Preventive effects of lansoprazole and famotidine on gastric mucosal injury induced by low-dose aspirin in Helicobacter pylori-negative healthy volunteers

Inhibition of Aspirin-Induced Gastrointestinal Injury: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Background: Administration of aspirin has the potential for significant side effects of gastrointestinal (GI) injury mainly caused by gastric acid stimulation, especially in long-term users or users with original gastrointestinal diseases. The debate on the optimal treatment of aspirin-induced gastrointestinal injury is ongoing. We aimed to compare and rank the different treatments for aspirin-induced gastrointestinal injury based on current evidence.

Methods: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), and Chinese databases for published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of different treatments for aspirin-induced gastrointestinal injury from inception to 1 May 2021. All of the direct and indirect evidence included was rated by network meta-analysis under a Bayesian framework.

Results: A total of 10 RCTs, which comprised 503 participants, were included in the analysis. The overall quality of evidence was rated as moderate to high. Eleven different treatments, including omeprazole, lansoprazole, rabeprazole, famotidine, geranylgeranylacetone, misoprostol, ranitidine bismuth citrate, chili, phosphatidylcholine complex, omeprazole plus rebamipide, and placebo, were evaluated in terms of preventing gastrointestinal injury. It was suggested that omeprazole plus rebamipide outperformed other treatments, whereas geranylgeranylacetone and placebo were among the least treatments.

Conclusion: This is the first systematic review and network meta-analysis of different treatments for aspirin-induced gastrointestinal injury. Our study suggested that omeprazole plus rebamipide might be considered the best option to treat aspirin-induced gastrointestinal injury. More multicenter, high quality, large sample size randomized controlled trials will confirm the advantages of these medicines in the treatment of aspirin-induced gastrointestinal injury in the future.

Effect of Low-Dose Aspirin on Chronic Acid Reflux Esophagitis in Rats

BACKGROUND

Clinical role of low-dose aspirin (LDA) in pathogenesis of gastroesophageal reflux disease is by far controversial. This can be attributed to the paucity of basic research detailing the mechanism of LDA-induced esophageal mucosal injury (EI) on underlying chronic acid reflux esophagitis (RE).

AIM

The aim of this study was to clarify the effect of LDA on chronic RE in rats.

METHODS

Esophagitis was induced in 8-week-old male Wistar rats by ligating the border between forestomach and glandular portion with a 2-0 silk tie and covering the duodenum with a small piece of 18-Fr Nélaton catheter. Seventy-eight chronic RE rat models were divided into five treatment groups, consisting of orally administered vehicle (controls), and aspirin doses of 2, 5, 50 or 100 mg/kg once daily for 28 days. EI was assessed by gross area of macroscopic mucosal injury, severity grade of esophagitis and microscopic depth of infiltration by inflammatory cells.

RESULTS

Area of esophagitis in animals with aspirin dose of 100 mg/kg/day showed a 36.5% increase compared with controls, although it failed to achieve statistical significance (p = 0.812). Additionally, the rate of severe EI was increased in animals with aspirin dose of 100 mg/kg/day as compared with controls (p < 0.05). The grade of severity correlated with the depth of inflammation (r _s = 0.492, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Maximal dose aspirin (100 mg/kg/day) contributed in exacerbating preexisting EI. LDA (2 and 5 mg/kg/day), on the other hand, did not affect chronic RE in this model. LDA seems to be safe for use in patients with chronic RE.

Influence of low-dose proton pump inhibitors administered concomitantly or separately on the anti-platelet function of clopidogrel

