Histological Phenotyping in Eosinophilic Esophagitis: Localized Proximal Disease Is Infrequent but Associated with Less Severe Disease and Better Disease Outcome.

INTRODUCTION: It is still unknown whether eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) patients with localized disease are different from those with extended disease. METHODS: We evaluated prospectively included patients in the Swiss EoE cohort. Data on all patients with active disease at baseline, no concomitant gastroesophageal reflux disease, no strictures at baseline, and at least one follow-up visit were analyzed. We compared patients with histologically localized proximal versus distal versus extended (=proximal and distal) disease with regard to patient, disease characteristics, disease presentation, and development of complications. RESULTS: We included 124 patients with a median of 2.5 years of follow-up (73.4% males, median age 35.0 years). Ten patients had proximal (8.1%), 46 patients had distal (37.1%), and 68 patients had extended disease (54.8%). Patients with proximal disease were significantly more often females (80%) compared with patients with distal (26.1%, p = 0.002) or extended disease (19.1%, p < 0.001) and reported less severe symptoms (VAS 0 vs. VAS 1, p = 0.001). Endoscopic and histological disease was less pronounced in the proximal esophagus of proximal EoE compared to extended disease (EREFS 1.0 vs. 3.0, p = 0.001; 27.0 eos/hpf vs. 52.5 eos/hpf, p = 0.008). Patients with proximal disease were less likely to undergo dilation compared to patients with distal disease in the follow-up (3.3% vs. 23.3%, p = 0.010). In a multivariate Cox regression model, proximal eosinophilia was less likely to be associated with treatment failure compared to distal eosinophilia. CONCLUSION: Although isolated proximal EoE is infrequent, it is associated with less severe disease and better disease outcome. Proximal disease appears to present a unique EoE phenotype.

Pediatric Patients with Eosinophilic Esophagitis and Their Parents Identify Symptoms as the Most Important Treatment Outcome.

INTRODUCTION: Given the lack of data, we aimed to explore which therapeutic endpoints pediatric patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) and their parents consider to be relevant. METHODS: We created an educational brochure on EoE and a questionnaire, both of which were content-validated by pediatric patients and parents. Validated documents were sent to 112 patients and parents. They ranked the importance (5 levels) of short (during next 3 months) and long-term (≥1 year) treatment effect on symptoms, quality of life, endoscopic inflammation, stricture formation, histological inflammation, and fibrosis. RESULTS: A total of 45 parents and 30 pediatric patients ≥11 years completed the questionnaires. Pediatric patients identified improvement in the following domains as most important in the short- and long-term, respectively: symptoms (73% vs. 77%), QoL (53% vs. 57%), histologic inflammation (47% vs. 50%), histologic fibrosis (40% vs. 33%), endoscopic inflammation (47% vs. 40%), and strictures (33% vs. 40%). Parents of children ≥11 years old classified improvement in the following domains as most important in the short- and long-term, respectively: symptoms (70% vs. 83%), QoL (63% vs. 80%), histologic inflammation (67% vs. 77%), histologic fibrosis (47% vs. 63%), endoscopic inflammation (77% vs. 80%), and strictures (40% vs. 53%). Agreement between caregiver and children on the short-term importance of treatment outcomes was as follows: symptoms (77%), QoL (40%), histologic inflammation and fibrosis (47% and 43%), endoscopic inflammation and strictures (50% and 40%). CONCLUSION: Pediatric patients and parents attributed most importance to improvement in symptoms and QoL. Agreement between parents and patients regarding therapy goals is limited.

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.

Barrett's Esophagus in Eosinophilic Esophagitis in Swiss Eosinophilic Esophagitis Cohort Study (SEECS).

