Esomeprazole for the Treatment of Erosive Esophagitis in Children: An International, Multicenter, Randomized, Parallel-Group, Double-Blind (for Dose) Study.

BACKGROUND: Acid suppression with a proton pump inhibitor is standard treatment for gastroesophageal reflux disease and erosive esophagitis in adults and increasingly is becoming first-line therapy for children aged 1-17 years. We evaluated endoscopic healing of erosive esophagitis with esomeprazole in young children with gastroesophageal reflux disease and described esophageal histology. METHODS: Children aged 1-11 years with endoscopically or histologically confirmed gastroesophageal reflux disease were randomized to esomeprazole 5 or 10 mg daily (<20 kg) or 10 or 20 mg daily (≥ 20 kg) for 8 weeks. Patients with erosive esophagitis underwent an endoscopy after 8 weeks to assess healing of erosions. RESULTS: Of 109 patients, 49% had erosive esophagitis and 51% had histologic evidence of reflux esophagitis without erosive esophagitis. Of the 45 patients who had erosive esophagitis and underwent follow-up endoscopy, 89% experienced erosion resolution. Dilation of intercellular space was reported in 24% of patients with histologic examination. CONCLUSIONS: Esomeprazole (0.2-1.0 mg/kg) effectively heals macroscopic and microscopic erosive esophagitis in this pediatric population with gastroesophageal reflux disease. Dilation of intercellular space may be an important histologic marker of erosive esophagitis in children.

Esomeprazole for the Treatment of Erosive Esophagitis in Children: An International, Multicenter, Randomized, Parallel-Group, Double-Blind (for Dose) Study.

BACKGROUND: Acid suppression with a proton pump inhibitor is standard treatment for gastroesophageal reflux disease and erosive esophagitis in adults and increasingly is becoming first-line therapy for children aged 1-17 years. We evaluated endoscopic healing of erosive esophagitis with esomeprazole in young children with gastroesophageal reflux disease and described esophageal histology. METHODS: Children aged 1-11 years with endoscopically or histologically confirmed gastroesophageal reflux disease were randomized to esomeprazole 5 or 10 mg daily (< 20 kg) or 10 or 20 mg daily (≥ 20 kg) for 8 weeks. Patients with erosive esophagitis underwent an endoscopy after 8 weeks to assess healing of erosions. RESULTS: Of 109 patients, 49% had erosive esophagitis and 51% had histologic evidence of reflux esophagitis without erosive esophagitis. Of the 45 patients who had erosive esophagitis and underwent follow-up endoscopy, 89% experienced erosion resolution. Dilation of intercellular space was reported in 24% of patients with histologic examination. CONCLUSIONS: Esomeprazole (0.2-1.0 mg/kg) effectively heals macroscopic and microscopic erosive esophagitis in this pediatric population with gastroesophageal reflux disease. Dilation of intercellular space may be an important histologic marker of erosive esophagitis in children.

Safety and Tolerability of Esomeprazole in Children With Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate safety, tolerability, and symptom improvement with once-daily esomeprazole in children with endoscopically proven gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this 8-week, multicenter, randomized, uncontrolled, double-blind study, children ages 1 to 11 years were stratified by weight to receive esomeprazole 5 or 10 mg (children < 20 kg) or 10 or 20 mg (children ≥ 20 kg) once daily. Safety and tolerability was assessed by evaluating adverse events (AEs; both treatment- and non-treatment-related AEs) and changes from baseline in medical history, physical examinations, and clinical laboratory tests. Investigators scored symptom severity every 2 weeks using the Physician's Global Assessment (PGA). Patients' parents rated GERD symptoms of heartburn, acid regurgitation, and epigastric pain (none to severe, 0-3) at baseline (based on past 72 hours) and daily (from past 24 hours). RESULTS: Of 109 patients randomized, 108 had safety data. AEs were experienced by 68.0% and 65.2% of children <20 kg receiving esomeprazole 5 and 10 mg, respectively, and 83.9% and 82.8% of children ≥ 20 kg receiving esomeprazole 10 and 20 mg, respectively, regardless of causality. Overall, only 9.3% of patients reported 13 treatment-related AEs; the most common were diarrhea (2.8% [3/108]), headache (1.9% [2/108]), and somnolence (1.9% [2/108]). Vomiting, a serious AE in 2 patients, was not judged by the investigator to be related to treatment. At the final visit, PGA scores improved significantly from baseline (P < 0.001). Of 58 patients with moderate to severe baseline PGA symptom scores, 91.4% had lower scores by the final visit. GERD symptom scores were significantly improved from baseline to the final week of the study in all of the treatment groups (P < 0.01) CONCLUSIONS:: In children ages 1 to 11 years with endoscopically proven GERD, esomeprazole (at daily doses of 5, 10, or 20 mg) was generally well tolerated. The frequency and severity of GERD-related symptoms were significantly reduced during the active treatment period.

