Ten-Day Vonoprazan-Amoxicillin Dual Therapy as a First-Line Treatment of Helicobacter pylori Infection Compared With Bismuth-Containing Quadruple Therapy.

INTRODUCTION: No study has investigated the efficacy and safety of vonoprazan-amoxicillin dual therapy compared with bismuth quadruple therapy (B-quadruple). This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of 10-day vonoprazan-amoxicillin dual therapy as a first-line treatment of Helicobacter pylori infection compared with B-quadruple and to explore the optimal dosage of amoxicillin in the dual therapy. METHODS: A total of 375 treatment-naive, H. pylori -infected subjects were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio into 3 regimen groups including VHA-dual (vonoprazan 20 mg twice/day + amoxicillin 750 mg 4 times/day), VA-dual (vonoprazan 20 mg + amoxicillin 1,000 mg twice/day), and B-quadruple (esomeprazole 20 mg + bismuth 200 mg + amoxicillin 1,000 mg + clarithromycin 500 mg twice/day). Eradication rates, adverse events (AEs), and compliance were compared between 3 groups. RESULTS: The eradication rates of B-quadruple, VHA-dual, and VA-dual were 90.9%, 93.4%, and 85.1%, respectively, by per-protocol analysis; 89.4%, 92.7%, and 84.4%, respectively, by modified intention-to-treat analysis; 88.0%, 91.2%, and 82.4%, respectively, by intention-to-treat analysis. The efficacy of the VHA-dual group was not inferior to the B-quadruple group ( P < 0.001), but VA-dual did not reach a noninferiority margin of -10%. The AEs rates of the B-quadruple group were significantly higher than those of the VHA-dual ( P = 0.012) and VA-dual ( P = 0.001) groups. There was no significant difference in medication compliance among 3 treatment groups ( P = 0.995). CONCLUSIONS: The 10-day VHA-dual therapy provided satisfactory eradication rates of >90%, lower AEs rates, and similar adherence compared with B-quadruple therapy as a first-line therapy for H. pylori infection. However, the efficacy of VA-dual therapy was not acceptable.

A Prediction Model Based on the Risk Factors Associated with Pathological Upgrading in Patients with Early-Stage Gastric Neoplasms Diagnosed by Endoscopic Forceps Biopsy.

Background/Aims: The discrepancies between the diagnosis of preoperative endoscopic forceps biopsy (EFB) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in patients with early gastric neoplasm (EGN) exist objectively. Among them, pathological upgrading directly influences the accuracy and appropriateness of clinical decisions. The aims of this study were to investigate the risk factors for the discrepancies, with a particular focus on pathological upgrading and to establish a prediction model for estimating the risk of pathological upgrading after EFB. Methods: We retrospectively collected the records of 978 patients who underwent ESD from December 1, 2017 to July 31, 2021 and who had a final histopathology determination of EGN. A nomogram to predict the risk of pathological upgrading was constructed after analyzing subgroup differences among the 901 lesions enrolled. Results: The ratio of pathological upgrading was 510 of 953 (53.5%). Clinical, laboratorial and endoscopic characteristics were analyzed using univariable and binary multivariable logistic regression analyses. A nomogram was constructed by including age, history of chronic atrophic gastritis, symptoms of digestive system, blood high density lipoprotein concentration, macroscopic type, pathological diagnosis of EFB, uneven surface, remarkable redness, and lesion size. The C-statistics were 0.804 (95% confidence interval, 0.774 to 0.834) and 0.748 (95% confidence interval, 0.664 to 0.832) in the training and validation set, respectively. We also built an online webserver based on the proposed nomogram for convenient clinical use. Conclusions: The clinical value of identifying the preoperative diagnosis of EGN lesions is limited when using EFB separately. We have developed a nomogram that can predict the probability of pathological upgrading with good calibration and discrimination value.