Second-line treatment for failure to eradicate Helicobacter pylori: a randomized trial comparing four treatment strategies

ACG Clinical Guideline: Treatment of Helicobacter pylori Infection

ABSTRACT

Helicobacter pylori is a prevalent, global infectious disease that causes dyspepsia, peptic ulcer disease, and gastric cancer. The American College of Gastroenterology commissioned this clinical practice guideline (CPG) to inform the evidence-based management of patients with H. pylori infection in North America. This CPG used Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology to systematically analyze 11 Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome questions and generate recommendations. Where evidence was insufficient or the topic did not lend itself to GRADE, expert consensus was used to create 6 key concepts. For treatment-naive patients with H. pylori infection, bismuth quadruple therapy (BQT) for 14 days is the preferred regimen when antibiotic susceptibility is unknown. Rifabutin triple therapy or potassium-competitive acid blocker dual therapy for 14 days is a suitable empiric alternative in patients without penicillin allergy. In treatment-experienced patients with persistent H. pylori infection, "optimized" BQT for 14 days is preferred for those who have not been treated with optimized BQT previously and for whom antibiotic susceptibility is unknown. In patients previously treated with optimized BQT, rifabutin triple therapy for 14 days is a suitable empiric alternative. Salvage regimens containing clarithromycin or levofloxacin should only be used if antibiotic susceptibility is confirmed. The CPG also addresses who to test, the need for universal post-treatment test-of-cure, and the current evidence regarding antibiotic susceptibility testing and its role in guiding the choice of initial and salvage treatment. The CPG concludes with a discussion of proposed research priorities to address knowledge gaps and inform future management recommendations in patients with H. pylori infection from North America.

Evolving Concepts in Helicobacter pylori Management

Helicobacter pylori is the most common chronic bacterial infection worldwide and the most significant risk factor for gastric cancer, which remains a leading cause of cancer-related death globally. H pylori and gastric cancer continue to disproportionately impact racial and ethnic minority and immigrant groups in the United States. The approach to H pylori case-finding thus far has relied on opportunistic testing based on symptoms or high-risk indicators, such as racial or ethnic background and family history. However, this approach misses a substantial proportion of individuals infected with H pylori who remain at risk for gastric cancer because most infections remain clinically silent. Moreover, individuals with chronic H pylori infection are at risk for gastric preneoplastic lesions, which are also asymptomatic and only reliably diagnosed using endoscopy and biopsy. Thus, to make a significant impact in gastric cancer prevention, a systematic approach is needed to better identify individuals at highest risk of both H pylori infection and its complications, including gastric preneoplasia and cancer. The approach to H pylori eradication must also be optimized given sharply decreasing rates of successful eradication with commonly used therapies and increasing antimicrobial resistance. With growing acceptance that H pylori should be managed as an infectious disease and the increasing availability of susceptibility testing, we now have the momentum to abandon empirical therapies demonstrated to have inadequate eradication rates. Molecular-based susceptibility profiling facilitates selection of a personalized eradication regimen without necessitating an invasive procedure. An improved approach to H pylori eradication coupled with population-level programs for screening and treatment could be an effective and efficient strategy to prevent gastric cancer, especially in minority and potentially marginalized populations that bear the heaviest burden of H pylori infection and its complications.

Optimizing Helicobacter pylori Treatment: An Updated Review of Empirical and Susceptibility Test-Based Treatments

As the rate of discovery of drug-resistant Helicobacter pylori cases increases worldwide, the relevant societies have updated their guidelines for primary eradication regimens. A promising strategy against drug-resistant H. pylori is tailored therapy based on the results of an antibiotic susceptibility test; however, it is difficult to apply this strategy to all cases. Although culture-based antibiotic susceptibility tests can assess resistance to any antimicrobial agent, their greatest disadvantage is the time required to draw a conclusion. In contrast, molecular-based methods, such as polymerase chain reaction, can rapidly determine the presence of resistance, although a single test can only test for one type of antimicrobial agent. Additionally, the limited availability of facilities for molecular-based methods has hindered their widespread use. Therefore, low-cost, minimally invasive, simple, and effective primary regimens are needed. Several studies have compared the efficacy of the latest primary eradication regimens against that of tailored therapies, and their results have shaped guidelines. This article reviews the latest research on empirical and tailored treatments for H. pylori infections. Evidence for the superiority of tailored therapy over empirical therapy is still limited and varies by region and treatment regimen. A network meta-analysis comparing different empirical treatment regimens showed that vonoprazan triple therapy provides a superior eradication effect. Recently, favorable results towards vonoprazan dual therapy have been reported, as it reached eradication levels similar to those of vonoprazan triple therapy. Both vonoprazan dual therapy and tailored therapy based on antibiotic susceptibility tests could contribute to future treatment strategies.

Current role of tailored therapy in treating Helicobacter pylori infections. A systematic review, meta-analysis and critical analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Recent guidelines dictate that all Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infected subjects should receive curative therapy. The efficacy of empirical regimens for H. pylori eradication might decline with bacterial, drug, and host factors. The necessity of a tailored therapy still remains controversial. Here we provide a meta-analysis of the current status of susceptibility-based (tailored) therapy in which susceptibility-based therapies were compared to the currently accepted choice of empiric therapy. In this rapidly closing era, neither the susceptibility nor empiric therapies were routinely optimized, such that we report the outcome of comparisons on the efficacy of unoptimized tailored vs. locally preferred empiric treatments.

METHODS

PubMed, Medline, and Embase databases were searched using suitable keywords. Individual and pooled odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using the fixed- or random-effects model as appropriate. Heterogeneity was calculated employing the Cochrane Q test and I² values, whereas the possibility of publication bias was examined by constructing funnel plots. Additionally, subgroup and sensitivity analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Thirty-four studies were included with a total of 9613 patients. Tailored therapy proved superior to empiric treatment [OR 2.07 (95% CI 1.53-2.79)]. However, tailored therapy achieved eradication rates >90% in only 15 (44%) studies and >95% in only 6 (17.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

Although tailored therapy performed better than empiric treatment, the lack of optimization of therapies failed to reliably achieve high cure rates (>90%). These results emphasize that H. pylori infection, like other infectious diseases, should utilize the principles of antimicrobial stewardship in relation to treatment guidance.