Safety and Tolerability of Esomeprazole in Children With Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate safety, tolerability, and symptom improvement with once-daily esomeprazole in children with endoscopically proven gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this 8-week, multicenter, randomized, uncontrolled, double-blind study, children ages 1 to 11 years were stratified by weight to receive esomeprazole 5 or 10 mg (children < 20 kg) or 10 or 20 mg (children ≥ 20 kg) once daily. Safety and tolerability was assessed by evaluating adverse events (AEs; both treatment- and non-treatment-related AEs) and changes from baseline in medical history, physical examinations, and clinical laboratory tests. Investigators scored symptom severity every 2 weeks using the Physician's Global Assessment (PGA). Patients' parents rated GERD symptoms of heartburn, acid regurgitation, and epigastric pain (none to severe, 0-3) at baseline (based on past 72 hours) and daily (from past 24 hours). RESULTS: Of 109 patients randomized, 108 had safety data. AEs were experienced by 68.0% and 65.2% of children < 20 kg receiving esomeprazole 5 and 10 mg, respectively, and 83.9% and 82.8% of children ≥ 20 kg receiving esomeprazole 10 and 20 mg, respectively, regardless of causality. Overall, only 9.3% of patients reported 13 treatment-related AEs; the most common were diarrhea (2.8% [3/108]), headache (1.9% [2/108]), and somnolence (1.9% [2/108]). Vomiting, a serious AE in 2 patients, was not judged by the investigator to be related to treatment. At the final visit, PGA scores improved significantly from baseline (P < 0.001). Of 58 patients with moderate to severe baseline PGA symptom scores, 91.4% had lower scores by the final visit. GERD symptom scores were significantly improved from baseline to the final week of the study in all of the treatment groups (P < 0.01) CONCLUSIONS: In children ages 1 to 11 years with endoscopically proven GERD, esomeprazole (at daily doses of 5, 10, or 20 mg) was generally well tolerated. The frequency and severity of GERD-related symptoms were significantly reduced during the active treatment period.

Esomeprazole for the treatment of erosive esophagitis in children: an international, multicenter, randomized, parallel-group, double-blind (for dose) study.

BACKGROUND: Acid suppression with a proton pump inhibitor is standard treatment for gastroesophageal reflux disease and erosive esophagitis in adults and increasingly is becoming first-line therapy for children aged 1-17 years. We evaluated endoscopic healing of erosive esophagitis with esomeprazole in young children with gastroesophageal reflux disease and described esophageal histology. METHODS: Children aged 1-11 years with endoscopically or histologically confirmed gastroesophageal reflux disease were randomized to esomeprazole 5 or 10 mg daily (< 20 kg) or 10 or 20 mg daily (> or = 20 kg) for 8 weeks. Patients with erosive esophagitis underwent an endoscopy after 8 weeks to assess healing of erosions. RESULTS: Of 109 patients, 49% had erosive esophagitis and 51% had histologic evidence of reflux esophagitis without erosive esophagitis. Of the 45 patients who had erosive esophagitis and underwent follow-up endoscopy, 89% experienced erosion resolution. Dilation of intercellular space was reported in 24% of patients with histologic examination. CONCLUSIONS: Esomeprazole (0.2-1.0 mg/kg) effectively heals macroscopic and microscopic erosive esophagitis in this pediatric population with gastroesophageal reflux disease. Dilation of intercellular space may be an important histologic marker of erosive esophagitis in children. TRIAL REGISTRATION: D9614C00097; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00228527.

