Dealing with uncertainty in the treatment of Helicobacter pylori

Iatrogenic factors of Helicobacter pylori eradication failure: lessons from the frontline

BACKGROUND

Iatrogenic factors play an important role in H. pylori eradication failure, whereas it can be easily missed. Therefore, we aimed to investigate and analyze these related iatrogenic factors of H. pylori eradication failure.

METHODS

A total of 508 patients who experienced H. pylori eradication failure were included in this study conducted from December 2019 to February 2022. All the patients filled out a questionnaire including demographic characteristics, duration of treatment, regimens, dosage, and time intervals in rescue treatment.

RESULTS

In the first-line treatment, 89 patients (17.5%, 89/508) used at least one antibiotic with high resistance rate in triple therapy and 57 patients (11.2%, 57/508) used two antibiotics with high resistance rates or other not recommended antibiotics in quadruple therapy. In the rescue therapy, 85 regimens were repeatedly used as salvage regimens in 58 patients (22.6%, 58/257) and 178 regimens containing antibiotics with high resistance rates were repeatedly used in 85 patients (33.1%, 85/257).

CONCLUSION

To decrease the risk of H. pylori eradication failure, iatrogenic factors need to gain more attention. Clinicians should enhance their education and training to standardize the treatment regimens, better manage the H. pylori infection, and improve the eradication rate eventually.

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.

Room for Improvement in the Treatment of Helicobacter pylori Infection: Lessons from the European Registry on H. pylori Management (Hp-EuReg)

BACKGROUND

Managing Helicobacter pylori infection requires constant decision making, and each decision is open to possible errors.

AIM

The aim was to evaluate common mistakes in the eradication of H. pylori, based on the "European Registry on Helicobacter pylori management".

METHODS

European Registry on Helicobacter pylori management is an international multicentre prospective noninterventional registry evaluating the decisions and outcomes of H. pylori management by European gastroenterologists in routine clinical practice.

RESULTS

Countries recruiting more than 1000 patients were included (26,340 patients). The most common mistakes (percentages) were: (1) To use the standard triple therapy where it is ineffective (46%). (2) To prescribe eradication therapy for only 7 to 10 days (69%). (3) To use a low dose of proton pump inhibitors (48%). (4) In patients allergic to penicillin, to prescribe always a triple therapy with clarithromycin and metronidazole (38%). (5) To repeat certain antibiotics after eradication failure (>15%). (6) Failing to consider the importance of compliance with treatment (2%). (7) Not to check the eradication success (6%). Time-trend analyses showed progressive greater compliance with current clinical guidelines.

CONCLUSION

The management of H. pylori infection by some European gastroenterologists is heterogeneous, frequently suboptimal and discrepant with current recommendations. Clinical practice is constantly adapting to updated recommendations, although this shift is delayed and slow.

Clinical Factors Implicated in Antibiotic Resistance in Helicobacter pylori Patients

Helicobacter pylori is a common gastric pathogen associated with multiple clinical syndromes, including cancer. Eradication rates of H. pylori remain suboptimal despite the progress made in the past few decades in improving treatment strategies. The low eradication rates are mainly driven by antibiotic resistance of H. pylori. Non-invasive molecular testing to identify patients with antibiotic-resistant H. pylori represents a promising therapeutic avenue, however this technology currently remains limited by availability, costs, and lack of robust validation. Moreover, there is insufficient evidence to demonstrate that resistance-testing-based treatment approaches are superior to appropriately designed empiric strategies. Consensus guidelines recommend use of proven locally effective regimens; however, eradication data are inconsistently generated in several regions of the world. In this review, we describe several clinical factors associated with increased rates of antibiotic resistant H. pylori, including history of previous antibiotic exposure, increasing age, female gender, ethnicity/race, extent of alcohol use, and non-ulcer dyspepsia. Assessment of these factors may aid the clinician in choosing the most appropriate empiric treatment strategy for each patient. Future study should aim to identify locally effective therapies and further explore the clinical factors associated with antibiotic resistance.

Antibiotics as a Stressing Factor Triggering the Harboring of Helicobacter pylori J99 within Candida albicans ATCC10231

First-line treatment for Helicobacter pylori includes amoxicillin and clarithromycin or metronidazole plus a proton pump inhibitor. Treatment failure is associated with antibiotic resistance and possibly also with internalization of H. pylori into eukaryotic cells, such as yeasts. Factors triggering the entry of H. pylori into yeast are poorly understood. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate whether clarithromycin or amoxicillin trigger the entry of H. pylori into C. albicans cells.

METHODS

H. pylori J99 and C. albicans ATCC 10231 were co-cultured in the presence of subinhibitory concentrations of amoxicillin and clarithromycin as stressors. Bacterial-bearing yeasts were observed by fresh examination. The viability of bacteria within yeasts was evaluated, confirming the entry of bacteria into Candida, amplifying, by PCR, the H. pylori16S rRNA gene in total yeast DNA.

RESULTS

Amoxicillin significantly increased the entry of H. pylori into C. albicans compared to the control.

