Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 225

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

High eradication rates of Helicobacter pylori with a new sequential treatment

Open access
Zullo, A., Vaira, D., Vakil, N., Hassan, C., Gatta, L., Ricci, C., De Francesco, V., Menegatti, M., Tampieri, A., Perna, F., Rinaldi, V., Perri, F., Papadìa, C., Fornari, F., Pilati, S., Mete, L. S., Merla, A., Potì, R., Marinone, G., Savioli, A., Campo, S. M. A., Faleo, D., Ierardi, E., Miglioli, M., Morini, S.·2003·Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics

Abstract

Summary: Background : Eradication rates of Helicobacter pylori with standard triple therapy are disappointing, and studies from several countries confirm this poor performance. Aim : To assess the eradication rate of a new sequential treatment regimen compared with conventional triple therapy for the eradication of H. pylori infection. Methods : One thousand and forty‐nine dyspeptic patients were studied prospectively. H. pylori‐infected patients were randomized to receive 10‐day sequential therapy [rabeprazole (40 mg daily) plus amoxicillin (1 g twice daily) for the first 5 days, followed by rabeprazole (20 mg), clarithromycin (500 mg) and tinidazole (500 mg) twice daily for the remaining 5 days] or standard 7‐day treatment [rabeprazole (20 mg), clarithromycin (500 mg) and amoxicillin (1 g) twice daily]. H. pylori status was assessed by histology, rapid urease test and 13 C‐urea breath test at baseline and 6 weeks or more after completion of treatment. Results : Higher eradication rates were found with the sequential regimen compared to the standard regimen (intention‐to‐treat: 92% vs. 74%, P < 0.0001; per protocol: 95% vs. 77%, P < 0.0001). Higher eradication rates were also seen in patients with peptic ulcer disease and non‐ulcer dyspepsia. In both treatments, compliance was similar (> 90%), as was the rate of side‐effects, which were mild. Conclusions : This 10‐day sequential treatment regimen achieves high eradication rates in peptic ulcer disease and non‐ulcer dyspepsia.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1046/j.1365-2036.2003.01461.x

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 225

Metadata

Authors
Zullo, A., Vaira, D., Vakil, N., Hassan, C., Gatta, L., Ricci, C., De Francesco, V., Menegatti, M., Tampieri, A., Perna, F., Rinaldi, V., Perri, F., Papadìa, C., Fornari, F., Pilati, S., Mete, L. S., Merla, A., Potì, R., Marinone, G., Savioli, A., Campo, S. M. A., Faleo, D., Ierardi, E., Miglioli, M., & Morini, S.
Venue
Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2003-02-28
Volume
17
Issue
5
Pages
719-726
ISSN
  • 0269-2813 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2036
OpenAlex
W2002580298
Cited by
225
References
1
FWCI
14.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: High eradication rates of Helicobacter pylori with a new sequential treatment. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1365-2036.2003.01461.x
The paper
Zullo, A., Vaira, D., Vakil, N., Hassan, C., Gatta, L., Ricci, C., De Francesco, V., Menegatti, M., Tampieri, A., Perna, F., Rinaldi, V., Perri, F., Papadìa, C., Fornari, F., Pilati, S., Mete, L. S., Merla, A., Potì, R., Marinone, G., . . . Morini, S. (2003). High eradication rates of Helicobacter pylori with a new sequential treatment. Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2036.2003.01461.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.