Indications and safety of proton pump inhibitor drug use in patients with cancer

Use of concomitant proton pump inhibitors, statins or metformin in patients treated with pembrolizumab for metastatic urothelial carcinoma: data from the ARON-2 retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Concomitant medications may potentially affect the outcome of cancer patients. In this sub-analysis of the ARON-2 real-world study (NCT05290038), we aimed to assess the impact of concomitant use of proton pump inhibitors (PPI), statins, or metformin on outcome of patients with metastatic urothelial cancer (mUC) receiving second-line pembrolizumab.

METHODS

We collected data from the hospital medical records of patients with mUC treated with pembrolizumab as second-line therapy at 87 institutions from 22 countries. Patients were assessed for overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall response rate. We carried out a survival analysis by a Cox regression model.

RESULTS

A total of 802 patients were eligible for this retrospective study; the median follow-up time was 15.3 months. PPI users compared to non-users showed inferior PFS (4.5 vs. 7.2 months, p = 0.002) and OS (8.7 vs. 14.1 months, p < 0.001). Concomitant PPI use remained a significant predictor of PFS and OS after multivariate Cox analysis. The use of statins or metformin was not associated with response or survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study results suggest a significant prognostic impact of concomitant PPI use in mUC patients receiving pembrolizumab in the real-world context. The mechanism of this interaction warrants further elucidation.

Effect of Antacid Use on Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Advanced Solid Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

The influence of antacids use on immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) efficacy remains unclear. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the effect of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and histamine-2-receptor antagonists (H2RAs) on ICI efficacy in advanced solid cancer patients. A systematic literature search in PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science was performed to retrieve studies investigating the effect of antacid use on ICI efficacy. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and immune-related adverse events were measured using hazard ratios (HRs) or odds ratios (ORs). Thirty studies enrolling 16,147 advanced cancer patients receiving ICI treatment were included. The pooled analysis indicated that PPI use was associated with shorter OS (HR=1.40, 95% CI, 1.25-1.57) and PFS (HR=1.34, 95% CI, 1.19-1.52) in advanced cancer patients treated with ICIs. PPI use did not show effect on ORR or immune-related adverse event of advanced cancer patients receiving ICI treatment. OS, PFS, and ORR did not differ between H2RA users and non-H2RA users. In subgroup analyses, PPI use was associated with shorter OS and PFS in NSCLC and urothelial carcinoma patients and in patients treated with anti-programmed cell death 1 or anti-programmed cell death ligand 1 monotherapy. In addition, ICI efficacy was different in the antacid exposure time frame subgroups. In conclusion, PPI use has a negative effect on OS and PFS among advanced cancer patients receiving ICI treatment. PPIs should be cautiously administered among advanced cancer patients treated with ICI. The safety of H2RAs and the influence of H2RAs on ICI efficacy need further investigation.

Clinical outcomes of concomitant use of proton pump inhibitors and regorafenib in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a multicenter study

AIM

To compare survival outcomes, response rates, and adverse events (AEs) in proton pump inhibitor (PPI) user and non-user patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treated with regorafenib.

METHODS

We included 272 patients with mCRC treated with regorafenib in this study. Patients were divided into two categories according to their status of PPI use. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). The secondary endpoints were time to treatment failure (TTF), response rates, and safety. To exclude immortal time bias in survival analyses, we compared PPI non-user patients and all patients.

RESULTS

There were 141 and 131 patients in the PPI non-user and user groups. Baseline characteristics were similar in each group. Pantoprazole was the most used PPI. At the median 35.2 (95% confidence interval (CI): 32.6-37.9) months follow-up, the median OS was similar in PPI non-user and all patients (6.9 months (95% CI: 5.3-8.5) and 7.7 months (95% CI:6.6-8.8), p = 0.913). TTF was also similar in PPI non-user and all patients (3.3 months (95% CI: 2.7-3.9) and 3.5 months (95% CI: 3.0-4.0), p = 0.661). In multivariable analysis, no statistically significant difference was observed between PPI user and non-user groups in OS and TTF (hazard ratio (HR), 0.99; 95% CI, 0.77-1.28; p = 0.963 for OS; HR, 0.93; 0.77-1.20, p = 0.598 for TTF). The objective response rates (ORR) were similar in the PPI non-user and user groups (19.8% and 16.8%, p = 0.455). The rates of any grade AEs were also similar in each group.

