P-CABs类药物用于治疗胃食管反流病的 疗效进展
Efficacy Advances of P-CABs in the Treatment of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease
摘要: 钾离子竞争性酸阻滞剂(P-CABs)代表了胃食管反流病(GERD)抑酸治疗的重要进展。与质子泵抑制剂(PPIs)相比,P-CABs具有起效更快、抑酸更强且不受CYP2C19代谢型影响的药理学优势。关键III期临床研究证实,伏诺拉生、替戈拉生、凯普拉生等P-CABs在糜烂性食管炎(EE)的8周黏膜愈合率上非劣于甚至优效于PPIs,这一优势在重度食管炎(LA C/D级)及PPI应答不佳患者中尤为显著。此外,P-CABs在长期维持治疗中也展现出低复发率的有效性。结论认为,P-CABs为GERD,尤其是中重度及难治性病例,提供了更优的初始和维持治疗选择。
Abstract: Potassium-competitive acid blockers (P-CABs) represent a significant advance in acid-suppressive therapy for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Compared with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), P-CABs offer pharmacological advantages including faster onset, stronger acid suppression, and independence from CYP2C19 metabolic phenotypes. Key phase III clinical trials have confirmed that P-CABs such as vonoprazan, tegoprazan, and keverprazan are non-inferior or even superior to PPIs in terms of 8-week mucosal healing rates for erosive esophagitis (EE). This advantage is particularly pronounced in patients with severe esophagitis (LA grades C/D) and those with an inadequate response to PPIs. Furthermore, P-CABs have demonstrated effectiveness in long-term maintenance therapy with low recurrence rates. In conclusion, P-CABs provide a superior option for both initial and maintenance treatment of GERD, especially in moderate-to-severe and refractory cases.
文章引用:陈乐天, 古赛. P-CABs类药物用于治疗胃食管反流病的 疗效进展[J]. 临床医学进展, 2026, 16(3): 350-355. https://doi.org/10.12677/acm.2026.163798

1. 引言

胃食管反流病(Gastroesophageal reflux disease, GERD)作为一种常见的消化系统疾病,以胃部烧灼感和胃酸反流作为其典型症状。患者还可出现如嗳气、恶心、上腹饱胀感、上腹痛、胸骨后疼痛等不典型症状[1]。如果长期得不到有效治疗,胃食管反流病会导致多种严重并发症,包括反流性食管炎和Barrett食管。反流性食管炎的严重程度差异很大,严重者会导致食管大面积糜烂、溃疡和狭窄[2]。其全球范围内流行病学分布因国家不同差异较大,其患病率在南亚和东南欧最高(超过25%),在东南亚、加拿大和法国最低(低于10%) [3]。GERD作为一种消化系统常见病,其反复发作引起的食管内外症状,严重影响患者生活质量,故治愈胃食管反流病有着切实的现实意义。

胃食管反流病的发病同多种因素相关,如食管下端括约肌松弛、食管下端括约肌完整性、食管动力减弱,但胃酸反流侵蚀食管粘膜在疾病发病过程中起至关重要的作用[4]。抑酸治疗已成为GERD管理的核心。GERD患者食管病变的愈合率与24小时内胃酸抑制的持续时间直接相关[5],快速、持久地抑制胃酸,可缓解相关症状并促进损伤的食道粘膜愈合。

H2受体拮抗剂:H2类风湿关节炎能缓解症状并促进黏膜异常的愈合,但其疗效仅限于较轻度的反流病。这主要是由于作用持续时间短,且服药约2周后会产生耐受性[6]。从而导致抑酸效果减弱、部分疗效丧失。

质子泵抑制剂:质子泵抑制剂(PPIs)被认为是治疗GERD的基石。相较于H2受体拮抗剂(H2RAs),PPIs具有更强的抑酸作用。相比目前所有可用的H2RAs,PPIs能更持久地缓解症状并促进食管愈合[7] [8]。但其起效较慢,且需多次给药才能达到最大效应,且PPIs通过CYP2C19和CYP3A4酶代谢,因此可能与某些药物发生相互作用。尤其当PPIs与华法林或苯妥英等药物合用时需特别谨慎,因为PPIs可能升高这些药物的血浆浓度[9]。且PPIs存在夜间酸突破(NAB),即夜间(22:00~06:00)连续60分钟内,胃酸恢复至pH低于4的状态[10]

