Risk of Cancer in Association with Ranitidine and Nizatidine vs Other H2 Blockers: Analysis of the Japan Medical Data Center Claims Database 2005-2018.

INTRODUCTION: In September 2019, ranitidine and nizatidine were suggested to contain N-nitrosodimethylamine, a carcinogenic substance. People have since been concerned about the potential impact of ranitidine/nizatidine use on the risk of cancer. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to investigate the risk of cancer among people receiving ranitidine or nizatidine compared with other histamine 2 receptor antagonists (H2 blockers) [cimetidine, famotidine, roxatidine, and lafutidine]. METHODS: In the Japan Medical Data Center claims database (comprising people aged < 75 years) from 2005 to 2018, we identified new adult users of H2 blockers and classified them into ranitidine/nizatidine users and other H2 blocker users. We estimated the incidence of cancer diagnosis in each group and conducted a multivariable Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: We identified 113,745 new users of ranitidine/nizatidine (median age 41.2 years [interquartile range 31.7-51.1]; 49.1% men; median follow-up 2.4 years [1.1-4.5]) and 503,982 new users of other H2 blockers (median age 40.9 years [31.1-51.2]; 51.0% men; median follow-up 2.3 years [0.9-4.2]). The incidence rate of cancer diagnosis was 6.39 (95% confidence interval 6.13-6.66) cases per 1000 person-years (top three sites: breast 14.8%; colorectal 14.6%; and stomach 11.5%) in the ranitidine/nizatidine group and 6.17 (6.05-6.30) cases per 1000 person-years (colorectal 14.7%; breast 13.5%; and stomach 11.2%) in the other H2 blockers group. The adjusted hazard ratio (ranitidine/nizatidine users vs other H2 blocker users) was 1.02 (0.98-1.07). The results were similar by follow-up length, by cancer site, and when ranitidine and nizatidine users were separately compared with the other H2 blockers group. By cumulative dose, the adjusted hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) was 1.03 (0.98-1.08) from 1 to 180 defined daily doses (DDDs), 1.00 (0.73-1.39) from 181 to 365 DDDs, 0.95 (0.61-1.48) from 366 to 730 DDDs, and 0.83 (0.45-1.55) at > 730 DDDs. CONCLUSIONS: We found no evidence that ranitidine/nizatidine is associated with an increased risk of cancer, although further studies with more accurate measurement of exposure, inclusion of older people, and longer follow-up may be needed.

Estimation of nizatidine gastric nitrosatability and product toxicity via an integrated approach combining HILIC, in silico toxicology, and molecular docking.

The liability of the H2-receptor antagonist nizatidine (NZ) to nitrosation in simulated gastric juice (SGJ) and under WHO-suggested conditions was investigated for the first time. For monitoring the nitrosatability of NZ, a hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography (HILIC) method was optimized and validated according to FDA guidance. A Cosmosil HILIC® column and a mobile phase composed of acetonitrile: 0.04 M acetate buffer pH 6.0 (92:8, v/v) were used for the separation of NZ and its N-nitroso derivative (NZ-NO) within 6 min with LODs of 0.02 and 0.1 µg/mL, respectively. NZ was found highly susceptible to nitrosation in SGJ reaching 100% nitrosation in 10 min, while only 18% nitrosation was observed after 160 min under the WHO-suggested conditions. The chemical structure of NZ-NO was clarified by ESI+/MS. In silico toxicology study confirmed the mutagenicity and toxicity of NZ-NO. Experiments evidenced that ascorbic acid strongly suppresses the nitrosation of NZ suggesting their co-administration for protection from potential risks. In addition, the impacts of the HILIC method on safety, health, and environment were favorably evaluated by three green analytical chemistry metrics and it was proved that, unlike the popular impression, HILIC methods could be green to the environment.

[Safety of proton pump inhibitors]. / Seguridad de la utilización de los inhibidores de la bomba de protones.

