Meta-analysis: comparing the efficacy of proton pump inhibitors in short-term use

Determinant factors for first-line treatment choice and effectiveness in pediatric eosinophilic esophagitis: an analysis of the EUREOS EoE CONNECT registry

This study compared short-term effectiveness of proton pump inhibitors (PPI), swallowed topical corticosteroids (STC), and dietary therapies in reversing clinical and histological features in pediatric patients with eosinophilic esophagitits (EoE). Determinants for treatment choice and PPI therapy effectiveness were also assessed.  A cross-sectional study analysis of patients under 18 years old recruited onto the multicenter EoE CONNECT registry was performed. Clinico-histological response was defined as symptomatic improvement plus a peak eosinophil count below 15 per high-power field after treatment. Effectiveness of first-line options used in monotherapy was compared. Overall, 393 patients (64% adolescents) receiving PPI, STC, or dietary monotherapy to induce EoE remission were identified. PPI was the preferred option (71.5%), despite STC providing the highest clinico-histological response rates (66%) compared to PPI (44%) and diet (42%). Logistic regression identified fibrotic features and recruitment at Italian sites independently associated to first-line STC treatment; age under 12 associated to dietary therapy over other options. Analysis of 262 patients in whom PPI effectiveness was evaluated after median (IQR) 96 (70-145) days showed that this effectiveness was significantly associated with management at pediatric facilities and use of high PPI doses. Among PPI responders, decrease in rings and structures in endoscopy from baseline was documented, with EREFS fibrotic subscore for rings also decreasing among responders (0.27 ± 0.63 vs. 0.05 ± 0.22, p < 0.001).    Conclusion: Initial therapy choice for EoE depends on endoscopic phenotype, patient's age, and patients' origin. High PPI doses and treatment in pediatric facilities significantly determined effectiveness, and reversed fibrotic endoscopic features among responders. What is Known: • Proton pump inhibitors are widely used to induce and maintain remission in EoE in real practice, despite other first-line alternative therapies possibly providing higher effectiveness. What is New: • Proton pump inhibitors represent up to two-thirds of first-line monotherapies used to induce EoE remission in pediatric and adolescent patients with EoE. The choice of STC as first-line treatment for EoE was significantly associated with fibrotic features at baseline endoscopy and recruitment in Italian centers; age less than 12 years was associated with dietary therapy. • PPI effectiveness was found to be determined by use of high doses, attendance at pediatric facilities, presenting inflammatory instead of fibrotic or mixed phenotypes, and younger age. Among responders, PPI therapy reversed both inflammatory and fibrotic features of EoE after short-term treatment.

Refractory Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: Diagnosis and Management

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is common, with increasing worldwide disease prevalence and high economic burden. A significant number of patients will remain symptomatic following an empiric proton pump inhibitor (PPI) trial. Persistent symptoms despite PPI therapy are often mislabeled as refractory GERD. For patients with no prior GERD evidence (unproven GERD), testing is performed off antisecretory therapy to identify objective evidence of pathologic reflux using criteria outlined by the Lyon consensus. In proven GERD, differentiation between refractory symptoms (persisting symptoms despite optimized antisecretory therapy) and refractory GERD (abnormal reflux metrics on ambulatory pH impedance monitoring and/or persistent erosive esophagitis on endoscopy while on optimized PPI therapy) can direct subsequent management. While refractory symptoms may arise from esophageal hypersensitivity or functional heartburn, proven refractory GERD requires personalization of the management approach, tapping from an array of non-pharmacologic, pharmacologic, endoscopic, and surgical interventions. Proper diagnosis and management of refractory GERD is critical to mitigate undesirable long-term complications such as strictures, Barrett's esophagus, and esophageal adenocarcinoma. This review outlines the diagnostic workup of patients presenting with refractory GERD symptoms, describes the distinction between unproven and proven GERD, and provides a comprehensive review of the current treatment strategies available for the management of refractory GERD.

Refractory Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: A Management Update

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is one of the most frequent gastrointestinal disorders. Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are effective in healing lesions and improving symptoms in most cases, although up to 40% of GERD patients do not respond adequately to PPI therapy. Refractory GERD (rGERD) is one of the most challenging problems, given its impact on the quality of life and consumption of health care resources. The definition of rGERD is a controversial topic as it has not been unequivocally established. Indeed, some patients unresponsive to PPIs who experience symptoms potentially related to GERD may not have GERD; in this case the definition could be replaced with “reflux-like PPI-refractory symptoms.” Patients with persistent reflux-like symptoms should undergo a diagnostic workup aimed at finding objective evidence of GERD through endoscopic and pH-impedance investigations. The management strategies regarding rGERD, apart from a careful check of patient's compliance with PPIs, a possible change in the timing of their administration and the choice of a PPI with a different metabolic pathway, include other pharmacologic treatments. These include histamine-2 receptor antagonists (H2RAs), alginates, antacids and mucosal protective agents, potassium competitive acid blockers (PCABs), prokinetics, gamma aminobutyric acid-B (GABA-B) receptor agonists and metabotropic glutamate receptor-5 (mGluR5) antagonists, and pain modulators. If there is no benefit from medical therapy, but there is objective evidence of GERD, invasive antireflux options should be evaluated after having carefully explained the risks and benefits to the patient. The most widely performed invasive antireflux option remains laparoscopic antireflux surgery (LARS), even if other, less invasive, interventions have been suggested in the last few decades, including endoscopic transoral incisionless fundoplication (TIF), magnetic sphincter augmentation (LINX) or radiofrequency therapy (Stretta). Due to the different mechanisms underlying rGERD, the most effective strategy can vary, and it should be tailored to each patient. The aim of this paper is to review the different management options available to successfully deal with rGERD.

Proton pump inhibitor therapy reverses endoscopic features of fibrosis in eosinophilic esophagitis

BACKGROUND

Long-standing inflammation leads to esophageal remodeling with stricture formation in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). The ability of proton pump inhibitors (PPI) to reverse endoscopic features of fibrosis is still unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effect of a short course of PPI treatment in reducing endoscopic findings indicative of esophageal fibrosis in EoE patients.