CONCLUSION

the internalization of H. pylori into C. albicans in the presence of antibiotics is dependent on the type of antibiotic used, and it suggests that a therapy including amoxicillin may stimulate the entry of the bacterium into Candida, thus negatively affecting the success of the treatment.

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.

Telephone-Based Reeducation of Drug Administration for Helicobacterpylori Eradication: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Study

Poor adherence to treatment instructions may play an important role in the failure of Helicobacter pylori eradication. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of telephone-based reeducation on 14-day quadruple H. pylori eradication therapy. In total, 162 patients were randomly assigned (1 : 1) to either the intervention group (patients received telephone-based reeducation on the 4^th, 7^th, and 10^th days of the course) or the control group (patients received instructions only at the time of getting the prescriptions). All patients received a 14-day quadruple H. pylori eradication therapy. The primary outcome was the H. pylori eradication rate. The secondary outcomes included the symptom relief rates and the incidence rates of adverse events. Seventy-five patients in the reeducation group and 74 patients in the control group completed the follow-up. The H. pylori eradication rate in the reeducation group was statistically higher than that in the control group (intention-to-treat: 72.8% vs. 50.6%, P = 0.006; per-protocol: 78.7% vs. 55.4%, P = 0.003). However, the symptom relief rates and the adverse event rates in these two groups were not significantly different. Overall, the results from this study suggest that telephone-based reeducation can be potentially applied to improve the H. pylori eradication rate in clinical practice, without significantly increasing the adverse effects.

High Effectiveness of a 14-Day Concomitant Therapy for Helicobacter pylori Treatment in Primary Care. An Observational Multicenter Study

Background: The current cure rates with triple therapy combining a proton-pump inhibitor, amoxicillin and clarithromycin are unacceptably low. Aims: To evaluate the efficacy of a 14-day concomitant therapy as an empirical first-line treatment for curing Helicobacter pylori (Hp) infection in primary care. Methods: Patients from six primary care centers in Catalonia -Spain- were included consecutively. Hp status pre and post treatment was assessed according to local clinical practice protocol. A 14-day concomitant therapy (amoxicillin 1 g, clarithromycin 500 mg and metronidazole 500 mg plus omeprazole 20 mg, all drugs administered twice daily) was prescribed. Adherence to therapy and adverse events were assessed by personal interview. Results: 112 patients were enrolled. Mean age was 46.7 ± 16.1 years. Main indication for treatment was non-investigated dyspepsia (83%). Hp eradication was achieved in 100 of the 112 patients. Eradication rates were 89.3% (95% CI: 81.7–94.1) by intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis and 91.7% (95% CI; 84.6–95.9) per protocol (PP). No major side effects were reported; 104 (92.8%) patients complete the treatment. Forty-seven patients (42%) complained of mild side effects (metallic taste, nausea). Low adherence to treatment (p = 0.004) and significant adverse events (p = 0.004) were the variables associated with treatment failure. Conclusions: In primary care, a 14-day concomitant therapy is highly effective and well tolerated.

Pylera® plus ranitidine vs Pylera® plus esomeprazole in first-line treatment of Helicobacter pylori infection: Two pilot studies

BACKGROUND

Several studies have shown that Pylera^® (three-in-one capsules containing 140 mg bismuth potassium subcitrate, 125 metronidazole, and tetracycline 125 mg) in association with omeprazole or esomeprazole is a good option in the treatment of Helicobacter pylori infection. In particular, the adjunction of a PPI to Pylera^® may be useful to overcome metronidazole resistance. However, omeprazole and its derivatives can promote greater bismuth absorption and enhance its toxicity. The H2 receptor antagonist (H2RA) ranitidine seems to induce less bismuth absorption and as a consequence less systemic toxicity.

AIM

To evaluate whether Pylera^® in combination with esomeprazole or with ranitidine is equally effective in the treatment of H. pylori infection.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Two separate groups of patients were treated simultaneously. One group was treated with Pylera^® three capsules qid plus esomeprazole 40 mg bid for 10 days (group A), and the other group was treated with Pylera^® three capsules qid plus ranitidine 300 mg bid for 10 days (group B). H. pylori eradication was defined as a negative result in ¹³ C urea breath test performed at least 8 weeks after the end of treatment with a delta-over-baseline value less than 5.

RESULTS

Thirty-two patients were recruited for group A and thirty-three patients in group B. Eradication rates were 93.7% (30/32) and 90.9% (30/33), respectively, at intention-to-treat analysis, and 96.6% (29/30) and 93.3% (28/30), respectively, at per-protocol analysis. Adverse events occurred in 26 patients and led to the suspension of treatment in one patient in group A and in one patient in group B.

CONCLUSION

The results showed that Pylera® plus a PPI or ranitidine were equally effective in the population studied. The high cure rates of bismuth triple therapy (without an antisecretory drug) and the lack of susceptibility testing make it impossible to exclude the possibility that the results would have been similar if neither the PPI nor the ranitidine were given.

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.