Trial reportGut and liver2026
Fourteen-Day Amoxicillin- or Tetracycline-Containing Bismuth Quadruple Therapy versus 14-Day Metronidazole-Based Triple Therapy as the Treatment for Clarithromycin-Resistant
Trial report in Gut and liver, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Reconsidering First-Line Therapy for Clarithromycin-ResistantGut and liver · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/Aims: Combination therapy comprising a proton pump inhibitor (PPI), amoxicillin, and metronidazole (PAM) is used to treat clarithromycin-resistant Methods: This prospective multicenter study enrolled patients with clarithromycin-resistant Results: In the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis, the eradication rate was significantly lower in the PAM group (68.2%) than in the PAM-B group (84.8%, p=0.024), whereas the difference from the PBMT group (81.8%) was not significant (p=0.070). The rate remained lowest in the PAM group (75.4%) in the per-protocol (PP) analysis (PAM-B, 96.5%, p=0.001; PBMT, 94.6%, p=0.004). Eradication rates were comparable between the PAM-B and PBMT groups in both the ITT (p=0.640) and PP analyses (p=0.633). Nausea and vomiting were significantly less frequent in the PAM-B group than in the PBMT group (6.8% vs 25.0%; p=0.007). Severe adverse events were rare, and all symptoms resolved after treatment discontinuation. Conclusions: PAM-B yielded eradication rates higher than those of PAM and comparable to those of PBMT, with no significant increase in the incidence of adverse events, suggesting the potential of PAM-B as a first-line treatment for clarithromycin-resistant
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.