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.     

Controlled comparison of cimetidine and carbenoxolone sodium in gastric ulcer.

Fifty-four outpatients with endoscopically diagnosed benign gastric ulcer were allocated at random to treatment with either cimetidine 800 mg daily for six weeks or carbenoxolone sodium 300 mg daily for one week then 150 mg daily for five weeks. Ulcers were reassessed by endoscopy at the end of the trial. The endoscopist was unaware of the treatment and did not take part in the clinical care of the patients. Twenty-one of the 27 patients (78%) given cimetidine and 14 of the 27 (52%) given carbenoxolone had healed ulcers. Symptomatic response occurred earlier with cimetidine but was not significantly better. Unwanted effects were more common in the carbenoxolone group: 12 patients developed hypokalaemia, four of whom needed oral potassium supplements. The results suggest that histamine H2-receptor blockade is at least as effective as carbenoxolone sodium for benign gastric ulcer and produces fewer side effects.     

Eradication of Helicobacter pylori Using One-week Triple Therapies Combining Omeprazole with Two Antimicrobials: The MACH I Study

Background. Eradication of Helicobacter pylori provides potential cure in the majority of patients with peptic ulcer disease, and eradication rates of more than 90% have been reported, using omeprazole in combination with two antimicrobials. The choice of antimicrobials, dose regimen and duration of treatment have varied between studies, however, and an optimal treatment still has to be established.
Materials and Methods. We conducted an international, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study involving more than 100 patients in each of six treatment groups in 43 hospital gastrointestinal units in Canada, Germany, Ireland, Sweden, and the United Kingdom. Patients (n=787) with proved duodenal ulcer disease were randomized to treatment twice daily for 1 week with omeprazole, 20 mg (O), plus either placebo (P) or combinations of two of the following anti-microbials: amoxicillin, 1 gm (A), clarithromycin, 250 or 500 mg (C250, C500), or metronidazole, 400 mg (M). Eradication of H. pylori was evaluated by ¹³C-UBT, performed before and 4 weeks after treatment cessation.
Results. The eradication rates for the all-patients-treated analysis were 96%. OAC500; 95%, OMC250; 90%, OMC500; 84%, OAC250; 79%, OAM; and 1%, OP. OAC500 and OMC250 achieved eradication rates with lower 95% confidence interval limits exceeding 90%. All regimens were well-tolerated, 96% of patients complied with their dose regimen, and 2.3% of the patients discontinued treatment owing to adverse events.
Conclusions. Omeprazole triple therapies given twice daily for 1 week produce high eradication rates, are well-tolerated, and are associated with high patient compliance. The two most effective therapies were those combining omeprazole, 20 mg, with either amoxicillin, 1 gm, plus clarithromycin, 500 mg, or metronidazole, 400 mg, plus clarithromycin, 250 mg, all given twice daily.     

A tolerability and pharmacokinetic study of adjuvant erlotinib and capecitabine with concurrent radiation in resected pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND: Erlotinib is approved for the treatment of advanced pancreas cancer. We conducted a prospective trial to determine the safety profile and recommended phase 2 dose of erlotinib and capecitabine given concurrently with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in resected pancreatic cancer patients. The pharmacokinetic profile of this combination was also evaluated. METHODS: Patients with resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma received erlotinib and capecitabine concurrently with IMRT delivered at 1.8 Gy daily in 28 fractions (total = 50.4 Gy). The starting dose level (DL 1) was erlotinib 150mgdaily and capecitabine 800 mg/m² twice daily without interruption. The next lower dose level (DL -1) was erlotinib 100 mg daily and capecitabine 800 mg/m² twice daily (Monday to Friday). Plasma samples were obtained for pharmacokinetic analysis. RESULTS: Thirteen patients were enrolled in total. At DL 1, six of the seven treated patients were evaluable for toxicities. Four completed planned treatment, but all required treatment interruption or dose reduction. The dose-limiting toxicities were neutropenia, diarrhea, and rash. Six patients were subsequently enrolled to and completed planned treatment in DL-1. Themost common toxicities were fatigue, elevated liver enzymes, and anorexia. The pharmacokinetic parameters of erlotinib and OSI-420 were not significantly different in the presence or absence of capecitabine and were consistent with historical controls. CONCLUSIONS: When administered concurrently with IMRT, erlotinib 100 mg daily and capecitabine 800 mg/m² twice daily (Monday to Friday) can be administered safely in resected pancreas cancer patients, and is the recommended regimen for efficacy studies using this regimen.     

