Concurrent Proton Pump Inhibitor Research Articles

Proton pump inhibitors decrease efficacy of palbociclib in patients with metastatic breast.

The objective of this investigation was to assess the impact of concurrent proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) on progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with hormone receptor-positive and HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer (mBC) who received palbociclib as first-line or successives therapy. A retrospective observational study was conducted, enrolling patients diagnosed with estrogen receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative mBC, and eligible for palbociclib treatment. Patients were categorized as "concurrent PPIs" if they received PPIs for at least two-thirds of the palbociclib therapy duration, and as "no concurrent PPIs" if they did not receive PPIs during the course of palbociclib treatment. A total of 165 patients were included in the study. Among first-line patients treated with palbociclib, those using concurrent PPIs exhibited a PFS of 8.88 months, while patients using palbociclib without concurrent PPIs had a PFS of 67.81 months (p < 0.0001). In second-line or subsequent treatments, patients on palbociclib with concurrent PPIs had a PFS of 7.46 months, whereas those using palbociclib without concurrent PPIs had a PFS of 17.29 months (p = 0.122). This study demonstrates that the concurrent use of PPIs in mBC patients receiving palbociclib negatively affects PFS, particularly in the first-line setting. Nevertheless, further investigation is warranted to explore the impact of PPIs on cycle-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors.

A network meta-analysis: evaluating the efficacy and safety of concurrent proton pump inhibitors and clopidogrel therapy in post-PCI patients.

The objective of this research was to evaluate the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) associated with the use of various proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) in combination with clopidogrel in patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). To accomplish this, we analyzed data from randomized controlled trials and retrospective cohort studies sourced from key electronic databases. These studies specifically examined the effects of different PPIs, such as lansoprazole, esomeprazole, omeprazole, rabeprazole, and pantoprazole, when used in conjunction with clopidogrel on MACEs. The primary focus was on the differential impact of these PPIs, while the secondary focus was on the comparison of gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding events in groups receiving different PPIs with clopidogrel vs. a placebo group. This study's protocol was officially registered with INPLASY (INPLASY2024-2-0009). We conducted a network meta-analysis involving 16 studies with a total of 145,999 patients. Our findings indicated that rabeprazole when combined with clopidogrel, had the lowest increase in MACE risk (effect size, 1.05, 95% CI: 0.66-1.66), while lansoprazole was associated with the highest risk increase (effect size, 1.48, 95% CI: 1.22-1.80). Esomeprazole (effect size, 1.28, 95% CI: 1.09-1.51), omeprazole (effect size, 1.23, 95% CI: 1.07-1.43), and pantoprazole (effect size, 1.38, 95% CI: 1.18-1.60) also significantly increased MACE risk. For the secondary outcome, esomeprazole (effect size, 0.30, 95% CI: 0.09-0.94), omeprazole (effect size, 0.34, 95% CI: 0.14-0.81), and pantoprazole (effect size, 0.33, 95% CI: 0.13-0.84) demonstrated an increased potential for GI bleeding prevention. In conclusion, the combination of lansoprazole and clopidogrel was found to significantly elevate the risk of MACEs without offering GI protection in post-PCI patients. This study is the first network meta-analysis to identify the most effective regimen for the concurrent use of clopidogrel with individual PPIs. https://inplasy.com/inplasy-2024-2-0009/, identifier (INPLASY2024-2-0009).

SUBA-itraconazole in the treatment of systemic fungal infections.

Conventional itraconazole (c-ITZ) can be used for a variety of fungal infections although variable absorption has been a significant limitation. Super-bioavailable itraconazole (SUBA-ITZ) is a novel formulation that overcomes absorption concerns by utilizing a polymer-matrix to disperse active drug and facilitate dissolution. The pH-driven matrix allows concurrent protonpump inhibitor administration without significant effects on drug concentrations. The enhanced bioavailability of SUBA-ITZ allows for lower dosing, while achieving similar serum concentrations as c-ITZ and SUBA-ITZ is now USFDA approved in the treatment of blastomycosis, histoplasmosisand aspergillosis. Common side effects of SUBA-ITZ include gastrointestinal disorders, peripheral edemaand drug-induced hypertension. Given the significant differences in pharmacokinetics between the formulations, c-ITZ and SUBA-ITZ capsules are not considered interchangeable. It is important to note that drug errors may occur when transitioning a patient from one formulation to another.

