300 mg nizatidine at night versus 300 mg ranitidine at night in patients with duodenal ulcer. A multicentre trial in Europe

A multi-center clinical trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of intravenous nizatidine in the management of peptic ulcer bleeding

AIM: To evaluate the safety and safety of intravenous nizatidine in the management of peptic ulcer bleeding.

METHODS: A muti-center, randomized, parallel-controlled clinical trial was conducted in 205 patients with endoscopically proved peptic ulcer bleeding. The patients were randomly divided into nizatidine group (n = 102) and control group (n = 103). Patients in the nizatidine group were intravenously given nizatidine 0.1 g three times daily for 5 days, while those in the control group were intravenously given famotidine 20 mg twice daily for 5 days.

RESULTS: There were 201 cases evaluable for efficacy and safety. The effective rate and response rate were comparable between the nizatidine group and the control group (85.0% vs 82.2%; 99.0% vs 98.0%; both P > 0.05). Major adverse events include leucopenia, slightly elevated transaminase and anaemia.

CONCLUSION: Intravenous nizatidine is a safe and effective drug for treatment of peptic ulcer bleeding.

Treatment of childhood peptic esophagitis: a double-blind placebo-controlled trial of nizatidine

BACKGROUND

Nizatidine is an H2 histaminic receptor blocker, which acts on the oxintic cells in the stomach. The efficacy of nizatidine on acid gastric secretion has been widely studied in adults with erosive and ulcerative esophagitis, but not in children. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the therapeutic efficacy of nizatidine in children with reflux esophagitis.

METHODS

Twenty-six patients were studied; all of them underwent endoscopy with multiple esophageal biopsies and 24-h intraesophageal pH monitoring. The diagnosis of esophagitis was based on histologic features. Patients were randomly assigned to double-blind treatment with either nizatidine or a placebo (10 mg/kg/day in two doses) for 8 weeks. A symptomatic score assessment was evaluated during the study.

RESULTS

Twenty-four patients completed the 8-week protocol. After therapy, 9/13 (69%) patients on nizatidine and 2/13 (15%) patients on the placebo were healed (p < 0.007 by Fisher's exact test). Histological findings were improved in two other (16.7%) patients and unchanged in the last (8.3%) patient on nizatidine. In the placebo group there was histological improvement in three (25%) patients, no variation in six (50%), and worsening in one (8.3%). After therapy, determination of esophageal pH showed a statistically significant decrease of the total acid exposure time (p < 0.01) only in the nizatidine group. The clinical score analysis showed an improvement of symptoms only in the nizatidine group (p < 0.01), except for vomiting, which was reduced in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results show that nizatidine is effective in treating children with reflux esophagitis. The children included in this study did not have severe esophagitis, and the conclusion must be limited to those with mild to moderate degrees of disease.

Policy analysis of the conversion of histamine2 antagonists to over-the-counter use

OBJECTIVES

The authors assess the costs associated with treatment of dyspepsia with histamine2 antagonists versus without availability of over-the-counter (OTC).

METHODS

A cost analysis was performed using a decision-analysis model. Patients with an initial episode of dyspepsia were studied. The model includes costs associated with consumption of OTC and prescription (Rx) medications for dyspepsia, physician visits and associated diagnostic testing, time spent for physician visits and diagnostic tests, and hospitalization costs.

RESULTS

The model is sensitive to the relative cost of histamine2 antagonists when purchased Rx or OTC, as well as to the efficacy of these drugs in relieving dyspeptic symptoms. For patients with nonulcer dyspepsia (the largest group of likely consumers), the model demonstrates a cost savings if the OTC cost of the medication is slightly less than one third the Rx cost. Costs are similar whether or not histamine2 antagonists are available OTC. If the symptom relief efficacies of histamine2 antagonists are equivalent whether purchased by prescription only or OTC, then the health-care expenditures for a typical patient with dyspepsia are $204 for OTC availability and $203 for Rx-only use. Viewing costs from the perspective of a managed-care organization, expenditures for an episode of dyspepsia are $149 regardless of whether or not histamine2 antagonists are available OTC. Restricting the analysis to patients with underlying nonulcer dyspepsia yields similar results. Variation of numerous assumptions and probabilities other than histamine antagonist cost and efficacy, including costs associated with physician visits and diagnostic tests, and the likelihood of seeking medical care, do not substantially affect the results of the model.