METHODS

Cross-sectional analysis of the EoE CONNECT registry. Patients who received PPI to induce EoE remission were evaluated. Endoscopic features were graded using the EoE Endoscopic Reference Score (EREFS), with rings and strictures indicating fibrosis. Results were compared to those from patients treated with swallowed topic corticosteroids (STC).

RESULTS

Clinico-histological remission was achieved in 83/166 adult patients treated with PPI (50%) and in 65/79 (82%) treated with STC; among responders, 60 (36%) and 57 (72%) patients respectively achieved deep histological remission (<5 eosinophils/hpf). At baseline, mean±SD EREFS was lower in patients treated with PPI compared to those who received STC (p < 0.001). Short term treatment significantly reduced EREFS scores in patients treated either with PPI or STC as well as rings and strictures. Among patients treated with PPI, deep histological remission (<5 eosinophils/hpf) provided further reduction in total EREFS score.

CONCLUSION

Effective PPI therapy for EoE significantly reduced endoscopic esophageal fibrosis in the short term.

Efficacy of proton pump inhibitor therapy for eosinophilic oesophagitis in 630 patients: results from the EoE connect registry

BACKGROUND

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are the most commonly used first-line therapy for patients with eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE). However, many aspects related to PPIs in EoE are still unknown.

AIMS

To assess the effectiveness of PPI therapy for EoE in real-world practice.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study collected data on PPI efficacy from the multicentre EoE CONNECT database. Clinical remission was defined as a decrease of ≥50% in dysphagia symptom score; histological remission was defined as a peak eosinophil count below 15 eosinophils per high-power field. Factors associated with effectiveness of PPI therapy were identified by binary logistic regression multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

Overall, 630 patients (76 children) received PPI as initial therapy (n = 600) or after failure to respond to other therapies (n = 30). PPI therapy achieved eosinophil density below 15 eosinophils per high-power field in 48.8% and a decreased symptom score in 71.0% of patients. More EoE patients with an inflammatory rather than stricturing phenotype accomplished clinico-histological remission after PPI therapy (OR 3.7; 95% CI, 1.4-9.5); as well as those who prolonged treatment length from 8 to 12 weeks (OR 2.7; 95% CI, 1.3-5.3). After achieving clinico-histological remission of EoE, PPI dosage reduction was effectively maintained in 69.9% of patients, but tended to be less effective among those with a stricturing phenotype.

CONCLUSIONS

Inflammatory EoE phenotype and treatment duration up to 12 weeks correlated with greater chance for inducing remission of EoE. A stricturing phenotype decreased response rates to PPI therapy both initially and in the long term.

Proton pump inhibitors for upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) remains a public health burden with a persistent high mortality despite advances in modern day management. Proton pump inhibitors (PPI) as medical therapy is an attractive adjuvant to endoscopic treatment in UGIB but the method and dose of PPI therapy remains controversial. This chapter aims to describe the current evidence addressing acute PPI use in the management of UGIB. It will explore the evidence behind the timing, the dosage and the mode of administration of PPI during initial UGIB management, prior to and immediately following endoscopy, as well as in the short-term following discharge.

Dexlansoprazole and Esomeprazole Do Not Affect Bone Homeostasis in Healthy Postmenopausal Women

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Epidemiological studies have associated proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy with osteoporotic fractures, but it is not clear if PPIs directly cause osteoporosis. We evaluated the effect of dexlansoprazole and esomeprazole on bone turnover, bone mineral density (BMD), true fractional calcium absorption (TFCA), serum and urine levels of minerals, and levels of parathyroid hormone (PTH) in healthy postmenopausal women.

METHODS

We performed a prospective, multicenter, double-blind study of 115 healthy, postmenopausal women (45 to 75 years of age) from November 4, 2010, through August 7, 2014. Women were randomly assigned to groups given dexlansoprazole (60 mg), esomeprazole (40 mg), or placebo daily for 26 weeks. We measured plasma levels of procollagen type 1 N-terminal propeptide (P1NP) and C-terminal telopeptide of type 1 collagen (CTX) at 0 (baseline), 13, and 26 weeks. Primary outcomes were percent change in P1NP and CTX between weeks 0 and 26. We also measured changes in serum and urine levels of mineral, BMD, PTH (all subjects), and TFCA (n = 30).

RESULTS

Between baseline and week 26, there were no significant within-group differences in markers of bone turnover; there was a nonsignificant increase in CTX levels in the dexlansoprazole group (0.12 ng/mL). The esomeprazole and dexlansoprazole groups had significantly increased levels of P1NP (18.2% and 19.2%, respectively) and CTX (22.0% and 27.4%, respectively) at week 26 compared with the placebo group, although these values remained within normal ranges. There were no statistically significant differences between groups in serum or urine levels of minerals, BMD, or PTH at week 26. PPI therapy did not reduce TFCA.

CONCLUSIONS

In a prospective study of postmenopausal women, we found significant increases in markers of bone turnover in women given PPI therapy compared with women given placebo, but levels remained within the normal reference range. We found no significant differences among groups in changes in BMD, PTH, serum or urine levels of minerals, or TFCA. Our findings indicate that 26 weeks of treatment with a PPI has no clinically meaningful effects on bone homeostasis. Clinicaltrials.gov no: NCT01216293.

Interchangeable Use of Proton Pump Inhibitors Based on Relative Potency

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

Proton pump inhibitor-refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease: challenges and solutions

A significant percentage of patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) will not respond to proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy. The causes of PPI-refractory GERD are numerous and diverse, and include adherence, persistent acid, functional disorders, nonacid reflux, and PPI bioavailability. The evaluation should start with a symptom assessment and may progress to imaging, endoscopy, and monitoring of esophageal pH, impedance, and bilirubin. There are a variety of pharmacologic and procedural interventions that should be selected based on the underlying mechanism of PPI failure. Pharmacologic treatments can include antacids, prokinetics, alginates, bile acid binders, reflux inhibitors, and antidepressants. Procedural options include laparoscopic fundoplication and LINX as well as endoscopic procedures, such as transoral incisionless fundoplication and Stretta. Several alternative and complementary treatments of possible benefit also exist.