Effect of Concurrent Proton Pump Inhibitors With Palbociclib Tablets for Metastatic Breast Cancer

BackgroundPalbociclib is indicated for the treatment of hormone receptor positive (HR+) human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative (HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (MBC) in combination with an aromatase inhibitor or fulvestrant. Two retrospective studies found that concurrent proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use with palbociclib capsules significantly reduced progression free survival (PFS) versus patients without a PPI. Palbociclib tablets were released in 2020 without restriction on PPI use. No study to date has evaluated the combination of palbociclib tablets with concurrent PPI use. MethodsPatients were retrospectively evaluated after they received palbociclib tablets for the treatment of HR+ HER2- MBC in the first line setting with or without a PPI. Patients were assigned to the no PPI use arm if they never used a PPI and the PPI use arm if they used a PPI for >50% of the duration of palbocicib therapy. The primary endpoint was PFS. The secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and adverse events. ResultsEighty-two patients were identified; 50 in the no PPI use group and 32 in the PPI use group. The median PFS was 20.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 16.07 to not estimable) in the no PPI use arm versus 21.0 months (95% CI, 15.15 to not estimable) in the PPI use arm (P = 0.95). Median OS was not reached in either arm. Adverse effects did not differ between arms. ConclusionUse of a concurrent PPI with palbociclib tablets does not significantly reduce PFS in patients treated for HR+ HER2- MBC.

The effect of concomitant proton pump inhibitor use on survival outcomes of Nivolumab-treated renal cell carcinoma patients: a multicenter study.

We aimed to evaluate the effect of concomitant proton pump inhibitors (PPI) use with nivolumab on survival outcomes in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) in second-line setting. The study was designed as a multicenter and retrospective involving patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma receiving second-line nivolumab therapy. One hundred and nine patients with mRCC were divided into two groups based on whether they use PPI concomitantly with nivolumab: concomitant PPI users and non-users. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were compared between the groups with and without concurrent PPIs. Of 109 patients in our study, 59 were not using PPI concomitantly with nivolumab and 50 were using PPI concomitantly. The median PFS was 6.37 (5.2-7.5) months in the concomitant PPI group and 9.7 (4.5-15) months in the non-users (p = 0.03). The median OS was 14.6 (7.1-22.1) months in patients on PPI concurrently with nivolumab and 29.9 (17.1-42.7) months in the non-users (p = 0.01). Accordingly, PPI use for PFS (Non-use vs. Use = HR: 0.44, 95%Cl 0.28-0.96, p = 0.014) and PPI use for OS (Non-use vs. Use = HR: 0.68, 95%Cl 0.22-0.88, p = 0.01) were found to be as independent risk factors. Concomitant use of PPIs is associated with worse survival outcomes in patients with mRCC treated with nivolumab. Clinicians should carefully consider the concomitant use of PPIs in such patients.

Bleeding risk in patients prescribed dual antiplatelet therapy and triple therapy after coronary interventions: the ADAPTT retrospective population-based cohort studies.