Tailored therapy for Helicobacter pylori eradication: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: Due to an increase in drug resistance, the eradication rate of H. pylori with empirical therapy has declined. Tailored therapy has been proposed as an alternative to standard empirical treatments. The necessity of personalized eradication therapy remains unclear. The aim of this study was to determine whether tailored therapy is superior to empirical therapy for H. pylori infection. Methods: We searched for eligible randomized controlled trials in the PubMed, Embase (Ovid), Wanfang, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases up to 10 December 2021. A random effects model comparing pooled relative risks (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) was applied in the meta-analysis. Results: Twenty-one studies were included in the meta-analysis. In the first-line treatment, tailored therapy was more effective than empirical therapy (RR, 1.14 [95% CI, 1.08-1.21], I2 = 72.2%). In the second-line therapy setting, the results did not reveal significant differences between the two treatments (RR, 1.05 [95% CI, 0.84-1.30], I2 = 80.6%). A similar result was observed in mixed second- and third-line treatments (RR, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.96-1.11], I2 = 0.0%). Regarding adverse events, no significant differences were found between the two treatments (RR, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.80-1.01], I2 = 35.7%). Most of the results were highly heterogeneous. Conclusion: A tailored approach might provide a better eradication rate than empirical methods in first-line treatment. There might be no obvious advantage in second-line or mixed second- and third-line treatments third-line treatment. Due to the high heterogeneity, the results should be interpreted with caution. Further clinical studies are needed and justified.

Empirical vs. Susceptibility-Guided Treatment of Helicobacter pylori Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Treating Helicobacter pylori infection according to antibiotic resistance has been frequently recommended. However, information on its real effectiveness is scarce.

Aim

The aim of this study is to perform a meta-analysis comparing empirical vs. susceptibility-guided treatment of H. pylori.

Methods

Selection of studies: Studies comparing empirical versus susceptibility-guided treatment were selected. Search strategy: electronic and manual up to August 2021. Data synthesis: by intention-to-treat (random-effects model).

Results

Overall, 54 studies were included (6,705 patients in the susceptibility-guided group and 7,895 in the empirical group). H. pylori eradication rate was 86 vs. 76%, respectively (RR: 1.12; 95% CI: 1.08-1.17; I 2: 83%). Similar results were found when only RCTs were evaluated (24 studies; RR: 1.16; 95% CI: 1.11-1.22; I 2: 71%) and when susceptibility testing was assessed by culture (RR: 1.12; 95% CI: 1.06-1.18) or PCR (RR: 1.14; 95% CI: 1.05-1.23). For first-line treatments (naïve patients; 30 studies), better efficacy results were obtained with the susceptibility-guided strategy (RR: 1.15; 95% CI: 1.11-1.20; I 2: 79%). However, for empirical first-line quadruple regimens, in particular (both with and without bismuth, excluding the suboptimal triple therapies), not based on CYP2C19 gene polymorphism, no differences in efficacy were found compared with the susceptibility-guided group (RR: 1.04; 95% CI: 0.99-1.09); this lack of difference was confirmed in RCTs (RR: 1.05; 95% CI: 0.99-1.12). For rescue therapies (13 studies, most 2nd-line), similar results were demonstrated for both strategies, including all studies (RR: 1.09; 95% CI: 0.97-1.22; I 2: 82%) and when only RCTs were considered (RR: 1.15; 95% CI: 0.97-1.36).

Conclusion

The benefit of susceptibility-guided treatment over empirical treatment of H. pylori infection could not be demonstrated, either in first-line (if the most updated quadruple regimens are prescribed) or in rescue therapies.

Second line therapy for Helicobacter pylori eradication: state of art

Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) is a Gram negative spiraliform bacterium who colonizes the human stomach. It is the most common cause of chronic gastritis, peptic ulcer, and gastric carcinoma. The eradication therapy is based on the combination of a proton pump inhibitor and several antibiotics such as amoxicillin, metronidazole, clarithromycin, levofloxacin or tetracycline. The most commonly used regimens for eradication in the first line are triple, sequential and concomitant therapy, despite the last European Guidelines suggesting a quadruple therapy already at the first attempt in areas with high resistance rates. However, the rise in antibiotic resistance is the main reason for a marked increase in first-line therapy failure. Clarithromycin resistancea , is especially acknowledged as the most important event resulting in failure. Up to 20% of patients are intended not to eradicate, therefore they will need a second line therapy. Currently, the most used rescue regimens are levofloxacin-based triple therapy and bismuth-containing quadruple therapy, despite guidelines suggesting to use a combination of antibiotics that have not been included in previous treatments. Nitazoxanide is a novel antibiotic with promising results. Additionally, an interesting field worth of investigation is the antibiotic susceptibility based approach, which could help to choose antibiotics with confirmed effectiveness in vitro. Analysis of antibiotic resistance may be performed by both bacterial culture and molecular biology techniques, able to detect point mutations conferring resistance. This is a particularly interesting approach, since it may personalize the therapy, thus optimizing the regimen and maximizing the probability of success.

Susceptibility-guided versus empirical treatment for Helicobacter pylori infection: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Empirical therapy for Helicobacter pylori infection is limited by increasing antibiotic resistance and suboptimal eradication rates. Studies of the relative effectiveness of susceptibility-guided therapy have produced conflicting results. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to determine whether susceptibility-guided therapy is superior to empirical therapy for H. pylori infection.

METHODS

We searched articles listed in PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science through May 25, 2020, RCTs comparing susceptibility-guided versus empirical therapy for H. pylori infection. Outcomes, including effectiveness and safety, were analyzed in a meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Our final analysis included 16 studies, comprising 2374 patients who received susceptibility-guided therapy and 2451 patients who received empirical treatment. In previously untreated subjects, susceptibility-guided therapy was slightly more effective than empirical therapy (intent to treat risk ratio [RR], 1.14; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.07-1.21; P < 0.0001, I²  = 75%). Susceptibility-guided therapy was superior to first-line clarithromycin-based triple therapy only when clarithromycin resistance exceeded 20% (RR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.07-1.30; P = 0.001, I²  = 81%). Susceptibility-guided therapy was not more effective than empirical quadruple therapy (RR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.92-1.13; P = 0.759, I²  = 80%). Three RCTs were performed exclusively among previously treated subjects, and were highly heterogeneous.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that susceptibility-guided treatment may be slightly superior to empirical first line triple therapy. Susceptibility- guided treatment does not appear to be superior to empirical first-line quadruple therapy or empirical rescue therapy.

