Ten days of levofloxacin-containing concomitant therapy can achieve effective Helicobacter pylori eradication in patients with type 2 diabetes

The nonadherence and risk factors of eradication failure by sequential therapy as first-line anti-Helicobacter pylori treatment in real-world clinical practice

BACKGROUND

The eradication rates of sequential therapy are high in clinical trials; however, the adherence for follow-up or the patient population in a real-world setting might be different from those in trails. This study investigates the effectiveness of sequential therapy in a real-world setting and the factors that lead to treatment failure.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this retrospective study, patients receiving sequential therapy as a first-line anti-Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) treatment in a real-world setting were reviewed. The age adjusted Charlson Comorbidity Index (age-CCI) and baseline variety of medications were reviewed to determine factors correlated with nonadherence for post-treatment testing and H. pylori eradication failure.

RESULTS

A total of 1053 patients were reviewed. A total of 579 patients receiving sequential therapy were included in the analyses. Among them, 462 received post-treatment testing and were placed into the follow-up group. Thus, the post-treatment testing rate was 79.8%. Stroke was an independent factor of nonadherence for post-treatment testing. In the follow-up group, the eradication failure rate was 8.2%. Female sex (odds ratio [OR] 2.41 [95% CI 1.16-5.03], p = 0.02) and age-CCI ≥2 (OR 3.16 [1.05-9.48], p = 0.04) were independent factors of H. pylori eradication failure. The eradication failure rates were 14.4%, 7.8%, 7.1%, and 3.1% for the females with age-CCI ≥2, females with age-CCI <2, males with age-CCI ≥2, and males with age-CCI <2 subgroups, respectively (p = 0.027).

CONCLUSIONS

In a real-world setting, the adherence rate of post-treatment testing for sequential therapy as a first-line anti-H. pylori treatment was found to be suboptimal. Female sex and age-CCI ≥2 were independent factors of eradication failure.

Helicobacter pylori eradication improves glycemic control in type 2 diabetes patients with asymptomatic active Helicobacter pylori infection

AIMS/INTRODUCTION

Helicobacter pylori infection is associated with insulin resistance and glycemia in non-diabetes. However, the relationship between H. pylori infection and glycemia in diabetes remains inconclusive. Therefore, we explored the effect of H. pylori infection status and its eradication on glycemic control and antidiabetic therapy in type 2 diabetes patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 549 diabetes patients were recruited for sequential two-step approach (immunoglobulin G [IgG] serology followed by 13 C-urea breath test [UBT]) to discriminate "active" (IgG+ and UBT+) from "non-active" (UBT- or IgG-) H. pylori infection, and "past" (IgG+ but UBT-) from "never/remote" (IgG-) infection. The differences in hemoglobin A1c (A1C) and antidiabetic regimens between groups were compared. In the "active" infection group, the differences in A1C changes between participants with and without 10-day eradication therapy were compared after 3 months.

RESULTS

Despite no between-group difference in A1C, the "active" infection group (n = 208) had significantly more prescriptions of oral antidiabetic drug classes (2.1 ± 1.1 vs 1.8 ± 1.1, P = 0.004) and higher percentages of sulfonylurea use (67.3% vs 50.4%, P < 0.001) than the "non-active" infection group (n = 341). There were no differences in A1C and oral antidiabetic drug classes between "past" (n = 111) and "never/remote" infection groups (n = 230). Compared with the non-eradication group (n = 99), the eradication group (n = 98) had significant within-group (-0.17 ± 0.80%, P = 0.036) and between-group (-0.23 ± 0.10%, P = 0.024) improvements in A1C.

CONCLUSIONS

Diabetes patients with active H. pylori infection need higher glycemic treatment intensity to achieve comparable glycemia. Furthermore, H. pylori eradication decreases A1C, and thus improves glycemic control.