Recent Advances in the Pharmacological Management of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease

The management of proton pump inhibitor-refractory GERD (rGERD) is a challenge in clinical practice. Since up to one-third of patients with typical GERD symptoms (heartburn and/or acid regurgitation) are not satisfied with proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy, new drug development targeting different pathophysiologies of GERD is imperative. At present, no other drugs serve as a more potent acid suppression agent than PPIs. As an add-on therapy, histamine type-2 receptor antagonists, alginates, prokinetics and transient lower esophageal sphincter relaxation inhibitors have some impact on the subgroups of rGERD, but greater effectiveness and fewer adverse effects for widespread use are required. Visceral hypersensitivity also contributes to the perception of GERD symptoms, and neuromodulators including antidepressants play a role in this category. Esophageal pH-impedance monitoring helps to distinguish functional heartburn from true GERD, and psychologic medication and cognitive behavior therapy are further therapy options instead of PPIs.

Practical considerations in the management of proton-pump inhibitors

Proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) are one of the most active ingredients prescribed in Spain. In recent decades there has been an overuse of these drugs in both outpatient clinics and hospitals that has lead to a significant increase in healthcare spending and to an increase in the risk of possible side effects. It is important for health professionals to know the accepted indications and the correct doses for the use of these drugs. On the market there are different types of PPI: omeprazole, pantoprazole, lansoprazole, rabeprazole and esomeprazole. Omeprazole is the oldest and most used PPI, being also the cheapest. Although there are no important differences between PPIs in curing diseases, esomeprazole, a new-generation PPI, has proved to be more effective in eradicating H. pylori and in healing severe esophagitis compared to other PPIs. In recent years the use of generic drugs has spread; these drugs have the same bioavailability than the original drugs. In the case of PPIs, the few comparative studies available in the literature between original and generic drugs have shown no significant differences in clinical efficacy.

Therapeutic Response to Twice-daily Rabeprazole on Health-related Quality of Life and Symptoms in Patients with Refractory Reflux Esophagitis: A Multicenter Observational Study

Objective To investigate the effect of twice-daily rabeprazole doses on health-related quality of life in refractory patients. Methods and Patients Reflux esophagitis patients with an insufficient response to once-daily proton pump inhibitor therapy (Los Angeles Classification grade A-D) received rabeprazole 10 mg or 20 mg twice daily for 8 weeks. The health-related quality of life (SF-8™) and symptoms, using the Frequency Scale for the Symptoms of Gastroesophageal reflux disease, were evaluated before treatment and at weeks 4 and 8. Endoscopy was performed at baseline and at weeks 8 and 32 where possible. The rabeprazole dose was determined by the attending physician. Results There were 1,796 patients analyzed for the efficacy of the twice-daily treatment. Of these cases, 1,462 were treated with rabeprazole 10 mg twice daily, and 334 were treated with rabeprazole 20 mg twice daily. The factors that affected the selection of the twice-daily rabeprazole dose by physicians were evaluated, and as expected, "endoscopic findings when treatment was started" had a strong effect on the selection of the rabeprazole dose. With both regimens, health-related quality of life and subjective symptoms were significantly improved at weeks 4 and 8 compared to baseline (p<0.001). The recurrence rate of erosive esophagitis at week 32 was 9.7% in rabeprazole twice daily-treated patients and 28.4% in proton pump inhibitor (PPI) once daily-treated patients. Both regimens were well tolerated. Conclusion Twice-daily treatment with rabeprazole improved the subjective symptoms and health-related quality of life in patients with refractory reflux esophagitis more effectively than the standard once-daily dose.

Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for gastroesophageal reflux disease 2015

As an increase in gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) has been reported in Japan, and public interest in GERD has been increasing, the Japanese Society of Gastroenterology published the Evidence-based Clinical Practice Guidelines for GERD (1st edition) in 2009. Six years have passed since its publication, and there have been a large number of reports in Japan concerning the epidemiology, pathophysiology, treatment, and Barrett's esophagus during this period. By incorporating the contents of these reports, the guidelines were completely revised, and a new edition was published in October 2015. The revised edition consists of eight items: epidemiology, pathophysiology, diagnosis, internal treatment, surgical treatment, esophagitis after surgery of the upper gastrointestinal tract, extraesophageal symptoms, and Barrett's esophagus. This paper summarizes these guidelines, particularly the parts related to the treatment for GERD. In the present revision, aggressive proton pump inhibitor (PPI) maintenance therapy is recommended for severe erosive GERD, and on-demand therapy or continuous maintenance therapy is recommended for mild erosive GERD or PPI-responsive non-erosive GERD. Moreover, PPI-resistant GERD (insufficient symptomatic improvement and/or esophageal mucosal break persisting despite the administration of PPI at a standard dose for 8 weeks) is defined, and a standard-dose PPI twice a day, change in PPI, change in the PPI timing of dosing, addition of a prokinetic drug, addition of rikkunshito (traditional Japanese herbal medicine), and addition of histamine H2-receptor antagonist are recommended for its treatment. If no improvement is observed even after these treatments, pathophysiological evaluation with esophageal impedance-pH monitoring or esophageal manometry at an expert facility for diseases of the esophagus is recommended.

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.

Comparative efficacy of esomeprazole and omeprazole: Racemate to single enantiomer switch

Background

Both omeprazole and its S enantiomer (esomeprazole) have been available and used to treat  symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and conditions associated with excessive stomach acid secretion for more than a decade. Controversy exists over improved efficacy of S enantiomer (esomeprazole) over parent racemate (omeprazole). However, a comparison of the clinical outcomes of these products may reveal the rationale for switching from the racemate to single enantiomer. Since enantiomers of omeprazole are equipotent, we compared the outcomes of equal doses of each product to see if both actually differ in their efficacy’s or the reported superiority of S enantiomer is just a dose effect.

Methods

A web search was carried out for randomized controlled trials with head-to-head comparisons of omeprazole and S-omeprazole. The data were abstracted and after calculating theodd ratios (OR) for the outcomes reported in each study, the combined overall odd ratios (OR’) were estimated. The random effect inverse variance method with omeprazole as the reference (OR” = 1) was used.