INTRODUCTION: There is a complex interrelationship between gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) potentially promoting the occurrence and modulating severity of each other reciprocally. Presence of Barrett's esophagus (BE) is a defining factor for the diagnosis of GERD. While several studies investigated the potential impact of concomitant GERD on the presentation and course of EoE, little was known with regards to BE in EoE patients. METHODS: We analyzed prospectively collected clinical, endoscopic, and histological data from patients enrolled in the Swiss Eosinophilic Esophagitis Cohort Study (SEECS) regarding differences between EoE patients with (EoE/BE+) versus without BE (EoE/BE-) and determined the prevalence of BE in EoE patients. RESULTS: Among a total of 509 EoE patients included in our analysis, 24 (4.7%) had concomitant BE with a high male preponderance (EoE/BE+ 83.3% vs. EoE/BE- 74.4%). While there were no differences in dysphagia, odynophagia was significantly (12.5 vs. 3.1%, p = 0.047) more common in EoE/BE+ versus EoE/BE-. General well-being at last follow-up was significantly lower in EoE/BE+. Endoscopically, we observed an increased incidence of fixed rings in the proximal esophagus in EoE/BE+ (70.8 vs. 46.3% in EoE/BE-, p = 0.019) and a higher fraction of patients with a severe fibrosis in the proximal histological specimen (8.7 vs. 1.6% in EoE/BE, p = 0.017). CONCLUSION: Our study reveals that BE is twice as frequent in EoE patients compared to general population. Despite many similarities between EoE patients with and without BE, the finding of a more pronounced remodeling in EoE patients with Barrett is noteworthy.

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.

Sex Impacts Disease Activity But Not Symptoms or Quality of Life in Adults With Eosinophilic Esophagitis.

BACKGROUND: Eosinophilic esophagitis has a strong male predominance that appears at least partially due to genetic susceptibility. However, data regarding sex-related differences in patients with EoE are scarce. METHODS: We analyzed prospectively collected data from adults enrolled into the Swiss Eosinophilic Esophagitis Cohort Study. Patients with and without dilation in the past 12 months completed patient-reported Eosinophilic Esophagitis Activity Index (EEsAI) and EoE-specific quality of life in adults (EoE-QoL-A) and underwent endoscopy with biopsies. We used linear regression with EEsAI or EoE-QoL-A as the outcome, eosinophils per high power field, rings and strictures, current therapy use, and disease duration as predictors. RESULTS: A total of 266 patients (77% male, median age at diagnosis 35.8 years, median disease duration 10.4 years) were seen during 408 visits. Men had a longer diagnostic delay (62 months vs 36 months; P = .022), higher endoscopic disease activity (median endoscopic reference score 3.0 [interquartile range, 1.0-6.0] vs 2.0 [interquartile range, 0.0-4.0]; P = .010), more microabscesses (25% vs 13%; P = .025), and more often fibrosis of the lamina propria (mild/moderate 74.7% vs 61.5%, severe 9.1% vs 5.8%; P = .047) than women. When adjusting for objective measures of disease activity, disease duration, and current therapy use, we did not observe differences in EEsAI or EoE-QoL-A between women and men. CONCLUSIONS: Male EoE patients had higher endoscopic and histologic disease activity than female patients. When adjusting for biologic activity and therapy use, we did not identify differences in symptom severity or EoE-QoL between male and female eosinophilic esophagitis patients.

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.

Diagnostic Delay in Patients With Eosinophilic Esophagitis Has Not Changed Since the First Description 30 Years Ago: Diagnostic Delay in Eosinophilic Esophagitis.

