METHODS: Prospective, multicenter, international registry on the management of H. pylori (European Registry on H. pylori Management). All infected and culture-diagnosed adult patients registered in the Spanish Association of Gastroenterology-Research Electronic Data Capture from 2013 to 2021 were included.
RESULTS: A total of 2,852 naive patients with culture results were analyzed. Resistance to clarithromycin, metronidazole, and quinolones was 22%, 27%, and 18%, respectively. The most effective treatment, regardless of resistance, were the 3-in-1 single capsule with bismuth, metronidazole, and tetracycline (91%) and the quadruple with bismuth, offering optimal cure rates even in the presence of bacterial resistance to clarithromycin or metronidazole. The concomitant regimen with tinidazole achieved an eradication rate of 99% (90/91) vs 84% (90/107) with metronidazole. Triple schedules, sequential, or concomitant regimen with metronidazole did not achieve optimal results. A total of 1,118 non-naive patients were analyzed. Resistance to clarithromycin, metronidazole, and quinolones was 49%, 41%, and 24%, respectively. The 3-in-1 single capsule (87%) and the triple therapy with levofloxacin (85%) were the only ones that provided encouraging results.
DISCUSSION: In regions where the antibiotic resistance rate of H. pylori is high, eradication treatment with the 3-in-1 single capsule, the quadruple with bismuth, and concomitant with tinidazole are the best options in naive patients. In non-naive patients, the 3-in-1 single capsule and the triple therapy with levofloxacin provided encouraging results.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Physicians who managed H. pylori eradication in daily practice across 10 Southeast Asian countries were invited to participate in an online questionnaire, which included questions about the local availability of antimicrobial susceptibility tests (ASTs) and their preferred eradication regimens in real-world practice. An empiric regimen was considered inappropriate if it did not follow the local guidelines/consensus, particularly if it contained antibiotics with a high reported resistance rate or was recommended not to be empirically used worldwide.
RESULTS: There were 564 valid responses, including 314 (55.7%) from gastroenterologists (GIs) and 250 (44.3%) from non-GI physicians. ASTs were unavailable in 41.7%. In countries with low and intermediate clarithromycin resistance, the most common first-line regimen was PAC (proton pump inhibitor [PPI], amoxicillin, clarithromycin) (72.7% and 73.2%, respectively). Regarding second-line therapy, the most common regimen was bismuth-based quadruple therapy, PBMT (PPI, bismuth, metronidazole, tetracycline) (50.0% and 59.8%, respectively), if other regimens were used as first-line treatment. Concomitant therapy (PPI, amoxicillin, clarithromycin, metronidazole) (30.5% and 25.9%, respectively) and PAL (PPI, amoxicillin, levofloxacin) (22.7% and 27.7%, respectively) were favored if PBMT had been used as first-line treatment. In countries with high clarithromycin resistance, the most common first-line regimen was PBMT, but the utilization rate was only 57.7%. Alarmingly, PAC was prescribed in 27.8% of patients, ranking as the second most common regimen, and its prescription rate was higher in non-GI physicians than GI physicians (40.1% vs. 16.2%, p
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial involved treatment-naïve H. pylori-positive patients. Ninety patients received standard triple therapy for 2 weeks before receiving either a probiotic or placebo for 4 weeks. The posttreatment eradication rate was assessed via a 14 C urea breath test in Week 8. The Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale (GSRS) questionnaire and an interview on treatment adverse effects were conducted during this study.
RESULTS: The eradication rate was higher in the probiotic group than in the placebo group, with a 22.2% difference in the intention-to-treat analysis (91.1% vs. 68.9%; p = 0.007) and 24.3% difference in the per-protocol analysis (93.2% vs. 68.9%; p = 0.007). The probiotic group showed significant pre- to post-treatment reductions in indigestion, constipation, abdominal pain, and total GSRS scores. The probiotic group showed significantly greater reductions in GSRS scores than the placebo group: indigestion (4.34 ± 5.00 vs. 1.78 ± 5.64; p = 0.026), abdominal pain (2.64 ± 2.88 vs. 0.89 ± 3.11; p = 0.007), constipation (2.34 ± 3.91 vs. 0.64 ± 2.92; p = 0.023), and total score (12.41 ± 12.19 vs. 4.24 ± 13.72; p = 0.004). The probiotic group reported significantly fewer adverse headache (0% vs. 15.6%; p = 0.012) and abdominal pain (0% vs. 13.3%; p = 0.026) effects.
CONCLUSIONS: There was a significant increase in H. pylori eradication rate and attenuation of symptoms and adverse treatment effects when L. reuteri was given as an adjunct treatment.
METHODS: We searched related articles from January 1998 to December 2020 to obtain the prevalence and relative risks (or odds ratio) of GC associated with H. pylori in Asia. The burden of GC attributable to H. pylori infection was quantified by Population Attributable Fraction (PAF) and Disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs).
RESULTS: We quantified the burden of GC attributable to H. pylori infection with 415.6 thousand DALYs and 38.03% PAF through the five included Asian countries in 2019. The study found that the burden had obvious regional differences. The DALYs ranged from 298.9 thousand in China to 1.9 thousand in Malaysia, and the PAFs were between 58.00% in Japan and 30.89% in China. The average prevalence of H. pylori in the included general population was estimated to be 56.29%.