Comparative Treatment of Helicobacter pylori–Positive Duodenal Ulcer Using Pantoprazole at Low and High Doses Versus Omeprazole in Triple Therapy

Background. Helicobacter pylori eradication has become the standard treatment for peptic ulcer disease. H. pylori –eradicating triple therapy with omeprazole plus two antibiotics has been used until recently; however, the efficacy of pantoprazole and antibiotics for H. pylori eradication has not been researched thoroughly until now. The aim of this randomized clinical trial was to verify the efficacy of triple oral therapy comparing the effects of pantoprazole using two different doses versus omeprazole twice daily in H. pylori eradication, in ulcer healing and relapses, and in gastritis improvement.
Materials and Methods. We enrolled 243 patients with H. pylori– positive duodenal ulcer and randomized them into three treatment groups: 84 patients (group Ome40) were assigned to receive omeprazole, 20 mg twice daily, plus amoxicillin, 1 gm twice daily, and clarithromycin, 500 mg twice daily for 10 days; 79 patients (group Pan40) were treated with pantoprazole, 40 mg daily, plus amoxicillin and clarithromycin at the same doses as those of group Ome40; and 80 patients (group Pan80) were treated with pantoprazole, 40 mg twice daily, plus amoxicillin and clarithromycin at the same doses as those of group Ome40.
Results. Ulcer healing was observed in 81 of 84 patients (96.4%) in group Ome40; in 66 of 79 patients (83.5%) in group Pan40; and in 77 of 80 patients (96.2%) in group Pan80. H. pylori was eradicated in 79 of 84 patients (94%) in group Ome40; in 63 of 79 patients (79.7%) in group Pan40; and in 75 of 80 patients (93.7%) in group Pan80.
Conclusions. We found that 10-day triple therapy with amoxicillin, clarithromycin, and either pantoprazole, 80 mg daily, or omeprazole, 40 mg daily, is highly effective in ulcer healing and is very well tolerated, achieving the 90% cure recommended for an ideal first-line anti– H. pylori positive duodenal ulcer treatment regimen.     

Twice-Daily Versus Thrice-Daily Clarithromycin in Combination with Ranitidine Bismuth Citrate in the Eradication of Helicobacter pylori

Background. Ranitidine bismuth citrate (RBC), 400 mg bid for 4 weeks, plus clarithromycin, 500 mg tid, is a regimen approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the eradication of Helicobacter pylori in patients with duodenal ulcers. Proof that the clarithromycin portion of the regimen could be given twice daily without loss of efficacy would reduce cost and improve patient compliance. The objective of this study was to compare the H. pylori eradication rates in patients who had duodenal ulcer and were randomly assigned to 4 weeks of treatment with RBC, 400 mg bid, in conjunction with 2 weeks of therapy with either clarithromycin, 500 mg tid, or clarithromycin, 500 mg bid. Patients and Methods. Patients who had a duodenal ulcer and were H. pylori–positive by at least two tests were randomly assigned to (1) RBC, 400 mg bid for 4 weeks, plus clarithromycin, 500 mg tid for 2 weeks, or (2) RBC, 400 mg bid for 4 weeks, plus clarithromycin, 500 mg bid for 2 weeks. H. pylori eradication was assessed 4 weeks after completion of RBC plus clarithromycin. Results. Three hundred eighty-three patients from 78 centers had a duodenal ulcer and were H. pylori–positive. The modified intent-to-treat (MITT) and the per-protocol (PP) eradication rates were statistically equivalent between the twice-daily (65% MITT, 74% PP) and thrice-daily (63% MITT, 73% PP) clarithromycin treatment regimens. Incidence and types of adverse events did not differ between the two groups. Conclusions. For eradicating H. pylori in patients with duodenal ulcer, clarithromycin, 500 mg bid for 2 weeks, with RBC, 400 mg bid for 4 weeks, is equivalent to clarithromycin, 500 mg tid with RBC. The potential enhancement of patient compliance, reduced cost of clarithromycin, and equivalent efficacy would support the use of twice-daily clarithromycin in triple-therapy regimens with RBC.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

