Safety of Intravenous Pantoprazole Sodium in Pediatric Patients Aged 1 Month to < 1 Year: A Real-World Retrospective Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the incidence rates (IR) of prespecified outcomes of interest in pediatric patients (1 month to < 1 year) treated with intravenous (IV) pantoprazole using Optum's longitudinal electronic health records database (Optum Market Clarity) from the United States (US). METHODS: This real-world, non-interventional, retrospective cohort study was conducted from 01 January 2007 to 31 December 2020 in patients who received IV pantoprazole. Premature patients and those weighing < 2.36 kg were excluded. Patients were categorized based on diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and erosive esophagitis (EE) into: Subgroup 1 (GERD and EE), Subgroup 2 (GERD and no EE), and Subgroup 3 (absence of GERD and EE). Overall IRs (per 1000 person-years [PY]) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of outcomes were estimated (overall and subgroups) and stratified by duration of IV pantoprazole treatment (< 4 days versus ≥ 4 days). RESULTS: Of 1879 eligible patients, none were identified in Subgroup 1; 851 (45.3%) and 1028 (54.7%) patients were identified in Subgroups 2 and 3, respectively. IRs of outcomes of interest ranged from 0.0 to 742.8 per 1000 PY. IRs were highest for vomiting (742.80), diarrhea (377.77), abdominal distension (214.31), hyponatremia (204.99), and hypokalemia (203.49). IRs were comparable between Subgroups 2 and 3. For most outcomes, IRs were higher among patients treated with IV pantoprazole for ≥ 4 days versus those treated for < 4 days. CONCLUSION: These results are consistent with the known safety profile of pantoprazole and emphasize the utility of using real-world data from pediatric populations for assessment of safety outcomes.

Improvement in severe asthma patients receiving biologics and factors associated with persistent insufficient control: a real-life national study.

BACKGROUND: Biological therapies have revolutionized the treatment of severe asthma with type 2 inflammation. Although such treatments are very effective in reducing exacerbation and the dose of oral steroids, little is known about the persistence of symptoms in severe asthma patients treated with biologics. PURPOSE: We aim to describe asthma control and healthcare consumption of severe asthma patients treated with biologics. DESIGN: The Second Souffle study is a real-life prospective observational study endorsed by the Clinical Research Initiative in Severe Asthma: a Lever for Innovation & Science Network. METHODS: Adults with a confirmed diagnosis of severe asthma for at least 12 months' duration were enrolled in the study. A self-administered questionnaire including the Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ), Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ) and a compliance evaluation test was given to the patients. Healthcare consumption within 12 months prior to enrolment was documented. In patients receiving biologics, doctors indicated whether the patients were biologic responders or non-responders. RESULTS: The characteristics of 431 patients with severe asthma were analysed. Among them, 409 patients (94.9%) presented asthma with type 2 inflammation (T2 high) profile, and 297 (72.6%) patients with a T2 high phenotype were treated with a biologic. Physicians estimated that 88.2% of patients receiving biologics were responders. However, asthma control was only achieved in 25.3% of those patients (ACQ > 0.75). A high proportion of patients (77.8%) identified as responders to biologics were not controlled according to the ACQ score. About 50% of patients continue to use oral corticosteroids either daily (25.2%) or more than three times a year for at least three consecutive days (25.6%). Gastro-oesophageal Reflux Disease (GERD) and Obstructive Sleep Apnoea syndrome (OSA) were identified as independent factors associated with uncontrolled asthma. CONCLUSION: Although a high proportion of severe asthma patients respond to biologics, only 25.3% have controlled asthma. GERD and OSA are independent factors of uncontrolled asthma.

[Current use of proton pump inhibitors and when to limit, stop or not start treatment].

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are potent inhibitors of gastric acid secretion that have changed treatment practice for gastric acid-related disorders. The major adequate indications for their use are treatment of gastro-esophageal reflux disease, peptic ulcers, eradication of Helicobacter pylori infection in combination with antibiotics and prophylaxis for patients on non-steroidal anti-inflammatory or antiplatelet drugs. Since their introduction, clinical success has been accompanied by widespread use of PPIs, which has steadily increased over the last decades without concomitant increase in the incidence of acid-related disorders. PPIs are now among the most widely prescribed class of medications worldwide and around 10% of Icelanders are current PPI users. This increase has been linked to PPI prescription without an indication, or continued use for longer duration than recommended. In recent years, concerns have been raised about PPI overuse and the associated increased risk of harm, not only in terms of increased costs but also the potential risk of physical dependence and long-term side effects of PPIs. The article is based on search in PubMed, the authors' own clinical experience and research, and is intended to provide practice advice on the use of PPIs with focus on appropriate prescription and deprescription of PPIs.