Empirical or susceptibility-guided treatment for Helicobacter pylori infection? A comprehensive review

Although susceptibility-guided therapy is frequently recommended for Helicobacter pylori infection, the evidence available to date supporting this strategy is limited. The aim of the present article is to review the advantages and limitations of the susceptibility-guided and the empirical strategies to treat this infection. We performed a bibliographic search to identify studies investigating H. pylori susceptibility-guided therapy. Culture is not the only way to assess antibiotic resistance, as different polymerase chain reaction-based approaches have been developed as alternative methods. For detecting H. pylori antimicrobial resistance, a molecular approach based on a stool sample might enable more convenient, time-saving methods. Unfortunately, the antimicrobial susceptibility cannot be obtained in all cases. Furthermore, antibiotic susceptibility testing in clinical practice yields useful information only for a few antibiotics: clarithromycin, metronidazole, and quinolones. In addition, susceptibility towards clarithromycin and metronidazole in vitro does not necessarily lead to eradication in vivo. In the case of H. pylori therapy failure, we should not re-administer any of the antibiotics against which H. pylori has probably become resistant. Our updated meta-analysis showed that susceptibility-guided treatment is not better than empirical treatment of H. pylori infection in first-line therapy if the most updated quadruple regimens are empirically prescribed, and similar efficacy results were also demonstrated with the two strategies for second-line therapy. Cumulative H. pylori eradication rate with several successive rescue therapies empirically prescribed reaches almost 100%. Finally, the studies that have evaluated the cost-effectiveness of the susceptibility-guided treatment have achieved contradictory results. In summary, we can conclude that the evidence is too limited to support the generalized use of susceptibility-guided therapy for H. pylori treatment in routine clinical practice, either as first-line or as rescue treatment. Nevertheless, it would be recommended that susceptibility tests are performed routinely, even before prescribing first-line treatment, in specialized centers with an interest in H. pylori management.

Efficacy of a tailored PCR-guided triple therapy in the treatment of Helicobacter pylori infection

INTRODUCTION

Resistance to clarithromycin and fluoroquinolones is increasing in many countries. We aimed to assess the efficacy of a tailored PCR-guided triple therapy versus an empirical triple therapy in the treatment of H. pylori infection.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

French multicenter prospective open-label randomized study to assess H. pylori and resistance to clarithromycin and levofloxacin with GenoType HelicoDR® test. Patients of the control group were treated with empirical therapy of proton pump inhibitor (PPI), amoxicillin, and clarithromycin for 7 days. Patients of the experimental group with clarithromycin-susceptible strains, clarithromycin-resistant/levofloxacin-susceptible strains, and with clarithromycin-resistant/levofloxacin-resistant strains received tailored therapy of PPI, amoxicillin, and clarithromycin for 7 days, PPI, amoxicillin, and levofloxacin for 10 days, and PPI, amoxicillin, and metronidazole for 14 days, respectively. H. pylori eradication was assessed by ¹³C urea breath test at least 28 days after the end of treatment.

RESULTS

We included 526 patients: 260 (49.4%) were randomly assigned to empirical triple therapy and 266 (50.6%) to tailored therapy. Clarithromycin and levofloxacin resistances were 23.3% and 12.8%, respectively. Follow-up urea breath test was available for 415 (78.9%) patients. Tailored therapy was superior to empirical therapy in terms of eradication (85.5% vs. 73.1%, RR=1.85, 95%CI [1.25-2.78], p=0.003). Findings were consistent in the susceptibility analysis using multiple imputation (RR=1.61, 95%CI [1.14-2.27], P=0.003) and per-protocol analysis (RR=1.89, 95%CI [0.25-2.78], p=0.003).

CONCLUSION

In a country with a high level of clarithromycin resistance, tailored PCR-guided therapy was superior to empirical triple therapy for H. pylori eradication (https://www.ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01168063).

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Risk factors of rescue bismuth quadruple therapy failure for Helicobacter pylori eradication

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Failure of bismuth quadruple therapy for Helicobacter pylori eradication is frequently observed. To increase the eradication rate, comprehensive analyses need to be performed regarding risk factors of bismuth quadruple therapy failure based on complete standard culture and antimicrobial susceptibility testing results.

METHODS

Patients with history of failed first therapy who had H. pylori colonies isolated from culture and successful minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) test were enrolled. Esomeprazole, bismuth, metronidazole, and tetracycline (quadruple) therapies for 7 or 14 days were given. Eradication rate, treatment compliance, adverse events, and risk factors for the failure of bismuth quadruple therapy were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total 54 patients were enrolled. Overall eradication rate in the present study was 88.8%. The eradication rate for cases with metronidazole resistance such as MIC 8-16 μg/mL or 16-32 μg/mL was 92.8% (13/14). For cases with high level metronidazole resistance (MIC > 32 μg/mL), the eradication rate was only 60% (6/10). Multivariate analysis regarding compliance, treatment duration, age > 60, three kinds of metronidazole MICs, tetracycline MIC > 4 μg/mL, adverse events and any other parameters, "metronidazole resistance, high level (MIC > 32 μg/mL)" was the only independent risk factor for eradication failure (P = 0.007).

CONCLUSION

For cases with metronidazole resistance at MIC > 32 μg/mL, rescue therapy other than bismuth-containing quadruple therapy is needed.

Seven days triple therapy for eradication of Helicobacter pylori does not alter the disease activity of patients with inflammatory bowel disease

Background/Aims

The influences of Helicobacter pylori eradication therapy on the disease course of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are still unclear. We therefore conducted a multicenter, retrospective cohort study to evaluate the safety of H. pylori eradication therapy for IBD patients.

Methods

IBD patients with H. pylori eradication from 2005 to 2015 (eradication group) and control patients (non-eradication group; 2 paired IBD patients without H. pylori eradication matched with each eradicated patient) were included. IBD exacerbation (increased/additional IBD drug or IBD-associated hospitalization/surgery) and disease improvement based on the physicians’ global assessment were investigated at baseline, and at 2 and 6 months after eradication or observation.

Results

A total of 429 IBD (378 ulcerative colitis, 51 Crohn’s disease) patients, comprising 144 patients in the eradication group and 285 patients in the non-eradication group, were enrolled at 25 institutions. IBD exacerbation was comparable between groups (eradication group: 8.3% at 2 months [odds ratio, 1.76; 95% confidence interval, 0.78–3.92; P=0.170], 11.8% at 6 months [odds ratio, 1.60; 95% confidence interval, 0.81–3.11; P=0.172]). Based on the physicians’ global assessment at 2 months, none of the patients in the eradication group improved, whereas 3.2% of the patients in the non-eradication group improved (P=0.019). Multivariate analysis revealed that active disease at baseline, but not H. pylori eradication, was an independent factor for IBD exacerbation during 2 months’ observation period. The overall eradication rate was 84.0%–comparable to previous reports in non-IBD patients.

Conclusions

H. pylori eradication therapy does not alter the short-term disease activity of IBD.

Helicobacter pylori management in ASEAN: The Bangkok consensus report

Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection remains to be the major cause of important upper gastrointestinal diseases such as chronic gastritis, peptic ulcer, gastric adenocarcinoma, and mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue lymphoma. H. pylori management in ASEAN: the Bangkok consensus report gathered key opinion leaders for the region to review and evaluate clinical aspects of H. pylori infection and to develop consensus statements, rationales, and grades of recommendation for the management of H. pylori infection in clinical practice in ASEAN countries. This ASEAN Consensus consisted of 34 international experts from 10 ASEAN countries, Japan, Taiwan, and the United States. The meeting mainly focused on four issues: (i) epidemiology and disease association; (ii) diagnostic tests; (iii) management; and (iv) follow-up after eradication. The final results of each workshop were presented for consensus voting by all participants. Statements, rationale, and recommendations were developed from the available current evidence to help clinicians in the diagnosis and treatment of H. pylori and its clinical diseases.

