Evidence Hub

Molecular testing-guided therapy versus susceptibility testing-guided therapy in first-line and third-line Helicobacter pylori eradication: two multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled, non-inferiority trials

Chen MJ, Chen PY, Fang YJ, Bair MJ, Chen CC, Chen CC, Yang TH, Lee JY et al.

The lancet. Gastroenterology & hepatology, 2023

288 participants

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Helicobacter pylori infection is an important causal factor of gastric cancer and peptic ulcer disease and is associated with immune thrombocytopenic purpura and functional dyspepsia. In H pylori strains, point mutations in the 23S rRNA and gyrA genes are associated with clarithromycin resistance and levofloxacin resistance, respectively. Whether the efficacy of molecular testing-guided therapy is non-inferior to that of susceptibility testing-guided therapy for H pylori eradication is unclear. Therefore, we aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of molecular testing-guided therapy and traditional culture-based susceptibility testing-guided therapy in first-line and third-line treatment of H pylori infection.

METHODS: We did two multicentre, open-label randomised trials in Taiwan. In trial 1 (done at seven hospitals), treatment-naive individuals infected with H pylori who were aged 20 years or older were eligible for study inclusion. In trial 2 (done at six hospitals), individuals aged 20 years or older who failed treatment after two or more eradication therapies for H pylori infection were eligible for enrolment. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either molecular testing-guided therapy or susceptibility testing-guided therapy. The randomisation sequence was generated by computer using permuted block randomisation with a block size of 4. All investigators were masked to the randomisation sequence. Clarithromycin and levofloxacin…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 288 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free