钾离子竞争性酸阻滞剂(P-CABs)作为一类新型抑酸剂,因其优秀的抑酸效果为胃食管反流病的治疗提供了新思路。

2. P-CABs的药理学特征

P-CABs作为一种H+/K+-ATP酶的有效抑制剂,包含伏诺拉生、替戈拉生、凯普拉生、戊二酸利那拉生酯等多种制剂,通过可逆性抑制阻断钾结合[11],通过这种机制可快速、深刻和持续地抑制胃酸分泌达到抑酸效果。相比于传统质子泵抑制剂(PPI)有着如下的优点:1) 在胃酸环境中的稳定性:与易被胃酸降解的PPI不同,P-CABs在酸性胃环境中保持稳定,因此无需包衣保护。2) 良好的溶解性:在酸性和中性条件下均具有良好的溶解性。3) 在胃黏膜富集:可积聚于胃黏膜并浓集于分泌小管内。4) 直接抑制且作用不依赖pH值:直接作用于H+/K+-ATP酶产生抑制作用,无需转化为活性形式,因此不属于前体药物[12] [13]

3. P-CABs在GERD治疗中的临床应用与疗效评价

多项设计严谨的III期临床试验一致证实,P-CABs在治疗糜烂性食管炎(EE)的8周黏膜愈合率上,不仅达到了非劣于标准剂量PPI,更在多项研究中实现了统计学优效。

一项在北美和欧洲开展的多中心、随机、双盲III期研究具有里程碑意义。该研究将伏诺拉生(20 mg/日)与当时的主流PPI兰索拉唑(30 mg/日)进行头对头比较。结果显示,治疗第8周时,伏诺拉生组的黏膜愈合率显著高于兰索拉唑组(92.2% vs. 82.5%, p < 0.001),确立了其优势性。这一优势在治疗早期(第2周和第4周)即已显现,印证了其快速起效的药理学特点[14]

另一项在亚洲开展的多中心、随机、双盲、剂量探索性II/III期研究为此提供了直接证据。该研究纳入了732名洛杉矶(LA)分级A-D级的糜烂性食管炎(EO)患者,旨在比较不同剂量伏诺拉生(5、10、20、40 mg/日)与兰索拉唑(LPZ,30 mg/日)治疗8周的疗效与安全性。研究结果显示,治疗第4周,所有剂量伏诺拉生组的黏膜愈合率(92.3%~97.0%)均非劣效于兰索拉唑组(93.2%)。尤为重要的是,在重度食管炎(LA C/D级)亚组分析中,伏诺拉生20 mg和40 mg剂量组展现出卓越的疗效,愈合率分别达到100%和96.0%,显著高于兰索拉唑组的87.0%。这直接证明了更高剂量(≥20 mg)的伏诺拉生对于愈合重度食管炎具有明确的优势[15]。上述研究显示出了P-CABs类药物在治疗GERD时的优越性,尤其在重度食管炎具有明确的优势,正因其在重度反流性食管炎中的优势作用其被日本胃食管反流病指南所推荐[16]。长期维持治疗是控制糜烂性食管炎(EE)、预防复发和并发症的关键。一项在日本开展的临床实验表明在长期维持研究中,接受伏诺拉生10 mg或20 mg治疗的患者食管炎复发率很低(<10%) [14]

