Introduction. Sporotrichosis is a subcutaneous infection caused by dimorphic Sporothrix species embedded in the clinical clade. Fungi have virulence factors, such as biofilm and melanin production, which contribute to their survival and are related to the increase in the number of cases of therapeutic failure, making it necessary to search for new options.Gap statement. Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) have already been shown to inhibit the growth and melanogenesis of other fungi.Aim. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the effect of the PPIs omeprazole (OMP), rabeprazole (RBP), esomeprazole, pantoprazole and lansoprazole on the susceptibility and melanogenesis of Sporothrix species, and their interactions with itraconazole, terbinafine and amphotericin B.Methodology. The antifungal activity of PPIs was evaluated using the microdilution method, and the combination of PPIs with itraconazole, terbinafine and amphotericin B was assessed using the checkerboard method. The assessment of melanogenesis inhibition was assessed using grey scale.Results. The OMP and RBP showed significant MIC results ranging from 32 to 256 µg ml-1 and 32 to 128 µg ml-1, respectively. Biofilms were sensitive, with a significant reduction (P<0.05) in metabolic activity of 52% for OMP and 50% for RBP at a concentration of 512 µg ml-1 and of biomass by 53% for OMP and 51% for RBP at concentrations of 512 µg ml-1. As for the inhibition of melanogenesis, only OMP showed inhibition, with a 54% reduction.Conclusion. It concludes that the PPIs OMP and RBP have antifungal activity in vitro against planktonic cells and biofilms of Sporothrix species and that, in addition, OMP can inhibit the melanization process in Sporothrix species.

UNASSIGNED: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are a widely prescribed class of drugs, potentially interacting with a large number of medicines, especially among older patients with multimorbidity and polypharmacy. Beyond summary of product characteristics (SPCs), interaction checkers (ICs) are routinely used tools to help clinicians in medication review interventions.
UNASSIGNED: To assess the consistency of information on drugs potentially interacting with PPIs as reported in their SPCs and different ICs.
UNASSIGNED: This cross-sectional study was conducted using data from SPCs for 5 PPIs (omeprazole, esomeprazole, lansoprazole, pantoprazole, and rabeprazole) and 5 ICs (ie, INTERCheck WEB, Micromedex, Lexicomp, Epocrates, and drugs.com). Information from the SPCs and the ICs were extracted between July 15 and 30, 2023.
UNASSIGNED: The main outcome was the level of agreement among SPCs and the 5 ICs in identifying drugs potentially interacting with PPIs and attributing drug-drug interaction (DDI) severity categories. The level of agreement was computed using Gwet AC1 statistic on the 5 ICs and by comparing 4-sets and 2-sets of ICs. As a sensitivity analysis, the level of agreement in listing PPI-related DDIs was evaluated using Cohen κ and Fleiss κ coefficients.
UNASSIGNED: Considering SPCs and the 5 ICs, a total of 518 potentially interacting drugs with omeprazole were reported, 455 for esomeprazole, 433 for lansoprazole, 421 for pantoprazole, and 405 for rabeprazole. As compared with the ICs, the SPCs reported a much smaller number of drugs potentially interacting with PPIs, with proportions ranging from 2.7% (11 potentially interacting drugs) for rabeprazole to 7.6% (33 potentially interacting drugs) for lansoprazole of the total identified drugs at risk of interaction with a PPI. The overall level of agreement among the 5 ICs for identifying potential interactions was poor (from 0.23 [95% CI, 0.21-0.25] for omeprazole to 0.27 [95% CI, 0.24-0.29] for pantoprazole and 0.27 [95% CI, 0.25-0.29] for rabeprazole). Similarly, the level of agreement was low in 4-set and 2-set analyses as well as when restricting the analysis to the potential DDIs identified as severe (range, 0.30-0.32).
UNASSIGNED: This cross-sectional study found significant disagreement among different ICs and SPCs, highlighting the need to focus on standardizing DDI databases. Therefore, to ensure evaluation and prevention of clinically relevant DDIs, it is recommended to revise multiple ICs and consult with specialists, such as clinical pharmacologists, particularly for patients with complex medical conditions.

