Extracellular matrix remodeling proteins as biomarkers for clinical assessment and treatment outcomes in eosinophilic esophagitis.

BACKGROUND: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic progressive inflammatory disease of the esophagus, characterized by extracellular matrix remodeling and fibrotic stricture formation. Disease monitoring requires multiple re-endoscopies with esophageal biopsies. Hence non-invasive methods for determining tissue fibrosis and treatment efficacy are warranted. AIMS: To investigate the ability of extracellular matrix proteins in serum as potential biomarkers of tissue remodeling and clinical, endoscopic, and histological disease outcomes in adult EoE patients. METHODS: Protein-fingerprint assays were used to measure neo-epitope specific fragments of collagen remodeling, human-neutrophil elastase degraded calprotectin, and citrullinated or non-citrullinated vimentin in the serum of an adult EoE-cohort. Biomarker analysis, symptoms, endoscopic features and histological disease activity (eosinophils(eos) per high-power-field(hpf)) were evaluated at baseline and after six weeks of dietary intervention. RESULTS: Patients with a baseline (Endoscopic Reference score) EREFS fibrosis subscore ≥ 2 presented with increased fibrolysis of cross-linked type III collagen (CTX-III) (p < 0.01), whereas low CTX-III levels were observed in patients achieving histological remission (< 15 eos/hpf) (vs. no histological remission (p < 0.05). Progression of endoscopic fibrosis after intervention was associated with increased levels of type-III (PRO-C3) and -VI collagen (PRO-C6) formation (all; p < 0.05). A baseline EREFS inflammatory subscore ≥ 2 correlated with higher neutrophilic activity (Cpa9-HNE) at week 6 (p < 0.05). Moreover, increased degradation of type-III (C3M) and -IV (C4M/PRO-C4) collagens were associated with remission of food impaction after intervention (all; p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Serum extracellular matrix remodeling proteins demonstrated potential as surrogate biomarkers for assessing histological disease remission, endoscopic fibrosis, and remission of symptoms of food impaction after diet intervention in adult EoE patients.

Dysphagia Days as an Assessment of Clinical Treatment Outcome in Eosinophilic Esophagitis.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to evaluate Dysphagia Days as a measure of symptom improvement in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis from the HEROES study. METHODS: Dysphagia Days, defined as a yes answer to the following question: During any meal today, did food go down slowly or get stuck in your throat or chest? was assessed for cendakimab vs placebo. RESULTS: A statistically significant reduction in the mean number of Dysphagia Days experienced was observed with cendakimab 360 mg vs placebo at week 16 (-4.67 vs -1.83; P = 0.0115); an even greater improvement was observed in steroid-refractory patients vs placebo (-4.48 vs -0.04; P = 0.0079). DISCUSSION: Dysphagia Days represents a relevant clinical end point to capture dysphagia-related symptoms.

Assessment of Esophageal Motility in Patients With Eosinophilic Esophagitis: A Scoping Review.

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic, immune-mediated condition causing esophageal symptoms, particularly dysphagia. Despite the important progress in the treatment of EoE, a significant proportion of patients continue to report symptoms that negatively impact quality of life. Esophageal manometry is used to assess motility and function, but is not routinely used in EoE. We aimed to systematically review and describe current literature evaluating esophageal manometry in EoE. Forty-eight studies meeting the criteria were identified, describing 802 patients. Using standard water swallow protocols, the proportion of abnormalities detected was not dissimilar to other populations, apart from disorders of esophago-gastric outflow, which were found in 5%. Twelve studies described pretreatment and posttreatment manometry, with motility normalization after pharmacological therapy reported in 20%. Early, brief panesophageal pressurization was described in a number of studies and was more prevalent in the few studies utilizing additional provocation testing. Reports in the literature regarding temporal relationships between manometric findings and symptoms are variable. Esophageal manometry may be capable of detecting clinically relevant changes to esophageal function in EoE. Possible mechanisms are altered neuromuscular function because of secretory products of EoE and/or fibroinflammatory processes, manifesting as pressurization because of altered esophageal compliance. Some changes may be reversible with therapy. Drawing strong conclusions from the literature is difficult, with bias toward case reports and retrospective observation. Adaptations to assessment protocols to include provocation testing may provide more robust evaluation and detect clinically relevant, subtle changes in esophageal function, earlier within the patient pathway.

