Interchangeable Use of Proton Pump Inhibitors Based on Relative Potency.
ABSTRACT: Although proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are widely used, their relative potency and ideal dosing regimens remain unclear. We analyzed data from randomized clinical trials that performed pH testing in patients receiving solid-dose PPI formulations (omeprazole, esomeprazole, lansoprazole, pantoprazole, rabeprazole) for a minimum of 5 days. We used omeprazole equivalency and the surrogate biomarker, percentage time pH > 4 over a 24-hour period (pH4time), to compare PPI effectiveness for different PPIs given once, twice, or 3 times daily. We found that increasing strength of once-daily PPIs (9-64 mg omeprazole equivalents) increased pH4time linearly from approximately 10.0 to 15.6 hours; higher doses produced no further increase in pH4time. Increasing the frequency to twice-daily PPI increased pH4time linearly, from approximately 15.8 to 21.0 hours. Three-times daily PPIs performed similarly to twice-daily PPIs. The costs of PPIs varied greatly, but the cost variation was not directly related to potency. We conclude that PPIs can be used interchangeably based on potency. Using twice-daily PPIs is more effective in increasing efficacy increasing once-daily PPI dosage. Omeprazole and lansoprazole (30 mg) and 20 mg of esomeprazole rabeprazole are functionally equivalent.
Project description:Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) belong to the most frequently used drugs, also in patients with cirrhosis. PPIs are extensively metabolized by the liver, but practice guidance on prescribing in cirrhosis is lacking. We aim to develop practical guidance on the safe use of PPIs in patients with cirrhosis.A systematic literature search identified studies on the safety (i.e. adverse events) and pharmacokinetics of PPIs in cirrhotic patients. This evidence and data from the product information was reviewed by an expert panel who classified drugs as safe; no additional risks known; additional risks known; unsafe; or unknown. Guidance was aimed at the oral use of PPIs and categorized by the severity of cirrhosis, using the Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) classification.A total of 69 studies were included. Esomeprazole, omeprazole and rabeprazole were classified as having 'no additional risks known'. A reduction in maximum dose of omeprazole and rabeprazole is recommended for CTP A and B patients. For patients with CTP C cirrhosis, the only PPI advised is esomeprazole at a maximum dosage of 20 mg per day. Pantoprazole and lansoprazole were classified as unsafe because of 4- to 8-fold increased exposure. The use of PPIs in cirrhotic patients has been associated with the development of infections and hepatic encephalopathy and should be carefully considered.We suggest using esomeprazole, omeprazole or rabeprazole in patients with CTP A or B cirrhosis and only esomeprazole in patients with CTP C. Pharmacokinetic changes are also important to consider when prescribing PPIs to vulnerable, cirrhotic patients.
Project description:Proton pump inhibitor (PPI)-induced inhibition of dimethylarginine dimethylaminohydrolase 1 (DDAH1), with consequent accumulation of the nitric oxide synthase inhibitor asymmetric dimethylarginine (ADMA), might explain the increased cardiovascular risk with PPI use. However, uncertainty exists regarding whether clinical PPI concentrations significantly inhibit DDAH1 under linear initial rate conditions, and whether PPI-induced DDAH1 inhibition significantly increases ADMA in humans. DDAH1 inhibition by esomeprazole, omeprazole, pantoprazole, lansoprazole and rabeprazole was determined by quantifying DDAH1-mediated L-citrulline formation in vitro. Plasma ADMA was measured in PPI users (n?=?134) and non-users (n?=?489) in the Hunter Community Study (HCS). At clinical PPI concentrations (0.1-10??mol/L), DDAH1 retained >80% activity vs. baseline. A significant, reversible, time-dependent inhibition was observed with lansoprazole (66% activity at 240?min, P?=?0.034) and rabeprazole (25% activity at 240?min, P?<?0.001). In regression analysis, PPI use was not associated with ADMA in HCS participants (beta 0.012, 95% CI -0.001 to 0.025, P?=?0.077). Furthermore, there were no differences in ADMA between specific PPIs (P?=?0.748). At clinical concentrations, PPIs are weak, reversible, DDAH1 inhibitors in vitro. The lack of significant associations between PPIs and ADMA in HCS participants questions the significance of DDAH1 inhibition as a mechanism explaining the increased cardiovascular risk reported with PPI use.