CONCLUSION

This study found no worse outcome in the combined use of PPI and regorafenib among patients with mCRC.

Association of Proton Pump Inhibitor Use With All-Cause and Cause-Specific Mortality

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) has increased rapidly in the past 2 decades. Concerns about the regular use of PPIs contributing to mortality have been raised.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective cohort study using data collected from the Nurses' Health Study (2004-2018) and the Health Professionals Follow-up Study (2004-2018). Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate the hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs for mortality according to PPI use. We used a modified lag-time approach to minimize reverse causation (ie, protopathic bias).

RESULTS

Among 50,156 women and 21,731 men followed for 831,407 person-years and a median of 13.8 years, we documented 22,125 deaths, including 4592 deaths from cancer, 5404 from cardiovascular diseases, and 12,129 deaths from other causes. Compared with nonusers of PPIs, PPI users had significantly higher risks of all-cause mortality (HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.13-1.24) and mortality due to cancer (HR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.17-1.44), cardiovascular diseases (HR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.02-1.26), respiratory diseases (HR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.12-1.56), and digestive diseases (HR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.10-2.05). Upon applying lag times of up to 6 years, the associations were attenuated and no longer statistically significant (all-cause: HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.97-1.11; cancer: HR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.89-1.28; cardiovascular diseases: HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.81-1.10; respiratory diseases: HR, 1.20; 95% CI, 0.95-1.50; digestive diseases: HR, 1.38; 95% CI, 0.88-2.18). Longer duration of PPI use did not confer higher risks for all-cause and cause-specific mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

After accounting for protopathic bias, PPI use was not associated with higher risks of all-cause mortality and mortality due to major causes.

Effects of PPIs use on clinical outcomes of urothelial cancer patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy

Objective: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have recently demonstrated promising performance in improving the prognosis of urological cancer patients. The goal of this meta-analysis was to determine the impact of PPI use on the clinical outcomes of urological cancer patients receiving ICI therapy.

Methods: Before 6 May 2022, the eligible literature was searched using PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar. The clinical outcomes were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and objective response rate (ORR).

Results: A total of six articles met the inclusion criteria, and of the 1980 patients with advanced or metastatic urothelial cancers (UC) included. The meta-analysis displayed that PPI use could increase the risk of progression by 50.7% (HR: 1.507, 95% CI: 1.327–1.711, p < 0.001) and death by 58.7% (HR: 1.587, 95% CI: 1.367–1.842, p < 0.001), and reduce the ORR (OR: 0.503, 95% CI: 0.360–0.703, p < 0.001) in UC patients receiving ICIs. No significant heterogeneity and publication bias existed. Sensitivity analysis proved that the results were stable and reliable.

Conclusion: The meta-analysis indicated that concomitant PPI use was significantly associated with low clinical benefit in UC patients.

The association between proton pump inhibitor use and systemic anti-tumour therapy on survival outcomes in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are often prescribed to prevent or treat gastrointestinal disease. Whether the combination of systemic anti-tumour therapy and PPIs leads to poor outcomes in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is unclear. This systematic review explored the relationship between PPIs and survival outcomes of patients with advanced NSCLC who are receiving systemic anti-tumour therapy.

METHODS

We searched studies reporting the overall survival (OS) and/or progression-free survival (PFS) of advanced NSCLC patients who are receiving systemic anti-tumour therapy with or without PPIs on PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library for literature published prior to 31 August 2021. The meta-analysis used a random effects model to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and I2 to assess statistical heterogeneity. Publication bias and sensitivity analysis were performed.

RESULTS

Fourteen retrospective studies comprising 13 709 advanced NSCLC patients were identified. Subgroup analyses showed that the use of PPI was correlated with the OS or PFS of patients receiving chemotherapy, targeted therapy, and immunotherapy (PPI users' group vs non-users' group: HR for OS = 1.35, 95% CI = 1.21-1.51, P < .00001; HR for PFS = 1.50, 95% CI = 1.25-1.80, P < .0001). Publication bias and sensitivity analyses confirmed that the results were robust.