Assessment of the clinical and allergy profiles of PPI responsive and non-responsive eosinophilic esophagitis.

A subset of patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) respond to proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy, however they cannot be distinguished prior to PPI trial and the mechanism of PPI response remains unclear. Improved understanding of the distinct patient phenotypes in PPI-responsive EoE (PPI-r-EoE), PPI-non-responsive EoE (PPI-nr-EoE) and erosive esophagitis (EE) may help guide management. The aim of this paper is to compare the clinical and allergy profiles of PPI-r-EoE versus PPI-nr-EoE and EE. This was a retrospective case-control study of EoE patients (>15 eos/hpf on esophageal biopsies) at a tertiary center. EE controls were identified from the pathology database. EoE patients were classified as PPI-r-EoE or PPI-nr-EoE based on histologic response to twice-daily PPI for ≥8 weeks. Patient demographics, comorbidities, symptoms, allergy history and endoscopic findings were recorded. Univariate analyses were performed using the Fisher-exact test or t-test. Multivariable analyses were performed using logistic regression. In all, 104 EoE (57 PPI-r-EoE/47 PPI-nr-EoE) and 80 EE subjects were included. On multivariable analyses, allergic conditions (aOR 20.1, P < 0.0001) and rings (aOR 108.3, P = 0.001) were independent predictors for PPI-r-EoE versus EE, whereas allergic conditions (aOR 4.8, P = 0.03), rings (aOR 27.5, P = 0.002) and furrows (aOR 17.1, P = 0.04) were independent predictors for PPI-nr-EoE versus EE. Esophageal rings was the only significant predictor found in PPI-nr-EoE versus PPI-r-EoE (OR 2.5, P = 0.03). Allergic conditions and esophageal rings are significantly more prevalent in PPI-r-EoE and PPI-nr-EoE compared with EE. PPI-r-EoE appears clinically similar to PPI-nr-EoE and significantly different from EE. Further studies are needed to delineate the underlying pathophysiology of PPI-r-EoE versus PPI-nr-EoE.

Esophageal dysmotility in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis: pathogenesis, assessment tools, manometric characteristics, and clinical implications.

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) represents a growing cause of chronic esophageal morbidity whose incidence and prevalence are increasing rapidly. The disease is characterized by eosinophilic infiltrates of the esophagus and organ dysfunction. Typical symptoms include dysphagia, chest pain, and bolus impaction, which are associated to mechanical obstructions in most patients. However, up to one in three EoE patients has no visible obstruction, suggesting that a motor disorder of the esophagus may underlie symptoms. Although potentially relevant for treatment refractoriness and symptomatic burden, esophageal dysmotility is often neglected when assessing EoE patients. The first systematic review investigating esophageal motility patterns in patients with EoE was published only recently. Accordingly, we reviewed the pathogenesis, assessment tools, manometric characteristics, and clinical implications of dysmotility in patients with EoE to highlight its clinical relevance. In summary, eosinophils can influence the amplitude of esophageal contractions via different mechanisms. The prevalence of dysmotility may increase with disease duration, possibly representing a late feature of EoE. Patients with EoE may display a wide range of motility disorders and possible disease-specific manometric pressurization patterns may be useful for raising a clinical suspicion. Intermittent dysmotility events have been found to correlate with symptoms on prolonged esophageal manometry, although high-resolution manometry studies have reported inconsistent results, possibly due to the suboptimal sensitivity of current manometry protocols. Motor abnormalities may recover following EoE treatment in a subset of patients, but invasive management of the motor disorder is required in some instances. In conclusion, esophageal motor abnormalities may have a role in eliciting symptoms, raising clinical suspicion, and influencing treatment outcome in EoE. The assessment of esophageal motility appears valuable in the EoE setting.

Disease Burden and Unmet Need in Eosinophilic Esophagitis.

