SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

Summary

  1. Top of page
  2. Summary
  3. Introduction
  4. Methods
  5. Results
  6. Discussion
  7. Acknowledgements
  8. References

Background : In subjects with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease treated with a gastric antisecretory agent, the extent to which gastric acidity needs to be reduced to prevent pathological oesophageal acid exposure is not known.

Methods : Gastric and oesophageal pH were measured in 26 healthy subjects and in 59 subjects with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. In 27 of the subjects with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, pH was also recorded on days 1, 2 and 8 of treatment with 20 mg omeprazole and 20 mg rabeprazole in a randomized, two-way, cross-over fashion.

Results : Receiver operating characteristic analysis was used to determine values for the integrated oesophageal acidity and time oesophageal pH≤4 that gave optimal cut-off points for distinguishing between normal and pathological oesophageal reflux. Using these cut-off points, we found that the probability of no pathological oesophageal reflux (Y) could be best fitted by an exponential equation, Y = a(ebX) + c, where a, b and c are constants and X is the value of the integrated gastric acidity. There was close agreement between the predicted and observed percentages of subjects with pathological oesophageal reflux during different days of treatment.

Conclusions : In subjects with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease treated with a proton pump inhibitor, the value of the integrated gastric acidity can predict the likelihood of pathological oesophageal reflux.


Introduction

  1. Top of page
  2. Summary
  3. Introduction
  4. Methods
  5. Results
  6. Discussion
  7. Acknowledgements
  8. References

The inhibition of gastric acid secretion with a proton pump inhibitor or histamine-2 receptor antagonist is the mainstay of treatment of the pathology and symptoms of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GERD).1, 2 However, the extent to which gastric secretion needs to be inhibited to produce the resolution of pathology and/or symptoms or to prevent their recurrence is not known. The few reports relating gastric acidity to GERD pathology have been based on a meta-analysis of the effects of different gastric antisecretory treatments on the time gastric pH≤4 in different groups of patients with peptic ulcer.3, 4 Results from this analysis have then been plotted as a function of the effects of some of the same treatments on the symptoms and pathology in different groups of patients with GERD.5, 6

One reason for the lack of information on the relationship between the effects of antisecretory treatment on gastric acid secretion or gastric acidity and the effects on other features in GERD has been the lack of suitable analytical techniques. Previously, we have described analytical approaches using recordings of gastric and oesophageal pH that can quantify acidity over time.7, 8 In a preceding paper, we illustrated how these approaches can be used to demonstrate that meal-stimulated gastric acid secretion and post-prandial gastric acidity are significantly increased in subjects with GERD.9 In the present paper, we have determined the extent to which gastric acidity has to be decreased to prevent pathological oesophageal reflux in subjects with GERD treated with a proton pump inhibitor, using the same records as employed in the preceding study.9 Our findings indicate that there is a highly precise relationship between the 24-h integrated gastric acidity and the probability of pathological oesophageal reflux.

Methods

  1. Top of page
  2. Summary
  3. Introduction
  4. Methods
  5. Results
  6. Discussion
  7. Acknowledgements
  8. References

This study was approved by and conducted in compliance with good clinical practice as supervised by the Western Institutional Review Board, Olympia, WA, USA. All subjects enrolled in the study gave written informed consent.

The analyses reported in this paper are based on the same data for gastric and oesophageal pH as used in a preceding paper.9

The integrated gastric and oesophageal acidity and the percentage of time gastric and oesophageal pH≤4 were calculated for each hour of the recording period, as described previously.6

Statistical analyses were performed using GraphPad for InStat version 3.01 for Windows software. Curve fitting was performed using GraphPad Prism version 3.00 for Windows.

