Severe DRESS with myocarditis secondary to naproxen/esomeprazole.

A man in his 60s presented with a widespread erythematous rash and associated chills, paraesthesia and haematuria. He had recently commenced naproxen/esomeprazole. Blood tests showed hypereosinophilia (0.73×109/L) and moderate acute kidney injury. Histology revealed parakeratosis, mild spongiosis with eosinophils. He developed acute coronary syndrome with rapid atrial fibrillation. Coronary angiogram was non-obstructive. Cardiac MRI (CMR) revealed acute myocarditis secondary to Drug Reaction with Eosinophilia and Systemic Symptoms (DRESS). Naproxen/esomeprazole was discontinued, and he was supported with oral corticosteroids. A repeat CMR 3 months later showed resolution of myocarditis. Naproxen/esomeprazole is not a common offending drug. DRESS is a rare drug-induced hypersensitivity reaction with a mortality rate of 10%. The objective of this case report is to highlight the significant but rare cardiac complications that can ensue from DRESS, which warrant prompt recognition and withdrawal of the causative drug.

Therapeutic efficacy and drug safety comparison of one-week Vonoprazan triple therapy with two-weeks Esomeprazole triple therapy in Helicobacter pylori infection: Findings from a single-centre randomized clinical trial in population of Pakistan.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the therapeutic efficacy and drug safety of Vonoprazan and Esomeprazole triple therapies in Helicobacter pylori infection. METHODS: The randomised clinical trial was conducted from December 2022 to January 2023 at the Department of Pharmacology, Army Medical College, National University of Medical Sciences, Rawalpindi, Pakistan, in collaboration with the Gastroenterology Department of Pak Emirates Military Hospital, Rawalpindi, and comprised patients found positive for Helicobacter pylori by stool antigen test. They were randomly distributed into two groups. The EAL group received twoweek triple therapy with Esomeprazole 20mgand Amoxicillin 1000mg twice daily with Levofloxacin 500mg once daily. The VAL group was prescribed one-week triple therapy with Vonoprazan 20mg and Amoxicillin 1000mg twice daily with Levofloxacin 500mg once daily. Eradication success was evaluated by stool antigen test 4 weeks after starting the treatment. Safety of the therapy was assessed by noting adverse effects at days 3 and 14 of the treatment. Data was analysed using SPSS 27. RESULTS: Of the 122 patients, there were 61(50%) in each of the 2 groups; 30(49.2%) males and 31(50.8%) females with mean age 38.40±12.25 years in group EAL, and 35(57.4%) males and 26(42.6%) females with mean age 40.98±12.13 years in VAL group. In the EAL group, 57(93.4%) patients were found to be free of Helicobacter pylori infection compared to 58(95%) in the VAL group. Nausea 14(23%), bitter taste 41(67.2%), abdominal pain 16(26.2%) and headache 20(32.8%) were the adverse effects that were significantly more common in the EAL group compared to the VAL group B. CONCLUSIONS: Vonoprazan-based triple therapy was found to be more effective with less reported adverse effects and potential benefits of better patient compliance due to shorter therapy duration. Clinical Trial Number: Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials: IRCT20221207056738N1.

Time-to-onset Analysis of Rhabdomyolysis due to Different Proton Pump Inhibitors Using a Pharmacovigilance Database.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Recent research has increasingly demonstrated an association between proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and serious adverse events. This study aimed to evaluate the association between PPI and rhabdomyolysis (RM), examining its time-to-onset profiles using the Japanese Adverse Drug Event Report (JADER) database. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data spanning from April 2004 to March 2022 were used. The association between PPIs and RM was evaluated using the reporting odds ratio (ROR), adjusted for sex and age. Subsequent analyses were conducted after excluding cases involving concomitant use of statins or fibrates. Furthermore, the onset time of RM and Weibull distribution parameters were calculated to evaluate the expression profile of RM, and the outcomes were examined. RESULTS: RM was associated with the use of esomeprazole, omeprazole, and rabeprazole, even in the absence of concomitant statin or fibrate use. The median time to RM onset varied among PPIs, ranging from 6.5 to 127 d. The Weibull distribution parameters indicated that the hazard types of nearly all orally administered PPIs were classified as early failure or close to random failure. Regarding outcomes, cases of death were reported for all PPIs except vonoprazan. CONCLUSION: The findings suggest the need for vigilant monitoring of RM during PPI administration, particularly in the early stages, considering the varying onset times.