FOXM1, a proto-oncogenic transcription factor, plays a critical role in cancer development and treatment resistance in cancers, particularly in breast cancer. Thus, this study aimed to identify potential FOXM1 inhibitors through computational screening of drug databases, followed by in vitro validation of their inhibitory activity against breast cancer cells. In silico studies involved pharmacophore modeling using the FOXM1 inhibitor, FDI-6, followed by virtual screening of DrugBank and Selleckchem databases. The selected drugs were prepared for molecular docking, and the crystal structure of FOXM1 was pre-processed for docking simulations. In vitro studies included MTT assays to assess cytotoxicity, and Western blot analysis to evaluate protein expression levels. Our study identified Pantoprazole and Rabeprazole as potential FOXM1 inhibitors through in silico screening and molecular docking. Molecular dynamics simulations confirmed stable interactions of these drugs with FOXM1. In vitro experiments showed both Pantoprazole and Rabeprazole exhibited strong FOXM1 inhibition at effective concentrations and that showed inhibition of cell proliferation. Rabeprazole showed the inhibitor activity at 10 µM in BT-20 and MCF-7 cell lines. Pantoprazole exhibited FOXM1 inhibition at 30 µM and in BT-20 cells and at 70 µM in MCF-7 cells, respectively. Our current study provides the first evidence that Rabeprazole and Pantoprazole can bind to FOXM1 and inhibit its activity and downstream signaling, including eEF2K and pEF2, in breast cancer cells. These findings indicate that rabeprazole and pantoprazole inhibit FOXM1 and breast cancer cell proliferation, and they can be used for FOXM1-targeted therapy in breast or other cancers driven by FOXM1.

BACKGROUND: Recently, a simple tailored therapy based on clarithromycin resistance has been implemented as Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) eradication therapy. Nonetheless, despite the tailored therapy and frequent adverse events, studies on treatment period are lacking. This study aimed to compare the H. pylori eradication rates of 7-day and 14-day tailored therapy regimens according to clarithromycin resistance.
METHODS: This multicenter, prospective, randomized, noninferiority trial enrolled H. pylori-positive patients who were randomly assigned to 7-day and 14-day regimen groups, depending on the presence or absence of clarithromycin resistance by 23S rRNA gene point mutations. Standard triple therapy (STT) (20 mg rabeprazole, 1 g amoxicillin, and 500 mg clarithromycin twice daily) or bismuth quadruple therapy (BQT) (20 mg rabeprazole twice daily, 500 mg metronidazole thrice daily, 120 mg bismuth four times daily, and 500 mg tetracycline four times daily) was assigned by clarithromycin resistance. Eradication rates and adverse events were evaluated.
RESULTS: A total of 314 and 278 patients were included in the intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) analyses, respectively; however, 31 patients were lost to follow-up, whereas five patients violated the protocol. Both the 7-day and 14-day regimens showed similar eradication rates in the ITT (7-day vs. 14-day: 78.3% vs. 78.3%, p > 0.99) and PP (87.9% vs. 89.1%, p = 0.851) analyses. Non-inferiority was confirmed (p < 0.025). A subgroup analysis according to clarithromycin resistance (clarithromycin resistance rate: 28.7%) revealed no significant difference in eradication rates between the 7-day and 14-day STT (90.0% vs. 90.1%, p > 0.99) and BQT (82.5% vs. 86.5%, p = 0.757). Furthermore, adverse events did not significantly differ between the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS: The 7-day triple and quadruple therapy according to clarithromycin resistance showed similar eradication rates, as compared to the 14-day therapy.

Purpose: To evaluate the effectiveness of rabeprazole and other proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) in providing symptomatic relief in patients with varying severity of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Methods: In this multicenter retrospective study, electronic medical records (EMRs) of GERD patients prescribed with PPIs at two Indian clinics/hospitals were reviewed (2016-2020). Rabeprazole\'s effectiveness was assessed at different follow-up visits and compared with other PPIs. Results: Overall, 269 patients (moderate and severe GERD: 84.39%) were included in three groups, viz rabeprazole, pantoprazole, and esomeprazole groups. A significant proportion of patients experienced quick and complete symptomatic relief at visit 1 with rabeprazole compared to the baseline visit, which gradually increased till visit 4 for both daytime [viz heartburn (38.78-93.88%; p < 0.001)] and nocturnal symptoms [viz sleep disturbances (62.92-97.75%; p < 0.001)]. Rabeprazole provided quick relief at visit 1 when compared with pantoprazole for daytime heartburn (38.78 vs 5.56%; p = 0.01), daytime epigastric pain (66.04 vs 12.12%; p = 0.049), and nocturnal water brash (60.71 vs 16.13%; p = 0.015), and when compared with esomeprazole for nocturnal nausea (82.61 vs 20.00%; p = 0.013). Further, the proportion of patients exhibiting complete treatment response was relatively higher in the rabeprazole group (83.33%) than in the pantoprazole (62.07%) and esomeprazole (65.67%) groups at visit 4. Conclusion: Rabeprazole was effective in providing quick and sustained relief for both daytime and nocturnal GERD symptoms in patients with moderate and severe GERD. Rabeprazole also demonstrated greater effectiveness when compared with pantoprazole and esomeprazole in reducing the severity of multiple GERD symptoms. How to cite this article: Lawate P, Jilawar N, Vyas K, et al. Effectiveness of Rabeprazole and Other Proton Pump Inhibitors in Managing GERD with Varying Severity: A Retrospective, Real-world EMR-based Study (POWER GERD Study). J Assoc Physicians India 2023;71(10):37-44.