Results

  1. Top of page
  2. Summary
  3. Introduction
  4. Methods
  5. Results
  6. Discussion
  7. Acknowledgements
  8. References

Figure 1 illustrates the results used to determine the value of the integrated oesophageal acidity that best distinguishes subjects with GERD from healthy controls. Figure 1a shows the percentage of controls and subjects with GERD with an integrated oesophageal acidity value above that indicated on the x axis of the graph. As expected, values in subjects with GERD were higher than those in controls. Figure 1a, however, does not clearly indicate the extent to which the integrated oesophageal acidity values differ between controls and subjects with GERD. Figure 1b addresses this issue and is a receiver operating characteristic curve of the data in Figure 1a.10 This curve plots the sensitivity (i.e. true positives or percentage of subjects with GERD with values above the cut-off point) vs. 1 − specificity (i.e. false positives or percentage of control subjects with values above the cut-off point) for each value of the integrated oesophageal acidity. In Figure 1b, the greater the displacement of the points from the diagonal identity line, the greater the extent to which the integrated oesophageal acidity distinguishes between controls and subjects with GERD. If, in Figure 1a, there was no overlap between the two groups with respect to the distributions of the integrated acidity values, the points in Figure 1b would increase upwards on the y axis to 100% and then spread horizontally across the line labelled 100%. On the other hand, if, in Figure 1a, the distributions were the same in subjects with GERD and controls, the points in Figure 1b would all fall on the diagonal identity line. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, which is conceptually equivalent to the Wilcoxon statistic,11–13 was 0.812 ± 0.047. (The standard error of the area was calculated using the procedure described in Hanley and McNeil.13) The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve is a quantitative measure of the extent to which the integrated oesophageal acidity differs between controls and subjects with GERD, and represents the probability that a subject selected randomly from the GERD group would have a higher integrated acidity value than a subject selected randomly from the control group.10–13 If there was no overlap in the integrated oesophageal acidity between the two groups, the area would be 1.00 and the probability would be 100%. If the distributions were identical, the area would be 0.50 and the probability would be 50%, i.e. the same as chance alone.

image

Figure 1. Integrated oesophageal acidity in subjects with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and controls (a) and receiver operating characteristic curve (b). (a) plots the percentage of subjects with 24-h integrated oesophageal acidity values above the value indicated on the x axis. (b) plots the sensitivity (% true positives) vs. 1 − specificity (% false positives) using each value of the integrated oesophageal acidity as a cut-off point to distinguish subjects with GERD from controls. In (b), the full diagonal line is the identity line and the area under the curve is 0.812 ± 0.047 (S.E.). The optimum cut-off point was 8.1 mmol.h/L and gave a sensitivity of 72% and a specificity of 88%. Values are from 26 controls and from baseline recordings in 57 subjects with GERD.

Download figure to PowerPoint

The time oesophageal pH≤4 is commonly used to estimate the oesophageal acid exposure in normal and disease states.1Figure 2 illustrates these values, which can be used to determine the value that best distinguishes subjects with GERD from healthy controls.

image

Figure 2. Time oesophageal pH≤4 in subjects with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and controls (a) and receiver operating characteristic curve (b). (a) plots the percentage of subjects with values for the time oesophageal pH≤4 above the value indicated on the x axis. (b) plots the sensitivity (% true positives) vs. 1 − specificity (% false positives) using each value of the time oesophageal pH≤4 as a cut-off point to distinguish subjects with GERD from controls. In (b), the full diagonal line is the identity line and the area under the curve is 0.857 ± 0.040 (S.E.). The optimum cut-off point was 4.5% and gave a sensitivity of 88% and a specificity of 81%. Values are from 26 controls and from the baseline recordings in 57 subjects with GERD.

Download figure to PowerPoint

From the results in Figures 1 and 2, the optimal values that distinguished between subjects with GERD and controls were: integrated oesophageal acidity, 8.1 mmol.h/L; time oesophageal pH≤4, 4.5%(Table 1). ‘Optimal’ was chosen as the value that gave the maximum combined values for sensitivity and specificity.

Table 1.  Comparison of the integrated oesophageal acidity and time oesophageal pH≤4 in distinguishing subjects with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GERD) from controls
MeasureIntegrated oesophageal acidity 8.1 mmol.h/LTime oesophageal pH≤4 4.5%
  1. Values are from 26 controls and 57 subjects with GERD at baseline.