Results

Out of 1171 studies, 14 were deemed eligible. There was no significant difference in the therapeutic success between omeprazole and S-omeprazole as a part of triple therapy for the treatment of H. pylori in both intention-to-treat (OR’, 1.06; CI, 0.83, 1.36; p = 0.63) as well as per-protocol analysis (OR’, 1.07; CI, 0.84, 1.36; p = 0.57). For the treatment of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, S-omeprazole was significantly but marginally superior to the racemate (OR’, 1.18; CI, 1.01, 1.38; p = 0.04). The two products were equipotent in all metrics used to assess intragastric pH except for the % patients maintaining a 24 h gastric pH above 4 (1.57; CI, 1.04, 2.381; p = 0.03).

Conclusion

The therapeutic benefit of chiral switch of omeprazole is questionable considering the substantially greater economic burden involved.

Diagnosis and therapy of non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is defined as bleeding proximal to the ligament of Treitz in the absence of oesophageal, gastric or duodenal varices. The clinical presentation varies according to the intensity of bleeding from occult bleeding to melena or haematemesis and haemorrhagic shock. Causes of UGIB are peptic ulcers, Mallory-Weiss lesions, erosive gastritis, reflux oesophagitis, Dieulafoy lesions or angiodysplasia. After admission to the hospital a structured approach to the patient with acute UGIB that includes haemodynamic resuscitation and stabilization as well as pre-endoscopic risk stratification has to be done. Endoscopy offers not only the localisation of the bleeding site but also a variety of therapeutic measures like injection therapy, thermocoagulation or endoclips. Endoscopic therapy is facilitated by acid suppression with proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy. These drugs are highly effective but the best route of application (oral vs intravenous) and the adequate dosage are still subjects of discussion. Patients with ulcer disease are tested for Helicobacter pylori and eradication therapy should be given if it is present. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs have to be discontinued if possible. If discontinuation is not possible, cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors in combination with PPI have the lowest bleeding risk but the incidence of cardiovascular events is increased.

Comparison of different regimens of proton pump inhibitors for acute peptic ulcer bleeding

BACKGROUND

Treatment with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) improves clinical outcomes in patients with peptic ulcer bleeding. However, the optimal dose and route of administration of PPIs remains controversial.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy of different regimens of PPIs in the management of acute peptic ulcer bleeding using evidence from direct comparison randomized controlled trials (RCTs).We specifically intended to assess the differential effect of the dose and route of administration of PPI on mortality, rebleeding, surgical intervention, further endoscopic haemostatic treatment (EHT), length of hospital stay, transfusion requirements and adverse events.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL (in The Cochrane Library 2010, Issue 3), MEDLINE and EMBASE (from inception to September 2010) and proceedings of major gastroenterology meetings (January 2000 to September 2010), without language restrictions. Original investigators were contacted to request missing data.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs that compared at least two different regimens of the same or a different PPI in patients with acute peptic ulcer bleeding, diagnosed endoscopically.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently selected studies, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We synthesized data using the Mantel-Haenszel random-effects method and performed multivariate meta-regression with random permutations based on Monte Carlo simulation. We measured heterogeneity with the I² statistic and Cochrane Q test and assessed publication bias with funnel plots and Egger's test. We graded the overall quality of evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty two RCTs were included; risk of bias was high in 17 and unclear in 5. The main analysis included 13 studies (1716 patients) comparing "high" dose regimens (72-hour cumulative dose > 600 mg of intravenous PPI) to other doses; there was no significant heterogeneity for any clinical outcome. We found low quality evidence that did not exclude a potential reduction or increase in mortality, rebleeding, surgical interventions or endoscopic haemostatic treatment (EHT) with "high" dose regimens. For mortality, pooled risk ratio (RR) was 0.85 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.47 to 1.54); pooled risk difference (RD) was 0 more deaths per 100 patients treated with "high" dose (95% CI from 1 fewer to 2 more deaths per 100 treated). For rebleeding, pooled RR was 1.27 (95% CI 0.96 to 1.67); pooled RD was 2 more rebleeding events per 100 patients treated with "high" dose (95% CI from 0 fewer to 5 more rebleeding events per 100 treated). For surgical interventions, pooled RR was 1.33 (95% CI 0.63 to 2.77); pooled RD was 1 more surgical intervention per 100 patients treated with "high" dose (95% CI from 1 fewer to 2 more surgical interventions per 100 treated). For further EHT, pooled RR was 1.39 (95% CI 0.88 to 2.18), pooled RD was 2 more events per 100 patients treated with "high" dose PPI (95% CI from 1 fewer to 5 more events per 100 treated). We found moderate quality evidence suggesting no important difference between the two regimens with regards to length of hospital stay (mean difference (MD) 0.26 days; 95% CI -0.08 to 0.6 days) or blood transfusion requirements (MD 0.05 units; 95% CI -0.21 to 0.3 units). There was visual and statistical evidence of "inverse" publication bias for mortality (missing small studies with favourable outcomes for "high" dose), but not for any other outcome. The results were similar for all subgroup analyses (according to risk of bias, geographical location, route of administration for non-"high" dose regimens, continuous infusion vs. bolus administration for intravenous non-"high" regimens group), sensitivity analyses (restriction to patients who had EHT for high risk stigmata, use of different dose thresholds for comparative regimens) and post hoc analyses (inclusion of all studies (N = 22) that compared at least two PPI regimens with different cumulative 72 hour doses; restriction of the previous analysis to patients who had EHT for high risk stigmata). Meta-regression analysis did not show any statistically significant associations between treatment effect (for the outcomes of mortality, rebleeding and surgical intervention) and the three study-level factors that were assessed (geographical location (Asia versus not Asia), route of PPI administration (intravenous versus oral), within-study ratio among the 72-hour cumulative doses of the two PPI regimens).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence for concluding superiority, inferiority or equivalence of high dose PPI treatment over lower doses in peptic ulcer bleeding.

Acid-suppressive therapy is associated with spontaneous bacterial peritonitis in cirrhotic patients: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Proton pump inhibitors (PPI) and H(2) -receptor antagonists (H2RA) are frequently prescribed in hospitalized patients with cirrhosis. There are conflicting reports regarding the role of acid-suppressive therapy in predisposing hospitalized patients with cirrhosis to spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP). The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the association between acid-suppressive therapy and the risk of SBP in hospitalized patients with cirrhosis.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE and four other databases for subject headings and text words related to SBP and acid-suppressive therapy. All observational studies that investigated the risk of SBP associated with PPI/H2RA therapy and utilized SBP as an endpoint were considered eligible. Data from the identified studies were combined by means of a random-effects model and odds ratios (ORs) were calculated.

