Luigi Gatta

Sequential Therapy versus Standard Triple-Drug Therapy for Helicobacter pylori Eradication: A Randomized Trial

Context Eradication rates for Helicobacter pylori infection are decreasing worldwide because of increasing antimicro-bial resistance. Contribution This double-blind trial randomly assigned 300 adults with dyspepsia or peptic ulcers to a 10-day sequential regimen (pantoprazole, amoxicillin, and placebo taken for 5 days followed by pantoprazole, clarithromycin, and tinidazole taken for 5 days) or standard 10-day therapy (pantoprazole, clarithromycin, and amoxicillin). The eradication rate of H. pylori infection was greater with the sequential regimen (89%) than with the standard treatment (77%). Approximately 5% of patients in each group had epigastric pain and 3% to 5% had mild diarrhea. Implication Sequential therapy eradicates H. pylori infection more often than does standard therapy. The Editors Helicobacter pylori infection causes peptic ulcers, gastric mucosaassociated lymphoid tissue lymphoma, and gastric cancer (1). Standard treatments for H. pylori infection that have been endorsed by U.S. and European authorities rely on clarithromycin or metronidazole in conjunction with other antibiotics and acid inhibitors (2, 3). The prevalence of clarithromycin and metronidazole resistance has increased substantially in recent years, and there has been a corresponding decrease in the eradication rate for H. pylori infection (4). Eradication rates in most western countries have declined to unacceptable levels. Eradication therapy fails in approximately 1 in 5 patients (5). A simple, short treatment regimen that would return eradication levels to those seen at the advent of H. pylori treatment is urgently needed (5). Such a regimen should have high efficacy against clarithromycin-resistant and metronidazole-resistant strains of H. pylori because these strains are increasingly encountered in routine clinical practice. Novel 10-day sequential therapy consisting of 5-day dual therapy (proton-pump inhibitor plus amoxicillin) followed by 5-day triple therapy (proton-pump inhibitor, clarithromycin, and tinidazole) has had good eradication success in unblinded trials in elderly and pediatric patients (68). However, no double-blind, controlled trials using conventional therapy have been reported, and the effect of clarithromycin and metronidazole resistance on the outcome of sequential therapy has not been studied prospectively. The aim of this study was to compare a 10-day sequential treatment regimen for H. pylori infection with standard 10-day triple therapy in a randomized, controlled trial. Secondary objectives were to determine the efficacy of the treatment regimen in patients with resistant strains of H. pylori, to assess treatment adherence, and to evaluate side effects. Methods Design Overview This was a prospective, double-blind, controlled study with a parallel-group design. At baseline, patients were evaluated for inclusion and exclusion criteria and provided written informed consent. Patients were then randomly assigned to a treatment group and had follow-up evaluations to assess the eradication rate of H. pylori infection, treatment adherence, and side effects. The study was performed according to good clinical practice and the Declaration of Helsinki. The ethics committees at the 2 participating centers approved the study. The consent form indicated that patients would be randomly assigned to treatment that was the current standard or a new therapy that might have higher eradication rates. Patients were told that eradication failure was possible with any therapy regimen. All patients with eradication failure were offered a rescue therapy on the basis of the results of sensitivity testing. Setting and Participants Between September 2003 and April 2006, consecutive patients with dyspepsia who were at least 18 years of age, who had never received treatment for H. pylori infection, and who had been referred to our hospitals (Bologna, Italy, and Rome, Italy) for a gastroenterology consultation were asked to participate in the study. No special recruitment techniques (such as advertisements or letters sent to primary care physicians) were used. Exclusion criteria were previous treatment for H. pylori infection; use of proton-pump inhibitors, H2-receptor antagonists, bismuth preparations, or antibiotics in the previous 2 weeks; concomitant use of anticoagulants or ketoconazole (because of potential interaction with the nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs) and glucocorticoids (because of association with ulcer disease); the ZollingerEllison syndrome; previous surgery of the esophagus or upper gastrointestinal tract (except appendectomy, polypectomy, or cholecystectomy); severe or unstable cardiovascular, pulmonary, or endocrine disease; clinically significant renal or hepatic disease or dysfunction; hematologic disorders; any other clinically significant medical condition that could increase risk; malignant disease of any kind except for