Citations

AbstractBackgroundRecent clinical trials have evaluated the efficacy of vonoprazan‐amoxicillin (VA) dual therapy as the first‐line treatment for Helicobacter pylori infection in different regions with inconsistent results reported. In this systematic review and meta‐analysis, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy of VA dual therapy compared to the currently recommended therapy for eradicating H. pylori.Materials and MethodsA comprehensive search of the PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases was performed using the following search terms: (“Helicobacter” OR “H. pylori” OR “Hp”) AND (“vonoprazan” OR “potassium‐competitive acid blocker” OR “P‐CAB”) AND (“amoxicillin” OR “penicillin”) AND (“dual”). The primary outcome was to evaluate the eradication rate according to intention‐to‐treat and per‐protocol analysis. The secondary outcomes were adverse events and compliance.ResultsA total of 15 studies involving 4, 568 patients were included. The pooled eradication rate of VA dual therapy was 85.0% and 90.0% by intention‐to‐treat and per‐protocol analysis, respectively. The adverse events rate and compliance of VA dual therapy were 17.5% and 96%, respectively. The efficacy of VA dual therapy was superior to proton pump inhibitors‐based triple therapy (82.0% vs. 71.4%, p < 0.01) but lower than vonoprazan‐containing quadruple therapy (83.1% vs. 93.3%, p = 0.02). 7‐day VA dual therapy showed lower eradication rates than 10‐day (χ2 = 24.09, p < 0.01) and 14‐day VA dual therapy (χ2 = 11.87, p < 0.01). The adverse events rate of VA dual therapy was lower than vonoprazan triple therapy (24.6% vs. 30.9%, p = 0.01) and bismuth‐containing quadruple therapy (20.5% vs. 47.9%, p < 0.01). No significant difference of compliance was observed between VA dual therapy and each subgroup.ConclusionVA dual therapy, a novel regimen, showed high efficacy as the first‐line treatment for H. pylori eradication, which should be optimized before application in different regions.

Background: Brugada syndrome (BrS) is an oligogenic arrhythmic disease with increased risk of sudden cardiac arrest. Several BrS or ECG traits-related single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were identified through previous genome-wide association studies in white patients. We aimed to validate these SNPs in BrS patients in the Taiwanese population, assessing the cumulative effect of risk alleles and the BrS-polygenic risk score in predicting cardiac events. Methods: We genotyped 190 unrelated BrS patients using the TWB Array, and Taiwan Biobank was used as controls. SNPs not included in the array were imputed by IMPUTE2. Cox proportional hazards model was used to evaluate the associations between each particular SNP, the collective BrS-polygenic risk score, and clinical outcomes. Results: Of the 88 previously reported SNPs, 22 were validated in Taiwanese BrS patients ( P <0.05). Of the 22 SNPs, 2 (rs10428132 and rs9388451) were linked with susceptibility to BrS, 10 were SNPs previously reaching genome-wide significance, and 10 were SNPs associated with ECG traits. For the 3 most commonly reported SNPs, disease risk increased consistently with the number of risk alleles (odds ratio, 3.54; P trend =1.38×10 −9 for 5 risk alleles versus 1). Similar patterns were observed in both SCN5A mutation+ (odds ratio, 3.66; P trend =0.049) and SCN5A mutation− (odds ratio, 3.75; P trend =8.54×10 −9 ) subgroups. Furthermore, BrS patients without SCN5A mutations had more risk alleles than BrS patients with SCN5A mutations regardless of the range of polygenic risk scores. Three SNPs (rs4687718, rs7784776, and rs2968863) showed significant associations with the composite outcome (sudden cardiac arrest plus syncope, hazard ratio, 2.13, 1.48, and 0.41; P =0.02, 0.006, and 0.008, respectively). Conclusions: Our findings suggested that some SNPs associated with BrS or ECG traits exist across multiple populations. The cumulative risk of the BrS-related SNPs is similar to that in white BrS patients, but it appears to correlate with the absence of SCN5A mutations.