在P-CABs的家族中,替戈拉生是继伏诺拉生之后另一个已进入临床应用的重要成员。其在夜间给药时,能产生相较于伏诺拉生能产生更快、更强且更持久的夜间抑酸效果,具有潜在更强的抑酸效果[17],一项在韩国开展的III期、随机、双盲、活性对照非劣效性试验,评估了替戈拉生(50 mg/日)对比兰索拉唑(30 mg/日)治疗糜烂性食管炎(EE)的疗效。该研究达到了其首要目标,并取得了关键发现:治疗第4周时,替戈拉生组的累积愈合率为95.2%,显著高于兰索拉唑组的86.2%。统计分析不仅证实了非劣效性,更确立了其优效性(p = 0.0266)。值得注意的是,替戈拉生在第2周即显示出更快的愈合趋势(88.4% vs. 82.6%),并在疗效上完全不受CYP2C19基因多态性的影响,确保了在不同代谢型患者中疗效的一致性。该研究结论指出,替戈拉生在治疗4周内对EE的疗效优于兰索拉唑。这为P-CABs的整体类别优势即快速起效、强效愈合且疗效不受基因型干扰提供了又一个强有力的例证[18]

凯普拉生作为P-CABs家族的另一新兴成员,于2023年于中国批注上市[19],一项在中国开展的III期、随机、双盲、多中心研究,直接比较了凯普拉生(20 mg/日)与兰索拉唑(30 mg/日)治疗糜烂性食管炎(EO) 4~8周的疗效与安全性。该研究显示,在治疗第8周时,凯普拉生组的食管炎愈合率在符合方案集(PPS)分析中达到99.1%,而兰索拉唑组为92.7%。在意向性治疗(ITT/FAS)分析中,两组愈合率分别为95.8%和89.9%。统计分析证实了凯普拉生相较于兰索拉唑的非劣效性,且在PPS分析中观察到了具有统计学意义的优效趋势(p = 0.018)。该研究结果表明,凯普拉生作为一种新型P-CAB,在中国糜烂性食管炎患者中展现出与伏诺拉生相似的卓越疗效,其愈合率数值甚至更高。这为临床医生,特别是针对中国人群,提供了又一个强效、安全的抑酸治疗新选择,并预示着P-CABs类药物在临床应用上的进一步多元化[20]

戊二酸利那拉生酯作为一种新型P-CABs类制剂,其研究代表了该类药物在优化给药方式和拓展治疗边界上的新探索。戊二酸利那拉生酯作为利那拉生的前体产物,一项剂量探索研究评估了戊二酸利那拉生酯的疗效。该研究专门入组了对PPI治疗应答不佳的糜烂性食管炎患者(定义为LA分级A/B级且对至少8周PPI治疗部分应答者),或基线即为重度食管炎(LA C/D级)的患者。患者被随机分配接受四种剂量的戊二酸利那拉生酯(25、50、75或100 mg,每日两次)或兰索拉唑(30 mg,每日一次)治疗4周。结果显示,在ITT分析中,所有戊二酸利那拉生酯剂量组的4周综合愈合率为71.1%,优于兰索拉唑组的60.6%。在病情更具挑战性的亚组中,其优势更为明显:疗效最佳的戊二酸利那拉生酯剂量组,在对PPI部分应答的LA A/B级患者中愈合率高出兰索拉唑28%,在LA C/D级患者中高出50%以上。该研究提示,针对PPI应答不佳和重度食管炎患者,采用更强效或不同给药策略的新型P-CABs,可能是实现黏膜愈合突破的新方向。戊二酸利那拉生酯所采用的每日两次给药方案,旨在提供更平稳、持续的抑酸效果,这为优化难治性GERD的治疗提供了新思路,并支持其进入III期临床开发[21]

4. 安全性研究

伏诺拉生作为P-CABs家族最早上市的药物,经过了长期的研究及市场检验,其安全性研究最为广泛,在相关研究中其表现出良好的耐受性,并显示出与PPIs相似的安全性[22]-[24]。但不可忽视的是,在一项长达5年的临床实验中提示,相比于传统PPIs长期使用伏诺拉生治疗,会升高胃泌素浓度,导致壁细胞增生及胃小凹增生程度更高,但并未增加恶性上皮细胞改变及胃神经内分泌肿瘤(NETs)的风险[25]

凯普拉生作为P-CABs家族的另一成员,其在临床研究中的安全性表现同伏诺拉生类似,均以少量轻度不良反应为主[26],相关临床实验体现出其在治疗中的药物相关不良事件同传统PPIs发生率相当[20]