CONCLUSIONS

Health-care costs associated with initial treatment of dyspepsia are similar regardless of the availability of histamine2 antagonists OTC. This is due largely to the similar efficacy of these drugs compared with antacids and the predicted increase in diagnostic testing that may result if a patient visits a physician after failure to achieve symptom relief with OTC use of histamine2 antagonists.

Effect of nizatidine and ranitidine on 24 hour intragastric pH, pepsin, prostaglandin E2 and serum gastrin concentrations in healthy volunteers

In order to achieve possible greater therapeutic efficacy, ranitidine 300 mg bid (R2) may be given rather than 300 mg qhs (R1), or nizatidine 300 mg bid (N2) may be given rather than 300 mg qhs (N1). A randomized placebo-controlled crossover study was performed in six healthy volunteers (four males, two females) who ranged in age from 23 to 43 years, comparing R1, R2, N1 and N2 versus placebo (P), measuring 24 h intragastric pH by the aspiration technique, gastric juice pepsin and prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) concentrations, as well as serum gastrin concentrations. In all treatment groups, 24-h intragastric pH was higher than with P; the 24 h and daytime (0800-2200 h) pH was higher with N2 than with N1, but not with R2 versus R1. The percentage pH > or = 3 was greater with N2 than with N1 during the daytime. Night-time (2200-0800 h) and 24 h pepsin concentrations were higher in R2 than in R1, were similar in N1 and N2, and were lower in these treatment groups than in P. The gastric juice PGE2 concentration at night-time, but not at daytime, was increased in the four treatment groups compared with P. Despite the higher pH values at night-time in the treatment groups, the night-time concentrations of serum gastrin were unchanged, and yet during the daytime the higher values of pH were associated with increased gastrin concentrations when R2 or N2 were given, but not with R1 and N1. There was a negative correlation between intragastric juice pH and pepsin concentration during the daytime, and a positive correlation between pH and PGE2 concentration during the night-time. The slopes and y-axis intercepts between pH and pepsin or PGE2 concentrations differed between the placebo and the treatment groups, suggesting that these H2-receptor antagonists may have an effect on lowering pepsin and raising PGE2 concentrations in addition to their effects on pH. As the percentage of time over the 24 h period and night-time periods when the pH was greater than 3 was not different between ranitidine and nizatidine, the two regimens will likely have similar clinical efficacy.

A single standard nocturnal dose of nizatidine enhances the healing of active duodenal ulcers among Chinese

Chinese people have a lower maximal acid output and gastrin response to meals compared to Western people. The aim of the present study was to assess the efficacy of a half-single nocturnal dose of nizatidine (150 mg at bedtime [h.s.], n = 40) with a standard full dose given once nightly (300 mg h.s., n = 38) or twice daily (150 mg twice a day [b.i.d.], n = 43) in the treatment of Chinese patients with active duodenal ulcers. An endoscopy was performed upon entry and at 4 week intervals until the ulcer healed (up to 8 weeks). There is no statistical difference in healing rates after 4 weeks of treatment (52.5, 52 and 47% in nizatidine 150 mg h.s., 150 mg b.i.d. and nizatidine 300 mg h.s., respectively) whereas nizatidine 300 h.s. had a significantly higher healing rate compared to nizatidine 150 mg h.s. and b.i.d. after 8 weeks of treatment (89 vs 70 and 67%, P < 0.05) by uni- and multivariate analysis of clinical and endoscopic characteristics. Symptomatic response was not significantly different in these three treated groups. Our study suggested that a half-single nocturnal dose of nizatidine is not ideal for the treatment of duodenal ulcer in Chinese patients, whereas a single standard nocturnal dose appears more effective than a twice-daily regimen.

