| Literature DB >> 28674348 |
Tadashi Shimoyama1, Daisuke Chinda1, Yoshihiko Sawada2, Kazuo Komai3, Hironobu Chiba4, Yoshiharu Saito5, Yoshio Sasaki6, Masashi Matsuzaka7, Shinsaku Fukuda1.
Abstract
Objective CYP2C19 metabolic activity influences the efficacy of Helicobacter pylori eradication therapies comprising PPIs. Rabeprazole (RPZ) and esomeprazole (EPZ) are PPIs not extensively metabolized by CYP2C19. The aim of this study was to elucidate whether or not first-line triple therapies using RPZ or EPZ are equally effective in Japanese patients with different CYP2C19 genotypes. Methods Two-hundred patients infected with H. pylori were randomized to receive one of the following regimens: amoxicillin (750 mg), clarithromycin (200 mg), and either esomeprazole (20 mg) (EAC group) or rabeprazole (10 mg) (RAC group), twice a day for one week. The CYP2C19 polymorphisms were determined by polymerase chain reaction and the serum level of pepsinogens was measured. Results The eradication rates of the EAC and RAC regimens were 79.8% (95% confidential interval: 71.7-89.0%) and 74.7% (66.0-83.4%), respectively, in a per protocol (PP) analysis (p=0.488). The eradication rates of the EAC and RAC regimens were not significantly different between patients with the homo EM genotype (p=0.999) or hetero IM or PM genotypes (p=0.286). A lower PG I/II ratio was associated with lower eradication rates (p=0.025). Conclusion Although the eradication rate was less than 80%, the EAC and RAC regimens were equally effective in each CYP2C19 genotype group. The PG I/II ratio was associated with the results of EAC and RAC therapy in this series of patients.Entities:
Keywords: CYP2C19; Helicobacter pylori; eradication; pepsinogen
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28674348 PMCID: PMC5519461 DOI: 10.2169/internalmedicine.56.7823
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Intern Med ISSN: 0918-2918 Impact factor: 1.271
Figure 1.Assignment of patients and subsequent study flow. The study enrolled 200 patients at 8 medical institutes in Aomori Prefecture. The patients were randomly assigned to either the EAC group (n=99) or the RAC group (n=100).
Characteristics of the Patients who Completed the Regimen.
| EAC | RAC | Total | p value | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number | 94 | 95 | 189 | ||
| Sex | Men | 43 (45.7) | 47 (49.5) | 90 (47.6) | 0.663 |
| Women | 51 (54.3) | 48 (50.5) | 99 (52.4) | ||
| Age (years) | <40 | 8 ( 8.5) | 7 ( 7.4) | 15 ( 7.9) | 0.800 |
| ≥40 | 86 (91.5) | 88 (92.6) | 174 (92.1) | ||
| Smoking | Non | 73 (77.7) | 75 (78.9) | 148 (78.3) | 0.861 |
| Current | 21 (22.3) | 20 (21.1) | 41 (21.7) | ||
| Drinking | Non | 43 (45.7) | 46 (48.4) | 89 (47.1) | 0.771 |
| Current | 51 (54.3) | 49 (51.6) | 100 (52.9) | ||
| PG I (ng/mL) | <49.0 | 23 (24.2) | 26 (27.7) | 49 (25.9) | 0.753 |
| 49.0≤<69.0 | 24 (25.3) | 25 (26.6) | 49 (25.9) | ||
| 69.0≤<89.0 | 17 (17.9) | 19 (20.2) | 36 (19) | ||
| 89.0< | 31 (32.6) | 24 (25.5) | 55 (29.2) | ||
| PG II (ng/mL) | <15.0 | 17 (17.9) | 26 (27.7) | 43 (22.8) | 0.270 |
| 15.0≤<23.0 | 29 (30.5) | 30 (31.9) | 59 (31.2) | ||
| 23.0≤<31.0 | 19 (20.0) | 18 (19.1) | 37 (19.6) | ||
| 31.0< | 30 (31.6) | 20 (21.3) | 50 (26.4) | ||
| PG I/II ratio | <2.2 | 25 (26.3) | 19 (20.2) | 44 (23.3) | 0.370 |
| 2.2≤<2.9 | 25 (26.3) | 19 (20.2) | 44 (23.3) | ||
| 2.9≤<3.6 | 16 (16.8) | 23 (24.5) | 39 (20.6) | ||
| 3.6< | 29 (30.6) | 33 (35.1) | 62 (32.8) | ||
| CYP2C19 | homo EM | 30 (31.9) | 30 (31.6) | 60 (31.7) | |
| hetero IM/PM | 64 (68.1) | 65 (68.4) | 129 (68.3) | 0.999 | |
| anti-Hp antibody | <24 | 34 (36.2) | 28 (29.5) | 62 (32.8) | 0.514 |
| (U/mL) | 24≤<46 | 29 (30.9) | 36 (37.9) | 65 (34.4) | |
| ≥46 | 31 (33.0) | 31 (32.6) | 62 (32.8) |
N, (%)
Figure 2.(A) The eradication rates of EAC and RAC therapy by a per-protocol (PP) analysis or intention-to-treat analysis. (B) The eradication rates of EAC and RAC therapy by a PP analysis in patients with homo EM versus those with hetero IM or PM.
Patients’ Characteristics and the Results of Eradication Therapy.
| Eradication | p value | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| failure | success | |||||
| Sex | Men | 19 | (21.1) | 71 | (78.9) | 0.729 |
| Women | 24 | (24.2) | 75 | (75.8) | ||
| Age (years) | <40 | 4 | (26.7) | 11 | (73.3) | 0.749 |
| ≥40 | 39 | (22.4) | 135 | (77.6) | ||
| Smoking | Non | 34 | (23) | 114 | (77) | 0.999 |
| Current | 9 | (22) | 32 | (78) | ||
| Drinking | Non | 17 | (19.1) | 72 | (80.9) | 0.299 |
| Current | 26 | (26) | 74 | (74) | ||
| CYP2C19 | homo EM | 15 | (25) | 45 | (75) | 0.710 |
| Hetero IM+PM | 28 | (21.7) | 101 | (78.3) | ||
| anti-Hp antibody | <24 | 14 | (22.6) | 48 | (77.4) | 0.997 |
| (U/mL) | 24≤<46 | 15 | (23.1) | 50 | (76.9) | |
| ≥46 | 14 | (22.6) | 48 | (77.4) | ||
N, (%)
Level of Pepsinogens and the Results of Eradication Therapy.
| eradication | p value | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| success (N) | failure (N) | rate (%) | |||
| PG I (ng/mL) | <49.0 | 35 | 14 | 71.4 | 0.177 |
| 49.0≤<69.0 | 37 | 12 | 75.5 | ||
| 69.0≤<89.0 | 29 | 7 | 80.6 | ||
| 89.0< | 45 | 10 | 81.8 | ||
| PG II (ng/mL) | <15.0 | 35 | 8 | 81.4 | 0.573 |
| 15.0≤<23.0 | 46 | 13 | 78.0 | ||
| 23.0≤<31.0 | 26 | 11 | 70.3 | ||
| 31.0< | 39 | 11 | 78.0 | ||
| PG I/II ratio | <2.2 | 30 | 14 | 68.2 | 0.025 |
| 2.2≤<2.9 | 31 | 13 | 70.5 | ||
| 2.9≤<3.6 | 33 | 6 | 84.6 | ||
| 3.6< | 52 | 10 | 83.9 | ||