RESULTS

Eight studies (n = 3815 patients) met inclusion criteria. The risk of hospitalized cirrhotic patients developing SBP increased when using acid-suppressive therapy. The risk was greater with PPI therapy (n = 3815; OR 3.15, 95% confidence interval 2.09-4.74) as compared to those on H2RA therapy (n = 562; OR 1.71, 95% confidence interval 0.97-3.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Pharmacologic acid suppression was associated with a greater risk of SBP in hospitalized patients with cirrhosis. Cirrhotic patients receiving a PPI have approximately three times the risk of developing SBP compared with those not receiving this medication. Prospective studies may help clarify this relationship and shed light on the mechanism(s) by which acid-suppressive therapy increases the risk of SBP in hospitalized patients with cirrhosis.

Association between proton pump inhibitor therapy and Clostridium difficile infection in a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

In the past decade, there has been a growing epidemic of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI). During this time, use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) has increased exponentially. We evaluated the association between PPI therapy and the risk of CDI by performing a meta-analysis.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE and 4 other databases for subject headings and text words related to CDI and PPI in articles published from 1990 to 2010. All observational studies that investigated the risk of CDI associated with PPI therapy and used CDI as an end point were considered eligible. Two investigators screened articles independently for inclusion criteria, data extraction, and quality assessment; disagreements were resolved based on consensus with a third investigator. Data were combined by means of a random-effects model and odds ratios were calculated. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were performed based on study design and antibiotic use.

RESULTS

Thirty studies (25 case-control and 5 cohort) reported in 29 articles met the inclusion criteria (n = 202,965). PPI therapy increased the risk for CDI (odds ratio, 2.15, 95% confidence interval, 1.81-2.55), but there was significant heterogeneity in results among studies (P < .00001). This association remained after subgroup and sensitivity analyses, although significant heterogeneity persisted among studies.

CONCLUSIONS

PPI therapy is associated with a 2-fold increase in risk for CDI. Because of the observational nature of the analyzed studies, we were not able to study the causes of this association. Further studies are needed to determine the mechanisms by which PPI therapy might increase risk for CDI.

Meta-analysis: proton pump inhibitor use and the risk of community-acquired pneumonia

BACKGROUND

Observational studies examining the association between proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use and risk of community-acquired pneumonia are conflicting.

AIM

To assess systematically the association between risk of community-acquired pneumonia and PPI use in adults.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL databases between 1988 and January 2010. Two reviewers independently selected studies based on eligibility criteria and extracted data. Included studies evaluated adults (> or =18 years) who took PPIs as an out-patient. The primary outcome was community-acquired pneumonia. Only observational studies with a comparison arm were included.

RESULTS

Over 2600 citations were reviewed. Six studies were included. All were nested case-control studies. Meta-analysis found an increased risk of community-acquired pneumonia associated with PPI use [OR 1.36 (95% CI 1.12-1.65)]; significant heterogeneity remained (I(2) 92%, P < 0.001). In exploratory subgroup analysis, short duration of use was associated with an increased odds of community-acquired pneumonia [OR 1.92 (95% CI 1.40-2.63), I(2) 75%, P = 0.003], whereas chronic use was not [OR 1.11 (95% CI 0.90-1.38), I(2) 91%, P < 0.001], a significant interaction (P < 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

Heterogeneity precluded interpretation of the summary statistic. Exploratory analysis revealed that duration of PPI use may impact the risk of community-acquired pneumonia, a finding that should be explored in future studies.

Systematic review: standard- and double-dose proton pump inhibitors for the healing of severe erosive oesophagitis -- a mixed treatment comparison of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

No randomized controlled trial (RCT) has compared all European-licensed standard- and double-dose PPIs for the healing of severe erosive oesophagitis.

AIM

To compare the effectiveness of licensed doses of PPIs for healing severe erosive oesophagitis (i.e. esomeprazole 40 mg, lansoprazole 30 mg, omeprazole 20 mg and 40 mg, pantoprazole 40 mg and rabeprazole 20 mg).

METHODS

Systematic review of CENTRAL, EMBASE and MEDLINE for RCTs in patients with erosive oesophagitis (completed October 2008). Endoscopically verified healing rates at 4 and 8 weeks were extracted and re-calculated if not analysed by intention-to-treat. A mixed treatment comparison was used to combine direct treatment comparisons with indirect trial evidence while maintaining randomization. Odds ratios (OR) are reported compared to omeprazole 20 mg.

RESULTS

A total of 3021 papers were identified in the literature search; 12 were of sufficient quality to be included in the analysis. Insufficient data were available to included rabeprazole. Esomeprazole 40 mg was found to provide significantly higher healing rates at 4 weeks [OR 1.84, 95% Credible Interval (95% CrI): 1.50 to 2.22] and 8 weeks (OR 1.91, 95% CrI: 1.13 to 2.88). No other PPI investigated had significantly higher healing rates than omeprazole 20 mg.

CONCLUSION

Esomeprazole 40 mg consistently demonstrates higher healing rates compared with licensed standard- and double-dose PPIs.

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

AIM

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

External validation of a measurement tool to assess systematic reviews (AMSTAR)

BACKGROUND

Thousands of systematic reviews have been conducted in all areas of health care. However, the methodological quality of these reviews is variable and should routinely be appraised. AMSTAR is a measurement tool to assess systematic reviews.

METHODOLOGY

AMSTAR was used to appraise 42 reviews focusing on therapies to treat gastro-esophageal reflux disease, peptic ulcer disease, and other acid-related diseases. Two assessors applied the AMSTAR to each review. Two other assessors, plus a clinician and/or methodologist applied a global assessment to each review independently.