INTRODUCTION: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic progressive disease. Diagnostic delay (DD) is associated with increased risk of esophageal strictures and food impactions. We aimed to assess the evolution of DD since the first description of EoE in 1993 until 2021. METHODS: We analyzed data from patients prospectively included in the Swiss EoE database. DD was calculated as the time interval between the first occurrence of EoE symptoms and the confirmed diagnosis. DD was analyzed annually over time (1989-2021) and according to milestone publications in the field (1993: first description; 2007: first consensus recommendations; and 2011: updated consensus recommendations). In addition, a Cox proportional hazards model has been used to describe the relation between DD and covariates. RESULTS: Complete data of 1,152 patients (857 male [74%]; median age at diagnosis: 38 years, interquartile range: 28-49, range: 1-86) were analyzed. Overall, median DD was 4 years (interquartile range: 1-11, range, 0-56), with DD ≥ 10 years in 32% of the population. Over time, DD did not significantly change, neither annually nor according to release dates of milestone publications with a persistently stable fraction of roughly one-third of all patients with a DD of ≥10 years. Both ages at diagnosis ( P < 0.001, with an increase in DD up to the age of 31-40 years) and at symptom onset (younger patients had a longer DD; P < 0.001) were significantly associated with DD. DISCUSSION: DD has not changed since the first description of EoE almost 30 years ago and remains substantial. Even today, one-third of patients have a persistently high DD of ≥10 years. Substantial efforts are warranted to increase awareness for EoE and its hallmark symptom, solid food dysphagia, as an age-independent red-flag symptom among healthcare professionals and presumably the general population alike to lower risk of long-term complications.

Characterization of eosinophilic esophagitis variants by clinical, histological, and molecular analyses: A cross-sectional multi-center study.

OBJECTIVE: Physicians are increasingly confronted with patients presenting with symptoms of esophageal dysfunction resembling eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), but absence of significant esophageal eosinophilia. The purpose of this study was to characterize and classify this group of EoE variants. DESIGN: Patients from six EoE-centers with symptoms of esophageal dysfunction, but peak eosinophil counts of <60/mm2 (<15/hpf) in esophageal biopsies and absence of gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD) were included. Clinical, endoscopic, (immuno)-histological, and molecular features were determined and compared with EoE, GERD, and healthy controls. RESULTS: We included 69 patients with EoE variants. Endoscopic abnormalities were found in 53.6%. We identified three histological subtypes: EoE-like esophagitis (36/69, 52.2%), lymphocytic esophagitis (14/69, 20.3%), and non-specific esophagitis (19/69, 27.5%). Immunohistochemistry revealed-in contrast to EoE-no significant increase in inflammatory cell infiltrates compared with GERD and healthy controls, except for lymphocytes in lymphocytic esophagitis. EoE-typical Th2-response was absent in all EoE variants. However, considerable structural changes were detected based on histology and protein expression. Using next generation mRNA sequencing, we found the three EoE variants to have distinct molecular fingerprints partially sharing pronounced traits of EoE. Hierarchical sample clustering of RNA sequencing data confirmed the presence of an EoE-like (characterized by eotaxin-3 expression), non-specific, and lymphocytic variant cluster (characterized by CD3 cells and TSLP expression). CONCLUSION: All EoE variants are clinically and histologically active conditions despite the absence of esophageal eosinophilia. EoE variants appear to be part of a disease spectrum, where classical EoE represents the most common and apparent phenotype.

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.

Increasing Incidence of Microscopic Colitis in a Population-Based Cohort Study in Switzerland.

Microscopic colitis (MC) is a chronic inflammatory disease of the colon that presents with chronic, nonbloody watery diarrhea and only few or no endoscopic abnormalities. Histologic examination discriminates lymphocytic colitis (LyC; presence of ≥20 intraepithelial lymphocytes per 100 surface epithelial cells) and collagenous colitis (CC; colonic subepithelial collagen band >10 µm in diameter).1,2 MC not otherwise specified describes a subgroup of patients who do not fulfill the diagnostic criteria for either CC or LyC.1,2 Population-based epidemiologic data regarding MC are scarce. We aimed to evaluate the clinical presentation at diagnosis, incidence, and prevalence of MC in Cantons of Vaud and Fribourg, Switzerland.