Severe Anemia from Multiple Gastric Hyperplastic Polyps in a Hemodialysis Patient after Long-term Use of a Proton-pump Inhibitor.

A 90-year-old man on maintenance hemodialysis was admitted due to severe symptomatic anemia. Biopsies under esophagogastroduodenoscopy demonstrated that the cause of anemia was intermittent blood oozing from multiple gastric hyperplastic polyps. Even after successful eradication of Helicobacter pylori, he showed hypergastrinemia (480 pg/mL) owing to esomeprazole (proton-pump inhibitor) therapy for the past 4.5 years to treat reflux esophagitis. Seven months after we switched esomeprazole to famotidine (H2-receptor antagonist), those gastric polyps and anemia were remarkably ameliorated with lowered gastrin levels. This case indicates that long-term use of a proton-pump inhibitor triggers chronic hypergastrinemia, leading to gastric hyperplastic polyps and subsequent severe anemia.

Relationships of Proton Pump Inhibitor-Induced Renal Injury with CYP2C19 Polymorphism: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) have recently been reported to be linked with nephrotoxicity. PPIs are metabolized mainly or partly by cytochrome P450 2C19 (CYP2C19). However, the relationship between CYP2C19 genetic polymorphism and PPI-induced nephrotoxicity is unclear. In this study, we aimed to analyze the association between the time of occurrence of renal injury by PPIs, including lansoprazole, esomeprazole, rabeprazole, and vonoprazan, and CYP2C19 metabolizer status classified by CYP2C19 genotypes. Patients prescribed PPIs were reviewed in this retrospective cohort study. The primary outcome was the time to a 30% decrease in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) from baseline. In patients treated with lansoprazole, the time to a 30% decrease in eGFR for the CYP2C19 poor metabolizer (PM) group was significantly shorter than that for the non-PM group (hazard ratio for PM vs. non-PM, 2.43, 95% confidence interval, 1.21 to 4.87, P = 0.012). In contrast, in patients that received esomeprazole, rabeprazole, or vonoprazan, no significant differences were found in the time to a 30% decrease in eGFR between non-PM and PM groups. The adjusted hazard ratios for the time to a 30% eGFR decrease in patients treated with lansoprazole were significantly higher for CYP2C19 PM, hypertension, and a history of myocardial infarction. In conclusion, this retrospective study showed that CYP2C19 metabolizer status was associated with the time to a 30% eGFR decrease in patients treated with lansoprazole, but not with esomeprazole, rabeprazole, or vonoprazan.

The efficacy and safety of fexuprazan in treating erosive esophagitis: a phase III, randomized, double-blind, multicenter study.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Fexuprazan is a novel potassium-competitive acid blocker (P-CAB). This study aimed to explore the noninferior efficacy and safety of fexuprazan to esomeprazole in treating erosive esophagitis (EE). METHODS: This was a phase III, randomized, double-blind multicenter study. Patients with endoscopically confirmed EE were randomized to receive fexuprazan 40 mg or esomeprazole 40 mg once a daily for 4-8 weeks. The healing rates of EE, symptom response, GERD-health-related quality life (GERD-HRQL), and treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were compared between fexuprazan group and esomeprazole group. RESULTS: A total of 332 subjects were included in full analysis set (FAS) and 311 in per-protocol set (PPS). The healing rates of fexuprazan and esomeprazole groups at 8 weeks were 88.5% (146/165) and 89.0% (145/163), respectively, in FAS and 97.3% (145/149) and 97.9% (143/146), respectively, in PPS. Noninferiority of fexuprazan compared with esomeprazole according to EE healing rates at 8 weeks was demonstrated in both FAS and PPS analysis. No significant difference was found between groups in EE healing rates at 4 weeks, symptom responses, and changes of GERD-HRQL. The incidence of drug-related AEs was 19.4% (32/165) in fexuprazan arm and 19.6% (32/163) in esomeprazole arm. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated noninferior efficacy of fexuprazan to esomeprazole in treating EE. The incidence of TEAEs was similar between fexuprazan and esomeprazole. Trial registration number NCT05813561.