Bleeding among populations undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting and among conservatively managed patients with acute coronary syndrome exposed to different dual antiplatelet therapy and triple therapy (i.e. dual antiplatelet therapy plus an anticoagulant) has not been previously quantified. The objectives were to estimate hazard ratios for bleeding for different antiplatelet and triple therapy regimens, estimate resources and the associated costs of treating bleeding events, and to extend existing economic models of the cost-effectiveness of dual antiplatelet therapy. The study was designed as three retrospective population-based cohort studies emulating target randomised controlled trials. The study was set in primary and secondary care in England from 2010 to 2017. Participants were patients aged ≥ 18 years undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting or emergency percutaneous coronary intervention (for acute coronary syndrome), or conservatively managed patients with acute coronary syndrome. Data were sourced from linked Clinical Practice Research Datalink and Hospital Episode Statistics. Coronary artery bypass grafting and conservatively managed acute coronary syndrome: aspirin (reference) compared with aspirin and clopidogrel. Percutaneous coronary intervention: aspirin and clopidogrel (reference) compared with aspirin and prasugrel (ST elevation myocardial infarction only) or aspirin and ticagrelor. Primary outcome: any bleeding events up to 12 months after the index event. Secondary outcomes: major or minor bleeding, all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, mortality from bleeding, myocardial infarction, stroke, additional coronary intervention and major adverse cardiovascular events. The incidence of any bleeding was 5% among coronary artery bypass graft patients, 10% among conservatively managed acute coronary syndrome patients and 9% among emergency percutaneous coronary intervention patients, compared with 18% among patients prescribed triple therapy. Among coronary artery bypass grafting and conservatively managed acute coronary syndrome patients, dual antiplatelet therapy, compared with aspirin, increased the hazards of any bleeding (coronary artery bypass grafting: hazard ratio 1.43, 95% confidence interval 1.21 to 1.69; conservatively-managed acute coronary syndrome: hazard ratio 1.72, 95% confidence interval 1.15 to 2.57) and major adverse cardiovascular events (coronary artery bypass grafting: hazard ratio 2.06, 95% confidence interval 1.23 to 3.46; conservatively-managed acute coronary syndrome: hazard ratio 1.57, 95% confidence interval 1.38 to 1.78). Among emergency percutaneous coronary intervention patients, dual antiplatelet therapy with ticagrelor, compared with dual antiplatelet therapy with clopidogrel, increased the hazard of any bleeding (hazard ratio 1.47, 95% confidence interval 1.19 to 1.82), but did not reduce the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (hazard ratio 1.06, 95% confidence interval 0.89 to 1.27). Among ST elevation myocardial infarction percutaneous coronary intervention patients, dual antiplatelet therapy with prasugrel, compared with dual antiplatelet therapy with clopidogrel, increased the hazard of any bleeding (hazard ratio 1.48, 95% confidence interval 1.02 to 2.12), but did not reduce the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (hazard ratio 1.10, 95% confidence interval 0.80 to 1.51). Health-care costs in the first year did not differ between dual antiplatelet therapy with clopidogrel and aspirin monotherapy among either coronary artery bypass grafting patients (mean difference £94, 95% confidence interval -£155 to £763) or conservatively managed acute coronary syndrome patients (mean difference £610, 95% confidence interval -£626 to £1516), but among emergency percutaneous coronary intervention patients were higher for those receiving dual antiplatelet therapy with ticagrelor than for those receiving dual antiplatelet therapy with clopidogrel, although for only patients on concurrent proton pump inhibitors (mean difference £1145, 95% confidence interval £269 to £2195). This study suggests that more potent dual antiplatelet therapy may increase the risk of bleeding without reducing the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events. These results should be carefully considered by clinicians and decision-makers alongside randomised controlled trial evidence when making recommendations about dual antiplatelet therapy. The estimates for bleeding and major adverse cardiovascular events may be biased from unmeasured confounding and the exclusion of an eligible subgroup of patients who could not be assigned an intervention. Because of these limitations, a formal cost-effectiveness analysis could not be conducted. Future work should explore the feasibility of using other UK data sets of routinely collected data, less susceptible to bias, to estimate the benefit and harm of antiplatelet interventions. This trial is registered as ISRCTN76607611. This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 27, No. 8. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Does Proton Pump Inhibitors Decrease the Efficacy of Palbociclib and Ribociclib in Patients with Metastatic Breast Cancer?

Background and Objectives: This investigation aimed to determine the impacts of concurrent proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) on progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with hormone receptor-positive and HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer managed with palbociclib or ribociclib as either the initial or subsequent line of therapy option. Materials and Methods: In this retrospective study, patients were classified as "concurrent PPIs" if PPIs were given for at least two-thirds of the palbociclib or ribociclib therapy period, and "no concurrent PPIs" if no PPIs were given during the period of palbociclib or ribociclib therapy. Each patient was also classified as endocrine-sensitive or endocrine-resistant according to the duration of previous endocrine responses. "Concurrent PPIs" and "no concurrent PPIs" groups were compared with each other in terms of PFS. This comparison was performed for both ribociclib and palbociclib groups. Results: The research included 220 patients in total. The PFS of 57 patients on palbociclib using concomitant PPIs was 14.4 months. Among 63 patients using palbociclib without concomitant PPIs, the PFS was 15.8 months. No statistically significant difference was found with PPI use (p = 0.82). Among 29 patients using ribociclib concurrently with PPIs, the PFS was 22.4 months. Among 71 patients using ribociclib without PPIs, the PFS was 20.2 months. No statistically significant difference was found with PPI use (p = 0.40). Conclusion: The results of our investigation showed that concomitant use of the most commonly used PPIs in the study (lansoprazole, pantoprazole, and esomeprazole) with palbociclib or ribociclib did not have any detrimental effects on PFS. Where appropriate, PPIs can be used concurrently with palbociclib and ribociclib. However, the effect of PPIs on cycling-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors deserves further investigation.

Effectiveness of pembrolizumab in patients with urothelial carcinoma receiving proton pump inhibitors