The significant inhibitory capacity of gastric acid secretion of PPIs makes them the drugs of choice for treating acid-related diseases. The considerable prevalence of these diseases and the need for maintaining the administration of the drug during considerably long periods results in this therapeutic group being one of the most widely used. However, in spite of their extensive use, there continue to emerge concerns about their potential toxicity; concerns surrounding the specificity of their mechanism of action and a consequential suspicion that something so potent must involve harmful effects. PPIs act selectively on the final stage of the process of gastric acid secretion, namely the H+/K+-ATPase or proton pump. This enzyme represents an essential step in the process of secretion of H+, and PPIs exert a very specific action on the parietal cell, as they need an environment with very low pH levels, which only exist in this cell. In the present article, the adverse effects of PPIs are reviewed, with special emphasis on those related to their continued administration and on the special circumstances of patients, as in the case of the elderly, those with liver failure, pregnant and breastfeeding mothers and children. All the PPIs on the market share a common chemical basis and there are no great differences in their potential adverse effects, the possibility of them promoting opportunist infections or their capacity to generate pharmacokinetic interactions with other drugs, which, if occur, are generally insignificant. After two decades of use, PPIs have proved to be very effective and safe drugs.

Nizatidine for the treatment of pediatric gastroesophageal reflux symptoms: an open-label, multiple-dose, randomized, multicenter clinical trial in 210 children.

BACKGROUND: Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), which is reflux that produces damage or troubling symptoms, afflicts approximately 7% of infants and children to the extent that administration of physician-directed pharmacotherapy is warranted. OBJECTIVE: This study was designed in conjunction with the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to assess the tolerability and effectiveness of nizatidine, in different doses and formulations, including a newly formulated premade oral solution, for pediatric GERD. METHODS: Children aged 5 days through 18 years were recruited to this 8-week, open-label, multiple-dose, randomized, parallel-group, multicenter study. The original study design specified that patients aged 5 days through 12 years at study start be given a nizatidine capsule dissolved in infant formula or apple juice depending on patient age ("extemporaneous solution"). Children 13 through 18 years old were to be given the "adult dose" of nizatidine capsules 150 mg BID regardless of body weight. All patients aged < 13 years were randomized in blocks of 4 between 2 dose levels (2.5 and 5 mg/kg per dose BID). A protocol amendment during the study added a newly formulated, more pediatric-appropriate, premade oral solution that was developed at the request of the FDA. This premade formulation ("oral solution") was to replace the extemporaneous solution mixed in infant formula or apple juice. Subsequently, an additional 44 children aged < 13 years old were enrolled in the study and randomized to receive the new nizatidine oral solution for 8 weeks at the same 2 dose levels as used for the extemporaneous solution. Outcome data at 4 and 8 weeks included adverse events (AEs) (severity, relation to study drug, and any relationship to study withdrawal) and effectiveness (investigators' assessment of changes in reflux symptoms and overall physical well-being, and parent/child assessment of change in antacid use). Formal statistical analyses were not planned, but post hoc chi-square analyses were performed. RESULTS: Of 214 children enrolled, 210 (98%) intent-to-treat (ITT) patients received > or = 1 dose; of these, 173 (82%) completed 8 weeks of study. At least 77% were compliant (ie, medicated on > or = 75% of days). Of the ITT patients, 37 did not complete 8 weeks due to insufficient response, AEs (regardless of relationship to study drug), or other reasons. Although 292 AEs occurred in 115 patients, 277 (95%) were mild to moderate and 15 (5%) were severe. Most of the AEs in these children studied during the winter were related to infectious illnesses. Only 4 serious AEs occurred; 3 were unrelated to study drug. The fourth AE--considered possibly related--was worsening sickle cell anemia 18 days after medication discontinuation. Approximately 30% of patients became asymptomatic after 8 weeks of treatment, regardless of dosing or formulation, and despite reduction of antacid use in half of the patients. No clear superiority of any dose or formulation was demonstrated. CONCLUSIONS: This large study, although limited by its open-label design and post hoc analyses, supports the tolerability and effectiveness of 8 weeks of treatment with nizatidine in children aged 5 days through 18 years. AE incidence and severity were as expected for children during the winter season. There was an overall improvement in symptoms and a decrease in antacid use. Formulation did not appear to alter tolerability or effectiveness assessments: the premade solution, extemporaneous solution, and capsule provided comparable symptomatic relief with no disproportionate adverse reactions.

Nizatidine prevents peptic ulceration in high-risk patients taking nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.

