Long term management of duodenal ulcer in general practice: How best to use cimetidine?

Two hundred and sixty seven patients with duodenal ulceration were entered into a five year study of two strategies of treatment with cimetidine. Two thirds were treated continuously with 400 mg at bedtime supplemented by temporary increases in dosage if they had symptomatic relapses (group 1), and the remaining third were given intermittent “healing” doses for four to eight weeks if a symptomatic recurrence was judged to have occurred (group 2). Life table analysis showed that the probability of remaining free of clinically important symptoms five years after the start of treatment was 24% (95% confidence interval (CI) 15·5% to 32·6%) in group 1 compared with nil in group 2 (p<0·0001). The median values for the longest periods free from relapse for each patient were 108 weeks in group 1 and 32 weeks in group 2, respectively (p<0·0001; 95% CI of the median difference 36 to 76). Over the five years 10 patients suffered major complications, two requiring emergency surgery, while a further nine had elective surgery because of the failure of medical treatment. There were no deaths that could be attributed either to ulceration or to treatment with cimetidine.Medical management was therefore very satisfactory for most patients, though those treated continuously with cimetidine suffered considerably less from their ulcer symptoms. As 80% of patients studied relapsed during the two years after a healing course of cimetidine, continuous treatment will benefit many patients treated in general practice.     

Highly selective vagotomy and duodenal ulcers that fail to respond to H2 receptor antagonists

A study was conducted to see whether patients with duodenal ulcers that failed to heal in response to H₂ receptor antagonists had a higher incidence of recurrent ulceration after highly selective vagotomy than patients whose ulcers healed with these drugs. Between 1977 and 1983, 157 patients had a highly selective vagotomy for uncomplicated duodenal ulcer; in 57 patients the ulcer had failed to heal despite treatment with H₂ receptor antagonists (refractory group), 19 patients had developed recurrent ulceration while receiving maintenance treatment, 67 patients had remained healed while taking H₂ receptor antagonists but suffered frequent relapses when treatment was stopped, and 14 patients had not been given these drugs before operation. The overall incidence of recurrent ulceration was 6% after two years and 11% after five years of follow up. In the refractory group, however, the incidence of recurrent ulceration was 18% at two years and 34% after five years, whereas the incidence of recurrence was only 1.5% at two years and 3% after five years in patients whose ulcers had healed with H₂ receptor antagonists. Resistance to H₂ receptor antagonists was not related to preoperative basal or peak acid output but was related to cigarette smoking. Factors associated with recurrent ulceration after highly selective vagotomy were basal acid outputs before and after operation, cigarette smoking, and the surgeon who performed the operation.Duodenal ulcers that fail to respond to H₂ receptor antagonists represent a more severe ulcer diathesis, for which highly selective vagotomy is less effective.     

Therapeutic effect of cimetidine in patients undergoing haemodialysis.

Blood concentrations of cimetidine were measured and the therapeutic effect of the drug assessed patients undergoing maintenance haemodialysis. Thirteen patients were given a single oral 200-mg dose of cimetidine a mean of 2.7 hours before the start of dialysis. Dialysing for 6--12-6 m2 hours led to a mean fall of 71% in blood cimetidine concentration during haemodialysis. Nine patients with various upper gastrointestinal lesions diagnosed endoscopically were treated for up to six weeks with a reduced cimetidine dose of 200 mg 12-hourly; two patients received two courses of treatment. Repeat endoscopy after treatment disclosed satisfactory healing, and the drug did not accumulate. This lower dose regimen is recommended for patients receiving dialysis who develop upper gastrointestinal lesions for which a histamine H2-receptor antagonist is indicated.     

Cimetidine for recurrent ulcer after vagotomy or gastrectomy: a randomised controlled trial.

In a randomised controlled trial cimetidine 1 g daily for six weeks was compared with placebo in the treatment of recurrent ulcers after gastrectomy or vagotomy for duodenal ulcer. Healing, assessed endoscopically, was seen in seven out of 12 patients given cimetidine and in five out of 12 controls. Four of the controls whose ulcers did not heal were subsequently treated with cimetidine, and in two the ulcers healed after six weeks. Pain recorded by the patient and consumption of alkalis were each slightly but not significantly less in the cimetidine-treated patients. When cimetidine is to be used for recurrent ulceration probably the dosage and duration of treatment should be increased.     

Cimetidine in patients with gastric ulcer: a multicentre controlled trial.

Forty-five adult outpatients with endoscopically confirmed gastric ulceration completed a double-blind trial of either cimetidine (1 g/day) or placebo. After six weeks 18 of the 23 patients receiving cimetidine showed complete ulcer healing compared with only six of the 22 patients receiving placebo. The cimetidine group also had fewer days with pain than the placebo group but the difference was not statistically significant. Cimetidine therefore seems to promote healing of gastric ulcers without severe side effects, although its effect on pain is less pronounced than in patients with duodenal ulcers.     

Prophylactic effect of cimetidine in duodenal ulcer disease.

Fifty-seven symptom-free patients with duodenal ulcer entered a double-blind trial to assess the prophylactic effect of cimetidine. Patients were randomly allocated to receive cimetidine 400 mg twice daily (29 patients) or placebo (28 patients). The trial was designed to imitate daily clinical practice, so duodenal ulcer disease was diagnosed by means of x-ray examination. Three patients from each group withdrew from the trial. All remaining patients continued to receive treatment for 12 months or until symptoms recurred. Three out of 26 patients suffered relapses during cimetidine treatment, compared with 20 out of 25 receiving placebo. No side effects were attributable to cimetidine. Long-term cimetidine treatment had no curative effect as relapses occurred soon after treatment was stopped. The estimated chance (cumulative remission rate +/- 2 SE) of remaining symptom-free 13 weeks after one year''s cimetidine treatment had been completed was 47 +/- 21%. Maintenance treatment with cimetidine is a suitable alternative to elective in surgery in patients with duodenal ulcer subjects frequent relapses. Further study is needed to establish the optimal duration and safety of prolonged cimetidine treatment.     

Effect of cimetidine on upper gastrointestinal bleeding after renal transplantation: a prospective study.

In 97 consecutive patients undergoing renal transplantation the incidence of upper gastrointestinal bleeding was registered over 180 days after allocation to treatment with either cimetidine or placebo. Bleeding episodes occurred in 12 patients, 11 of whom were receiving placebo and only one cimetidine (p less than 0.01). All bleeding episodes occurred during the first month after allotransplantation. Treatment with cimetidine did not lead to an increased incidence of rejection of the allograft. It is concluded that cimetidine is effective and safe in protecting against upper gastrointestinal bleeding after renal transplantation.     

Cost effectiveness of screening for and eradication of Helicobacter pylori in management of dyspeptic patients under 45 years of age.

OBJECTIVE--To assess the cost effectiveness of screening for and eradicating Helicobacter pylori in patients under 45 years of age presenting with dyspepsia. DESIGN--A decision analytic model composed of a decision tree to represent the epidemiology of dyspepsia and a Markov process to model the outcomes of treatment. PATIENTS--Patients under the age of 45 years presenting to their general practitioner with (peptic type) dyspepsia. INTERVENTIONS--Conventional empirical treatment with healing and maintenance doses of cimetidine v eradication treatment solely in patients with confirmed peptic ulcer; and conventional empirical treatment for all dyspeptic patients compared with the use of a serology test to identify patients with H pylori, who then receive endoscopy to investigate the presence of peptic ulcer disease and, when disease is found, are given eradication treatment with a breath test to confirm successful eradication. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES--Expected cumulative costs over a period of 10 years. The proportion of time patients spend without a recurrent ulcer. RESULTS--After receiving eradication treatment, patients with confirmed ulcer spend an average of 99% of their time free from recurrent ulcer disease compared with 95% after treatment with cimetidine. Eradication treatment costs less than that with cimetidine. When the initial cost of identifying appropriate patients to receive eradication treatment is added to the analysis, however, these cost savings take almost eight years to accrue. CONCLUSIONS--Enthusiasm for introducing testing for and eradication of H pylori for dyspeptic patients in general practice should be tempered by an awareness that cost savings may take many years to realise.     

Cimetidine for duodenal ulceration in patients undergoing haemodialysis.

