Efficacy of fexuprazan compared with rebamipide in Korean patients with gastritis: A matching-adjusted indirect comparison

Table 1 Patient characteristics for the primary analysis

		Fexuprazan 10 mg BID[3], before matching (n = 102)	Fexuprazan 10 mg BID[3], after matching (n = 44.51)	Rebamipide 100 mg TID[4] (n = 225)
Age, yr		46.4	-	46.8
Male		35.3	41.8	41.8
Body mass index (kg/m2)		23.7	24	24
Smoking	Non-smoker	77.5	77.3	77.3
	Smoker	11.8	14.2	14.2
Alcohol drinking	Non-drinker	28.4	-	39.1
	Drinker	57.8	-	57.3
Erosion	2 (1-2 erosions)	56.9	34.7	34.7
	3 (3-5 erosions)	24.5	33.3	33.3
	4 (≥ 6 erosions)	18.6	32	32
Edema	1 (none)	29.4	42.7	42.7
Redness	1 (none)	47.1	16.9	16.9
	2 (mild)	38.2	52	52
	3 (moderate)	10.8	27.1	27.1
Hemorrhage	1 (none)	83.3	60.4	60.4
	2 (1 lesion)	8.8	16.4	16.4
	3 (2-5 lesions)	5.9	16.9	16.9
	4 (6-10 lesions)	1	4.9	4.9
Patient-assessed symptom score		20.5	-	9.1

¹Effective sample size was computed as the square of the summed weights divided by the sum of the squared weights.

Data are expressed as percentages of patients, unless specified otherwise. Matching variables included in the scenario are indicated in bold.

Table 2 Matching-adjusted indirect comparison of outcome measures at two weeks after treatment

	Fexuprazan 10 mg BID[3], before matching (n = 102)	Fexuprazan 10 mg BID[3], after matching (n = 44.51)	Rebamipide 100 mg TID[4] (n = 225)
Erosion improvement rate	65.7	64.5	43.6
Risk difference (95%CI)	22.1 (10.9, 33.4)	21.0 (9.6, 32.3)
P value	< 0.01	< 0.01
Erosion healing rate	57.8	53.2	35.6
Risk difference (95%CI)	22.3 (10.8, 33.7)	17.6 (6.1, 29.2)
P value	< 0.01	0.003

¹Effective sample size was computed as the square of the summed weights divided by the sum of the squared weights.

Data are expressed as percentages of patients, unless specified otherwise.

Table 3 Patient characteristics for the additional matching-adjusted indirect comparison analysis

		Fexuprazan 10 mg BID[3], before matching (n = 102)	Fexuprazan 10 mg BID[3], after matching (n = 87.51)	Rebamipide 100 mg TID[16] (n = 99)
Age, years		46.4	49.8	49.8
Male		35.3	36.4	36.4
Erosion	2 (1-2 erosions)	56.9	45.5	45.5
	3 (3-5 erosions)	24.5	23.2	23.2
	4 (≥ 6 erosions)	18.6	31.3	31.3

¹Effective sample size was computed as the square of the summed weights divided by the sum of the squared weights.

Data are expressed as percentages of patients, unless specified otherwise. Matching variables included in the scenario are indicated in bold.

Table 4 Outcome measures of fexuprazan (2 wk) vs rebamipide (4 wk)

	Fexuprazan 10 mg BID[3], before matching (n = 102)	Fexuprazan 10 mg BID[3], after matching (n = 87.51)	Rebamipide 100 mg TID[16] (n = 99)
Erosion improvement rate	65.7	64.2	60.6
Risk difference (95%CI)	5.1 (-8.2, 18.4)	3.6 (-9.8, 17.0)
P value	0.455	0.6
Erosion healing rate	57.8	51.2	53.5
Risk difference (95%CI)	4.3 (-9.4, 18.0)	-2.3 (-16.1, 11.5)
P value	0.538	0.744

¹Effective sample size was computed as the square of the summed weights divided by the sum of the squared weights.

Data are expressed as percentages of patients, unless specified otherwise.