Clarithromycin Versus Metronidazole in First-Line Helicobacter Pylori Triple Eradication Therapy Based on Resistance to Antimicrobial Agents Original paper
Researched by:
-
Divine Aleru
ID
Divine Aleru
I am a biochemist with a deep curiosity for the human microbiome and how it shapes human health, and I enjoy making microbiome science more accessible through research and writing. With 2 years experience in microbiome research, I have curated microbiome studies, analyzed microbial signatures, and now focus on interventions as a Microbiome Signatures and Interventions Research Coordinator.
-
Divine Aleru
Researched by:
-
Divine Aleru
ID
Divine Aleru
Microbiome Signatures identifies and validates condition-specific microbiome shifts and interventions to accelerate clinical translation. Our multidisciplinary team supports clinicians, researchers, and innovators in turning microbiome science into actionable medicine.
Divine Aleru
What was reviewed?
The study conducted a meta-analysis of 27 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 4,825 patients. It assessed the comparative efficacy and safety of two first-line H. pylori eradication regimens, PAC (proton pump inhibitor, amoxicillin, clarithromycin) and PAM (proton pump inhibitor, amoxicillin, metronidazole), by stratifying outcomes based on regional antimicrobial resistance rates. This review evaluated eradication rates and adverse effects in diverse populations across different geographical resistance patterns to clarithromycin (CAM) and metronidazole (MNZ), providing a framework for tailoring first-line therapy to regional resistance profiles.
Who was reviewed?
The review synthesized findings from patients across 27 RCTs conducted in regions with varying resistance to clarithromycin and metronidazole, including Europe, Asia, North Africa, and the Middle East. Study participants ranged in age from 26 to 77 years and were treated with PAC or PAM regimens lasting 7 to 14 days. Trials included in the review were categorized based on local antimicrobial resistance levels: low/high resistance to CAM and/or MNZ, allowing for stratified efficacy analyses by resistance profile.
What were the most important findings?
The meta-analysis revealed that overall eradication rates between PAC and PAM therapies were statistically equivalent across all populations, but regional resistance patterns dramatically influenced regimen effectiveness. In areas with low metronidazole resistance and high clarithromycin resistance as seen in Japan, the PAM regimen achieved significantly higher eradication rates (92.5%) compared to PAC (70.8%), supporting its use as first-line therapy in these populations.
In contrast, in areas with high resistance to both CAM and MNZ, eradication rates were poor for both regimens, with PAC slightly outperforming PAM. This supports the need for alternative or tailored regimens in such regions. Importantly, PAC showed insufficient efficacy (<75%) even in areas with low CAM resistance, suggesting a possible shift in clinical effectiveness thresholds and underscoring the need for resistance-guided therapy.
This review reinforces that prior exposure and resistance to antibiotics like clarithromycin and metronidazole may persistently reshape gut microbial dynamics, potentially reducing treatment success over time. Since metronidazole has known impacts on anaerobic microbiota and clarithromycin on gram-positive and commensal organisms, these regimens may differentially disrupt the microbiome. For clinicians practicing microbiome-sensitive prescribing, this meta-analysis underscores the value of choosing regimens not only based on susceptibility but also on the ecological footprint of each drug, especially in repeated or multi-drug exposure scenarios.
What are the implications of this review?
The findings from this meta-analysis advocate for regional resistance profiling before initiating H. pylori treatment and favor metronidazole-based therapy in low-resistance settings, particularly where clarithromycin resistance is high. Importantly, the equivalence in overall eradication rates masks regional failures of PAC therapy, which no longer reliably achieves the desired >90% eradication benchmark in many parts of the world. For microbiome-aware practitioners, this review highlights the critical intersection between antibiotic resistance, treatment outcomes, and microbiome preservation. It also provides a compelling rationale for avoiding PAC therapy in areas with rising clarithromycin resistance, even if local guidelines still endorse it.
Future clinical decision-making should integrate real-time resistance data, microbiome sensitivity considerations, and duration-of-treatment optimization. PAM’s potential superiority in specific resistance contexts makes it a more flexible and promising option for first-line therapy, provided metronidazole resistance remains low.