Trial reportGut and liver2025
Evaluation of the Efficacy and Safety of a Dual Delayed-Release Formulation of 10-mg Esomeprazole in Patients with Gastric Erosions: A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind, Active-Control, Phase III Study.
Trial report in Gut and liver, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05024721 (A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-blind, Active-controlled, Phase Ⅲ Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of HIP2101 in Patients With Acute or Chronic Gastritis), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-blind, Active-controlled, Phase Ⅲ Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of HIP2101 in Patients With Acute or Chronic Gastritis
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Component-specific effects of PMFrontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Can Dual Delayed-Release Esomeprazole Replace Dexlansoprazole?Gut and liver · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
24 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/Aims: Clinical data on the efficacy and safety of the dual delayed-release formulation of 10-mg esomeprazole (HIP2101) are currently limited. Therefore, this study compared the efficacy and safety of HIP2101 and 20-mg famotidine (RLD2101) in patients with gastric erosions. Methods: In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind, active-control, phase III study, 326 patients with endoscopically proven gastric mucosal erosion were randomly assigned to receive either HIP2101 or RLD2101 once daily for 2 weeks. The primary endpoint was the rate of improvement of erosion. Secondary endpoints (rate of cure of erosion and edema, and rate of improvement of hematin and gastrointestinal symptoms) and treatment-emergent adverse events were compared between the groups. Results: Based on the per-protocol set (PPS) analysis, the improvement rates for erosion were 64.9% (98/151) and 63.7% (100/157) in the HIP2101 and RLD2101 groups, respectively (95% confidence interval, -9.5 to 11.9). The lower bound of the 95% confidence interval was greater than the noninferiority margin of -14%. These results were similar to those of the full analysis set (FAS) (HIP2101 group, 64.6%; RLD2101 group, 62.7%). Based on the PPS and FAS analyses, the cure rates for erosion and edema and the improvement rates for hematin and gastrointestinal symptoms were comparable between the groups. The number of adverse events did not differ significantly between the groups. Conclusions: The efficacy and safety of HIP2101 were comparable to those of RLD2101 in the treatment of gastric erosions and symptomatic improvement. These findings suggest that HIP2101 may be a novel treatment option for gastritis (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05024721).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.