Efficacy and safety of HIP1601 (dual delayed-release esomeprazole) 40 mg in erosive esophagitis compared to HGP1705 (delayed-release esomeprazole) 40 mg: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority study.

BACKGROUND: Proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) are the most effective drugs for treating acid-related disorders. However, once-daily dosing with conventional PPIs fail to fully control acid secretion over 24 h. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of HIP1601 (dual delayed-release esomeprazole) and HGP1705 (delayed-release esomeprazole) in patients with erosive esophagitis (EE). METHODS: We enrolled 213 patients with EE randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive 40 mg HIP1601 (n = 107) or HGP1705 (n = 106) once daily for 4 or 8 weeks. The primary endpoint was the EE healing rate, confirmed by endoscopy up to week 8. GERD-related symptoms and treatment-emergent adverse events were compared between both groups. RESULTS: By week 8, the estimated healing rates of EE were 97.8% and 96.8% in the HIP1601 and HGP1705 groups, respectively, with a 95% confidence interval of -4.7 to 7.2. After 4 or 8 weeks of treatment, the EE healing rate at week 4, complete resolution rate of symptoms, time to sustained resolution of symptoms, and number of rescue medications used were similar in both groups. The proportion of heartburn- and acid regurgitation-free nights by week 4 were higher in the HIP1601 group compared to the HGP1705 group, but the difference did not reach clinical significance (87.7% vs. 85.8%, P = 0.514, 87.5% vs. 85.8%, P = 0.774). The number of adverse events did not differ significantly between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy and safety of HIP1601 40 mg were comparable to those of HGP1705 40 mg for the treatment of EE and symptomatic improvement of GERD. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04080726 ( https://classic. CLINICALTRIALS: gov/ct2/show/NCT04080726 ), registration date: 25/10/2018.

Voriconazole-induced visual abnormality based on drug interaction between voriconazole and esomeprazole: A case report.

We report a case of voriconazole-induced visual abnormality based on drug interaction of voriconazole and esomeprazole, therapeutic drug monitoring, and optimal therapy. An 81-year-old male developed visual abnormality after the blood concentration of voriconazole was up to 6.47 mg/L induced by coadministration with esomeprazole. Voriconazole is a substrate of multiple CYP450 isoenzymes including CYP2C19 (the major route), CYP3A4, and CYP2C9. Esomeprazole, a proton pump inhibitor (PPI), is also converted to inactive metabolites through CYP3A4 and CYP2C19-mediated metabolism, and is also a CYP2C19 inhibitor. The coadministration with esomeprazole inhibited the metabolism of voriconazole via CYP2C19 and promoted the elevation of voriconazole blood concentration beyond the minimum toxic level (5.5 mg/L). According to the pharmacist's advice, the adverse effects of visual abnormalities in the patient disappeared after the clinician reduced voriconazole dosage by 50% when other medication schedules remained unchanged. Therefore, therapeutic drug monitoring of voriconazole should be considered in patients receiving PPIs, especially esomeprazole, in order to adjust the dosage in time and achieve optimal therapeutic response and minimal adverse reaction.

CYP2C19 loss-of-function alleles and use of omeprazole or esomeprazole increase the risk of cardiovascular outcomes in patients using clopidogrel.