Effect of daily oral omeprazole on 24 hour intragastric acidity.

Twenty four hour intragastric acidity was measured in nine patients with duodenal ulcer before and after one week of treatment with oral omeprazole 30 mg daily, a drug that inhibits gastric secretion by inhibition of parietal cell H+K+ adenosinetriphosphatase (ATPase). Omeprazole virtually eliminated intragastric acidity in all patients: the median 24 hour intragastric pH rose from 1.4 to 5.3 and the mean hourly hydrogen ion activity fell from 38.50 to 1.95 mmol(mEq)/1 (p less than 0.001). This inhibition of 24 hour intragastric acidity is more profound than that previously reported with either cimetidine 1 g daily or ranitidine 300 mg daily.     

Treatment of Nocturnal Asthma: the Role of Sustained-Release Theophylline and Oral β-2-Mimetics

In two double-blind, multiple-dose cross-over studies the therapeutic effects of SR theophylline preparations given once each night (mean 11.2mg/kg per day) versus twice daily in equal doses (mean 10.3 mg/kg per day) (study I) and SR-terbutaline in equal doses (mean 0.25 mg/kg per day) versus SR theophylline in unequally divided daily doses (mean 5.3 mg/kg morning dose, 10.6 mg/kg evening dose) study II) were compared in 19 patients with nocturnal asthma. At the end of each treatment period drug serum concentrations and PEFR were measured every 2 hr over a 24-hr period. With the twice-daily, equally divided regimen, serum theophylline concentrations were lower at night than during the day (mean 9.4 ±0.9 versus 11.3± 1.0mg/l). With the single evening administration, serum theophylline concentrations were considerably higher at night (C_max16.3 ±1.4 mg/1) and the circadian variation of PEFR was significantly reduced. PEFR was higher during night and early morning (283 ±14 versus 217 ± 11 l/min, P< 0.005). During daytime in study II, PEFR values were slightly higher with theophylline than terbutaline. There was no significant difference in peak flow between either treatment during the night and early morning. However, additional use of inhaled β-2-mimetics because of asthmatic attacks occurred more often during terbutaline (79 times in 8/10 patients) than theophylline treatment (29 times in 5/10 patients). Symptom scores, number of attacks and side-effects clearly favor the theophylline regimen. We conclude that for patients with nocturnal asthma a once-nightly dose of SR theophylline can be sufficient for stabilization of the airways.     

Treatment of nocturnal asthma: the role of sustained-release theophylline and oral beta-2-mimetics

In two double-blind, multiple-dose cross-over studies the therapeutic effects of SR theophylline preparations given once each night (mean 11.2 mg/kg per day) versus twice daily in equal doses (mean 10.3 mg/kg per day) (study I) and SR-terbutaline in equal doses (mean 0.25 mg/kg per day) versus SR theophylline in unequally divided daily doses (mean 5.3 mg/kg morning dose, 10.6 mg/kg evening dose) study II) were compared in 19 patients with nocturnal asthma. At the end of each treatment period drug serum concentrations and PEFR were measured every 2 hr over a 24-hr period. With the twice-daily, equally divided regimen, serum theophylline concentrations were lower at night than during the day (mean 9.4 +/- 0.9 versus 11.3 +/- 1.0 mg/l). With the single evening administration, serum theophylline concentrations were considerably higher at night (Cmax 16.3 +/- 1.4 mg/l) and the circadian variation of PEFR was significantly reduced. PEFR was higher during night and early morning (283 +/- 14 versus 217 +/- 11 l/min, P less than 0.005). During daytime in study II, PEFR values were slightly higher with theophylline than terbutaline. There was no significant difference in peak flow between either treatment during the night and early morning. However, additional use of inhaled beta-2-mimetics because of asthmatic attacks occurred more often during terbutaline (79 times in 8/10 patients) than theophylline treatment (29 times in 5/10 patients). Symptom scores, number of attacks and side-effects clearly favor the theophylline regimen. We conclude that for patients with nocturnal asthma a once-nightly dose of SR theophylline can be sufficient for stabilization of the airways.     

Verapamil versus hydrochlorothiazide in the treatment of hypertension: results of long term double blind comparative trial. Verapamil versus Diuretic (VERDI) Trial Research Group.

OBJECTIVE--To compare the efficacy and tolerability of hydrochlorothiazide, sustained release verapamil, and their combination in patients with mild to moderate hypertension. DESIGN--Randomised multicentre trial of 48 weeks'' duration with a double blind comparison of hydrochlorothiazide and verapamil followed by an open trial of combined treatment for patients not achieving the target diastolic blood pressure (less than 90 mm Hg) during treatment with a single drug. SETTING--Outpatient departments in 10 clinics and 10 private practices of general practitioners or internists. PATIENTS--369 Hypertensive patients with a diastolic blood pressure of 95-120 mm Hg during a placebo run in period of two weeks. INTERVENTIONS--Initial treatment consisted of 12.5 mg hydrochlorothiazide (n = 187) or 120 mg sustained release verapamil (n = 182) once daily (regimen I). If the target diastolic blood pressure of less than 90 mm Hg was not achieved within four weeks doses were increased to 25 mg hydrochlorothiazide or 240 mg verapamil once (regimen II) and twice daily (regimen III). Patients not achieving target blood pressure were given the combination of hydrochlorothiazide and verapamil--that is, 25 and 240 mg once (regimen IV) and twice daily (regimen V). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE--Blood pressure determined with a device permitting automatic repeated measurements with printouts. RESULTS--After eight weeks of treatment with a single drug 76 out of 178 (43%) and 101 out of 175 (58%) patients achieved the target blood pressure with hydrochlorothiazide and verapamil, respectively. During follow up until 48 weeks patients treated with verapamil reached the target blood pressure more often and at lower doses and were less likely to switch to combination treatment than patients randomised to hydrochlorothiazide treatment. Adding verapamil to hydrochlorothiazide was more effective than the addition of hydrochlorothiazide to verapamil. At the end of the study 42 out of 169 (25%) and 73 out of 163 (45%) patients initially randomised to hydrochlorothiazide and verapamil, respectively, were at target blood pressure without combination treatment. After adding verapamil to hydrochlorothiazide or hydrochlorothiazide to verapamil an additional 58 (34%) and 29 (18%) patients reached the target blood pressure, respectively. Altogether 92 out of 332 (28%) patients failed to achieve target blood pressure with regimen V. There were four, 10, seven, and seven withdrawals due to possible adverse effects to treatment with hydrochlorothiazide, verapamil, combining verapamil with hydrochlorothiazide, and combining hydrochlorothiazide with verapamil, respectively. CONCLUSIONS--In doses currently used in antihypertensive treatment verapamil was more effective than hydrochlorothiazide as a single agent and in combination in mild to moderate hypertension, whereas withdrawal rates caused by side effects possibly related to treatment were similar.     

Coadministration of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Rifampicin in HIV and Tuberculosis Co-Infected Adults in South Africa

Background

In HIV-infected patients receiving rifampicin-based treatment for tuberculosis (TB), the dosage of lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) is adjusted to prevent sub-therapeutic lopinavir concentrations. In this setting, South African clinicians were advised to administer super-boosted LPV/r (400 mg/400 mg) twice daily, instead of standard dosed LPV/r (400 mg/100 mg) twice daily. We sought to determine – in routine practice – the tolerability and HIV treatment outcomes associated with super-boosted LPV/r compared to unadjusted LPV/r in combination with rifampicin-based TB treatment.

