Gut and liver · 2021
Efficacy and Safety of Rebamipide versus Its New Formulation, AD-203, in Patients with Erosive Gastritis: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Active Control, Noninferiority, Multicenter, Phase 3 Study.
Клиническое исследование III фазыСтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеРандомизированное исследованиеEquivalence TrialНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Kim Gwang Ha, Lee Hang Lak, Joo Moon Kyung, Park Hong Jun, Jung Sung Woo, Lee Ok-Jae, Kim Hyungkil, Chun Hoon Jai, Lee Soo Teik, Kim Ji Won, Jeon Han Ho, Chung Il-Kwun, Kim Hyun-Soo, Lee Dong Ho, Kim Kyoung-Oh, Lim Yun Jeong, Park Seun-Ja, Cho Soo-Jeong, Kim Byung-Wook, Ko Kwang Hyun, Jeon Seong Woo, Kim Jae Gyu, Sung In-Kyung, Kim Tae Nyeun, Sung Jae Kyu, Park Jong-Jae
Аннотация
BACKGROUND/AIMS: : The mucoprotective drug rebamipide is used to treat gastritis and peptic ulcers. We compared the efficacy of MucostaⓇ (rebamipide 100 mg) and its new formulation, AD-203 (rebamipide 150 mg), in treating erosive gastritis.
METHODS: This double-blind, active control, noninferiority, multicenter, phase 3 clinical trial randomly assigned 475 patients with endoscopically proven erosive gastritis to two groups: AD-203 twice daily or MucostaⓇ thrice daily for 2 weeks. The intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis included 454 patients (AD-203, n=229; MucostaⓇ, n=225), and the per-protocol (PP) analysis included 439 patients (AD-203, n=224; MucostaⓇ, n=215). The posttreatment assessments included the primary (erosion improvement rate) and secondary endpoints (erosion and edema cure rates; improvement rates of redness, hemorrhage, and gastrointestinal symptoms). Drug-related adverse events were evaluated.
RESULTS: According to the ITT analysis, the erosion improvement rates (posttreatment) in AD-203-treated and MucostaⓇ-treated patients were 39.7% and 43.8%, respectively. According to the PP analysis, the erosion improvement rates (posttreatment) in AD-203-treated and MucostaⓇ-treated patients were 39.3% and 43.7%, respectively. The one-sided 97.5% lower limit for the improvement rate difference between the study groups was -4.01% (95% confidence interval [CI], -13.09% to 5.06%) in the ITT analysis and -4.44% (95% CI, -13.65% to 4.78%) in the PP analysis. The groups did not significantly differ in the secondary endpoints in either analysis. Twenty-four AD-203-treated and 20 MucostaⓇ-treated patients reported adverse events but no serious adverse drug reactions; both groups presented similar adverse event rates.
CONCLUSIONS: The new formulation of rebamipide 150 mg (AD-203) twice daily was not inferior to rebamipide 100 mg (MucostaⓇ) thrice daily. Both formulations showed a similar efficacy in treating erosive gastritis.
METHODS: This double-blind, active control, noninferiority, multicenter, phase 3 clinical trial randomly assigned 475 patients with endoscopically proven erosive gastritis to two groups: AD-203 twice daily or MucostaⓇ thrice daily for 2 weeks. The intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis included 454 patients (AD-203, n=229; MucostaⓇ, n=225), and the per-protocol (PP) analysis included 439 patients (AD-203, n=224; MucostaⓇ, n=215). The posttreatment assessments included the primary (erosion improvement rate) and secondary endpoints (erosion and edema cure rates; improvement rates of redness, hemorrhage, and gastrointestinal symptoms). Drug-related adverse events were evaluated.
RESULTS: According to the ITT analysis, the erosion improvement rates (posttreatment) in AD-203-treated and MucostaⓇ-treated patients were 39.7% and 43.8%, respectively. According to the PP analysis, the erosion improvement rates (posttreatment) in AD-203-treated and MucostaⓇ-treated patients were 39.3% and 43.7%, respectively. The one-sided 97.5% lower limit for the improvement rate difference between the study groups was -4.01% (95% confidence interval [CI], -13.09% to 5.06%) in the ITT analysis and -4.44% (95% CI, -13.65% to 4.78%) in the PP analysis. The groups did not significantly differ in the secondary endpoints in either analysis. Twenty-four AD-203-treated and 20 MucostaⓇ-treated patients reported adverse events but no serious adverse drug reactions; both groups presented similar adverse event rates.
CONCLUSIONS: The new formulation of rebamipide 150 mg (AD-203) twice daily was not inferior to rebamipide 100 mg (MucostaⓇ) thrice daily. Both formulations showed a similar efficacy in treating erosive gastritis.