Key result
Famotidine did not significantly reduce the incidence of recurrent peptic ulcer compared to placebo in thienopyridine users with a history of peptic ulcer (7.0% vs 11.4%; P=0.239).
Why the study?
Does famotidine prevent recurrent peptic ulcers in atherosclerotic patients on thienopyridine monotherapy with a history of peptic ulcer?
RCT (n=228)
Double-blind, double-dummy
Randomly assigned
Does famotidine prevent recurrent peptic ulcers in atherosclerotic patients on thienopyridine monotherapy with a history of peptic ulcer?
Effect estimate: Difference 4.4% (95% CI -11.7 to 2.9)
Absolute Event Rate: 7% vs 11.4%
Absolute Risk Reduction: 4.4%
p-value: p=0.239
Famotidine does not significantly reduce the incidence of recurrent peptic ulcers or ulcer bleeding in atherosclerotic patients receiving thienopyridine monotherapy.
H2RA ineffective for ulcer prevention on thienopyridines; challenges PPI-alternative assumption and leaves optimal gastroprotection open.
OBJECTIVES: Proton pump inhibitor can effectively prevent recurrent peptic ulcers among atherosclerotic patients receiving clopidogrel monotherapy. However, the interaction between proton pump inhibitors and clopidogrel has raised concerns over the safety of combined use of the two medicines in clinical practice. The aims of this randomized-controlled, double-blind and double-dummy trial were to investigate the efficacy of histamine-2 receptor antagonist (H2RA) in the prevention of recurrent peptic ulcer in patients undergoing thienopyridine monotherapy. METHODS: From January 2012 to 2016, long-termed thienopyridine users with a peptic ulcer history who did not have peptic ulcers at initial endoscopy were randomly assigned to receive either famotidine (40 mg, before bedtime) or placebo (before bedtime) for 6 months. Follow-up endoscopy was performed at the end of the 6th month and whenever dyspepsia, hematemesis, or melena occurred. RESULTS: The cumulative incidence of recurrent peptic ulcer during the 6-month period was 7.0% in famotidine group (n=114) and 11.4% in the placebo group (n=114). The two patient groups had comparable cumulative incidence of peptic ulcer (difference, 4.4%; 95% confidence interval (CI), -11.7 to 2.9%; P=0.239). Additionally, there was no difference in the cumulative incidence of ulcer bleeding (2.6% vs. 1.8%; difference, 0.8%; 95% CI, -0.6 to 2.4%, P=1.000) between famotidine and placebo groups. However, the former had a lower incidence of gastroduodenal erosion than the latter (21.1% vs. 36.8%; difference, 15.7%; 95% CI, -27.3 to -4.1%; P=0.013). CONCLUSIONS: Famotidine cannot decrease the incidence of peptic ulcer or ulcer bleeding in thienopyridine users with atherosclerotic disease and a history of peptic ulcer.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hsu et al. (2016) conducted an RCT in Atherosclerotic disease with a history of peptic ulcer on thienopyridine monotherapy (n=228). Famotidine vs. Placebo was evaluated on Recurrent peptic ulcer (Difference 4.4%, 95% CI -11.7 to 2.9, p=0.239). Famotidine did not significantly reduce the incidence of recurrent peptic ulcer compared to placebo in thienopyridine users with a history of peptic ulcer (7.0% vs 11.4%; P=0.239).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: