Comparison between Single-Dose Esomeprazole- and Pantoprazole-Based Triple Therapy on the Effectiveness for <i>Helicobacter pylori</i> Eradication in Taiwanese Population

Shih, Hsiang-Yao; Wang, Sophie S. W.; Kuo, Chao-Hung; Kuo, Fu-Chen; Chen, Yi-Yu; Wu, Meng-Chieh; Weng, Bi-Chuang; Lee, Yi-Chern; Hu, Chi-Tan; Wu, Deng-Chyang; Chen, Yen-Hsu

doi:https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/674324

Gastroenterology Research and Practice

On this page

Abstract Introduction Methods Results Discussion Acknowledgments References Copyright Related Articles

Special Issue

<i>H. pylori</i> Eradication Therapy

View this Special Issue

Clinical Study | Open Access

Volume 2012 | Article ID 674324 | https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/674324

Comparison between Single-Dose Esomeprazole- and Pantoprazole-Based Triple Therapy on the Effectiveness for Helicobacter pylori Eradication in Taiwanese Population

Hsiang-Yao Shih,^1,2Sophie S. W. Wang,^1,3Chao-Hung Kuo,^1,3,4Fu-Chen Kuo,⁵Yi-Yu Chen,¹Meng-Chieh Wu,¹Bi-Chuang Weng,¹Yi-Chern Lee,¹Chi-Tan Hu,⁶Deng-Chyang Wu,^1,3,4and Yen-Hsu Chen⁷

Academic Editor: Ping-I Hsu

Received14 Mar 2012

Accepted03 May 2012

Published05 Jul 2012

Abstract

Background and Study Aims. To compare the effectiveness of two regimens, single-dose esomeprazole- and pantoprazole-based triple therapy, for Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) eradication. Patients and Methods. A total of 453 patients were enrolled for H. pylori eradication. They were randomly assigned to either EAC group (Esomeprazole 40 mg once daily, Amoxicillin 1 g twice daily, Clarithromycin 500 mg twice daily for 7 days) or PAC group (Pantoprazole 40 mg twice daily, Amoxicillin 1 g twice daily, Clarithromycin 500 mg twice daily for 7 days). Follow-up endoscopy or urea breath test was scheduled 12–16 weeks after the eradication to evaluate the therapeutic response. Results. Higher eradication rate in EAC group than PAC group was shown by intention-to-treat analysis (EAC 72% versus PAC 55%, ) and per-protocol analysis (EAC 91% versus PAC 72%, ). The incidence of adverse effects (EAC 19% versus PAC 17%, ) and the compliance (EAC 87% versus PAC 91%, ) were comparable between these 2 groups. Conclusions. Single-dose esomeprazole-based triple therapy is effective for H. pylori eradication.

1. Introduction

Chronic Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection is responsible for gastritis, peptic ulcer disease, gastric mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue lymphoma (MALT lymphoma) [1], and gastric adenocarcinoma [2]. Consequently, eradication of H. pylori is indicated for patients with peptic ulcer disease, low-grade gastric MALT lymphoma, atrophic gastritis. First-degree relatives of gastric cancer patients and some extraintestinal diseases, for example, unexplained iron deficiency anemia, and chronic idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura may benefit from H. pylori eradication as well [2]. According to the Maastricht III Consensus Report, the recommended first-line treatment of H. pylori eradication is triple therapy with a proton pump inhibitor (PPI), clarithromycin, and amoxicillin or metronidazole given twice daily [2].

Proton pump inhibitor (PPI) is superior to H2 blocker for H. pylori eradication [3] because PPI is the most potent drug to inhibit gastric secretion to enhance the bioavailability of the antibiotics in the stomach [4]. PPI is metabolized via hepatic enzyme cytochrome P450 system, especially S-mephenytoin 4′-hydroxylase (CYP 2C19) and CYP 3A4 [5]. Single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) of these enzymes may lead to variable plasma level of PPI and affect intragastric pH level as a result. Esomeprazole is the S-enantiomer of omeprazole. This single enantiomer is shown to be more efficacious than the racemic mixture of omeprazole. Although esomeprazole and its metabolites are indistinguishable from omeprazole, a single oral dose of 40 mg esomeprazole generally results in peak plasma esomeprazole concentrations of 0.5–1.0 mg/L within 1–4 hours [6]. Theoretically, esomeprazole (40 mg once daily) should be as effective and economic for H. pylori eradication as the regular bid dose of PPI, suggested by Maastricht III consensus. Although some studies showed the effectiveness of esomeprazole-based triple therapy for H. pylori eradication, they studied esomeprazole 40 mg twice daily [7, 8], instead of esomeprazole 40 mg once daily. Therefore, we conducted the study to evaluate the effectiveness of single-dose 40 mg once daily esomeprazole based triple therapy for H. pylori eradication.