Sensitivity (%)7289
Specificity (%)8881
Positive predictive value (%)9382
Negative predictive value (%)5973

The sensitivity and specificity assess how well a particular value of the integrated acidity or time pH≤4 distinguishes between subjects with GERD and controls. As pointed out by others,11, 14 the sensitivity and specificity are properties of the measure used to distinguish between subjects with GERD and controls and do not depend on the prevalence of GERD in the sample. The positive predictive value addresses the question: ‘If a subject has a value above the cut-off point, what is the probability that the subject has GERD?’. The negative predictive value addresses the question: ‘If a subject has a value below the cut-off point, what is the probability that the subject does not have GERD?’. An important feature of the predictive values is that they depend on the prevalence of GERD in the sample, and the lower the prevalence, the lower the ratio of true positives to false positives (a particularly clear discussion is given in Motulsky14). This issue will become more important later in this paper when we address the value of the integrated gastric acidity that is necessary to prevent pathological oesophageal reflux in subjects with GERD.

Initially, it seemed like a straightforward process to determine the value of the integrated gastric acidity that would prevent pathological oesophageal reflux in subjects with GERD. That is, we thought that we could use all values from subjects with GERD at baseline and during treatment with a proton pump inhibitor, and plot 24-h values for the integrated oesophageal acidity or for the time oesophageal pH≤4 vs. the corresponding value of the integrated gastric acidity. We could then determine graphically the highest value of the integrated gastric acidity that was associated with an integrated oesophageal acidity below 8.1 mmol.h/L and a time oesophageal pH≤4 below 4.5%, and use these values of gastric acidity as cut-off points.

Figure 3 illustrates the results of such plots. For both the integrated oesophageal acidity and time oesophageal pH≤4, normal oesophageal reflux values (i.e. values below the full horizontal lines in Figure 3) were associated with the entire range of integrated gastric acidity values, and there was no obvious relationship between either measure of oesophageal acidity and integrated gastric acidity.

image

Figure 3. Integrated oesophageal acidity vs. integrated gastric acidity (a) and time oesophageal pH≤4 vs. integrated gastric acidity (b) in subjects with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Results are from 24-h measurements at baseline in 57 subjects and during treatment with each of two different proton pump inhibitors for 1, 2 and 8 days in 27 subjects. The full horizontal line indicates the optimal cut-off point for distinguishing subjects with GERD from controls in terms of the integrated oesophageal acidity (a) and time oesophageal pH≤4 (b).

Download figure to PowerPoint

We next stratified all values of the integrated gastric acidity for the accompanying value of the integrated oesophageal acidity using 8.1 mmol.h/L as a cut-off point. Figure 4a illustrates that the percentage of integrated gastric acidity values with pathological oesophageal reflux (integrated oesophageal acidity above 8.1 mmol.h/L) was significantly higher than the percentage of values with no pathological oesophageal reflux (integrated oesophageal acidity below 8.1 mmol.h/L) at all values of the integrated gastric acidity (P < 0.0001 by Wilcoxon matched pairs test). Figure 4b shows a receiver operating characteristic curve of the percentage of recordings with pathological oesophageal reflux vs. the percentage of recordings with no pathological oesophageal reflux at all values of the integrated gastric acidity. The area under the curve was 0.783 ± 0.033 which, as pointed out previously, gives the probability that a randomly selected subject with pathological oesophageal reflux would have a higher value of the integrated gastric acidity than a randomly selected subject with no pathological oesophageal reflux.

image

Figure 4. Values for the 24-h integrated gastric acidity stratified for the 24-h integrated oesophageal acidity above or below 8.1 mmol.h/L (a) and receiver operating characteristic curve (b) in subjects with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GERD). (a) plots the percentage of subjects with integrated gastric acidity values above that indicated on the x axis. (b) plots the percentage of recordings with pathological oesophageal reflux (integrated oesophageal acidity above 8.1 mmol.h/L) vs. the percentage of recordings without pathological oesophageal reflux (integrated oesophageal acidity below 8.1 mmol.h/L) for each value of the integrated gastric acidity. In (b), the full diagonal line is the identity line and the area under the curve is 0.783 ± 0.033 (S.E.). Results are from 24-h measurements at baseline in 57 subjects and during treatment with each of two different proton pump inhibitors for 1, 2 and 8 days in 27 subjects.