戊二酸利那拉生酯作为一种新型P-CABs类制剂,其相关安全性研究相对较少,但从现有的临床实验中,其也体现出同传统PPIs相似的安全性[27]。但因其相对上市较晚,相关研究仍有发展空间。

5. 结论

P-CABs凭借其直接、快速、持久的抑酸特性,已成为GERD治疗的新标准。临床证据表明,其在糜烂性食管炎的黏膜愈合率上非劣效乃至优效于PPIs,对重度及难治性病例优势显著,且疗效不受CYP2C19基因型影响。因此,P-CABs是追求快速深度愈合、尤其是治疗重度或难治性GERD的优选方案。未来需更多长期研究及药物经济学评价以巩固其地位。

NOTES

*通讯作者。

参考文献

[1] Vakil, N., van Zanten, S.V., Kahrilas, P., Dent, J. and Jones, R. (2006) The Montreal Definition and Classification of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: A Global Evidence-Based Consensus. The American Journal of Gastroenterology, 101, 1900-1920. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[2] Ronkainen, J., Aro, P., Storskrubb, T., Johansson, S., Lind, T., Bolling-Sternevald, E., et al. (2005) High Prevalence of Gastroesophageal Reflux Symptoms and Esophagitis with or without Symptoms in the General Adult Swedish Population: A Kalixanda Study Report. Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology, 40, 275-285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[3] Eusebi, L.H., Ratnakumaran, R., Yuan, Y., Solaymani-Dodaran, M., Bazzoli, F. and Ford, A.C. (2017) Global Prevalence Of, and Risk Factors For, Gastro-Oesophageal Reflux Symptoms: A Meta-Analysis. Gut, 67, 430-440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[4] Zachariah, R.A., Goo, T. and Lee, R.H. (2020) Mechanism and Pathophysiology of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Clinics of North America, 30, 209-226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[5] Bell, N.J.V., Burget, D., Howden, C.W., Wilkinson, J. and Hunt, R.H. (1992) Appropriate Acid Suppression for the Management of Gastro-Oesophageal Reflux Disease. Digestion, 51, 59-67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[6] Tytgat, G.N.J. (2002) Treatment of Mild and Severe Cases of Gerd. Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics, 16, 73-78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[7] Chiba, N., De Gara, C., Wilkinson, J. and Hunt, R. (1997) Speed of Healing and Symptom Relief in Grade II to IV Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: A Meta-Analysis. Gastroenterology, 112, 1798-1810. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[8] DeVault, K.R. and Castell, D.O. (1999) Updated Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease. American Journal of Gastroenterology, 94, 1434-1442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[9] Juurlink, D.N., Gomes, T., Ko, D.T., Szmitko, P.E., Austin, P.C., Tu, J.V., et al. (2009) A Population-Based Study of the Drug Interaction between Proton Pump Inhibitors and Clopidogrel. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 180, 713-718. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[10] Horn, J. (2000) The Proton-Pump Inhibitors: Similarities and Differences. Clinical Therapeutics, 22, 266-280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[11] Shin, J.M., Inatomi, N., Munson, K., Strugatsky, D., Tokhtaeva, E., Vagin, O., et al. (2011) Characterization of a Novel Potassium-Competitive Acid Blocker of the Gastric H,K-Atpase, 1-[5-(2-Fluorophenyl)-1-(Pyridin-3-Ylsulfonyl)-1H-Pyrrol-3-Yl]-N-Methylmethanamine Monofumarate (TAK-438). The Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, 339, 412-420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[12] Jiang, Y., Zhang, R., Fang, Y., Zhao, R., Fu, Y., Ren, P., et al. (2024) P-CAB versus PPI in the Eradication of Helicobacter pylori: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis. Therapeutic Advances in Gastroenterology, 17, 1-20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[13] Scarpignato, C. and Hunt, R.H. (2024) Potassium-Competitive Acid Blockers: Current Clinical Use and Future Developments. Current Gastroenterology Reports, 26, 273-293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[14] Ashida, K., Sakurai, Y., Hori, T., Kudou, K., Nishimura, A., Hiramatsu, N., et al. (2015) Randomised Clinical Trial: Vonoprazan, a Novel Potassium‐Competitive Acid Blocker, vs. Lansoprazole for the Healing of Erosive Oesophagitis. Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics, 43, 240-251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[15] Ashida, K., Sakurai, Y., Nishimura, A., Kudou, K., Hiramatsu, N., Umegaki, E., et al. (2015) Randomised Clinical Trial: A Dose‐ranging Study of Vonoprazan, a Novel Potassium‐Competitive Acid Blocker, vs. Lansoprazole for the Treatment of Erosive Oesophagitis. Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics, 42, 685-695. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[16] Iwakiri, K., Fujiwara, Y., Manabe, N., Ihara, E., Kuribayashi, S., Akiyama, J., et al. (2022) Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines for Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease 2021. Journal of Gastroenterology, 57, 267-285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[17] Mermelstein, J., Mermelstein, A.C., and Chait, M.M., (2020) Tegoprazan to Treat Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease. Drugs of Today, 56, 715-721. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[18] Shin, C.M., Choi, S.C., Cho, J.W., Kim, S.Y., Lee, O.J., Kim, D.H., et al. (2024) Comparison of Tegoprazan and Lansoprazole in Patients with Erosive Esophagitis up to 4 Weeks: A Multi‐Center, Randomized, Double‐Blind, Active‐Comparator Phase 4 Trial. Neurogastroenterology & Motility, 37, e14969. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[19] Kang, C. (2023) Keverprazan Hydrochloride: First Approval. Drugs, 83, 639-643. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[20] Chen, S., Liu, D., Chen, H., Liao, A., Li, F., Liu, C., et al. (2022) The Efficacy and Safety of Keverprazan, a Novel Potassium‐Competitive Acid Blocker, in Treating Erosive Oesophagitis: A Phase III, Randomised, Double‐Blind Multicentre Study. Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics, 55, 1524-1533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[21] Sharma, P., Vaezi, M., Unge, P., Andersson, K., Larsson, K., Popadiyn, I., et al. (2025) Clinical Trial: Dose‐Finding Study of Linaprazan Glurate, a Novel Potassium‐Competitive Acid Blocker, versus Lansoprazole for the Treatment of Erosive Oesophagitis. Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics, 61, 1590-1602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[22] Xu, W., Bai, Z., Shang, Y., Wang, J., Wong, Y. and Qi, X. (2023) Incidence and Type of Adverse Events in Patients Taking Vonoprazan: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Therapeutic Advances in Gastroenterology, 16, 1-22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[23] Howden, C.W., Katz, P., DeVault, K.R., Metz, D.C., Tamene, D., Smith, N., et al. (2024) Integrated Analysis of Vonoprazan Safety for Symptomatic Gastro‐Oesophageal Reflux Disease or Erosive Oesophagitis. Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics, 61, 835-851. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[24] Gong, H., Han, D., Liu, S., Liu, C., Zhu, X. and Chen, D. (2022) Adverse Events of Vonoprazan in the Treatments of Acid-Related Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Revista Española de Enfermedades Digestivas, 115, 294-300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[25] Uemura, N., Kinoshita, Y., Haruma, K., Kushima, R., Yao, T., Akiyama, J., et al. (2025) Vonoprazan as a Long-Term Maintenance Treatment for Erosive Esophagitis: VISION, a 5-Year, Randomized, Open-Label Study. Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology, 23, 748-757.e5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[26] Zhou, S., Xie, L., Zhou, C., Wang, L., Chen, J., Ding, S., et al. (2023) Keverprazan, a Novel Potassium‐Competitive Acid Blocker: Multiple Oral Doses Safety, Tolerability, Pharmacokinetics, and Pharmacodynamics in Healthy Subjects. Clinical and Translational Science, 16, 1911-1922. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[27] Zhuang, Q., Chen, S., Zhou, X., Jia, X., Zhang, M., Tan, N., et al. (2024) Comparative Efficacy of P-CAB vs Proton Pump Inhibitors for Grade C/D Esophagitis: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis. American Journal of Gastroenterology, 119, 803-813. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]