Randomized Controlled Trial
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2022.
World J Gastroenterol. Nov 28, 2022; 28(44): 6294-6309
Published online Nov 28, 2022. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v28.i44.6294
Table 1 Baseline characteristics of the patients (full analysis set)
VariablesFexuprazan 40 mg (n = 116)Esomeprazole 40 mg (n = 115)P value
Age, yr (mean ± SD)553.70 ± 12.4455.05 ± 12.890.343w
Sex, n (%)6
Men78 (67.2)74 (64.3)0.643c
Women38 (32.8)41 (35.7)
BMI, kg/m2 (SD)524.42 ± 3.0824.81 ± 3.250.529w
Smoking history, n (%)6
Non-smokers67 (57.8)66 (57.4)0.978c
Current smokers25 (21.6)26 (22.6)
Past smokers24 (20.7)23 (20.0)
Drinking history, n (%)6
Non-drinkers15 (12.9)15 (13.0)0.992c
Current drinkers77 (66.4)77 (67.0)
Past drinkers24 (20.7)23 (20.0)
LA classification1, n (%)6
Grade A75 (64.7)76 (66.1)0.630f
Grade B33 (28.4)31 (27.0)
Grade C6 (5.2)8 (7.0)
Grade D2 ( 1.7)0 (0.0)
Helicobacter pylori2, n (%)6
Positive20 (17.4)31 (27.2)0.075c
Negative95 (82.6)83 (72.8)
CYP2C193, n (%)6
EM39 (76.5)53 (94.6)0.007c
PM12 (23.5)3 (5.4)
Severity for heartburn4, n (%)6
Mild53 (45.7)50 (43.5)0.735c
Moderate/severe63 (54.3)65 (56.5)
Table 2 Change in reflux disease questionnaires symptom scores from baseline at weeks 4 and 8 (per protocol set)
Fexuprazan 40 mg
Esomeprazole 40 mg
Baseline (n = 107)
Week 4 (n = 103)
Week 8 (n = 107)
Baseline (n = 111)
Week 4 (n = 104)
Week 8 (n = 111)
Frequency
Heartburn
mean ± SD1.92 ± 1.230.91 ± 1.370.86 ± 1.332.12 ± 1.420.80 ± 1.290.70 ± 1.28
Change from baseline (mean ± SD)--0.96 ± 1.50-1.06 ± 1.49--1.33 ± 1.69-1.42 ± 1.64
P value1-< 0.001w< 0.001w-< 0.001w< 0.001w
LS mean difference from esomeprazole-0.190.22---
P value2-0.2800.184---
Reflux
mean ± SD2.14 ± 1.290.93 ± 1.480.92 ± 1.491.95 ± 1.290.61 ± 1.070.59 ± 1.12
Change from baseline (mean ± SD)--1.19 ± 1.58-1.22 ± 1.53--1.32 ± 1.44-1.36 ± 1.40
P value1-< 0.001w< 0.001w-< 0.001w< 0.001w
LS mean difference from esomeprazole-0.280.28---
P value2-0.1120.101---
Severity
Heartburn
mean ± SD1.81 ± 1.180.57 ± 0.780.53 ± 0.772.10 ± 1.240.45 ± 0.750.42 ± 0.79
Change from baseline (mean ± SD)--1.23 ± 1.26-1.28 ± 1.26--1.63 ± 1.29-1.68 ± 1.27
P value1-< 0.001w< 0.001w-< 0.001w< 0.001w
LS mean difference from esomeprazole-0.160.16---
P value2-0.1160.121---
Reflux
mean ± SD2.06 ± 1.220.61 ± 0.920.58 ± 0.901.97 ± 1.210.40 ± 0.690.39 ± 0.73
Change from baseline (mean ± SD)--1.43 ± 1.23-1.48 ± 1.20--1.55 ± 1.23-1.58 ± 1.19
P value1-< 0.001w< 0.001w-< 0.001w< 0.001w
LS mean difference from esomeprazole-0.200.18---
P value2-0.0660.089---
Table 3 Change in gastroesophageal reflux disease-health related quality of life score from baseline at weeks 4 and 8 (per protocol set)
GERD-HRQLFexuprazan 40 mg
Esomeprazole 40 mg
Baseline (n = 107)
Week 4 (n = 102)
Week 8 (n = 106)
Baseline (n = 111)
Week 4 (n = 104)
Week 8 (n = 111)
mean ± SD11.88 ± 8.114.21 ± 6.174.01 ± 6.2012.98 ± 9.623.42 ± 5.043.32 ± 5.54
Change from baseline (mean ± SD)--7.71 ± 8.37-7.90 ± 8.56--9.84 ± 8.70-9.67 ± 8.56
P value1-< 0.001w< 0.001t-< 0.001w< 0.001w
LS mean difference from esomeprazole-1.061.05---
P value2-0.1370.151---
Table 4 Overall Summary of treatment-emergent adverse events (safety set)
Fexuprazan 40 mg (n = 131)
Esomeprazole 40 mg (n = 131)
Total (n = 262)
n (%) [number of event]
Subjects with TEAEs22 (16.8) [34]25 (19.1) [34]47 (17.9) [68]
95%CI[10.4, 23.2][12.4, 25.8][13.3, 22.6]
P value10.629c
Subjects with ADRs9 (6.9) [13]7 (5.3) [11]16 (6.1) [24]
95%CI[2.5, 11.2][1.5, 9.2][3.2, 9.0]
P value10.606c
Subjects with serious TEAEs000
Subjects with serious ADRs000
Most frequently occurring (≥ 2%) TEAEs by system organ class and preferred term
System organ class preferred term
Gastrointestinal disorders
Diarrhoea4 (3.1) [4]2 (1.5) [2]6 (2.3) [6]
Nervous system disorders
Dizziness1 (0.8) [1]3 (2.3) [3]4 (1.5) [4]

  • Citation: Lee KN, Lee OY, Chun HJ, Kim JI, Kim SK, Lee SW, Park KS, Lee KL, Choi SC, Jang JY, Kim GH, Sung IK, Park MI, Kwon JG, Kim N, Kim JJ, Lee ST, Kim HS, Kim KB, Lee YC, Choi MG, Lee JS, Jung HY, Lee KJ, Kim JH, Chung H. Randomized controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of fexuprazan compared with esomeprazole in erosive esophagitis. World J Gastroenterol 2022; 28(44): 6294-6309
  • URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/full/v28/i44/6294.htm
  • DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v28.i44.6294