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic, progressive, type 2 inflammatory disease of increasing prevalence, characterized by symptoms of dysphagia and reduced quality of life. A dysregulated type 2 immune response to food and aeroallergen leads to barrier dysfunction, chronic esophageal inflammation, remodeling, and fibrosis. Patients with EoE have impaired quality of life because of dysphagia and other symptoms. They may also suffer social and psychological implications of food-related illness and expensive out-of-pocket costs associated with treatment. Disease burden in EoE is often compounded by the presence of comorbid type 2 inflammatory diseases. Current conventional treatments include elimination diet, proton pump inhibitors, and swallowed topical corticosteroids, as well as esophageal dilation in patients who have developed strictures. These treatments demonstrate variable response rates and may not always provide long-term disease control. There is an unmet need for long-term histologic, endoscopic, and symptomatic disease control; for targeted therapies that can normalize the immune response to triggers, reduce chronic inflammation, and limit or prevent remodeling and fibrosis; and for earlier diagnosis, defined treatment outcomes, and a greater understanding of patient perspectives on treatment. In addition, healthcare professionals need a better understanding of the patient perspective on disease burden, the disconnect between symptoms and disease activity, and the progressive nature of EoE and the need for continuous monitoring and maintenance treatment. In this review, we explore the progression of disease over the patient's lifespan, highlight the patient perspective on disease, and discuss the unmet need for effective long-term treatments.

Reliability and responsiveness of endoscopic disease activity assessment in eosinophilic esophagitis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopic outcomes have become important measures of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) disease activity, including as an endpoint in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We evaluated the operating properties of endoscopic measures for use in EoE RCTs. METHODS: Modified Research and Development/University of California Los Angeles appropriateness methods and a panel of 15 international EoE experts identified endoscopic items and definitions with face validity that were used in a 2-round voting process to define simplified (all items graded as absent or present) and expanded versions (additional grades for edema, furrows, and/or exudates) of the EoE Endoscopic Reference Score (EREFS). Inter- and intrarater reliability of these instruments (expressed as intraclass correlation coefficients [ICC]) were evaluated using paired endoscopy video assessments of 2 blinded central readers in patients before and after 8 weeks of proton pump inhibitors, swallowed topical corticosteroids, or dietary elimination. Responsiveness was measured using the standardized effect size (SES). RESULTS: The appropriateness of 41 statements relevant to EoE endoscopic activity (endoscopic items, item definitions and grading, and other considerations relevant for endoscopy) was considered. The original and expanded EREFS demonstrated moderate-to-substantial inter-rater reliability (ICCs of .472-.736 and .469-.763, respectively) and moderate-to-almost perfect intrarater reliability (ICCs of .580-.828 and .581-.828, respectively). Strictures were least reliably assessed (ICC, .072-.385). The original EREFS was highly responsive (SES, 1.126 [95% confidence interval {CI}, .757-1.534]), although both expanded versions of EREFS, scored based on worst affected area, were numerically most responsive to treatment (expanded furrows: SES, 1.229 [95% CI, .858-1.643]; all items expanded: SES, 1.252 [95% CI, .880-1.667]). The EREFS and its modifications were not more reliably scored by segment and also not more responsive when proximal and distal EREFSs were summed. CONCLUSIONS: EREFS and its modifications were reliable and responsive, and the original or expanded versions of the EREFS may be preferred in RCTs. Disease activity scored based on the worst affected area optimizes reliability and responsiveness.

Needs Assessment for Eosinophilic Esophagitis Education in School Nurses.

Over the past 2 decades, eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) has become increasingly recognized as a common cause of gastrointestinal morbidity in children. A mainstay of treatment is food avoidance, which must be implemented in both the home and school settings for school-aged children. The aim of this study is to assess school nurses' familiarity with EoE with regard to food avoidance and treatment in the school setting. We conducted a 19-question online survey of 60 school nurses (elementary through high school) recruited from Dauphin, Lebanon, and Lancaster Counties in Pennsylvania. Results indicated that 62% of respondents were familiar with EoE. However, only 22% felt comfortable distinguishing between symptoms of EoE and food-dependent anaphylaxis. Almost all respondents (97%) were interested in learning more about EoE. We report significantly increased familiarity with food-dependent anaphylaxis in comparison with EoE among school nurses. There is an interest and need for increasing education on EoE.