CONCLUSIONS

The sample of 42 reviews covered a wide range of methodological quality. The overall scores on AMSTAR ranged from 0 to 10 (out of a maximum of 11) with a mean of 4.6 (95% CI: 3.7 to 5.6) and median 4.0 (range 2.0 to 6.0). The inter-observer agreement of the individual items ranged from moderate to almost perfect agreement. Nine items scored a kappa of >0.75 (95% CI: 0.55 to 0.96). The reliability of the total AMSTAR score was excellent: kappa 0.84 (95% CI: 0.67 to 1.00) and Pearson's R 0.96 (95% CI: 0.92 to 0.98). The overall scores for the global assessment ranged from 2 to 7 (out of a maximum score of 7) with a mean of 4.43 (95% CI: 3.6 to 5.3) and median 4.0 (range 2.25 to 5.75). The agreement was lower with a kappa of 0.63 (95% CI: 0.40 to 0.88). Construct validity was shown by AMSTAR convergence with the results of the global assessment: Pearson's R 0.72 (95% CI: 0.53 to 0.84). For the AMSTAR total score, the limits of agreement were -0.19+/-1.38. This translates to a minimum detectable difference between reviews of 0.64 'AMSTAR points'. Further validation of AMSTAR is needed to assess its validity, reliability and perceived utility by appraisers and end users of reviews across a broader range of systematic reviews.

Medical management of gastroesophageal reflux disease

Gastroesophageal reflux disease is a common worldwide disorder. Most patients have typical symptoms of heartburn, regurgitation and exacerbation of symptoms with large meal volumes, fatty meals, recumbency or bending forward. Patients who show typical symptoms for under 10 years may be treated empirically with lifestyle and dietary modifications plus acid-suppressing medications. The recent decrease in cost, established safety and wide availability of proton pump inhibitors make them the best choice for monotherapy. Other medical therapies include antacids, H(2) receptor antagonists and prokinetic agents. Patients who have alarm symptoms or long-standing symptoms should have an esophagoscopy to evaluate for complications of reflux. Patients who do not respond to therapy should have a test to confirm the diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux disease.

Systematic review: proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) for the healing of reflux oesophagitis - a comparison of esomeprazole with other PPIs

BACKGROUND

No randomized controlled trial has compared all the licensed standard dose proton pump inhibitors in the healing of reflux oesophagitis.

AIM

To compare the effectiveness of esomeprazole with licensed standard dose proton pump inhibitors for healing of reflux oesophagitis (i.e. lansoprazole 30 mg, omeprazole 20 mg, pantoprazole 40 mg and rabeprazole 20 mg).

METHODS

Systematic review of CENTRAL, BIOSIS, EMBASE and MEDLINE for randomized controlled trials in patients with reflux oesophagitis. Searching was completed in February 2005. Data on endoscopic healing rates at 4 and 8 weeks were extracted and re-analysed if not analysed by intention-to-treat. Meta-analysis was conducted using a fixed effects model.

RESULTS

Of 133 papers identified in the literature search, six were of sufficient quality to be included in the analysis. No studies were identified comparing rabeprazole with esomeprazole. A meta-analysis of healing rates of esomeprazole 40 mg compared with standard dose proton pump inhibitors gave the following results: at 4 weeks [relative risk (RR) 0.92; 95% CI: 0.90, 0.94; P < 0.00001], and 8 weeks (RR 0.95; 95% CI: 0.94, 0.97; P < 0.00001). Publication bias did not have a significant impact on the results. The results were robust to changes in the inclusion/exclusion criteria and using a random effects model.

CONCLUSION

Esomeprazole consistently demonstrates higher healing rates when compared with standard dose proton pump inhibitors.

Effect of acid suppression on molecular predictors for esophageal cancer

BACKGROUND

Gastroesophageal reflux disease is a risk factor for the development of Barrett's esophagus and esophageal adenocarcinoma. The effect of antireflux therapy on the incidence of esophageal adenocarcinoma is unknown. Acid exposure in vitro induces hyperproliferation via a cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) dependent mechanism. Epidemiologic and animal studies suggest that COX inhibitors decrease the incidence of esophageal adenocarcinoma.

AIM

To study the differential effect of complete compared with incomplete acid suppression on proliferation, apoptosis, and COX-2.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Fifty-one patients with Barrett's esophagus who underwent pH monitoring were divided into two groups according to their DeMeester score: 32 acid-suppressed patients (group 1) and 19 patients with abnormally high acid exposure (group 2). Slides from biopsies taken 3 months before and 4 and 12 months after pH monitoring were stained for Mcm2, COX-2, c-myc, and cleaved caspase-3 (marker of apoptosis).

RESULTS

There was no evidence of a difference between the two groups in terms of age, gender ratio, medication, dysplasia status, and the expression levels of any marker before pH monitoring. In group 1, Mcm2 expression decreased in the luminal surface and throughout the tissue 12 months after monitoring when compared with the two previous time points (P < 0.05). The levels of COX-2 increased overtime (P < 0.01 in group 1, not significant in group 2). There was no correlation between Mcm2 and COX-2 expression. Acid suppression had no effect on c-myc or apoptosis.

CONCLUSION

Long-term acid suppression reduces proliferation in Barrett's esophagus samples but has no advantageous effect on c-myc, apoptosis, or COX-2.

Pharmacogenomics and individualized drug therapy

Pharmacogenetics deals with inherited differences in the response to drugs. The best-recognized examples are genetic polymorphisms of drug-metabolizing enzymes, which affect about 30% of all drugs. Loss of function of thiopurine S-methyltransferase (TPMT) results in severe and life-threatening hematopoietic toxicity if patients receive standard doses of mercaptopurine and azathioprine. Gene duplication of cytochrome P4502D6 (CYP2D6), which metabolizes many antidepressants, has been identified as a mechanism of poor response in the treatment of depression. There is also a growing list of genetic polymorphisms in drug targets that have been shown to influence drug response. A major limitation that has heretofore moderated the use of pharmacogenetic testing in the clinical setting is the lack of prospective clinical trials demonstrating that such testing can improve the benefit/risk ratio of drug therapy.