Project description:There is controversy and little information about whether individual proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) differentially alter the effectiveness of clopidogrel in reducing ischemic stroke risk. We, therefore, aimed to elucidate the risk of ischemic stroke among concomitant users of clopidogrel and individual PPIs.We conducted a propensity score-adjusted cohort study of adult new users of clopidogrel, using 1999 to 2009 Medicaid claims from 5 large states. Exposures were defined by prescriptions for esomeprazole, lansoprazole, omeprazole, rabeprazole, and pantoprazole-with pantoprazole serving as the referent. The end point was hospitalization for acute ischemic stroke, defined by International Classification of Diseases Ninth Revision Clinical Modification codes in the principal position on inpatient claims, within 180 days of concomitant therapy initiation.Among 325 559 concomitant users of clopidogrel and a PPI, we identified 1667 ischemic strokes for an annual incidence of 2.4% (95% confidence interval, 2.3-2.5). Adjusted hazard ratios for ischemic stroke versus pantoprazole were 0.98 (0.82-1.17) for esomeprazole; 1.06 (0.92-1.21) for lansoprazole; 0.98 (0.85-1.15) for omeprazole; and 0.85 (0.63-1.13) for rabeprazole.PPIs of interest did not increase the rate of ischemic stroke among clopidogrel users when compared with pantoprazole, a PPI thought to be devoid of the potential to interact with clopidogrel.
Project description:This study compared the effectiveness and acceptability of all Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-recommended dose proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) in erosive esophagitis (EE): Dexlansoprazole 60?mg, Esomeprazole 40?mg, Esomeprazole 20?mg, Pantoprazole 40?mg, Lansoprazole 30?mg, Rabeprazole 20?mg, Omeprazole 20?mg.A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library. Totally, 25 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) met study selection criteria and were incorporated in this network meta-analysis (NMA) study.For the NMA, eligible RCTs of adults with EE verified by endoscopic examination were randomly assigned to the licensed PPIs at least 4 weeks of continuous therapy. The primary efficacy outcome was the endoscopic healing rates at 4 and 8 weeks. Heartburn relief rates were a secondary efficacy outcome. The rates of withdrawal were analyzed as a safety outcome. In comparison to the common comparator omeprazole 20?mg, esomeprazole 40?mg provided significantly healing rates at 4 weeks [odds ratio (OR), 1.46 (95% confidence interval, 95% CI, 1.24-1.71)] and 8 weeks [1.58 (1.29-1.92)], and improved the heartburn relief rates [1.29 (1.07-1.56)]. In comparison to lansoprazole 30?mg, esomeprazole 40?mg provided significantly healing rates at 4 weeks [1.30 (1.10-1.53)] and 8 weeks [1.37 (1.13-1.67)], and improved the heartburn relief rates [1.29 (1.03-1.62)]. In terms of acceptability, only dexlansoprazole 60?mg had significantly more all-cause discontinuation than omeprazole 20?mg [1.54 (1.03-2.29)], pantoprazole 40?mg [1.68 (1.08-2.63)], and lansoprazole 30?mg [1.38 (1.02-1.88)].The standard-dose esomeprazole 40?mg had more superiority in mucosal erosion healing and heartburn relief. Esomeprazole 40?mg, pantoprazole 40?mg, esomeprazole 20?mg, and lansoprazole 30?mg showed more benefits in effectiveness and acceptability than other interventions.
Project description:<h4>Objectives</h4>In 2009, the FDA issued a warning that omeprazole--a proton pump inhibitor (PPI)--reduces the antithrombotic effect of clopidogrel by almost half when taken concomitantly. This study aims to analyze the impact of the FDA Safety Communications on prescribing clopidogrel together with PPIs.<h4>Methods</h4>This retrospective study identified clopidogrel users from the Truven Health Analytics MarketScan Databases (01/2006-12/2012). Rates of clopidogrel-PPI combination therapy were estimated in 6-month intervals for patients with ?1 clopidogrel prescription fill, then were analyzed pre- and post-safety communication (11/17/2009). Analyses were also conducted by grouping PPIs into CYP2C19 inhibitors (omeprazole and esomeprazole) and CYP2C19 non-inhibitors (pantoprazole, lansoprazole, dexlansoprazole, and rabeprazole).<h4>Results</h4>Overall, 483,074 patients met the selection criteria; of these, 157,248 used a clopidogrel-PPI combination. On average, 30.5% of patients in the pre- and 19.9% in the post-communication period used a clopidogrel-PPI combination therapy. Among clopidogrel users, the probability of using clopidogrel-PPI combinations fell by over 40% in the post-communication period (OR = 0.57; p<0.001); the proportion of patients using esomeprazole fell from 12.9% to 5.3%, and the proportion using omeprazole fell from 10.1% to 6.3%. Among combination therapy users, the probability of patients using a combination with a CYP2C19 inhibitor decreased by 53% (OR = 0.47; p<0.001); however, 31.5% of patients were still prescribed a clopidogrel-PPI combination therapy. Trends were similar for all and newly treated patients, regardless of clopidogrel indication and physician specialty.<h4>Conclusions</h4>The FDA Safety Communication resulted in a reduction in the number of patients undergoing combination therapy; however approximately one-third of patients still used combination therapy post-communication.
