↓ Skip to main content

Vonoprazan-based triple therapy is non-inferior to susceptibility-guided proton pump inhibitor-based triple therapy for Helicobacter pylori eradication

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Clinical Microbiology and Antimicrobials, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
14 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
33 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Vonoprazan-based triple therapy is non-inferior to susceptibility-guided proton pump inhibitor-based triple therapy for Helicobacter pylori eradication
Published in
Annals of Clinical Microbiology and Antimicrobials, June 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12941-018-0281-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hiroki Tanabe, Keiichi Yoshino, Katsuyoshi Ando, Yoshiki Nomura, Katsuhisa Ohta, Kiichi Satoh, Eiichiro Ichiishi, Akiei Ishizuka, Takaaki Otake, Yutaka Kohgo, Mikihiro Fujiya, Toshikatsu Okumura

Abstract

All Helicobacter pylori-infected patients are recommended for eradication with an appropriate regimen in each geographic area. The choice of the therapy is somewhat dependent on the antimicrobial susceptibility. The rate of clarithromycin resistance has been increasing and is associated with failure; thus, susceptibility testing is recommended before triple therapy with clarithromycin. However, antimicrobial susceptibility testing is not yet clinically available and an alternative newly developed acid inhibitor vonoprazan is used for triple therapy in Japan. The aim of this study was to determine whether vonoprazan-based triple therapy is plausible treatment in H. pylori eradication. A retrospective observational study of H. pylori eradication was conducted in a single institute. The patients who requested antimicrobial susceptibility testing were treated with susceptibility-guided proton pump inhibitor-based triple therapy in International University of Health and Welfare Hospital from 2013 to 2016. Other patients were treated with empirical treatment with a proton pump inhibitor. From 2015 to 2016, vonoprazan-based triple treatment (vonoprazan, 20 mg; amoxicillin, 750 mg; and clarithromycin, 200 or 400 mg, b.i.d.) was conducted, and its effectiveness was compared with susceptibility-guided proton pump inhibitor-based triple therapy. We also investigated the improvement in eradication rate when antimicrobial susceptibility testing was performed, and compared the outcomes of vonoprazan-based and proton pump inhibitor-based empirical therapy. A total of 1355 patients who received first-line eradication treatment were enrolled in the present study. The eradication rates of the empirical proton pump inhibitor-based therapy and the vonoprazan-based therapy group in a per-protocol analysis were 86.3% (95% CI 83.8-88.8) and 97.4% (95% CI 95.7-99.1), respectively. In 212 patients who received antimicrobial susceptibility testing, the rate of clarithromycin resistant was 23.5% and the eradication rate in susceptibility-guided treatment was 95.7% (95% CI 92.9-98.4). The difference between susceptibility-guided and vonoprazan-based therapy was - 1.7% (95% CI - 4.9 to 1.5%), and the non-inferiority of vonoprazan-based triple therapy was confirmed. Vonoprazan-based triple therapy was effective as susceptibility-guided triple therapy for H. pylori eradication. An empirical triple therapy with vonoprazan is preferable even in area with high rates of clarithromycin-resistance. Trial registration The study was retrospectively registered in University Hospital Medical Information Network (UMIN000032351).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 33 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 7 21%
Researcher 6 18%
Student > Master 4 12%
Other 2 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 11 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 36%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Environmental Science 1 3%
Other 4 12%
Unknown 11 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 July 2018.
All research outputs
#3,473,907
of 23,866,543 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Clinical Microbiology and Antimicrobials
#66
of 633 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#70,262
of 331,170 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Clinical Microbiology and Antimicrobials
#1
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,866,543 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 633 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 331,170 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.