Long-term Efficacy and Tolerability of RPC4046 in an Open-Label Extension Trial of Patients With Eosinophilic Esophagitis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The short-term efficacy of RPC4046, a monoclonal antibody against interleukin-13, has been shown in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). We investigated the long-term efficacy and safety of RPC4046 in an open-label, long-term extension (LTE) study in adults with EoE. METHODS: We analyzed data from 66 patients who completed the 16-week, double-blind, induction portion of a phase 2 study of RPC4046 (180 mg or 360 mg/wk) vs placebo and then completed a 52-week LTE, receiving open-label RPC4046 360 mg/wk. The study was conducted at 28 centers in 3 countries; patients were enrolled between September 2014 and January 2017. Outcomes were stratified by double-blind dose group and included esophageal eosinophil counts, EoE endoscopic reference score, EoE histologic scoring system score, symptom-based EoE activity index score, and safety. RESULTS: By week 12 of the LTE, esophageal eosinophil mean and peak counts, total EoE endoscopic reference scores, and EoE histologic scoring system grade and stage scores did not differ considerably between patients who originally received placebo vs RPC4046. Most patients maintained responses through week 52. Symptom remission (symptom-based EoE activity index score, ≤20) increased from 14% at LTE entry to 67% at LTE week 52 in placebo‒RPC4046 patients and from 30% to 54% in RPC4046‒RPC4046 (either dose) patients. Of the 28 patients who did not have a histologic response to RPC4046 during the double-blind induction phase, 10 patients (36%) achieved response during the LTE. The most common adverse events were upper respiratory tract infection (21%) and nasopharyngitis (14%). CONCLUSIONS: One year of treatment with RPC4046 is generally well tolerated and results in continued improvement and/or maintenance of endoscopic, histologic, and clinical measures of EoE disease activity relative to baseline. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02098473.

Effectiveness and Safety of High- vs Low-Dose Swallowed Topical Steroids for Maintenance Treatment of Eosinophilic Esophagitis: A Multicenter Observational Study.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Data evaluating efficacy of different doses of swallowed topical corticosteroids (STC) in the long-term management of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) are lacking. We assessed long-term effectiveness and safety of different STC doses for adults with EoE after achievement of histological remission. METHODS: We performed a retrospective multicenter study at five EoE referral centers (US and Switzerland). We analyzed data on 82 patients with EoE in histological remission and ongoing STC treatment with therapeutic adherence of ≥75% (58 males; mean age at diagnosis, 37.2±14.4 years). Patients were followed for a median of 2.2 years (interquartile range [IQR], 1.0-3.8 years). We collected data from 217 follow-up endoscopy visits. The primary endpoint was time to histological relapse. RESULTS: Histological relapse occurred in 67% of patients. Relapse rates were comparable in patients taking low dose (≤0.5 mg per day, n = 58) and high dose STC (>0.5 mg per day, n = 24) with 72 vs 54% (ns). However, histological relapse occurred significantly earlier with low dose STC (1.0 vs 1.8 years, P = .030). There was no difference regarding rates of and time to stricture formation for low vs high dose STC. Esophageal candidiasis was observed in 6% of patients (5% for low dose, 8% for high dose, ns). No dysplasia or mucosal atrophy was detected. CONCLUSION: Histological relapse frequently occurs in EoE despite ongoing STC treatment regardless of STC doses. However, relapse develops later in patients on high dose STC without an increase in side-effects. Doses higher than 0.5 mg/day may be considered for EoE maintenance treatment, but advantage over lower doses appears to be small.

