DESIGN: In this phase III, double-blind, multicentre study, patients with endoscopically confirmed EO were randomised 1:1 to receive vonoprazan 20 mg or lansoprazole 30 mg, once daily for up to 8 weeks. The primary endpoint was EO healing rate at 8 weeks. The secondary endpoints were EO healing rates at 2 and 4 weeks. Safety endpoints included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs).
RESULTS: In the vonoprazan (n=238) and lansoprazole (n=230) arms, 8-week EO healing rates were 92.4% and 91.3%, respectively (difference 1.1% (95% CI -3.822% to 6.087%)). The respective 2-week EO healing rates were 75.0% and 67.8% (difference 7.2% (95% CI -1.054% to 15.371%)), and the respective 4-week EO healing rates were 85.3% and 83.5% (difference 1.8% (95% CI -4.763% to 8.395%)). In patients with baseline Los Angeles classification grade C/D, 2-week, 4-week and 8-week EO healing rates were higher with vonoprazan versus lansoprazole (2 weeks: 62.2% vs 51.5%, difference 10.6% (95% CI -5.708% to 27.002%); 4 weeks: 73.3% vs 67.2%, difference 6.2% (95% CI -8.884 to 21.223); and 8 weeks: 84.0% vs 80.6%, difference 3.4% (95% CI -9.187% to 15.993%)). Overall, EO healing rates appeared higher with vonoprazan versus lansoprazole. TEAE rates were 38.1% and 36.6% in the vonoprazan and lansoprazole group, respectively.
CONCLUSION: Our findings demonstrate the non-inferior efficacy of vonoprazan versus lansoprazole in terms of EO healing rate at 8 weeks in this population. Safety outcomes were similar in the two treatment arms.
TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02388724.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: During the period from 16 to 21 March 2007, outbreak investigations and active case finding were carried out among residents and nursing staff at the welfare home. Interviews and medical notes review were conducted to obtain epidemiological and clinical data. Hospitalised patients were tested for respiratory pathogens. Further genetic studies were also carried out on positive respiratory samples.
RESULTS: The overall clinical attack rate was 9.4% (17/180) in residents and 6.7% (2/30) in staff. All infected residents and staff had received influenza immunisation. Fifteen residents were hospitalised, with 2 developing severe complications. Genetic sequencing revealed that the outbreak strain had an 8.2% amino acid difference from B/Malaysia/2506/2004, the 2006 southern hemisphere influenza vaccine strain, which the residents and staff had earlier received.
CONCLUSIONS: A mismatch between the vaccine and circulating influenza virus strains can result in an outbreak in a highly immunised LTCF resident population. Active surveillance for acute respiratory illness in LTCFs could be implemented for rapid detection of antigenic drift. Enhanced infection control and other preventive measures can then be deployed in a timely manner to mitigate the effect of any outbreaks.