successfully treated skin cancer (basal- or squamous-cell carcinoma) during the previous 5 years; Barrett esophagus or high-grade dysplasia; drug, alcohol, or medication abuse within the past year; severe psychiatric or neurologic disorders; and pregnancy or lactation, as well as sexually active women of child-bearing years who were not willing to practice medically acceptable contraception (oral or injectable contraceptives, implantable or mechanical intrauterine or vaginal devices, or vasectomy for the partner) for the study duration. Randomization and Interventions Patient allocation was determined with a random-number chart that was concealed from investigators and patients by using numbered blister packs of the study medication that corresponded to the random-number chart. A computer-generated randomization chart was used to determine allocation, which was stratified according to center by using a block design and a block size of 4. Allocation was concealed with an opaque envelope, which contained a number that corresponded to the numbered blister packs. The envelope was opened when the patient met the inclusion criteria and provided informed consent. Patients and investigators were blinded to treatment group. Patients were randomly allocated to receive a 10-day sequential regimen (40 mg of pantoprazole, 1 g of amoxicillin, and placebo, each administered twice daily for the first 5 days, followed by 40 mg of pantoprazole, 500 mg of clarithromycin, and 500 mg of tinidazole, each administered twice daily for the remaining 5 days); or standard therapy (40 mg of pantoprazole, 500 mg of clarithromycin, and 1 g of amoxicillin, each administered twice daily for 10 days). Medications were contained in individual blisters in the package. A placebo that was identical in color and shape to the clarithromycin capsule was administered during the first 5 days of sequential therapy to maintain blinding. This ensured that all patients took 3 medications twice a day for 10 days. Measurements and Outcomes The primary outcome of the study was eradication of H. pylori infection. Secondary outcomes were to determine the efficacy of sequential treatment against clarithromycin-resistant strains of H. pylori, to assess adherence to therapy, and to determine the frequency of self-reported side effects. 13C-Urea Breath Test Urea breath tests were done after an overnight fast. A baseline breath sample was obtained, and 75 mg of 13C-urea with citric acid (1.5 g) was administered as an aqueous solution. Another breath sample was collected 30 minutes after the test solution was administered. The results of the test were considered positive if the difference between the baseline sample and the 30-minute sample exceeded 4.5 parts per 1000 of 13CO2. All breath samples were analyzed in Bologna by using a single gas isotope ratio mass spectrometer (Finnigan, Bremen, Germany). The accuracy of the urea breath test was previously validated in our laboratory. We reported sensitivity and specificity values of 94.7% and 95.7%, respectively (9). Endoscopy All patients with positive results on the urea breath test had upper endoscopy, and 5 biopsy specimens were obtained during the procedure. Two specimens were taken from the antrum and 2 were taken from the corpus for histologic evaluation. The specimens were stained with hematoxylin and eosin and Giemsa stains, and gastritis was scored by using the updated Sydney System (10). The pathologist who performed the histologic examination was blinded to the results of all other tests. One biopsy specimen was obtained from the antrum for the rapid urease test (Campylobacter pylori test, Yamanouchi Pharma S.p.A, Corrugate, Milan, Italy). Two additional biopsy samples from the antrum were collected for bacterial culture and susceptibility testing. We performed cultures without knowing the other test results. For this purpose, biopsy specimens were sent to a single microbiological laboratory in Bologna within 24 hours and were stored at 70C. Isolated strains were tested for primary clarithromycin and metronidazole resistance by using an agar dilution method, which was defined as a minimal inhibitory concentration greater than 1 mg/L and greater than 8 mg/L for clarithromycin and metronidazole, respectively (11). Strains were classified as having isolated resistance to clarithromycin or metronidazole if the organisms were only resistant to 1 antibiotic. Dual resistance was defined as resistance to clarithromycin and metronidazole. At baseline, patients were classified as having H. pylori infection if the results on the urea breath test were positive and if the results on at least 2 of the following 3 tests were positive: rapid urease test, histologic examination, and culture. An expert panel recommended these criteria for use in clinical trials of H. pylori infection (12). Follow-up Procedures Treatment Adherence and Side Effects Patients were asked to return at the completion of therapy for a physical evaluation and to assess adherence to therapy and side effects. We first aske