The association of concurrent proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use with treatment outcome of metastatic urothelial carcinoma (UC) remains controversial.We retrospectively analyzed the records of 227 patients with platinum-treated metastatic UC treated with pembrolizumab. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Immune progression-free survival (iPFS) and objective response per immune response evaluation criteria in solid tumors were also compared. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW)-adjusted multivariable Cox regression models and an IPTW-adjusted multivariable logistic regression model were used to evaluate the oncological outcomes. Furthermore, the heterogeneity of the treatment effect on OS was examined using interaction terms within the IPTW-adjusted univariate Cox regression models.Overall, 86 patients (37.9%) used PPIs. After weighting, no significant differences in patient characteristics were observed between PPI users and non-users. PPI use was significantly associated with a shorter OS (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.02, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.28-3.18, P = 0.003) and iPFS (HR: 1.70, 95% CI: 1.23-2.35, P = 0.001). Although not statistically significant, PPI use was associated with objective response as well (OR: 0.61, 95% CI: 0.36-1.02, P = 0.06). The interaction analyses showed that the effect of PPI significantly decreased with age (HR: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.93-1.00, P[interaction] = 0.048) and was increased in males (HR: 2.97, 95% CI: 1.10-8.05, P[interaction] = 0.032).PPI use was significantly associated with worse survival of patients with metastatic UC treated with pembrolizumab. Furthermore, the results suggested that its effects decreased with age and was increased in males.

Proton pump inhibitors may reduce the efficacy of ribociclib and palbociclib in metastatic breast cancer patients based on an observational study

IntroductionApproximately 20–33% of all cancer patients are treated with acid-reducing agents (ARAs), most commonly proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), to reduce gastroesophageal reflux disease symptoms. Palbociclib and ribociclib are weak bases so their solubility depends on different pH. The solubility of palbociclib dramatically decreases to < 0.5 mg/ml when pH is above 4,5 but ribociclibs’ solubility decreases when pH increases above 6,5. In the current study, we aimed to investigate the effects of concurrent PPIs on palbociclib and ribociclib efficacy in terms of progression-free survival in metastatic breast cancer (mBC) patients.Patients and methodsWe enrolled hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative mBC patients treated with endocrine treatment (letrozole or fulvestrant) combined palbociclib or ribociclib alone or with PPI accompanying our observational study. During palbociclib/ribociclib therapy, patients should be treated with "concurrent PPIs" defined as all or more than half of treatment with palbociclib/ribociclib, If no PPI was applied, it was defined as ‘no concurrent PPI’, those who used PPI but less than half were excluded from the study. All data was collected from real-life retrospectively.ResultsOur study included 217 patients, 105 of whom received palbociclib and 112 received ribociclib treatment. In the study population CDK inhibitor treatment was added to fulvestrant 102 patients ( 47%), to letrozole 115 patients (53%). In the Palbociclib arm fulvestrant/letrozole ratio was 53.3/46.7%, in the ribociclib arm it was 41.07/58.93%. Of 105 patients who received palbociclib, 65 were on concomitant PPI therapy, 40 were not. Of the 112 patients who received ribociclib, 61 were on concomitant PPI therapy, 51 were not. In the palbociclib group, the PFS of the patients using PPIs was shorter than the PFS of the patients not using (13.04 months vs. unreachable, p < 0.001). It was determined that taking PPIs was an independent predictor of shortening PFS (p < 0.001) in the multivariate analysis, In the ribociclib group, the PFS of the patients using PPIs was shorter than the PFS of the patients not using (12.64 months vs. unreachable, p = 0.003). It was determined that taking PPIs was single statistically independent predictor of shortening PFS (p = 0.003, univariate analysis).ConclusionsOur study demonstrated that concomitant usage of PPIs was associated with shorter PFS in mBC treated with both ribociclib and especially palbociclib. If it needs to be used, PPI selection should be made carefully and low-strength PPI or other ARAs (eg H2 antagonists, antacids) should be preferred.

Impact of proton pump inhibitors on sustained virologic response in veterans treated with sofosbuvir/velpatasvir for chronic hepatitis C virus: A retrospective cohort study.

The objective of this study was to determine the clinical relationship between proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use and sustained virologic response (SVR) in patients treated with sofosbuvir/velpatasvir (SOF/VEL) for chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. This was a multicenter retrospective cohort study. Data was collected on patients from 128 Veterans Affairs Medical Centers throughout the United States. This study included veterans aged 18-89 years with viremic HCV who received a full course of SOF/VEL treatment from June 2016 - July 2017. Sustained viral response was compared in patients taking SOF/VEL with or without concurrent PPI prescriptions. Analysis of the primary outcome was completed utilizing logistic regression. The relationship between SVR and PPI use was adjusted for African-American race, presence of cirrhosis, prior treatment, BMI greater than 30 kg/m2, and HCV genotype. The final analysis included 4,008 veterans, 830 with concomitant PPI use and 3,178 without PPI use. After adjustment for other variables in the logistic model, there was no statistically significant association between PPI use and lower SVR (odds ratio 0.67; 95%CI: 0.42, 1.06; p=0.087). Concomitant PPI treatment adjusted for other variables did not significantly impact success or failure of SOF/VEL treatment of chronic HCV. Despite the lack of significant association identified in this study, in efforts to provide the best care possible, it remains prudent to proceed with caution in patients desiring to use PPI therapy while receiving SOF/VEL, and ensure prescribing instructions are closely followed in regard to concomitant PPI use, especially in patients with other risk factors for decreased SVR.