Our aim was to investigate in a real-life prospective patient cohort how CYP2C19 loss-of-function (LOF) variants and CYP2C19 inhibitor omeprazole or esomeprazole influence the incidence of cardiovascular events in patients using clopidogrel. Data based simultaneously on these factors are conflicting and sparse. A cohort of prospective patients (n = 1972) with acute coronary syndrome (n = 1302) or symptomatic chronic coronary disease (n = 656) was followed for 365 days after hospitalization with information on purchased prescription drugs, hospital discharge, death, and genotype for CYP2C19*2, CYP2C19*3, and CYP2C19*8 LOF variants. The primary study outcome measurement was cardiovascular death or recurring myocardial infarction or stroke. Altogether, 608 patients (30.8%) carried CYP2C19 LOF alleles. During the 365-day follow-up 252 patients (12.8%) had an ischemic vascular event. Cardiovascular events were significantly more frequent in carriers of CYP2C19 LOF alleles (14.8%, 95% confidence interval [CI], 11.7-17.8) than in non-carriers (10.8%, 95% CI, 9.0-12.6, p = 0.0159). Omeprazole or esomeprazole use was similar among LOF allele carriers (n = 131, 21.5%) and non-carriers (n = 250, 18.3%, p = 0.185). Cardiovascular events were significantly more common in a composite group consisting of all CYP2C19 LOF carriers regardless of proton pump inhibitor use status and non-carriers using omeprazole or esomeprazole than in non-carriers not using omeprazole or esomeprazole (14.8%, 95% CI, 12.2-17.3 vs. 9.9%, 95% CI, 8.0-11.9, p = 0.00173). We observed significantly more cardiovascular events in carriers of CYP2C19 LOF variants and in non-carriers using omeprazole or esomeprazole. For optimal patient care, both genetics and concomitant medication should be considered.

Comparative Efficacy of Tegoprazan vs Esomeprazole/Sodium Bicarbonate for the Treatment of Helicobacter pylori Infection.

INTRODUCTION: Potassium-competitive acid blockers and proton pump inhibitors/sodium bicarbonate can rapidly increase intragastric pH. In this study, we aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of tegoprazan-based and esomeprazole/sodium bicarbonate-based triple therapies in the treatment of Helicobacter pylori infection. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the data of patients with H. pylori infection treated with a 14-day tegoprazan-based triple therapy or 14-day esomeprazole/sodium bicarbonate-based triple therapy. The primary end point was the H. pylori eradication rate with first-line treatment in an intention-to-treat analysis. Secondary end points included the eradication rate with first-line therapy in the per-protocol analysis and adverse events associated with eradication therapy. RESULTS: Of the 854 included patients, 435 were treated with tegoprazan-based therapy, and 419 received esomeprazole/sodium bicarbonate-based therapy. In the intention-to-treat population, no significant difference in eradication rate was detected between the tegoprazan-treated and esomeprazole/sodium bicarbonate-treated groups (78.6% [95% confidence interval (CI), 74.6-82.3%] vs 81.4% [95% CI, 77.4-84.9%], P = 0.313). The per-protocol analysis also revealed a similar eradication rate between groups (tegoprazan vs esomeprazole/sodium bicarbonate: 85.5% [95% CI, 81.8-87.5%] vs 87.8% [95% CI, 84.1-90.7%], P = 0.339). However, abdominal discomfort and diarrhea were more common in the esomeprazole/sodium bicarbonate-treated group than in the tegoprazan-treated group (abdominal discomfort: 1.1% vs 3.8%, P = 0.012; diarrhea: 9.9% vs 21.2%, P < 0.001). DISCUSSION: The efficacy of the esomeprazole/sodium bicarbonate-based triple therapy for H. pylori eradication was comparable with that of the tegoprazan-based triple therapy. However, esomeprazole/sodium bicarbonate-based therapy exhibited a higher risk of abdominal discomfort and diarrhea than tegoprazan-based therapy.

Evaluation of the pharmacokinetic interactions and safety of atogepant coadministered with esomeprazole.

Aim: To investigate potential pharmacokinetic interactions between atogepant and esomeprazole. Methods: Atogepant, esomeprazole, or both were administered to 32 healthy adults in an open-label, nonrandomized, crossover study. Systemic exposure (area under the plasma concentration-time curve [AUC] and peak plasma concentration [Cmax]) for atogepant administered in combination versus alone were compared using a linear mixed effects model. Results: Coadministration with esomeprazole delayed atogepant time to Cmax by ∼1.5 h and reduced Cmax by ∼23% with no statistically significant change in AUC compared with atogepant alone. Administration of atogepant 60 mg alone or in combination with esomeprazole 40 mg was well tolerated in healthy adults. Conclusion: Esomeprazole had no clinically meaningful effect on atogepant pharmacokinetics. Clinical Trial Registration: unregistered phase I study.

