Efficacy and safety of single‐triple capsules of bismuth biskalcitrate, metronidazole and tetracycline, given with omeprazole, for the eradication of <i>Helicobacter pylori</i>: an international multicentre study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The high prevalence of Helicobacter pylori resistance to metronidazole demands treatments more effective than standard bismuth-based triple therapy against these strains. AIM: To evaluate the H. pylori eradication rate in both metronidazole-sensitive and -resistant strains following quadruple therapy using single-triple capsules of bismuth biskalcitrate, metronidazole and tetracycline, given with omeprazole. METHODS: One hundred and seventy valid patients with duodenal ulcer, gastric ulcer or non-ulcer dyspepsia were treated in eight centres located in five countries. H. pylori was confirmed at baseline using 13C-urea breath test, histology and/or culture. Patients received three single-triple capsules q.i.d. and omeprazole, 20 mg b.d., for 10 days. Each capsule contained bismuth biskalcitrate, 140 mg (as 40 mg Bi2O3 equivalent), metronidazole, 125 mg, and tetracycline, 125 mg. 13C-Urea breath test was repeated at least 4 and 8 weeks post-treatment. RESULTS: Overall eradication rates were 93% (158/170) by modified intention-to-treat analysis and 97% (142/146) by per protocol analysis. Eradication rates were 93% (40/43) and 95% (38/40) for strains resistant to metronidazole and 95% (82/86) and 99% (75/76) for strains sensitive to metronidazole by modified intention-to-treat and per protocol analysis, respectively. CONCLUSION: This omeprazole-bismuth biskalcitrate-metronidazole-tetracycline 10-day regimen is a very effective and well-tolerated treatment, which overcomes metronidazole resistance.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".