Efficacy of Dupilumab in a Phase 2 Randomized Trial of Adults With Active Eosinophilic Esophagitis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is an allergen-mediated inflammatory disease with no approved treatment in the United States. Dupilumab, a VelocImmune-derived human monoclonal antibody against the interleukin (IL) 4 receptor, inhibits IL4 and IL13 signaling. Dupilumab is effective in the treatment of allergic, atopic, and type 2 diseases, so we assessed its efficacy and safety in patients with EoE. METHODS: We performed a phase 2 study of adults with active EoE (2 episodes of dysphagia/week with peak esophageal eosinophil density of 15 or more eosinophils per high-power field), from May 12, 2015, through November 9, 2016, at 14 sites. Participants were randomly assigned to groups that received weekly subcutaneous injections of dupilumab (300 mg, n = 23) or placebo (n = 24) for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was change from baseline to week 10 in Straumann Dysphagia Instrument (SDI) patient-reported outcome (PRO) score. We also assessed histologic features of EoE (peak esophageal intraepithelial eosinophil count and EoE histologic scores), endoscopically visualized features (endoscopic reference score), esophageal distensibility, and safety. RESULTS: The mean SDI PRO score was 6.4 when the study began. In the dupilumab group, SDI PRO scores were reduced by a mean value of 3.0 at week 10 compared with a mean reduction of 1.3 in the placebo group (P = .0304). At week 12, dupilumab reduced the peak esophageal intraepithelial eosinophil count by a mean 86.8 eosinophils per high-power field (reduction of 107.1%; P < .0001 vs placebo), the EoE-histologic scoring system (HSS) severity score by 68.3% (P < .0001 vs placebo), and the endoscopic reference score by 1.6 (P = .0006 vs placebo). Dupilumab increased esophageal distensibility by 18% vs placebo (P < .0001). Higher proportions of patients in the dupilumab group developed injection-site erythema (35% vs 8% in the placebo group) and nasopharyngitis (17% vs 4% in the placebo group). CONCLUSIONS: In a phase 2 trial of patients with active EoE, dupilumab reduced dysphagia, histologic features of disease (including eosinophilic infiltration and a marker of type 2 inflammation), and abnormal endoscopic features compared with placebo. Dupilumab increased esophageal distensibility and was generally well tolerated. ClinicalTrials.gov, Number: NCT02379052.

Food-induced immediate response of the esophagus-A newly identified syndrome in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis.

BACKGROUND: Dysphagia is the main symptom of adult eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). We describe a novel syndrome, referred to as "food-induced immediate response of the esophagus" (FIRE), observed in EoE patients. METHODS: Food-induced immediate response of the esophagus is an unpleasant/painful sensation, unrelated to dysphagia, occurring immediately after esophageal contact with specific foods. Eosinophilic esophagitis experts were surveyed to estimate the prevalence of FIRE, characterize symptoms, and identify food triggers. We also surveyed a large group of EoE patients enrolled in the Swiss EoE Cohort Study for FIRE. RESULTS: Response rates were 82% (47/57) for the expert and 65% (239/368) for the patient survey, respectively. Almost, 90% of EoE experts had observed the FIRE symptom complex in their patients. Forty percent of EoE patients reported experiencing FIRE, more commonly in patients who developed EoE symptoms at a younger age (mean age of 46.4 years vs 54.1 years without FIRE; P < .01) and in those with high allergic comorbidity. Food-induced immediate response of the esophagus symptoms included narrowing, burning, choking, and pressure in the esophagus appearing within 5 minutes of ingesting a provoking food that lasted less than 2 hours. Symptom severity rated a median 7 points on a visual analogue scale from 1 to 10. Fresh fruits/vegetables and wine were the most frequent triggers. Endoscopic food removal was significantly more commonly reported in male patients with vs without FIRE (44.3% vs 27.6%; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: Food-induced immediate response of the esophagus is a novel syndrome frequently reported in EoE patients, characterized by an intense, unpleasant/painful sensation occurring rapidly and reproducibly in 40% of surveyed EoE patients after esophageal contact with specific foods.

Systematic Review of Outcome Measures Used in Observational Studies of Adults with Eosinophilic Esophagitis.

