One-food versus 4-food elimination diet for pediatric eosinophilic esophagitis: A multisite randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: A 6-food elimination diet in pediatric eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is difficult to implement and may negatively affect quality of life (QoL). Less restrictive elimination diets may balance QoL and efficacy. OBJECTIVE: We performed a multisite, randomized comparative efficacy trial of a 1-food (milk) elimination diet (1FED) versus 4-food (milk, egg, wheat, soy) elimination diet (4FED) in pediatric EoE. METHODS: Patients aged 6 to 17 years with histologically active and symptomatic EoE were randomized 1:1 to 1FED or 4FED for 12 weeks. Primary end point was symptom improvement by Pediatric Eosinophilic Esophagitis Symptom Score (PEESS). Secondary end points were proportion experiencing histologic remission (<15 eosinophils per high-power field); change in histologic features (histology scoring system), endoscopic severity (endoscopic reference score), transcriptome (EoE diagnostic panel), and QoL scores; and predictors of remission. RESULTS: Sixty-three patients were randomly assigned to 1FED (n = 38) and 4FED (n = 25). In 4FED versus 1FED, mean PEESS improved -25.0 versus -14.5 (P = .04), but remission rates (41% vs 44%; P = 1.00), histology scoring system (-0.25 vs -0.29; P = .77), endoscopic reference score (-1.10 vs -0.58; P = .47), and QoL scores were similar between groups. The EoE transcriptome normalized in those with histologic response to both diets. Baseline peak eosinophil count predicted remission (odds ratio, 0.975 [95% confidence interval, 0.953-0.999], P = .04; cutoff ≤42 eosinophils per high-power field). The 4FED withdrawal rate (32%) exceeded that of 1FED (11%) (P = .0496). CONCLUSIONS: Although 4FED moderately improved symptoms compared with 1FED, the histologic, endoscopic, QoL, and transcriptomic outcomes were similar in both groups. 1FED is a reasonable first-choice therapy for pediatric EoE, given its effects, tolerability, and relative simplicity.

Monitoring Patients With Eosinophilic Esophagitis in Routine Clinical Practice - International Expert Recommendations.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: There are no studies or recommendations on optimal monitoring strategies for patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). Our objective was to develop guidance on how to monitor patients with EoE in routine clinical practice, on the basis of available clinical evidence and expert opinion. METHODS: A multidisciplinary, international group of EoE experts identified the following important 3 questions during several consensus meetings: why, by what means, and when to monitor patients with EoE. A steering committee was named, and 3 teams were formed to review literature and to formulate statements for each topic. In a Delphi survey, a level of agreement of ≥75% was defined as threshold value for acceptance. In a final conference, results were presented, critical points and comments on the statements were discussed, and statements were rephrased/rewritten if necessary. RESULTS: Eighteen EoE experts (14 adult and pediatric gastroenterologists, 2 pathologists and 2 allergists) with a median of 21.7 years in clinical practice, mostly academic or university-based, completed the Delphi survey, which included 11 statements and a proposed algorithm for monitoring patients with EoE. Each statement attained ≥75% agreement. Participants discussed and debated mostly about the statement concerning surveillance intervals for EoE patients with stable disease. CONCLUSIONS: It was concluded that effective maintenance treatment probably reduces the development of EoE complications, and regular, structured, and, under certain conditions, individualized clinical follow-up is recommended to assess disease activity while opening a window to monitoring side effects, adjusting therapy, and encouraging adherence to treatment. Follow-up should comprise symptom assessment and periodic or repeated endoscopy with histological assessment in specific EoE settings.

