Ilaprazole Compared With Rabeprazole in the Treatment of Duodenal Ulcer: A Randomized, Double-blind, Active-controlled, Multicenter Study

Cost-effectiveness analysis of Anaprazole versus Ilaprazole for the treatment of duodenal ulcers in China

Objective

Anaprazole, an innovative drug, has shown promise in initial clinical trials for patients with duodenal ulcers (DU) in China. This study aimed to evaluate the potential effects, safety, and cost-effectiveness of Anaprazole compared to Ilaprazole in the treatment of DU and the budgetary impact on the healthcare system.

Methods

Two multicentre, randomized controlled trials were used as data sources. The efficacy and safety of Anaprazole and Ilaprazole were compared using an anchored matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC). A cost-utility analysis (CUA) was performed using a Markov model. A budget impact analysis (BIA) was conducted to evaluate the impact on the expenditure of the Chinese healthcare system. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were undertaken to test the uncertainty.

Results

The study findings indicated that Anaprazole and Ilaprazole have similar efficacy and safety in treating DU (OR = 1.05; 95% CI, 0.94-1.01; p = 0.35; OR = 0.63; 95% CI, 0.39-1.08; p = 0.12). The ICUR was 2,995.41¥/QALY, which is below the WTP threshold. The CUA results showed that Anaprazole is a cost-effective intervention with a probability of 85% at a given threshold. The results demonstrated strong robustness in the sensitivity analysis. Anaprazole imposed a low burden on the Chinese healthcare budget in the BIA.

Conclusion

Compared with Ilaprazole, Anaprazole has similar efficacy, safety, and high cost-effectiveness, while also impacting the total expenditure of the healthcare system.

Clinical Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT04215653 and NCT02847455.

Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Potassium-Competitive Acid Blockers vs. Proton Pump Inhibitors for Peptic Ulcer with or without Helicobacter pylori Infection: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Novel potassium-competitive acid blockers (P-CABs) have emerged as effective acid-suppressive drugs in recent years, replacing proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). We aim to compare the efficacy and safety of P-CABs versus PPIs in the treatment of peptic ulcers with or without Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection. We searched in PubMed, Embase, WOS, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, CNKI, and Wanfang databases (all years up to January 2024). Efficacy and safety outcomes were evaluated using odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). The Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking (SUCRA) probabilities were used to rank each intervention. Among 14,056 studies screened, 56 studies involving 9792 participants were analyzed. Vonoprazan demonstrated the best efficacy in ulcer healing rate and H. pylori eradication rate (SUCRA = 86.4% and 90.7%, respectively). Keverprazan ranked second in ulcer healing rates (SUCRA = 76.0%) and was more effective in pain remission rates (SUCRA = 91.7%). The risk of adverse events was low for keverprazan (SUCRA = 11.8%) and tegoprazan (SUCRA = 12.9%), and moderate risk for vonoprazan (SUCRA = 44.3%) was demonstrated. Compared to lansoprazole, vonoprazan exhibited a higher risk of drug-related adverse events (OR: 2.15; 95% CI: 1.60-2.89) and serious adverse events (OR: 2.22; 95% CI: 1.11-4.42). Subgroup analysis on patients with H. pylori-positive peptic ulcers showed that vonoprazan was at the top of the SUCRA rankings, followed by keverprazan. Vonoprazan showed superior performance in peptic ulcers, especially for patients with H. pylori-positive peptic ulcers. However, the risk of adverse events associated with vonoprazan should be noted. Keverprazan has also shown good therapeutic outcomes and has performed better in terms of safety.

