Trial reportHelicobacter
Efficacy and Safety of Vonoprazan-Based Dual Therapies With Different Antibiotics Versus Bismuth-Containing Quadruple Therapy for Helicobacter pylori Eradication: A Prospective, Four-Arm, Randomized Controlled Trial.
Trial report in Helicobacter. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07068607 (Efficacy Comparison of Vonoprazan Combined With Different Antibiotics in Dual Therapy for Helicobacter Pylori Eradication), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Efficacy Comparison of Vonoprazan Combined With Different Antibiotics in Dual Therapy for Helicobacter Pylori Eradication: A Prospective, Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundVonoprazan-based dual therapy has been proposed as a simplified strategy for Helicobacter pylori eradication, but head-to-head comparisons of different antibiotic partners are limited. We compared the efficacy, safety, and adherence of vonoprazan-based dual regimens with those of bismuth-containing quadruple therapy (BQT).
methodsIn this randomized controlled trial, H. pylori-infected patients were allocated (1:1:1:1) to receive VA (vonoprazan [20 mg, bid] plus amoxicillin [1000 mg, tid]), VT (vonoprazan [20 mg, bid] plus tetracycline [500 mg, tid]), VM (vonoprazan [20 mg, bid] plus minocycline [100 mg, bid]), or VACB (vonoprazan [20 mg, bid], amoxicillin [1000 mg, bid], clarithromycin [500 mg, bid], and bismuth [220 mg, bid]) for 14 days. The primary endpoint was the H. pylori eradication rate, and the secondary endpoints were the incidence of adverse events and patient adherence.
resultsThe ITT eradication rates were 83.0% (83/100), 74.0% (74/100), 82.0% (82/100), and 83.0% (83/100) in the VA, VT, VM, and VACB groups, respectively (p = 0.304). The PP eradication rates were 90.2% (83/92), 83.1% (74/89), 88.2% (82/93), and 92.2% (83/90), respectively (p = 0.262). Adverse events occurred in 21.5% of the patients overall and differed across groups (10.0%, 15.0%, 29.0%, and 32.0% in VA, VT, VM, and VACB, respectively; p < 0.001); nausea and dizziness were more frequent with VM, whereas bitter taste and black stool were more frequent with VACB. All adverse events were mild or moderate, and no severe events were recorded. Adherence was high and comparable across groups (VA 100.0%, VT 96.0%, VM 99.0%, VACB 99.0%; p = 0.107).
conclusionVonoprazan-based regimens showed no statistically significant between-group differences in eradication and were associated with good adherence overall. In our setting, VA and VM may represent practical simplified options, whereas VT appeared less robust as an empiric regimen. These exploratory findings warrant confirmation in larger, adequately powered randomized trials.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov (NCT07068607).
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.