Background/Aims: Fexuprazan, a novel potassium-competitive acid blocker, was developed for treating acid-related disorders. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of fexuprazan, unlike those of proton pump inhibitors, are independent of food effect. This study aims to evaluate differences in efficacy and safety of fexuprazan in patients with erosive esophagitis (EE) according to the timing of dosing. Methods: In this multicenter, open-label noninferiority study, patients who had typical reflux symptoms with endoscopically confirmed EE were randomized 1:1 to receive fexuprazan 40 mg daily 30 minutes before or after meal. Treatment was completed after 2 weeks or 4 weeks when healing was endoscopically confirmed. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with healed EE confirmed by endoscopy up to week 4. Safety endpoints included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Results: In the prior-to-meal group (n = 89) and after-meal group (n = 86), 4-week EE healing rates were 98.77% and 100.00% (difference, 0.01%; 95% CI, –0.01% to 0.04%) and 2-week EE healing rates were 95.77% and 97.14% (difference, 0.01%; 95% CI, –0.05% to 0.07%), respectively. TEAEs were 9.78% and 8.70% in the prior-to-meal group and the after-meal group, respectively. Conclusions Non-inferiority analysis revealed that taking fexuprazan after meal was non-inferior to taking fexuprazan before meals in patients with EE. The frequency of adverse events was similar between the 2 study groups. The drug is safe and effective for healing EE regardless of the timing of dosing.

Background/Aims: Fexuprazan, a novel potassium-competitive acid blocker, was developed for treating acid-related disorders. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of fexuprazan, unlike those of proton pump inhibitors, are independent of food effect. This study aims to evaluate differences in efficacy and safety of fexuprazan in patients with erosive esophagitis (EE) according to the timing of dosing. Methods: In this multicenter, open-label noninferiority study, patients who had typical reflux symptoms with endoscopically confirmed EE were randomized 1:1 to receive fexuprazan 40 mg daily 30 minutes before or after meal. Treatment was completed after 2 weeks or 4 weeks when healing was endoscopically confirmed. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with healed EE confirmed by endoscopy up to week 4. Safety endpoints included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Results: In the prior-to-meal group (n = 89) and after-meal group (n = 86), 4-week EE healing rates were 98.77% and 100.00% (difference, 0.01%; 95% CI, –0.01% to 0.04%) and 2-week EE healing rates were 95.77% and 97.14% (difference, 0.01%; 95% CI, –0.05% to 0.07%), respectively. TEAEs were 9.78% and 8.70% in the prior-to-meal group and the after-meal group, respectively. Conclusions Non-inferiority analysis revealed that taking fexuprazan after meal was non-inferior to taking fexuprazan before meals in patients with EE. The frequency of adverse events was similar between the 2 study groups. The drug is safe and effective for healing EE regardless of the timing of dosing.

Background/Aims: Fexuprazan, a novel potassium-competitive acid blocker, was developed for treating acid-related disorders. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of fexuprazan, unlike those of proton pump inhibitors, are independent of food effect. This study aims to evaluate differences in efficacy and safety of fexuprazan in patients with erosive esophagitis (EE) according to the timing of dosing. Methods: In this multicenter, open-label noninferiority study, patients who had typical reflux symptoms with endoscopically confirmed EE were randomized 1:1 to receive fexuprazan 40 mg daily 30 minutes before or after meal. Treatment was completed after 2 weeks or 4 weeks when healing was endoscopically confirmed. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with healed EE confirmed by endoscopy up to week 4. Safety endpoints included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Results: In the prior-to-meal group (n = 89) and after-meal group (n = 86), 4-week EE healing rates were 98.77% and 100.00% (difference, 0.01%; 95% CI, –0.01% to 0.04%) and 2-week EE healing rates were 95.77% and 97.14% (difference, 0.01%; 95% CI, –0.05% to 0.07%), respectively. TEAEs were 9.78% and 8.70% in the prior-to-meal group and the after-meal group, respectively. Conclusions Non-inferiority analysis revealed that taking fexuprazan after meal was non-inferior to taking fexuprazan before meals in patients with EE. The frequency of adverse events was similar between the 2 study groups. The drug is safe and effective for healing EE regardless of the timing of dosing.