Peptic ulcer in the elderly--a double-blind, short-term study comparing nizatidine 300 mg with ranitidine 300 mg. GISU (Interdisciplinary Ulcer Study Group)

This was a randomized, double-blind, multicentre, short-term study comparing ranitidine and nizatidine at the standard dosages of 300 mg at bedtime. In 49 centres in Italy, all peptic ulcer patients aged over 65 years and with endoscopically documented acute disease were considered eligible for the study. Clinical check-ups were repeated every 3 weeks, while the endoscopic and biochemical assessments were scheduled at 6 and (in unhealed patients) 12 weeks.

STATISTICS

chi-squared test, Fisher's exact test, Student t-test for unpaired data. The study included 170 duodenal ulcer and 75 gastric ulcer patients. Of these, 83/170 duodenal ulcer and 38/75 gastric ulcer patients were treated with nizatidine 300 mg and the remainder with ranitidine 300 mg. The groups were well-matched for common clinical data. Eight patients dropped out. Healing rates at 6 and 12 weeks were 81.9% and 91.5% for nizatidine-treated duodenal ulcer patients versus 78.1% and 94.2% for ranitidine-treated duodenal ulcer cases (P: N.S.); 6 and 12-week healing rates were 76.3% and 89.5% for nizatidine-treated gastric ulcer patients versus 67.6% and 83.8% for ranitidine-treated gastric ulcer patients (P: N.S.). No slow healing risk factors were found. Only minor adverse events were registered.

IN CONCLUSION

ranitidine 300 mg and nizatidine 300 mg both proved effective and safe in the treatment of acute peptic ulceration in the elderly.

Histamine H2-receptor antagonists in peptic ulcer disease. Efficacy in healing peptic ulcers

Duodenal ulcer healing depends on the degree and length of inhibition of gastric secretion and upon the duration of therapy, while gastric ulcer healing is dependent mainly on the duration of therapy. Currently marketed doses of the histamine H2-receptor antagonists heal between 77 and 92% of duodenal ulcers at 4 weeks, and adjuvant treatment to eradicate Helicobacter pylori increases this rate. Once-daily administration is as effective as more frequent dosing regimens and may even result in higher healing rates. Gastric ulcers heal more slowly, but 75 to 88% of ulcers heal after 8 weeks of treatment. While newer more potent acid suppressors such as omeprazole heal ulcers slightly more quickly, the H2-receptor antagonists have an unparalleled safety record of over 15 years. It is unlikely that the prostaglandin analogues can improve on the efficacy of the H2-receptor antagonists with as low an incidence of side effects.

Ranitidine in the treatment of duodenal ulcer disease: relationship between antisecretory effect and ulcer healing rate

The relationship between drug-induced suppression of intragastric acidity and the rate of duodenal ulcer healing was examined using data for a single drug, ranitidine, from 156 clinical trials involving 16,362 patients together with data on acid suppression from 37 studies of intragastric acidity in 630 subjects. In these studies ranitidine was given in doses ranging from 150 mg to 1200 mg per day administered in 9 different dosage regimens. The overall percentage of patients whose duodenal ulcers healed at 2 and 4 weeks on the different regimens was highly correlated with the percentage suppression of 24-hour intragastric acidity induced by different regimens. Thus the therapeutic benefit of a given ranitidine dosage regimen in healing duodenal ulcers relates directly to its antisecretory effect.

A comparison of two doses of nizatidine versus placebo in the treatment of reflux oesophagitis

Three-hundred and twenty-five patients with endoscopically verified oesophagitis entered a double-blind, randomized multicentre study that compared 300 mg nizatidine b.d., 300 mg nocte and placebo. The 6- and 12-week treatment responses were studied. Healing was defined as complete epithelialization of all oesophageal lesions. The healing rates were 40% in the 300 mg nizatidine b.d. group, 30% in the 300 mg nocte group and 26% in the placebo group at 6 weeks. The corresponding figures after 12 weeks of treatment were 50%, 44% and 34%, respectively. The healing rates were significantly different (P less than 0.05) between the high-dose nizatidine group and placebo only, both at 6 and 12 weeks. Despite a trend at both 6 and 12 weeks in favour of 300 mg nizatidine nocte compared to placebo, this was not significantly different. The most important factor for the outcome, apart from the treatment group, was the pre-entry severity of oesophagitis. The differences observed between treatment groups in healing rates, symptomatic relief, and antacid consumption appear to result mainly from the patients with moderate and severe oesophagitis upon entry. Nizatidine (300 mg) b.d. appeared to be safe and effective in the treatment of reflux oesophagitis.