Sequential therapy or triple therapy for Helicobacter pylori infection: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials in adults and children.

OBJECTIVES:Eradication rates with triple therapy (TT) for Helicobacter pylori infection have declined to unacceptable levels. Sequential therapy (ST) is a novel treatment that has shown promise in several controlled trials. Our aim was to assess the efficacy of ST in adults and children compared with that of TT by performing a systematic review and meta-analysis.METHODS:We performed an electronic search of the following: Cochrane Trial Register (until Issue 4, 2008), MEDLINE (1966 to 21 October 2008), EMBASE (1980 to 21 October 2008), and abstracts from the major US, European, and Asian gastroenterology conferences. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials with a parallel group design comparing the ST with a TT lasting at least 7 days were used.RESULTS:Ten RCTs enrolled 3,006 adult patients and the odds ratio (OR) for eradication of H. pylori with ST compared with TT was 2.99 (95% confidence interval (CI): 2.47–3.62), giving a number needed to treat (NNT) of 6 (95% CI: 5–7) favoring ST. There was no publication bias. The OR for eradication with ST compared with 10-day TT was 2.92 (95% CI: 1.95–4.38), yielding an NNT of 8 (95% CI: 6–12), favoring ST. In patients with clarithromycin resistance, the OR for eradication with ST was 10.21 (95% CI: 3.01–34.58) compared with TT, but the numbers studied are small. Three RCTs enrolled 260 children and adolescents, and the OR for eradication was 1.98 (95% CI: 0.96–4.07). There was no difference in the rate of side effects between the ST and the TT (OR, 1.01; 95% CI: 0.78–1.30).CONCLUSIONS:ST appears to be better than TT in the eradication of H. pylori. This is a promising therapy, but further trials are needed in other European countries and North America before it can be recommended as a first-line treatment.

Global eradication rates for Helicobacter pylori infection: systematic review and meta-analysis of sequential therapy

Objective To do a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing sequential therapy for eradication of Helicobacter pylori with pre-existing and new therapies, thus providing a glimpse of eradication success worldwide. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis. Data sources Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials up to May 2013; abstract books of major European, American, and Asian gastroenterological meetings. Study selection Randomised controlled trials in previously untreated adults, in which sequential therapy was compared with a pre-existing or new therapy. Results 46 randomised controlled trials were reviewed and analysed. 5666 patients were randomised to sequential therapy and 7866 to other (established and new) treatments. The overall eradication rate of sequential therapy was 84.3% (95% confidence interval 82.1% to 86.4%). Sequential therapy was superior to seven day triple therapy (relative risk 1.21, 95% confidence interval 1.17 to 1.25; I2=29.3%; number needed to treat 6 , 95% confidence interval 5% to 7%), marginally superior to 10 day triple therapy (1.11, 1.04 to 1.19; I2= 67.2%; NNT 10, 7 to 15), but not superior to 14 day triple therapy (1.00, 0.94 to 1.06; I2=54.3%), bismuth based therapy (1.01, 0.95 to 1.06; I2=21.1%), and non-bismuth based therapy (0.99, 0.94 to 1.05; I2=52.3%). Data on eradication according to pre-treatment antimicrobial susceptibility testing were available in eight studies, and sequential therapy was able to eradicate 72.8% (61.6% to 82.8%) of the strains resistant to clarithromycin. Conclusions Eradication rates with pre-existing and new therapies for H pylori are suboptimal. Regional monitoring of resistance rates should help to guide treatment, and new agents for treatment need to be developed.