Esophageal Epithelium and Lamina Propria Are Unevenly Involved in Eosinophilic Esophagitis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The nature of the involvement of esophageal tissue in eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is unclear. We estimated the intrabiopsy site agreements of the EoE Histologic Scoring System (EoEHSS) scores for the grade (degree) and stage (extent) of involvement of the esophageal epithelial and lamina propria and examined if the EoE activity status influenced the intrabiopsy site agreement. METHODS: Demographic, clinical, and EoEHSS scores collected as part of the prospective Outcome Measures for Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Diseases Across Ages study were analyzed. A weighted Cohen's kappa agreement coefficient (k) was used to calculate the pairwise agreements for proximal:distal, proximal:middle, and middle:distal esophageal biopsy sites, separately for grade and stage scores, for each of the 8 components of EoEHSS. A k > 0.75 was considered uniform involvement. Inactive EoE was defined as fewer than 15 eosinophils per high-powered field. RESULTS: EoEHSS scores from 1263 esophageal biopsy specimens were analyzed. The k for the stage of involvement of the dilated intercellular spaces across all 3 sites in inactive EoE was consistently greater than 0.75 (range, 0.87-0.99). The k for lamina propria fibrosis was greater than 0.75 across some of the biopsy sites but not across all 3. Otherwise, the k for all other features, for both grade and stage, irrespective of the disease activity status, was 0.75 or less (range, 0.00-0.74). CONCLUSIONS: Except for the extent of involvement of dilated intercellular spaces in inactive EoE, the remaining epithelial features and lamina propria are involved unevenly across biopsy sites in EoE, irrespective of the disease activity status. This study enhances our understanding of the effects of EoE on esophageal tissue pathology.

A Clinical Severity Index for Eosinophilic Esophagitis: Development, Consensus, and Future Directions.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Disease activity and severity of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) dictate therapeutic options and management, but the decision-making process for determining severity varies among practitioners. To reduce variability in practice patterns and help clinicians monitor the clinical course of the disease in an office setting, we aimed to create an international consensus severity scoring index for EoE. METHODS: A multidisciplinary international group of adult and pediatric EoE researchers and clinicians, as well as non-EoE allergy immunology and gastroenterology experts, formed 3 teams to review the existing literature on histology, endoscopy, and symptoms of EoE in the context of progression and severity. A steering committee convened a 1-day virtual meeting to reach consensus on each team's opinion on salient features of severity across key clinicopathologic domains and distill features that would allow providers to categorize disease severity. RESULTS: Symptom features and complications and inflammatory and fibrostenotic features on both endoscopic and histologic examination were collated into a simplified scoring system-the Index of Severity for Eosinophilic Esophagitis (I-SEE)-that can be completed at routine clinic visits to assess disease severity using a point scale of 0-6 for mild, 7-14 for moderate, and ≥15 for severe EoE. CONCLUSIONS: A multidisciplinary team of experts iteratively created a clinically usable EoE severity scoring system denominated "I-SEE" to guide practitioners in EoE management by standardizing disease components reflecting disease severity beyond eosinophil counts. I-SEE should be validated and refined using data from future clinical trials and routine clinical practice to increase its utilization and functionality.

Loss of Endothelial TSPAN12 Promotes Fibrostenotic Eosinophilic Esophagitis via Endothelial Cell-Fibroblast Crosstalk.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) can progress to fibrostenosis by unclear mechanisms. Herein, we investigated gene dysregulation in fibrostenotic EoE, its association with clinical parameters and specific pathways, and the functional consequences. METHODS: Esophageal biopsies from subjects with EoE were collected across 11 Consortium of Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Disease Researchers sites (n = 311) and 2 independent replication cohorts (n = 83). Inclusion criteria for fibrostenotic EoE were endoscopic rings, stricture, and/or a history of dilation. Endoscopic, histologic, and molecular features were assessed by the EoE Endoscopic Reference Score, EoE Histology Scoring System, EoE Diagnostic Panel, and RNA sequencing. Esophageal endothelial TSPAN12 expression and functional effects on barrier integrity and gene expression were analyzed in vitro. RESULTS: TSPAN12 was the gene most correlated with fibrostenosis (r = -0.40, P < .001). TSPAN12 was lower in fibrostenotic EoE and correlated with EoE Endoscopic Reference Score, EoE Diagnostic Panel, and EoE Histology Scoring System (r = 0.34-0.47, P < .001). Lower TSPAN12 associated with smaller esophageal diameter (r = 0.44, P = .03), increased lamina propria fibrosis (r = -0.41, P < .001), and genes enriched in cell cycle-related pathways. Interleukin (IL)-13 reduced TSPAN12 expression in endothelial cells. Conversely, anti-IL-13 therapy increased TSPAN12 expression. TSPAN12 gene silencing increased endothelial cell permeability and dysregulated genes associated with extracellular matrix pathways. Endothelial cell-fibroblast crosstalk induced extracellular matrix changes relevant to esophageal remodeling. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with fibrostenotic EoE express decreased levels of endothelial TSPAN12. We propose that IL-13 decreases TSPAN12, likely contributing to the chronicity of EoE by promoting tissue remodeling through fibroblast-endothelial cell crosstalk.