Disease Burden and Treatment Patterns Associated With Eosinophilic Esophagitis in the United States: A Retrospective Claims Study.

GOALS: This US-based, retrospective claims study aimed to investigate disease burden and treatment patterns in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), and to compare health care resource use (HCRU) in patients with EoE and matched controls without EoE. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with a diagnosis of EoE and ≥12 months of prediagnosis data were identified from the Truven Health MarketScan Research databases (January 2008 to September 2016) and followed up from the diagnosis date until termination of eligibility for a health plan. Patient clinical characteristics and HCRU were recorded in the 12 months before diagnosis; HCRU and treatment patterns were recorded during follow-up. HCRU in patients with EoE and matched controls was compared during the 12-month postdiagnosis period. RESULTS: Among the 23,003 patients with EoE (mean age: 34.3 y; 64.8% male), gastroesophageal reflux disease was the most common prediagnosis condition (34.6%). After diagnosis, the most common off-label, first-line treatments were proton pump inhibitor monotherapy (52.8%) and topical corticosteroid monotherapy (21.5%). Overall, 3336 patients (14.5%) received at least 3 lines of off-label pharmacotherapy. Outpatient visits (recorded in 99.9% of patients on and postdiagnosis) were most frequently to gastroenterologists/pediatric gastroenterologists (49.5% prediagnosis, 72.6% on and postdiagnosis). Inpatient admissions and outpatient and emergency room visits were more likely in patients with EoE than in matched controls (P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with EoE in the USA experience a high disease burden both before and after diagnosis, which requires significant HCRU. Our findings highlight the unmet need for adequate control of EoE-related symptoms.

Eosinophilic Esophagitis: Incidence, Diagnosis, Management, and Future Directions.

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is an antigen-mediated esophageal disease defined by the presence of esophageal eosinophilia and symptoms of esophageal dysfunction. The pathophysiology involves an allergen-driven Th2 T cell response that triggers infiltration of eosinophils into the esophagus leading to inflammation, remodeling, and fibrosis. This results in disruption of esophageal function and accompanying symptoms - most notably dysphagia. Effective therapies target inflammation or fibrostenotic complications and include proton pump inhibitors, swallowed topical steroids, dietary exclusion, and dilation. Clinical trials testing promising biologic therapies are ongoing.

Esophageal Hypervigilance and Symptom-Specific Anxiety in Patients with Eosinophilic Esophagitis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Patient symptom reporting often does not correlate with the pathophysiological markers of esophageal disease, including eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). Esophageal hypervigilance and symptom-specific anxiety are emerging as important considerations in understanding symptom reporting. As such, we aimed to conduct the first study of these constructs in EoE. METHODS: A retrospective review of an EoE patient registry was conducted and included eosinophils per high power field (from esophagogastroduodenoscopy biopsy: proximal, distal), endoscopic reference score, distal distensibility plateau (functional luminal imaging probe), Brief Esophageal Dysphagia Questionnaire, Visual Dysphagia Question of EoE Activity Index, Northwestern Esophageal Quality of Life scale, and the Esophageal Hypervigilance and Anxiety Scale. Correlational and regression analyses evaluated relationships of hypervigilance and anxiety with Brief Esophageal Dysphagia Questionnaire, Visual Dysphagia Question of EoE Activity Index, and Northwestern Esophageal Quality of Life scale when controlling for histology and endoscopic severity. RESULTS: One hundred and three patients had complete data, 69.9% were male, and the mean (SD) age was 40.66 (13.85) years. Forty-one percent had elevated dysphagia and 46% had elevated hypervigilance and anxiety. Esophageal symptom-specific anxiety emerged as the most important predictor of Brief Esophageal Dysphagia Questionnaire severity (44.8% of the variance), Visual Dysphagia Question of EoE Activity Index severity (26%), and poor health-related quality of life (HRQoL) (55.3%). Hypervigilance was also important, but to a lesser extent. Pathophysiological variables did not significantly predict symptoms or HRQoL. Recent food impaction can predict symptom-specific anxiety and proton pump inhibitor use can reduce hypervigilance. CONCLUSIONS: Hypervigilance and symptom-specific anxiety are important for our understanding of self-reported patient outcomes in EoE. These processes outweigh endoscopic and histologic markers of EoE disease activity across dysphagia, difficulty eating, and HRQoL. Clinicians should assess hypervigilance and anxiety, especially in patients with refractory symptoms and poor HRQoL.

