Abstract. Gastric acid inhibition during treatment is important for the eradication of Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection. A novel potassium-competitive acid blocker, vonoprazan (VPZ), has been demonstrated to achieve high eradication rates; however, the efficacy of second-line treatment in failures of VPZ-based triple therapy has not been well studied.The aim of the current study was to determine the efficacy of VPZ in a first-line regimen for H. pylori eradication, and the efficacy of a second-line regimen using metronidazole (MTZ) in failures with the first-line regimen. Of 580 subjects enrolled in the study, 524 patients completed first-line treatment (275 patients who received VPZ and 249 patients who received LPZ). First-line regimens consisted of a combination of clarithromycin (CAM) 200 or 400 mg twice a day, amoxicillin (AMPC) 750 mg twice a day, and either LPZ 30 mg or VPZ 20 mg twice a day, administered orally for 7 days. CAM and VPZ/LPZ were replaced with metronidazole (MTZ) 250 mg and rabeprazole 10 mg in the second-line regimens. The eradication of H. pylori was assessed by the H. pylori stool antigen test. The overall first-line eradication rate with VPZ was significantly higher than that with LPZ [91.0% (250/275) vs. 84.7% (211/249), respectively, P=0.030]. The dose of CAM (400 vs. 800 mg) did not affect the eradication rate in either the VPZ or LPZ regimens. The overall eradication rates of the second-line regimens with MTZ did not differ significantly between the VPZ-failure and LPZ-failure groups [87.0% (20/23) vs. 87.9% (29/33), respectively, P= 0.700]. Therefore, VPZ was significantly more effective than LPZ for first-line treatment. In patients with failure of first-line eradication therapy, successful results of second-line eradication therapy did not differ between the VPZ-and LPZ-failure groups. In conclusion, VPZ-based triple therapy should be recommended for eradication of H. pylori.

Hepatic arterial infusion (HAI) chemotherapy is expected to be a more effective and safer method to treat the hepatic metastasis of pancreatic cancer than intravenous (iv) administration because of higher tumor exposure and lower systemic exposure. To clarify the uptake mechanism of nucleoside anticancer drugs, including gemcitabine (GEM), in pancreatic cancer, we investigated the uptakes of radiolabeled uridine (a general substrate of nucleoside transporters) and GEM in pancreatic cancer cell lines MIA-PaCa2 and As-PC1. Uridine uptake was inhibited by non-labeled GEM and also by S-(4-nitrobenzyl)-6-thioinosine (NBMPR; an inhibitor of equilibrative nucleoside transporters, ENTs) in a concentration-dependent manner, suggesting that ENTs contribute to uridine uptake in pancreatic cancer cells. As for GEM, saturable uptake was mediated by high- and low-affinity components with K values of micromolar and millimolar orders, respectively. Uptake was inhibited in a concentration-dependent manner by NBMPR and was sodium ion-independent. Moreover, the concentration dependence of uptake in the presence of 0.1 μM NBMPR showed a single low-affinity site. These results indicated that the high- and low-affinity sites correspond to hENT1 and hENT2, respectively. The results indicated that at clinically relevant hepatic concentrations of GEM in GEM-HAI therapy, the metastatic tumor exposure of GEM is predominantly determined by hENT2 under unsaturated conditions, suggesting that hENT2 expression in metastatic tumor would be a candidate biomarker for indicating anticancer therapy with GEM-HAI.

Vascular pain is a characteristic adverse effect of gemcitabine (GEM) intravenous infusion, but risk factors have not been sufficiently examined. We conducted logistic regression analysis to determine vascular pain-associated clinical factors and evaluated the protective effect of NSAIDs and opioids against GEM-induced vascular pain. Four-hundred-fifty-seven patients (total number of doses: 3,306 infusions) who received GEM therapy from April 2006 to March 2011 were analyzed. As a result of multivariate logistic analysis of patient backgrounds, administration of opioids (no) and sex (female) were independent risk factors related to the onset of vascular pain by GEM. No statistically significant difference was demonstrated, but the incidence of GEM-induced vascular pain was 29.7％ in patients administered opioids compared to 38.6％ in those without analgesics. These findings suggest that some prophylaxes for vascular pain are necessary from the initial dose of GEM in patients having such a risk factor.