A Clinical Severity Index for Eosinophilic Esophagitis: Development, Consensus, and Future Directions.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Disease activity and severity of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) dictate therapeutic options and management, but the decision-making process for determining severity varies among practitioners. To reduce variability in practice patterns and help clinicians monitor the clinical course of the disease in an office setting, we aimed to create an international consensus severity scoring index for EoE. METHODS: A multidisciplinary international group of adult and pediatric EoE researchers and clinicians, as well as non-EoE allergy immunology and gastroenterology experts, formed 3 teams to review the existing literature on histology, endoscopy, and symptoms of EoE in the context of progression and severity. A steering committee convened a 1-day virtual meeting to reach consensus on each team's opinion on salient features of severity across key clinicopathologic domains and distill features that would allow providers to categorize disease severity. RESULTS: Symptom features and complications and inflammatory and fibrostenotic features on both endoscopic and histologic examination were collated into a simplified scoring system-the Index of Severity for Eosinophilic Esophagitis (I-SEE)-that can be completed at routine clinic visits to assess disease severity using a point scale of 0-6 for mild, 7-14 for moderate, and ≥15 for severe EoE. CONCLUSIONS: A multidisciplinary team of experts iteratively created a clinically usable EoE severity scoring system denominated "I-SEE" to guide practitioners in EoE management by standardizing disease components reflecting disease severity beyond eosinophil counts. I-SEE should be validated and refined using data from future clinical trials and routine clinical practice to increase its utilization and functionality.

Long-Lasting Dissociation of Esophageal Eosinophilia and Symptoms After Dilation in Adults With Eosinophilic Esophagitis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Esophageal dilation improves dysphagia but not inflammation in eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) patients. We investigated if dilation modifies the association between symptoms and peak esophageal eosinophils per high-power field (eos/hpf). METHODS: Adults enrolled in a multisite prospective Consortium of Gastrointestinal Eosinophilic Disease Researchers Outcome Measures for Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Diseases Across Ages observational study (NCT02523118) completed the symptom-based EoE activity index (EEsAI) patient-reported outcome instrument and underwent endoscopy with biopsy specimens. Patients were stratified based on dilation status as absent, performed 1 year or less before endoscopy, and performed more than 1 year before endoscopy. Assessments included Spearman correlations of the relationship between symptoms and eos/hpf and linear regression with EEsAI as the outcome, eos/hpf as predictor, and interaction for dilation and eos/hpf. RESULTS: Among 100 patients (n = 61 males; median age, 37 y), 15 and 40 patients underwent dilation 1 year or less and more than 1 year before index endoscopy, respectively. In nondilated patients, the association between eos/hpf and symptoms was moderate (ρ = 0.49; P < .001); for a 10-eos/hpf increase, the predicted EEsAI increased by 2.69 (P = .002). In patients dilated 1 or less and more than 1 year before index endoscopy, this association was abolished (ρ = -0.38; P = .157 for ≤1 y and ρ = 0.02; P = .883 >1 y); for a 10-eos/hpf increase, the predicted EEsAI changed by -1.64 (P = .183) and 0.78 (P = .494), respectively. Dilation modified the association between symptoms and eos/hpf (P = .005 and P = .187 for interaction terms of eos/hpf and dilation 1 or less years before and more than 1 year before index endoscopy, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In nondilated EoE adults, eos/hpf correlate modestly with symptoms; this correlation was no longer appreciated in dilated patients, and the dilation effects lasted longer than 1 year. Dilation status should be considered in studies evaluating EoE treatment and for clinical follow-up evaluation.