Appropriateness of Repeating Helicobacter pylori Culture and Susceptibility Testing Following Failure of Individualized Antibiotic Therapy

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines recommend direct Helicobacter pylori culture and antibiotic susceptibility testing following 2 failed eradication attempts. If this process is followed and yet subsequent treatment is unsuccessful, it is unclear whether susceptibility testing should be repeated. This is the first study to examine the appropriateness of repeated H. pylori culture and susceptibility testing following failure of individualized treatment.

METHODS

Between 2007 and 2014, consecutive patients who underwent at least 2 upper gastrointestinal endoscopies with H. pylori culture and susceptibility testing at our institution following several treatment failures were retrospectively identified. Antibiotic susceptibility was recorded and linked to demographic data.

RESULTS

A total of 68 cultures from 34 patients were included (12 (35.3%) men, 41.4 ± 16.6 years), and 20 (58.8%) cultures had a different antibiotic susceptibility profile on repeat testing (8 (23.5%) with new susceptibility and 13 (38.2%) with new resistance). Acquired resistance to clarithromycin, levofloxacin and metronidazole was observed in 9 (26.5%), 2 (5.9%) and 10 (29.4%) cultures, respectively. Subjects with resistance to ≤1 antibiotic at baseline were more likely to develop resistance to at least 1 antibiotic on subsequent culture, compared to subjects with resistance to ≥2 antibiotics at baseline (13 (100%) vs. 5 (23.8%), p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Repeating H. pylori culture and susceptibility testing usually yields new antimicrobial susceptibility data. However, the clinical usefulness of this approach remains unclear.

Current Status of Five Different Regimens for Empiric First-Line Helicobacter pylori Eradication in Turkey

BACKGROUND/AIMS

This study aimed at comparing the efficacy and tolerability of 5 different regimens for Helicobacter pylori eradication in recent years.

METHODS

H. pylori-positive patients with dyspeptic symptoms were included and separated into 5 groups. The 'PAC group' was given pantoprazole, amoxicillin and clarithromycin for 14 days. The 'PAM group' was given pantoprazole, amoxicillin and metronidazole for 14 days. The 'bismuth-containing group' was given pantoprazole, bismuth subsalicylate, tetracycline and metronidazole for 14 days. The 'sequential group' was given pantoprazole and amoxicillin for 5 days, followed by pantoprazole, tetracycline, and metronidazole for the next 5 days. The 'concomitant group' was given pantoprazole, amoxicillin, tetracycline, and metronidazole for 10 days. Eradication was assessed through the urea breath test on 6 weeks after eradication therapy.

RESULTS

The eradication rate of intention-to-treat/per protocol were 42/48.3% in the PAC group, 52/54.2% in the PAM group, 62/77.5% in the bismuth group, 71/80.7% in the sequential group and 72/83.7% in concomitant group. The frequency of mild and moderate side effects was similar between groups.

CONCLUSION

The concomitant and sequential therapies are an effective treatment for H. pylori. Bismuth-containing therapy is superior to conventional triple therapies; however, the eradication rate is not satisfactory. In our country, conventional triple therapies are not effective for eradication.

ACG Clinical Guideline: Treatment of Helicobacter pylori Infection

Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection is a common worldwide infection that is an important cause of peptic ulcer disease and gastric cancer. H. pylori may also have a role in uninvestigated and functional dyspepsia, ulcer risk in patients taking low-dose aspirin or starting therapy with a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory medication, unexplained iron deficiency anemia, and idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura. While choosing a treatment regimen for H. pylori, patients should be asked about previous antibiotic exposure and this information should be incorporated into the decision-making process. For first-line treatment, clarithromycin triple therapy should be confined to patients with no previous history of macrolide exposure who reside in areas where clarithromycin resistance amongst H. pylori isolates is known to be low. Most patients will be better served by first-line treatment with bismuth quadruple therapy or concomitant therapy consisting of a PPI, clarithromycin, amoxicillin, and metronidazole. When first-line therapy fails, a salvage regimen should avoid antibiotics that were previously used. If a patient received a first-line treatment containing clarithromycin, bismuth quadruple therapy or levofloxacin salvage regimens are the preferred treatment options. If a patient received first-line bismuth quadruple therapy, clarithromycin or levofloxacin-containing salvage regimens are the preferred treatment options. Details regarding the drugs, doses and durations of the recommended and suggested first-line and salvage regimens can be found in the guideline.

Systematic review and meta-analysis: triple therapy combining a proton-pump inhibitor, amoxicillin and metronidazole for Helicobacter pylori first-line treatment

BACKGROUND

Due to clarithromycin resistance, the current efficacy of Helicobacter pylori first-line triple therapies including clarithromycin is low. It seems reasonable to explore alternative clarithromycin-free therapies.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of triple therapy including a proton-pump inhibitor (PPI), amoxicillin and metronidazole (PAM) as first-line H. pylori therapy by systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

Studies evaluating PAM in adult patients were included. Meta-analyses comparing PAM with other treatments were performed. The primary endpoint was the ITT eradication rate for H. pylori first-line treatment. In addition, sensitivity analyses ascertained the effects of treatment schedule, dosage and duration on cure rates.

RESULTS

Ninety-four studies (8061 patients) were included. Meta-analyses comparing PAM versus clarithromycin-including triple therapies showed a significant difference in favour of PPI, amoxicillin and clarithromycin (PAC) (70% versus 77.1%; OR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.56-0.88) and PPI, metronidazole and clarithromycin (PMC) therapy (66.4% versus 77.7%; OR = 0.55, 95% CI = 0.39-0.76). Sensitivity analyses showed a similar efficacy of PAM versus PAC when drugs were administered for 14 days (80% versus 84%; OR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.44-1.12). There were not enough studies to perform further comparisons. Number of antibiotic doses (P = 0.012), length of treatment (P < 0.001) and use of high metronidazole doses (P = 0.021) were related to higher cure rates in the sensitivity analysis including observational studies.

CONCLUSIONS

PAM was less efficacious than clarithromycin-including triple therapies. However, its efficacy was similar to that of PAC when drugs were administered for 14 days, although ITT cure rates did not reach 90%. Use of 14 day, thrice daily and high-metronidazole-dose PAM treatments markedly increased the cure rate.

Systematic review: third-line susceptibility-guided treatment for Helicobacter pylori infection

BACKGROUND

Susceptibility-guided therapies (SGTs) have been proposed as preferable to empirical rescue treatments after two treatment failures. The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating the effectiveness and efficacy of SGT as third-line therapy.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed in multiple databases. Studies reporting cure rates of Helicobacter pylori with SGT in third-line therapy were selected. A qualitative analysis describing the current evidence and a pooled mean analysis summarizing the cure rates of SGT in third-line therapy was performed.