Why do ulcers heal with sucralfate?

It is unknown why ulcers in general heal. Some clues are worth considering. What is known is (i) that ulcer healing occurs spontaneously, (ii) that ulcers heal more quickly in the duodenum than in the stomach, (iii) that mucosal blood flow at ulcer edge improves with healing, and (iv) that healing can be speeded up by (a) not smoking, (b) removing acid from the stomach, and (c) using non-antisecretory mucosal protective agents such as sucralfate and colloidal bismuth. The difference in healing rates between duodenal and gastric ulcers may be related to ulcer size, duodenal alkalinity due to the secretion of the Brunner's glands, and other uninvestigated factors such as epidermal growth factor and mucosal blood flow. The difference between smokers and non-smokers may be related to inhibition of prostaglandin synthesis and impairment of mucosal blood flow due to smoking and to higher acid secretion in smokers. The success with antisecretory agents indicates that acid inhibits the healing process. The success of sucralfate and bismuth indicates that cytoprotective mechanisms play a role in ulcer healing. The literature also shows that ulcer healing is less affected by smoking in patients treated with sucralfate than in those treated with antisecretory agents, suggesting that cytoprotective mechanisms play a more important part than acid inhibition in counteracting the adverse effects of smoking on healing. Furthermore, ulcer relapse occurs sooner in patients treated with antisecretory agents than in those treated with sucralfate or bismuth, suggesting that withdrawal of antisecretory agents speeds up relapse and/or that cytoprotective mechanisms are associated with longer-lasting remission. It is concluded that sucralfate healing involves cytoprotective mechanisms and that these cannot be ignored in the planning of any anti-ulcer therapy. Despite the understanding of the various site-protective and cytoprotective mechanisms, as discussed in the previous article, it is not clear why ulcers heal with sucralfate. In fact, there is no clear answer to the fundamental question as to why ulcers in general heal with the known therapeutic agents, including H2-receptor antagonists, antacids, proton pump inhibitors, anticholinergics, site-protective agents, and cytoprotective agents. This review examines this question, using sucralfate as a model.

Duodenal ulcer treated with omeprazole: healing and relapse rates. Does treatment duration influence subsequent remission?

One hundred and twenty-nine patients were studied with regard to healing of duodenal ulcers with 30 mg omeprazole once daily, recurrence rates after 2 and 4 weeks' treatment in patients with ulcers healed after 2 weeks, and recurrences in rapid and slow healers. Cumulative healing rates were 77% and 98% after 2 and 4 weeks, respectively. Eighty-one patients (65%) were without ulcer symptoms after 2 weeks, and 43 (34%) were improved. Seven of 45 patients (16%; 95% confidence limits, 6-30%) with ulcers healed after 2 weeks had relapsed after another 2 weeks of placebo; 3 were asymptomatic. The overall relapse rate after 6 months was 62%. There were no statistically significant differences in relapse rates between 2 and 4 weeks' treatment of patients with ulcers healed after 2 weeks or between rapid and slow healers. Ulcer size, smoking habits, and alcohol consumption were not significantly related to healing or relapse.

Ranitidine. An updated review of its pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties and therapeutic use in peptic ulcer disease and other allied diseases