International Consensus Recommendations for Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Disease Nomenclature.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Substantial heterogeneity in terminology used for eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases (EGIDs), particularly the catchall term "eosinophilic gastroenteritis," limits clinical and research advances. We aimed to achieve an international consensus for standardized EGID nomenclature. METHODS: This consensus process utilized Delphi methodology. An initial naming framework was proposed and refined in iterative fashion, then assessed in a first round of Delphi voting. Results were discussed in 2 consensus meetings, and the framework was updated and reassessed in a second Delphi vote, with a 70% threshold set for agreement. RESULTS: Of 91 experts participating, 85 (93%) completed the first and 82 (90%) completed the second Delphi surveys. Consensus was reached on all but 2 statements. "EGID" was the preferred umbrella term for disorders of gastrointestinal (GI) tract eosinophilic inflammation in the absence of secondary causes (100% agreement). Involved GI tract segments will be named specifically and use an "Eo" abbreviation convention: eosinophilic gastritis (now abbreviated EoG), eosinophilic enteritis (EoN), and eosinophilic colitis (EoC). The term "eosinophilic gastroenteritis" is no longer preferred as the overall name (96% agreement). When >2 GI tract areas are involved, the name should reflect all of the involved areas. CONCLUSIONS: This international process resulted in consensus for updated EGID nomenclature for both clinical and research use. EGID will be the umbrella term, rather than "eosinophilic gastroenteritis," and specific naming conventions by location of GI tract involvement are recommended. As more data are developed, this framework can be updated to reflect best practices and the underlying science.

Prospective Endoscopic Activity Assessment for Eosinophilic Gastritis in a Multisite Cohort.

INTRODUCTION: Eosinophilic gastritis (EG) is a chronic inflammatory disease of the stomach characterized by eosinophil-predominant gastric mucosal inflammation and gastrointestinal symptoms. The aim of this study was to prospectively evaluate endoscopic features in a large series of children and adults with EG to better understand the endoscopic manifestations and develop a standardized instrument for investigations. METHODS: Data were prospectively collected as part of the Consortium for Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Disease Researchers, a national collaborative network. Endoscopic features were prospectively recorded using a system specifically developed for EG, the EG Endoscopic Reference System (EG-REFS). Correlations were made between EG-REFS and clinical and histologic features. RESULTS: Of 98 patients with EG, 65 underwent assessments using EG-REFS. The most common findings were erythema (72%), raised lesions (49%), erosions (46%), and granularity (35%); only 8% of patients with active histology (≥30 eosinophils/high-power field) exhibited no endoscopic findings. A strong correlation between EG-REFS scores and physician global assessment of endoscopy severity was demonstrated (Spearman r = 0.84, P < 0.0001). The overall score and specific components of EG-REFS were more common in the antrum than in the fundus or body. EG-REFS severity was significantly correlated with active histology, defined by a threshold of ≥30 eosinophils/high-power field (P = 0.0002). DISCUSSION: Prospective application of EG-REFS identified gastric features with a strong correlation with physician global assessment of endoscopic activity in EG. Endoscopic features demonstrated greater severity in patients with active histology and a predilection for the gastric antrum. Further development of EG-REFS should improve its utility in clinical studies.

Management of eosinophilic esophagitis associated food impaction in Europe and the United States.

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is the most common cause of esophageal food impaction (EFI). Approaches to management of EFI due to EoE have not been well characterized. We conducted a web-based survey to understand approaches to management of EFI due to EoE among endoscopists. Questions focused on management of patients from presentation to post-endoscopy follow-up. The survey was administered to a list of eligible candidates provided by societies of gastroenterology. A total of 308 endoscopists completed the questionnaire. The majority (83%) practiced in Europe and treated adults (78%). Most agreed patients should be advised to seek emergency care (66%) within 1 to 2 hours (41% agreement). There was agreement that medications to induce vomiting should be avoided (84%) and that blood tests or imaging studies were usually not required before endoscopy. By contrast, there was more variability in the type of sedation recommended and the need for endotracheal intubation, especially when comparing more experienced with less experienced EoE-endoscopists. Overall, fewer than half (43%) respondents recommended obtaining esophageal biopsies during the initial endoscopy. However, there were significant differences in the proportion who recommended biopsies based on level of EoE-experience (25, 52, 77%, P < 0.001; less vs. moderate vs. very experienced) and comparing pediatric and adult endoscopists (32, vs. 79%, P < 0.001; adult vs. pediatric). There exists heterogeneity among endoscopists in recommendations to manage EFI in patients with EoE. These findings support development of clinical guidelines and new studies to clarify the rationale for best practices. Key summary: Established knowledge-The optimal management of patients with esophageal food impaction due to eosinophilic esophagitis from presentation at the emergency department to postendoscopy care is unclear. New findings-Considerable recommendation variation exists in the management of EFI in patients with EoE. Our findings provide a rationale for the creation of consensus practice guidelines and further study into best practices.