Proton pump inhibitor-induced gut dysbiosis and immunomodulation: current knowledge and potential restoration by probiotics.

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are the most commonly prescribed drugs for the treatment of non-erosive reflux disease (NERD), ulcers associated with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), esophagitis, peptic ulcer disease (PUD), Zollinger-Ellison syndrome (ZES), gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), non-ulcer dyspepsia, and Helicobacter pylori eradication therapy. The drugs have the effect of inhibiting acid production in the stomach. According to research, PPIs can affect the composition of gut microbiota and modulate the immune response. Recently, there has been a problem with the over-prescription of such drugs. Although PPIs do not have many side effects, their long-term use can contribute to small intestinal bacterial overgrowth (SIBO) or C. difficile and other intestinal infections. Probiotic supplementation during PPIs therapy may provide some hope in the reduction of emerging therapy side effects. This review aims to present the most important effects of long-term PPI use and provides critical insights into the role of probiotic intervention in PPI therapy.

Effects of obesity on the pharmacology of proton pump inhibitors: current understanding and future implications for patient care and research.

INTRODUCTION: In the United States, obesity affects approximately ⅖ adults and ⅕ children, leading to increased risk for comorbidities, like gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), treated increasingly with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). Currently, there are no clinical guidelines to inform PPI dose selection for obesity, with sparse data regarding whether dose augmentation is necessary. AREAS COVERED: We provide a review of available literature regarding the pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD), and/or metabolism of PPIs in children and adults with obesity, as a step toward informing PPI dose selection. EXPERT OPINION: Published PK data in adults and children are limited to first-generation PPIs and point toward reduced apparent oral drug clearance in obesity, with equipoise regarding obesity impact on drug absorption. Available PD data are sparse, conflicting, and limited to adults. No studies are available to inform the PPI PK→PD relationship in obesity and if/how it differs compared to individuals without obesity. In the absence of data, best practice may be to dose PPIs based on CYP2C19 genotype and lean body weight, so as to avoid systemic overexposure and potential toxicities, while monitoring closely for efficacy.

Tracheobronchial-esophageal reflex initiates esophageal hypersensitivity and aggravates cough hyperreactivity in guinea pigs with esophageal acid infusion.

Esophageal-tracheobronchial reflex is considered the main mechanism underlying cough due to gastroesophageal reflux, and is associated with esophageal hypersensitivity. We hypothesized that tracheobronchial-esophageal reflex may also exist, and may be related to esophageal hypersensitivity. To test this hypothesis, conscious and ether-anesthetized guinea pigs were subjected to repetitive capsaicin inhalation to establish models of cough (conscious) and cough-free (anesthetized) airway injury, respectively, followed by esophageal acid infusion. Recurrent capsaicin inhalation induced similar cough hyperreactivity to inhaled capsaicin after esophageal acid infusion in guinea pigs with cough and guinea pigs with cough-free airway injury during recurrent capsaicin inhalation. Cough hyperreactivity, along with overexpression of transient receptor potential vanilloid 1 (TRPV1) receptors in esophageal mucosa and in nerve fibers of tracheal mucosa of guinea pigs were blocked by pretreatment with esophageal infusion of capsazepine, but not atropine. Thus, recurrent airway nociceptive stimuli induce esophageal hyperreactivity via a tracheobronchial-esophageal reflex mediated by vagal C afferents expressing TRPV1, and enhance cough due to reflux.

AGA Clinical Practice Update on De-Prescribing of Proton Pump Inhibitors: Expert Review.