RESULTS

No randomized controlled trials or comparative studies were found. Four observational studies reported cure rates with SGT in third-line treatment, and three studies which mixed patients with second- and third-line treatment also reported cure rates with SGT. The majority of the studies included the patients when culture had been already obtained, and so the effectiveness of SGT and empirical therapy has never been compared. A pooled mean analysis including four observational studies (283 patients) showed intention-to-treat and per-protocol eradication rates with SGT of 72% (95% confidence interval 56-87%; I(2) : 92%) and 80% (95% confidence interval 71-90%; I(2) : 80%), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

SGT may be an acceptable option as rescue treatment. However, cure rates are, at best, moderate and this approach has never been compared with a well-devised empirical therapy. The evidence in favor of SGT as rescue therapy is currently insufficient to recommend its use.

Comparison of the efficacy of culture-based tailored therapy for Helicobacter pylori eradication with that of the traditional second-line rescue therapy in Korean patients: a prospective single tertiary center study

OBJECTIVE

The effectiveness of Helicobacter pylori therapies has declined with an increase in antibiotic resistance. To overcome this problem, the efficacy of tailored H. pylori eradication therapy based on antimicrobial susceptibility testing was compared with that of empirical second-line rescue regimens.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Patients who had persistent H. pylori infection after the first eradication were recommended to undergo culture for determining the minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) via gastroscopy, which increased the cost by 300%. Fourteen-day esomeprazole, tripotassium dicitrate bismuthate, metronidazole and tetracycline (EBMT) therapy or esomeprazole, moxifloxacin and amoxicillin (MEA) therapy was performed according to the results of antibiotic susceptibility testing. In case of refusal to undergo culture, the participants were treated with either 14-day empirical EBMT or MEA regimen for second eradication after explaining the complexity, side effects and costs associated with each regimen. This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.Gov (NCT 02349685).

RESULTS

In the 219 patients included, the intention to treat (ITT) and per protocol (PP) eradication rates was 75.3% and 79.8% in the 14-day EBMT group (n = 89), 70.8% and 72.4% in the 14-day MEA group (n = 89) and 87.8% and 100.0% in the 14-day tailored therapy group (n = 41), respectively. Based on the PP analysis, the 14-day tailored therapy group showed a significantly higher eradication rate than the 14-day EBMT or MEA group (both p ≤ 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Tailored therapy based on H. pylori culture and MIC test could be an option as a second-line eradication regimen in the presence of high level of antimicrobial resistance.

Update on the Diagnosis and Management of Helicobacter pylori Infection in Adults

Treatment of Helicobacter pylori infection is becoming increasingly challenging due largely to the rising rates of antimicrobial resistance and to the relative complexity of treatment regimens. If a reliable test to assess the antimicrobial sensitivity/resistance of H. pylori was readily available, treatment would be more focused and-presumably-more effective. However, antimicrobial sensitivity testing is difficult to obtain in most parts of the United States. Therefore, physicians have to rely on clinical judgment in selecting treatment regimens for their infected patients. The aims of this review are to summarize recent treatment recommendations and to examine available evidence for how we might improve on our current treatment selections. Information on this review is directed primarily toward physicians practicing in the United States.

Systematic review and meta-analysis: susceptibility-guided versus empirical antibiotic treatment for Helicobacter pylori infection

BACKGROUND

The cure rate of standard triple therapy for Helicobacter pylori infection is unacceptably low. Susceptibility-guided therapies (SGTs) have been proposed as an alternative to standard empirical treatments. The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating the efficacy of SGTs.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed in multiple databases. Randomized controlled trials comparing cure rates of SGTs versus those of empirical therapy were selected and analysed separately for first- and second-line treatments. A meta-analysis was performed using risk ratio (RR) and number needed to treat (NNT) to measure the effect.

RESULTS

Twelve studies were included in the meta-analysis. In first-line treatment, SGT was more efficacious than empirical 7-10 day triple therapy (RR 1.16, 95% CI 1.10-1.23, I (2) = 33%; NNT = 8). Most studies used a 7-10 day triple therapy and randomized the patients after endoscopy and/or culture, thus precluding the comparison of SGT versus non-invasive testing and empirical treatment in clinical practice. For second-line therapy, only four studies were found. Results were highly heterogeneous and no significant differences were found (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.82-1.51, I (2) = 87%).

CONCLUSIONS

Once endoscopy and culture have been performed, SGT is superior to empirical 7 or 10 day triple therapy for first-line treatment. Further studies are needed to evaluate the effectiveness of SGT in clinical practice, especially when compared with currently recommended first-line quadruple therapies.

Factors affecting first-line triple therapy of Helicobacter pylori including CYP2C19 genotype and antibiotic resistance

BACKGROUND

Emerging evidence shows that the eradication rate of proton pump inhibitor (PPI)-based triple therapy for the first-line treatment of Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) has decreased.

AIMS

To clarify the trend of eradication rate of PPI-based triple therapy and to assess the related factors in Korea during the past decade.

METHODS

We prospectively prescribed the triple regimen for seven days (PPI + amoxicillin 1.0 g + clarithromycin 500 mg, twice a day) from March 2003 to May 2013 in 2,202 H. pylori-positive patients. Antibiotic susceptibility tests were performed by the agar dilution method, and the CYP2C19 genotype was determined by the PCR method.

RESULTS

In the past decade, the annual eradication rate showed a decreasing trend in intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses (P = 0.001, both). The antibiotic resistance was increased to amoxicillin (7.2-17.2%, P = 0.003) and clarithromycin (23.2-37.3%, P = 0.010) during the study period. The poor metabolizer genotype of CYP2C19 showed a high eradication rate compared to the extensive metabolizer (86.8 vs. 78.2%, P = 0.035). In addition, age ≥ 50 years, female gender, BMI < 25 kg/m(2), amoxicillin and/or clarithromycin resistance were associated with treatment failure on univariate analysis. However, on multivariate analysis, clarithromycin resistance was the only significant factor for treatment failure (OR, 12.76; 95% CI, 5.58-29.18; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

An increase in clarithromycin resistance has led to decreased eradication rate of first-line triple therapy, and; hence, a new strategy is needed to improve the eradication rate of H. pylori.