Assessment of IgE- and cell-mediated immunity in pediatric patients with eosinophilic esophagitis.

Summary: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic allergen/immune-mediated disease leading to esophageal dysfunction. Food allergens play critical roles in the pathogenesis and treatment of EoE via different mechanisms. This study aimed to present the characteristics and evaluate the ability of skin prick test (SPT), skin prick to prick test (SPP) (IgE-mediated), and atopic patch test (APT) (cell-mediated) individually or simultaneously to diagnose food allergy in patients suffering from EoE. This prospective study was conducted on 58 patients with EoE. Seven patients (12.1%) were positive to only one, 3 (5.2%) were simultaneously positive to two, and 32 (55.2%) were simultaneously positive to three tests. Single and double sensitizations were totally 10.4% in IgE-mediated reactions, while 36.5% in cell-mediated reactions. In contrast, poly sensitization (> 2 allergens) was 51.7% in IgE-mediated tests and 20.7% in the cell-mediated test. Multiple sensitization findings showed egg white, milk, yolk, and soy were the most frequent allergens. Our findings indicate that EoE is early onset and associated with multiple food sensitizations, particularly via IgE-mediated mechanisms. These immune-mediated responses encompass both IgE-mediated (SPT and SPP) and cell-mediated (APT) reactions simultaneously not individually. Therefore, employing multiple assays may strengthen the diagnosis of food sensitization.

High Patient Disease Burden in a Cross-sectional, Multicenter Contact Registry Study of Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Diseases.

OBJECTIVES: Clinical features of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) have been well-described in the literature, however, characterization of features experienced by patients with other eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases (EGIDs) is lacking. Using data collected from a patient contact registry, we sought to characterize and contrast patient-reported gastrointestinal and extragastrointestinal symptoms and comorbidities in non-EoE EGIDs, including eosinophilic gastritis, gastroenteritis and colitis, relative to EoE. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study of contact registry data collected from 2015 to 2018. Statistical comparisons were made using chi-square (categorical measures) and the Mann-Whitney U test (continuous measures). Multivariable analyses were used to evaluate associations between treatment and feelings of isolation. RESULTS: Of the 715 reporting an EGID diagnosis (n = 525 EoE; n = 190 non-EoE EGID), a higher proportion of those with a non-EoE EGID reported more frequent specific and nonspecific gastrointestinal symptoms, including nausea, abdominal pain, diarrhea, constipation, and bloating (P < 0.01 for all). Participants with a non-EoE EGID were more likely to report higher frequency of fatigue, isolation, and deep muscle or joint pain (P < 0.01 for all). Specific food elimination and elemental formula treatments were associated with increased odds of more frequent (at least weekly) feelings of isolation for participants with EoE (adjusted odds rtaio [aOR]: 2.4; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.5--4.1 for specific food elimination and adjusted OR: 1.9; 95% CI: 1.2--3.3 for elemental formula). CONCLUSIONS: Significant differences exist in the symptoms and comorbidities experienced between those with EoE versus non-EoE EGIDs. Additional investigation is needed to elucidate the factors that may contribute to the high disease burden of these poorly understood conditions.