A clinical study was conducted in 32 healthy adults to evaluate the possibility of interactions between atogepant, a new drug for the prevention of migraine, and esomeprazole, a drug used to reduce stomach acid. The participants of the study were given each drug alone and together to understand the effect they had on the body's ability to absorb, distribute, and excrete each drug alone and together. The results of this study show that there are no clinically important changes in how atogepant is processed by the body when administered with esomeprazole, and they can be safely taken together.

Pharmacokinetics, Safety, and Tolerability of Vonoprazan- or Esomeprazole-Based Bismuth-Containing Quadruple Therapy: A Phase 1, Double-Blind, Parallel-Group Study in Adults with Helicobacter pylori Infection in China.

Quadruple therapy comprising 2 antibiotics, a proton pump inhibitor, and bismuth, is recommended for Helicobacter pylori eradication in China. This Phase 1, double-blind, parallel-group study aimed to evaluate the pharmacokinetics, safety, and tolerability of bismuth-containing vonoprazan- or esomeprazole-based quadruple therapy in H. pylori-positive healthy subjects at a single site in China. Quadruple therapy comprising vonoprazan 20 mg or esomeprazole 20 mg with bismuth potassium citrate 600 mg (equivalent to bismuth 220 mg), clarithromycin 500 mg, and amoxicillin 1000 mg was administered twice daily for 2 weeks. Forty-four subjects were enrolled, 22 each in the vonoprazan (mean age, 34.5 years; men, 63.6%) and esomeprazole (mean age, 31.6 years; men, 59.1%) groups. Day 14 bismuth plasma pharmacokinetic parameters area under the plasma concentration-time curve during a dosing interval (geometric mean ratio, 1.07 [90% confidence interval, 0.82-1.40]) and maximum observed plasma concentration (geometric mean ratio, 1.30 [90% confidence interval, 0.94-1.81]) were similar between the treatment groups. At Day 42 follow-up, 100% and 94.4% of subjects were H. pylori negative in the vonoprazan and esomeprazole groups, respectively. The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was similar between the groups, with no serious adverse events. No new safety concerns were identified. In conclusion, vonoprazan had no significant effect on plasma bismuth exposure compared with esomeprazole.

Structural characterization of the optical isomers esomeprazole and omeprazole using the JADER and FAERS databases.

BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether the s (-) form of esomeprazole (EPZ) has an improved safety profile when compared with its racemic form omeprazole (OPZ). We assessed the potential complications of these optical isomers when combined with cilostazol, clopidogrel, and prasugrel, which are frequently used concomitant medications. METHODS: Using two adverse event spontaneous reporting databases, Japanese Adverse Drug Event Report (JADER) and FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS), adverse event names for hemorrhage, venous/arterial embolization, and thrombus were obtained from the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities. Reported odds ratios were calculated using a 2 × 2 contingency table, and a signal was considered present if the lower limit of the 95% confidence interval was >1. RESULTS: In combination with cilostazol, a hemorrhagic signal for OPZ in JADER and arterial emboli and thrombus signals for EPZ were detected in both databases. In combination with clopidogrel, OPZ showed arterial emboli and thrombus signals in JADER and venous/arterial emboli and thrombus signals in FAERS, while EPZ displayed arterial emboli and thrombus signals in FAERS. In contrast, when in combination with prasugrel, there were no adverse event signals in either database. CONCLUSION: This study has confirmed using big data, that EPZ, the optical isomer and racemic form of omeprazole, has the beneficial characteristics of being less sensitive to CYP, as was intended by its design.

Pharmacokinetics, Bioequivalence, and Safety of Esomeprazole Magnesium Enteric-Coated Capsules in Healthy Chinese Subjects.