DESCRIPTION: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are among the most commonly used medications in the world. Developed for the treatment and prevention of acid-mediated upper gastrointestinal conditions, these agents are being used increasingly for indications where their benefits are less certain. PPI overprescription imposes an economic cost and contributes to polypharmacy. In addition, PPI use has been increasingly linked to a number of adverse events (PPI-associated adverse events [PAAEs]). Therefore, de-prescribing of PPIs is an important strategy to lower pill burden while reducing real costs and theoretical risks. The purpose of this clinical update was to provide Best Practice Advice (BPA) statements about how to approach PPI de-prescribing in ambulatory patients. METHODS: Our guiding principle was that, although PPIs are generally safe, patients should not use any medication when there is not a reasonable expectation of benefit based on scientific evidence or prior treatment response. Prescribers are responsible for determining whether PPI use is absolutely or conditionally indicated and, when uncertainty exists, to incorporate patient perspectives into PPI decision making. We collaboratively outlined a high-level "process map" of the conceptual approach to de-prescribing PPIs in a clinical setting. We identified the following 3 key domains that required BPA guidance: documentation of PPI indication; identifying suitable candidates for consideration of de-prescribing; and optimizing successful de-prescribing. Co-authors drafted 1 or more potential BPAs, supported by literature review, for each domain. All co-authors reviewed, edited, and selected or rejected draft BPAs for inclusion in the final list submitted to the American Gastroenterological Association Governing Board. Because this was not a systematic review, we did not carry out a formal rating of the quality of evidence or strength of the presented considerations. Best Practice Advice Statements BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 1: All patients taking a PPI should have a regular review of the ongoing indications for use and documentation of that indication. This review should be the responsibility of the patient's primary care provider. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 2: All patients without a definitive indication for chronic PPI should be considered for trial of de-prescribing. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 3: Most patients with an indication for chronic PPI use who take twice-daily dosing should be considered for step down to once-daily PPI. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 4: Patients with complicated gastroesophageal reflux disease, such as those with a history of severe erosive esophagitis, esophageal ulcer, or peptic stricture, should generally not be considered for PPI discontinuation. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 5: Patients with known Barrett's esophagus, eosinophilic esophagitis, or idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis should generally not be considered for a trial of de-prescribing. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 6: PPI users should be assessed for upper gastrointestinal bleeding risk using an evidence-based strategy before de-prescribing. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 7: Patients at high risk for upper gastrointestinal bleeding should not be considered for PPI de-prescribing. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 8: Patients who discontinue long-term PPI therapy should be advised that they may develop transient upper gastrointestinal symptoms due to rebound acid hypersecretion. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 9: When de-prescribing PPIs, either dose tapering or abrupt discontinuation can be considered. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 10: The decision to discontinue PPIs should be based solely on the lack of an indication for PPI use, and not because of concern for PAAEs. The presence of a PAAE or a history of a PAAE in a current PPI user is not an independent indication for PPI withdrawal. Similarly, the presence of underlying risk factors for the development of an adverse event associated with PPI use should also not be an independent indication for PPI withdrawal.

Resolvin D1 attenuates acid-induced DNA damage in esophageal epithelial cells and rat models of acid reflux.

The role of resolvin D1 (RvD1) in gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) remains largely unknown. Here, we investigated the potential role of RvD1 in acid-induced DNA damage in esophageal epithelial cells, patients with refractory GERD and a rat model of acid reflux. Weak acid exposure induced longer comet tails, reactive oxygen species (ROS) generation, oxidative DNA damage and DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) in cells and RvD1 (0.1 µM) blocked all these effects. Mechanistic analyses showed that apart from ROS-reducing effects, RvD1 possessed a strong capacity to promote DNA damage repair, augmenting cell cycle checkpoint activity and DSB repair by modulating phosphatase and tensin homolog (PTEN) in cells. We also detected the surface expression of formyl peptide receptor 2 (FPR2), a receptor for RvD1, in the esophageal epithelial cells, and inhibition of FPR2 abrogated the protective effects of RvD1 on cells. Furthermore, a positive correlation between RvD1 and PTEN was observed predominantly in the esophageal epithelium from patients with refractory GERD (r = 0.67, P < 0.05). Additionally, RvD1 administration upregulated PTEN, suppressed DNA DSBs and alleviated microscopic damage in the rat model of gastric reflux. FPR2 gene silencing abolished the therapeutic effects of RvD1 on the rat model. Taken together, RvD1 binding to FPR2 protects the esophageal epithelium from acid reflux-induced DNA damage via a mechanism involving the inhibition of ROS production and facilitation of DSB repair. These findings support RvD1 as a promising approach that may be valuable for the treatment of GERD.

Daidzein ameliorates experimental acute reflux esophagitis in rats via regulation of cytokines.