CONCLUSIONS: Helicobacter pylori poses a huge disease burden of GC to the population, and its eradication should receive attention, especially in the countries with high incidence of and mortality due to GC.
METHODS: We searched up to June 5, 2022, for randomized controlled trials of gastric acid-related diseases that included erosive esophagitis, symptomatic gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), peptic ulcers, and Helicobacter pylori infection. The pooled risk ratio (RR) was evaluated for the efficacy outcome and treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) as the safety outcome. Sensitivity analyses were performed to test the robustness of the study findings.
RESULTS: Of the 710 screened studies, 19 studies including 7023 participants were analyzed. The RRs for the healing of erosive esophagitis with Vonoprazan versus PPI were 1.09 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.03-1.14), 1.03 (95% CI 1.00-1.07), and 1.02 (95% CI 1.00-1.05) in Weeks 2, 4, and 8, respectively. There were no differences in the improvement of GERD symptoms and healing of gastric and duodenal ulcers between PCAB and PPI. The pooled eradication rates of H. pylori were significantly higher in Vonoprazan versus PPI first-line treatment (RR 1.13; 95% CI 1.04-1.22). The overall RR of TEAEs with Vonoprazan versus PPI was 1.08 (95% CI 0.89-1.31). Overall, the risk of bias was low to some concerns. Furthermore, sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the study's conclusion.
CONCLUSION: Vonoprazan is superior to PPI in first-line H. pylori eradication and erosive esophagitis but non-inferior in other gastric acid-related diseases. Likewise, short-term safety is comparable in both treatment groups.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the influence of P-gp modulation on the efficacy of treatment regimen.
METHOD: P-gp modulation in rats was performed by using P-gp inducer (150 mg/kg rifampicin) and P-gp inhibitor (10 mg/kg cyclosporine A) for 14 days prior to be infected with Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori). The rats were further divided into groups, which were normal control, vehicle control, antibiotics and omeprazole, antibiotics only and omeprazole only for another 2 weeks of treatment. The ulcer formation and P-gp expression were determined by using macroscopic evaluation and western blot analysis, respectively.
RESULTS: The highest P-gp expression was shown in the induced P-gp rats (2.00 ± 0.68) while the lowest P-gp expression was shown in the inhibited P-gp rats (0.45 ± 0.36) compared to the normal P-gp rats. In all groups, the rats which were infected with H. pylori, had a significant increase (p
METHODS: 28 experts from 11 countries reviewed the evidence and modified the statements using the Delphi method, with consensus level predefined as ≥80% of agreement on each statement. The Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was followed.
RESULTS: Consensus was reached in 26 statements. At an individual level, eradication of H. pylori reduces the risk of GC in asymptomatic subjects and is recommended unless there are competing considerations. In cohorts of vulnerable subjects (eg, first-degree relatives of patients with GC), a screen-and-treat strategy is also beneficial. H. pylori eradication in patients with early GC after curative endoscopic resection reduces the risk of metachronous cancer and calls for a re-examination on the hypothesis of 'the point of no return'. At the general population level, the strategy of screen-and-treat for H. pylori infection is most cost-effective in young adults in regions with a high incidence of GC and is recommended preferably before the development of atrophic gastritis and intestinal metaplasia. However, such a strategy may still be effective in people aged over 50, and may be integrated or included into national healthcare priorities, such as colorectal cancer screening programmes, to optimise the resources. Reliable locally effective regimens based on the principles of antibiotic stewardship are recommended. Subjects at higher risk of GC, such as those with advanced gastric atrophy or intestinal metaplasia, should receive surveillance endoscopy after eradication of H. pylori.
CONCLUSION: Evidence supports the proposal that eradication therapy should be offered to all individuals infected with H. pylori. Vulnerable subjects should be tested, and treated if the test is positive. Mass screening and eradication of H. pylori should be considered in populations at higher risk of GC.
OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate the effects of HP eradication on PD symptoms.
METHODS: In this parallel-group, double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled, single-center trial, patients with PD with positive HP urea breath test and serology were block randomized (1:1) to receive standard eradication triple therapy or identically appearing placebo capsules for 1 week. Prespecified motor (International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society Unified PD Rating Scale [MDS-UPDRS], timed tests, and home-based wearable sensor measurements), nonmotor (Leeds Dyspepsia Questionnaire and Montreal Cognitive Assessment), and quality-of-life (Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire-39) outcome measures were assessed at weeks 6, 12, 24, and 52. The primary outcome was the baseline-to-week 12 change in ON medication MDS-UPDRS motor scores. Lactulose-hydrogen breath testing for concomitant small intestinal bacterial overgrowth was performed at baseline and repeated at week 24, together with the urea breath test.