CONCLUSION

Meta-analysis demonstrated that PPI use in advanced NSCLC patients who were undergoing systemic anti-tumour therapy was correlated with increased mortality risk. Until results are further confirmed, caution should be applied when administering PPIs and systemic anti-tumour therapy to advanced NSCLC patients.

Impact of proton-pump inhibitors on the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors in non-small cell lung cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) is a rapidly evolving treatment modality for stage IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Concomitant proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use can potentially reduce the clinical efficacy of ICIs; however, the consensus in recent literature has been conflicting. This study aims to analyze overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) outcomes in patients with NSCLC on ICI and concomitant PPI therapy.

Methods

A literature search was done in 3 databases (Pubmed/Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central). All studies meeting the inclusion criteria assessing the impact of PPIs on the efficacy of ICI in NSCLC patients were systematically identified. A random-effects network meta-analysis evaluated OS and PFS in the two arms.

Results

Four studies with 2,940 patients are included in our analysis. ICI usage alone was associated with significantly better OS [HR = 1.46, 95% CI = 1.27–1.67, P < 0.00001] and PFS [HR = 1.31, 95% CI = 1.17–1.47, P < 0.00001] when compared to concomitant PPI and ICI therapy.

Conclusion

The concomitant use of PPIs during ICI therapy significantly worsens clinical outcomes with shorter OS and increased risk of disease progression in patients with NSCLC.

•

Immune checkpoint inhibitors are a rapidly evolving treatment regime used for various cancer therapies. The role of other medications in their effectiveness remains conflicted. Proton Pump Inhibitors are one of the most commonly prescribed medications and are particularly often prescribed to cancer patients.

•

Our study finds that Proton Pump Inhibitors worsen the outcomes of overall survival and increase risk of disease progression in Non-Small Cell Lung Carcinoma.

•

We hope that this study will enlighten providers to use proton pump inhibitors more judiciously in patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Carcinoma.

Proton pump inhibitors are still overprescribed for hospitalized children

OBJECTIVE

The use of proton pump inhibitors has increased exponentially over the past 20 years. Several side effects have been reported and concerns exist about the consequences of long-term proton pump inhibitors on health, leading to limitation of their use. The present study analyzed prescriptions of proton pump inhibitors at inpatient units and assessed their compliance with current recommendations.

METHODS

This single-center, observational, retrospective study reviewed medical file of patients hospitalized at the pediatric medical departments of the Bordeaux University Hospital between April 1 and September 30, 2019. Patients younger than 18 years, hospitalized in the pediatric hospital units and treated with proton pump inhibitors were included. Prescriptions of proton pump inhibitors were compared with French and international guidelines.

RESULTS

Proton pump inhibitors were prescribed for 251 of 2237 children (11%), mainly for gastroesophageal reflux disease (47%) and prevention of peptic ulcer disease (32.7%). Proton pump inhibitor prescription complied to recommendations in 34.5% of cases, less often in children aged younger than 1 year (13.5%) than in older children. Compliance to recommendations was lower when proton pump inhibitors were indicated for the prevention of peptic disease (5%) than for gastroesophageal reflux disease (48%).

CONCLUSIONS

Proton pump inhibitors are frequently prescribed for hospitalized children, and indications comply with recommendations in only 35% of the cases. Efforts in spreading awareness of the recommendations on the use of proton pump inhibitors in children are mandatory among hospital pediatricians.

The association between proton pump inhibitors use and clinical outcome of patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors therapy

BACKGROUND

The gut microbiome can mediate the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). Meanwhile, proton pump inhibitors (PPI) can modulate the gut microbiome significantly. However, the impact of PPI use on the clinical outcome of ICI therapy remains unclear.

METHODS

Searches of PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were conducted to retrieve studies exploring the relationship between PPI use and the clinical benefit of patients undergoing ICI therapy through June 2020. The pooled hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to evaluate the influence of PPI use on overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS).

RESULTS

A total of seven studies were eligible for our final analysis. There was no significant association between PPI use and OS or PFS (PPI users versus non-users: HR for OS: 1.05, 95% CI: 0.79-1.40, P = 0.73; HR for PFS: 0.90, 95% CI: 0.66-1.23, P = 0.51). However, subgroup analyses demonstrated that PPI use was related to a superior PFS of melanoma patients (HR: 0.50, 95% CI: 0.28-0.91, P = 0.02) and an inferior PFS of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients (HR: 1.17, 95% CI: 1.05-1.31, P = 0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

Our present study indicates that PPI use is not significantly associated with OS and PFS of patients undergoing ICI treatment. However, concomitant PPI therapy may have a positive effect on melanoma patients and a negative effect on NSCLC patients. It is advisable for clinical oncologists to evaluate the necessity for PPI use when they treat patients with ICI therapy.