Different Antibiotic No Culture Eradicating (DANCE) strategy: an easy way to manage H. pylori eradication

Treatment of Helicobacter pylori infection is becoming a very relevant problem especially in industrialized Countries. Although different therapeutic regimens are currently available, treatment failure remains a growing problem in daily medical practice. Several factors could play a role in the eradication failure, but the most relevant are antibiotic resistance and patient's compliance. While Helicobacter pylori resistance to amoxicillin is rare, clarithromycin and metronidazole resistance varies significantly from close to zero up to 25%. However, metronidazole in vitro resistance exhibits a lower impact on eradication success because resistance in vitro does not reflect that in vivo. Specific guidelines have then been published, mostly based on antibiotic resistance among different geographic areas. Basically, first-line and second-line regimens have been well defined; concerning third-line treatment Maastricht III guidelines suggest to adopt a culture-based approach. Culture is, however, expensive, invasive and available only in few specialized centres. An alternative approach may be to use an empirical strategy, based on the avoidance of repeating similar eradicating schemes in the same patients during the course of different eradicating regimens. For this approach we propose the acronym DANCE (Different Antibiotic No Culture Eradicating) strategy. When correctly applied, this approach showed to reach successful eradication in up to 99.5% of Helicobacter pylori-positive patients.

Comparison of the Eradication Rate between 1- and 2-Week Bismuth-Containing Quadruple Rescue Therapies for Helicobacter pylori Eradication

Background/Aims

First-line therapies against Helicobacter pylori, including proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) plus two antibiotics, may fail in up to 20% of patients. 'Rescue' therapy is usually needed for patients who failed the first-line treatment. This study evaluated the eradication rate of bismuth-containing quadruple rescue therapy over a 1- or 2-week period.

Methods

We prospectively investigated 169 patients with a persistent H. pylori infection after the first-line triple therapy, which was administered from October 2008 to March 2010. The patients were randomized to receive a 1- or 2-week quadruple rescue therapy (pantoprazole 40 mg b.i.d., tripotassium dicitrate bismuthate 300 mg q.i.d., metronidazole 500 mg t.i.d., and tetracycline 500 mg q.i.d.). After the 'rescue' therapy, the eradication rate, compliance, and adverse events were evaluated.

Results

The 1-week group achieved 83.5% (71/85) and 87.7% (71/81) eradication rates in the intention to treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) analyses, respectively. The 2-week group obtained 87.7% (72/84) and 88.9% (72/81) eradication rate in the ITT and PP analyses, respectively. There was no significant difference in the eradication rate, patient compliance or rate of adverse events between the two groups.

Conclusions

One-week bismuth-containing quadruple therapy can be as effective as a 2-week therapy after the failure of the first-line eradication therapy.

Comparison of 10 day bismuth quadruple therapy with high-dose metronidazole or levofloxacin for second-line Helicobacter pylori therapy: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

This prospective study was designed to compare the efficacies of levofloxacin-containing and high-dose metronidazole-containing quadruple therapies after failure of standard triple therapies.

METHODS

A total of 150 Helicobacter pylori-infected patients were enrolled in our study and randomly assigned to levofloxacin-containing quadruple therapy (EBTL group) (40 mg of esomeprazole twice daily, 300 mg of bismuth subcitrate four times daily, 500 mg of tetracycline four times daily and 500 mg of levofloxacin once daily for 10 days) (n = 76) or high-dose metronidazole-based quadruple therapy (EBTM group) (40 mg of esomeprazole twice daily, 300 mg of bismuth subcitrate four times daily, 500 mg of tetracycline four times daily and 500 mg of metronidazole four times daily for 10 days) (n = 74). Follow-up endoscopy or urea breath test was done 16 weeks later to assess the treatment response. Patients' responses, CYP2C19 genotypes and antibiotic resistances were also examined. All participants, caregivers and those assessing the outcomes were blinded to group assignment.

RESULTS

Intention-to-treat analysis revealed that both groups showed similar eradication rates: EBTL, 78.9% (60/76) (95% CI 69.7%-88.1%) and EBTM, 79.7% (59/74) (95% CI 70.5%-88.7%) [risk ratio (RR) 0.97, 95% CI 0.44-2.14]. Per-protocol results were EBTL = 87.0% (60/69) (95% CI 79.4%-94.9%) and EBTM = 90.8% (59/65) (95% CI 83.8%-97.8%) (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.23-2.0). We did not find significant differences in compliance (RR 0.5, 95% CI 0.54-2.3) and adverse events (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.54-2.3) between the two groups. Logistic regression analysis showed that only compliance was an important predictor for eradication failure. CYP2C19 polymorphism did not influence the eradicating effect.

CONCLUSIONS

The 10 day bismuth quadruple therapies with high-dose metronidazole or levofloxacin were effective even in areas with high resistance. These two therapies were equally safe and tolerated. Besides this, the metronidazole-containing therapy was cheaper. So it is persuasive that high-dose metronidazole-containing quadruple therapy could be a good choice for second-line H. pylori eradication in areas with high resistance.

Efficacy of a therapeutic strategy for eradication of Helicobacter pylori infection

AIM: To determine the efficacy of our therapeutic strategy for Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) eradication and to identify predictive factors for successful eradication.

METHODS: From April 2006 to June 2010, we retrospectively assessed 2428 consecutive patients (1025 men, 1403 women; mean age 55 years, age range 18-92 years) with gastric histology positive for H. pylori infection referred to our unit for 13-C urea breath test (UBT), after first-line therapy with proton pump inhibitor (PPI) b.i.d. + amoxicillin 1 g b.i.d. + clarithromycin 500 mg b.i.d. for 7 d. Patients who were still positive to UBT were recommended a second-line therapy (PPI b.i.d. + amoxicillin 1 g b.i.d. + tinidazole 500 mg b.i.d. for 14 d). Third choice treatment was empirical with PPI b.i.d. + amoxicillin 1 g b.i.d. + levofloxacin 250 mg b.i.d. for 14 d.

RESULTS: Out of 614 patients, still H. pylori-positive after first-line therapy, only 326 and 19 patients respectively rechecked their H. pylori status by UBT after the suggested second and third-line regimens. “Per protocol” eradication rates for first, second and third-line therapy were 74.7% (95% CI: 72.7%-76.4%), 85.3% (95% CI: 81.1%-89.1%) and 89.5% (95% CI: 74.9%-103%) respectively. The overall percentage of patients with H. pylori eradicated after two treatments was 97.8% (95% CI: 97.1%-98.4%), vs 99.9% (95% CI: 99.8%-100%) after three treatments. The study found that eradication therapy was most effective in patients with ulcer disease (P < 0.05, P = 0.028), especially in those with duodenal ulcer. Smoking habits did not significantly affect the eradication rate.

CONCLUSION: First-line therapy with amoxicillin and clarithromycin produces an H. pylori eradication rate comparable or superior to other studies and second-line treatment can still be triple therapy with amoxicillin and tinidazole.