Population pharmacokinetic modeling of ilaprazole in healthy subjects and patients with duodenal ulcer in China

Aims: This study aimed to develop a population pharmacokinetic (PopPK) model of ilaprazole in healthy subjects and patients with duodenal ulcer in Chinese and investigate the effect of potential covariates on pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters. Methods: Pharmacokinetic data from 4 phase I clinical trials and 1 phase IIa clinical trial of ilaprazole were included in PopPK analysis. Phoenix NLME 8.3 was used to establish a PopPK model and quantify the effects of covariate, such as demographic data, biochemical indicators and disease state on the PK parameters of ilaprazole. The final model was evaluated by goodness-of-fit plots, bootstrap analysis, and visual predictive check. Results: A two-compartment model with first-order elimination successfully described the pharmacokinetic properties of ilaprazole. In the final PopPK model, body weight and sex were identified as statistically significant covariates for volume of peripheral compartment (Vp) and clearance of central compartment (CL), respectively, and disease status was also screened as a significant covariate affecting both CL and Vp. The validation results demonstrated the good predictability of the model, which was accurate and reliable. Conclusion: This is the first population pharmacokinetics study of ilaprazole in the Chinese, and the PopPK model developed in this study is expected to be helpful in providing relevant PK parameters and covariates information for further studies of ilaprazole.

Efficacy and safety of proton pump inhibitors and H2 receptor antagonists in the initial non‑eradication treatment of duodenal ulcer: A network meta‑analysis

The present network meta-analysis aimed to enhance the corresponding evidence with respect to the efficacy and safety of pharmaceuticals treatments. Frequentist network meta-analysis was used. Medical literature up to November 2022 was searched for randomized clinical trials assessing the efficacy and safety of these pharmaceuticals, either compared with each other or compared with placebo. With the exception of ranitidine (300 mg four times daily) and vonoprazan (20 mg once daily) having lower safety than placebo, the efficacy and safety of the remaining treatments were superior to placebo. Cimetidine (400 mg four times daily) and pantoprazole (40 mg once daily) were ranked first in terms of efficacy. The frequentist network meta-analysis shows that for cimetidine (except 400 mg once daily), famotidine, rabeprazole, ilaprazole, lansoprazole (except 7.5 mg once daily) and omeprazole (except 10 mg once daily or 30 mg once daily), the efficacy comparison between the different doses of each of the aforementioned pharmaceuticals did not indicate statistically significant differences. In conclusion, pantoprazole (40 mg once daily) was the best choice for the initial non-eradication treatment of patients with duodenal ulcer, and cimetidine (400 mg twice daily), omeprazole (20 mg once daily), lansoprazole (15 mg once daily), ilaprazole (5 mg once daily) and rabeprazole (10 mg once daily) could be used as the first choice. If the aforementioned pharmaceuticals cannot be prescribed, famotidine (40 mg twice daily) is recommended.

Effects of ilaprazole on the steady-state pharmacodynamics of clopidogrel in healthy volunteers: An open-label randomized crossover study

Background: Previous studies have suggested that proton pump inhibitors could impair the antiplatelet effect of clopidogrel. It is uncertain whether ilaprazole affects the antiplatelet effect of clopidogrel. This study aimed to determine the drug-drug interaction between ilaprazole and clopidogrel.

Methods: A randomized crossover trial of 40 healthy subjects was performed. Clopidogrel was administered alone or in combination with ilaprazole for 7 days. The maximal platelet aggregation (MPA) to 5 μmol/L adenosine diphosphate was measured by light transmission aggregometry and the platelet reactivity index (PRI) was determined by vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein P2Y₁₂ assay. High on-treatment platelet reactivity (HOPR) was defined as a MPA of >40%. The inhibition of platelet aggregation (IPA) and PRI in the two phases were compared between two regimens after the last dosing.

Results: IPA was comparable between the two regimens at 0, 10 and 24 h (p > 0.05), but higher at 4 h in the clopidogrel alone regimen compared with that in the combined treatment regimen (75.66 ± 18.44% vs. 70.18 ± 17.67%, p = 0.031). The inhibition of PRI was comparable between the two regimens at 0 and 24 h. There were no significant differences in the area under the time-IPA% curve (AUC) or the incidence of HOPR at all time-points between the two regimens.

Conclusion: In healthy subjects, ilaprazole has limited effect on the pharmacodynamics of clopidogrel and it may not be clinically relevant.