Why does Japan have a high incidence of gastric cancer? Comparison of gastritis between UK and Japanese patients

Background and aims: The incidence of gastric cancer in Japan is four times higher than in the UK. It usually arises in a stomach with corpus predominant or pangastritis that has undergone extensive atrophy and intestinal metaplasia. We hypothesised that a Japanese population would have a more severe gastritis with a corpus predominant or pangastritis pattern and a greater degree of atrophy and intestinal metaplasia than that found in the UK. To test this we designed a comparative trial. Methods: A total of 252 age matched consecutive patients were recruited from the endoscopy services in Leeds and Tokyo. In each centre, 21 patients were prospectively selected from each decennial, between the ages of 20–80 years. All had epigastric discomfort as their predominant symptom. Patients with peptic ulcer, cancer, and oesophagitis were excluded. Five gastric biopsies were examined by two histopathologists using the updated Sydney system. Helicobacter pylori infection was assessed by histology and culture of biopsies and enzyme linked immunosorbent assay and immunoblot of plasma. Results: Gastritis was found by both pathologists in 59 (47%) UK and 76 (60%) Japanese patients (χ2 test, p = 0.04). In those patients with gastritis, corpus predominant or pangastritis was commoner in the Japanese (63% Japan v 36% in the UK (χ2 test, p = 0.003) Atrophy and intestinal metaplasia were more extensive and severe (Mann-Whitney U test, p<0.001) and chronic inflammation and polymorph activity were also greater, especially in the corpus (Mann-Whitney U test, p<0.001). Fifty three of 59 UK gastritis patients (90%) and 67/76 (88%) (χ2 test, p = 1) Japanese gastritis patients were positive for H pylori. Using a previously described “gastric cancer risk index” among H pylori positive patients, there were significantly more Japanese than UK subjects with a “high risk” score. Conclusion: In Japanese as opposed to English patients, gastritis is more prevalent and severe with more corpus predominant atrophy and intestinal metaplasia. These differences may partially explain the higher incidence of gastric cancer in Japan.

The Stool Antigen Test for Detection of Helicobacter pylori after Eradication Therapy