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.

Updated International Consensus Diagnostic Criteria for Eosinophilic Esophagitis: Proceedings of the AGREE Conference.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Over the last decade, clinical experiences and research studies raised concerns regarding use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) as part of the diagnostic strategy for eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). We aimed to clarify the use of PPIs in the evaluation and treatment of children and adults with suspected EoE to develop updated international consensus criteria for EoE diagnosis. METHODS: A consensus conference was convened to address the issue of PPI use for esophageal eosinophilia using a process consistent with standards described in the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II. Pediatric and adult physicians and researchers from gastroenterology, allergy, and pathology subspecialties representing 14 countries used online communications, teleconferences, and a face-to-face meeting to review the literature and clinical experiences. RESULTS: Substantial evidence documented that PPIs reduce esophageal eosinophilia in children, adolescents, and adults, with several mechanisms potentially explaining the treatment effect. Based on these findings, an updated diagnostic algorithm for EoE was developed, with removal of the PPI trial requirement. CONCLUSIONS: EoE should be diagnosed when there are symptoms of esophageal dysfunction and at least 15 eosinophils per high-power field (or approximately 60 eosinophils per mm2) on esophageal biopsy and after a comprehensive assessment of non-EoE disorders that could cause or potentially contribute to esophageal eosinophilia. The evidence suggests that PPIs are better classified as a treatment for esophageal eosinophilia that may be due to EoE than as a diagnostic criterion, and we have developed updated consensus criteria for EoE that reflect this change.

Alignment of parent- and child-reported outcomes and histology in eosinophilic esophagitis across multiple CEGIR sites.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcome metrics for eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) have been developed and validated but not used in a multicenter pediatric population or systematically aligned with histology. OBJECTIVE: We sought to understand (1) the potential of caregiver report to predict patient self-reported symptoms and (2) the correlation of patient-reported outcome domains with histology. METHODS: Patients with EoE (n = 310) and their parents participating in the Consortium of Gastrointestinal Eosinophilic Disease Researchers (CEGIR) observational clinical trial were queried for baseline patient symptoms and quality of life (QOL) by using the Pediatric Eosinophilic Esophagitis Symptom Score, version 2 (PEESSv2.0), and the Pediatric QOL EoE module (PedsQL-EoE), and biopsy specimens were analyzed by using the EoE Histology Scoring System. RESULTS: PEESSv2.0 parental and child reports aligned across all domains (r = 0.68-0.73, P < .001). PedsQL-EoE reports correlated between parents and children across ages and multiple domains (r = 0.48-0.79, P < .001). There was a tight correlation between symptoms on PEESSv2.0 and their effects on QOL both on self-report and parental report (P < .001). Self-reported symptoms on PEESSv2.0 (positively) and PedsQL-EoE (inversely) showed a weak correlation with proximal, but not distal, peak eosinophil counts and features and architectural tissue changes on the EoE Histology Scoring System (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Parents of children with EoE aged 3 to 18 years accurately reflected their children's disease symptoms and QOL. Self- and parent-reported symptoms correlate with proximal esophageal histology. Our data suggest that parental report in young children can function as an adequate marker for self-reported symptoms and that self-reported symptoms can reflect changes in tissue histology in the proximal esophagus. These findings should be considered during clinical trials for drug development.

