Vonoprazan Triple and Dual Therapy for Helicobacter pylori Infection in the United States and Europe: Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Novel, effective treatments for Helicobacter pylori infection are needed. This study evaluated the efficacy of vonoprazan, a potassium-competitive acid blocker, vs standard treatment on H pylori eradication in the United States and Europe. METHODS: In a randomized, controlled, phase 3 trial, treatment-naïve adults with H pylori infection were randomized 1:1:1 to open-label vonoprazan dual therapy (20 mg vonoprazan twice daily; 1 g amoxicillin 3 times daily), or double-blind triple therapy twice a day (vonoprazan 20 mg or lansoprazole 30 mg; amoxicillin 1 g; clarithromycin 500 mg) for 14 days. The primary outcome was noninferiority in eradication rates in patients without clarithromycin- and amoxicillin-resistant strains (noninferiority margin = 10%). Secondary outcomes assessed superiority in eradication rates in clarithromycin-resistant infections, and in all patients. RESULTS: A total of 1046 patients were randomized. Primary outcome eradication rates (nonresistant strains): vonoprazan triple therapy 84.7%, dual therapy 78.5%, vs lansoprazole triple therapy 78.8% (both noninferior; difference 5.9%; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.8 to 12.6; P < .001; difference -0.3%; 95% CI, -7.4 to 6.8; P = .007, respectively). Eradication rates in clarithromycin-resistant infections: vonoprazan triple therapy 65.8%, dual therapy 69.6%, vs lansoprazole triple therapy 31.9% (both superior; difference 33.9%; 95% CI, 17.7-48.1; P < .001; difference 37.7%; 95% CI, 20.5-52.6; P < .001, respectively). In all patients, vonoprazan triple and dual therapy were superior to lansoprazole triple therapy (80.8% and 77.2%, respectively, vs 68.5%, difference 12.3%; 95% CI, 5.7-18.8; P < .001; difference 8.7%; 95% CI, 1.9-15.4; P = .013). Overall frequency of treatment-emergent adverse events was similar between vonoprazan and lansoprazole regimens (P > .05). CONCLUSION: Both vonoprazan-based regimens were superior to proton pump inhibitor-based triple therapy in clarithromycin-resistant strains and in the overall study population. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; NCT04167670.

Determinants of the clinical outcomes of gout during the first year of urate-lowering therapy.

Clinical benefit early in urate-lowering treatment of gout is difficult to document. We examined data from 1,832 gouty subjects treated with either urate-lowering agents or placebo to identify determinants of gout flare incidence and tophus size during year 1 of treatment. Reductions from pretreatment serum urate levels influenced flare frequency and tophus size, but the effect of urate level on flare incidence was biphasic. Lower urate levels were associated with higher flare incidence early in treatment but lower incidence by one year. The complex relationship between urate-lowering and clinical outcome early in treatment has implications for both clinical and investigative approaches to urate-lowering management.

Randomized, double-blind, multicenter comparison of oral cefditoren 200 or 400 mg BID with either cefuroxime 250 mg BID or cefadroxil 500 mg BID for the treatment of uncomplicated skin and skin-structure infections.

BACKGROUND: Uncomplicated skin and skin-structure infections are commonly observed in medical practice. Because these infections typically are confined to the superficial layers and seldom lead to the destruction of skin structures and resultant systemic dissemination, in general they can be treated with an oral antibiotic with potent microbiologic activity against gram-positive pathogens. OBJECTIVE: This paper compares the efficacy and tolerability of 3 beta-lactam antibiotics in patients with uncomplicated skin and skin-structure infections. METHODS: Two double-blind, multicenter, parallel-group studies were conducted, in which patients aged > or = 12 years with uncomplicated skin and skin-structure infections were randomized to receive cefditoren 200 or 400 mg, cefuroxime 250 mg, or cefadroxil 500 mg, each BID for 10 days. Study 1 compared cefditoren with cefuroxime; Study 2 compared cefditoren with cefadroxil. Clinical and microbiologic responses were assessed at a posttreatment visit (within 48 hours of treatment completion) and test-of-cure visit (7-14 days after treatment completion). Patients were monitored closely throughout the study with the use of physical examinations, clinical laboratory tests, and assessment of adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 1,685 patients (855 males, 830 females; mean age, 41.1 years [range, 12-95 years]) were enrolled. Within both studies, the 3 treatment groups were similar at baseline based on demographic characteristics and types of infection. Cellulitis (26%), wound infection (25%), and simple abscess (15%) were the most common infections. Clinical cure rates at the test-of-cure visit were 85% (443/523) for cefditoren 200 mg, 83% (427/516) for cefditoren 400 mg, 88% (234/265) for cefuroxime, and 85% (211/248) for cefadroxil. At the test-of-cure visit, cefditoren 200 mg had eradicated significantly fewer of the causative pathogens isolated before treatment in microbiologically evaluable patients than did cefuroxime in Study 1 (P = 0.043) but significantly more of the pathogens than did cefadroxil in Study 2 (P = 0.018). Eradication rates for the most commonly isolated pathogens were generally similar in the 3 treatment groups in both studies, with the only significant difference favoring cefditoren 200 and 400 mg over cefadroxil for Peptostreptococcus species in Study 2 (P = 0.016 and P = 0.003, respectively). A minority of patients (< or = 5% in any treatment group) discontinued study-drug treatment prematurely due to a treatment-related adverse event, with statistically higher rates for cefditoren 400 mg than for cefditoren 200 mg and the comparator cephalosporins (each P < 0.05). All 3 cephalosporins were generally well tolerated. Most adverse events (>93%) were categorized as mild to moderate, with the most common being diarrhea, nausea, and headache. CONCLUSION: In this population of patients with uncomplicated skin and skin-structure infections, including those due to Staphylococcus aureus or Streptococcus pyogenes, the clinical cure rate and tolerability of cefditoren were comparable to those of cefuroxime and cefadroxil.