RESULTS: A total of 310 patients were screened for eligibility and 80 were randomly assigned, of whom 67 were included in the full-analysis set (32 treatment group patients, 35 placebo patients). HP eradication did not improve MDS-UPDRS motor scores at week 12 (mean difference 2.6 points in favor of placebo, 95% confidence interval: -0.4 to 5.6, P = 0.089). There was no significant improvement in any motor, nonmotor, or quality-of-life outcome at weeks 12 and 52. Both the full-analysis and per-protocol analyses (based on eradication status) supported these conclusions. Small intestinal bacterial overgrowth status did not influence treatment results.
CONCLUSIONS: HP eradication does not improve clinical outcomes in PD, suggesting that there is no justification for routine HP screening or eradication with the goal of improving PD symptoms. © 2020 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.
RESULTS: 96.6% (n=85) of H. pylori isolates were cagPAI-positive with 22.4% (19/85) having an intact cagPAI, whereas 77.6% (66/85) had a partial/rearranged cagPAI. The frequency of cag2 and cag14 were found to be significantly higher in H. pylori isolated from Malays, whereas cag4 was predominantly found in Chinese isolates. The cag24 was significantly found in higher proportions in Malay and Indian isolates than in Chinese isolates. The intactness of cagPAI region showed an association with histopathological scores of the gastric mucosa. Significant association was observed between H. pylori harbouring partial cagPAI with higher density of bacteria and neutrophil activity, whereas strains lacking cagPAI were associated with higher inflammatory score.
CONCLUSIONS: The genotypes of H. pylori strains with various cagPAI rearrangement associated with patients' ethnicities and histopathological scores might contribute to the pathogenesis of H. pylori infection in a multi-ethnic population.
METHODS: H pylori-positive patients were randomly assigned to either a rabeparzole (Pariet) 20 mg b.i.d., amoxicillin (Ospamox) 1 g b.i.d. and clarithromycin (Klacid) 500 mg b.i.d. for 14 days or rabeprazole (Pariet) 20 mg q.i.d., amoxicillin (Ospamox) 1 g q.i.d. also for 14 days. Eradication was tested for by the C13 -UBT at least 4 weeks after the completion of therapy.
RESULTS: H pylori was eradicated in 86.2% of patients (81/94) (95% CI: 77.8-91.7) in the STT group compared with 92.8% (90/97) (95% CI: 85.9-96.5) in the HDDT group on ITT analysis. On PP analysis, H pylori was eradicated in 91.0% of patients (81/89) (95% CI: 83.3-95.4) in the STT group compared with 93.8% (90/96) (95% CI: 87.0-97.1) in the HDDT group. Side effects were few although many patients in the STT arm complained of bitter taste. The HDDT arm was well tolerated by patients.
CONCLUSIONS: The HDDT gave a high eradication rate comparable to the STT for 2 weeks and was a well-tolerated regimen for H pylori eradication.
METHODS: We applied H. pylori multiplex serology to measure antibody responses to 13 H. pylori proteins in prediagnostic serum samples from 485 colorectal cancer cases and 485 matched controls nested within the EPIC study. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using multivariable conditional logistic regression to estimate the association of H. pylori overall and protein-specific seropositivity with odds of developing colorectal cancer.
RESULTS: Fifty-one percent of colorectal cancer cases were H. pylori seropositive compared with 44% of controls, resulting in an OR of 1.36 (95% CI, 1.00-1.85). Among the 13 individual H. pylori proteins, the association was driven mostly by seropositivity to Helicobacter cysteine-rich protein C (HcpC; OR: 1.66; 95% CI, 1.19-2.30) and Vacuolating cytotoxin A (VacA) (OR: 1.34; 95% CI, 0.99-1.82), the latter being nonstatistically significant only in the fully adjusted model.
CONCLUSIONS: In this prospective multicenter European study, antibody responses to H. pylori proteins, specifically HcpC and VacA, were associated with an increased risk of developing colorectal cancer.
IMPACT: Biological mechanisms for a potential causal role of H. pylori in colorectal carcinogenesis need to be elucidated, and subsequently whether H. pylori eradication may decrease colorectal cancer incidence.
Methods: A database search was performed up to July 2019 inclusive for all studies that compared H. pylori infection in IBD patients vs. non-IBD controls. The relative risk (RR) was used to quantify the association between IBD and H. pylori, and the effects were combined across studies using a mixed-effects meta-regression model, which included IBD subtype and geographic region as categorical moderator variables.
Results: Our meta-regression model exhibited moderate heterogeneity (I2=48.74%). Pooled RR depended on both region (P=0.02) and subtype (P<0.001). Pooled RRs were <1 for all subtype and region combinations, indicative of a protective effect of H. pylori against IBD. The pooled RR was 28% (9%, 50%; P=0.001) greater for UC vs. CD and 43% (4%, 96%; P=0.02) greater for Mediterranean countries vs. East Asia. The pooled RR was 18% (-13%, 60%; P=0.48) greater for Europe vs. East Asia and 21% (-13%, 68%; P=0.42) greater for Mediterranean vs. Europe, though these differences were not statistically significant.
Conclusions: The protective effect of H. pylori on IBD varied by both subtype (more protection against CD vs. UC) and region (East Asia more protected than Mediterranean regions). Variation due to these effects could provide insight into IBD etiology.