Context: Daidzein is a secondary metabolite derived from plants, has a flavonoid structure and is known for its protective activity in gastrointestinal disorders. Objective: The current work determines the preventive effect of daidzein against injury in the esophagus mucosa induced by esophageal reflux (RE) in an animal model. Methods: Adult male Wistar rats were classified into six groups: normal control, ER + different doses of daidzein and ER + omeprazole. RE was induced in all animals except controls and supplemented with daidzein and standard drugs orally for 6 hours. Serum and tissue were used for further biochemical parameters. Results: Daidzein as a flavonoid has antioxidant properties and shows in vitro antioxidant activity. The outcomes also reveal an elevation in lipid peroxidation and a decline in the levels of sulphhydryl groups and glutathione, along with the depletion in the activities of enzymatic antioxidants in the oxidative stress state. In a dose-dependent manner daidzein and omeprazole amended all macroscopic and biochemical variations and protected against the raised level of hydrogen peroxide (H2O2), calcium and free iron levels in esophageal tissue induced during RE. It also improved the expression and level of proinflammatory cytokines. Conclusion: The finding reports that daidzein has a potential to show a shielding effect against esophagus damage induced by RE in rats, at least in part via alteration of inflammatory cytokines.

Esophageal cancer cells convert the death signal from TRAIL into a stimulus for survival during acid/bile exposure.

BACKGROUND: TRAIL is best known for killing cancer cells selectively, however, some cancers resist TRAIL treatment for various reasons. Esophageal adenocarcinoma is such an example. Previously, we reported that the tumor cells interrupted TRAIL-mediated apoptosis by overexpressing the decoy receptors and survivin. AIMS: To investigate TRAIL resistance in esophageal adenocarcinoma during GERD. METHODS: We simulated GERD episodes in vitro by exposing cancer cells to the acid/bile conditions acutely as well as chronically. TRAIL and its receptors were examined for expression, interaction, and induction of cell death. RESULTS: We found that acid/bile exposure drove the tumor cells to express TRAIL and TRAILR2 robustly, but did not lead to apoptosis, because the tumor cells overexpressed TRADD to replace FADD as the adaptor molecule to trigger NFκB activation instead of caspases, and thereby convert a death signal from TRAIL into a stimulus for survival. The tumor cells also overexpressed c-FLIP to keep caspases away from TRAILR2 in case FADD finds a way back to the death receptor. CONCLUSION: Multiple reasons contribute to TRAIL resistance in esophageal adenocarcinoma, including overexpression of the decoy receptors to block the death receptors, using TRADD to replace FADD, and using c-FLIP to replace caspase-8.

Acid/bile exposure triggers TRAIL-mediated apoptosis in esophageal cancer cells by suppressing the decoy receptors and c-FLIPR.

Esophageal adenocarcinoma essentially develops from esophageal inflammation caused by chronic GERD. During GERD episodes, the lower esophageal epithelium is repeatedly exposed to stomach acid, which often contains duodenal bile salts that prompt malignant transformation. TRAIL is one of the cytokines produced in response to such insults and targets the transformed cells exclusively. In this study, we simulated GERD episodes in vitro by exposing the cancer cells to acid or acid/bile combination and found that the cancer cells lived through acid attacks by expression of the decoy receptors and c-FLIPR but died of TRAIL-mediated apoptosis when bile salts were present. Further investigation revealed that acid/bile exposure downregulated the decoy receptors and thereby facilitated TRAIL signaling; meantime, it inhibited protein kinase C activity and thus expedited c-FLIPR degradation, allowing apoptosis to take place.

Botox injection into the lower esophageal sphincter induces hiatal paralysis and gastroesophageal reflux.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic intrasphincteric injection of Botox (ISIB) is used routinely for the treatment of achalasia esophagus and other spastic motor disorders. Studies show that the ISIB reduces the smooth muscle lower esophageal sphincter (LES) pressure. The esophageal hiatus, formed by the right crus of diaphragm, surrounds the cranial half of the LES and works like an external LES. We studied the effects of ISIB on the LES and hiatal contraction and gastroesophageal reflux (GER). Fourteen patients treated with ISIB were studied. Esophageal manometry-impedance recordings were performed before and after the ISIB. Hiatal contraction was assessed during tidal inspiration, forced inspiration, Müller's maneuver, and straight leg raise. In 6 subjects, the manometry were repeated 6-12 mo after the ISIB. The esophagogastric junction (EGJ) pressure was measured at end expiration (LES pressure) and at the peak of maneuvers (hiatal contraction). Transdiaphragmatic pressure (pdi; force of diaphragmatic contraction) was measured at the peak of forced inspiration. GER was measured from the impedance recordings. The EGJ pressure at end expiration (LES pressure) decreased significantly after the Botox injection. The peak EGJ pressure at tidal inspiration, forced inspiration, Müller's maneuver, and straight leg raise was also dramatically reduced by the ISIB. There was no effect of Botox on the pdi during forced inspiration. Seven of 10 subjects demonstrated GER during maneuvers following the ISIB. Six to 12 mo after ISIB, the LES and hiatal contraction pressure returned to the pre-ISIB levels. ISIB, in addition to decreasing LES pressure, paralyzes the esophageal hiatus (crural diaphragm) and induces GER.NEW & NOTEWORTHY The sphincter mechanism at the lower end of the esophagus comprises smooth muscle lower esophageal sphincter (LES) and skeletal muscle crural diaphragm (hiatus). Current thinking is that the endoscopic intrasphincteric injection of Botox (ISIB), used routinely for the treatment of achalasia esophagus, reduces LES pressure. Our study shows that ISIB, even though injected into the LES, diffuses into the hiatus and causes its paralysis. These findings emphasize the importance of esophageal hiatus as an important component of the antireflux barrier and that the ISIB is refluxogenic.