Ranitidine, a histamine H2-receptor antagonist, is now well established as a potent inhibitor of gastric acid secretion effective in the treatment and prophylaxis of gastrointestinal lesions aggravated by gastric acid secretion. Therapeutic trials involving several thousands of patients with peptic ulcer disease confirm that ranitidine 300mg daily administered orally in single or divided doses is at least as effective as cimetidine 800 to 1000mg daily in increasing the rate of healing of duodenal and gastric ulcers. Similar dosages of ranitidine have been shown to relieve the symptoms of reflux oesophagitis and heal or prevent gastrointestinal damage caused by ulcerogenic drugs. Ranitidine 150mg orally at night maintains ulcer healing in the long term. Ranitidine has also demonstrated good results in the treatment of Zollinger-Ellison syndrome and in the prevention of aspiration pneumonitis when given prior to surgery and to pregnant women at full term. It may also have a place in the management of acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding and in the prevention of stress ulcers in the intensive care setting, although these areas require further investigation. Ranitidine has been used safely in obstetric patients during labour, in children, the elderly, and in patients with renal impairment when given in appropriate dosages. The drug is very well tolerated and is only infrequently associated with serious adverse reactions or clinically significant drug interactions. Even at high dosages, ranitidine appears devoid of antiandrogenic effects. Ranitidine is clearly comparable or superior to most other antiulcer agents in the treatment and prevention of a variety of gastrointestinal disorders associated with gastric acid secretion. With its favourable efficacy and tolerability profiles, ranitidine must be considered a first-line agent when suppression of gastric acid secretion is indicated.

Rebound nocturnal hypersecretion after four weeks treatment with an H2 receptor antagonist

Daytime intragastric pH, fasting and meal stimulated serum gastrin and nocturnal acid output were studied in eight male duodenal ulcer patients before, during and two days after completing nizatidine 300 mg nocte (20:00 h) for four weeks. Median nocturnal acid output (mmol/10 h) decreased during treatment to 11.6 (range 0.4-26.7) compared with pretreatment value of 39.4 (9.8-91.2); median acid inhibition 77% (p less than 0.01) which was strongest between 24:00 and 04:00 h. Two days after discontinuing treatment, nocturnal acid output increased to 74.1 (11-181). Compared with the pretreatment value this represents median rebound hypersecretion of 77% (p less than 0.05), caused by increased H+ concentration and volume of secretion. Overall median daytime intragastric pH (09:00-21:00 h) was unchanged on the final day of treatment and two days after completing therapy, compared with the pretreatment values. Fasting serum gastrin measured between 09:30 and 10:00 h and the integrated gastrin response to an OXO breakfast taken out at 10:00 h were also similar during and after treatment, compared with pretreatment values. The rebound nocturnal hypersecretion may be relevant to the high ulcer relapse rates after stopping H2 receptor antagonists.

Nizatidine. A preliminary review of its pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties, and its therapeutic use in peptic ulcer disease

Nizatidine is an H2-receptor antagonist which in animal studies was more active on a weight-for-weight basis than cimetidine in inhibiting basal and stimulated gastric acid secretion. Similarly, studies in humans have confirmed that nizatidine is a potent inhibitor of basal, nocturnal and stimulated gastric acid secretion. As might be expected at this stage of its development, published therapeutic experience with nizatidine is limited. Nevertheless, multicentre therapeutic trials have shown that nizatidine 300mg at bedtime or 150mg twice daily is significantly more effective than placebo for healing active duodenal ulcer, and is apparently as effective as standard doses of ranitidine in increasing the rate of healing of both duodenal and gastric ulcers, and as effective as a standard dose of cimetidine in active duodenal ulcer. When used prophylactically a single 150mg dose of nizatidine at night produces a decrease in the incidence of ulcer recurrence compared with placebo, and a similar rate of decrease to that achieved with ranitidine 150mg. Nizatidine is well tolerated. Unlike cimetidine it does not have any antiandrogenic effects or alter the hepatic metabolism of drugs. However, only wider clinical experience with nizatidine can accurately determine its relative efficacy and tolerability compared with other antiulcer therapy. Thus, early clinical experience suggests that nizatidine is a useful alternative to the histamine H2-receptor antagonists presently in clinical use.

Histamine H2-receptor antagonists

The first histamine H2-receptor antagonists were developed in the early 1970s, and they have a dominant role in today's management of peptic ulceration. The original regimens using either cimetidine or ranitidine attempted to control acidity across the 24 hours, but more 'modern' regimens use a large single dose of the H2-blocker in the evening, which produces a pulse of decreased intragastric acidity during the night with a normal acidity in the daytime. High-dose regimens using a new generation of extremely potent histamine H2-receptor antagonists may improve ulcer healing rates at 4 weeks, and may be particularly useful for the management of either severe oesophagitis or intractable duodenal ulceration.