2. Patients and Methods

2.1. Patients and Study Design

A total of 501 dyspeptic patients were included and 453 patients (192 men and 261 women, mean age 52.48 years old, 16–83 years old) were enrolled at the Outpatient Department of the Division of Gastroenterology, Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan, from March 2005 to March 2009. Exclusion criteria were recent use of antibiotics, bismuth, or PPIs within the prior 4 weeks; history of gastric surgery; allergy to the study medication; serious comorbid illness (decompensated liver cirrhosis, renal failure); women who are pregnant and breastfeeding; previous H. pylori eradicated therapy. All of them received esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD). In addition, all of the patients were interviewed by a trained interviewer for the personal and medical history obtained by a standardized questionnaire. Once the status of H. pylori infection was confirmed, participants were randomly assigned to two groups: EAC group (esomeprazole 40 mg once daily, amoxicillin 1 g twice daily, clarithromycin 500 mg twice daily for 7 days) or PAC group (pantoprazole 40 mg twice daily, amoxicillin 1 g twice daily, clarithromycin 500 g twice daily for 7 days). Follow-up endoscopy or urea breath test was scheduled 12–16 weeks after the eradication to evaluate the therapeutic response and PPI was withheld 2 weeks beforehand. This study was approved by Institutional Review Board and Ethical committee of Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital and we obtained written informed consents from all the participants.

2.2. Questionnaire

The standardized questionnaire consisted of demographic data, underlying diseases, use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) and personal history about smoking and alcohol, coffee, or tea drinking. Smokers were defined as consumption of more than one pack of cigarettes per week. Drinkers were defined as consumption of more than one glass of alcoholic beverage per day. Compliance was defined as good (taking more than 70% of all administered medication) and poor [9]. The adverse events included diarrhea, constipation, abdominal pain, anorexia, nausea, vomiting, skin rash, headache, dizziness, taste perversion, and fatigue. The adverse events were further divided into positive adverse events defined as those who considered the adverse events disturbing the quality of daily life and negative ones defined as those who did not experience the events or did not consider them troublesome [9].

2.3. Diagnosis of H. pylori Infection

Culture, histology, rapid urease test, and ¹³C-urea breath test (UBT) were used in this study. Endoscopic biopsy specimens were rubbed on the surface of a Columbia blood agar plate for culture. Positive culture was considered if one or more colonies showed Gram negative, oxidase(+), catalase(+), urease(+), or spiral or curved rods in morphology. The presence of H. pylori in the pathology of gastric biopsy specimens was also evaluated by experienced pathologists. The result of rapid urease test (sensitivity 93–97%, specificity 98%) [10], CLO test (Delta West Bentley, WA, Australia), was interpreted as positive if the color turned to pink or red at room temperature 6 hours after the EGD examination. The ¹³C-urea breath test used in the study was manufactured by the Institute of Nuclear Energy Research, Taiwan. H. pylori infection was defined as positive either culture was positive or at least two positive results of rapid urease test, histology, or UBT [11].

2.4. Statistical Analysis

The primary outcomes were rates of eradication, adverse events, and compliance. The difference of the age of the patients was analyzed by Student’s t-test. The eradication rate, adverse effects and compliance between EAC and PAC groups were analyzed by Chi-square test. P was considered statistically significant.

3. Results

3.1. Demographic Characteristics

The demographic characteristics, including age, gender, smoking, alcohol consumption, ingestion of coffee or tea or both and no significant difference demonstrated, and endoscopic diagnosis of both groups (EAC group and PAC group) were analyzed (Table 1). No significant difference was found between the two groups except age and alcohol consumption (Table 1). The patient disposition according to CONSORT statement was shown (Figure 1) [12].

3.2. Eradication Rate

The eradication rate of H. pylori between the two groups was shown in Table 2. The eradication rate in the EAC group was significantly better than the PAC group in both the intention-to-treat (ITT) and the per-protocol (PP) analyses.