Comparison of gastrointestinal adverse events with different doses of metformin in the treatment of elderly people with type 2 diabetes.

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE: Gastrointestinal discomfort is the most common adverse event of metformin treatment for type 2 diabetes, especially in elderly patients. The aim of this study was to compare gastrointestinal adverse events resulting from different doses of metformin used for the treatment of elderly people with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: A total of 361 elderly patients with newly diagnosed diabetes were randomly divided into three groups: metformin 1000 mg/d (N = 120), metformin 1500 mg/d (N = 121) and metformin 2000 mg/d (N = 120). Glycaemic control and gastrointestinal adverse events (abdominal pain, diarrhoea, nausea, vomiting, bloating and anorexia) were assessed and compared among the three groups after 12 weeks of treatment. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: At baseline, there was no significant difference in gastrointestinal symptoms among the three groups. After 12 weeks of treatment with metformin, the change in HbA1c level was -0.7%, -0.9% and -1.0% for the 1000 mg/d, 1500 mg/d and 2000 mg/d groups, respectively (P < .0001). There was no significant difference in gastrointestinal adverse events among the three groups after treatment with metformin. In total, 62 people (17.2%) could not tolerate the adverse effects of metformin, and most of them stopped treatment in the first 4 weeks. Logistic regression analysis shows that female sex (OR = 2.660, 95%CI 1.692-4.183, P < .0001) and the concurrent use of organic cation transporter 1-inhibiting drugs (OR = 1.874, 95%CI 1.076-3.265, P = .027) are independent risk factors for adverse events. WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSIONS: Our data demonstrate that metformin doses of 1000 mg/d-2000 mg/d have similar adverse events but that 2000 mg/d of metformin yields the best glycaemic control in elderly people with diabetes. If elderly people can tolerate 1000 mg/d of metformin, we could gradually increase the dose to 2000 mg/d to achieve better glycaemic control.

[Effect of omeprazole on plasma concentration and adverse reactions of capecitabine in patients with colon cancer].

Objective: To investigate the effect of omeprazole on plasma concentration, efficacy and adverse reactions of capecitabine in patients with colon cancer. Methods: Seventy-two patients with colon cancer treated with capecitabine were analysed retrospective. The patients treated with capecitabine combined with omeprazole were identified as experimental group and the capecitabine treatment alone as control group.The differences of blood concentration and the side effects of capecitabine between these two groups were compared. Results: The plasma concentration of 5-Fluorouracilum in experimental group was (126.25±50.59) µg/ml, without significant difference of (123.09±56.70) µg/ml in control group (P=0.121). The incidence of Ⅲ to Ⅳ degree bone marrow suppression, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea and hand-foot syndrome in experimental group were 13.8%, 0%, 0% and 19.4%, respectively. In control group, the incidence of Ⅲ to Ⅳ degree bone marrow suppression, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea and the hand-foot syndrome were 11.1%, 0%, 0% and 19.4%, respectively, without significant difference of experimental group (P>0.05). The incidence of acid reflux and heartburn in the control group was 72.2%, significantly higher than 44.4% of the experimental group (P<0.05). The objective response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival time (PFS) in these two groups were 30.6% and 33.3%, and 8.0 month and 8.5 month, respectively, without significant difference (P>0.05). Conclusion: The intravenous omeprazole attenuates reflux and heartburn of colon cancer patients treated with capecitabine, without affecting its plasma concentration and side effects and has no impact on the PFS of these patients.