Differences in Management of Eosinophilic Esophagitis in Europe: An Assessment of Current Practice.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to assess differences in the diagnosis and management of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) by European pediatric (PG) and adult gastroenterologists (AG), and their self-reported adherence to guidelines. METHODS: A multiple-choice questionnaire gauged the diagnostic and management strategies of gastroenterologists treating children or adults in 14 European countries and the United Arab Emirates (UAE). RESULTS: Questionnaires were completed by 465 PG and 743 AG. PG were significantly more likely to take biopsies in patients with symptoms of esophageal dysfunction (86.2% PG vs 75.4% AG, P < 0.001) and to perform endoscopic follow-up (86.3% PG vs 80.6% AG, P < 0.001). After failure of proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs), topical steroids were the preferred second-line therapy; however, PG opted more frequently for elimination diets (47.5% PG vs 13.7% AG, P < 0.001). More PG than AG indicated having read recent guidelines (89.4% PG vs 58.2% AG, P < 0.001). Geographic differences in practice were reported, with respondents from the United Kingdom, Portugal, and Spain more often adhering to recommended biopsy protocols. Physicians in the UAE, France, Lithuania, and Poland tended to opt for steroid therapy or elimination diets as first-line therapy, in contrast to most other countries. CONCLUSIONS: Significant differences in general practice between PG and AG were demonstrated with notable divergence from consensus guidelines. International practice variations are also apparent. Among other strategies, educational activities to highlight current recommendations may help harmonize and optimize clinical practice.

Cost-effective care in eosinophilic esophagitis.

OBJECTIVE: To examine costs related to eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), understand the source of these costs, discuss a possible approach for cost-effective care in EoE, and identify areas for future research in this topic. DATA SOURCES/STUDY SELECTIONS: Narrative review of the literature from 1977 (first description of EoE) to March 2019, focusing on costs and cost-effectiveness analyses in EoE. RESULTS: High costs in EoE can be related to diagnostic delays, requirement for upper endoscopy with biopsy for diagnosis and monitoring of disease activity, expensive medications currently used off-label, increased food costs related to dietary elimination treatment, frequent doctor visits with subspecialists, and complications or disease exacerbations. Provision of cost-effective care in EoE is an understudied area, and a patient-centric approach is key. There are multiple areas in which future research can make an impact. These include determining predictors of treatment response, minimally or noninvasive methods to monitor disease activity, and validation of the use of multidisciplinary care. CONCLUSION: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is considered to be a rare disease, but the costs of care and burden of disease attributed to EoE are substantial. However, few studies examine either the costs related to EoE or the approach to cost-effective care for the EoE patient. To provide cost-effective care, a patient-centric approach and shared decision-making model are optimal. In addition, a rational strategy for EoE diagnosis and initial treatment, effective maintenance therapy for disease control and ideally to prevent complications, and appropriate long-term monitoring are all required.

Sensitivity and Specificity of Administrative Medical Coding for Pediatric Eosinophilic Esophagitis.

OBJECTIVES: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a delayed-type hypersensitivity with increasing rates among pediatric populations. Although studies have used International Classification of Diseases (ICD) coding to define local cohorts and report disease epidemiology, the accuracy of the EoE ICD code for pediatric EoE is unknown. METHODS: We searched the Intermountain Healthcare Database for pediatric cases with the EoE ICD code over a 5-year period. We cross-referenced these results with a recently published pediatric EoE cohort from the same region and period, where incident cases were identified via retrospective review of pathology reports and medical records. Using the retrospective review cohort as the reference standard, we evaluated the accuracy of the EoE ICD code. RESULTS: Via retrospective review, we identified 1129 new pediatric EoE cases in the Intermountain Healthcare system over 5 years. Six hundred ten of these had the EoE ICD code associated with their chart. Out of 878,872 unique pediatric records in the Intermountain Healthcare system, 219 had the EoE ICD code incorrectly applied. The specificity of the EoE ICD code in children was 99%, but sensitivity and positive predictive value were 61% and 79%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The EoE ICD code has strengths and weaknesses in pediatrics. The EoE ICD code is specific, with few false positives across a large population, but not sensitive. The low sensitivity is likely multifactorial and requires further evaluation. Compared to retrospective chart review, which allows for application of clinicopathologic EoE diagnostic criteria, sole use of ICD codes results in underascertainment of EoE cases and key misclassifications.