3.3. Adverse Events and Compliance

There was no difference regarding adverse effects during the treatment (EAC versus PAC, 19% versus 17%) (Table 2). In our study, adverse events included abdominal symptoms (diarrhea, constipation, abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting), taste perversion, anorexia, dizziness, headache, fatigue, and skin rash. Of all the adverse events taste perversion (EAC group 32 patients (15.4%); PAC group 29 patients (11.9%)) was the most common, followed by dizziness (EAC group 12 patients (5.8%); PAC group 11 patients (4.5%)). Fatigue (EAC 4.8%) and diarrhea (PAC 4.1%) also topped the list (Table 3). As for the compliance, 87% in the EAC group and 91% in the PAC group were noted. No significant difference was noted.

4. Discussion

Our study demonstrated higher eradication rate of H. pylori with single-dose esomeprazole based triple therapy (esomeprazole 40 mg once daily, amoxicillin 1 g twice daily, clarithromycin 500 mg twice daily for 7 days) than pantoprazole-based triple therapy (pantoprazole 40 mg twice daily, amoxicillin 1 g twice daily, clarithromycin 500 mg twice daily for 7 days). Similar prevalence of adverse events and compliance were observed between the two groups. Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are primarily metabolized via hepatic cytochrome P450(CYP)2C19 pathway. Genetic polymorphisms in CYP2C19 has been shown to have great influence on the metabolism of the PPIs. In our study, esomeprazole, s-isomer-omeprazole, is less influenced than pantoprazole. Consequently, it is more likely that esomeprazole may keep its therapeutic potency persistently [13–16].

Another issue which matters with the potency of PPI is to tackle the increasing antibiotic resistance. Increasing prevalence of resistant strain of H. pylori to clarithromycin was demonstrated in some studies. According to Vakil the prevalence of clarithromycin-resistant strain in the United States was 10–12% and wider range of 1–21% in the Europe. In Asia, a study from Hong Kong disclosed that the prevalence was 7.8% and the prevalence in Taiwan was 6% [17–19]. PPI could enhance the bioavailability and activity of the clarithromycin by reducing gastric acid secretion. In other words, the more potent the PPI is, the more effective clarithromycin would be. Esomeprazole gets more anti-H. pylori activity by its potent suppression of gastric acid secretion. This may be an explanation why higher eradication rate of H. pylori was observed in the EAC group. The other explanation for the higher eradication rate in the EAC group is higher pKa1 and pKa2 values of esomeprazole. The PPI pharmacophore is a 2-pyridylmethyl-sulfinyl-benzimidazole. The differences of the structure of the current marketed PPIs (omeprazole, esomeprazole, lansoprazole, pantoprazole, rabeprazole) are about the substituents placed on the pyridine and benzimidazole rings. pKa1 means the pKa value of the pyridine nitrogen (the pH at which the number of inactive not protonated forms and that of active protonated forms are equal, in other words the relative acidic stability) and pKa2 is the pKa value of the benzimidazole N3. They two are crucial for the activation of the PPI and higher values are positively related to more potent and persistent effects [16, 20]. As reported by Roche et al., pKa1 and pKa2 values of esomeprazole are 4.06 and 0.79, respectively, and the values of pantoprazole are 3.83 and 0.11 [20, 21]. In addition, reports showed younger age and alcohol consumption had positive effects on H. pylori eradication [22, 23]. We also observed a similar correlation in our study. In the EAC group, which had a higher eradication rate, patients tended to be younger and have more frequent alcohol consumption. Therefore, we suggest that age, alcohol consumption and prescribed PPI are the clinical factors which may influence the eradication rate (Table 4). In conclusion the higher eradication rate observed in the EAC group was the accumulative results from more potency of esomeprazole, higher pKa1 and pKa2 values, less influence by genetic polymorphisms in CYP2C19, younger age, and being more frequent alcohol consumption in EAC group.

According to the results of some studies from the United States the eradication rate of H. pylori by first-line therapy (PPI + Amoxicillin + Clarithromycin) is decreasing in recent years from 75% (Laine, 1998) to 65% (Bochenek, 2003) [17]. As shown from our study the eradication rate in the EAC group was still as high as 91%. As mentioned above, PPIs are metabolized primarily via CYP2C19 pathway. According to the polymorphism of CYP2C19, individuals can be divided into extensive metabolizer (EM) and poor metabolizer (PM). The prevalence of PM is more frequent in Asian population (15–23%) than Caucasian population (2–5%) [24]. The therapeutic effect of PPI in terms of H. pylori eradication is better in PM individuals. This observation might explain the higher eradication rate in our study than studies from the United States. In addition, another major determinant for successful eradication is body mass index (BMI). According to Hsu et al. [9] the average body weight of the Asian is less than the Caucasian. Therefore, it is not surprising that higher eradication rate is found Asian populations, if the same dose of proton pump inhibitor and antibiotics are used.