Rescue Therapy for Helicobacter pylori Infection 2012

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

Eradication of H. pylori Infection: the Challenge is on if Standard Therapy Fails

The recommended standard triple therapy for Helicobacter pylori infection, consisting of a proton pump inhibitor, clarithromycin and amoxicillin or metronidazole, can reach eradication rates in over 90%. However, in recent years resistance to antibiotics has increased and eradication rates have declined. Approximately one in five patients need a second-line therapy because eradication therapy fails. Second-line treatment with a bismuth-based quadruple therapy leads to satisfactory eradication rates, but bismuth is not available in many countries. Modern second- and third-line treatments can only be successful if they are adapted to the current resistance situation and they need to evolve continuously. Moreover, pharmacodynamic effects due to polymorphisms of the cytochrome P450 system are important. Because therapy adherence is significantly associated with therapy success, modern regimens if possible should be easy to take and well tolerated. In recent years, various novel salvage-therapy regimens have been investigated that significantly improve treatment options.

Management of Helicobacter pylori infection

Helicobacter pylori is the cause of peptic ulcer, gastric cancer and gastric lymphoma. Diagnosis of H. pylori infection can be made using invasive and noninvasive tests. Invasive tests based on endoscopy, such as histology, are recommended when a gastric malignancy is suspected. Alternatively, noninvasive tests, such as the urea breath test and stool tests are useful for H. pylori diagnosis and follow-up. Triple therapy with either amoxicillin or metronidazole, clarithromycin and proton pump inhibitor given twice daily for 7-14 days is the recommended first-line treatment, after having checked the individual clarithromycin antimicrobial susceptibility. A triple therapy with levofloxacin, amoxicillin and proton pump inhibitor for 10-14 days should be used as second-line treatment, where the strains are susceptible to fluoroquinolone. Alternatively, bismuth-based quadruple therapy is recommended.

Rabeprazole can overcome the impact of CYP2C19 polymorphism on quadruple therapy

OBJECTIVES

The prospective study was designed to clarify the impact of CYP2C19 on quadruple therapies and survey the efficacies of rabeprazole-based quadruple therapy for Helicobacter pylori infection after failure of standard triple therapies.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From January 2007 to March 2009, 1055 H. pylori-infected patients received standard triple regimens (proton-pump inhibitor (PPI), clarithromycin, and amoxicillin). Helicobacter pylori eradication was achieved in 865 (81.9%) subjects. One hundred ninety eradication-failure patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive a 7-day eradication therapy. Ninety-six patients were treated with esomeprazole-based quadruple rescue therapies (EB), while 94 patients were treated with rabeprazole-based quadruple rescue therapies (RB). Follow-up endoscopy was done 16 weeks later to assess the treatment response. Patients' responses, CYP2C19 genotypes, and antibiotics resistances were also examined.

RESULTS

Intention-to-treat analysis revealed that RB had better eradication rates than EB (EB: 72.9%; 95% CI: 64.9-80.9% and RB: 78.7%; 95% CI 72.5-84.9%) (p value = .543). Per-protocol results were EB = 75.3%; 95% CI: 70.3-80.3% and RB = 85.1%; 95% CI: 80.6-89.6% (p value = .0401). Both regimens had similar compliance (p value = 0.155) and adverse events (p value = 0.219). We also surveyed those patients without resistance of any antibiotics. RB still showed better outcome than EB. Our data showed that esomeprazole-based regimen and CYP2C19 Hom EM genotype were important predictors for eradication failure.

CONCLUSIONS

In quadruple therapy, rabeprazole-based regimens had better efficacy than esomeprazole-based regimens. CYP2C19 polymorphism also played an important role in quadruple therapy. It seems advisable to change PPI to rabeprazole in second-line quadruple therapy.

Guidelines for the management of Helicobacter pylori infection in Japan: 2009 revised edition

BACKGROUND

Over the past few years, the profile of Helicobacter pylori infection has changed in Japan. In particular, the relationship between H. pylori and gastric cancer has been demonstrated more clearly. Accordingly, the committee of the Japanese Society for Helicobacter Research has revised the guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of H. pylori infection in Japan.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Four meetings of guidelines preparation committee were held from July 2007 to December 2008. In the new guidelines, recommendations for treatment have been classified into five grades according to the Minds Recommendation Grades, while the level of evidence has been classified into six grades. The Japanese national health insurance system was not taken into consideration when preparing these guidelines.

RESULTS

Helicobacter pylori eradication therapy achieved a Grade A recommendation, being useful for the treatment of gastric or duodenal ulcer, for the treatment and prevention of H. pylori-associated diseases such as gastric cancer, and for inhibiting the spread of H. pylori infection. Levels of evidence were determined for each disease associated with H. pylori infection. For the diagnosis of H. pylori infection, measurement of H. pylori antigen in the feces was added to the tests not requiring biopsy. One week of proton-pump inhibitor-based triple therapy (including amoxicillin and metronidazole) was recommended as second-line therapy after failure of first-line eradication therapy.

CONCLUSION

The revised Japanese guidelines for H. pylori are based on scientific evidence and avoid the administrative restraints that applied to earlier versions.

Second-line rescue therapy of helicobacter pylori infection

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

Peptic ulcer disease

Peptic ulcer disease had a tremendous effect on morbidity and mortality until the last decades of the 20th century, when epidemiological trends started to point to an impressive fall in its incidence. Two important developments are associated with the decrease in rates of peptic ulcer disease: the discovery of effective and potent acid suppressants, and of Helicobacter pylori. With the discovery of H pylori infection, the causes, pathogenesis, and treatment of peptic ulcer disease have been rewritten. We focus on this revolution of understanding and management of peptic ulcer disease over the past 25 years. Despite substantial advances, this disease remains an important clinical problem, largely because of the increasingly widespread use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and low-dose aspirin. We discuss the role of these agents in the causes of ulcer disease and therapeutic and preventive strategies for drug-induced ulcers. The rare but increasingly problematic H pylori-negative NSAID-negative ulcer is also examined.

Moxifloxacin-containing triple therapy as second-line treatment for Helicobacter pylori infection: effect of treatment duration and antibiotic resistance on the eradication rate

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of a moxifloxacin-containing triple therapy as second-line treatment for Helicobacter pylori infection. We also investigated the effect of treatment duration and antibiotic resistance on the eradication rate of this therapy.

METHODS

We prospectively enrolled patients found to have persistent H. pylori infections after failure of first-line proton-pump inhibitor-based triple therapy. Patients took moxifloxacin (400 mg q.d.), amoxicillin (1000 mg b.i.d.), and esomeprazole (20 mg b.i.d.). The eradication rate, drug compliance, and adverse event rates were evaluated. Minimal inhibitory tests were performed for moxifloxacin and amoxicillin by the agar dilution method.

RESULTS

In 2004, 41 patients were treated for 7 days. The intention-to-treat and per-protocol eradication rates (ITT/PP) were 75.6/83.8%. Moxifloxacin resistance was 5.6%. Therapy was extended to 10 days during 2005-2006 and 139 patients were treated. The ITT/PP eradication rates were 71.9/82.6%; moxifloxacin resistance had increased to 12%. The final group of 181 patients in 2007-2008 who were treated for 14 days also had low eradication rates (68/79.9%), but there was no statistical significance in the efficacy among the treatment periods. Moxifloxacin resistance in 2007-2008 was 28.2%. Side-effect increased with treatment duration (i.e., 9.8, 12.2, and 25.4% at 7, 10, and 14 days, respectively, p = .001).