Effects of esomeprazole treatment for gastroesophageal reflux disease on quality of life in 12- to 17-year-old adolescents: an international health outcomes study.

BACKGROUND: Although gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is common in adolescents, the burden of GERD on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in adolescents has not been previously evaluated. Therefore, the objective of the study was to examine the effect of GERD on HRQOL in adolescents. METHODS: This international, 31-site, 8-week safety study randomized adolescents, aged 12 to 17 years inclusive, with GERD to receive esomeprazole 20 or 40 mg once daily. The Quality of Life in Reflux and Dyspepsia questionnaire (QOLRAD), previously validated in adults, consists of 25 questions grouped into 5 domains: emotional distress, sleep disturbance, food/drink problems, physical/social functioning, and vitality. The QOLRAD was administered at the baseline and week-8 (final) visits. RESULTS: Of the 149 patients randomized, 134 completed the QOLRAD at baseline and final visits and were eligible for analysis of their HRQOL data. Baseline QOLRAD scores indicated GERD had a negative effect on the HRQOL of these adolescents, especially in the domains of vitality and emotional distress, and problems with food/drink. At the final visit, mean scores for all 5 QOLRAD domains improved significantly (P < .0001); change of scores (ie, delta) for all domains met or exceeded the adult QOLRAD minimal clinically significant difference standard of 0.5 units. CONCLUSION: GERD had a negative effect on QOL in adolescents. After esomeprazole treatment, statistically and clinically significant improvements occurred in all domains of the QOLRAD for these adolescents. TRIAL REGISTRATION: D9614C00098; ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT00241501.

Safety and tolerability of esomeprazole in children with gastroesophageal reflux disease.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate safety, tolerability, and symptom improvement with once-daily esomeprazole in children with endoscopically proven gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this 8-week, multicenter, randomized, uncontrolled, double-blind study, children ages 1 to 11 years were stratified by weight to receive esomeprazole 5 or 10 mg (children <20 kg) or 10 or 20 mg (children >or=20 kg) once daily. Safety and tolerability was assessed by evaluating adverse events (AEs; both treatment- and non-treatment-related AEs) and changes from baseline in medical history, physical examinations, and clinical laboratory tests. Investigators scored symptom severity every 2 weeks using the Physician's Global Assessment (PGA). Patients' parents rated GERD symptoms of heartburn, acid regurgitation, and epigastric pain (none to severe, 0-3) at baseline (based on past 72 hours) and daily (from past 24 hours). RESULTS: Of 109 patients randomized, 108 had safety data. AEs were experienced by 68.0% and 65.2% of children <20 kg receiving esomeprazole 5 and 10 mg, respectively, and 83.9% and 82.8% of children >or=20 kg receiving esomeprazole 10 and 20 mg, respectively, regardless of causality. Overall, only 9.3% of patients reported 13 treatment-related AEs; the most common were diarrhea (2.8% [3/108]), headache (1.9% [2/108]), and somnolence (1.9% [2/108]). Vomiting, a serious AE in 2 patients, was not judged by the investigator to be related to treatment. At the final visit, PGA scores improved significantly from baseline (P < 0.001). Of 58 patients with moderate to severe baseline PGA symptom scores, 91.4% had lower scores by the final visit. GERD symptom scores were significantly improved from baseline to the final week of the study in all of the treatment groups (P < 0.01) CONCLUSIONS: In children ages 1 to 11 years with endoscopically proven GERD, esomeprazole (at daily doses of 5, 10, or 20 mg) was generally well tolerated. The frequency and severity of GERD-related symptoms were significantly reduced during the active treatment period.