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) at low doses can effectively prevent gastrointestinal bleeding due to aspirin and are widely used in Japan for gastroprotection in patients taking anti-platelet agents. We examined the influence of different PPIs at low doses administered concomitantly or separately on anti-platelet functions of clopidogrel. In 41 healthy Japanese volunteers with different CYP2C19 genotypes who took clopidogrel 75 mg in the morning alone, or with omeprazole 10 mg, esomeprazole 10 mg, lansoprazole 15 mg, or rabeprazole 10 mg, either concomitantly in the morning or separately in the evening, we measured the inhibition of platelet aggregation (IPA, %) using VerifyNow P2Y12 assay at 4 h after the last clopidogrel dose on Day 7 of each regimen. IPA by clopidogrel with rabeprazole administered at lunchtime, approximately 4 h after clopidogrel, was also measured. Mean IPAs in those concomitantly receiving omeprazole, esomeprazole, lansoprazole or rabeprazole (47.2 ± 21.1%, 43.2 ± 20.2%, 46.4 ± 18.8%, and 47.3 ± 19.2%, respectively) were significantly decreased compared with those receiving clopidogrel alone (56.0%) (all ps < 0.001). This decrease was observed when PPIs were administered separately in the evening. However, IPA by clopidogrel with rabeprazole administered at lunchtime was 51.6%, which was markedly similar to that of clopidogrel alone (p = 0.114). All tested PPIs reduce the efficacy of clopidogrel when administered concomitantly. Our preliminary data suggest that administration of rabeprazole 4 h following clopidogrel may minimize potential drug-drug interactions.

Improvement of gastroesophageal reflux disease in Japanese patients with spinal kyphotic deformity who underwent surgical spinal correction

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Spinal kyphotic deformity occasionally results in gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). The effects of acid reflux on the esophagus in kyphotic patients are unclear, however, and it is unknown whether acid reflux, endoscopic GERD, and reflux-related symptoms improve following surgical spinal correction in these patients. Herein, we investigated the characteristics of GERD in kyphotic patients and the improvement in GERD following surgical correction.

METHODS

In 48 patients with severe kyphotic deformity scheduled for surgical spinal correction, we conducted esophagogastroduodenoscopy, 24-h pH monitoring and three questionnaire surveys, including the frequency scale for the symptoms of GERD (FSSG). We repeated these measurements after surgical correction and compared pre- and post-surgery values.

RESULTS

Of 48 patients, 70.8% [95% CI: 55.9-83.0%, 34/48] had endoscopically evaluated esophageal mucosal injury. Regarding pH before surgery, 64.9% (CI: 47.5-79.8%, 24/37) had abnormal acid reflux (intraesophageal pH < 4 more than 5% of the time). FSSG score was significantly associated with the severity of GERD, and the positive rate was 52.6% (CI: 35.8-69.0%, 20/38). Following surgical correction, esophageal mucosal injury improved endoscopically in 90% of patients, and median total FSSG score significantly decreased from 8 (0-30) to 5 (0-19) (P = 0.005). Regarding pH after surgery, prevalence of abnormal acid reflux decreased from 66.7% (95% CI: 41.0-86.7%) to 33.3% (95% CI: 13.3-59.0%) (P = 0.045).

CONCLUSION

Surgical spinal correction in kyphosis patients improves not only kyphotic deformity-related disorders but also esophageal mucosal injury, abnormal acid reflux, and reflux-related symptoms.

Effect of bacterial and host factors on Helicobacter pylori eradication therapy

INTRODUCTION

A clearer understanding of the factors affecting the cure rate of Helicobacter pylori infection might lead to the development of novel prevention strategies and therapeutic targets.

AREAS COVERED

This review covers two important issues that affect the eradication of H. pylori: bacterial and host factors. Several virulence factors have been shown to be predictors for gastroduodenal diseases. Successful treatment of H. pylori infection also depends on host genetic factors such as CYP2C19 and IL-1B. The latest evidence on host genetic factors is discussed.

EXPERT OPINION

The authors identify three main targets for achieving effective eradication therapy. The first therapeutic target is to identify counter measures for antibiotic-resistant H. pylori strains. Thus, antibiotic susceptibility should be checked in all patients, ideally, before the start of eradication treatment. The second therapeutic target is the inhibition of acid suppression. Maintaining a high intragastric pH for 24 h increases the effectiveness of some antibiotics and the eradication effects for H. pylori. The third therapeutic target is to identify high-risk groups; the CYP2C19 and IL-1B polymorphisms are candidates for significant risk factors. A personalized medical approach will likely increase the cure rate of H. pylori infection.