Background: Despite the proven effectiveness of oral antivirals against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in randomized trials, their clinical reevaluation is vital in the context of widespread immunity and milder prevalent variants. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of oral antivirals for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods: This retrospective cohort study utilized a target trial emulation framework to analyze patients with COVID-19 aged 60+ from January to December 2022. Data were obtained from the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency and Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service. The study involved 957,036 patients treated with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and 243,360 treated with molnupiravir, each compared with the matched control groups. Primary outcome was progression to critical COVID-19 requiring advanced respiratory support. Secondary outcomes included progression to severe COVID-19, need for supplemental oxygen, and death within 30 days of the onset of COVID-19.Number needed to treat (NNT) derived from the absolute risk reduction. Results: Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir was significantly associated with a reduced risk of severe (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.823; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.803–0.843), critical (aOR, 0.560; 95% CI, 0.503–0.624), and fatal COVID-19 (aOR, 0.694; 95% CI, 0.647–0.744).Similarly, molnupiravir reduced the risk of severe (aOR, 0.895; 95% CI, 0.856–0.937), critical (aOR, 0.672; 95% CI, 0.559–0.807), and fatal cases (aOR, 0.679; 95% CI, 0.592–0.779).NNTs for nirmatrelvir/ritonavir were 203.71 (severe), 1,230.12 (critical), and 691.50 (death);for molnupiravir, they were 352.70 (severe), 1,398.62 (critical), and 862.98 (death). Higher effectiveness was associated with older adults, unvaccinated individuals, and the late pandemic phase. Conclusion Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and molnupiravir are effective in preventing progression to severe disease in elderly adults with COVID-19.

Background/Aims: Prokinetics such as mosapride citrate CR (conventional-release; Gasmotin) are commonly used in functional dyspepsia (FD). This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of once-a-day mosapride citrate SR (DWJ1252), a sustained-release formulation of mosapride citrate, compared with mosapride citrate CR 3 times a day, in patients with FD. Methods: In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, non-inferiority study, 119 patients with FD (by the Rome III criteria, 60 for mosapride citrate SR and 59 for mosapride citrate CR) were randomly allocated to mosapride citrate SR once daily or mosapride citrate CR thrice daily for 4 weeks in 16 medical institutions. Primary end point was the change in gastrointestinal symptom (GIS) score from baseline, assessed by GIS questionnaires on 5-point Likert scale after 4-week treatment. Secondary end points and safety profiles were also analyzed. Results: The study included 51 and 49 subjects in the mosapride citrate SR and mosapride citrate CR groups, respectively. GIS scores at week 4 were significantly reduced in both groups (mean ± SD: − 10.04 ± 4.45 and − 10.86 ± 5.53 in the mosapride citrate SR and mosapride citrate CR groups, respectively; P < 0.001), and the GIS changes from baseline did not differ between the 2 groups (difference, 0.82 point; 95% CI, − 1.17, 2.81; P = 0.643). Changes in GIS at weeks 2 and 4 and quality of life at week 4, and the improvement rates of global assessments at weeks 2 and 4, did not differ between the groups. Adverse events were similar in the 2 groups, and there were no serious adverse events. Conclusion In patients with FD, mosapride citrate SR once daily is as effective as mosapride citrate CR thrice daily, with a similar safety profile.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of a controlled release, once-daily formulation of mosapride (UI05MSP015CT) in patients with functional dyspepsia (FD). METHODS: Patients with FD were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either UI05MSP015CT (15 mg once a day, study group) or mosapride (5 mg three times a day, control group) and corresponding placebo for 4 weeks. The primary endpoint was a change in the gastrointestinal symptom score (GIS) evaluated at enrollment and after 4 weeks. Secondary endpoints were changes in the Nepean Dyspepsia Index-Korean version (NDI-K), rate of satisfactory symptom relief, and rate of adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 138 patients were enrolled (female, 73.9%; mean age, 44.0±15.4 years). After excluding patients who violated the study protocol, 59 and 58 patients from the study and control groups, respectively, were included in the per-protocol analysis. No difference was observed in drug compliance between the control and study groups (97.07%±4.52% vs 96.85%±6.05%, p=0.870). Changes in GIS scores were 9.69±6.44 and 10.01±5.92 in the study and control groups. The mean difference in GIS change between groups was 0.33 (95% confidence interval, 1.75 to 2.41), demonstrating non-inferiority of UI-05MSP015CT (p=0.755). The rate of satisfactory symptom relief was not different between the study and control groups (39.0% vs 56.9%, p=0.053). No differences in change in NDI-K score (14.3 vs 16.9, p=0.263) or rates of adverse events (12.9% vs. 4.4%, p=0.062) were observed between the study and control groups. CONCLUSIONS: Once-daily mosapride is not inferior to conventional mosapride in efficacy and is safe in patients with FD.
Compliance ; Dyspepsia* ; Humans