Prevention of upper gastrointestinal bleeding in critically ill Chinese patients: a randomized, double-blind study evaluating esomeprazole and cimetidine.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of esomeprazole in preventing upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding in critically ill Chinese patients, using cimetidine as an active comparator. METHODS: A pre-specified non-inferiority limit (5%) was used to compare rates of significant upper GI bleeding in this randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, phase 3 study across 27 intensive care units in China. Secondary endpoints included safety and tolerability measures. Patients required mechanical ventilation and had at least one additional risk factor for stress ulcer bleeding. Patients were randomized to receive either active esomeprazole 40 mg, as a 30-min intravenous (IV) infusion twice daily, and an IV placebo cimetidine infusion or active cimetidine 50 mg/h, as a continuous infusion following an initial bolus of 300 mg, and placebo esomeprazole injections, given up to 14 days. Patients were blinded using this double-dummy technique. RESULTS: Of 274 patients, 2.7% with esomeprazole and 4.6% with cimetidine had significant upper GI bleeding (bright red blood in the gastric tube not clearing after lavage or persistent Gastroccult-positive "coffee grounds" material). Non-inferiority of esomeprazole to cimetidine was demonstrated. The safety profiles of both drugs were similar and as expected in critically ill patients. CONCLUSIONS: Esomeprazole is effective in preventing upper GI bleeding in critically ill Chinese patients, as demonstrated by the non-inferiority analysis using cimetidine as an active control. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02157376.

Safety and symptom improvement with esomeprazole in adolescents with gastroesophageal reflux disease.

OBJECTIVES: The primary objective was to assess the safety of esomeprazole 20 or 40 mg once daily in adolescents with clinically diagnosed gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). A secondary aim was to assess changes in GERD symptoms after esomeprazole therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind study, adolescents ages 12 to 17 years inclusive received esomeprazole 20 or 40 mg once daily for 8 weeks. Adverse events and changes in clinical parameters (eg, physical examination, laboratory measurements) were evaluated to assess safety. Patients or their parents or guardians scored symptom severity daily, and investigators scored overall GERD symptom severity every 2 weeks using a 4-point scale. RESULTS: In the 148 adolescents with safety data, treatment-related and non-treatment-related adverse events were reported by 75% and 78% of patients in the esomeprazole 20- and 40-mg groups, respectively. Twenty-two patients (14.9%) experienced adverse events that were considered related to treatment; the most common were headache (8%, 12/148), abdominal pain (3%, 4/148), nausea (2%, 3/148), and diarrhea (2%, 3/148). No serious adverse events or clinically important findings in other safety assessments were observed. At baseline, 68% (100/147) had heartburn, 63% (93/147) had epigastric pain, 57% (84/147) had acid regurgitation, and 15% (22/147) had vomiting symptoms. Symptom scores decreased significantly in both the esomeprazole 20-mg and 40-mg groups by the final study week (P < 0.0001). Investigators rated 63.1% (94/149) of the patients as having moderate or severe symptoms at baseline; at the final visit, this percentage decreased significantly to 9.3% (13/140; P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: In adolescent patients with GERD, esomeprazole 20 or 40 mg daily for 8 weeks was well tolerated, and GERD-related symptoms were significantly reduced from baseline values in both groups.

Daytime intragastric acid control: post hoc analyses of esomeprazole 20 mg and over-the-counter proton-pump inhibitors.

OBJECTIVES: In mild gastroesophageal reflux disease, which accounts for the great majority of cases, the major burden of reflux occurs during daytime hours, after food intake. The aim of these analyses was to evaluate intragastric pH control during the typical 14-hour daytime awake period by proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) given at over-the-counter (OTC) dosages. METHODS: In one double-blind and three open-label, randomized, crossover studies, intragastric pH was monitored for 24 hours on day 5 of treatment. The 24-hour data have been reported previously. Post hoc analyses reassessed these studies for the 14-hour daytime period, comparing esomeprazole 20 mg with currently available OTC PPIs omeprazole, pantoprazole (not available in the US) and lansoprazole. RESULTS: Subjects maintained intragastric pH >4 for a significantly greater mean percentage of the 14-hour daytime period with esomeprazole 20 mg compared with any of the PPI comparators at OTC dosages. Geometric mean ratios (95% confidence intervals) for esomeprazole 20 mg versus the comparators were: 1.45 (1.14-1.85; p = 0.003) versus omeprazole 20 mg; 2.50 (2.01-3.11; p < 0.0001) versus pantoprazole 20 mg; and 1.69 (1.46-1.97; p < 0.0001) and 1.89 (1.05-3.37; p = 0.03) versus lansoprazole 15 mg. A greater proportion of subjects had better pH control with esomeprazole than with the other PPIs (range: 69-97%). CONCLUSIONS: Across the 14-hour daytime period, esomeprazole 20 mg once daily given 30 minutes before breakfast for 5 days provided acid control for a significantly greater average proportion of time versus the PPI comparators omeprazole, pantoprazole and lansoprazole at currently available OTC dosages.