The dysphagia stress test for rapid assessment of swallowing difficulties in esophageal conditions.

BACKGROUND: Esophageal dysphagia is a common symptom in gastroenterology practice. Current rapid assessment tools are limited to oropharyngeal dysphagia and do not translate well to esophageal conditions. We aim to create a novel tool, the dysphagia stress test (DST), to evaluate swallowing in patients with esophageal disease characterized by dysphagia. METHODS: Adults with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), achalasia, and dysphagia not otherwise specified (NOS) participated. Patient controls with non-esophageal diagnoses and healthy controls were also recruited. Participants completed the DST with five bolus challenges: water, applesauce, rice, bread, barium tablet and rated their swallowing difficulty and pain. A study clinician observed and documented water use and refusal of any challenges. Participants also completed measures of esophageal symptoms, hypersensitivity, and symptom anxiety to evaluate the DST validity. Collinearity of bolus challenges guided item reduction. KEY RESULTS: A total of 132 subjects participated. Both control groups and GERD patients had the best swallowing ability, while achalasia, EOE, and dysphagia NOS scored poorer. About 90% of patients were able to attempt or pass each of the bolus challenges, suggesting high acceptability. Construct validity of the DST is evidenced by modest negative correlations with symptom severity, hypersensitivity, and anxiety. The DST does not appear to be influenced by brain-gut processes. Applesauce, rice, and bread demonstrated collinearity; thus, the DST was reduced to three challenges. CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES: The DST is the first rapid assessment tool designed for gastroenterology clinics with direct observation of swallowing ability across several conditions to mitigate issues related to patient self-report of esophageal symptoms.

Variation in Endoscopic Activity Assessment and Endoscopy Score Validation in Adults With Eosinophilic Esophagitis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is assessed endoscopically (endoscopic activity), based on grades of edema, rings, exudates, furrows, and strictures (EREFS). We examined variations in endoscopic assessments of severity, developed and validated 3 EREFS-based scoring systems, and assessed responsiveness of these systems using data from a randomized placebo-controlled trial of patients with EoE. METHODS: For the development set, 5 gastroenterologists reviewed EREFS findings from 266 adults with EoE and provided endoscopist global assessment scores (EndoGA, scale of 0 to 10); variation (ΔEndoGA) was assessed using linear regression. We evaluated simple scores (features given arbitrary values from 0 to 3) and developed 2 scoring systems (adjusted score range, 0-100). We then fitted our linear regression model with mean EndoGA to data from 146 adults recruited in centers in Switzerland and the United States between April 2011 and December 2012. For the validation set, we collected data from 120 separate adults (recruited in centers in Switzerland and the United States between May 2013 and July 2014), assessing regression coefficient-based scores using Bland-Altman method. We assessed the responsiveness of our scoring systems using data from a randomized trial of patients with EoE given fluticasone (n=16) or placebo (n=8). RESULTS: The distribution of EndoGA values differed among endoscopists (mean ΔEndoGA, 2.6±1.8; range 0-6.6). We developed 2 regression-based scoring systems to assess overall and proximal and distal esophageal findings; variation in endoscopic features accounted for more than 90% of the mean EndoGA variation. In the validation group, differences between mean EndoGA and regression-based scores were small (ranging from -4.70 to 2.03), indicating good agreement. In analyses of data from the randomized trial, the baseline to end of study change in patients given fluticasone was a reduction of 24.3 in simple score (reduction of 4.6 in patients given placebo, P=.052); a reduction of 23.5 in regression-based overall score (reduction of 6.56 in patients given placebo, P=.12), and a reduction of 23.8 (reduction of 8.44 in patients given placebo, P=.11). CONCLUSION: Assessments of endoscopic activity in patients with EoE vary among endoscopists. In an analysis of data from a randomized controlled trial, we found that newly developed scoring systems are no better than simple scoring system in detecting changes in endoscopic activity. These results support the use of a simple scoring system in evaluation of endoscopic activity in patients with EoE. clinicaltrials.gov no: NCT00939263 and NCT01386112.