Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25071901›Full record

Trial reportGut and liver2014

Preventive efficacy and safety of rebamipide in nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug-induced mucosal toxicity.

Jeong Ho Kim, Soo-Heon Park, Chul-Soo Cho, Soo Teik Lee, Wan-Hee Yoo, Sung Kook Kim, Young Mo Kang, Jong Sun Rew, Yong-Wook Park, Soo Kon Lee and 3 more

Open access · diamondAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Gut and liver, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Rebamipide in gastric mucosal protection and healing: An Asian perspective.World journal of gastrointestinal pharmacology and therapeutics · 2025
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Toward More GI-Friendly Anti-Inflammatory Medications.Current treatment options in gastroenterology · 2015
    Article
  15. 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

13 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.

Jeong Ho KimDepartment of Gastroenterology, Yeouido St. Mary's Hospital, The Catholic University of Korea College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Soo-Heon ParkDepartment of Gastroenterology, Yeouido St. Mary's Hospital, The Catholic University of Korea College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Chul-Soo ChoDepartment of Rheumatology, Yeouido St. Mary's Hospital, The Catholic University of Korea College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Soo Teik LeeDepartment of Gastroenterology, Chonbuk National University Hospital, Chonbuk National University Medical School, Jeonju, Korea.
Wan-Hee YooDepartment of Rheumatology, Chonbuk National University Hospital, Chonbuk National University Medical School, Jeonju, Korea.
Sung Kook KimDepartment of Gastroenterology, Kyungpook National University Hospital, Kyungpook National University School of Medicine, Daegu, Korea.
Young Mo KangDepartment of Rheumatology, Kyungpook National University Hospital, Kyungpook National University School of Medicine, Daegu, Korea.
Jong Sun RewDepartment of Gastroenterology, Chonnam National University Hospital, Chonnam National University Medical School, Gwangju, Korea.
Yong-Wook ParkDepartment of Rheumatology, Chonnam National University Hospital, Chonnam National University Medical School, Gwangju, Korea.
Soo Kon LeeDepartment of Rheumatology, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Yong Chan LeeDepartment of Gastroenterology, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Won ParkDepartment of Rheumatology, Inha University Hospital, Inha University School of Medicine, Incheon, Korea.
Don-Haeng LeeDepartment of Gastroenterology, Inha University Hospital, Inha University School of Medicine, Incheon, Korea.
Catholic University of Korea · KRKyungpook National University · KRYonsei University · KRChonnam National University · KRChonnam National University Hospital · KRInha University · KRInha University Hospital · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND/

aimsThe use of proton pump inhibitors or misoprostol is known to prevent the gastrointestinal complications of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Rebamipide is known to increase the mucosal generation of prostaglandins and to eliminate free oxygen radicals, thus enhancing the protective function of the gastric mucosa. However, it is unknown whether rebamipide plays a role in preventing NSAID-induced gastropathy. The aim of this study was to determine the effectiveness of rebamipide compared to misoprostol in preventing NSAID-induced gastrointestinal complications in patients requiring continuous NSAID treatment.

methodsWe studied 479 patients who required continuous NSAID treatment. The patients were randomly assigned to groups that received 100 mg of rebamipide three times per day or 200 μg of misoprostol three times per day for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint of the analysis was the occurrence rate of gastric ulcers, as determined by endoscopy after 12 weeks of therapy.

resultsOf the 479 patients in the study, 242 received rebamipide, and 237 received misoprostol. Ultimately, 44 patients (18.6%) withdrew from the misoprostol group and 25 patients (10.3%) withdrew from the rebamipide group. There was a significant difference in withdrawal rate between the two groups (p=0.0103). The per protocol analysis set was not valid because of the dropout rate of the misoprostol group; thus, the intention to treat (ITT) analysis set is the main set for the efficacy analysis in this study. After 12 weeks, the occurrence rate of gastric ulcers was similar in the rebamipide and misoprostol groups (20.3% vs 21.9%, p=0.6497) according to ITT analysis. In addition, the therapeutic failure rate was similar in the rebamipide and misoprostol groups (13.6% vs 13.1%, p=0.8580). The total severity score of the gastrointestinal symptoms was significantly lower in the rebamipide group than in the misoprostol group (p=0.0002). The amount of antacid used was significantly lower in the rebamipide group than in the misoprostol group (p=0.0258).

conclusionsRebamipide can prevent gastric ulcers when used with NSAIDs and can decrease the gastrointestinal symptoms associated with NSAID administration. When the possibility of poor compliance and the potential adverse effects of misoprostol are considered, rebamipide appears to be a clinically effective and safe alternative.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAlanineAnti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-SteroidalAnti-Ulcer AgentsArthritisButanonesDiclofenacDouble-Blind MethodDrug Administration ScheduleGastric MucosaHumansMeloxicamMiddle AgedMisoprostolNabumetoneaceclofenacAlanineAnti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-SteroidalAnti-Ulcer AgentsButanonesDiclofenacMeloxicamMisoprostolNabumetoneQuinolonesrebamipideThiazinesThiazolesAnti-inflammatory agentsComplicationsMisoprostolnon-steroidalRebamipideRheumatic diseases

Identifiers

PMID25071901
PMCPMC4113040
OpenAlexW2091203102

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.