Concomitant Use of Proton Pump Inhibitors With Capecitabine Based Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: Is it Safe?

Capecitabine (Cape) is routinely used for the neoadjuvant chemoradiation treatment (NACRT) of locally advanced rectal cancers (LARCs). Previous reports have suggested that the concomitant use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) may affect the efficacy of Cape, although the true effect of PPIs when used with Cape as a radiosensitizer for neoadjuvant radiation is unclear. The aim of our study was to evaluate the impact of concurrent PPI use along with fluorouracil (FU) and Cape based NACRT in terms of pathologic and oncological outcomes, in patients with LARC. LARC patients treated at our center with NACRT from 2010 to 2016 were identified. Postoperative pathology and follow-up outcomes were examined for any differences with relation to the use of PPIs concurrently with FU and Cape based NACRT and adjuvant chemotherapy regimens. Three hundred four and 204 patients received treatment with FU and Cape based NACRT. No difference in pathologic complete response rate was noted between the 2 arms with the concurrent use of PPIs (25.8% and 25%, respectively, P=0.633); or with and without the use of PPIs in the Cape-NACRT arm specifically (20% and 20.7%, P=0.945). At a median follow-up of 5 years, no statistical difference in local or distant control was noted in the Cape-NACRT patients, with and without concomitant PPI use (P=0.411 and 0.264, respectively).Multivariate analysis showed no association of PPI use and NACRT with Cape, in terms of local control (hazard ratio=0.001, P=0.988) or overall survival (hazard ratio=1.179, confidence interval=0.249-5.579, P=0.835). Our study revealed that there was no adverse pathologic or oncological outcome with the concurrent use of PPIs along with Cape-NACRT in the treatment of LARC. We report that it may be safe to use PPIs if essential, in this clinical setting, although it would be wise to exercise caution.

Association of proton pump inhibitors with survival in Veterans with non-small cell lung cancer receiving immunotherapy.

e18729 Background: Proton pump inhibitors (PPI) can disrupt the gut microbiome and thereby modulate response to immunotherapy in cancer patients. In a recently published post-hoc analysis of 757 non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients receiving atezolizumab pooled from two prospective trials, overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival were significantly lower among the 234 patients receiving PPI. We investigated the impact of PPI in a larger cohort of NSCLC patients treated with ICI within the Veterans Health Administration. Methods: We conducted a nested cohort study of Veterans who were diagnosed with NSCLC between 2010 &amp; 2018 and treated with ICI (immune checkpoint inhibitors). Exposure was defined as receipt of a PPI prescription within 90 days of an ICI infusion. Chi-square tests were used to compare characteristics of exposed versus unexposed Veterans. OS was measured from start of ICI. Cox proportional hazard multivariate (MV) regression was used to calculate hazard ratios (HR) corresponding to variables associated with OS. Results: We identified 3,634 Veterans receiving ICI with non-exclusive exposures to nivolumab (59.3%), pembrolizumab (35.1%), durvalumab (6.9%), and atezolizumab (3.3%). Their median age was 69, and a plurality had male gender (97.0%), white race (73.0%), comorbidity count ≥1 (60.4%), adenocarcinoma (47.8%), and stage IV disease at diagnosis (40.9%). In this nested cohort, 2,159 (59.4%) were exposed to PPI, predominantly omeprazole (1,264 or 85.6% of PPI group). Patients receiving PPI were more likely to be ≤71 years of age, to be white, to reside in rural areas, to have a higher comorbidity burden, to have adenocarcinoma histology, and to receive chemotherapy (all p≤0.04). On MV analysis, PPI use was not significantly associated with detriment in OS (HR 0.96 [0.89-1.04], p= 0.35). In the matched cohort analysis, median survival did not significantly differ between the 1,389 patients taking PPI and the 1,389 without PPI (median 10 versus 10 months, HR 0.98 [0.90-1.06], p= 0.59). Conclusions: In the largest analysis to date of concurrent PPI use in patients with NSCLC receiving ICI, there were no survival differences associated with concomitant PPI use. These results suggest that PPIs do not compromise ICI efficacy.

Effectiveness of 8-Week Glecaprevir/Pibrentasvir for Treatment-Naïve, Compensated Cirrhotic Patients with Chronic Hepatitis C Infection.