Clinical Trial Registration: [www.chictr.org.cn], identifier [ChiCTR2000031482].

The pharmacotherapeutic management of duodenal and gastric ulcers

INTRODUCTION

Although the incidence and prevalence of duodenal and gastric ulcers have been declining, it remains challenging for health care systems. Based on the underlying cause, history, and characteristics of ulcers, management is generally provided by administering proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) or antibiotics.

AREAS COVERED

This article is based on global guidelines and English language literature from the past decade obtained through searches using PubMed, Clinicaltrials.gov, the US FDA, and the Cochrane library. Using a stepwise approach, dose and duration of treatment, drug interactions, warnings and contraindications, adverse effects, and administration points were specified. New drug candidates that may get American and European approvals were also introduced.

EXPERT OPINION

Despite the wide use of PPIs, their development lags behind the clinical need. There is an absolute requirement to develop third-generation PPIs with higher potency and improved pharmacokinetic and safety profiles. Regarding the antibiotic resistance crisis, including those used against H. pylori, conducting more clinical trials and investigating regional antibiotic resistance are warranted. Potassium competitive acid blockers, ilaprazole, and an H. pylori vaccine all show promise for the future.

Mucosal Healing Effectiveness and Safety of Anaprazole, a Novel PPI, vs. Rabeprazole in Patients With Duodenal Ulcers: A Randomized Double-Blinded Multicenter Phase II Clinical Trial

Background: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are validated gastric acid suppressors and have been widely used to treat patients with active duodenal ulcers. Although existing PPIs have shown great efficacy, many scientists are still devoted to developing more effective PPIs with better safety profile. Herein, we aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of anaprazole in duodenal mucosal healing, a novel PPI, to that of rabeprazole.

Methods: In this multicenter, randomized, positive-controlled, double-blinded, parallel-group phase II clinical trial, a total of 150 qualified patients with endoscopically confirmed active duodenal ulcers were randomized (1:1:1) to receive rabeprazole 10 mg, anaprazole 20 mg or anaprazole 40 mg for 4 weeks. The ulcer healing rates after 4 weeks of treatment were compared between groups by independent central review and investigator review. In addition, symptoms and safety were evaluated.

Results: Based on the independent central review, the ulcer healing rates of the 10 mg rabeprazole, 20 mg anaprazole and 40 mg anaprazole groups were 88.0, 85.1, and 87.5%, respectively, in the FAS population and 88.9, 86.0, and 90.9%, respectively, in the PPS population. The ulcer healing rate difference between anaprazole 20 mg and Rabeprazole 10 mg is −2.9% (95% CI, −16.5–10.7%), and −0.5% (95% CI, −13.5–12.5%) between anaprazole 40 mg and Rabeprazole 10 mg, in the FAS population. Based on the investigator review, the ulcer healing rates of the 10 mg rabeprazole, 20 mg anaprazole, and 40 mg anaprazole groups were 72.0, 70.2, and 77.1%, respectively, in the FAS population and 75.6, 72.1, and 79.5%, respectively, in the PPS population. The ulcer healing rate difference between anaprazole 20 mg and Rabeprazole 10 mg is −1.8% (95% CI, −19.8–16.3%), and 5.1% (95% CI, −12.2–22.3%) between anaprazole 40 mg and Rabeprazole 10 mg, in the FAS population. Most patients (>90%) eventually achieved complete symptom relief. The incidence rates of adverse events were of no significant differences among the treatment groups. Potential possible better liver tolerance was observed in two anaprazole dose groups than rabeprazole 10 mg group.

Conclusion: Both at a dosage of 20 and 40 mg daily, anaprazole, is effective with good safety profile in the treatment of active duodenal ulcers in this Phase 2 study, which allows anaprazole to be advanced to a phase III clinical trial.

Clinical Trial Registration:https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?cond=&term=NCT04503629&cntry=&state=&city=&dist=, Identifier: CTR20181464, NCT04503629.