BACKGROUND: Over the last 20 years, diverse outcome measures have been used to evaluate the effectiveness of therapies for eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). This systematic review aims to identify the readouts used in observational studies of topical corticosteroids, diet, and dilation in adult EoE patients. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE and Embase for prospective and retrospective studies (cohorts/case series, randomized open-label, and case-control) evaluating the use of diets, dilation, and topical corticosteroids in adults with EoE. Two authors independently assessed the articles and extracted information about histologic, endoscopic, and patient-reported outcomes and tools used to assess treatment effects. RESULTS: We included 69 studies that met inclusion criteria. EoE-associated endoscopic findings (assessed either as absence/presence or using Endoscopic Reference Score) were evaluated in 24/35, 11/17, and 9/17 studies of topical corticosteroids, diet, and dilation, respectively. Esophageal eosinophil density was recorded in 32/35, 17/17, and 11/17 studies of topical corticosteroids, diet, and dilation, respectively. Patient-reported outcomes were not uniformly used (only in 14, 8, and 3 studies of topical corticosteroids, diet, and dilation, respectively), and most tools were not validated for use in adults with EoE. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the lack of an agreed set of core outcomes that should be recorded and reported in studies in adult EoE patients, endoscopic EoE-associated findings and esophageal eosinophil density are commonly used to assess disease activity in observational studies. Standardization of outcomes and data supporting the use of outcomes are needed to facilitate interpretation of evidence, its synthesis, and comparisons of interventions in meta-analyses of therapeutic trials in adults with EoE.

Technical feasibility, clinical effectiveness, and safety of esophageal stricture dilation using a novel endoscopic attachment cap in adults with eosinophilic esophagitis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The BougieCap (Ovesco Endoscopy AG, Tübingen, Germany) is a new device that allows optical and tactile feedback during stricture dilation of the upper GI tract. We evaluated the technical feasibility, clinical efficacy, and safety of a 1-time esophageal stricture dilation using the BougieCap in adults with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). METHODS: EoE patients prospectively included in the Swiss EoE Cohort were dilated with the BougieCap for esophageal strictures (esophageal diameter, ≤14 mm) and stricture-related symptoms. Symptoms were assessed before and 2 weeks after a single dilation session using the validated Eosinophilic Esophagitis Activity Index Patient Reported Outcomes instrument (score ranges from 0 to 100 points). RESULTS: Fifty patients (70% men; median age, 41 years; median disease duration, 4 years; 50% treated with swallowed topical corticosteroids, 10% with proton pump inhibitors, 14% with combined swallowed topical corticosteroids plus proton pump inhibitors, 14% with elimination diet, 12% without antieosinophil therapy) were evaluated. Endoscopic bougienage was technically successful in 100%. The median esophageal diameter increased from 12 mm (interquartile range [IQR], 12-13) to 16 mm (IQR, 16-16; P < .001). Median symptom severity dropped from 32 points (IQR, 27-41) to 0 (IQR, 0-10; P < .001) at 2 weeks postdilation. In 1 patient the BougieCap was temporarily lost after stricture dilation in the hypopharynx but could be retrieved. No severe adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: In adults with EoE, endoscopic treatment of esophageal strictures using the BougieCap is technically feasible and safe and offers significant symptomatic improvement in the short term.

Higher educational level in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis: a comparative analysis.

BACKGROUND: Eosinophilic esophagitis is a chronic inflammatory gastrointestinal disease with a high prevalence in younger, atopic males. In our clinical practice, we observed a striking preponderance of patients having a high educational background. The purposes of this study were first to assess the level of education of eosinophilic esophagitis patients and second to compare the findings to patients with inflammatory bowel disease, another chronic immune-mediated condition of the gastrointestinal tract, and with the Swiss general population. METHODS: Using a questionnaire, we assessed the educational level of adult patients who have attended Swiss Eosinophilic Esophagitis Clinics in the past. In addition, the educational level of the parents was assessed as well. We calculated the proportions of patients and parents who have obtained a higher educational level. Data from the Swiss Inflammatory Bowel Disease Cohort Study and from the Swiss general population served as confirmation and as comparison, respectively. RESULTS: A total of 277 successfully contacted patients (response rate 69.1%; mean age 51.1 years, 73% male) participated. A significantly higher proportion of surveyed eosinophilic esophagitis patients had a high International Standard Classification of Education level (66.8%, P < 0.001) compared with inflammatory bowel disease patients (n = 2534; 34.2%, P < 0.001) and to the Swiss general population (n = 6,066,907; 30.5% P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Our analysis confirms the clinical observation that eosinophilic esophagitis patients have a significantly higher educational level compared with the general population and to patients with other chronic inflammatory diseases of the gastrointestinal tract. As a limitation, this impressive finding remains on a purely descriptive level.