Clinical response (remission of symptoms) in erosive and non-erosive gastro-oesophageal reflux disease

Complete remission of symptoms and prevention of symptomatic recurrence are among the main therapeutic aims in gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD). In this context, a potent pharmacologic inhibition of gastric acid secretion plays a central role. The goal of antisecretory treatment in GORD is to maintain an intragastric pH greater than 4.0 for the longest possible time. This is best achieved by the administration of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). Tolerability and safety of different PPIs are similar and consistently high, but therapeutic efficacy may differ among them. Esomeprazole appears to achieve an intragastric pH greater than 4.0 for a larger number of hours compared with any other PPI. This is associated with a greater therapeutic efficacy of esomeprazole compared with omeprazole, lansoprazole and pantoprazole in both complete remission of symptoms and prevention of symptomatic recurrence in GORD. This review provides evidence-based recommendations for the treatment of GORD-related symptoms in clinical practice.

Pharmacokinetics of proton pump inhibitors in children

The use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) has become widespread in children and infants for the management of paediatric acid-related disease. Pharmacokinetic profiles of only omeprazole and lansoprazole have been well characterised in children over 2 years of age with acid-related diseases. Few data have been recently published regarding the pharmacokinetics of pantoprazole in children, and none are available for rabeprazole or esomeprazole. The metabolism of PPI enantiomers has never been studied in the paediatric population. A one-compartment model best describes the pharmacokinetic behaviour of omeprazole, lansoprazole and pantoprazole in children, with important interindividual variability for each pharmacokinetic parameter. Like adults, PPIs are rapidly absorbed in children following oral administration; the mean time to reach maximum plasma concentration varies from 1 to 3 hours. Since these agents are acid labile, their oral formulations consist of capsules containing enteric-coated granules. No liquid formulation is available for any of the PPIs. Thus, for those patients unable to swallow capsules, extemporaneous liquid preparations for omeprazole and lansoprazole have been reported; however, neither the absolute nor the relative bioavailabilities of these oral formulations have been studied in children. Intravenous formulations are available for omeprazole (in Europe), lansoprazole and pantoprazole. PPIs are rapidly metabolised in children, with short elimination half-lives of around 1 hour, similar to that reported for adults. All PPIs are extensively metabolised by the liver, primarily by cytochrome P450 (CYP) isoforms CYP2C19 and CYP3A4, to inactive metabolites, with little unchanged drug excreted in the urine. Similar to that seen in adults, the absolute bioavailability of omeprazole increases with repeated dosing in children; this phenomenon is thought to be due to a combination of decreased first-pass elimination and reduced systemic clearance. The apparent clearance (CL/F) of omeprazole, lansoprazole and pantoprazole appears to be faster for children than for adults. A higher metabolic capacity in children as well as differences in the extent of PPI bioavailability are most likely responsible for this finding. This may partly account for the need in children for variable and sometimes considerably greater doses of PPIs, on a per kilogram basis, than for adults to achieve similar plasma concentrations. Furthermore, no studies have been able to demonstrate a statistically significant correlation between age and pharmacokinetic parameters among children. Despite the small number of very young infants studied, there is some evidence for reduced PPI metabolism in newborns. The limited paediatric data regarding the impact of CYP2C19 genetic polymorphism on PPI metabolism are similar to those reported for adults, with poor metabolisers having 6- to 10-fold higher area under the concentration-time curve values compared with extensive metabolisers. Finally, because a pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic relationship exists for PPIs, the significant interindividual variability in their disposition may partly explain the wide range of therapeutic doses used in children. Further studies are needed to better define the pharmacokinetics of PPIs in children <2 years of age.

Developments in the inhibition of gastric acid secretion

Understanding the physiology of gastric acid secretion and the pathophysiology of acid-related diseases (e.g. gastrooesophageal reflux and peptic ulcer) has led to the development of numerous ways to decrease acid exposure. Pharmacologically one can try to neutralize secreted acid by antacids, prevent stimulation of the parietal cell, improve mucosal defences and block the functioning of the proton pump. Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) inhibit the final step of acid secretion, and are currently the most potent acid inhibitors. Major therapeutic improvement within the PPI class appears unlikely, as agents in this class share similar chemistry, mode of action, and pharmacokinetic profiles. New approaches that block acid secretion are now being developed. Gastrin (CCK2) receptor antagonists and potassium-competitive acid blockers (P-CABs) are in clinical development.

Medikament�se Therapie der gastro�sophagealen Refluxkrankheit

Acid-suppressant drugs predominate in the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Proton pump inhibitors (PPI) are the first-line choice in both reflux esophagitis and nonerosive reflux disease (NERD). H(2)-blockers play a minor role and should not be used in erosive esophagitis. Other drugs such as mucosa-protective compounds, prokinetics, and antacids do not play a role, either alone oder in combination with acid suppressants. Proton pump inhibitors should also be used in maintenance therapy which is not associated with significant risks. There is a general trend toward on-demand treatment (already established in NERD). In cases refractory to therapy, the choice of drug should be critically analyzed (in case H(2)-blockers are used), and increasing the PPI dose is recommended; persistent symptoms should lead to reevaluation of the diagnosis. Asymptomatic Barrett's esophagus represents no indication for treatment, which in symptomatic patients is carried out in the normal fashion.

Twice-daily standard dose of omeprazole achieves the necessary level of acid inhibition for Helicobacter pylori eradication. A randomized controlled trial using standard and double doses of omeprazole in triple therapy

Antibiotic resistances and level of acid inhibition may affect the outcome of eradicating regimens for H. pylori. To evaluate the impact of different degrees of acid inhibition on the efficacy of triple treatment, we treated 323 patients with H. pylori infection with clarithromycin and tinidazole plus omeprazole, either 20 mg bid or 40 mg bid. Gastric biopsies and antimicrobial susceptibility testing were performed. Eradication was evaluated by means of breath test. Eradication rates were (intention to treat and per protocol) 83.3 and 84.3% in patients receiving 40 mg omeprazole and 81.9 and 84.1% in those receiving 80 mg omeprazole. Culture was successful in 218 patients (68.7%). Resistance to clarithromycin and metronidazole were found in 13.7 and 20.6%, respectively. Eighteen further patients (8.2%) presented double resistance. Resistance was comparable across the two groups. In resistant patients the eradication rate was significantly lower (66.6% [95% CI, 56-76%], vs 86% [95% CI, 78-91%]; P = 0.001). Antibiotic resistance (OR, 2.73; 95% CI, 1.4-5.3) and smoking (OR, 2.68; 95% CI, 1.4-5.2) were independent predictors of eradication failure. Omeprazole, 20 mg bid, achieves the optimal acid inhibition in H. pylori eradication. Increasing antisecretory activity does not significantly enhance cure rates.

