One‐week triple therapy with esomeprazole provides effective eradication of <i>Helicobacter pylori</i> in duodenal ulcer disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Esomeprazole is the first proton pump inhibitor to be developed as an optical isomer for the treatment of acid-related diseases. METHODS: Four hundred and forty eight duodenal ulcer patients with Helicobacter pylori infection, confirmed by 13C-urea breath test (UBT), and no current ulcer, were randomised to double-blind treatment with esomeprazole 20 mg twice daily (b.d.) (n=224) or omeprazole 20 mg b.d. (n=224), in combination with amoxicillin 1 g b.d. and clarithromycin 500 mg b.d. for 1 week (EAC and OAC, respectively). A negative UBT at both 4 and 8 weeks after completing therapy indicated successful H. pylori eradication. RESULTS: Intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis comprised 400 patients (EAC, n=204; OAC, n=196) and per protocol (PP) analysis 377 patients (EAC, n=192; OAC, n=185). Eradication rates (95% confidence intervals) for ITT and PP populations were: EAC, 90% (85-94%) and 91% (86-94%); OAC, 88% (82-92%) and 91% (86-95%). Between-group differences in eradication rates were not statistically significant. Both regimens were well tolerated, with an adverse event profile and frequency typical of proton pump inhibitor plus antibiotic combination therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Esomeprazole-based triple therapy for 1 week is highly effective in eradicating H. pylori infection in duodenal ulcer disease, offers comparable efficacy to omeprazole-based therapy, and is well tolerated.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".