Peptic ulcer is a common problem in advanced renal failure, but most drugs for ulcers are hazardous in this condition. In a small open study cimetidine was given to nine patients with acid hypersecretion and endoscopically diagnosed duodenal ulceration who were undergoing haemodialysis. The patients obtained good pain relief and suffered no serious side effects. Both basal and stimulated acid output fell considerably and the plasma gastrin response to food increased during treatment. Two patients with recurrent vomiting during haemodialysis had a striking response to cimetidine, which suggested that such vomiting may be acid-mediated in some patients. These preliminary results suggest that cimetidine may prove to be an advance in the management of peptic ulcer in uraemic patients.     

Intermittent treatment of duodenal ulcer with cimetidine.

Intermittent treatment with short courses of cimetidine given only when symptoms recurred was assessed in patients with duodenal ulcer as an alternative to maintenance treatment. Their progress was followed up for up to 22 months. Gastroscopy was carried out in most attacks to confirm recurrence of the ulcer and subsequent healing. Out of 125 patients treated, 83 relapsed, of whom 21 defaulted. After retreatment 36 patients relapsed again. The pattern of relapse and remission for the group as a whole was similar after both courses of treatment, indicating an unchanged natural history. Nevertheless, wide variation occurred in individual patients, so that the pattern of relapse could not be predicted by the duration of the initial remission. Most patients had one or two or rarely three symptomatic relapses a year, which were rapidly treated successfully with cimetidine. Therefore, unless the necessity for long-term maintenance treatment is established, intermittent treatment provides an adequate alternative in most patients with duodenal ulcer.     

Comparison of the results of the treatment with pirenzepine combined with cimetidine and sucralfate of stomach ulcer resistant to cimetidine

Increased inhibition of gastric acid release through simultaneous blockade of H2-receptors and muscarine-receptors or administration of gastroprotective agent is theoretically justified in patients with peptic ulcer unresponsive to cimetidine. The study involved 70 patients with peptic ulcer previously treated with cimetidine in daily dose 1000 mg for 6 weeks without an effect. Patients were divided into two groups: group 1 treated with cimetidine plus pirenzepine, and group 2 given sucralfate in daily dose 4.0 g. Pirenzepine to patients of group 1 was given in a single dose of 50 mg before bedtime. Both groups were comparable in age, sex, disease onset, smoking, gastric acid secretion, and ulcer size. Healing was evaluated with endoscopic technique following 2 and weeks of therapy. Ulceration healed up within 2 weeks in 40% of patients treated with cimetidine combined with pirenzepine and in 31.4% patients treated with sucralfate. After 4 weeks, healing of ulceration was 71.4% and 68.6%, respectively. Large ulcers (over 1 cm in diameter) and previous partial gastrectomy did not affect healing rate. The obtained results suggest that administered therapies enable recovery in over 2/3 of patients with peptic ulcer unresponsive to a 6-week therapy with cimetidine alone.     

Comparison of cimetidine 800 mg once daily and 400 mg twice daily in acute duodenal ulceration.

A double blind trial was conducted in seven centres to evaluate the safety and efficacy of cimetidine 800 mg given at night compared with 400 mg given at breakfast and at bedtime. Altogether 197 patients with active duodenal ulcer confirmed by endoscopy entered the study, of whom 187 were eligible for analysis. After four weeks'' treatment the ulcer was healed in 76 of 91 patients (84%) receiving the once daily regimen and in 65 of the 96 patients (68%) receiving the twice daily regimen (p less than 0.05). Both dosage regimens were equally effective in reducing ulcer pain and consumption of antacids. Pain relief was considerable within the first two weeks, and most of the patients were free of symptoms by the end of treatment. No patients were withdrawn because of adverse events as these were few and mild, consistent with the proved safety profile of cimetidine. Cimetidine 800 mg given at night is as effective as 400 mg twice daily; the single dose regimen may improve patient compliance, thus facilitating treatment.     

Antiulcer activity of N-phthaloyl GABA--a new GABA mimetic agent

N-phthaloyl GABA (P. GABA) inhibited gastric ulceration induced by 3 hr restraint stress at 4 degrees C (CRS) in albino rats. Antiulcer activity of P. GABA was compared with sodium valproate and cimetidine. P. GABA, sodium valproate and cimetidine showed a dose dependent reduction of gastric ulceration. Pretreatment with GABA antagonists-bicuculline methiodide (0.5 mg/kg, im) or 3 mercaptopropionic acid (2 mg/kg, im) reversed the antiulcerogenic activity of both the drugs (P. GABA and sodium valproate). GABA antagonists as such did not induce gastric ulceration in normal rats.     