The interaction between proton pump inhibitor and clopidogrel remains a controversial issue. As recent studies reported PPI and clopidogrel are both metabolized via cytochrome P450 pathway (CYP), especially 2C19 [25]. Therefore, coprescribing PPI and clopidogrel may contribute to decreased cardiovascular protection related to clopidogrel. Esomeprazole is less metabolized than pantoprazole via CYP2C19 pathway [25, 26]. In addition we could administer single-dose esomeprazole in the morning and clopidogrel in the evening or at bedtime during H. pylori eradication for reducing the interaction. According to Hsu et al. esomeprazole doesn’t have negative effect on clopidogrel about platelet aggregation [27]. Single-dose esomeprazole-based triple therapy is a better option than pantoprazole for patients coprescribed clopidogrel.

In conclusion, our study show that single-dose esomeprazole-based first line triple therapy (esomeprazole 40 mg once daily, amoxicillin 1 g twice daily, clarithromycin 500 mg twice daily) is an effective regimen for H. pylori eradication in Taiwan.

Conflict of Interests

All authors have no conflict of interest to declare.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to appreciate the staff in Division of Gastroenterology and Infectious diseases at Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital and Division of Gastroenterology at Buddhist Tzu Chi Hospital and Tzu Chi University, Hualien.

References

W. D. Chey and B. C. Y. Wong, “American College of Gastroenterology guideline on the management of Helicobacter pylori infection,” American Journal of Gastroenterology, vol. 102, no. 8, pp. 1808–1825, 2007.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
P. Malfertheiner, F. Megraud, C. O'Morain et al., “Current concepts in the management of Helicobacter pylori infection: the Maastricht III Consensus Report,” Gut, vol. 56, no. 6, pp. 772–781, 2007.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. P. Gisbert, S. Khorrami, X. Calvet, R. Gabriel, F. Carballo, and J. M. Pajares, “Meta-analysis: proton pump inhibitors vs. H2-receptor antagonists-their efficacy with antibiotics in Helicobacter pylori eradication,” Alimentary Pharmacology and Therapeutics, vol. 18, no. 8, pp. 757–766, 2003.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. M. Spencer and D. Faulds, “Esomeprazole,” Drugs, vol. 60, no. 2, pp. 321–329, 2000.
View at: Google Scholar
T. Furuta, N. Shirai, M. Sugimoto, A. Nakamura, A. Hishida, and T. Ishizaki, “Influence of CYP2C19 pharmacogenetic polymorphism on proton pump inhibitor-based therapies.,” Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 153–167, 2005.
View at: Google Scholar
R. C. Baselt, Disposition of Toxic Drugs and Chemicals in Man, Biomedical Publications, Seal Beach, Calif, USA, 8th edition, 2011.
I. C. Wu, D. C. Wu, P. I. Hsu et al., “Rabeprazole- versus esomeprazole-based eradication regimens for H. pylori infection,” Helicobacter, vol. 12, no. 6, pp. 633–637, 2007.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
P. I. Hsu, K. H. Lai, C. K. Lin et al., “A prospective randomized trial of esomeprazole- versus pantoprazole-based triple therapy for Helicobacter pylori eradication,” American Journal of Gastroenterology, vol. 100, no. 11, pp. 2387–2392, 2005.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
P. I. Hsu, K. H. Lai, C. J. Wu et al., “High-dose versus low-dose esomeprazole-based triple therapy for Helicobacter pylori infection,” European Journal of Clinical Investigation, vol. 37, no. 9, pp. 724–730, 2007.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
P. Midolo and B. J. Marshall, “Accurate diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori: urease tests,” Gastroenterology Clinics of North America, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 871–878, 2000.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. H. Kuo, H. M. Hu, F. C. Kuo et al., “Efficacy of levofloxacin-based rescue therapy for Helicobacter pylori infection after standard triple therapy: a randomized controlled trial,” Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy, vol. 63, no. 5, pp. 1017–1024, 2009.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. M. M. Queiroz, R. Dani, L. D. Silva et al., “Factors associated with treatment failure of Helicobacter pylori infection in a developing country,” Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology, vol. 35, no. 4, pp. 315–320, 2002.