Efficacy of tailored second-line therapy of Helicobacter pylori eradication in patients with clarithromycin-based treatment failure: a multicenter prospective study

Efficacy and safety of high-dose ilaprazole-amoxicillin dual therapy for Helicobacter pylori eradication: a prospective, single-center, randomized trial

Background: Until now, there have been no randomized controlled trials directly evaluating the efficacy of high-dose ilaprazole-amoxicillin dual therapy (HT) in comparison to other standard treatments for H. pylori (Helicobacter pylori) infection. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of HT with bismuth quadruple therapy (BQT) as an initial treatment for H. pylori. Methods: This single-center, prospective, randomized clinical controlled trial recruited 225 consecutive patients. They were assigned to either HT group (ilaprazole, 10 mg, twice daily; amoxicillin 1,000 mg, three times daily) or BQT group (compound bismuth aluminate granules, 2.6 g, three times daily; ilaprazole, 5 mg, twice daily; amoxicillin, 1,000 mg, twice daily; clarithromycin, 500 mg, twice daily) for 14 days. The 13C-urea breath test assessed eradication success 4 weeks after treatment. The primary outcome focused on the eradication rate, with secondary outcomes including safety and compliance. Results: From February 2023 to March 2023, 228 subjects were screened, and 225 were randomized. The HT and BQT groups showed eradication rates of 76.3% and 61.3% (p = 0.015) both by intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis and per-protocol (PP) analysis. HT was associated with fewer adverse events than BQT (27.2% vs. 81.8%, p = 0.002). The most commonly reported adverse events was bitter taste of mouth (3.5% vs. 60.4%, p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in compliance between the two groups (89.5% vs. 92.8%, p = 0.264). Conclusion: The 14-day HT treatment demonstrates better efficacy in H. pylori eradication treatment and improved safety and compliance compared to BQT. The results provide supporting evidence for 14-day HT can be potentially considered as a first-line regimen for empirical treatment. Clinical Trial Registration: https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=186562, identifier ChiCTR2200066284.

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.

Treatment of refractory Helicobacter pylori infection: A new challenge for clinicians

Patients who have failed two or more attempts to eradicate Helicobacter pylori are commonly referred to as refractory. Although the incidence of refractory Helicobacter pylori infection is only 10–20%, with the increasing rate of antibiotic resistance in various regions, the treatment of refractory Helicobacter pylori infection has gradually become a difficult problem faced by clinicians. When choosing a rescue therapy, the physician must consider numerous factors. A longer treatment duration, higher doses of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), or the use of potassium-competitive acid blocker (P-CAB) may increase the efficacy of triple therapy or bismuth quadruple therapy. Rescue treatment based on bismuth quadruple therapy usually achieves better results. At the same time, treatment based on drug susceptibility tests or genotypic resistance is recommended where available. Of course, appropriate empiric treatment can also be selected according to local drug resistance, a patient’s previous medication history and compliance. It is the best choice if it can improve the success rate of the first treatment and reduce the occurrence of refractory Helicobacter pylori infection. This review aims to summarize the articles related to refractory Helicobacter pylori in recent years and to explore a better remedial treatment plan for clinicians.

The effect of previous eradication failure on antibiotic resistance of Helicobacter pylori: A retrospective study over 8 years in Beijing

BACKGROUND

Antibiotic resistance is the main cause of Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) treatment failure. This study aimed to explore the characteristics of antibiotic resistance of H. pylori isolates in Beijing in the last 8 years and to estimate the impact of previous eradication failure on resistance patterns.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective study included data from a single center in Beijing from 2013 to 2020. Antibiotic susceptibility of 365 clinical H. pylori isolates was tested for amoxicillin, clarithromycin, metronidazole, levofloxacin, moxifloxacin, and tetracycline. The characteristics of the included patients and their previous eradication history were collected. Primary and secondary resistance rates of H. pylori to the six antibiotics and the impact of previous eradication failure on antibiotic resistance patterns were analyzed.

RESULTS

The overall primary resistance rates of amoxicillin, clarithromycin, metronidazole, levofloxacin, moxifloxacin, and tetracycline were 0.7%, 55.2%, 68.0%, 49.7%, 64.5%, and 0%, with no significant increase during the observed period; while the secondary resistance rates were 3.2%, 96.7%, 90.7%, 93.1%, 80.0%, and 0%, respectively. The secondary resistance rate of clarithromycin (p < .001), metronidazole (p = .001), and levofloxacin (p < .001) significantly increased to 100% as the number of previous eradication therapies increased and exhibited a linear association. For strains naive to eradication, only 6.8% were susceptible to all the antibiotics, while 32.4% were single resistant, and 60.8% dual or multiple resistant. Clarithromycin+metronidazole+fluoroquinolone multiple resistance was the predominant pattern (0 course: 21.6%, 1 course: 37.5%, 2 courses: 56.1%, ≥3 courses: 71.1%; p < .001) for patients with treatment failure. The prevalence of dual or multiple-resistance patterns increased significantly as the number of previous therapies increased.

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of primary and secondary resistance rates of clarithromycin, metronidazole, moxifloxacin, and levofloxacin were high in Beijing. Multiple-resistance patterns were common after treatment failure. Resistance rates of amoxicillin and tetracycline remained low and stable.