IntroductionGlecaprevir/pibrentasvir (G/P) was approved on 26 September 2019 by the US Food and Drug Administration for 8-week duration in treatment-naïve (TN) hepatitis C virus (HCV)-infected patients with compensated cirrhosis (CC). Evidence from the EXPEDITION-8 study demonstrated that 8 weeks of G/P achieved a 98% intent-to-treat (ITT) sustained virologic response rate 12 weeks post treatment (SVR12) in 343 TN/CC patients. The aim of this study is to demonstrate the first US real-world effectiveness of G/P 8-week treatment in genotype 1–6 TN/CC HCV patients.MethodsData from 73 TN/CC patients who initiated 8 weeks of G/P treatment between August 2017 and November 2018 were collected electronically from providers and specialty pharmacies of the Trio Health network and analyzed. Cirrhosis was determined by FIB-4 > 5.2 or was physician reported. The primary outcome was Per Protocol (PP) SVR12.ResultsThe majority (60%) of patients were male, with (mean values): age 59 years, body mass index (BMI) of 30, aspartate aminotransferase (AST) 105, and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) 101 IU/ml. HCV genotypes (GT) were: GT1 81% (59/73), GT2 10% (7/73), GT3 5% (4/73), GT4 3% (2/73), and GT6 1% (1/73). Eight percent (6/73) of patients had concurrent proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use, and 15% (11/72) had a baseline viral load > 6 MM IU/ml. Zero patients discontinued, two patients were reported as lost to follow-up, and there was one virologic failure. PP sustained virologic response at 12 weeks (SVR12) rate was 99% (70/71), and the intent-to-treat (ITT) SVR12 rate was 96% (70/73).ConclusionsEarly real-world experience indicates high effectiveness of the 8-week G/P regimen in a diverse treatment-naïve, compensated cirrhotic US population.

Influence of proton pump inhibitors and H2-receptor antagonists on the efficacy and safety of dasatinib in chronic myeloid leukemia patients.

We evaluated the effect of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and H2-receptor antagonists (H2RAs) on the efficacy and safety of dasatinib for chronic-phase chronic myeloid leukemia (CP-CML). Retrospective analyses were performed for patients with CP-CML who received dasatinib at seven hospitals between April 2009 and December 2016. Seventy-three patients were identified, 16 of whom received PPIs or H2RAs concurrently with dasatinib. Major molecular response at 12months was observed in 13 of 13 patients (100%) with concurrent PPIs or H2RAs (combination group), and in 23 of 51 patients (45.1%) who received only dasatinib (dasatinib-alone group; P < 0.001). Deep molecular response at 12months was observed in four of six patients (66.7%) in the combination group, and seven of 38 patients (18.4%) in the dasatinib-alone group (P = 0.027). Dasatinib chemotherapy was stopped after 18months for 25 patients (43.9%) from the dasatinib-alone group, but for none from the combination group. Combination treatment with PPIs or H2RAs did not reduce the efficacy of dasatinib. PPIs and H2RAs reduce the incidence of dasatinib discontinuation due to adverse events and increase the efficacy of dasatinib chemotherapy for patients.

Effect of concurrent proton pump inhibitors (PPI) use in patients (pts) treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) for metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC).

500 Background: PPI are widely used in pts with cancer. PPI are associated with anti-inflammatory properties and direct effects on neutrophils and monocytes that might prevent inflammation. We investigate the role of PPI on outcomes of pt receiving ICI in mUC. Methods: Medical records from pts with mUC treated with ICI from May 2013 to May 2019 using a multi-institutional database was evaluated. Use of PPI was defined: 30 days prior, during the treatment and 30 days after the last dose of ICI. ORR were assessed according to RECIST v1.1. The X2 test was used to determine differences in rates. PFS and OS were estimated using Kaplan-Method and long rank test was used to assess differences between groups. All analyses were performed using SPSS v21. Results: Overall, 115 pts received therapy with ICI. Of these pts, 20 were not included due to the absence of information about PPI. Thus, 95 pts were included for the analysis. 50 (52.6%) pts received PPI. Median age was 68 years, 79 pts (83.2%) were male, 78 pts (82.1%) had ECOG PS 0-1, 20 pts (21.1%) had liver metastasis and 36 pts (37.9%) received ICI treatment as frontline therapy. ICI prescribed were atezolizumab (58.9%), pembrolizumab (17.9%), durvalumab (12.6%), nivolumab (6.3%) and durvalumab/tremelimumab (4.2%). Pts with no PPIs use had higher ORR (CR [8.9%] +PR [14.4%]) compared to those pt who use PPIs (CR [4.4%] + PR [8.9%]) (P=0.197). Median PFS was 10.05 mo (95% CI: 3.86-16.27) for non PPI users and 3.87 mo (95% CI:1.84-5.91) for PPI users (P=0.04). Median OS was 19.71 mo (95% IC:8.93-30.49) for non PPI users and 7.9 mo (4.4-11.45) for PPI users (P=0.072). Conclusions: We have observed shorter PFS and trend toward lower OS and ORR for PPI users. The real impact of PPI should be confirmed in prospective studies.