PPI versus Histamine H2 Receptor Antagonists for Prevention of Upper Gastrointestinal Injury Associated with Low-Dose Aspirin: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

This study compared proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and histamine H2 receptor antagonists (H2RAs) for prevention of low-dose aspirin (LDA)-related gastrointestinal (GI) erosion, ulcer and bleeding. Electronic databases including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, and WanFang Data were searched from the date of their establishment to December 31, 2013. Randomized controlled trials comparing PPIs and H2RAs for prevention of GI injury associated with low-dose aspirin (LDA) were collected. Two reviewers independently abstracted studies and patient characteristics and appraised study quality using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.1 software. We included nine RCTs involving 1047 patients. The meta-analysis showed that PPIs were superior to H2RAs for prevention of LDA-associated GI erosion/ulcer [odds ratio (OR=0.28, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.16-0.50] and bleeding (OR=0.28, 95% CI: 0.14-0.59). In conclusion, PPIs were superior to H2RAs for prevention of LDA-related GI erosion/ulcer and bleeding. Higher quality, large, multicenter RCTs are needed to demonstrate the preventive effect of the two acid-suppressive drugs.

Antiplatelet drugs are a risk factor for esophageal mucosal injury

BACKGROUND

In esophagus whether antiplatelet drugs, such as low-dose aspirin (LDA) and clopidogrel, induce mucosal injury by pH changes or by acid reflux is unclear. We designed to clarify which mechanism was responsible.

METHODS

In study 1, 80 patients taking LDA and 80 age- and sex-matched subjects who underwent endoscopy for dyspeptic symptoms or for a health check-up were evaluated the endoscopic incidence of esophageal mucosal injury and severity. In study 2, 35 healthy subjects were treated with LDA 100 mg (regimen A), and then 20 randomly selected subjects were dosed clopidogrel 75 mg (regimen C), LDA/clopidogrel (regimen AC), or LDA/clopidogrel/rabeprazole 10 mg for 7 days. Subjects underwent endoscopy and 24-hour pH measurements on day 7.

RESULTS

In study 1, the prevalence of esophageal injury in LDA patients was 40.0%, significantly higher than in non-LDA subjects (25.0%, p = 0.042). In study 2, significant increases in incidence of injury were observed with regimens A (45.8%) and AC (50.0%), but not with C (20.0%), on day 7. Among subjects in whom pH was >5.0 and <4.0 for less than 40% of time, none developed esophageal injury.

CONCLUSIONS

LDA caused esophageal injury in half of patients and volunteers. Acid-inhibitory drugs effectively prevented the development of LDA-induced, not clopidogrel, esophageal injury.

Safe prescription recommendations for non steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs: consensus document ellaborated by nominated experts of three scientific associations (SER-SEC-AEG)

This article outlines key recommendations for the appropriate prescription of non steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs to patients with different musculoskeletal problems. These recommendations are based on current scientific evidence, and takes into consideration gastrointestinal and cardiovascular safety issues. The recommendations have been agreed on by experts from three scientific societies (Spanish Society of Rheumatology [SER], Spanish Association of Gastroenterology [AEG] and Spanish Society of Cardiology [SEC]), following a two-round Delphi methodology. Areas that have been taken into account encompass: efficiency, cardiovascular risk, gastrointestinal risk, liver risk, renal risk, inflammatory bowel disease, anemia, post-operative pain, and prevention strategies. We propose a patient management algorithm that summarizes the main aspects of the recommendations.

Pharmacodynamic evaluation of intragastric pH and implications for famotidine dosing in the prophylaxis of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug induced gastropathy-a proof of concept analysis

Objective

Famotidine given at a dose of 80 mg/day is effective in preventing NSAID-induced gastropathy. The aim of this proof of concept study was to compare twice a day (BID) vs 3-times a day (TID) administration of this total dose of famotidine on intragastric pH in healthy volunteers.

Research design and methods

Two analyses were undertaken: (1) a 13 subject controlled cross-over 24-h intragastric pH evaluation of the BID and TID administration of 80 mg/day of famotidine, as well as measures for drug accumulation over 5 days (EudraCT, number 2006-002930-39); and (2) a pharmacokinetic (PK)/pharmacodynamic (PD) model which predicted steady-state famotidine plasma concentrations and pH of the two regimens.