BACKGROUND: Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) use is increasingly recognized as a major factor associated with peptic ulcer disease and complications. We undertook a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to evaluate efficacy and safety of nizatidine in preventing ulcer formation in patients with osteoarthritis who were taking NSAIDs. METHODS: After endoscopy to rule out the presence of an acute ulcer, 496 patients were randomized to receive nizatidine, 150 mg twice daily (248 patients) or placebo (248 patients) for 3 months. Repeated endoscopies were performed monthly. We defined failure as development of a peptic ulcer (> or = 0.3 cm in diameter). RESULTS: Baseline characteristics tested were comparable for the two groups with regard to age, sex, ulcer history, and Helicobacter pylori status. Overall ulcer occurrence in the nizatidine group (9.7%) was not significantly different from that in the placebo group (13.7%; P = .163). High-risk subgroups (patients with ulcer history and patients > or = 65 years of age), however, revealed statistically fewer ulcers for patients receiving nizatidine (P = .035 and P = .042, respectively). Analysis of antacid use showed significantly less use in nizatidine recipients, although there were similar percentages of patients showing improvement in dyspeptic symptoms in each treatment group. We failed to observe a conclusive correlation between H pylori status at baseline, as measured by serum immunoglobulin antibody, and development of an ulcer. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that nizatidine, 150 mg, twice daily, significantly reduces the incidence of ulcer formation in high-risk patients taking long-term NSAID therapy. It also relieves NSAID-associated dyspeptic symptoms in some patients.

Effects of computerized physician order entry on prescribing practices.

BACKGROUND: Computerized order entry systems have the potential to prevent errors, to improve quality of care, and to reduce costs by providing feedback and suggestions to the physician as each order is entered. This study assesses the impact of an inpatient computerized physician order entry system on prescribing practices. METHODS: A time series analysis was performed at an urban academic medical center at which all adult inpatient orders are entered through a computerized system. When physicians enter drug orders, the computer displays drug use guidelines, offers relevant alternatives, and suggests appropriate doses and frequencies. RESULT: For medication selection, use of a computerized guideline resulted in a change in use of the recommended drug (nizatidine) from 15.6% of all histamine(2)-blocker orders to 81.3% (P<.001). Implementation of dose selection menus resulted in a decrease in the SD of drug doses by 11% (P<.001). The proportion of doses that exceeded the recommended maximum decreased from 2.1% before order entry to 0.6% afterward (P<.001). Display of a recommended frequency for ondansetron hydrochloride administration resulted in an increase in the use of the approved frequency from 6% of all ondansetron orders to 75% (P<.001). The use of subcutaneous heparin sodium to prevent thrombosis in patients at bed rest increased from 24% to 47% when the computer suggested this option (P<.001). All these changes persisted at 1- and 2-year follow-up analyses. CONCLUSION: Computerized physician order entry is a powerful and effective tool for improving physician prescribing practices.

Nizatidine versus placebo in active benign gastric ulcer disease: an eight-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind comparison. The Nizatidine Benign Gastric Ulcer Disease Study Group.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To determine if 150 mg nizatidine twice daily or 300 mg nizatidine at bedtime are similarly effective and to compare each dose with placebo in healing benign gastric ulcers and relieving peptic ulcer symptoms. METHODS: This study was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled parallel comparison. The study was conducted at 74 gastroenterology and internal medicine clinics in the United States and Canada. Four hundred fifty-six patients with active benign gastric ulcer documented by endoscopy participated in the study. On the basis of a computer-generated randomization list, patients were assigned sequentially to receive either 150 mg nizatidine twice daily (n = 151), 300 mg nizatidine once daily at bedtime and identically appearing placebo capsules in the morning (n = 153), or placebo capsules twice daily (n = 152). Treatment lasted for 8 weeks unless healing was documented by endoscopy after 4 weeks. Antacid tablets (aluminum hydroxide, magnesium hydroxide, simethicone combination) were supplied for relief of symptoms. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Both doses of nizatidine significantly improved healing rates at 8 weeks compared with placebo. Daytime and nighttime symptom severity was improved by both nizatidine regimens at end point (p less than 0.015 versus placebo, two-tailed test). Antacid use was similar for all groups in the end point analysis. Patient well-being was significantly better in patients treated with nizatidine than in patients in the placebo group ((p less than 0.04, two-tailed test). No clinically significant differences in the incidence of adverse clinical or laboratory events were noted. CONCLUSION: Nizatidine, 300 mg at bedtime and 150 mg twice daily, resulted in greater healing of benign gastric ulcers than placebo treatment after 8 weeks. Relief of the symptoms of gastric ulcer was significantly better in the patients receiving nizatidine treatment versus placebo treatment.