CONCLUSION

The 7-day moxifloxacin-containing triple therapy produced an unacceptably low eradication rate. Increasing the duration of therapy was expected to increase the eradication rate, but the expected increased did not materialize, most likely because of coincident marked increase in the prevalence of resistance to moxifloxacin. Tailored treatment based on antibiotic susceptibility testing might be more effective in the achievement of high eradication rate when rapid antibiotic resistance such as moxifloxacin is occurring.

Second-line treatment for Helicobacter pylori infection based on moxifloxacin triple therapy: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

In eradication of Helicobacter pylori infection, standard quadruple second-line therapy consisting of proton pump inhibitor (PPI), bismuth, metronidazole and tetracycline often fails and shows poor patient compliance. The aim of our study was to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of moxifloxacin-based triple therapy as an alternative second-line protocol.

METHODS

A total of 160 patients, in whom the initial standard PPI triple therapy had failed to eradicate H. pylori infection, were included in the study. The initial H. pylori status was assessed using the (13)C-urea breath test. Patients were randomized to one of the following 7-day treatment regimens: (1) OMM: omeprazole 20 mg twice a day, moxifloxacin 400 mg/day, metronidazole 500 mg three times a day; and (2) OBMT: omeprazole 20 mg twice a day, colloidal bismuth subcitrate 120 mg four times a day, metronidazole 500 mg three times a day, tetracycline 500 mg four times a day. Patient compliance and adverse events were evaluated one week after completion of therapy. H. pylori status was re-assessed with the (13)C-urea breath test six weeks after the end of therapy.

RESULTS

The eradication rates were 73.2% (60/82) and 78.9% (60/76) with moxifloxacin-based triple therapy, and 53.8% (42/78) and 64.6% (42/65) with bismuth-based quadruple therapy, by intention-to-treat (p = 0.018) and per-protocol (p = 0.088) analyses, respectively. Adverse events/intolerability were described in 12/82 patients in the OMM group and 18/78 patients in the OBMT group. Compliance with treatment was 92.7% in the OMM group and 83.3% in the OBMT group.

CONCLUSION

Moxifloxacin-based triple therapy is a highly effective second-line eradication treatment in H. pylori infection. Because of its high levels of safety and tolerability, this protocol represents an adequate alternative to the standard bismuth-based quadruple therapy.

Cloning, polymorphism, and inhibition of beta-carbonic anhydrase of Helicobacter pylori

BACKGROUND

Carbonic anhydrase (CA) catalyzes the reversible hydration of CO(2) to bicarbonate and a proton, and alpha-class CA has been reported to facilitate the acid acclimation of Helicobacter pylori (hpalphaCA). The purpose of this study was to characterize the beta-class CA of H. pylori (hpbetaCA) and elucidate the role of this enzyme as a possible drug target for eradication therapy.

METHODS

We isolated DNA clones of independent H. pylori strains obtained from patients with gastritis (n = 15), gastric ulcer (n = 6), or gastric cancer (n = 16), and then studied genetic polymorphisms. In addition, the susceptibility of H. pylori to sulpiride, an antiulcer drug and efficient inhibitor of both hpalphaCA and hpbetaCA, was studied with an in vitro killing assay.

RESULTS

DNA sequences of all 37 hpbetaCA clones encoded a 221 amino acid polypeptide with a variety of polymorphisms (57 types of amino acid substitution at 48 residue positions). There was no polymorphism functionally relevant to the gastric lesion type. One strain included unique residues that were not seen in the other 36 clones from Japanese patients but which were found in a strain obtained from the United Kingdom. Sulpiride had killing effects at concentrations greater than 200 microg/ml for H. pylori, including strains resistant to clarithromycin, metronidazole, or ampicillin.

CONCLUSIONS

Helicobacter pylori might have evolved independently in the Caucasian and Japanese populations. Dual inhibition of alpha-and beta-class CAs could be applied as alternative therapy for eradication of H. pylori.

“Rescue” regimens after Helicobacter pylori treatment failure

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

[Treatment of Helicobacter pylori infection]

The eradication rate of H. pylori after an initial course of antibiotic treatment is only 70%. It is therefore essential to inform patients from the onset that a follow-up verification of eradication will be needed 4 to 6 weeks after the first course of treatment and a second or even a third course may be required. After two treatment failures, antibiotic treatment should be adapted to the specific bacterial sensitivity, which necessitates endoscopy with biopsy and culture. The recent increase in bacterial resistance to clarithromycin will probably lead to modifications in the French guidelines within the next 2 years. Recognition of the carcinogenic role of H. pylori has increased the indications for bacterial eradication.

One-week once-daily triple therapy with esomeprazole, moxifloxacin, and rifabutin for eradication of persistent Helicobacter pylori resistant to both metronidazole and clarithromycin

AIM

To investigate a 1-week once-daily triple therapy with esomeprazole, moxifloxacin, and rifabutin for rescue therapy of Helicobacter pylori infection.

METHODS

Consecutive patients (n = 103) with at least one previous treatment failure and H. pylori infection resistant to both metronidazole and clarithromycin were treated with esomeprazole 40 mg, moxifloxacin 400 mg, and rifabutin 300 mg, given once daily for 7 days. Eradication was confirmed by histology and culture. CYP2C19 status was determined by polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism.

RESULTS

Intention-to-treat and per-protocol eradication rates were 77.7% (68.4-85.3) and 83.3% (74.4-90.2). Five patients discontinued prematurely (4.8%). Eradication was achieved in 93.1% of poor/intermediate metabolizers and in 78.8% of homozygous extensive metabolizers (p = .14). Eradication rates in patients with one, two, three, and four or more previous failures were 78.3%, 89.6%, 68.6%, and 88.9%, respectively (p = .21). The regimen was effective in seven of nine patients who previously failed quadruple therapy. Post-treatment resistance to moxifloxacin and rifabutin was detected in two (12.5%) and five (31%) patients after treatment failure.

CONCLUSION

Once-daily triple therapy with esomeprazole, moxifloxacin, and rifabutin is a promising, safe, and convenient regimen for rescue therapy of H. pylori infection that may serve as a valuable alternative to quadruple therapy, particularly for patients with intolerance to amoxicillin.

Treatment of Helicobacter pylori

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

Eradication therapy for Helicobacter pylori

Eradication therapy for Helicobacter pylori is recommended in a number of clinical conditions. In this article, we discuss the epidemiology and cellular mechanisms that result in antimicrobial resistance, the results of current eradication therapies, and new approaches to the management of Helicobacter pylori infection.