Download figure to PowerPoint

Figure 5 illustrates the results from the same type of analysis as illustrated in Figure 4, but using a time oesophageal pH≤4 of 4.5% as the cut-off point. The results in Figure 5 are essentially the same as those in Figure 4. That is, the percentage of integrated gastric acidity values with pathological oesophageal reflux (time oesophageal pH≤4 above 4.5%) was significantly higher than the percentage of values with no pathological oesophageal reflux (time oesophageal pH≤4 below 4.5%) at all values of the integrated gastric acidity (P < 0.0001 by Wilcoxon matched pairs test). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.712 ± 0.036.

image

Figure 5. Values for the 24-h integrated gastric acidity stratified for the 24-h time oesophageal pH≤4 above or below 4.5% (a) and receiver operating characteristic curve (b) in subjects with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GERD). (a) plots the percentage of subjects with integrated gastric acidity values above that indicated on the x axis. (b) plots the percentage of recordings with pathological oesophageal reflux (time oesophageal pH≤4 above 4.5%) vs. the percentage of recordings without pathological oesophageal reflux (time oesophageal pH≤4 below 4.5%) for each value of the integrated gastric acidity. In (b), the full diagonal line is the identity line and the area under the curve is 0.712 ± 0.036 (S.E.). Results are from 24-h measurements at baseline in 57 subjects and during treatment with each of two different proton pump inhibitors for 1, 2 and 8 days in 27 subjects.

Download figure to PowerPoint

Table 2 gives the cut-off points for the integrated gastric acidity that best distinguish between recordings with pathological and normal oesophageal reflux using two different measures to define pathological reflux. The optimal cut-off point for the integrated gastric acidity was 943 mmol.h/L using the integrated oesophageal acidity to define pathological reflux, and 800 mmol.h/L using the time oesophageal pH≤4 to define pathological oesophageal reflux. With either cut-off point, the discrimination between pathological and normal oesophageal reflux was higher when the integrated oesophageal acidity was used rather than the time oesophageal pH≤4. We also conducted many of the analyses illustrated in the present paper using the time gastric pH≤4 instead of the integrated gastric acidity, but were unable to distinguish between pathological and normal oesophageal reflux (results not shown).

Table 2.  Cut-off points for integrated gastric acidity that optimally distinguish between pathological and normal oesophageal acid exposure
Cut-off point for integrated gastric acidity (mmol.h/L)Integrated oesophageal acidityTime oesophageal pH≤4
Pathological oesophageal reflux (%)Normal oesophageal reflux (%)Pathological oesophageal reflux (%)Normal oesophageal reflux (%)
  1. Results are from 226, 24-h pH recordings from 57 subjects with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GERD) at baseline and 27 subjects with GERD during treatment with rabeprazole and omeprazole. Values given are for the percentage of recordings with pathological or normal oesophageal reflux and values of the integrated gastric acidity above the cut-off point indicated. One cut-off point (943 mmol.h/L) was optimal using pathological oesophageal reflux defined as the integrated oesophageal acidity above 8.1 mmol.h/L. The other cut-off point (800 mmol.h/L) was optimal using pathological oesophageal reflux defined as the percentage of time oesophageal pH≤4 above 4.5%.