Project description:Voriconazole is a broad-spectrum antifungal agent used for the treatment of severe fungal infections. Maintaining therapeutic concentrations of 1 to 5.5 ?g/ml is currently recommended to maximize the exposure-response relationship of voriconazole. However, this is challenging, given the highly variable pharmacokinetics of the drug, which includes metabolism by cytochrome P450 (CYP450) isotypes CYP2C19, CYP3A4, and CYP2C9, through which common metabolic pathways for many medications take place and which are also expressed in different isoforms with various metabolic efficacies. Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are also metabolized through these enzymes, making them competitive inhibitors of voriconazole metabolism, and coadministration with voriconazole has been reported to increase total voriconazole exposure. We examined the effects of five PPIs (rabeprazole, pantoprazole, lansoprazole, omeprazole, and esomeprazole) on voriconazole concentrations using four sets of human liver microsomes (HLMs) of different CYP450 phenotypes. Overall, the use of voriconazole in combination with any PPI led to a significantly higher voriconazole yield compared to that achieved with voriconazole alone in both pooled HLMs (77% versus 59%; P < 0.001) and individual HLMs (86% versus 76%; P < 0.001). The mean percent change in the voriconazole yield from that at the baseline after PPI exposure in pooled microsomes ranged from 22% with pantoprazole to 51% with esomeprazole. Future studies are warranted to confirm whether and how the deliberate coadministration of voriconazole and PPIs can be used to boost voriconazole levels in patients with difficult-to-treat fungal infections.
Project description:Although many case reports have described patients with proton pump inhibitor (PPI)-induced hypomagnesemia, the impact of PPI use on hypomagnesemia has not been fully clarified through comparative studies. We aimed to evaluate the association between the use of PPI and the risk of developing hypomagnesemia by conducting a systematic review with meta-analysis.We conducted a systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library using the primary keywords "proton pump," "dexlansoprazole," "esomeprazole," "ilaprazole," "lansoprazole," "omeprazole," "pantoprazole," "rabeprazole," "hypomagnesemia," "hypomagnesaemia," and "magnesium." Studies were included if they evaluated the association between PPI use and hypomagnesemia and reported relative risks or odds ratios or provided data for their estimation. Pooled odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals were calculated using the random effects model. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed with Cochran's Q test and I2 statistics.Nine studies including 115,455 patients were analyzed. The median Newcastle-Ottawa quality score for the included studies was seven (range, 6-9). Among patients taking PPIs, the median proportion of patients with hypomagnesemia was 27.1% (range, 11.3-55.2%) across all included studies. Among patients not taking PPIs, the median proportion of patients with hypomagnesemia was 18.4% (range, 4.3-52.7%). On meta-analysis, pooled odds ratio for PPI use was found to be 1.775 (95% confidence interval 1.077-2.924). Significant heterogeneity was identified using Cochran's Q test (df?=?7, P<0.001, I2?=?98.0%).PPI use may increase the risk of hypomagnesemia. However, significant heterogeneity among the included studies prevented us from reaching a definitive conclusion.