Efficacies of Genotypic Resistance-Guided vs Empirical Therapy for Refractory Helicobacter pylori Infection

BACKGROUND & AIMS

We aimed to compare the efficacy of genotypic resistance-guided therapy vs empirical therapy for eradication of refractory Helicobacter pylori infection in randomized controlled trials.

METHODS

We performed 2 multicenter, open-label trials of patients with H pylori infection (20 years or older) failed by 2 or more previous treatment regimens, from October 2012 through September 2017 in Taiwan. The patients were randomly assigned to groups given genotypic resistance-guided therapy for 14 days (n = 21 in trial 1, n = 205 in trial 2) or empirical therapy according to medication history for 14 days (n = 20 in trial 1, n = 205 in trial 2). Patients received sequential therapy containing esomeprazole and amoxicillin for the first 7 days, followed by esomeprazole and metronidazole, with levofloxacin, clarithromycin, or tetracycline (doxycycline in trial 1, tetracycline in trial 2) for another 7 days (all given twice daily) based on genotype markers of resistance determined from gastric biopsy specimens (group A) or empirical therapy according to medication history. Resistance-associated mutations in 23S ribosomal RNA or gyrase A were identified by polymerase chain reaction with direct sequencing. Eradication status was determined by ¹³C-urea breath test. The primary outcome was eradication rate.

RESULTS

H pylori infection was eradicated in 17 of 21 (81%) patients receiving genotype resistance-guided therapy and 12 of 20 (60%) patients receiving empirical therapy (P = .181) in trial 1. This trial was terminated ahead of schedule due to the low rate of eradication in patients given doxycycline sequential therapy (15 of 26 [57.7%]). In trial 2, H pylori infection was eradicated in 160 of 205 (78%) patients receiving genotype resistance-guided therapy and 148 of 205 (72.2%) patients receiving empirical therapy (P = .170), according to intent to treat analysis. The frequencies of adverse effects and compliance did not differ significantly between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Properly designed empirical therapy, based on medication history, is an acceptable alternative to genotypic resistance-guided therapy for eradication of refractory H pylori infection after consideration of accessibility, cost, and patient preference. ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT01725906.

Treatment of Helicobacter pylori infection in 2018

Treatment options for the eradication of Helicobacter pylori continue to evolve. There have been many guidelines for H. pylori treatment published, which may lead to some confusion. However, most are in agreement with the most recent iteration of the Maastricht treatment guidelines. Triple therapy is still the most frequently used treatment, especially in areas of low clarithromycin resistance. Its best results are achieved when taken for a minimum of 10 days and with high-dose acid suppression. Quadruple therapy is gaining in popularity particularly in areas with increasing resistance to standard triple therapy. Whether three antibiotics, or bismuth and two antibiotics are used, excellent eradication rates are achieved, albeit with increased side effects. Levofloxacin second-line therapy is widely used; however bismuth, when available, is an increasingly successful option. Sequential therapy is challenging in terms of compliance and is no longer recommended. This past year witnessed a notable increase in the number of studies based on antimicrobial susceptibility testing and tailored eradication therapy, reflecting the role of culture-guided treatment, which may well represent the future of H. pylori treatment and prevent the inappropriate use of antibiotics.

Treatment of Helicobacter pylori infection 2017

This review summarizes important studies regarding Helicobacter pylori therapy published from April 2016 to April 2017. The main themes that emerge involve studies assessing the efficacy of bismuth and nonbismuth quadruple regimens. While in recent years, much of the emphasis on the use of bismuth has focussed on its utility in a second-line setting, an increasing number of studies this year have shown excellent efficacy in first-line therapy. The efficacy of bismuth as a second-line after sequential and concomitant therapy was particularly noteworthy. Antibiotic resistance was more intensely studied this year than for a long time, and definite trends are presented regarding an increase in resistance, including the fact that clarithromycin resistance in particular is now at a level where the continued use of clarithromycin triple therapy first-line as a mainstream treatment is not recommended. Another exciting trend to emerge this year is the utility of vonoprazan as an alternative to PPI therapy, especially in resistant and difficult-to-treat groups.