Efficacy of controlled-release subgingival chlorhexidine to enhance periodontal regeneration.

BACKGROUND: Periodontal regeneration success may be limited by placing bone grafts and membranes in infected sites. The objective of this study was to test the hypothesis that adjunctive subgingival administration of chlorhexidine gelatin bioresorbable chips enhances bone gain when used in conjunction with guided tissue regeneration. METHODS: This was a single center, blinded, 2-arm parallel design study of 44 subjects with one or more sites with probing depth and clinical attachment loss > or = 5 mm following initial therapy and radiographic evidence of bone loss. The patients were randomly assigned to receive either chlorhexidine (CHX) chip or sham chip placement one week prior to regenerative therapy that included graft placement and site coverage with guided tissue membranes. Patients also received CHX or sham chip placement, per their randomization, adjunctively to scaling and root planing or maintenance procedures. Periodontal examinations were completed at baseline (8 weeks prior to surgery); 1 week prior to surgery; and at 3, 6, and 9 months postsurgery. The major outcomes for the study were changes in bone height and bone mass as measured from standardized radiographs used for quantitative digital subtraction radiography over the 11-month study period. RESULTS: Subjects receiving sham chip placement gained a mean bone height of 1.49 +/- 0.22 mm, while patients receiving the CHX chips gained significantly more bone height (3.54 +/- 0.45 mm; P<0.001). Similarly, subjects receiving CHX chips as an adjunct gained significantly more bone mass (5.57 +/- 0.69 mg; P<0.001) than the standard therapy (2.59 +/- 0.34 mg). CONCLUSIONS: These pilot results indicate that locally delivered, controlled-release antimicrobial treatment may improve the amount of bone gain during guided tissue regeneration procedures. These data support the evidence that infection control is an important variable in successful regeneration.

Esomeprazole treatment of frequent heartburn: two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials.

PURPOSE: To determine the efficacy of a 14-day regimen of esomeprazole 20 mg for the treatment of frequent heartburn in subjects who are likely to self-treat with over-the-counter medications without consulting a health care provider. METHODS: Adults with frequent heartburn ≥ 2 days per week in the past 4 weeks were randomly assigned to 14-day double-blind treatment with esomeprazole 20 mg once daily or placebo in 2 identical multicenter studies (ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT01370525, NCT01370538). The primary efficacy outcome was percentage of heartburn-free 24-hour days across 14 days. Secondary efficacy outcomes included heartburn resolution, defined as heartburn ≤ 2 days over 14 days, and percentages of subjects reporting ≤ 1 day with heartburn in the first and final weeks of treatment. Subjects recorded data in daily self-assessment diaries. RESULTS: The percentage of heartburn-free 24-hour days over 14 days was significantly higher (P < 0.0001) in subjects receiving esomeprazole 20 mg compared with placebo in study 1 (N = 331; 46.13% vs. 33.07%, respectively) and study 2 (N = 320; 48.00% vs 32.75%, respectively). Significantly more subjects treated with esomeprazole 20 mg had heartburn resolution over 14 days and in the first and final weeks compared with placebo. Within the first 4 days, the proportion of subjects with heartburn-free days was significantly greater with esomeprazole 20 mg versus placebo. Treatment was generally well tolerated, with a safety pattern consistent with the known profile for esomeprazole. CONCLUSION: A 14-day regimen of esomeprazole 20 mg once daily was effective for treating frequent heartburn in subjects who are likely to self-treat with over-the-counter medications.