Success in eradication of H. pylori is decreasing due to increasing resistant strains. In particular, side-effects due to 4-agent treatment multiple drug use are observed and treatment compliance decreases. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy, reliability, and side-effect profile of the combination of amoxicillin and rabeprazole with gemifloxacin, which is a new generation quinolone, in the treatment of H. pylori infection. This study was conducted on 71 naive patients who received H. pylori eradication. All the patients were administered treatment of Amoxicillin (1000 mg twice a day) + Gemifloxacin (320 mg once a day) + rabeprazole (20 mg twice a day) for 7 days. Drug compliance and treatment tolerance were evaluated after finishing the treatment. At 1 month after the end of the treatment, H. pylori eradication was evaluated in all the patients by examining H. pylori antigen in the feces. In the evaluation after treatment, H. pylori eradication was obtained in 63 (88.7%) patients and eradication was not obtained in 8 (11.3%) patients. The treatment was not completed by 2 patients because of side-effects and noncompliance, so after exclusion of these 2 patients, successful H. pylori eradication was obtained in 63 (91.3%) of 69 patients who completed the treatment. Side-effects were seen in a total of 9 (12.7%) patients. Diarrhea, bloating, abdominal pain, and nausea-vomiting were seen in some patients, but no reflux, constipation, skin rash, listlessness-fatigue, headache, dizziness, palpitations, dry mouth, or weight loss was seen in any patient. In regions with high resistance to clarithromycin and metronidazole in particular, the combination of gemifloxacin with amoxicillin and rabeprazole can be considered for use in first-stage treatment as both the efficacy and tolerability are high.

Macrophage polarization is closely associated with obesity-induced chronic inflammation and insulin resistance. Proton pump inhibitor Rabeprazole has long been used to treat gastritis and gastric ulcers. However, whether Rabeprazole plays a role in macrophage polarization during obesity is unknown. Here, we show that Rabeprazole suppresses M1-type macrophage-mediated inflammation, leads to increased M2-type macrophages and alters the polarization status from M1 to M2 in vitro. Mechanistically, Rabe-regulated macrophage polarization is associated with inhibition of NF-κB and activation of STAT6 signaling pathways. Furthermore, Rabeprazole induces M2-type adipose tissue macrophages and alleviates chronic inflammation, improving glucose tolerance and insulin sensitivity in high-fat diet-fed mice. In addition, Rabeprazole increases CD206+ M2-type liver macrophages and relieves liver inflammation, alleviating liver injury and lipid accumulation. Thus, our findings show that Rabeprazole effectively regulates macrophage polarization and controls obesity-associated chronic inflammation and insulin resistance, thus providing a potential therapeutic strategy against obesity-associated metabolic diseases.

Background: Laryngopharyngeal reflux disease (LPRD) is an extraesophageal syndromic manifestation of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Despite the increasing incidence of and concern about LPRD, treatment with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) is unsatisfactory. Here, LPRD was treated with Tonghua Liyan (THLY) granules in combination with PPIs to evaluate treatment efficacy and possible adverse reactions. Methods: Seventy-six LPRD patients with stagnation of phlegm and qi syndrome (SPQS) were randomly divided into an experimental group and a control group. The experimental group received THLY granules combined with rabeprazole capsules. The control group received THLY granule placebo combined with rabeprazole capsules. A parallel, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial was conducted with these two groups. The treatment cycle was 8 weeks. The reflux symptom index (RSI), clinical symptom score, salivary pepsin content, reflux finding score (RFS) and gastroesophageal reflux disease questionnaire (GerdQ) were used to evaluate clinical efficacy. The final efficacy rate was evaluated according to the RSI and clinical symptom score. Results: Compared with those at baseline, all the indicators in the experimental group and control group significantly improved (p < 0.01). In terms of the RSI, clinical symptom score, and RFS, the experimental group had a higher degree of improvement (p < 0.05), and the overall efficacy rate was higher (p < 0.05). In terms of the salivary pepsin concentration and GerdQ, there was no significant difference between the test group and the control group (p > 0.05). Both groups of safety indicators showed no abnormalities and did not cause any allergic reactions in the body. Conclusion: Compared with PPIs alone, THLY granules combined with PPIs are more effective in the treatment of LPRD patients with SPQS in terms of symptoms and signs. This combination treatment, because of its higher clinical efficacy and lack of obvious adverse reactions, is worthy of clinical promotion and further in-depth study. Clinical Trial Registration: www.chictr.org.cn, identifier ChiCTR2100046614.