Methodology/Principle Findings

We conducted a retrospective review of HIV-infected patients who receiving second-line ART with a LPV/r-containing regimen who required concomitant TB treatment. We identified 29 patients; the median age was 36 years (IQR 29–40), 22 (76%) were female, the median CD4 cell count and viral load at first-line ART failure was 86 cells/mm³ (IQR 21–159) and 39,457 copies/mL (IQR 6,025–157,500), respectively. According to physician preference, 15 (52%) of 29 patients received super-boosted LPV/r (400 mg/400 mg) every 12 hours during TB treatment and 14 (48%) of 29 patients received standard dose LPV/r (400 mg/100 mg) twice daily during TB treatment. Among patients who received super-boosted LPV/r there was a trend towards a higher rate of symptomatic transaminitis (27% vs. 7%; p = 0.3), gastrointestinal toxicity (20% vs. 0%; p = 0.2) and a significantly increased need for treatment discontinuation (47% vs. 7%; p = 0.035. The durability of coadministered treatment was significantly shorter in patients who received super-boosted lopinavir/ritonavir with TB treatment compared to patients who received standard lopinavir/ritonavir dosing (log rank, P = 0.036). The rate of virologic failure was not higher in patients with unadjusted LPV/r dosing.

Conclusions/Significance

We observed a high rate of toxicity and need for treatment discontinuation among patients on standard rifampicin-based TB treatment who received super-boosted LPV/r.     

Cimetidine and ranitidine in duodenal ulcer.

Two histamine H2 antagonists, cimetidine and ranitidine, given in doses of 1 g daily and 200 mg daily to 18 and 20 patients respectively proved equivalent in promoting healing of duodenal ulcer. No adverse effects occurred during the trial, though serum urea and creatinine concentrations tended to rise slightly during treatment with cimetidine but not ranitidine. Choice between the two drugs is likely to be influenced by overall patterns of adverse effects rather than considerations of individual potency.     

Efficacy and safety of a combined treatment of sodium stibogluconate at 20mg/kg/day with upper maximum daily dose limit of 850mg and Paromomycin 15mg/kg/day in HIV negative visceral leishmaniasis patients. A retrospective study,northwest Ethiopia

BackgroundVisceral leishmaniasis (VL) is one of the most neglected tropical infectious diseases. It is fatal if left untreated. The objective of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of 17-day injections of combined regimen of sodium stibogluconate and paromomycin (SSG/PM) in HIV-negative VL patients.MethodsA retrospective analysis of medical records of VL patients treated in the University of Gondar Hospital during period 2012–2019 was carried out.ResultsA total of 2836 patients were treated for VL from 2012 to 2019. Of these 1233 were treated with SSG-PM, and 1000 of them were included in the study. Initial cure was achieved in 922 (92.2%) patients. The frequency of treatment failure, treatment interruptions, default and deaths respectively were 30 (3%), 20 (2%), 13 (1.3%) and 15 (1.5%). Among 280 patients who completed 6-month follow up, the final cure was 93.9% (263/280), 4 (1.4%) relapsed and 13 (4.6%) developed post-kala-azar dermal leishmaniasis (PKDL). The most common adverse events (AEs) were raised liver transaminases (35.1%; 351 patients), injection site pain (29.1%, 291 patients) and raised serum alpha-amylase (29.1%, 291 patients). Factors associated with poor treatment outcomes were sepsis, pneumonia, and adverse events.ConclusionA combination of SSG at 20mg/kg with upper daily maximum dose of 850mg and PM was effective for achieving initial cure at end of treatment and safe for treatment of HIV negative VL patients in northwestern Ethiopia. Our data are consistent with previous reports and confirms effectiveness of SSG/PM treatment regimen in the Eastern African countries. Efficacy at 6-months (93.9%) was estimated on data derived from patients who completed follow up and needs to be interrogated by future studies.     