94377275521
80080346124

The data used for the analyses illustrated in Figures 4 and 5 can also be employed to address the question of the probability that a subject with a particular value of the integrated gastric acidity has no pathological oesophageal reflux. We calculated the probability of no pathological reflux by dividing the number of recordings with an integrated oesophageal acidity below 8.1 mmol.h/L, or a time oesophageal pH≤4 below 4.5%, by the total number of recordings at each value of the integrated gastric acidity. Figure 6a illustrates the results obtained using the integrated oesophageal acidity to define pathological oesophageal reflux. In this figure, the probability of no pathological reflux is 100% with a value of the integrated gastric acidity of near zero, and with increasing values of gastric acidity, the probability falls progressively to 60%. As mentioned above, the predictive values given previously in Table 1 are dependent on the prevalence of what is being detected. In Figure 6, values for the probability of no pathological reflux depend on the percentage of recordings without pathological oesophageal reflux. In the case of no pathological reflux defined as an integrated oesophageal acidity below 8.1 mmol.h/L, 60% of the recordings used for analysis had no pathological reflux; therefore, the probability of no pathological reflux can never be less than 60%.

image

Figure 6. Probability of no pathological oesophageal reflux with a particular value of the integrated gastric acidity using the integrated oesophageal acidity (a) or time oesophageal pH≤4 (b) to define pathological reflux. Each value is the percentage of subjects with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease with no pathological reflux at the indicated value of the integrated gastric acidity. Results are from 24-h measurements at baseline in 57 subjects and during treatment with each of two different proton pump inhibitors for 1, 2 and 8 days in 27 subjects.

Download figure to PowerPoint

The results in Figure 6a were best fitted by an equation with a single exponential plus a plateau, i.e.

  • image

where Y is the probability of no pathological reflux, k is a constant with a value of 7.383 × 10−4 and X is the value of the integrated gastric acidity. This equation fitted the data in Figure 6a with R2 = 0.965, indicating that virtually all of the variation in the probability of no pathological reflux could be accounted for by values of the integrated gastric acidity.

Figure 6b illustrates the results obtained using a time oesophageal pH≤4 below 4.5% to define pathological oesophageal reflux. In this figure, the probability of no pathological reflux is 53% with a value of the integrated gastric acidity of near zero, and with increasing values of gastric acidity, the probability falls progressively to 26%. The results in Figure 6b could also be fitted by an equation with a single exponential plus a plateau, i.e.

  • image

where X and Y are the same as defined above and k is a constant with a value of 2.662 × 10−5. This equation fitted the data in Figure 6b with R2 = 0.934.

As a previous study has demonstrated that the results for predictive values, sensitivity and specificity are often misinterpreted,15 it is worth reviewing how the present findings should be interpreted, using the data in Figures 4 and 6 as examples. Figure 4a illustrates that, with a value of the integrated gastric acidity of 527 mmol.h/L as an example, 10% of subjects with pathological oesophageal reflux have values of the integrated gastric acidity below 527 mmol.h/L and 51% of subjects without pathological oesophageal reflux have values of the integrated gastric acidity above 527 mmol.h/L. It is not correct to conclude that the probability of no pathological oesophageal reflux in a subject with an integrated gastric acidity of 527 mmol.h/L can be calculated from these percentages, i.e. 51/(51 + 10) = 84%. The reason that this approach is not correct is that the probability depends on the relative abundance of recordings with no pathological oesophageal reflux. For example, if there were nine times more recordings with pathological oesophageal reflux than with no pathological reflux, the correct calculation would be 51/[(51 + (9 × 10)] = 36%. The results in Figure 6a display the probability of no pathological oesophageal reflux at each value of the integrated gastric acidity, calculated in a manner that takes into account the relative abundance of recordings with no pathological oesophageal reflux. Using the best-fit equation for the data in Figure 6a, the calculated probability of no pathological oesophageal reflux with a value of the integrated gastric acidity of 527 mmol.h/L is 87%.