This bioequivalence study is critically important for drug production. Recently, a local pharmaceutical company produced esomeprazole magnesium enteric-coated capsules, a major drug to help to eradicate Helicobacter pylori, but the bioequivalence is not well known. The present study aimed to evaluate the bioequivalence of the 2 esomeprazole magnesium enteric-coated capsules and their pharmacokinetics and safety in 3 biological equivalence trials: fasting, feeding, and mixing. The fasting and mixing trials used single-centered randomized, open-label, single-dose, 2-treatment, 2-period, and 2-sequence crossover design, while the fed trials used single-centered, randomized, open-label, single-dose, 2-treatment, 3-period, 3-sequence partial crossover design. For the fasting and mixing trials, each of the 32 subjects was fasted overnight prior to taking the test preparations or reference preparations. In the fed trial, 54 subjects were given a high-fat meal 1 hour before the drugs were administered. Blood specimens from all subjects were collected against the light within 14 hours, with the plasma drug concentration being detected by the validated ultra-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry analysis method. Geometric mean ratio of maximum concentration, the area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to the last measurable concentration, and area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity with 90% confidence interval were calculated. The data from fasting, mixing, and fed trials met the bioequivalence criteria. No serious adverse reactions were found, suggesting that the test and reference preparations of esomeprazole magnesium enteric capsules have similar safety profile.

Second-line levofloxacin-based quadruple therapy versus bismuth-based quadruple therapy for Helicobacter pylori eradication and long-term changes to the gut microbiota and antibiotic resistome: a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Levofloxacin-based therapy or bismuth-based quadruple therapy are the recommended second-line regimens for Helicobacter pylori eradication after failure of clarithromycin-based therapy. However, resistance to levofloxacin has increased in the past decade. Furthermore, little is known about the long-term effects of H pylori eradication on the antibiotic resistome. In this study, we compared these second-line eradication therapies for efficacy, tolerability, and short-term and long-term effects on the gut microbiota, antibiotic resistome, and metabolic parameters. METHODS: We did a multicentre, open-label, parallel group, randomised controlled trial at eight hospitals in Taiwan. Adult patients (age ≥20 years) with persistent H pylori infection after first-line clarithromycin-based therapy were randomly assigned (1:1, permuted block sizes of four) to receive levofloxacin-based sequential quadruple therapy for 14 days (EAML14; esomeprazole 40 mg and amoxicillin 1 g for 7 days, followed by esomeprazole 40 mg, metronidazole 500 mg, and levofloxacin 250 mg for 7 days, all twice-daily) or bismuth-based quadruple therapy for 10 days (BQ10; esomeprazole 40 mg twice daily, bismuth tripotassium dicitrate 300 mg four times a day, tetracycline 500 mg four times a day, and metronidazole 500 mg three times a day). All investigators were masked to the randomisation sequence. The primary endpoint was H pylori eradication rate measured by 13C urea breath test 6 weeks after second-line treatment according to both intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol analysis. The microbiota composition and antibiotic resistome of faecal samples collected at baseline (before treatment) and at 2 weeks, 8 weeks, and 1 year after eradication therapy was profiled by shotgun metagenomic sequencing and 16S rRNA gene sequencing. The frequency of adverse effects and changes in the gut microbiota and antibiotic resistome were assessed in all participants with available data. The trial is complete and registered with ClinicalTrails.gov, NCT03148366. FINDINGS: Between Feb 25, 2015, and Dec 11, 2020, 560 patients were randomly assigned to receive EAML14 or BQ10 (n=280 per group; 261 [47%] men and 299 [53%] women). Mean age was 55·9 years (SD 12·7) in the EAML14 group and 54·9 years (12·3) in the BQ10 group. Eradication of H pylori was achieved in 246 (88%) of 280 participants in the EAML14 group and 245 (88%) of 280 in the BQ10 group according to ITT analysis (risk difference -0·4%, 95% CI -5·8 to 5·1; p=0·90). In the per-protocol analysis, 246 (90%) of 273 participants in the EAML14 group and 245 (93%) of 264 participants in the BQ10 group achieved H pylori eradication (risk difference 2·7%, 95% CI -0·2 to 7·4; p=0·27). Transient perturbation of faecal microbiota diversity at week 2 was largely restored to basal state 1 year after EAML14 or BQ10. Diversity recovery was slower with BQ10, and recovery in species abundance was partial after both therapies. On shotgun sequencing, we observed significant increases in total resistome after EAML14 (p=0·0002) and BQ10 (p=4·3 × 10-10) at week 2, which were restored to pretreatment level by week 8. The resistance rates of Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumonia to levofloxacin, ciprofloxacin, ampicillin (ampicillin-sulbactam for K pneumonia), and various cephalosporins were significantly increased in the EAML14 group compared with in the BQ10 group at week 2, which were restored to pretreatment levels and showed no significant differences at week 8 and 1 year. The frequency of any adverse effects was significantly higher after BQ10 therapy (211 [77%] of 273 participants) than after EAML14 therapy (134 [48%] of 277; p<0·0001). INTERPRETATION: We found no evidence of superiority between levofloxacin-based quadruple therapy and bismuth-based quadruple therapy in the second-line treatment of H pylori infection. The transient increase in the antibiotic resistome and perturbation of faecal microbiota diversity were largely restored to pretreatment state from 2 months to 1 year after eradication therapy. FUNDING: The Ministry of Science and Technology of Taiwan, the Ministry of Health and Welfare of Taiwan, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei Veteran General Hospital, and the Australian Federal Government through the St George and Sutherland Medical Research Foundation. TRANSLATION: For the Chinese translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Time-dependent association between omeprazole and esomeprazole and hospitalization due to hyponatremia.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to explore the time-course of hospitalization due to hyponatremia associated with omeprazole and esomeprazole. METHODS: In this register-based case-control study, we compared patients hospitalized with a main diagnosis of hyponatremia (n = 11,213) to matched controls (n = 44,801). We used multiple regression to investigate time-related associations between omeprazole and esomeprazole and hospitalization because of hyponatremia. RESULTS: The overall adjusted OR (aOR) between proton pump inhibitor (PPI) exposure, regardless of treatment duration and hospitalization with a main diagnosis of hyponatremia, was 1.23 (95% confidence interval CI 1.15-1.32). Exposure to PPIs was associated with a prompt increase in risk of hospitalization for hyponatremia from the first week (aOR 6.87; 95% CI 4.83-9.86). The risk then gradually declined, reaching an aOR of 1.64 (0.96-2.75) the fifth week. The aOR of ongoing PPI treatment was 1.10 (1.03-1.18). CONCLUSION: The present study shows a marked association between omeprazole and esomeprazole and hyponatremia related to recently initiated treatment. Consequently, newly initiated PPIs should be considered a potential culprit in any patient suffering from hyponatremia. However, if the patient has had this treatment for a longer time, the PPI should be considered a less likely cause.