Comparison of the efficacy of pantoprazole vs. nizatidine in the treatment of erosive oesophagitis: a randomized, active-controlled, double-blind study.

BACKGROUND: Pantoprazole is a proton pump inhibitor approved for the treatment of erosive oesophagitis and gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. AIM: To compare the efficacy and safety of pantoprazole vs. nizatidine for the treatment of symptomatic gastro-oesophageal reflux disease and endoscopically documented erosive oesophagitis (grade > or = 2). METHODS: A multicentre, double-blind, randomized, active-controlled study (221 patients) was performed to compare 20 and 40 mg pantoprazole daily with nizatidine 150 mg b.d. (maximum, 8 weeks). The primary end-point was endoscopic healing of erosive oesophagitis (grade 1 or 0). The secondary end-point was symptomatic improvement. RESULTS: Healing averaged 61%, 64% and 22% for pantoprazole 20 mg, pantoprazole 40 mg and nizatidine 150 mg, respectively, at 4 weeks, and 79%, 83% and 41% at 8 weeks (P < 0.05, differences between groups at both points). Starting on day 1 of symptom assessment, significantly fewer pantoprazole-treated patients reported night-time heartburn and regurgitation compared with nizatidine-treated patients. Symptoms of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease were completely eliminated in 68% and 65% of patients in the pantoprazole 20-mg and 40-mg groups and in 28% of patients in the nizatidine group at study completion. The difference between each pantoprazole group and the nizatidine group was significant (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Pantoprazole, at single daily doses of 20 mg and 40 mg for up to 8 weeks, provides more rapid relief of symptoms and superior healing of erosive oesophagitis than nizatidine 150 mg b.d., and is well tolerated.

Nizatidine in combination with amoxycillin and clarithromycin in the treatment of Helicobacter pylori infection.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of H2-antagonists in combination with antibiotics in curing Helicobacter pylori infection remains controversial, and it is uncertain whether double dose H2-antagonist therapy is superior to standard dose. AIM: To determine the efficacy of two doses of nizatidine in combination with two antibiotics in the treatment of H. pylori. METHODS: A randomized controlled trial was conducted in 160 patients comparing nizatidine 150 mg with 300 mg b.d. (standard vs. double dose), in combination with clarithromycin (500 mg) and amoxycillin (1000 mg) b.d. for 14 days, in Australia and Taiwan. Compliance was based on a clinical assessment and pill count. H. pylori status was determined by histology (antrum and corpus) and CLO-test. RESULTS: Baseline clinical and endoscopic findings were similar in both arms of the study. Based on an intention-to-treat analysis, cure of H. pylori was achieved in 78% (95% CI: 70.4-85.4%) in the standard nizatidine dose arm and 70% (95% CI: 61.6-78.2%) in the double dose arm (P=0.2). Similar cure rates were observed in ulcer and non-ulcer patient groups. Compliance was excellent in the single and double dose arms (85 and 91%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The combination of nizatidine in standard or double dose with clarithromycin and amoxycillin is similarly efficacious in curing H. pylori infection.

Extrapyramidal symptoms related to adjunctive nizatidine therapy in an adolescent receiving quetiapine and paroxetine.

Weight gain is a serious problem with recently introduced atypical antipsychotic agents. Nizatidine, a histamine2 (H2)-receptor antagonist, may help reduce this weight gain. To our knowledge, no adverse effects have been reported when nizatidine is given at recommended doses with atypical antipyschotic agents. We describe, however, an adolescent who was receiving quetiapine and paroxetine for schizophrenia and depression, and developed extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS; parkinsonism and akathisia) after taking nizatidine for weight loss. Based on a report of another patient who developed EPS after taking higher-than-recommended doses of nizatidine, we reviewed the literature on treatment with H2-receptor antagonists for weight gain and on central nervous system adverse effects of nizatidine. Nizatidine may be effective for reducing weight gain associated with both medical and psychiatric conditions. Its safety profile is usually benign, although some patients may develop serious adverse effects, such as EPS and delirium. Therefore, the drug is recommended for short-term management of weight gain associated with atypical antipsychotic agents. Patients receiving nizatidine therapy should be monitored closely for development of EPS, particularly when high doses are prescribed.