Prediction Models of Mortality in Acute Pancreatitis in Adults: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Acute pancreatitis (AP) varies in severity, prompting development of systems aimed at predicting prognosis to help guide therapy. Although several prediction approaches are available, their test characteristics and clinical utility are not completely understood. PURPOSE: To evaluate the test characteristics (prognostic accuracy, incremental predictive value) and clinical utility (effect on patient outcomes) of severity scores for predicting mortality in AP. DATA SOURCES: Ovid MEDLINE and EMBASE (inception to 3 May 2016). STUDY SELECTION: Longitudinal studies, in any language, that evaluated the prognostic value of at least 1 clinical severity score in AP. DATA EXTRACTION: Dual data extraction and quality assessment. DATA SYNTHESIS: Of 4039 citations screened, 94 unique studies evaluating 18 scores in 53 547 patients met the inclusion criteria. All studies provided data on prognostic accuracy, whereas 6 provided data on incremental predictive values. Most scores demonstrated low prognostic accuracy. The Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II score and the Ranson criteria were studied most extensively. The median sensitivity and specificity of APACHE II at a threshold of 7 were 100% (range, 68% to 100%) and 63% (range, 21% to 96%), respectively, and those of the Ranson criteria at a threshold of 2 were 90% (range, 0% to 100%) and 67% (range, 14% to 97%), respectively. Estimates of sensitivity were based on relatively few patients. Evidence was limited regarding the incremental predictive value of the scoring systems or their effect on patient outcomes. LIMITATION: Substantial clinical heterogeneity and inadequate methodological and reporting quality precluded a meta-analysis. CONCLUSION: The test characteristics and clinical utility of AP severity scores remain uncertain. Additional studies with improved methodological rigor are needed, and the development of new scoring systems may be justified. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Global Scholarship Programme for Research Excellence for 2014 to 2015, The Chinese University of Hong Kong.

Should wheat, barley, rye, and/or gluten be avoided in a 6-food elimination diet?

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), a food antigen-mediated disease, is effectively treated with the dietary elimination of 6 foods commonly associated with food allergies (milk, wheat, egg, soy, tree nuts/peanuts, and fish/shellfish). Because wheat shares homologous proteins (including gluten) with barley and rye and can also be processed with these grains, some clinicians have suggested that barley and rye might also trigger EoE as a result of cross-reaction and/or cross-contamination with wheat. In this article, we discuss the theoretical risks of cross-reactivity and cross-contamination among wheat, barley, and rye proteins (including gluten); assess common practices at EoE treatment centers; and provide recommendations for dietary treatment and future studies of EoE.

Abdominal compression during endoscopy (the Bolster technique) demonstrates hidden Schatzki rings (with videos).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Schatzki rings are found in the distal esophagus, are associated with hiatal hernias, and present with intermittent dysphagia to solid foods. They can be identified by radiology (GI series or barium swallow studies) or endoscopy. Rings are not always visualized during endoscopy in patients in whom they are suspected clinically. The Bolster technique involves application of epigastric abdominal pressure, which offers the potential to reveal a Schatzki ring that is otherwise obscured within a reduced hiatal hernia. The aim of this study was to determine whether the Bolster technique improves endoscopic detection of Schatzki rings. METHODS: We reviewed 30 symptomatic patients with a history of a Schatzki ring in a tertiary care center. The Bolster technique was applied to patients in whom the ring was not visible during standard endoscopy. The main outcome measurement was identification of the Schatzki ring after the Bolster technique. RESULTS: A Schatzki ring was visible during standard endoscopy in 26 of the 30 patients. In the remaining 4, the ring was visible only after the application of the Bolster technique. CONCLUSION: The Bolster technique is a simple maneuver that can increase detection rates of Schatzki rings during endoscopy.

