Effectiveness of Second through Sixth Line Salvage<i>Helicobacter pylori</i>Treatment: Bismuth Quadruple Therapy is Almost Always a Reasonable Choice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim. There is a paucity of data on the efficacy of empiric H. pylori treatment after multiple treatment failures. The aim of this study is to examine the efficacy of empiric salvage therapy as a second through sixth line treatment. Methods. In this single gastroenterology center prospective study in Montreal, Canada, patients with failed H. pylori treatment were offered empiric salvage therapy based on the patients' previous antibiotic exposure. Enrollment occurred after 1-5 previous failed attempts and eradication determined at least 4 weeks after completion of treatment. Results. 205 treatments were attempted in 175 patients using 7 different regimens. Eradication was achieved in 154 attempts (PP = 81% (154/191), ITT = 75% (154/205)). Bismuth quadruple therapy (BQT) had higher eradication success (PP = 91% (102/112), ITT = 84% (102/121)) when compared to all PPI triple therapies combined (PP = 66% (49/74), absolute risk reduction (ARR): 25% (95% CI: 13-37), ITT = 62% (49/79), ARR: 22% (95% CI: 10-35), and p < 0.001) and when compared to levofloxacin triple therapy (PP = 66% (40/61), ARR: 26% (95% CI: 13-39), ITT = 61% (40/66), and ARR: 24% (95% CI: 10-37)). Eradication was achieved in a high proportion with BQT on attempt two (PP = 94% (67/71), ITT = 91% (67/74)), three (PP = 85% (17/20), ITT = 71% (17/24)), four (PP = 100% (11/11), ITT = 92% (11/12)), and five (PP = 86% (6/7), ITT = 75% (6/8)). Patients with previous combined bismuth and tetracycline exposure had a lower proportion of eradication compared to patients without such an exposure (PP: 60% (6/10) versus 95% (94/99), ARR: 35% (95% CI: 11-64), and p < 0.001; ITT: 55% (6/11) versus 90% (94/105), ARR: 35% (95% CI: 10-62), and p < 0.01). Conclusions. Salvage therapy with a bismuth quadruple regimen is superior to triple therapies and is effective for second through fifth line empirical treatment (≥85% PP, ≥70% ITT). Successful eradication is significantly lower with BQT if a similar bismuth based regimen was used in the past.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".