This study compared the efficacy of DA-9601 (Dong-A ST Co., Seoul, Korea) and its new formulation, DA-5204 (Dong-A ST Co.), for treating erosive gastritis. This phase III, randomized, multicenter, double-blind, non-inferiority trial randomly assigned 434 patients with endoscopically proven gastric mucosal erosions into two groups: DA-9601 3 times daily or DA-5,204 twice daily for 2 weeks. The final analysis included 421 patients (DA-5204, 209; DA-9601, 212). The primary endpoint (rate of effective gastric erosion healing) and secondary endpoints (cure rate of endoscopic erosion and gastrointestinal [GI] symptom relief) were assessed using endoscopy after the treatment. Drug-related adverse events (AEs), including GI symptoms, were also compared. At week 2, gastric healing rates with DA-5204 and DA-9601 were 42.1% (88/209) and 42.5% (90/212), respectively. The difference between the groups was −0.4% (95% confidence interval, −9.8% to 9.1%), which was above the non-inferiority margin of −14%. The cure rate of gastric erosion in both groups was 37.3%. The improvement rates of GI symptoms with DA-5204 and DA-9601 were 40.4% and 40.8%, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in both secondary endpoints. AEs were reported in 18 (8.4%) patients in the DA-5204 group and 19 (8.8%) in the DA-9601 group. Rates of AE were not different between the two groups. No serious AE or adverse drug reaction (ADR) occurred. These results demonstrate the non-inferiority of DA-5204 compared to DA-9601. DA-5204 is as effective as DA-9601 in the treatment of erosive gastritis. Registered randomized clinical trial at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02282670)
Artemisia ; Double-Blind Method ; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions ; Endoscopy ; Gastritis* ; Humans ; Seoul