Short-term treatment with proton pump inhibitors, H2-receptor antagonists and prokinetics for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease-like symptoms and endoscopy negative reflux disease.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 25% of adults regularly experience heartburn, a symptom of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD). Most patients are treated empirically (without specific diagnostic evaluation e.g. endoscopy. Among patients who have an upper endoscopy, findings range from a normal appearance, mild erythema to severe oesophagitis with stricture formation. Patients without visible damage to the oesophagus have endoscopy negative reflux disease (ENRD). The pathogenesis of ENRD, and its response to treatment may differ from GORD with oesophagitis. OBJECTIVES: Summarise, quantify and compare the efficacy of short-term use of proton pump inhibitors (PPI), H2-receptor antagonists (H2RA) and prokinetics in adults with GORD, treated empirically and in those with endoscopy negative reflux disease (ENRD). SEARCH METHODS: We searched MEDLINE (January 1966 to November 2011), EMBASE (January 1988 to November 2011), and EBMR in November 2011. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials reporting symptomatic outcome after short-term treatment for GORD using proton pump inhibitors, H2-receptor antagonists or prokinetic agents. Participants had to be either from an empirical treatment group (no endoscopy used in treatment allocation) or from an endoscopy negative reflux disease group (no signs of erosive oesophagitis). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. MAIN RESULTS: Thirty-four trials (1314 participants) were included: fifteen in the empirical treatment group, fifteen in the ENRD group and four in both. In empirical treatment of GORD the risk ratio (RR) for heartburn remission (the primary efficacy variable) in placebo-controlled trials for PPI was 0.37 (two trials, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.32 to 0.44), for H2RAs 0.77 (two trials, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.99) and for prokinetics 0.86 (one trial, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.01). In a direct comparison PPIs were more effective than H2RAs (seven trials, RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.73) and prokinetics (two trials, RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.87).In treatment of ENRD, the RR for heartburn remission for PPI versus placebo was 0.71 (ten trials, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.78) and for H2RA versus placebo was 0.84 (two trials, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.95). The RR for PPI versus H2RA was 0.78 (three trials, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.97) and for PPI versus prokinetic 0.72 (one trial, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.92). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: PPIs are more effective than H2RAs in relieving heartburn in patients with GORD who are treated empirically and in those with ENRD, although the magnitude of benefit is greater for those treated empirically.

One-food versus six-food elimination diet therapy for the treatment of eosinophilic oesophagitis: a multicentre, randomised, open-label trial.

BACKGROUND: Empirical elimination diets are effective for achieving histological remission in eosinophilic oesophagitis, but randomised trials comparing diet therapies are lacking. We aimed to compare a six-food elimination diet (6FED) with a one-food elimination diet (1FED) for the treatment of adults with eosinophilic oesophagitis. METHODS: We conducted a multicentre, randomised, open-label trial across ten sites of the Consortium of Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Disease Researchers in the USA. Adults aged 18-60 years with active, symptomatic eosinophilic oesophagitis were centrally randomly allocated (1:1; block size of four) to 1FED (animal milk) or 6FED (animal milk, wheat, egg, soy, fish and shellfish, and peanut and tree nuts) for 6 weeks. Randomisation was stratified by age, enrolling site, and gender. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with histological remission (peak oesophageal count <15 eosinophils per high-power field [eos/hpf]). Key secondary endpoints were the proportions with complete histological remission (peak count ≤1 eos/hpf) and partial remission (peak counts ≤10 and ≤6 eos/hpf) and changes from baseline in peak eosinophil count and scores on the Eosinophilic Esophagitis Histology Scoring System (EoEHSS), Eosinophilic Esophagitis Endoscopic Reference Score (EREFS), Eosinophilic Esophagitis Activity Index (EEsAI), and quality of life (Adult Eosinophilic Esophagitis Quality-of-Life and Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Information System Global Health questionnaires). Individuals without histological response to 1FED could proceed to 6FED, and those without histological response to 6FED could proceed to swallowed topical fluticasone propionate 880 µg twice per day (with unrestricted diet), for 6 weeks. Histological remission after switching therapy was assessed as a secondary endpoint. Efficacy and safety analyses were done in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population. This trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02778867, and is completed. FINDINGS: Between May 23, 2016, and March 6, 2019, 129 patients (70 [54%] men and 59 [46%] women; mean age 37·0 years [SD 10·3]) were enrolled, randomly assigned to 1FED (n=67) or 6FED (n=62), and included in the ITT population. At 6 weeks, 25 (40%) of 62 patients in the 6FED group had histological remission compared with 23 (34%) of 67 in the 1FED group (difference 6% [95% CI -11 to 23]; p=0·58). We found no significant difference between the groups at stricter thresholds for partial remission (≤10 eos/hpf, difference 7% [-9 to 24], p=0·46; ≤6 eos/hpf, 14% [-0 to 29], p=0·069); the proportion with complete remission was significantly higher in the 6FED group than in the 1FED group (difference 13% [2 to 25]; p=0·031). Peak eosinophil counts decreased in both groups (geometric mean ratio 0·72 [0·43 to 1·20]; p=0·21). For 6FED versus 1FED, mean changes from baseline in EoEHSS (-0·23 vs -0·15; difference -0·08 [-0·21 to 0·05]; p=0·23), EREFS (-1·0 vs -0·6; difference -0·4 [-1·1 to 0·3]; p=0·28), and EEsAI (-8·2 vs -3·0; difference -5·2 [-11·2 to 0·8]; p=0·091) were not significantly different. Changes in quality-of-life scores were small and similar between the groups. No adverse event was observed in more than 5% of patients in either diet group. For patients without histological response to 1FED who proceeded to 6FED, nine (43%) of 21 reached histological remission; for patients without histological response to 6FED who proceeded to fluticasone propionate, nine (82%) of 11 reached histological remission. INTERPRETATION: Histological remission rates and improvements in histological and endoscopic features were similar after 1FED and 6FED in adults with eosinophilic oesophagitis. 6FED had efficacy in just less than half of 1FED non-responders and steroids had efficacy in most 6FED non-responders. Our findings indicate that eliminating animal milk alone is an acceptable initial dietary therapy for eosinophilic oesophagitis. FUNDING: US National Institutes of Health.