Results

For the cross-over study, gastric pH was above 3.5 for a mean of 20 min longer for TID dosing compared to BID dosing on Day 1. On Day 5, the mean time above this threshold was higher with the BID regimen by ∼25 min. For pH 4, subjects’ gastric pH was above this pH value for a mean of 25 min longer for TID dosing compared to BID dosing on Day 1. For Day 5, the pH was above 4 for ∼45 min longer with the TID regimen as compared with the BID regimen. The mean 24-h gastric pH values when taken in the upright position trended higher for the TID dosing period compared to the BID regimen on Day 1. The steady-state simulation model indicated that, following TID dosing, intragastric pH will be above 3 for 24 h vs 16 h for the BID regimen. There was no evidence for plasma accumulation of famotidine with TID dosing as compared to BID dosing from either analysis.

Conclusion

The data indicate that overall more time is spent above the acidic threshold pH values when 80 mg/day of famotidine is administered TID vs BID. Key limitations included small study size with a short duration and lack of a baseline examination, but was compensated for by the cross-over and PK/PD modeling design. Although most of the comparisons in this proof of concept study were not statistically significant these results have important implications for future research on gastric acid lowering agents used for the prevention of NSAID-induced gastropathy.

Prevalence of gastroduodenal ulcers/erosions in patients taking low-dose aspirin with either 15 mg/day of lansoprazole or 40 mg/day of famotidine: the OITA-GF study 2

Background

The preventive effects of histamine 2 receptor antagonists vs. proton pump inhibitors on low-dose aspirin (LDA)-related gastroduodenal mucosal injury have not been fully investigated. We conducted a cross-sectional study to compare the prevalence of gastroduodenal ulcers or erosions in patients taking LDA with either 40 mg/day of famotidine or 15 mg/day of lansoprazole for at least three months.

Methods

Of 84 eligible patients, two taking 40 mg/day of famotidine and four taking 15 mg/day of lansoprazole refused to undergo upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. Ultimately, we performed upper gastrointestinal endoscopy in 78 patients taking either 40 mg/day of famotidine (group F, n = 31) or 15 mg/day of lansoprazole (group L, n = 47). The prevalence of gastroduodenal ulcers or erosions and the magnitude of gastric mucosal injury evaluated using modified Lanza scores were compared between the two groups.

Results

No patients in either group had gastroduodenal ulcers. Gastroduodenal erosions were more prevalent in group F than in group L (48.4% vs. 17.0%, p = 0.005). The modified Lanza scores (mean ± SD) were significantly higher in group F than in group L (0.9 ± 1.3 vs. 0.3 ± 0.7, p = 0.007). A multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that the use of lansoprazole was negatively associated with gastroduodenal erosions.

Conclusions

This study suggests that 15 mg/day of lansoprazole may be more effective in preventing the development of LDA-related gastroduodenal erosions than 40 mg/day of famotidine. The preventive effects of these two regimens on the development of LDA-related gastroduodenal ulcers require further investigation.

Ability of rabeprazole to prevent gastric mucosal damage from clopidogrel and low doses of aspirin depends on CYP2C19 genotype

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Low doses of aspirin can injure the gastric mucosa. It is not clear whether other drugs such as the antiplatelet agent clopidogrel also cause gastric mucosal injury or exacerbate aspirin-induced injury, or whether proton pump inhibitors prevent damage.

METHODS

Twenty Japanese subjects with different CYP2C19 genotypes were randomly assigned to groups that were given a low dose of aspirin (100 mg; A), clopidogrel (75 mg; C), low dose of aspirin and clopidogrel (AC), or low dose of aspirin in combination with clopidogrel and rabeprazole (10 mg; ACR) once daily for 7 days. Subjects underwent gastroduodenoscopy and platelet tests on days 3 and 7; gastric mucosal damage was assessed by using the modified Lanza score (MLS). We performed 24-hour intragastric pH monitoring on day 7 of each regimen. We also analyzed the effects of the AC regimen on 30 patients with different CYP2C19 genotypes.

RESULTS

Subjects in groups A, C, and AC had significantly higher levels of gastric mucosal damage on days 3 and 7, compared with baseline. The median MLS for the AC group was similar to that of the A group. Helicobacter pylori-negative subjects in the ACR group with different CYP2C19 genotypes had significant differences in MLS, intragastric pH, and platelet function. Gastric mucosal injury was inhibited equally among H pylori-positive subjects in the ACR group. Rabeprazole did not appear to affect platelet function or intragastric pH in subjects given clopidogrel.

