Bismuth-based quadruple therapy versus standard triple therapy for the eradication of Helicobacter pylori in Belgium: a multicentre, non-blinded randomized, prospective study.
S François, F Mana, R Ntounda, V Lamy, S Cadranel, P Bontems, V Miendje Deyi, E Macken, S Kindt
{"title":"Bismuth-based quadruple therapy versus standard triple therapy for the eradication of Helicobacter pylori in Belgium: a multicentre, non-blinded randomized, prospective study.","authors":"S François, F Mana, R Ntounda, V Lamy, S Cadranel, P Bontems, V Miendje Deyi, E Macken, S Kindt","doi":"10.51821/87.2.12142","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Helicobacter pylori (Hp) infection predisposes to malignant and non-malignant diseases warranting eradication. In Belgium, resistance rates for clarithromycin demonstrate regional variations making the use of standard triple therapy (STT) borderline acceptable. According to a recent Belgian survey, STT and bismuth-based quadruple therapy (BQT), are equally frequent prescribed as first line treatment for treatment naïve Hp positive patients. This study aims to evaluate the eradication rates (ER) of BQT versus STT.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Multicentre, non-blinded randomized, prospective study comparing ER in treatment-naïve Hp positive patients. ER were compared by intention to treat (ITT) and per protocol (PP) analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall 250 patients were included (STT 126, BQT 124). Seventeen patients were lost to follow-up (6,8%). No significant difference in ER between BQT and STT was observed in ITT (73% vs 68%, p= 0,54) neither in PP analysis (81% vs 75%, p= 0,33). Side effects and endoscopic findings were comparable between groups. Post-hoc analysis showed no differences according to gender or site allocation.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The numerical advantage of BQT did not translate in a significant improvement of ER when compared with STT. These results question the cost-effectiveness of BQT, while confirming the suboptimal eradication rates on STT. A nationwide monitoring of resistance patterns, maximal investments in treatment adherence as well as a detailed follow-up of the changing treatment landscape are mandatory to continuously optimise Hp ER in Belgium.</p>","PeriodicalId":7322,"journal":{"name":"Acta gastro-enterologica Belgica","volume":"87 2","pages":"235-240"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta gastro-enterologica Belgica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.51821/87.2.12142","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Helicobacter pylori (Hp) infection predisposes to malignant and non-malignant diseases warranting eradication. In Belgium, resistance rates for clarithromycin demonstrate regional variations making the use of standard triple therapy (STT) borderline acceptable. According to a recent Belgian survey, STT and bismuth-based quadruple therapy (BQT), are equally frequent prescribed as first line treatment for treatment naïve Hp positive patients. This study aims to evaluate the eradication rates (ER) of BQT versus STT.
Methods: Multicentre, non-blinded randomized, prospective study comparing ER in treatment-naïve Hp positive patients. ER were compared by intention to treat (ITT) and per protocol (PP) analysis.
Results: Overall 250 patients were included (STT 126, BQT 124). Seventeen patients were lost to follow-up (6,8%). No significant difference in ER between BQT and STT was observed in ITT (73% vs 68%, p= 0,54) neither in PP analysis (81% vs 75%, p= 0,33). Side effects and endoscopic findings were comparable between groups. Post-hoc analysis showed no differences according to gender or site allocation.
Conclusion: The numerical advantage of BQT did not translate in a significant improvement of ER when compared with STT. These results question the cost-effectiveness of BQT, while confirming the suboptimal eradication rates on STT. A nationwide monitoring of resistance patterns, maximal investments in treatment adherence as well as a detailed follow-up of the changing treatment landscape are mandatory to continuously optimise Hp ER in Belgium.
期刊介绍：
The Journal Acta Gastro-Enterologica Belgica principally publishes peer-reviewed original manuscripts, reviews, letters to editors, book reviews and guidelines in the field of clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology, including digestive oncology, digestive pathology, as well as nutrition. Pure animal or in vitro work will not be considered for publication in the Journal. Translational research papers (including sections of animal or in vitro work) are considered by the Journal if they have a clear relationship to or relevance for clinical hepato-gastroenterology (screening, disease mechanisms and/or new therapies). Case reports and clinical images will be accepted if they represent an important contribution to the description, the pathogenesis or the treatment of a specific gastroenterology or liver problem. The language of the Journal is English. Papers from any country will be considered for publication. Manuscripts submitted to the Journal should not have been published previously (in English or any other language), nor should they be under consideration for publication elsewhere. Unsolicited papers are peer-reviewed before it is decided whether they should be accepted, rejected, or returned for revision. Manuscripts that do not meet the presentation criteria (as indicated below) will be returned to the authors. Papers that go too far beyond the scope of the journal will be also returned to the authors by the editorial board generally within 2 weeks. The Journal reserves the right to edit the language of papers accepted for publication for clarity and correctness, and to make formal changes to ensure compliance with AGEB’s style. Authors have the opportunity to review such changes in the proofs.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
