BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Sequential therapy is a two-step therapy achieving a promising eradication rate for Helicobacter pylori infection. The rationale of sequential method has been proposed that amoxicillin weakens bacterial cell walls in the initial phase of treatment, preventing the development of drug efflux channels for clarithromycin and metronidazole used in the second phase. The aim of this prospective, randomized, controlled study was to investigate whether the efficacy of reverse sequential therapy was noninferior to sequential therapy in the treatment of H. pylori infection. METHODS:From January 2009 to December 2010, consecutive H. pylori-infected patients were randomly assigned to receive either sequential therapy (a 5-day dual therapy with pantoprazole plus amoxicillin, followed by a 5-day triple therapy with pantoprazole plus clarithromycin and metronidazole) or reverse sequential therapy (a 5-day triple therapy with pantoprazole plus clarithromycin and metronidazole, followed by a 5-day dual therapy with pantoprazole plus amoxicillin). H. pylori status was examined 6 weeks after the end of treatment by rapid urease and histology or urea breath test. RESULTS:One hundred and twenty-twoH. pylori-infected participants were randomized to receive sequential (n = 60) or reverse sequential therapy (n = 62). The eradication rates, by intention-to-treat analysis, were similar: 91.9% (95% confidence interval (CI): 85.1-98.7%) for sequential therapy and 96.7% (95% CI: 92.2-101.2%) for reverse sequential therapy (p = .44). Per-protocol analysis also showed similar results: 91.8% (95% CI: 84.9-98.7%) for sequential group and 96.7% (95% CI: 92.2-101.2%) for reverse sequential therapy (p = .43). The two treatments exhibited comparable frequencies of adverse events (11.3% vs 6.7%, respectively) and drug compliance (98.4% vs 100%, respectively). The overall resistance rates of antibiotics were clarithromycin 10.5%, amoxicillin 0%, and metronidazole 44.2% of patients, respectively. The dual resistance rate of clarithromycin and metronidazole was 4.2%. Both therapies achieved a high eradication rate for clarithromycin-resistant strains (100% vs 100%, respectively) and metronidazole-resistant strains (81.8% vs 95%, respectively) by intention-to-treat analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Ten-day reverse sequential therapy and standard sequential therapy are equally effective for H. Pylori eradication. The finding indicates that the sequence of antibiotics administered in sequential therapy does not influence the efficacy of the treatment.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Sequential therapy is a two-step therapy achieving a promising eradication rate for Helicobacter pyloriinfection. The rationale of sequential method has been proposed that amoxicillin weakens bacterial cell walls in the initial phase of treatment, preventing the development of drug efflux channels for clarithromycin and metronidazole used in the second phase. The aim of this prospective, randomized, controlled study was to investigate whether the efficacy of reverse sequential therapy was noninferior to sequential therapy in the treatment of H. pylori infection. METHODS: From January 2009 to December 2010, consecutive H. pylori-infectedpatients were randomly assigned to receive either sequential therapy (a 5-day dual therapy with pantoprazole plus amoxicillin, followed by a 5-day triple therapy with pantoprazole plus clarithromycin and metronidazole) or reverse sequential therapy (a 5-day triple therapy with pantoprazole plus clarithromycin and metronidazole, followed by a 5-day dual therapy with pantoprazole plus amoxicillin). H. pylori status was examined 6 weeks after the end of treatment by rapid urease and histology or urea breath test. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-two H. pylori-infectedparticipants were randomized to receive sequential (n = 60) or reverse sequential therapy (n = 62). The eradication rates, by intention-to-treat analysis, were similar: 91.9% (95% confidence interval (CI): 85.1-98.7%) for sequential therapy and 96.7% (95% CI: 92.2-101.2%) for reverse sequential therapy (p = .44). Per-protocol analysis also showed similar results: 91.8% (95% CI: 84.9-98.7%) for sequential group and 96.7% (95% CI: 92.2-101.2%) for reverse sequential therapy (p = .43). The two treatments exhibited comparable frequencies of adverse events (11.3% vs 6.7%, respectively) and drug compliance (98.4% vs 100%, respectively). The overall resistance rates of antibiotics were clarithromycin 10.5%, amoxicillin 0%, and metronidazole 44.2% of patients, respectively. The dual resistance rate of clarithromycin and metronidazole was 4.2%. Both therapies achieved a high eradication rate for clarithromycin-resistant strains (100% vs 100%, respectively) and metronidazole-resistant strains (81.8% vs 95%, respectively) by intention-to-treat analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Ten-day reverse sequential therapy and standard sequential therapy are equally effective for H. Pylori eradication. The finding indicates that the sequence of antibiotics administered in sequential therapy does not influence the efficacy of the treatment.
Authors: I Thung; H Aramin; V Vavinskaya; S Gupta; J Y Park; S E Crowe; M A Valasek Journal: Aliment Pharmacol Ther Date: 2015-12-23 Impact factor: 8.171
Authors: Sotirios D Georgopoulos; Vasilios Papastergiou; Beatriz Martinez-Gonzalez; Elias Xirouchakis; Ioannis Familias; Dionysis Sgouras; Andreas Mentis; Stylianos Karatapanis Journal: Ann Gastroenterol Date: 2017-12-15