Is there overuse of proton pump inhibitors in B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphomas? A cohort study based on the French health insurance database in the Midi-Pyrénées region

Patients suffering from B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphomas (B-NHL) have an increased likelihood of being exposed to proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), related to several factors which have been reported in the literature. PPIs are among the drugs most likely to be prescribed inappropriately. Consequently, B-NHL patients could be particularly at risk of inappropriate PPI prescription, with potential adverse drug reactions. We aimed to evaluate the incidence of PPIs use and to identify factors associated with PPIs initiation during the active treatment phase of B-NHL. We conducted a new-user cohort study using regional data from the French national health insurance database in the Midi-Pyrénées region (southwestern France). Incident B-NHL patients were selected according to an algorithm of selection, validated with data from a cancer registry. Our study revealed that 48.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 45.2-52.6) of patients initiated PPIs during chemotherapy after B-NHL diagnosis. According to information available in the SNDS, recommended indications for PPI prescriptions were identified in 21.1% of cases. Median duration of treatment was 65.3 days (CI: 35-112). Determinants of PPIs initiation were peptic ulcer disease, gastroprotection (appropriate or not) for medications considered at risk (NSAIDs, glucocorticoids and anticoagulants), age, nonfollicular lymphoma, polypharmacy, gastroenterologists' consultations and being hospitalized in a university hospital. Around 50% of patients initiated PPI treatment during the chemotherapy phase with only one-fifth identified as appropriate prescriptions and with long durations of treatment in most cases. Given this background, appropriate PPI prescription should be promoted in B-NHL to avoid potential inappropriate chronic use and related adverse events.

Effective and safe proton pump inhibitor therapy in acid-related diseases - A position paper addressing benefits and potential harms of acid suppression

BACKGROUND

The introduction of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) into clinical practice has revolutionized the management of acid-related diseases. Studies in primary care and emergency settings suggest that PPIs are frequently prescribed for inappropriate indications or for indications where their use offers little benefit. Inappropriate PPI use is a matter of great concern, especially in the elderly, who are often affected by multiple comorbidities and are taking multiple medications, and are thus at an increased risk of long-term PPI-related adverse outcomes as well as drug-to-drug interactions. Herein, we aim to review the current literature on PPI use and develop a position paper addressing the benefits and potential harms of acid suppression with the purpose of providing evidence-based guidelines on the appropriate use of these medications.

METHODS

The topics, identified by a Scientific Committee, were assigned to experts selected by three Italian Scientific Societies, who independently performed a systematic search of the relevant literature using Medline/PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane databases. Search outputs were distilled, paying more attention to systematic reviews and meta-analyses (where available) representing the best evidence. The draft prepared on each topic was circulated amongst all the members of the Scientific Committee. Each expert then provided her/his input to the writing, suggesting changes and the inclusion of new material and/or additional relevant references. The global recommendations were then thoroughly discussed in a specific meeting, refined with regard to both content and wording, and approved to obtain a summary of current evidence.

RESULTS

Twenty-five years after their introduction into clinical practice, PPIs remain the mainstay of the treatment of acid-related diseases, where their use in gastroesophageal reflux disease, eosinophilic esophagitis, Helicobacter pylori infection, peptic ulcer disease and bleeding as well as, and Zollinger-Ellison syndrome is appropriate. Prevention of gastroduodenal mucosal lesions (and symptoms) in patients taking non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or antiplatelet therapies and carrying gastrointestinal risk factors also represents an appropriate indication. On the contrary, steroid use does not need any gastroprotection, unless combined with NSAID therapy. In dyspeptic patients with persisting symptoms, despite successful H. pylori eradication, short-term PPI treatment could be attempted. Finally, addition of PPIs to pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy in patients with refractory steatorrhea may be worthwhile.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, PPIs are irreplaceable drugs in the management of acid-related diseases. However, PPI treatment, as any kind of drug therapy, is not without risk of adverse effects. The overall benefits of therapy and improvement in quality of life significantly outweigh potential harms in most patients, but those without clear clinical indication are only exposed to the risks of PPI prescription. Adhering with evidence-based guidelines represents the only rational approach to effective and safe PPI therapy. Please see related Commentary: doi: 10.1186/s12916-016-0724-1 .