The effect of Heweijiangni-decoction on esophageal morphology in a rat model of OVA-induced visceral hypersensitivity followed by acid exposure.

Heweijiangni decoction (HWJND) is an effective traditional Chinese medicine prescription in clinical treatment of nonerosive reflux disease (NERD). Esophageal hypersensitivity and acid contribute to the disease. However, the exact underlying mechanism of action remains unclear. In this study, we observed the effect of HWJND on esophageal morphology in a rat model of ovalbumin (OVA)-induced visceral hypersensitivity followed by acid exposure. Esophageal morphology was assessed by measuring the extent of dilated intercellular spaces (DIS), desmosome disruption, and mitochondrial fragmentation. HWJND in low, moderate, and high doses relieved DIS and desmosome disruption in esophageal epithelium compared with model group (P<0.05 for all doses). In addition, HWJND in high dose protected mitochondria from fragmentation (P<0.05). Other findings suggest that DIS and mitochondrial fragmentation are independent events, and that omeprazole protects mitochondria. Overall, HWJND significantly resists esophageal morphology changes in OVA-induced and acid exposure rat model.

Magnesium alginate in children with uncontrolled asthma.

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) may be frequently associated with asthma in children and may affect asthma control. Proton pump inhibitors (PPI) are commonly prescribed in asthmatic children, despite uncertain efficacy on respiratory symptoms and risk of relevant adverse effects.

[Gastroesophageal reflux disease and esophagitis associated with the use of drugs: the modern state of the problem].

From the standpoint of evidence - based medicine, the ability of various drugs to induce the development of gastroesophageal reflux disease and esophagitis is considered. Thus, all known drugs can be divided into 3 groups: drugs that have the ability to reduce pressure in the lower esophageal sphincter, for example, ß-adrenoreceptor agonists, α-adrenoreceptor antagonists, anticholinergics, calcium channel blockers, nitrates, benzodiazepines (diazepam), estrogen, progesterone, aminophylline (theophylline), tricyclic antidepressants, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, glucocorticosteroids; means providing a direct damaging effect on the esophageal mucosa, as well as lowering its resistance reflyuktatu, e.g., bisphosphonates, acetylsalicylic acid / non - steroidal anti - inflammatory agents, anticoagulants, antiplatelet drugs, iron preparations, ascorbic acid, potassium chloride, quinidine, phenytoin, calcium dobesilate, 131I sodium iodide, antibiotics (tetracycline, doxycycline, clindamycin, ciprofloxacin, ornidazole, clindamycin, rifampicin), antitumor agents; drugs that impede gastric emptying: calcium channel blockers, anticholinergics. These data can be used in practice in the choice of treatment tactics, especially in individuals with a diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux disease or heartburn.

A case-control study of the risk of upper gastrointestinal mucosal injuries in patients prescribed concurrent NSAIDs and antithrombotic drugs based on data from the Japanese national claims database of 13 million accumulated patients.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to identify the adverse effects of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and antithrombotics on the upper gastrointestinal (GI) mucosa in a clinical setting as a case-control study using a large-scale medical database in Japan. METHODS: We evaluated the risk of upper GI mucosal injuries in patients receiving NSAIDs and antithrombotics using the Japan Medical Data Center claims database with data for 13 million accumulated patients, from January 2009 to December 2014. Endoscopically evaluated upper GI mucosal injuries were peptic ulcers (n = 143,271), upper GI bleeding (n = 10,545), and gastroesophageal reflux disease (n = 154,755). For each patient, ten controls were matched by age, sex, and diagnosis month. RESULTS: The odds ratio (OR) for peptic ulcers was 1.45, 1.31, 1.50, 1.53, and 1.62; for upper GI bleeding: 1.76, 1.62, 1.96, 1.82, and 2.38; and for gastroesophageal reflux disease: 1.54, 1.41, 1.89, 1.67, and 1.91 for NSAIDs, COX-2 selective inhibitors, low-dose aspirin, antiplatelet drugs, and anticoagulants, respectively (all statistically significant: P < 0.001). Polypharmacy with NSAIDs and antithrombotic drugs increased the risk of upper GI injuries compared with single-drug therapy. The injury risk was also increased by lifestyle-related diseases, including diabetes mellitus and hyperlipidemia. CONCLUSIONS: This case-control study using the large organized Japanese claims database provided the risk of upper GI mucosal injuries in patients receiving NSAIDs and antithrombotic drugs.