Cimetidine: prophylaxis against upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage after renal transplantation.

The incidence of upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage within four months of renal transplantation was studied in two groups of patients. Thirty patients who received prophylactic cimetidine suffered no episodes of upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage, while six of the 33 patients who did not receive cimetidine suffered haemorrhages and one of them died as a result. The difference between the groups was significant. The results suggest that the prophylactic use of cimetidine in patients receiving renal transplants is worth while.     

Protective effects of cimetidine on radiation-induced micronuclei and apoptosis in human peripheral blood lymphocytes

The radioprotective effects of cimetidine, which has been used clinically as an antagonist of H 2 receptor, on radiation-induced micronuclei and apoptosis in human peripheral blood lymphocytes (PBL) prepared from healthy donors were studied. Cells were treated with cimetidine before or after X-irradiation, and then cytokinesis-blocked micronucleus assay and flow cytometry for measurement of phosphatidylserine externalization were utilized to evaluate the radiation-induced cytogenetic damage and apoptosis. The protective effect of pre-irradiation treatment of cimetidine on radiation-induced micronuclei was dependent on the concentration. The maximum protection rates of cimetidine (1 mM) on frequencies of micronuclei were 38.8 and 30.2% for cells treated before and after X-irradiation (5 Gy), respectively. Protective effects of pre- and post-irradiation treatment with cimetidine on radiation-induced early apoptosis and decreased activity of caspase-3 were observed. A study of electron paramagnetic resonance-spin trapping with 5,5'-dimethyl-1- N -oxide revealed that the rate constant of cimetidine with radiation-induced OH radicals is about 4.5 ×10 9 l/mol/s. Cimetidine did not significantly increase the intracellular concentration of glutathione. These results suggest that cimetidine suppresses radiation-induced micronuclei and apoptosis via OH radical scavenging and an intracellular antioxidation mechanism. Cimetidine appears to be a useful candidate for the future development of post-irradiation radioprotectors.     

Effects of cimetidine and ranitidine on high density lipoprotein cholesterol concentrations.

To assess the effect of cimetidine and ranitidine on high density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol concentration two groups of eight patients with duodenal ulcer or oesophagitis matched for age, sex, and cigarette consumption were given either cimetidine 1 g daily or ranitidine 300 mg daily for one month. There was no significant change in the cholesterol content of HDL and its subfraction HDL3 after treatment with ranitidine or cimetidine, or in the cholesterol content of the subfraction HDL2 after treatment with ranitidine; the HDL2 cholesterol concentration was, however, significantly increased after treatment with cimetidine. Further studies are being undertaken to establish the mechanism of this effect.     

Cimetidine-induced vascular cell apoptosis impairs testicular microvasculature in adult rats

Cimetidine, an H? receptor antagonist used for treatment of gastric ulcers, exerts antiandrogenic and antiangiogenic effects. In the testes cimetidine impairs spermatogenesis, Sertoli cells and peritubular tissue, inducing apoptosis in the myoid cells. Regarding the importance of histamine and androgens for vascular maintenance, the effect of cimetidine on the structural integrity of the testicular vasculature was evaluated. Adult male rats received cimetidine (CMTG) and saline (CG) for 50 days. The testes were fixed in buffered 4% formaldehyde and embedded in historesin and paraffin. In the PAS-stained sections, the microvascular density (MVD) and the vascular luminal area (VLA) were obtained. TUNEL method was performed for detection of cell death. Testicular fragments embedded in Araldite were analyzed under transmission electron microscopy. A significant decrease in the MVD and VLA and a high number of collapsed blood vessel profiles were observed in CMTG. Endothelial cells and vascular muscle cells were TUNEL-positive and showed ultrastructural features of apoptosis. These results indicate that cimetidine induces apoptosis in vascular cells, leading to testicular vascular atrophy. A possible antagonist effect of cimetidine on the H? receptors and/or androgen receptors in the vascular cells may be responsible for the impairment of the testicular microvasculature.     

