Randomised controlled trial: susceptibility‐guided therapy versus empiric bismuth quadruple therapy for first‐line Helicobacter pylori treatment

Summary Background Increasing Helicobacter pylori resistance has led to decreases in treatment effectiveness. Aim To test the effectiveness of susceptibility‐guided therapy vs a locally highly effective empiric modified bismuth quadruple therapy for first‐line H pylori treatment in a region with hig...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inAlimentary pharmacology & therapeutics Vol. 49; no. 11; pp. 1385 - 1394
Main Authors Chen, Qi, Long, Xiaohua, Ji, Yingjie, Liang, Xiao, Li, Dongping, Gao, Hong, Xu, Beili, Liu, Ming, Chen, Ying, Sun, Yunwei, Zhao, Yan, Xu, Gang, Song, Yanyan, Yu, Lou, Zhang, Wei, Liu, Wenzhong, Graham, David Y., Lu, Hong
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published England Wiley Subscription Services, Inc 01.06.2019
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Summary Background Increasing Helicobacter pylori resistance has led to decreases in treatment effectiveness. Aim To test the effectiveness of susceptibility‐guided therapy vs a locally highly effective empiric modified bismuth quadruple therapy for first‐line H pylori treatment in a region with high antimicrobial resistance. Methods We compared 14‐day susceptibility‐guided with empiric therapy using a multicentre superiority‐design trial, which randomised H pylori infected subjects 3:1 to (a) susceptibility‐guided therapies contained esomeprazole 20 mg and amoxicillin 1 g b.d. plus clarithromycin 500 mg, metronidazole 400 mg b.d., or levofloxacin 500 mg daily for susceptible infections or bismuth 220 mg b.d. and metronidazole 400 mg q.d.s. for triple‐resistant infections; (b) Empiric therapy contained esomeprazole 20 mg, bismuth 220 mg b.d., amoxicillin 1 g and metronidazole 400 mg t.d.s. Primary outcome was H pylori eradication. Results Between February 2017 and March 2018, 491 subjects were screened and 382 were randomised. Both the susceptibility‐guided and the empiric regimens were highly successful with per‐protocol eradication rates of 97.7% (250/256) vs 97.6% (81/83, P = 1.00) and intent‐to‐treat eradication rates of 91.6% (262/286) vs 85.4% (82/96, P = 0.12). Overall, susceptibility‐guided therapy was not superior to empiric therapy with 0.1% per‐protocol (95% CI −3.1% to 3.2%) and 6.2% intent‐to‐treat (−0.3% to 12.7%) eradication difference. Both approaches had high adherence and low adverse event rates. Conclusions Both susceptibility‐guided and empiric therapies provided excellent eradication rates. Clinically, the choice would hinge on availability of susceptibility testing and/or a locally highly effective empiric therapy.
Bibliography:Funding information
David Y. Graham is a consultant for RedHill Biopharma regarding novel
infection and for Takeda in relation to
therapies, outside the submitted work. All other authors have nothing to declare. This study was funded in full by the grant from Clinical Research Center, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, grant number DLY201608. The funder of the study had no role in study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation or writing of the report.
therapies and has received research support for culture of
and is the PI of an international study of the use of antimycobacterial therapy for Crohn's disease, and a consultant for BioGaia in relation to probiotic therapy for
H pylori
H pylori
ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
content type line 23
ObjectType-Undefined-3
ISSN:0269-2813
1365-2036
1365-2036
DOI:10.1111/apt.15273