Literature DB >> 3092661

Comparative clinical trial of enprostil and ranitidine in the treatment of gastric ulcer.

H G Dammann, W Hüttemann, H D Kalek, H G Rohner, B Simon.   

Abstract

In a randomized, double-bind, parallel, multi-clinic study, the safety and efficacy of enprostil (35 micrograms twice daily) and ranitidine (150 mg twice daily) were compared in the treatment of active gastric ulcer in 93 outpatients (47 enprostil-treated patients and 46 ranitidine). The two treatment groups were well matched for demographic characteristics. The healing rates in the enprostil group were 22, 58, 80, and 86 percent at two, four, six, and eight weeks, respectively. The corresponding rates in the ranitidine group were 22, 66, 84, and 89 percent. None of these differences was statistically significant. The area of the ulcer at baseline and smoking status did not appear to influence healing rates. There were no significant differences between treatment groups in time to relief of ulcer symptoms, frequency of daytime or nighttime ulcer pain, or antacid use. Side effects attributable to enprostil treatment were diarrhea (10 percent versus 6 percent with ranitidine), gastrointestinal pain, and vomiting. These side effects, however, did not influence the patients' assessments of their overall response to enprostil and ranitidine therapy. Six enprostil-treated patients and one ranitidine-treated patient withdrew from the trial prematurely because of adverse experiences. Monitoring of clinical laboratory test results showed no significant changes in the two treatment groups. This study demonstrates that a prostaglandin E2 analogue, enprostil, in a dose of 35 micrograms twice daily, is similarly safe and effective as ranitidine in the treatment of active gastric ulcer.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1986        PMID: 3092661     DOI: 10.1016/s0002-9343(86)80017-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Med        ISSN: 0002-9343            Impact factor:   4.965


  7 in total

Review 1.  Histamine H2-receptor antagonists versus prostaglandins in the treatment of peptic ulcer disease.

Authors:  J G Penston; K G Wormsley
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  1989-04       Impact factor: 9.546

Review 2.  Formulary management of antiulcer drugs: clinical considerations.

Authors:  S L Sankey; L S Friedman
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1994-03       Impact factor: 4.981

3.  Randomized, double-blind comparison of famotidine with ranitidine in treatment of acute, benign gastric ulcer disease. Community-based study coupled with a patient registry.

Authors:  S R Brazer; M P Tyor; F S Pancotto; R S Brice; J T Garbutt; N M Wildermann; F E Harrell; D B Pryor; C L Liss; J K Root
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  1989-07       Impact factor: 3.199

4.  Prostaglandins in peptic ulcer disease. An overview of current status and future directions.

Authors:  S J Sontag
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  1986-11       Impact factor: 9.546

Review 5.  Ranitidine. An updated review of its pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties and therapeutic use in peptic ulcer disease and other allied diseases.

Authors:  S M Grant; H D Langtry; R N Brogden
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  1989-06       Impact factor: 9.546

6.  Effects of PGE2, misoprostol, and enprostil on guinea pig enterocyte adenylate cyclase. Clinical implications.

Authors:  J M Pawlotsky; P Ruszniewski; F Reyl-Desmars; M Bourgeois; M J Lewin
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  1993-02       Impact factor: 3.199

Review 7.  Enprostil. A preliminary review of its pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties, and therapeutic efficacy in the treatment of peptic ulcer disease.

Authors:  K L Goa; J P Monk
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  1987-11       Impact factor: 9.546

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.