Concurrent proton-pump inhibitors increase risk of death for lung cancer patients receiving 1st-line gefitinib treatment - a nationwide population-based study.

PurposeConcurrent proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use might reduce the plasma concentration of epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs). Clinically, the adverse effect of PPIs on patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with first-line EGFR TKIs remains controversial. This study was conducted to evaluate whether the combined use of gefitinib with PPIs affected NSCLC outcomes.Patients and methodsWe performed a nationwide cohort study of patients newly diagnosed with NSCLC between 1997 and 2013 using the Taiwan Cancer Registry and Taiwan National Health Insurance databases. We identified patients who were treated with first-line EGFR TKIs and analyzed the association between use of PPIs and TKI treatment outcome. We defined the coverage ratio of PPIs as duration of PPI treatment in days divided by duration of TKIs in days. Patients who exhibited an overlap of >20% between PPI and TKI usage days were defined as having a high coverage ratio.ResultsA total of 1278 patients were treated with first-line gefitinib, 309 of which took PPIs at the same time and 145 had a high PPI coverage ratio. Patients had similar time to failure regardless of their PPI coverage ratio during gefitinib treatment. However, higher PPI coverage ratio significantly decreased overall survival (OS) compared with that of patients with a lower PPI coverage ratio or no PPI treatment in univariate analysis (median OS, 13.5, 16.7, and 21.8 months, respectively, p<0.01) and multivariate analyses (high coverage ratio HR: 1.67; low coverage ratio HR: 1.29). Exposure to PPIs during first line gefitinib treatment significantly decreased overall survival of patients with NSCLC.ConclusionConcurrent use of PPIs was associated with lower overall survival in patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC under first-line gefitinib treatment.

NSAID use among residents in 68 residential aged care facilities 2014 to 2017: An analysis of duration, concomitant medication use, and high-risk conditions.

People in residential aged care are at increased risk of adverse events from nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) due to their age and health status, but little is known about use of NSAIDs in this setting. We aimed to estimate the prevalence of NSAID use by route, differences by high-risk conditions, prevalence of concurrent proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use, and prevalence of the "triple whammy" combination (oral NSAID, diuretic, and angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor antagonist). We conducted a dynamic cohort study using medication administration data from 68 residential aged care facilities (RACFs) during 2014 to 2017. Descriptive statistics and regression were used to estimate the proportion of residents who used NSAIDs, NSAIDs long term, NSAIDs with PPIs, and the triple whammy combination. Ten thousand three hundred sixty-seven residents were included. Two thousand four hundred fourteen (23.3%) used at least one NSAID: 756 (7.3%) used only oral, 1326 (12.8%) used only topical, and 332 (3.2%) used both topical and oral NSAIDs. One thousand five hundred forty two (14.8%) used an NSAID long term, a majority of which only used topical NSAIDs 933/1542 (60.5%). Age, sex, and health status were associated with greater variation in long-term topical use relative to oral NSAID use. A majority of oral NSAID users concomitantly used a PPI, which varied according to age, sex, and health status. Among residents with any oral NSAID use, 182/1088 (16.7%) had triple whammy medication use. Targeted interventions to reduce NSAID use among RACF residents, to reduce triple whammy medication use, and increase PPI use for long-term oral NSAID users are warranted.

Effectiveness and Safety of Clopidogrel Co-administered With Statins and Proton Pump Inhibitors: A Korean National Health Insurance Database Study.

Simultaneous competition for cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2C19 and CYP3A4 might diminish clopidogrel's antiplatelet effect by impacting its metabolic activation. This pharmacoepidemiologic study investigated whether proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and CYP3A4-metabolized statins individually and jointly increase thrombotic events by attenuating clopidogrel's effectiveness. From Korean nationwide claims data (2007-2015), we selected 59,233 patients who initiated clopidogrel and statins after coronary stenting and compared thrombotic risks by PPI or CYP3A4-metabolized statin use or both. PPIs were associated with increased thrombotic risks (hazard ratio (HR) 1.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.12-1.45), unlike CYP3A4-metabolized statins (HR 1.03, 95% CI 0.98-1.07). PPIs with high CYP2C19-inhibitory potential were more relevant than those with low potential (HR 1.28, 95% CI 1.02-1.61). Joint effects of PPIs and CYP3A4-metabolized statins were nonsignificant (relative excess risk due to interaction -0.14, 95% CI -0.34 to 0.07). Concurrent PPIs were associated with increased thrombotic risks in patients receiving clopidogrel and statins; CYP3A4-metabolized statins did not exacerbate PPI-associated risks.