CONCLUSIONS

Clopidogrel and low doses of aspirin cause a similar degree of gastric mucosal damage. Rabeprazole prevented this damage without reducing the antiplatelet function of clopidogrel. However, its prophylactic effect varies with CYP2C19 genotype in H pylori-negative subjects.

Efficacy of esomeprazole in treating acid-related diseases in Japanese populations

Esomeprazole (Nexium^®; AstraZeneca), the S-isomer of omeprazole, is the first proton pump inhibitor (PPI) to be developed as an optical isomer. Compared with omeprazole, esomeprazole has an improved pharmacokinetic profile with regards to CYP2C19 (S-mephenytoin 4′-hydroxylase) genotype, showing increased systemic exposure and less interindividual variability. Further, esomeprazole is a more potent acid inhibitor than other currently available PPIs and is therefore used as a first-line drug for acid-related diseases. While esomeprazole has been available in a number of countries worldwide, the compound only received authorized permission to be marketed in Japan in September 2011. The standard esomeprazole dose in Japan for the treatment of peptic ulcers and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is 20 mg. Other advised dosages are 10 mg for nonerosive reflux disease and 20 mg twice-daily dosing for eradication of Helicobacter pylori. In Japanese, the effective rate of esomeprazole 20 mg during 24 weeks for GERD patients is 92.0% (88.0%–96.0%), while the prevention of peptic ulcer development using 20 mg for 24 weeks in patients treated with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs is 96.0% (92.8%–99.1%). Although clinical data are limited, the usefulness of esomeprazole is expected in Japanese subjects given the reduced prevalence of CYP2C19 rapid metabolizers in Japan compared with Western countries.

Proton Pump Inhibitor Therapy before and after Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection: A Review

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a novel endoscopic procedure first developed in the 1990s which enables en bloc resection of gastric neoplastic lesions that are difficult to resect via conventional endoscopic mucosal resection. However, given that ESD increases the risk of intra- and post-ESD delayed bleeding and that platelet aggregation and coagulation in artificial ulcers after ESD strongly depend on intragastric pH, faster and stronger acid inhibition via proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and histamine 2-receptor antagonists (H(2)RAs) as well as endoscopic hemostasis by thermocoagulation during ESD have been used to prevent ESD-related bleeding. Because PPIs more potently inhibit acid secretion than H(2)RAs, they are often the first-line drugs employed in ESD treatment. However, acid inhibition after the initial infusion of a PPI is weaker in the early phase than that achievable with H(2)RAs; further, PPI effectiveness can vary depending on genetic differences in CYP2C19. Therefore, optimal acid inhibition may require tailored treatment based on CYP2C19 genotype when ESD is performed, with a concomitant infusion of PPI and H(2)RA possibly most effective for patients with the rapid metabolizer CYP2C19 genotype, while PPI alone may be sufficient for those with the intermediate or poor metabolizer genotypes.

Acid-NSAID/aspirin interaction in peptic ulcer disease

The presence of gastric acid plays a critical role in the mechanisms of NSAIDs/aspirin-associated gastric and duodenal mucosal injury and ulceration. The role of gastric acid and its relationship to NSAIDs/aspirin in mucosal damage, ulcer and ulcer complications continues to be an important concern because of the increasing worldwide use of NSAIDs and aspirin. Acid suppression continues to be an important prevention strategy for NSAID-associated gastric and duodenal ulcer and ulcer complications. While a coxib or an NSAID and PPI in combination are considered to have comparable safety profiles, the evidence from direct comparisons in high-risk patients is limited, and the cardiovascular safety of coxibs and NSAIDs remains a concern especially in patients with a high risk of cardiovascular disease. An evaluation of individual gastrointestinal and cardiovascular risks and benefits, selection of the most appropriate NSAID and dose for each particular patient should always be emphasized. Twice daily PPI is more appropriate to protect a patient who is taking NSAIDs twice daily. PPI co-therapy is still recommended in patients receiving dual antiplatelet treatment, although conflicting results have been reported about adverse drug interactions between PPIs and clopidogrel.