Treatment of patients with persistent heartburn symptoms: a double-blind, randomized trial.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Common treatment practices in patients who continue to be symptomatic on proton pump inhibitor once-daily treatment include either increasing the dosage or the use of supplemental medication. This trial's purpose was to compare 2 therapeutic strategies, increasing the proton pump inhibitor dosage to twice daily versus switching to another proton pump inhibitor, in patients with persistent heartburn while receiving standard-dose proton pump inhibitor therapy. METHODS: This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy trial included patients with persistent heartburn symptoms while receiving therapy with lansoprazole 30 mg once daily. Patients were randomly assigned to treatment for 8 weeks with either single-dose esomeprazole (40 mg once daily) (n = 138) or lansoprazole 30 mg twice daily (n = 144). The primary efficacy variable was the percentage of heartburn-free days from day 8 to the end of treatment. RESULTS: Single-dose esomeprazole was at least as effective as twice-daily lansoprazole for the primary end point of percentage of heartburn-free days during the study period (54.4% and 57.5%, respectively). Symptom scores improved from baseline in similar numbers of patients for heartburn (83.3% of patients in each group), acid regurgitation (76.8% vs 72.9%, P = .58), and epigastric pain (67.4% vs 61.1%, P = .32), and rescue antacid use was also similar (0.4 tablets/day vs 0.5 tablets/day, P = .50). CONCLUSIONS: Switching patients with persistent heartburn on a standard-dose proton pump inhibitor to a different proton pump inhibitor was as effective as increasing the proton pump inhibitor dosage to twice daily for controlling heartburn symptoms.

Gastric and esophageal pH in patients with Barrett's esophagus treated with three esomeprazole dosages: a randomized, double-blind, crossover trial.

BACKGROUND: It has been suggested that patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE) are unusually resistant to the antisecretory effects of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). OBJECTIVES: To compare intragastric and intraesophageal acidity in patients with BE receiving esomeprazole 40 mg three times daily (t.i.d.), esomeprazole 40 mg twice daily (b.i.d.), and esomeprazole 20 mg t.i.d. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, three-way crossover study, patients with long-segment BE received each of the three esomeprazole dosages for 5 days separated by 10-14-day washout periods. Intragastric and intraesophageal pHs were measured for 24 h on day 5. RESULTS: Among 31 patients with evaluable pH data, intragastric pH was >4.0 for 88.4%, 81.4%, and 80.4% of day 5 after treatment with esomeprazole 40 mg t.i.d., 40 mg b.i.d., and 20 mg t.i.d., respectively. Esomeprazole 40 mg t.i.d. was significantly more effective than the other dosages (p < 0.01). Intraesophageal pH was <4.0 for mean values of <5% of the monitoring period with all the three dosing regimens, but esophageal pH remained <4.0 for >5% of the time in 16%, 23%, and 19% of patients receiving esomeprazole 40 mg t.i.d., 40 mg b.i.d., and 20 mg t.i.d., respectively. All dosages were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: All the three esomeprazole dosages significantly decreased intragastric acidity and reduced esophageal acid exposure to mean normal values in the total group of patients with BE. However, abnormal esophageal acid exposure continued in 16-23% of patients despite the significant decrease in gastric acidity. These results suggest that the apparent "PPI resistance" described in patients with BE may be caused by their profound reflux diathesis rather than by gastric resistance to the antisecretory effects of PPIs.

Effect of esomeprazole on nighttime heartburn and sleep quality in patients with GERD: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: Sleep disturbances are common in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). This study examined the effects of esomeprazole on nighttime heartburn, GERD-related sleep disturbances, sleep quality, work productivity, and regular activities. METHODS: This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial included adults with GERD-associated sleep disturbances and moderate-to-severe nighttime heartburn (recorded by patient diary during screening). Patients received oral esomeprazole 40 mg (n = 220) or 20 mg (n = 226) or placebo (n = 229) once daily for 4 wk. The primary outcome was relief of nighttime heartburn. Secondary outcomes included resolution of sleep disturbances, sleep quality measured by the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) questionnaire, and work productivity measured by the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire. RESULTS: Nighttime heartburn was relieved in 53.1% (111/209), 50.5% (111/220), and 12.7% (28/221) of patients who received esomeprazole 40 mg, esomeprazole 20 mg, and placebo, respectively. Differences (95% CI) versus placebo were 40.5% (32.4%, 48.5%) and 37.8% (29.9%, 45.7%) and were highly significant (p < 0.0001). GERD-related sleep disturbances resolved in significantly more (p < 0.0001) patients who received esomeprazole 40 (73.7%) or 20 mg (73.2%) than in those who received placebo (41.2%). Both esomeprazole groups had greater PSQI global score changes from baseline (p < 0.0001 vs placebo) and more (p < 0.0001 vs placebo) work hours saved per week per patient compared with baseline (esomeprazole 40 mg, 11.6 h; esomeprazole 20 mg, 12.3 h; placebo, 6.2 h). CONCLUSIONS: Esomeprazole reduced nighttime heartburn and GERD-related sleep disturbances and improved sleep quality and work productivity.

