4.4 Review

Efficacy of Vonoprazan-Based Triple Therapy for Helicobacter pylori Eradication: A Multicenter Study and a Review of the Literature

期刊

DIGESTIVE DISEASES AND SCIENCES
卷 62, 期 11, 页码 3069-3076

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10620-017-4664-1

关键词

Triple therapy; Vonoprazan; P-CAB

资金

  1. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [17K15911] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Eradication therapies for Helicobacter pylori infection are advancing as new acid inhibitory reagents approved. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of vonoprazan-based triple treatment. Materials and Methods Triple therapy with vonoprazan and two antibiotics (amoxicillin and clarithromycin or metronidazole) received focus in this analysis. We performed a multicenter retrospective study of patients who received vonoprazan-based eradication therapy between February 2015 and February 2016 and conducted a review of the literature. Results The eradication rate among the 799 patients in our multicenter study was 94.4% (95% confidence interval [CI] 92.6-96.2%) in the per-protocol analysis for first-line treatment (with vonoprazan 20 mg, amoxicillin 750 mg, and clarithromycin 200 or 400 mg, twice a day for 7 days) and 97.1% (95% CI 93.0-101.1%) for second-line treatment (with vonoprazan 20 mg, amoxicillin 750 mg, and metronidazole 250 mg, twice a day for 7 days). The overall incidence of adverse events was 4.4% in an intention-to-treat analysis with no patients hospitalized. In a literature review, six reports, in which 1380 patients received vonoprazan-based first-line eradication therapy, were included and were all reported by Japanese researchers. The eradication success rates in per-protocol analysis were between 85 and 93%, which was roughly the same among the studies. Conclusions Vonoprazan-based triple therapy was effective and safe for Helicobacter pylori eradication in real-world experience, confirmed by a multicenter study and a review of the pertinent literature.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据