Figure 7 compares the calculated probability of no pathological oesophageal reflux using the equations above with the observed percentage of subjects with no pathological oesophageal reflux on days 1, 2 and 8 of treatment with a proton pump inhibitor. There was close agreement between the calculated and observed values on days 2 and 8 using either criterion for no pathological oesophageal reflux. On day 1, however, the predicted probability was approximately twice the observed value. These differences on day 1 probably result from the fact that some subjects have oesophageal reflux before the onset of action of the proton pump inhibitor on gastric and oesophageal acidity. That is, even though on day 1, subjects have decreased integrated gastric acidity over the 24-h period, which reduces the calculated probability of no pathological oesophageal reflux, some subjects experience oesophageal reflux before the onset of action of the proton pump inhibitor on gastric acidity.

image

Figure 7. Comparison of the predicted and observed values of the percentage of subjects with no pathological oesophageal reflux on each day of active treatment, using the integrated oesophageal acidity (a) or the time oesophageal pH≤4 (b) to define pathological oesophageal reflux. Values given are the means for the two treatment periods from days 1, 2 and 8 of treatment with a proton pump inhibitor. Results are means from 27 subjects with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, and the vertical bars give the 95% confidence intervals.

Download figure to PowerPoint

Discussion

  1. Top of page
  2. Summary
  3. Introduction
  4. Methods
  5. Results
  6. Discussion
  7. Acknowledgements
  8. References

The main purpose of the present study was to examine the extent to which gastric acidity in subjects with GERD treated with a proton pump inhibitor needs to be decreased to prevent pathological oesophageal reflux. Although the reduction of gastric acidity with a gastric antisecretory agent is the mainstay of treatment of GERD, the relationship between gastric and oesophageal acidity has not been examined. Others have published values for the time gastric pH > 4 with different antisecretory agents, and have related these values to the time oesophageal pH < 4 and to the percentages of subjects with healed erosive oesophagitis;5, 6 however, the values of gastric acidity were obtained from subjects with peptic ulcers, whereas the values of oesophageal acidity and oesophagitis were obtained from subjects with GERD.

We defined pathological oesophageal reflux in the same way as others,16, 17 using the value of the oesophageal acid exposure, calculated from 24-h oesophageal pH recordings, that best distinguished between subjects with GERD and normal subjects. The optimal cut-off point in terms of the time oesophageal pH≤4 was 4.5%, and this value agrees with the cut-off point determined in other studies.16, 17 We are unaware of values of the integrated oesophageal acidity being used to distinguish between normal subjects and those with GERD, but the calculation is straightforward, and it should be possible for others to perform such calculations using existing oesophageal pH recordings from normal subjects and those with GERD. The cut-off point that we used to define pathological oesophageal reflux was that which gave the maximal values for sensitivity and specificity in distinguishing between subjects with GERD and normal subjects. Under other circumstances, other cut-off points might be used. For example, a different value might optimally distinguish between subjects with GERD with and without healed oesophagitis, whilst another value might optimally distinguish between subjects with GERD with and without resolved heartburn.

There was no apparent relationship between the integrated gastric acidity values and the corresponding values of the integrated oesophageal acidity or time oesophageal pH≤4 in subjects with GERD treated for different times with a proton pump inhibitor. We were initially surprised by this finding, because proton pump inhibitors decrease both the gastric and oesophageal acidity, and the magnitude of the decrease tends to be greater after several days of treatment than after 1 day of treatment.18 In contrast with the results in the present study, a study by others has reported a linear relationship between the time oesophageal pH < 4 and the time gastric pH > 4;5 however, as mentioned above, oesophageal pH values were obtained from subjects with GERD, whereas gastric pH values were obtained from subjects with peptic ulcer.

Our primary focus in the present study was not on the value of the oesophageal acidity per se, but on whether the value was pathological using a cut-off point based on findings in normal subjects and those with GERD. We then determined the extent to which corresponding values of the integrated gastric acidity could distinguish between pathological and non-pathological oesophageal reflux. Integrated gastric acidity values from subjects with pathological oesophageal reflux were significantly higher than values from subjects without pathological reflux. Moreover, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve indicated that the probability that a subject chosen randomly from the group with pathological oesophageal reflux would have a higher value of gastric acidity than a subject chosen randomly from the group without pathological reflux was 0.712 or 0.783, depending on how pathological reflux was defined.