BACKGROUND: A cure for Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) remains a problem of global concern. The prevalence of antimicrobial resistance is widely rising and becoming a challenging issue worldwide. Optimizing sequential therapy seems to be one of the most attractive strategies in terms of efficacy, tolerability and cost. The most common sequential therapy consists of a dual therapy [proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) and amoxicillin] for the first period (5 to 7 d), followed by a triple therapy for the second period (PPI, clarithromycin and metronidazole). PPIs play a key role in maintaining a gastric pH at a level that allows an optimal efficacy of antibiotics, hence the idea of using new generation molecules.
OBJECTIVE: To compare an optimized sequential therapy with the standard non-bismuth quadruple therapies of 10 and 14 d, in terms of efficacy, incidence of adverse effects (AEs) and cost.
METHODS: This open-label prospective study randomized 328 patients with confirmed H. pylori infection into three groups (1:1:1): The first group received quadruple therapy consisting of twice-daily (bid) omeprazole 20 mg, amoxicillin 1 g, clarithromycin 500 mg and metronidazole 500 mg for 10 d (QT-10), the second group received a 14 d quadruple therapy following the same regimen (QT-14), and the third group received an optimized sequential therapy consisting of bid rabeprazole 20 mg plus amoxicillin 1 g for 7 d, followed by bid rabeprazole 20 mg, clarithromycin 500 mg and metronidazole 500 mg for the next 7 d (OST-14). AEs were recorded throughout the study, and the H. pylori eradication rate was determined 4 to 6 wk after the end of treatment, using the 13C urea breath test.
RESULTS: In the intention-to-treat and per-protocol analysis, the eradication rate was higher in the OST-14 group compared to the QT-10 group: (93.5%, 85.5% P = 0.04) and (96.2%, 89.5% P = 0.03) respectively. However, there was no statistically significant difference in eradication rates between the OST-14 and QT-14 groups: (93.5%, 91.8% P = 0.34) and (96.2%, 94.4% P = 0.35), respectively. The overall incidence of AEs was significantly lower in the OST-14 group (P = 0.01). Furthermore, OST-14 was the most cost-effective among the three groups.
CONCLUSIONS: The optimized 14-d sequential therapy is a safe and effective alternative. Its eradication rate is comparable to that of the 14-d concomitant therapy while causing fewer AEs and allowing a gain in terms of cost.

BACKGROUND: High-dose dual therapy (HDDT) using proton-pump inhibitors (PPI) and amoxicillin attracted attention for its simplicity and lower adverse event profile. Besides, vonoprazan is not available worldwide. This real-world study aims to compare the efficacy of esomeprazole-based and rabeprazole-based HDDT regimens and to identify clinical factors influencing outcomes.
METHODS: A retrospective study enrolled 346 Helicobacter pylori-infected naïve patients from January 2016 to August 2023. Patients were assigned to either a 14-day esomeprazole-based HDDT (EA-14; esomeprazole 40 mg t.i.d. and amoxicillin 750 mg q.i.d. for 14 days, n = 173) or a 14-day rabeprazole-based HDDT (RA-14; rabeprazole 20 mg and amoxicillin 750 mg q.i.d. for 14 days, n = 173).
RESULTS: Five patients from the EA-14 group and 10 from the RA-14 group were lost to follow-up, resulting in 168 and 163 patients for the per-protocol (PP) analysis, respectively. Eradication rates for the EA-14 and RA-14 groups were 90.2% and 80.9% (P = 0.014) in intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis; and 92.9% and 85.9% (P = 0.039) in PP analysis. Adverse event rates were similar between the two groups (11.9% vs 11.7%, P = 0.944). In multiple logistic regression analysis, age≧60 was associated with eradication failure (P = 0.046) and a trend of significance for smoking (P = 0.060) in the EA-14 group but not in the RA-14 group. A trend of significance was also observed for eradication regimens (EA-14 vs RA-14) (P = 0.071). The antibiotic resistance rates were amoxicillin (2.3%), clarithromycin (14.7%), metronidazole (40.3%), and dual resistance to clarithromycin and metronidazole (7.0%).
CONCLUSIONS: Esomeprazole-based HDDT achieved over 90% eradication rates but rabeprazole-based HDDT, which failed.