A Randomized, Double-Blind, Active-Control, Noninferiority, Multicenter, Phase 4 Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Esomeprazole/Sodium Bicarbonate 20/800 mg in Patients with Nonerosive Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease.

Background/Aims: Efficacy of proton pump inhibitors is limited in patients with nonerosive reflux disease (NERD). The aim of this study was to comparatively evaluate the efficacy and safety of esomeprazole with sodium bicarbonate and esomeprazole alone. Methods: This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, noninferiority comparative study. A total of 379 patients with NERD were randomly allocated to receive either EsoduoⓇ (esomeprazole 20 mg with sodium bicarbonate 800 mg) or NexiumⓇ (esomeprazole 20 mg) once daily for 4 weeks from January 2019 to December 2019. The patients had a history of heartburn for at least 2 days in the week before randomization as well as in the last 3 months and no esophageal mucosal breaks on endoscopy. The primary endpoint was a complete cure of heartburn at week 4. The secondary and exploratory endpoints as well as the safety profiles were compared in the groups at weeks 2 and 4. Results: A total of 355 patients completed the study (180 in the EsoduoⓇ group and 175 in the NexiumⓇ group). The proportions of patients without heartburn in the entire 4th week of treatment were not different between the two groups (33.33% in the EsoduoⓇ group and 35% in the NexiumⓇ group, p=0.737). There were no significant differences in most of the secondary and exploratory endpoints as well as the safety profiles. Conclusions: EsoduoⓇ is as effective and safe as NexiumⓇ for managing typical symptoms in patients with NERD (ClinicalTrial.gov identifier: NCT03928470).