The present finding that the 24-h integrated gastric acidity in subjects with pathological oesophageal reflux was significantly higher than that in subjects without pathological reflux might appear to disagree with the finding in a preceding paper that the 24-h integrated gastric acidity in subjects with GERD was not significantly different from that in controls.9 The basis for the difference is probably that the values for no pathological oesophageal reflux in the present report were caused by treatment with a proton pump inhibitor, which decreased the gastric acidity over the entire 24-h period, not just during the post-prandial period. In contrast, in the preceding study, gastric acidity was significantly increased only during the post-prandial period, not during the entire 24-h period.

We found that the probability of pathological oesophageal reflux in subjects treated with a proton pump inhibitor could be predicted with high precision using an equation with a single exponential plus a plateau that reflected the percentage of the total recordings with no pathological oesophageal reflux. There is no mechanistic or pathophysiological significance to this equation that we are aware of. It was simply the equation that best fitted the data. We also found that there was close agreement between the observed and predicted percentages of subjects with no pathological oesophageal reflux on days 2 and 8 of treatment. As mentioned above, the difference between the observed and predicted percentages on day 1 probably occurred because some subjects experienced pathological oesophageal reflux before the onset of action of the proton pump inhibitor on gastric acidity.

There are, however, several caveats related to the present analyses. First, the results are probably only applicable to subjects with GERD treated with a proton pump inhibitor. Similar subjects treated with a histamine-2 receptor antagonist would probably give different results, because these agents have a different duration of action on gastric acid secretion, have different effects on gastric pH during fasting, and inhibit fasting gastric acid secretion to a greater extent than meal-stimulated secretion.19–21 Second, in the present study, subjects with GERD treated with a proton pump inhibitor were those with an oesophageal pH≤4 for at least 10% of a 24-h baseline recording period. The parameter values for the exponential equation that give the probability of no pathological reflux might differ in important ways in subjects with GERD who have lower values of oesophageal acidity. Third, we and others have reported that subjects with GERD with erosive oesophagitis have higher values of oesophageal acid exposure than those without erosive oesophagitis.7, 22 It may be that the relationship between gastric and oesophageal acidity during treatment with a proton pump inhibitor may differ between these two groups. Fourth, we have found that subjects with GERD can be classified in terms of whether most of their oesophageal acid exposure occurs before or after 23.00 h.7, 8 The relationship between gastric and oesophageal acidity during treatment with a proton pump inhibitor might differ between these two groups.

Previously, we have commented on some of the shortcomings of time pH≤4 compared with integrated acidity in the evaluation of gastric and oesophageal pH recordings.7, 8 The present study also illustrates that the time oesophageal pH≤4 is less sensitive than the integrated oesophageal acidity in assessing the relationship between the integrated gastric acidity and the probability of no pathological oesophageal reflux. Our observation that the use of the time gastric pH≤4 was unsatisfactory in evaluating the relationships between gastric acidity and the presence or absence of pathological oesophageal reflux agrees with our previous findings that this measure is unsatisfactory in assessing the extent to which rabeprazole reduces gastric acidity.8

To the extent that the subjects in the present study represent the overall population of subjects with GERD, we can use the parameter values for the exponential equation to predict the probability of normalizing oesophageal acid exposure during treatment with a proton pump inhibitor from the corresponding value of the integrated gastric acidity. The present study also illustrates an analytical approach that can be used to explore the relationship between the effect of a gastric antisecretory agent on gastric or oesophageal pH and clinical end-points in GERD, such as heartburn or oesophagitis.

Acknowledgements

  1. Top of page
  2. Summary
  3. Introduction
  4. Methods
  5. Results
  6. Discussion
  7. Acknowledgements
  8. References

This work was supported by grants from Janssen Pharmaceutica Research Foundation to the Oklahoma Foundation for Digestive Research and to Science for Organizations, Inc.