Disease Progression and Outcomes of Pregnancies in Women With Eosinophilic Esophagitis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) most often affects young patients of reproductive age, yet little is known about its effects during pregnancy. We examined the course of EoE during pregnancy, outcomes of pregnancies, and patient concerns related to pregnancy and EoE. METHODS: We sent a survey that queried demographic and disease-specific characteristics as well as pregnancy-related topics to all 151 female patients treated at 2 EoE centers in Switzerland. We analyzed cross-sectional survey data. RESULTS: Of 72 patients that returned the survey, we identified 20 patients that had at least 1 pregnancy and analyzed the data on 34 pregnancies. During pregnancy, improvement of dysphagia was reported in 56% (19/34) of all pregnancies, whereas deterioration was reported in 20% (7/34) of all pregnancies. After delivery, dysphagia returned to the pre-pregnancy level in 68% (13/19) of all pregnancies for patients with improvement of dysphagia and 57% (4/7) of all pregnancies for patients with deterioration of dysphagia during pregnancy. Esophagogastroduodenoscopy during pregnancy was required in less than 10% (3/34) of all pregnancies. Pregnancy-related complications occurred in 12% of pregnancies (4/34). The leading patient-reported concerns were fear of heritability (40% of patients, 8/20) and concerns of that use of medication would harm the fetus (30% of patients, 6/20). CONCLUSIONS: Pregnancy affects the course of EoE, with improvement of symptoms reported in most patients. Dysphagia returned to the pre-pregnancy level following delivery. EoE has likely no negative effects on outcomes of pregnancies.

RPC4046, a Monoclonal Antibody Against IL13, Reduces Histologic and Endoscopic Activity in Patients With Eosinophilic Esophagitis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic, esophageal, type 2 inflammatory response associated with increased serum levels of interleukin 13 (IL13), which might contribute to its pathogenesis. RPC4046, a recombinant humanized monoclonal antibody against IL13, prevents its binding to the receptor subunits IL13RA1 and IL13RA2. We performed a phase 2 trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of RPC4046 in patients with EoE. METHODS: We performed a multicenter, double-blind trial of 99 adults with active EoE randomly assigned (1:1:1) to groups given RPC4046 (180 or 360 mg) or placebo once weekly for 16 weeks, from September 2014 through December 2015. Patients were seen at day 1 (baseline) and weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16. They underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy and biopsies were collected at baseline and week 16. Patients completed a daily dysphagia symptom diary through week 16 and patient-reported outcome data were collected. The primary outcome was change in mean esophageal eosinophil count in the 5 high-power fields (hpfs) with the highest level of inflammation. RESULTS: At week 16, mean changes in esophageal eosinophil count per hpf were a reduction of 94.8 ± 67.3 in patients who received 180 mg RPC4046 (P < .0001) and a reduction of 99.9 ± 79.5 in patients who received 360 mg RPC4046 (P < .0001) compared with a reduction of 4.4 ± 59.9 in patients who received placebo. The 360-mg RPC4046 group, compared with the placebo group, showed significant reductions in validated endoscopic severity score at all esophageal locations (P < .0001), validated histologic grade and stage scores (both P < .0001), and clinician's global assessment of disease severity (P = .0352); they had a numerical reduction in scores from the dysphagia symptom diary (P = .0733). Significant reductions in esophageal eosinophil counts and histologic and endoscopic features were observed in patients with steroid-refractory EoE who received RPC4046. The most common adverse events were headache and upper respiratory tract infection. CONCLUSIONS: In a phase 2 trial of patients with EoE, we found RPC4046 (a monoclonal antibody against IL13) to reduce histologic and endoscopic features compared with placebo. RPC4046 was well tolerated. ClinicalTrials.gov no: NCT02098473.