The pharmacokinetics of H2 receptor blocking agents in compensated liver cirrhosis

The bioavailability of oral and intravenous cimetidine and ranitidine was studied in patients with compensated liver cirrhosis. Single doses of 200 and 400 mg cimetidine were used for both administration routes, while ranitidine was administered in doses of 150 mg orally or 50 mg i.v. Plasma concentrations and urinary recovery were determined by the HPLC method. The pharmacokinetics of both of these drugs in the cirrhotic patients did not differ from those found in normal subjects. The two doses of cimetidine given i.v. gave rise to the same plasma concentrations, while after oral administration, 400 mg produced higher plasma concentrations than 200 mg. As to the pharmacokinetic parameters, neither cimetidine nor ranitidine administered i.v. offered any further advantages compared to the oral route. The urinary recovery of both cimetidine and ranitidine was higher after intravenous than after oral administration. It is concluded therefore that the pharmacokinetics of cimetidine and ranitidine is not altered in compensated liver cirrhosis.     

Omeprazole and cimetidine in the treatment of ulcers of the body of the stomach: a double blind comparative trial. Danish Omeprazole Study Group.

OBJECTIVE--To see whether omeprazole was superior to cimetidine in healing ulcers of the body of the stomach. DESIGN--Double blind randomised parallel group study of omeprazole versus cimetidine for six weeks with assessment of healing at end of every second week. SETTING--Outpatient referrals in 11 centres in Denmark. PATIENTS--One hundred sixty one patients who satisfied the following criteria: age 18-79; one or more ulcers of body of stomach (that is, at or above the angulus) seen endoscopically within four days before study treatment; no H2 receptor antagonists taken within previous two weeks; no history of gastric surgery and no complications needing surgery; no concurrent treatment or disease that might confound assessment; oral contraception or an intrauterine device being used by women of childbearing age. INTERVENTIONS--Omeprazole 30 mg daily (one capsule in the morning) or cimetidine 1 g daily (one 200 mg tablet thrice daily, two tablets at bedtime) for six weeks. Inactive capsules and tablets provided so that all patients took same number of capsules and tablets daily. Compliance monitored by pill counts. END POINT--Endoscopic evidence of accelerated healing of type I gastric ulcers after four weeks of omeprazole. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS--Pain recorded on diary cards and patients assessed after two, four, and six weeks of treatment for clinical state and by endoscopy and biopsy and repeat laboratory tests. Twenty eight patients withdrawn during trial for violations of protocol. At two weeks healing rates were identical in the two treatment groups (omeprazole 41% (30/73 patients); cimetidine 41% (30/73]. At four weeks cumulative healing rates were 77% (53/69 patients) in the omeprazole treatment group and 58% (41/71) in the cimetidine treatment group (95% confidence interval of difference between groups 4% to 34%). By six weeks the cumulative healing rates in the two treatment groups differed by only 6% (60/68 patients (88%) given omeprazole; 53/65 (82%) given cimetidine). Log rank analysis with ulcer size used as covariable showed a significant difference in healing times in favour of omeprazole. There was no difference in the occurrence of pain relief between the two treatment groups. No serious clinical or biochemical side effects of treatment were noted. CONCLUSIONS--Omeprazole 30 mg daily accelerates healing of ulcers in the body of the stomach as compared with cimetidine 1 g daily. This effect is more pronounced in ulcers greater than 12 mm diameter.     

Effect of cimetidine, ranitidine and omeprazole on postprandial gastrin and somatostatin release in conscious dogs

During a first series of experiments, the gastrin responses to a meal were measured and compared to the responses seen after administration of cimetidine (2.5 mg/kg/h) or omeprazole (2 mg/kg). During a second series of experiments the effects of cimetidine (2.5 mg/kg/h), ranitidine (0.5 mg/kg/h) and omeprazole (2 mg/kg) on post-prandial gastrin and somatostatin release were determined in experiments during which the intragastric pH was maintained close to 6.4. During a third series of experiments, the effects of cimetidine (2.5 mg/kg/h) and omeprazole (2 mg/kg) on basal gastrin and somatostatin release were estimated. Postprandial gastrin release was increased by cimetidine and by omeprazole. When acidification of the gastric content was prevented by intragastric titration, postprandial gastrin release was increased by about 100%. No further increase was observed when the animals were concomitantly treated with cimetidine, ranitidine or omeprazole. Intragastric titration did not alter postprandial somatostatin release. Concomitant administration of H2 blockers decreased the somatostatin response to the meal, while concomitant administration of omeprazole did not alter this release. No significant changes were observed in basal gastrin or somatostatin levels after administration of cimetidine or omeprazole.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)