articles and abstracts were searched in PubMed.

EXPERT OPINION

P-CABs proved to address some of the unmet clinical needs in GERD, with a favorable risk-benefit ratio compared to conventional PPIs. Preclinical and clinical findings have highlighted P-CAB safety to be superimposable, to that of PPIs, in short-term treatments, although further studies are warranted to monitor their effects in long-term therapy. From an epidemiological point of view, the paucity of rigorous data for many variables (e.g. age, ethnicity, drug interactions, comorbidities, genetic polymorphisms, interindividual susceptibility, and gut dysbiosis) deserves a worldwide framework of continuous pre/post-marketing pharmacovigilance programs to reduce potential confounding factors and accurately link acute and chronic P-CAB therapy to adverse outcomes.

Efficacy and Safety of Potassium-Competitive Acid Blockers vs Proton Pump Inhibitors for Peptic Ulcer Disease or Postprocedural Artificial Ulcers: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Peptic ulcer disease (PUD) and postprocedural artificial ulcers are common ulcer disease. For them, proton pump inhibitor (PPI) and potassium-competitive acid blocker (P-CAB) are commonly used in clinical practice. PPI requires acid, time, and multiple doses, but P-CAB has fewer limitations. We compared the efficacy, safety, and prevention of PPI and P-CAB in PUD or artificial ulcer.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov , Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases for all studies. All eligible randomized controlled trials up to August 5, 2023, were included. Healing rates, shrinking rates, treatment-emergent adverse events rates, and recurrence rates were measured. Risk of bias, sensitivity analyses, and heterogeneity were also performed.

RESULTS

Twenty researches that were selected from 926 screening studies and in total 6,551 participants were included. The risk ratio (RR) of healing rate with P-CABs vs PPIs of PUD at 4 weeks was RR 1.01 (95% confidence interval 0.98-1.04). In addition, the healing rate distinction of artificial peptic ulcer was RR 1.04 (0.89-1.22), and the shrinking rate was mean difference 0.10 (-1.30-1.51). The result of treatment-emergent adverse event rate of PUD was RR 1.11 (0.91-1.35), and the delayed bleeding rate of artificial ulcer was RR 0.35 (0.16-0.80). The RR for recurrence rate of drug-related ulcers was 0.45 (0.25-0.81).

DISCUSSION

P-CAB is noninferior in healing artificial ulcer and PUD, also the incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events. But, there may be a statistical advantage in holding back delayed bleeding and preventing drug-induced ulcers. More standardized experiments are needed for further applications and more precise conclusions.

The efficacy and safety of fexuprazan in treating erosive esophagitis: a phase III, randomized, double-blind, multicenter study

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Fexuprazan is a novel potassium-competitive acid blocker (P-CAB). This study aimed to explore the noninferior efficacy and safety of fexuprazan to esomeprazole in treating erosive esophagitis (EE).

METHODS

This was a phase III, randomized, double-blind multicenter study. Patients with endoscopically confirmed EE were randomized to receive fexuprazan 40 mg or esomeprazole 40 mg once a daily for 4-8 weeks. The healing rates of EE, symptom response, GERD-health-related quality life (GERD-HRQL), and treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were compared between fexuprazan group and esomeprazole group.

RESULTS

A total of 332 subjects were included in full analysis set (FAS) and 311 in per-protocol set (PPS). The healing rates of fexuprazan and esomeprazole groups at 8 weeks were 88.5% (146/165) and 89.0% (145/163), respectively, in FAS and 97.3% (145/149) and 97.9% (143/146), respectively, in PPS. Noninferiority of fexuprazan compared with esomeprazole according to EE healing rates at 8 weeks was demonstrated in both FAS and PPS analysis. No significant difference was found between groups in EE healing rates at 4 weeks, symptom responses, and changes of GERD-HRQL. The incidence of drug-related AEs was 19.4% (32/165) in fexuprazan arm and 19.6% (32/163) in esomeprazole arm.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated noninferior efficacy of fexuprazan to esomeprazole in treating EE. The incidence of TEAEs was similar between fexuprazan and esomeprazole. Trial registration number NCT05813561.