Efficacy of Albis for the Prevention of Gastric Mucosal Injury Concomitant with the Use of Low-Dose Aspirin: A Prospective, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Study

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Long-term use of aspirin can be a risk factor of peptic ulcer diseases. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of Albis (Daewoong Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.) for the prevention of gastric mucosal injury caused by aspirin. METHODS: Aspirin users were enrolled and randomized into the Albis or placebo group. Screening and follow-up endoscopy were performed for modified Lanza scores (MLSs). Primary outcome was measured by the incidence rate of peptic ulcer, and secondary outcomes were measured by the incidence rate of gastritis, improvement in MLS and subjective symptoms. RESULTS: In total, 81 aspirin users were randomized, 43 in the Albis group and 38 in the placebo group. There was no incidence of peptic ulcer in both groups. The incidence of gastritis was significantly higher in the placebo group (44.4% vs. 10.0%, p=0.003); however, the scores of mucosal edema, hyperemia and hemorrhage were not statistically different between the two groups (p>0.05). The frequency of subjective symptoms were more improved in the Albis group than in the placebo group (p=0.023). CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of gastritis was lower in the group that received low-dose aspirin and Albis. The development of peptic ulcer due to long-term use of aspirin might be prevented with concomitant use of Albis.

Efficacy and Safety of Albis(R) in Acute and Chronic Patients with Gastritis: A Double-blind, Placebo-controlled, Randomized Multi-center Study / 대한소화기내시경학회지

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Albis(R) is a newly developed drug comprised of ranitidine, bismuth and sucralfate. The aim of the study was to demonstrate the efficacy and safety superiority of Albis(R) compared to Stillen(R) for treating erosive gastritis. METHODS: This study was a randomized, double-blind, multi-center trial. The primary endpoint was 2 weeks of treatment. RESULTS: Of the 229 patients in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population, 87 from the Albis(R), and 96 from the Stillen(R) group were included in the per protocol (PP) analysis. The endoscopic improvement rate was not different between the Albis(R)(R) group and the control in both the PP (42.5%, 39.6%) and ITT (35.3%, 34.5%) populations. The endoscopic cure of erosion was also not different in the Albis(R) group than that in the control group in both the PP (32.3%, 31.3%) and ITT (27.6%, 27.4%) populations. The endoscopic improvement rate for hemorrhage, edema, and erythema were also not different between the two groups in both the PP and ITT populations. No statistically significant differences were observed for adverse events between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Half of the approved dose of Albis(R) for peptic ulcers was superior to Stillen(R). A low dosage of Albis(R) is more cost efficient and safe than that of Stillen(R).