[Reflux esophagitis]

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is one of the most prevalent diseases in the industrialized countries. Approximately 15-25% of adults suffer from reflux symptoms, characterized mainly by heartburn and/or regurgitation. Currently, antisecretory medication with proton pump inhibitors (PPI) or antireflux surgery are the established options for GERD-treatment. PPI are the therapeutic gold standard in acute, long-term or on-demand therapy of GERD. Since PPI do not restore the antireflux barrier but merely suppress acid secretion a life-long tablet adherence is required in most cases. In view of limitations of PPI and the potential risks of laparoscopic surgery, several endoscopic antireflux techniques were developed and may evolve as a valuable third option. However, so far objective long-term data are lacking for choosing the appropriate patient who will benefit most from endoluminal antireflux therapy.

CYP2C19Polymorphism and Proton Pump Inhibitors

Proton pump inhibitors such as omeprazole (esomeprazole), lansoprazole, pantoprazole and rabeprazole are eliminated by the hepatic route and the polymorphic CYP2C19 is mainly involved in their metabolism. In different populations three phenotypes have been identified: extensive metabolizers, poor metabolizers and individuals carrying one wild type and one mutant allele (het extensive metabolizers). Systemic exposure to the proton pump inhibitors as expressed by the AUC (area under the plasma level time profiles) is 5-12-times higher in poor metabolizers than in extensive metabolizers. As the pharmacodynamic response (elevation of intragastric pH) to the proton pump inhibitors is related directly to their AUC, a much higher pH can be monitored over 24 hr in poor metabolizers than in extensive metabolizers. Furthermore, clinical efficacy of all proton pump inhibitors depend on maintaining intragastric pH above certain threshold levels and significantly higher eradication rates of Helicobacter pylori have been observed in patients of the poor metabolizers and het extensive metabolizers phenotype if compared to extensive metabolizers. Likewise, limited data suggest that proton pump inhibitors-induced healing rates in gastro-oesophageal reflux disease are apparently higher in poor metabolizers/het extensive metabolizers than in extensive metabolizers of CYP2C19. Therefore initial genotyping for this enzyme and higher dosage in extensive metabolizers is likely to improve the clinical efficacy of proton pump inhibitors.

Les nouveaux inhibiteurs de la pompe à protons, un progrès dans la prise en charge des maladies acido-peptiques ?

EFFECTS AND INCONVENIENCIES OF THE OLDER PRODUCTS: The proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are now universally considered the treatment of choice for management of gastric-acid-related diseases, mainly gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GERD). These drugs share similar properties: general structure, acid-activation step, covalent binding to the proton pump of the gastric parietal cell via the production of covalent disulphide bonds, relatively stable inhibition of H+,K+-ATPase. However, the older PPIs (omeprazole, lansoprazole et pantoprazole) have notable limitations. These drugs exhibit substantial interpatient variability and may have significant interactions with other drugs. These first-generation PPIs also do not achieve a rapid and sustained suppression of gastric acid, leading to the development of new acid-pump antagonists. The new-generation PPIs, esomeprazole and rabeprazole, offer several pharmacokinetic advantages: lower oxidative hepatic metabolism rate via the CYP 2C19 reducing the activity variations due to genetic polymorphisms and decreasing the risk of significant drug-drug interactions (advantages mainly for rabeprazole), lower metabolic clearance of esomeprazole (S-enantiomer of omeprazole) increasing plasma concentrations and acid suppression of this new PPI, higher accumulation of rabeprazole in the parietal cell due to its higher pKa. Gastric pH studies and therapeutic trials have demonstrated significant advantages of esomeprazole and rabeprazole compared with the older PPIs, which omeprazole is the prototype: a greater inhibition of acid secretion, a more rapid onset of action to provide reflux symptoms relief over 24 hours with lower GERD-related cost for rabeprazole, a sustained acid suppression, cost-effectiveness advantages for esomeprazole in the healing and maintenance of erosive esophagitis compared with lansoprazole, reduced potential for clinically significant drug-drug interactions with rabeprazole compared with omeprazole and esomeprazole. Due to their properties, esomeprazole and rabeprazole are the best candidates for "on demand" treatment of GERD.

Report of the Asia-Pacific consensus on the management of gastroesophageal reflux disease

This report summarizes the conclusions and recommendations of a panel of gastroenterologists practising in the Asia-Pacific region. The group recognized that although gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is less common and milder in endoscopic severity in Asia than in the West, there is nevertheless data to suggest an increasing frequency of the disease. During a 2-day workshop, the evidence for key issues in the diagnosis and clinical strategies for the management of the disease was evaluated, following which the recommendations were made and debated. The consensus report was presented at the Asia-Pacific Digestive Week 2003 in Singapore for ratification. Upper gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy is the gold standard for the diagnosis of erosive GERD. There is no gold standard for the diagnosis of non-erosive GERD (NERD). Diagnosis therefore relies on symptoms, a positive 24-h pH study or a response to a course of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) treatment. The goals of treatment for GERD are to heal esophagitis, relieve symptoms, maintain the patient free of symptoms, improve quality of life and prevent complications. The PPI are the most effective medical treatment. Following initial treatment, on-demand therapy may be effective in some patients with NERD or mild (GI) erosive esophagitis. Anti-reflux surgery by a competent surgeon could achieve a similar outcome, although there is an operative mortality of 0.1-0.8%. The decision is dependent on the patient's preference and the availability of surgical expertise. Currently, endoscopic treatment should be performed only in the context of a clinical trial. Treatment of patients with typical GERD symptoms without alarm features in primary care could begin with PPI for 2 weeks followed by a further 4 weeks before going to on-demand therapy.

The challenges of Barrett's -- suppression, symptoms or surveillance

Barrett's esophagus is a metaplastic change related to esophageal reflux of acidic gastric contents. Its presence is associated with an increased risk of adenocarcinoma. The data behind our current clinical strategies are, however, based on limited evidence. This document considers the sort of information that should be discussed with patients to allow them to make their own choices regarding therapeutic strategies.