References

  1. Top of page
  2. Summary
  3. Introduction
  4. Methods
  5. Results
  6. Discussion
  7. Acknowledgements
  8. References
  • 1
    Dent J. Gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. Digestion 1998; 59: 43345.
  • 2
    Robinson M. Medical management of gastroesophageal reflux disease. In: CastellDO, RichterJE, eds. The Esophagus, 3rd edn. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 1999: 44762.
  • 3
    Jones DB, Howden CW, Burget DW, Kerr GD, Hunt RH. Acid suppression in duodenal ulcer: a meta-analysis to define optimal dosing with antisecretory drugs. Gut 1987; 28: 11207.
  • 4
    Burget DW, Chiverton SG, Hunt RH. Is there an optimal degree of acid suppression for healing of duodenal ulcers? Gastroenterology 1990; 99: 34551.
  • 5
    Bell NJV, Burget D, Howden CW, Wilkinson J, Hunt RH. Appropriate acid suppression for the management of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Digestion 1992; 51(Suppl. 1): 5967.
  • 6
    Hunt RH. The relationship between the control of pH and healing and symptom relief in gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 1995; 9(Suppl. 1): 37.
  • 7
    Gardner JD, Rodriguez-Stanley S, Robinson M. Integrated acidity and the pathophysiology of GERD. Am J Gastroenterol 2001; 96: 136370.
    Direct Link:
  • 8
    Gardner JD, Perdomo C, Sloan S, et al. Integrated acidity and rabeprazole pharmacology. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2002; 16: 45564.
  • 9
    Gardner JD, Sloan S, Miner PB Jr, Robinson M. Meal-stimulated gastric acid secretion and integrated gastric acidity in gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2003; 17: 945953.
  • 10
    Swets JA. Measuring the accuracy of diagnostic systems. Science 1988; 240: 128593.
  • 11
    McNeil BJ, Keeler E, Adelstein SJ. Primer on certain elements of medical decision making. N Engl J Med 1975; 293: 2115.
  • 12
    Hanley JA, McNeil BJ. A method of comparing the areas under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology 1982; 143: 2936.
  • 13
    Hanley JA, McNeil BJ. The meaning and use of the area under receiver operating characteristic curves derived from the same cases. Radiology 1983; 148: 83943.
  • 14
    Motulsky H. Interpreting laboratory tests: introduction to Bayesian thinking. In: Intuitive Biostatistics. New York: Oxford University Press, 1995: 12939.
  • 15
    Hoffrage U, Lindsey S, Hertwig R, Gigerenzer G. Communicating statistical information. Science 2000; 290: 22612.
  • 16
    Schindlbeck NE, Heinrich C, Konig A, Dendorfer A, Pace F, Muller-Lissner SA. Optimal thresholds, sensitivity, and specificity of long-term pH-metry for detection of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Gastroenterology 1987; 93: 8590.
  • 17
    Jamieson JR, Stein HJ, DeMeester TR, et al. Ambulatory 24-h oesophageal monitoring: normal values, optimal thresholds, specificity, sensitivity, and reproducibility. Am J Gastroenterol 1992; 87: 110211.
  • 18
    Howden CW. Clinical pharmacology of omeprazole. Clin Pharmacokinet 1991; 20: 3849.
  • 19
    Hurlimann S, Abbuhl B, Inauen W, Halter F. Comparison of acid inhibition by either oral high-dose ranitidine or omeprazole. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 1994; 8: 193201.
  • 20
    Hedenstrom H, Alm C, Kraft M, Grahnen A. Intragastric pH after oral administration of single doses of ranitidine effervescent tablets, omeprazole capsules and famotidine fast-dissolving tablets to fasting healthy volunteers. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 1997; 11: 113741.
  • 21
    Hatlebakk JG, Berstad A. Pharmacokinetic optimisation in the treatment of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. Clin Pharmacokinet 1996; 31: 386406.
  • 22
    Robertson D, Aldersley M, Shepherd H, Smith CL. Patterns of acid reflux in complicated oesophagitis. Gut 1987; 28: 14848.