Twice daily versus four times daily insulin dose regimens for diabetes in pregnancy: randomised controlled trial

ObjectiveTo compare perinatal outcome and glycaemic control in two groups of pregnant diabetic patients receiving two insulin regimens.DesignRandomised controlled open label study.SettingUniversity affiliated hospital, Israel.Participants138 patients with gestational diabetes mellitus and 58 patients with pregestational diabetes mellitus received insulin four times daily, and 136 patients with gestational diabetes and 60 patients with pregestational diabetes received insulin twice daily.InterventionThree doses of regular insulin before meals and an intermediate insulin dose before bedtime (four times daily regimen), and a combination of regular and intermediate insulin in the morning and evening (twice daily regimen).ResultsMean daily insulin concentration before birth was higher in the women receiving insulin four times daily compared with twice daily: by 22 units (95% confidence interval 12 to 32) in patients with gestational diabetes and by 28 units (15 to 41) in patients with pregestational diabetes. Glycaemic control was better with the four times daily regimen than with the twice daily regimen: in patients with gestational diabetes mean blood glucose concentrations decreased by 0.19 mmol/l (0.13 to 0.25), HbA_1c by 0.3% (0.2% to 0.4%), and fructosamine by 41 μmol/l (37 to 45), and adequate glycaemic control (mean blood glucose concentration <5.8 mmol/l) was achieved in 17% (8% to 26%) more women; in patients with pregestational diabetes mean blood glucose concentration decreased by 0.44 mmol/l (0.28 to 0.60), HbA_1c by 0.5% (0.2% to 0.8%), and fructosamine by 51 μmol/l (45 to 57), and adequate glycaemic control was achieved in 31% (15% to 47%) more women. Maternal severe hypoglycaemic events, caesarean section, preterm birth, macrosomia, and low Apgar scores were similar in both dose groups. In women with gestational diabetes the four times daily regimen resulted in a lower rate of overall neonatal morbidity than the twice daily regimen (relative risk 0.59, 0.38 to 0.92), and the relative risk for hyperbilirubinaemia and hypoglycaemia was lower (0.51, 0.29 to 0.91 and 0.12, 0.02 to 0.97 respectively). The relative risk of hypoglycaemia in newborn infants to mothers with pregestational diabetes was 0.17 (0.04 to 0.74).ConclusionsGiving insulin four times rather than twice daily in pregnancy improved glycaemic control and perinatal outcome without further risking the mother.

Key messages

• Improving maternal glycaemic control during pregnancy is the key to better perinatal outcome
• In pregnant diabetic women insulin four times daily achieved better glycaemic control and lower rate of perinatal complications (hypoglycaemia, hyperbilirubinaemia) than insulin twice daily
• Better glycaemic control resulted from a larger total daily insulin dose
• The intensified regimen did not lead to higher rate of severe maternal hypoglycaemia

     

Induction of micronuclei in bone marrow of mice exposed to 1, 2 or 3 daily doses of urethane

Urethane was studied for its potential to induce micronuclei in bone marrow of CD-1 mice following various dosing and sampling schedules. It was found that: (1) mice dosed for 3 days by gavage with urethane at daily doses of 300, 600 and 1200 mg.kg-1 showed no increases in micronuclei compared to normal control values; (2) mice injected with 3 daily intraperitoneal (i.p.) doses of urethane at 400 and 1200 mg.kg-1 demonstrated substantial and dose-related increases in micronuclei; (3) mice given urethane at i.p. doses of 400 mg.kg-1 for 1, 2 and 3 days showed protocol related micronucleus yields with triple greater than single greater than double dosing, while mice given urethane at i.p. doses of 1200 mg.kg-1 showed a different trend with double greater than single dosing, the triple-dosing regimen proving cytotoxic to the bone marrow; (4) mice exposed i.p. to 400 mg.kg-1 of urethane had more micronuclei when sampled at 24 h than at 48 h after 1 or 2 daily treatments, while mice dosed i.p. with 1200 mg.kg-1 of urethane showed more micronuclei at 48 h than at 24 h after a single treatment, the double-dosing protocol being toxic to the marrow; (5) female mice were more susceptible to bone-marrow micronucleus induction than males with both quantitative and qualitative sex differences noted, depending on dose, regimen and sample.     