Evaluation of the effects of formulation, food, or a proton-pump inhibitor on the pharmacokinetics of glasdegib (PF-04449913) in healthy volunteers: a randomized phase I study

PurposeTo demonstrate the bioequivalence of the planned maleate salt-based commercial glasdegib tablet formulation [International Council for Harmonization (ICH) glasdegib] to the clinical di-hydrochloride (di-HCl) salt-based glasdegib formulation (di-HCl glasdegib). Additionally, to estimate the effects of a high-fat, high-calorie meal and proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) on the pharmacokinetics of ICH glasdegib.MethodsThis Phase I open-label study (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03130556) enrolled 24 healthy subjects to receive two different tablet formulations of single-dose 100-mg glasdegib under fasted conditions. A subset of healthy volunteers (n = 12) received single-dose 100-mg ICH glasdegib following a high-fat, high-calorie meal or concurrently with a PPI (rabeprazole).ResultsThe adjusted geometric mean ratio (ICH glasdegib:di-HCl glasdegib) and 90% confidence intervals (CI) of area under the plasma concentration–time curve from time zero to infinity (AUCinf) and maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) were 104.0% (99.7‒108.5%) and 101.6% (96.1‒107.4%), respectively, within the acceptance range for bioequivalence (80‒125%). The adjusted geometric mean ratio (90% CIs) for AUCinf and Cmax under fed conditions were 84.3% (78.6‒90.6%) and 69.0% (61.8‒77.0%), respectively, relative to fasted conditions. When ICH glasdegib was administered concurrently with the PPI, the adjusted geometric mean ratio (90% CI) of AUCinf and Cmax were 100.6% (93.2‒108.6%) and 80.5% (70.7‒91.6%), respectively, relative to fasted conditions. Glasdegib was generally well tolerated under all conditions studied.ConclusionsThe ICH glasdegib tablet formulation was bioequivalent to the clinical di-HCl formulation under fasted conditions. A high-fat, high-calorie meal or concurrent PPI treatment had a minimal effect on glasdegib exposure, and was not considered clinically meaningful.

PPIs may decrease the effectiveness of hepatitis C antivirals

Sustained virologic responses (SVRs) were lower in patients with hepatitis C taking direct-acting antivirals with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) compared with those not receiving PPIs, according to results of a comprehensive review published in the Journal of Clinical and Translational Hepatology. Acid-reducing medications have been shown to decrease the concentrations of select hepatitis C treatments such as ledipasvir/sofosbuvir (Harvoni—Gilead) and sofosbuvir/velpatasvir (Epclusa—Gilead). However, previous research about the effects of concurrent use of PPIs and direct-acting antivirals on SVRs in patients with hepatitis C has been inconsistent. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to assess the effects of PPIs on SVRs in patients with hepatitis C receiving a variety of direct-acting antivirals. Nine cohort studies involving 32,684 patients were included in the analysis. Seven of these nine studies assessed the interaction between PPIs and ledipasvir/sofosbuvir. The analysis showed that there were lower odds of achieving an SVR in patients who were on concurrent PPIs compared with those not on PPI therapy. A similar trend was observed for achieving an SVR at 12 weeks. The results remained the same even after adjusting for select confounding factors. The authors of the current analysis concluded that the study “demonstrated a significantly increased risk of failure of achievement of SVR in [hepatitis C virus]–infected patients taking [direct-acting antivirals] with PPIs compared to non-PPI users. Providers should consider whether PPI therapy is indicated for these patients and withdraw PPI therapy in the absence of indications.” An assessment of the labels for various direct-acting antivirals showed that they include cautions on potential drug interactions with PPIs. For example, the prescribing information for ledipasvir/sofosbuvir noted that the solubility of ledipasvir decreases as gastric pH increases. Therefore, drugs such as antacids, histamine-2 receptor antagonists, and PPIs that increase gastric pH are expected to decrease the concentration of ledipasvir. The label recommends that doses comparable to omeprazole 20 mg or lower can be administered simultaneously with the drug under fasting conditions. A similar statement is listed in the sofosbuvir/velpatasvir prescribing information, in which the solubility of velpatasvir decreases as gastric pH increases. The label states that coadministration of omeprazole or other PPIs is not recommended, but if it is medically necessary, the direct-acting antiviral should be administered with food and taken 4 hours before omeprazole 20 mg. Inform patients with hepatitis C receiving direct-acting antivirals about the potential for these agents to interact with PPIs. Tell them to avoid PPIs (both OTC and prescription agents) unless their prescriber deems them to be medically necessary.