Symptom response and healing of erosive esophagitis with proton-pump inhibitors in patients with Helicobacter pylori infection.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this article is to determine the severity of esophagitis and the response to treatment with proton-pump inhibitors in patients with and without evidence of Helicobacter pylori infection. METHODS: This retrospective analysis evaluated data collected in a randomized, double-blind clinical trial that assessed the efficacy and safety of once-daily esomeprazole 40 mg (n = 2,624) versus lansoprazole 30 mg (n = 2,617) for up to 8 wk in the treatment of reflux-associated erosive esophagitis. At baseline, erosive esophagitis was graded using the Los Angeles (LA) classification; serologic testing for H. pylori was performed using a FlexSure HP serum test. RESULTS: There were 14.7% of patients who were seropositive for H. pylori. The percentages of seropositive and seronegative patients with each grade of esophagitis were: LA grade A, 38%, 36%; LA grade B, 41%, 39%; LA grade C, 16%, 19%; and LA grade D, 5%, 6%, respectively. Severe heartburn was present at baseline in 42% of H. pylori-positive and 42% of H. pylori-negative patients. Life-table healing rates with esomeprazole were not influenced by H. pylori status (seropositive 92.6% (95% confidence interval: 89.8-95.4); seronegative 92.6% (95% confidence interval: 91.4-93.7)). The rates with esomeprazole were significantly higher than those with lansoprazole (seropositive 90.5% (95% confidence interval: 87.5-93.5); seronegative 88.5% (95% confidence interval: 87.1-89.8)) after adjusting for baseline H. pylori status (p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The severity of erosive esophagitis at baseline was similar regardless of H. pylori seropositivity. Healing rates were not influenced by H. pylori status.

Dysphagia in patients with erosive esophagitis: prevalence, severity, and response to proton pump inhibitor treatment.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Dysphagia is considered an alarm symptom, raising the question of stricture or malignancy. We sought to determine the prevalence and severity of dysphagia in patients with uncomplicated erosive esophagitis and its response to therapy. METHODS: A total of 11,945 patients with endoscopically confirmed erosive esophagitis (Los Angeles grades A-D) participated in 5 double-blind, randomized, clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of up to 8 weeks of treatment with either once-daily esomeprazole 40 mg (n = 5068), esomeprazole 20 mg (n = 1243), omeprazole 20 mg (n = 3018), or lansoprazole 30 mg (n = 2616). The severity of dysphagia (4-point scale) was rated at baseline and at week 4. Esophagitis was classified as mild (grade A or B) or severe (grade C or D). RESULTS: At baseline, 4449 of 11,945 patients (37%) had dysphagia-43% of patients with severe esophagitis, and 35% of patients with mild esophagitis (odds ratio, 1.39; 95% confidence interval, 1.27-1.51, P < 0.001). Dysphagia resolved in 83% of patients after 4 weeks of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) treatment. Resolution of dysphagia was associated with a mean healing rate of 90% across all treatments. Seventeen percent of patients reported persistent dysphagia, and in these patients the healing rates were decreased significantly (mean 72%; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Dysphagia is common in patients with erosive esophagitis but is not a reliable clinical predictor of severe erosive esophagitis. Dysphagia resolved with PPI therapy in most cases, but persistent dysphagia may indicate failed healing.