Context Standard treatment regimens do not eradicate infection in approximately 10% to 20% of people with ulcers or gastritis caused by Helicobacter pylori. Symptoms do not reliably identify patients who have persistent infection despite treatment. Although positive results on a urea breath test done 4 weeks after treatment reliably identify persistent infection, a noninvasive test that detects successful eradication earlier would be useful. Contribution This multicenter study shows that a positive finding on a stool antigen test done as early as 1 week after treatment identifies about 95% (range, 70% to 100%) of cases of persistent infection. Generalization Cautions Findings are from patients with dyspepsia who were referred for endoscopy; 20% of patients were still infected at 1 month despite eradication therapy. The Editors Noninvasive tests for Helicobacter pylori are important in primary care, both for initial diagnosis of H. pylori infection and for confirmation of eradication. Current guidelines recommend noninvasive testing and treatment of young dyspeptic patients without alarm symptoms (such as dysphagia or weight loss that suggest underlying malignant disease) in a primary care setting by using low-cost noninvasive tests (1, 2). Randomized, controlled trials have shown that a test and eradicate strategy toward H. pylori is effective in patients with dyspepsia seen in primary care settings who have not undergone investigations such as endoscopy or radiographic studies (3). Post-therapy testing is also growing in importance. Resistant strains of H. pylori are now widely prevalent in the United States and Europe, and eradication therapy with current regimens fails in 10% to 20% of patients (4, 5). Furthermore, some patients with ulcer disease remain symptomatic despite successful eradication of H. pylori and healing of the ulcer (6). In patients with persistent symptoms, testing for persistent H. pylori infection is important to direct further therapy. Routine testing to confirm eradication in patients with complicated ulcer disease, such as bleeding peptic ulcer, is necessary because the risk for rebleeding is greatly increased in patients with persistent infection (7). The choice of tests in the post-therapy setting is limited. Serologic tests are unreliable in determining eradication (8). Endoscopic tests (rapid urease test, histologic examination, or culture) are reliable, but endoscopy is expensive and inconvenient. Until recently, the only noninvasive test that reliably demonstrated whether eradication was successful was the urea breath test (9). This test has high sensitivity and specificity in the post-therapy setting but cannot be used until 4 weeks after treatment. Moreover, the breath test is still not widely available in the United States. The fecal antigen test is a relatively new noninvasive test for detection of H. pylori (10). This test detects the presence of infection by measuring the fecal excretion of H. pylori antigens. It has been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for detection of H. pylori before and after therapy. We sought to determine whether a stool antigen test administered at various times after treatment correctly identifies persons in whom H. pylori infection persists despite eradication therapy. Methods We prospectively studied 84 patients infected with H. pylori at six clinical centers (31 in Bologna, Italy; 29 in Amsterdam, the Netherlands; 9 in Rome, Italy; 8 in Lisbon, Portugal; 4 in Madrid, Spain; and 3 in Milwaukee, Wisconsin). The sample consisted of consecutive patients with dyspepsia (defined as pain or discomfort centered in the upper abdomen) who were referred by primary care physicians for upper endoscopy (11). Consenting patients were enrolled if they tested positive for H. pylori on endoscopic tests. Patients enrolled in this study have not been enrolled in other studies. Patients were excluded if they had taken proton-pump inhibitors, H2-receptor antagonists, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents, or antibiotics in the 4 weeks before the study. Failure to return for follow-up endoscopy was an a priori exclusion criterion. All patients gave written informed consent, and the study was approved by the human subjects review committee or equivalent at each participating institution. At baseline, patients underwent endoscopy with biopsy sampling for histologic examination (two samples from the antrum and two from the corpus), culture (two samples from the antrum and two from the corpus), and a rapid urease test (one sample from the antrum). All patients were infected with H. pylori at baseline, as demonstrated by positive results on both rapid urease testing and histologic examination or a positive culture for H. pylori. Within 24 hours of the endoscopy, all patients underwent a 13C or 14C urea breath test. The breath test was chosen according to local availability and experience, but in all cases a validated breath test analysis system was used. Cut-off values were determined according to the recommendations of the various manufacturers of these tests. Patients collected stool using a kit consisting of a plastic spoon that is used to scoop a small amount of stool from the toilet paper or toilet bowl into an airtight container. At all sites, the stool assay was performed by using the Premier Platinum HpSA test (Meridian Diagnostics, Inc., Cincinnati, Ohio). The assay is a microwell-based enzyme immunoassay that uses polyclonal antiH. pylori capture antibody adsorbed to microwells. Diluted patient samples and a peroxidase-conjugated polyclonal antibody were added to the wells and incubated at room temperature for 1 hour. A wash was performed to remove unbound material. Substrate was added and incubated for 10 minutes at room temperature. Color develops in the presence of bound enzyme. Stop solution was added, and the results were inspected spectrophotometrically at 450 nm within 15 minutes of adding the stop solution. Visual determination can also be used; this has been shown to have similar results (12). A positive control and a negative control are built into the test. The cut-off values were classified as negative (<0.140), indeterminate (0.140 to 0.159), or positive (>0.160). After completion of the baseline procedures, treatment was begun with ranitidine bismuth citrate (400 mg twice daily) or omeprazole (20 mg twice daily) in combination with amoxicillin (1 g twice daily) and clarithromycin (500 mg twice daily) for 7 to 10 days. Seven-day eradication therapy was used in Europe, where it is approved by the European Union and has been shown to be effective (5). Ten-day triple therapy with proton-pump inhibitors was used in the United States, where it is approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Patients collected stool for the stool antigen test on days 3, 7, 15, 21, 28, and 35 after completion of H. pylori eradication therapy. On day 35 after completion of eradication therapy, endoscopy was repeated and biopsy samples were again obtained for histologic examination, culture, and the rapid urease test, as performed at the baseline visit. The 13C or 14C urea breath test was repeated on day 35 by using the same method and cut-off values as at baseline. Patients were classified as being infected with H. pylori at baseline and having persistent infection on day 35 if culture of gastric biopsy specimens was positive for H. pylori or results of the rapid urease test and histologic examination were positive. All other patients were classified as negative. These criteria have been recommended by an expert panel for use in clinical trials of H. pylori eradication (13). At baseline, the sensitivity of the stool test and urea breath test were calculated by using the presence of infection (defined above) as the gold standard. At each time point after completion of therapy (days 3, 7, 15, 21, 28), predictive values were calculated by using continued infection on day 35 as the gold standard (positive result on culture or on rapid urease test and histologic examination). Trained investigators who were blinded to the results of the other diagnostic studies performed the stool assays. The first endoscopy procedure was performed before the stool and breath tests. Therapy was given on the basis of results on endoscopic testing. Endoscopists were blinded to the results of post-treatment stool studies and the breath test until all evaluations were completed. Long-Term Follow-up Patients in whom eradication of H. pylori was successful were eligible for entry into a long-term study evaluating the stool antigen test. For 6 months, stool antigen tests were done monthly and a urea breath test was obtained every 3 months. Statistical Analysis Statistical analysis was performed by using StatView for Windows, version 5.01 (SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, North Carolina). Results are presented as the mean (SD). Sensitivity, specificity, probabilities, and predictive values are presented with 95% exact binomial CIs. Equivocal stool tests are considered by inclusion in the denominator of sensitivity and specificity. Stool antigen concentrations at individual time points were compared by using theMannWhitney test with downward adjustment of the P values for repeated observations (14). Role of the Funding Source The manufacturer (Meridian Diagnostics, Inc.) provided the stool kits. The study had no other funding source. Collection, analysis, and interpretation of the data, including the decision to publish, were solely the decision of the authors; the manufacturer of the test had no role in this process. Results The mean age of the 84 study patients was 52 years (range, 18 to 81 years). Fifty-three patients were women, and 31 were men. Endoscopic findings were as follows: normal (7 patients), esophagitis (2 patients), erythema in the antrum (45 patients), erosions in the antrum (11 patients), erosive duodenitis (9 patients), duodenal ulcers (8 patients), gastric ulcer (2 p