Options for pharmacological management of obesity in patients treated with atypical antipsychotics.

Obesity is associated with considerable morbidity and decreased life expectancy. Weight gain is a commonly encountered problem associated with antipsychotic treatment. We reviewed the literature regarding the mechanisms of weight gain in response to these agents and eight substances implicated as potential obesity prevention or treatment: orlistat, sibutramine, fluoxetine, topiramate, amantadine, nizatidine and cimetidine, and metformin. Weight gain in response to antipsychotic treatment may be mediated through serotonergic, dopaminergic, adrenergic, cholinergic, histaminergic and glutaminergic receptors. Sex hormone dysregulation and altered insulin sensitivity have also been implicated. Two compounds, orlistat and sibutramine, have been shown to help prevent weight gain following a hypocaloric diet, but orlistat requires compliance with a fat-reduced diet, and sibutramine is unsuitable for patients taking serotonergic agents. The weight reducing effect of fluoxetine, even in conjunction with a hypocaloric diet, is only transient. Topiramate, amantadine and metformin may have adverse side-effects potentially outweighing the weight reducing potential. The effectiveness of cimetidine and nizatedine remains unclear. The hazards of these agents in a psychiatric population are discussed. It is concluded that the current evidence does not support the general use of pharmacological interventions for overweight patients treated with antipsychotic medication, although individually selected patients may benefit.

[Nizatidine: a meta-analytical study]. / La nizatidina: uno studio metanalitico.

The medline database was applied to search all randomized clinical trials published from 1986 to 1992 concerning the use of Nizatidine, a powerful H2-antagonist, versus other treatments, including placebo, in the treatment of duodenal ulcer disease. Therapeutic efficacy of nizatidine is comparable to that of other H2-antagonists; with the use of meta-analysis, no significant differences were demonstrated, both in acute and long-term treatment of duodenal ulcer between nizatidine and ranitidine, but untoward side effects were less frequent with nizatidine than with ranitidine.

Possible nizatidine-induced subfulminant hepatic failure.

Subfulminant hepatic failure has not been reported to occur with the histamine-2 receptor antagonists. We report a possible case of nizatidine-induced subfulminant hepatic failure leading to the eventual development of cirrhosis.

Nizatidine versus placebo in gastro-oesophageal reflux disease: a 12-week, multicentre, randomised, double-blind study.

Two doses of nizatidine (150 mg twice daily and 300 mg at bedtime), an H2-receptor antagonist, were compared with placebo in a 12-week, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, parallel study in 466 patients with endoscopically documented gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. Antacid tablets were given concomitantly as needed for pain. Compared with placebo, nizatidine 150 mg twice daily was highly effective in rapidly reducing the severity of heartburn, regardless of oesophagitis severity at entry. Significantly greater complete mucosal healing of oesophagitis occurred after 6 weeks of therapy with nizatidine 150 mg bid (vs nizatidine 300 mg at bedtime or placebo) only in patients with erosive oesophagitis [16/68 (24%) vs 8/65 (12%)] and erosive and ulcerative oesophagitis combined [21/99 (21%) vs 10/94 (11%)]. At week 12, healing with nizatidine 150 mg bid was also significantly greater than placebo in erosive [19/68 (28%) vs 9/65 (14%)], ulcerative [10/31 (32%) vs 3/29 (10%)], and erosive and ulcerative oesophagitis combined [29/99 (29%) vs 12/94 (13%)]. These results show that twice-daily therapy with nizatidine 150 mg is very effective at relieving heartburn, and can also heal erosive and ulcerative oesophagitis. Nizatidine 300 mg at bedtime was not effective at healing oesophagitis, compared with placebo.

[Modern trends in the treatment of ulcer disease (clinical study of nizatidine "Galitidine")]. / Savremeni trendovi u lecenju ulkusne bolesti (Klinicko ispitivanje nizatidina "Galitidina").