Assessment of fractionated exhaled nitric oxide as a biomarker for the treatment of eosinophilic esophagitis.

Diagnosis of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) and determination of response to therapy is based on histological assessment of the esophagus, which requires upper endoscopy. In children, in whom a dietary approach is commonly used, multiple endoscopies are needed, because foods are eliminated and then gradually reintroduced. Ideally, noninvasive methods could supplement or replace upper endoscopy to facilitate management. Fractionated exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) has been proposed as a useful measure for monitoring disease activity in studies of patients with eosinophil-predominant asthma and in other atopic disorders. Thus, we evaluated whether FeNO levels could be a useful biomarker to assess the response to therapy in EoE patients. This study was designed to determine whether there is a change in FeNO levels during treatment with topical corticosteroids and whether changes correlated with clinical response. This was a prospective, multicenter study that enrolled nonasthmatic patients with established EoE. FeNO levels and symptom scores were measured at baseline, biweekly during 6-week swallowed fluticasone treatment, and 4 weeks posttreatment. Twelve patients completed the trial. We found a statistically significant difference between median pre- and posttreatment FeNO levels [20.3 ppb (16.0 -29.0 ppb) vs 17.6 ppb (11.7 -27.3 ppb), [corrected] p=0.009]. However, neither the pretreatment FeNO level, a change of FeNO level after 2 weeks of treatment, nor the FeNO level at the end of treatment confidently predicted a clinical or histological response. Although our findings suggest nitric oxide possibly has a physiological role in EoE, our observations do not support a role of FeNo determination for management of EoE.

Eosinophilic esophagitis: updated consensus recommendations for children and adults.

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a clinicopathologic condition of increasing recognition and prevalence. In 2007, a consensus recommendation provided clinical and histopathologic guidance for the diagnosis and treatment of EoE; however, only a minority of physicians use the 2007 guidelines, which require fulfillment of both histologic and clinical features. Since 2007, the number of EoE publications has doubled, providing new disease insight. Accordingly, a panel of 33 physicians with expertise in pediatric and adult allergy/immunology, gastroenterology, and pathology conducted a systematic review of the EoE literature (since September 2006) using electronic databases. Based on the literature review and expertise of the panel, information and recommendations were provided in each of the following areas of EoE: diagnostics, genetics, allergy testing, therapeutics, and disease complications. Because accumulating animal and human data have provided evidence that EoE appears to be an antigen-driven immunologic process that involves multiple pathogenic pathways, a new conceptual definition is proposed highlighting that EoE represents a chronic, immune/antigen-mediated disease characterized clinically by symptoms related to esophageal dysfunction and histologically by eosinophil-predominant inflammation. The diagnostic guidelines continue to define EoE as an isolated chronic disorder of the esophagus diagnosed by the need of both clinical and pathologic features. Patients commonly have high rates of concurrent allergic diatheses, especially food sensitization, compared with the general population. Proved therapeutic options include chronic dietary elimination, topical corticosteroids, and esophageal dilation. Important additions since 2007 include genetic underpinnings that implicate EoE susceptibility caused by polymorphisms in the thymic stromal lymphopoietin protein gene and the description of a new potential disease phenotype, proton pump inhibitor-responsive esophageal eosinophila. Further advances and controversies regarding diagnostic methods, surrogate disease markers, allergy testing, and treatment approaches are discussed.