Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19026766›Full record

ReviewClinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association2009

Efficient identification and evaluation of effective Helicobacter pylori therapies.

David Y Graham

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
50citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

50 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Sequential and concomitant therapy with four drugs is equally effective for eradication of H pylori infection.Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2010
    Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Tailored Therapy vs. Empirical Therapy forJournal of personalized medicine · 2025
    Review
  12. An Update on Eradication ofMiddle East journal of digestive diseases · 2024
    Review
  13. Efficacy and tolerability ofHealth science reports · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Antibiotic Resistance, Susceptibility Testing and Stewardship inInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Review
  16. The prevalence and treatment outcomes ofJGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2023
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Infection and drug resistance · 2022
    Review
  19. Transitioning ofAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020
    Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

David Y GrahamDepartment of Medicine, Michael E. DeBakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Houston, Texas 77030, USA. dgraham@bcm.tmc.edu

Funding

Tissue Analysis & Molecular Imaging CoreP30DK056338 · NIDDK · BAYLOR COLLEGE OF MEDICINE · PI Geoffrey A Preidis · 2001 to 2026
$28.3M
NIDDK NIH HHS DK56338NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK056338
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Annually hundreds if not thousands of patients fail empiric H. pylori eradication therapy. Failure occurs in part because routine post treatment testing, which provides an early warning of increasing antibiotic resistance, is not universally done and physicians are generally unaware that cure rates with legacy triple therapy (a proton-pump inhibitor, amoxicillin, and clarithromycin) in most places has fallen below 80%. We propose first, institution of routine post eradication testing and second, abandonment of the "better than another therapy" approach to separating acceptable from unacceptable therapies. Instead, we propose using results-based outcomes (ie, >95% cure rates). H. pylori should be evaluated as other infectious diseases (ie, few would compare a new antibiotic for pneumonia with the previous best choice whose effectiveness was now impaired because of resistance). Randomized comparisons should be restricted to studies designed to improve (eg, simplify or reduce costs) high cure rate therapies while maintaining efficacy. We also discuss potential ethical issues such as those including known or suspected low cure rate therapies. Legacy therapies cannot be identified as "approved" or "recommended" even if both statements were true. Instead patients and ethics boards must receive "full disclosures" both before and during studies that include all that might affect a patient's decision to enter or to continue. Finally, we provides advice regarding trial design using "best shot" pilot studies to efficiently identify tentative effective regimens which are then confirmed in randomized trials all the while minimizing patient risks and drug exposure.

Indexed as

AmoxicillinAnti-Bacterial AgentsClarithromycinClinical Trials as TopicHelicobacter InfectionsHelicobacter pyloriHumansPractice Guidelines as TopicProton Pump InhibitorsStomachTreatment OutcomeAmoxicillinAnti-Bacterial AgentsClarithromycinProton Pump Inhibitors

Identifiers

PMID19026766
PMCPMC2838433

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.