Project description:Background: Short-term use of standard-dose proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) is the first-line initial non-eradication treatment for duodenal ulcer (DU), but the choice on individual PPI drug is still controversial. The purpose of this study is to compare the efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness of standard-dose PPI medications in the initial non-eradication treatment of DU. Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Clinicaltrials.gov, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, VIP database, and the Wanfang database from their earliest records to September 2017. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating omeprazole (20 mg/day), pantoprazole (40 mg/day), lansoprazole (30 mg/day), rabeprazole (20 mg/day), ilaprazole (10 mg/day), ranitidine (300 mg/day), famotidine (40 mg/day), or placebo for DU were included. The outcomes were 4-week ulcer healing rate (4-UHR) and the incidence of adverse events (AEs). A network meta-analysis (NMA) using a Bayesian random effects model was conducted, and a cost-effectiveness analysis using a decision tree was performed from the payer's perspective over 1 year. Results: A total of 62 RCTs involving 10,339 participants (eight interventions) were included. The NMA showed that all the PPIs significantly increased the 4-UHR compared to H2 receptor antagonists (H2RA) and placebo, while there was no significant difference for 4-UHR among PPIs. As to the incidence of AEs, no significant difference was observed among PPIs, H2RA, and placebo during 4-week follow-up. Based on the costs of both PPIs and management of AEs in China, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio per quality-adjusted life year (in US dollars) for pantoprazole, lansoprazole, rabeprazole, and ilaprazole compared to omeprazole corresponded to $5134.67, $17801.67, $25488.31, and $44572.22, respectively. Conclusion: Although the efficacy and tolerance of different PPIs are similar in the initial non-eradication treatment of DU, pantoprazole (40 mg/day) seems to be the most cost-effective option in China.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Long-term maintenance treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is important to prevent relapse. Proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) are used for both treatment and maintenance therapy of GERD. Recently, a potassium-competitive acid blocker vonoprazan was launched in Japan. We evaluated the comparative efficacy of vonoprazan and other PPIs for GERD maintenance. METHODS:A systematic literature search was performed using MEDLINE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Double-blind randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of PPIs, vonoprazan, and placebo for GERD maintenance published in English or Japanese were selected. Among them, studies conducted at the recommended dose and for the recommended use, and containing information on maintenance rate based on endoscopic assessment, were included. The comparative efficacies of treatments were estimated by performing a Bayesian network meta-analysis, which assessed the consistency assumption. Outcomes were number or rate of patients who maintained remission. RESULTS:Of 4001 articles identified, 22 RCTs were eligible for analysis. One study published as an abstract was hand-searched and added. The consistency hypothesis was not rejected for the analysis. The odds ratio of vonoprazan 10 mg to each PPI was 13.92 (95% credible interval [CI] 1.70-114.21) to esomeprazole 10 mg; 5.75 (95% CI 0.59-51.57) to rabeprazole 10 mg; 3.74 (95% CI 0.70-19.99) to lansoprazole 15 mg; and 9.23 (95% CI 1.17-68.72) to omeprazole 10 mg. CONCLUSIONS:The efficacy of vonoprazan in GERD maintenance treatment may be higher than that of some PPIs. However, a direct comparison of vonoprazan and PPIs is required to confirm these effects.
Project description:AGN 201904-Z is a new, slowly absorbed, acid-stable pro-proton pump inhibitor (pro-PPI) rapidly converted to omeprazole in the systemic circulation giving a prolonged residence time.To investigate pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of AGN 201904-Z compared to esomeprazole.A randomized, open-label, parallel group, investigator-blinded intragastric pH study was conducted in 24 healthy Helicobacter pylori negative male volunteers. AGN 201904-Z enteric-coated capsules (600 mg/day) or esomeprazole delayed-release tablets (40 mg/day) were administered for 5 days. Twenty-four-hour intragastric pH recordings were acquired at baseline, days 1, 3 and 5 with blood levels of omeprazole, AGN 201904-Z and gastrin.On day 1, median nocturnal pH and proportion of nocturnal time with pH >or=4 and 24-h and nocturnal time pH >or=5 were significantly higher with AGN 201904-Z than esomeprazole. At day 5, 24-h and median nocturnal pH were significantly higher for AGN 201904-Z than esomeprazole (P < 0.0001). There was also a marked reduction in periods of nocturnal pH <4.0. Area under curve of the AGN 201904-Z active metabolite (omeprazole) in the blood was twice that of esomeprazole at day 5.AGN 201904-Z produced a significantly greater and more prolonged acid suppression than esomeprazole, and nocturnal acid suppression was more prolonged over all 5 days. AGN 201904-Z should provide true once-a-day treatment and better clinical efficacy than current PPIs.