By an analysis of nizatidine vs ranitidine activity, the authors show a contemporary controlled approach to the treatment of ulcer disease. In a prospective, randomized, double-blind, parallel comparative, multicentric study, the treatment of duodenal ulcer was carried out in 120 patients with H2-receptor blockers, nizatidine and ranitidine. The treatment lasted one or two months with endoscopic control of the results. The recovery of the ulcer nische in patients who received nizatidine, 150 mg twice daily over a month, was achieved in 89.75% of the cases, while in those who at the same time received ranitidine twice daily ulcer was suppressed in 84.61% of the patients; in those who received Nizatidine, 300 mg once daily it was suppressed in 88.24% of the patients. Statistically, x2 = 2.177 with p > 0.3 which shows that there is no statistically significant differences between the groups although the first group shows the best results. Adverse effects of the drugs were not observed.

A comparison of nizatidine and ranitidine in the maintenance treatment of duodenal ulcer. A randomized, double blind, multicentre, 2-year study.

UNLABELLED: One hundred and eight patients with an endoscopically documented healed duodenal ulcer (DU) participated to a multicentre, randomized, double-blind, long-term study. The study was planned with the aim to compare the efficacy of nizatidine 150 mg with ranitidine 150 mg in preventing relapse during the 2 years following the DU healing. Fifty four patients were assigned to each treatment. Endoscopic examinations were scheduled at 6, 12 and 24 months. Clinical evaluations were performed every two months. Routine laboratory tests were investigated at the beginning of the study and at each of the scheduled endoscopies. STATISTICS: chi-squared test with Yate's correction, Student's t test for unpaired data, Wilcoxon Rank Sum test and Logrank test. Twenty five patients dropped-out: 15 in the nizatidine and 10 in the ranitidine group. The cumulative relapse rate was 18% for nizatidine and 21% for ranitidine treatment (p:ns). Both drugs resulted safe, as only minor side effects were registered. IN CONCLUSION: nizatidine is as effective and safe as ranitidine in the long-term (2 year) treatment of DU.

Nizatidine versus placebo in gastro-oesophageal reflux disease: a 6-week, multicentre, randomised, double-blind comparison. Nizatidine Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Study Group.

In a randomised, multicentre trial, nizatidine 150 mg or 300 mg or placebo was administered twice daily for 6 weeks to 515 patients with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD). Antacid tablets were taken as needed for pain. Significantly superior rates of endoscopically proven complete healing (normal-appearing mucosa) versus placebo occurred after 3 weeks with nizatidine 150 mg and after 6 weeks with nizatidine 300 mg. Six-week healing rates were 38.5% for nizatidine 300 mg, 41.1% for nizatidine 150 mg, and 25.8% for placebo. The nizatidine 150 mg treatment group had significantly greater improvement in daytime and nighttime heartburn severity after 1 day of therapy versus placebo. Twice-daily administration of nizatidine 150 mg or 300 mg provides prompt relief from the major symptom of GORD, heartburn, and complete healing of oesophagitis is seen in many patients.

Nizatidine versus placebo in gastroesophageal reflux disease: a 12-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind study.

Two doses of nizatidine (150 mg bid and 300 mg hs), an H2-receptor antagonist, were compared with placebo in a 12-wk, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel study in 466 patients with endoscopically documented gastroesophageal reflux disease. Antacid tablets were given concomitantly as needed for pain. Compared with placebo, nizatidine 150 mg twice daily was highly effective in rapidly reducing the severity of heartburn, regardless of esophagitis severity at entry. Significantly greater complete mucosal healing of esophagitis occurred after 6 wk of therapy with nizatidine 150 mg bid (vs. nizatidine 300 mg hs or placebo) only in patients with erosive esophagitis [16/68 (24%) vs. 8/65 (12%)] and erosive and ulcerative esophagitis combined [21/99 (21%) vs. 10/94 (11%)]. At wk 12, healing with nizatidine 150 mg bid was also significantly greater than placebo in erosive [19/68 (28%) vs. 9/65 (14%)], ulcerative [10/31 (32%) vs. 3/29 (10%)], and erosive and ulcerative esophagitis combined [29/99 (29%) vs. 12/94 (13%)]. These results show that twice-daily therapy with nizatidine 150 mg is very effective at relieving heartburn, and can also heal erosive and ulcerative esophagitis. Nizatidine 300 mg hs was not effective in healing esophagitis, compared with placebo.