Effect of proton pump inhibitors and antacid therapy on 13C urea breath tests and stool test for Helicobacter pylori infection.

OBJECTIVE:There is uncertainty about the best method of testing patients for Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection while they are taking proton pump inhibitors. The aim of this study was to determine: (i) if the decreased sensitivity of the urea breath test during proton pump inhibitor is corrected by different techniques for breath testing and (ii) if the sensitivity of stool test is decreased with the administration of proton pump inhibitors.METHODS:Prospective randomized single-blind study was performed in a tertiary care university hospital. Out of 72 H. pylori infected patients endoscoped for upper abdominal symptoms 48 were randomized to proton pump inhibitors (omeprazole 20 mg each day or esomeprazole 40 mg each day) and 24 to antacid (aluminum hydroxide 800 mg each day) for 14 days. Several breath tests (standard 75 mg 13C-UBT with citric acid, with orange juice, a tablet breath test with 100 and 50 mg of 13C), and a stool test were carried out. Baseline samples were collected before and after treatment.RESULTS:The baseline sensitivity for all breath tests was 100% in both groups; for stool test it was 97.8% (95% CI: 88.7–96.6) and 90% (95% CI: 69.9–97.2) in the proton pump inhibitor and antacid group, respectively. After treatment, the sensitivity of tests was significantly low (UBTs range: 77.1%–85.4%; stool test: 83%; 95% CI: 63.9–91.1), while it was unchanged in the antacid group.CONCLUSIONS:False negative breath and stool tests are equally common in patients taking proton pump inhibitors. Antacids do not impair the sensitivity of the breath tests or the stool test.