The HOMER Study: the effect of increasing the dose of metronidazole when given with omeprazole and amoxicillin to cure Helicobacter pylori infection

Background. Helicobacter pylori eradication with omeprazole, amoxycillin, and metronidazole is both effective and inexpensive. However, eradication rates with different dosages and dosing vary, and data on the impact of resistance are sparse. In this study, three different dosages of omeprazole, amoxycillin, and metronidazole were compared, and the influence of metronidazole resistance on eradication was assessed. Methods. Patients (n = 394) with a positive H. pylori screening test result and endoscopy‐proven duodenal ulcer in the past were enrolled into a multicenter study performed in four European countries and Canada. After baseline endoscopy, patients were randomly assigned to treatment for 1 week with either omeprazole, 20 mg twice daily, plus amoxycillin, 1,000 mg twice daily, plus metronidazole, 400 mg twice daily (low M); or omeprazole, 40 mg once daily, plus amoxycillin, 500 mg three times daily, plus metronidazole, 400 mg three times daily (medium M); or omeprazole, 20 mg twice daily, plus amoxycillin, 1,000 mg twice daily, plus metronidazole, 800 mg twice daily (high M). H. pylori status at entry was assessed by a ¹³C urea breath test and a culture. Eradication was defined as two negative ¹³C‐urea breath test results 4 and 8 weeks after therapy. Susceptibility testing using the agar dilution method was performed at entry and in patients with persistent infection after therapy. Results. The eradication rates, in terms of intention to treat (ITT) (population n = 379) (and 95% confidence interval [CI]) were as follows: low M 76% (68%, 84%), medium M 76% (68%, 84%), and high M 83% (75%, 89%). By per‐protocol analysis (population n = 348), the corresponding eradication rates were: low M 81%, medium M 80%, and high M 85%. No H. pylori strains were found to be resistant to amoxycillin. Prestudy resistance of H. pylori strains to metronidazole was found in 72 of 348 (21%) of the cultures at entry (range, 10%–39% in the five countries). The overall eradication rate in prestudy metronidazole‐susceptible strains was 232 of 266 (87%) and, for resistant strains, it was 41 of 70 (57%; p < .001). Within each group, the results were as follows (susceptible/resistant): low M, 85%/54%; medium M, 86%/50%; and high M, 90%/75%. There were no statistically significant differences among the treatment groups. 23 strains susceptible to metronidazole before treatment were recultured after therapy failed; 20 of these had now developed resistance. Conclusions. H. pylori eradication rates were similar (approximately 80%) with all three regimens. Metronidazole resistance reduced efficacy; increasing the dose of metronidazole appeared not to overcome the problem or significantly improve the outcome. Treatment failure was generally associated with either prestudy or acquired metronidazole resistance. These findings are of importance when attempting H. pylori eradication in communities with high levels of metronidazole resistance.     

Antiulcerogenic activity of Satavari mandur--an Ayurvedic herbo-mineral preparation

Satavari mandur (SM) is a herbo-mineral preparation containing Asparagus racemosus, which finds mention in ancient Indian texts for treatment of gastric ulcers. The ulcer protective effect of SM, 125-500 mg/kg given orally, twice daily for three, five and seven days, was studied on cold restraint stress-induced gastric ulcer in rats. The effective regimen was found to be 250 mg/kg given for five days and hence was used for further experiments. SM showed significant protection against acute gastric ulcers induced by pyloric ligation but was ineffective against aspirin- and ethanol-induced ulcers. Further, gastric juice studies showed that, SM significantly increased the mucosal defensive factors like mucus secretion, but had little or no effect on offensive factors like acid and pepsin secretion.