Randomized controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of fexuprazan compared with esomeprazole in erosive esophagitis.

BACKGROUND: Fexuprazan, a novel potassium-competitive acid blocker, reversibly suppresses the K+/H+-ATPase enzyme in proton pumps within gastric parietal cells. Fexuprazan's suppression of gastric acid was maintained in healthy individuals for 24 h in a dose-dependent manner. AIM: To compare fexuprazan to esomeprazole and establish its efficacy and safety in patients with erosive esophagitis (EE). METHODS: Korean adult patients with endoscopically confirmed EE were randomized 1:1 to receive fexuprazan 40 mg or esomeprazole 40 mg once daily for eight weeks. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with healed EE confirmed by endoscopy at week 8. The secondary endpoints included the healing rate of EE at week 4, symptom response, and quality of life assessment. Safety profiles and serum gastrin levels were compared between the groups. RESULTS: Of the 263 randomized, 218 completed the study per protocol (fexuprazan 40 mg, n = 107; esomeprazole 40 mg, n = 111). Fexuprazan was non-inferior to esomeprazole regarding the healing rate at week 8 [99.1% (106/107) vs 99.1% (110/111)]. There were no between-group differences in the EE healing rate at week 4 [90.3% (93/103) vs 88.5% (92/104)], symptom responses, and quality of life assessments. Additionally, serum gastrin levels at weeks 4 and 8 and drug-related side effects did not significantly differ between the groups. CONCLUSION: Fexuprazan 40 mg is non-inferior to esomeprazole 40 mg in EE healing at week 8. We suggest that fexuprazan is an alternative promising treatment option to PPIs for patients with EE.

Insulin autoimmune syndrome caused by esomeprazole in a Chinese patient.

Not required for Clinical Vignettes.

Efficacy and safety of high-dose esomeprazole-amoxicillin dual therapy for Helicobacter pylori rescue treatment: a multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: High-dose dual therapy (HDDT) with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and amoxicillin has attracted widespread attention due to its favorable efficacy in eradicating Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori). This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of high-dose PPI-amoxicillin dual therapy and bismuth-containing quadruple therapy for H. pylori rescue treatment. METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized, multicenter, non-inferiority trial. Patients recruited from eight centers who had failed previous treatment were randomly (1:1) allocated to two eradication groups: HDDT (esomeprazole 40 mg and amoxicillin 1000 mg three times daily; the HDDT group) and bismuth-containing quadruple therapy (esomeprazole 40 mg, bismuth potassium citrate 220 mg, and furazolidone 100 mg twice daily, combined with tetracycline 500 mg three times daily; the tetracycline, furazolidone, esomeprazole, and bismuth [TFEB] group) for 14 days. The primary endpoint was the H. pylori eradication rate. The secondary endpoints were adverse effects, symptom improvement rates, and patient compliance. RESULTS: A total of 658 patients who met the criteria were enrolled in this study. The HDDT group achieved eradication rates of 75.4% (248/329), 81.0% (248/306), and 81.3% (248/305) asdetermined by the intention-to-treat (ITT), modified intention-to-treat (MITT), and per-protocol (PP) analyses, respectively. The eradication rates were similar to those in the TFEB group: 78.1% (257/329), 84.2% (257/305), and 85.1% (257/302). The lower 95% confidence interval boundary (-9.19% in the ITT analysis, - 9.21% in the MITT analysis, and -9.73% in the PP analysis) was greater than the predefined non-inferiority margin of -10%, establishing a non-inferiority of the HDDT group vs. the TFEB group. The incidence of adverse events in the HDDT group was significantly lower than that in the TFEB group (11.1% vs. 26.8%, P  < 0.001). Symptom improvement rates and patients' compliance were similar between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Fourteen-day HDDT is non-inferior to bismuth-containing quadruple therapy, with fewer adverse effects and good treatment compliance, suggesting HDDT as an alternative for H. pylori rescue treatment in the local region. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT04678492.