Effective and safe proton pump inhibitor therapy in acid-related diseases – A position paper addressing benefits and potential harms of acid suppression

BackgroundThe introduction of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) into clinical practice has revolutionized the management of acid-related diseases. Studies in primary care and emergency settings suggest that PPIs are frequently prescribed for inappropriate indications or for indications where their use offers little benefit. Inappropriate PPI use is a matter of great concern, especially in the elderly, who are often affected by multiple comorbidities and are taking multiple medications, and are thus at an increased risk of long-term PPI-related adverse outcomes as well as drug-to-drug interactions. Herein, we aim to review the current literature on PPI use and develop a position paper addressing the benefits and potential harms of acid suppression with the purpose of providing evidence-based guidelines on the appropriate use of these medications.MethodsThe topics, identified by a Scientific Committee, were assigned to experts selected by three Italian Scientific Societies, who independently performed a systematic search of the relevant literature using Medline/PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane databases. Search outputs were distilled, paying more attention to systematic reviews and meta-analyses (where available) representing the best evidence. The draft prepared on each topic was circulated amongst all the members of the Scientific Committee. Each expert then provided her/his input to the writing, suggesting changes and the inclusion of new material and/or additional relevant references. The global recommendations were then thoroughly discussed in a specific meeting, refined with regard to both content and wording, and approved to obtain a summary of current evidence.ResultsTwenty-five years after their introduction into clinical practice, PPIs remain the mainstay of the treatment of acid-related diseases, where their use in gastroesophageal reflux disease, eosinophilic esophagitis, Helicobacter pylori infection, peptic ulcer disease and bleeding as well as, and Zollinger–Ellison syndrome is appropriate. Prevention of gastroduodenal mucosal lesions (and symptoms) in patients taking non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or antiplatelet therapies and carrying gastrointestinal risk factors also represents an appropriate indication. On the contrary, steroid use does not need any gastroprotection, unless combined with NSAID therapy. In dyspeptic patients with persisting symptoms, despite successful H. pylori eradication, short-term PPI treatment could be attempted. Finally, addition of PPIs to pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy in patients with refractory steatorrhea may be worthwhile.ConclusionsOverall, PPIs are irreplaceable drugs in the management of acid-related diseases. However, PPI treatment, as any kind of drug therapy, is not without risk of adverse effects. The overall benefits of therapy and improvement in quality of life significantly outweigh potential harms in most patients, but those without clear clinical indication are only exposed to the risks of PPI prescription. Adhering with evidence-based guidelines represents the only rational approach to effective and safe PPI therapy.Please see related Commentary: doi:10.1186/s12916-016-0724-1.

Efficacy of 5-asa in the Treatment of Colonic Diverticular Disease

Objective To assess the therapeutic efficacy of 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA) in patients with colonic diverticular disease performing a systematic review of the literature. Data Sources Cochrane Trial Register (until Issue 4, 2008), Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (1966 to October 1, 2008), Excerpta Medica Database (1980 to October 1, 2008), and abstracts from the major US, European, and Asian gastroenterology conferences. Expert opinions sought and reference lists of identified studies and any relevant published reviews checked. Study Selection Randomized controlled trial (RCT) or a controlled clinical trial with a parallel group design using 5-ASA as 1 treatment arm. Results Six RCTs enrolling 818 patients were found: 3 were performed in patients with uncomplicated diverticulitis, and the remaining in patients with symptomatic uncomplicated diverticular disease. The results of these studies showed that patients treated with 5-ASA had significantly better outcomes and that also mesalazine scheduled daily was superior to cyclic administration to prevent relapse of diverticular disease. However, several of these studies have not included an endoscopy at the start of the study and when patients had recurrences. Conclusions From this systematic review, it seems that 5-ASAs may have a role in patients with colonic diverticular disease. However, high-quality well-designed RCTs are necessary to confirm these initial observations.