Combined use of proton pump inhibitors and prokinetics: Feasibility and cautions

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are a group of preferred medicines for treating acid related diseases. Prokinetic drugs are widely used in gastroesophageal reflux disease and diseases caused by gastrointestinal motility. The combined use of PPIs and prokinetic drugs has been considered irrational when some authors discuss the clinical rational use of PPIs and prokinetic drugs, and they recommended that PPI and prokinetic drugs should not be taken at the same time, but should be separated by 1-2 h. This is somewhat misleading for clinicians to prescribe medicines and pharmacists to evaluate the rational use of the drugs. In this paper, we discuss the feasibility and cautions of combined use of PPIs and prokinetic drugs, to provide a reference for clinicians and pharmacists.

Clinical Outcomes of Acid Suppressive Therapy Use in Hematology/Oncology Patients at an Academic Medical Center

Background: Acid suppressive therapy (AST)—namely, proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and histamine-2 receptor antagonists (H2RAs)—is routinely prescribed to hospitalized patients for stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP). Objective: To identify the incidence of and indications for AST use in the hematology/oncology population as well as to identify the occurrence of the following PPI-associated adverse events: pneumonia and Clostridium difficile–associated diarrhea (CDAD). Methods: A retrospective chart review was conducted on adult hematology/oncology patients admitted to any oncology service for ≥48 hours from October 1, 2014, to December 31, 2014. Results: Of the 298 patients who met the inclusion criteria, 73% (n = 218) received an AST during admission. The most common indication for an AST was SUP (63%). The incidence of hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) was 10%, 0%, and 4% in patients who received a PPI, H2RA, and no AST, respectively (14/142 vs 0/70 vs 3/80; odds ratio [OR] for PPI vs no AST = 2.68; 95% CI = 0.75-9.63). The incidence of CDAD was 3%, 1.3%, and 1.2% in patients who received a PPI, H2RA, and no AST, respectively (4/142 vs 1/70 vs 1/80; OR for PPI vs H2RA = 1.92; 95% CI = 0.21-17.47). Conclusion: This is the first study to describe the incidence of and indications for AST use in the hospitalized hematology/oncology population. There was a high occurrence of AST use, particularly PPIs, in these patients at our institution. Additionally, there was a trend toward an increased risk of HAP and CDAD in patients who received AST during admission.

A drug utilization study of cognition enhancers in dementia in a tertiary care hospital in mumbai

BACKGROUND

Cognitive decline is one of the important factors undermining the quality of life in geriatric patients. Although the WHO has declared 'Dementia' as a priority health condition.Cognitive neuropharmacology is still in its infancy and there is no general consensus on the use of cognition enhancing (CE) drugs in humans. Since drug utilization data of CEs in dementia are scarce, we conducted a study to describe the observed patterns of CE drug use, compare it to the current recommendations and conduct a preliminary cost analysis.

METHODS

A prospective cross sectional drug utilization study of 100 prescriptions of patients of both sexes and all ages suffering from dementia attending the Neurology and Psychiatry clinics was undertaken as per the WHO - DUS and the STROBE guidelines.

RESULTS

In all, the 100 prescriptions contained 322 drugs, out of which, 168 were CE drugs. 38.2% of the drugs were prescribed by generic names. Donepezil, Memantine, Piracetam, Rivastigmine and Gallantamine were prescribed to 76%, 34%, 8%, 6% and 0%, respectively. The PDD/DDD ratio of Donepezil and Memantine were 1.36 and 0.94, respectively. The average cost per prescription was INR 626.29 or USD 9.5.

CONCLUSION

Principles of rational prescribing were followed. Donepezil and Memantine were the most commonly prescribed drugs and hence should be included in the hospital drug schedule. Piracetam should not be prescribed because of doubtful benefits and high cost. Antipsychotics should be used in geriatric dementia patients very judiciously. A major part of the total cost per prescription was borne by the patient.