BACKGROUND/AIMS: The effect of proton pump inhibitors (PPI) in Asian functional dyspepsia (FD) patients has not been well established as in Western countries. DA-9701, a novel prokinetic agent, stimulates gastric emptying and modulates visceral hypersensitivity in vivo and in human studies. This study was conducted to compare the efficacy of DA-9701 with a conventional PPI in mono or combination therapy in patients with FD. METHODS: In this double-blind, randomized, non-inferiority trial, 389 patients diagnosed with FD using Rome III criteria were allocated among 3 groups: 30-mg DA-9701 t.i.d (means 3 times a day), 40-mg pantoprazole, and 30-mg DA-9701 t.i.d + 40-mg pantoprazole. The primary efficacy end-point was a global assessment of the patient binary response or response on a 5-Likert scale after 4 weeks. RESULTS: The global symptomatic improvement was 60.5% in the DA-9701 group, 65.6% in the pantoprazole group, and 63.5% in the DA-9701 + pantoprazole group using a 5-Likert scale at week 4 with no significant difference among 3 groups (P = 0.685). Symptom improvement measured by binary outcome was significantly achieved in each of the 3 groups, but not different among groups. Patients in all treatment groups reported significant improvement in the response rate and symptoms according to FD subtypes and dyspepsia-related quality of life (P < 0.001), but there were no significant differences among the 3 groups. CONCLUSIONS: DA-9701 improves global and individual symptoms and increases dyspepsia-specific quality of life in patients with FD. The efficacy of DA-9701 monotherapy is comparable with pantoprazole and there is no additive effect with combination of DA-9701 and pantoprazole in patients with FD.
Asian Continental Ancestry Group ; Dyspepsia* ; Gastric Emptying ; Humans ; Hypersensitivity ; Proton Pump Inhibitors ; Quality of Life

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for tumors occurring in the remnant stomach is technically difficult to perform because of limited working space and severe fibrosis and staples present around the suture line. We aimed to elucidate the feasibility and clinical outcomes of performing ESD for tumors in the remnant stomach. METHODS: Between December 2007 and January 2013, 18 patients underwent ESD for tumors (six adenomas and 12 differentiated-type early gastric cancers [EGCs]) occurring in the remnant stomach after distal gastrectomy. Clinicopathologic features and clinical outcomes after ESD were retrospectively analyzed. RESULTS: Two-thirds of the lesions were located on the body, and half were located on the suture line. En bloc resection, R0 resection, and en bloc with R0 resection rates were 88.9%, 100%, and 88.9%, respectively. Curative resection rate for EGC was 91.7%. Perforation occurred in one patient (5.6%) and was successfully managed by endoscopic closure with metallic clips and conservative management. There was no significant bleeding after ESD. During a median follow-up of 47.5 months, no local, metachronous, or extragastric recurrence was seen for either EGC or adenoma lesions. CONCLUSIONS: ESD is a feasible and effective treatment modality and can be considered a primary intervention for early gastric neoplasia occurring in the remnant stomach.
Adenoma ; Fibrosis ; Follow-Up Studies ; Gastrectomy* ; Gastric Stump* ; Hemorrhage ; Humans ; Recurrence ; Retrospective Studies ; Stomach Neoplasms ; Sutures

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Therapies of functional dyspepsia (FD) are limited. DA-9701 is a novel prokinetic agent formulated with Pharbitis semen and Corydalis Tuber. We aimed to assess the efficacy of DA-9701 compared with itopride in FD patients. METHODS: Patients with FD randomly received either itopride 50 mg or DA-9701 30 mg t.i.d after a 2-week baseline period. After 4 weeks of treatment, 2 primary efficacy endpoints were analyzed: the change from baseline in composite score of the 8 dyspeptic symptoms and the overall treatment effect. Impact on patients' quality of life was assessed using the Nepean Dyspepsia Index (NDI) questionnaire. RESULTS: We randomly assigned 464 patients with 455 having outcome data. The difference of the composite score change of the 8 symptoms between the 2 groups was 0.62, indicating that DA-9701 was not inferior to itopride. The overall treatment effect response rate was not different between the groups. When responder was defined as > or = 5 of the 7 Likert scale, responder rates were 37% of DA-9701 and 36% of itopride group. Patients receiving DA-9701 experienced similar mean percentage of days with adequate relief during the 4-week treatment period compared with those receiving itopride (56.8% vs 59.1%). Both drugs increased the NDI score of 5 domains without any difference in change of the NDI score between the groups. The safety profile of both drugs was comparable. CONCLUSIONS: DA-9701 significantly improves symptoms in patients with FD. DA-9701 showed non-inferior efficacy to itopride with comparable safety.
Corydalis ; Dyspepsia* ; Humans ; Quality of Life ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; Semen