Serological markers for gastric atrophy in asymptomatic patients infected with Helicobacter pylori

OBJECTIVE:Atrophic gastritis is a precancerous condition that is commonly caused by chronic Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection. This blinded, controlled study was designed to determine if serum gastrin and pepsinogens were reliable markers of atrophy in asymptomatic patients.METHODS:One hundred and forty-seven asymptomatic patients underwent endoscopy with multiple gastric biopsies obtained for histology, culture, and rapid urease test. Fasting serum gastrin (total and G-17) and serum pepsinogens (I-II) were determined by standard immunoassays. Gastric atrophy was histologically assessed in accordance with internationally accepted criteria; three main patterns of gastritis were distinguished: (a) nonatrophic gastritis, (b) atrophic antrum-restricted and antrum-predominant gastritis, and (c) corpus-restricted gastritis. Receiving operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was used to determine the best cut-off for each serum test in nonatrophic gastritis versus antrum-restricted/antrum-predominant atrophic gastritis.RESULTS:No significant differences in serum gastrin and pepsinogens I-II were detected in nonatrophic gastritis versus patients with antrum-restricted/antrum-predominant atrophic gastritis. The positive likelihood ratios for an abnormal serum test to detect antrum-restricted/antrum-predominant atrophy in the gastric body were total serum gastrin 2.13 (95% CI 0.99, 4.6), gastrin-17: 1.55 (95% CI 0.75, 36.17), pepsinogen I: 2.74 (1.4, 5.4), pepsinogen II: 1.74 (1.27, 2.39), and the ratio of pepsinogen I and II: 1.8 (1.2–2.8). Negative likelihood ratios ranged from 0.20 to 0.65.CONCLUSIONS:In an asymptomatic population, serum gastrin (total and G-17) and pepsinogens I-II (and their ratio) do not discriminate nonatrophic versus antrum-restricted/predominant atrophic gastritis.

Higher risk of tuberculosis reactivation when anti-TNF is combined with immunosuppressive agents: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials

Abstract Objective. Treatment with tumour necrosis factor antagonists (anti-TNF) has been recognized as a risk factor for tuberculosis (TB) reactivation. Our aim was to evaluate risk of TB reactivation in rheumatologic and non-rheumatologic diseases treated with the same anti-TNF agents with and without concomitant therapies. Methods. We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating infliximab, adalimumab, and certolizumab in both rheumatologic and non-rheumatologic diseases until 2012. Results were calculated as pooled rates and/or pooled odd ratios (OR). Results. Overall, 40 RCTs with a total of 14,683 patients (anti-TNF: 10,010; placebo: 4673) were included. TB reactivation was 0.26% (26/10,010) in the anti-TNF group and 0% (0/4673) in the control group, corresponding to an OR of 24.8 (95% CI 2.4–133). TB risk was higher when anti-TNF agents were combined with methotrexate or azathioprine as compared with either controls (24/4241 versus 0/4673; OR 54; 95% CI 5.3–88) or anti-TNF monotherapy (24/4241 versus 2/5769; OR 13.3; 95% CI 3.7–100). When anti-TNF was used as monotherapy, TB risk tended to be higher than placebo (2/5769 versus 0/4673; OR 4; 95% CI 0.2–15.7). Conclusions. TB risk with anti-TNF agents appeared to be increased when these agents were used in combination with methotrexate or azathioprine as compared with monotherapy regimen. TB risk seemed to be higher than placebo, even when monotherapy is prescribed.