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Yasuda, Y. Horai, Y. Tomono et al., “Comparison of the kinetic disposition and metabolism of E3810, a new proton pump inhibitor, and omeprazole in relation to S-mephenytoin 4'-hydroxylation status,” Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, vol. 58, no. 2, pp. 143–154, 1995.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. Becquemont, I. Ragueneau, M. A. Le Bot, C. Riche, C. Funck-Brentano, and P. Jaillon, “Influence of the CYP1A2 inhibitor fluvoxamine on tacrine pharmacokinetics in humans,” Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, vol. 61, no. 6, pp. 619–627, 1997.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. R. Sohn, J. T. Kwon, H. K. Kim, and T. Ishizaki, “Metabolic disposition of lansoprazole in relation to the S-mephenytoin 4'-hydroxylation phenotype status,” Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, vol. 61, no. 5, pp. 574–582, 1997.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. Andersson, M. Hassan-Alin, G. Hasselgren, K. Röhss, and L. Weidolf, “Pharmacokinetic studies with esomeprazole, the (S)-isomer of omeprazole,” Clinical Pharmacokinetics, vol. 40, no. 6, pp. 411–426, 2001.
View at: Google Scholar
N. Vakil and F. Megraud, “Eradication Therapy for Helicobacter pylori,” Gastroenterology, vol. 133, no. 3, pp. 985–1001, 2007.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Q. Gu, H. H. X. Xia, J. D. Wang et al., “Update on clarithromycin resistance in Helicobacter pylori in Hong Kong and its effect on clarithromycin-based triple therapy,” Digestion, vol. 73, no. 2-3, pp. 101–106, 2006.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. H. Huang, B. S. Sheu, H. B. Yang, C. C. Huang, J. J. Wu, and X. Z. Lin, “Impact of Helicobacter pylori antimicrobial resistance on the outcome of 1-week lansoprazole-based triple therapy,” Journal of the Formosan Medical Association, vol. 99, no. 9, pp. 704–709, 2000.
View at: Google Scholar
V. F. Roche, “The chemically elegant proton pump inhibitors,” American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, vol. 70, no. 5, article no. 101, 2006.
View at: Google Scholar
J. Kirchheiner, S. Glatt, U. Fuhr et al., “Relative potency of proton-pump inhibitors-comparison of effects on intragastric pH,” European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, vol. 65, no. 1, pp. 19–31, 2009.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
F. Perri, M. R. Villani, V. Festa, M. Quitadamo, and A. Andriulli, “Predictors of failure of Helicobacter pylori eradication with the standard “Maastricht triple therapy”,” Alimentary Pharmacology and Therapeutics, vol. 15, no. 7, pp. 1023–1029, 2001.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. M. Baena, C. López, A. Hidalgo et al., “Relation between alcohol consumption and the success of Helicobacter pylori eradication therapy using omeprazole, clarithromycin and amoxicillin for 1 week,” European Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 291–296, 2002.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. M. Kang, N. Kim, D. H. Lee et al., “Effect of the CYP2C19 polymorphism on the eradication rate of Helicobacter pylori infection by 7-day triple therapy with regular proton pump inhibitor dosage,” Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, vol. 23, no. 8, pp. 1287–1291, 2008.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
V. P. Tan, B. P. Yan, R. H. Hunt, and B. C. Y. Wong, “Proton pump inhibitor and clopidogrel interaction: the case for watchful waiting,” Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, vol. 25, no. 8, pp. 1342–1347, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
P. W. Y. Lim, K. L. Goh, and B. C. Y. Wong, “CYP2C19 genotype and the PPIs - Focus on rabeprazole,” Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, vol. 20, no. 3, supplement, pp. S22–S28, 2005.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
P. I. Hsu, K. Lai, and C. Liu, “Esomeprazole with clopidogrel reduces peptic ulcer recurrence, compared with clopidogrel alone, in patients with atherosclerosis,” Gastroenterology, vol. 140, no. 3, pp. 791–798, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar

Copyright

Copyright © 2012 Hsiang-Yao Shih et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

PDF Download Citation

Download other formats

Order printed copies

Views

6861

Downloads

1857

Citations