Monitoring and modulating the trajectory of eosinophilic esophagitis.

Current treatments of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) aim to eliminate esophageal mucosal inflammation and attenuate, stabilize, or reverse stricture formation. However, our ability to study the long-term course of esophageal strictures in patients with EoE is hampered by the short-term existence of this disease. It is unclear to what degree of control of inflammation is needed to prevent stricture formation. Additionally, identified phenotypes of EoE may ultimately dictate different levels of concern and time intervals for developing fibrosis. Currently, multiple methods are used to monitor patients' disease progression to fibrosis, as symptoms alone do not correlate with disease activity. Endoscopic findings and mucosal histology are used to monitor disease activity, but these focus on improvements in inflammation with inconsistent evaluation of underlying fibrosis. The use of functional lumen impedance planimetry, barium esophagraphy, and endoscopic ultrasound continues to expand in EoE. The rapid advancements in EoE have led to an armamentarium of measuring tools and therapies that holistically characterize disease severity and response to therapy. Nevertheless, our ability to evaluate gross esophageal fibrosis and stricture formation from a transmural rather than mucosal view should be a focus of future investigations because it is essential to monitoring and modulating the trajectory of EoE.

Clinical and molecular correlates of the Index of Severity for Eosinophilic Esophagitis.

BACKGROUND: The Index of Severity for Eosinophilic Esophagitis (I-SEE) is a new expert-defined clinical tool that classifies disease severity of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine whether I-SEE is associated with patient characteristics, molecular features of EoE, or both. METHODS: We analyzed a prospective cohort of patients with EoE from the Consortium of Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Disease Researchers (CEGIR). Associations between I-SEE and clinical and molecular features (assessed by an EoE diagnostic panel [EDP]) were assessed. RESULTS: In 318 patients with chronic EoE (209 adults, 109 children), median total I-SEE score was 7.0, with a higher symptoms and complications score in children than adults (4.0 vs 1.0; P < .001) and higher inflammatory and fibrostenotic features scores in adults than children (3.0 vs 1.0 and 3.0 vs 0, respectively; both P < .001). Total I-SEE score had a bimodal distribution with the inactive to moderate categories and severe category. EDP score correlated with total I-SEE score (r = -0.352, P < .001) and both inflammatory and fibrostenotic features scores (r = -0.665, P < .001; r = -0.446, P < .001, respectively), but not with symptoms and complications scores (r = 0.047, P = .408). Molecular severity increased from inactive to mild and moderate, but not severe, categories. Longitudinal changes of modified I-SEE scores and inflammatory and fibrostenotic features scores reflected histologic and molecular activity. CONCLUSIONS: I-SEE score is associated with select clinical features across severity categories and with EoE molecular features for nonsevere categories, warranting further validation.

Number of Older Biological Siblings and Early-Onset Colorectal Cancer Risk.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer in the United States.1 Although CRC incidence has declined in individuals >50 years, incidence is rising in adults <50 years (early onset).1 By 2027, CRC is projected to become the leading cause of cancer mortality in US adults <50 years.2 To combat the rising incidence of early onset CRC (EOCRC), national guidelines recently lowered the screening age from 50 to 45 years for average-risk individuals.3 Understanding the risk profile of EOCRC can help combat the rising burden in young adults, especially in those ineligible for screening.

Satisfaction With and Adherence to Off-Label Corticosteroids in Adolescents and Adults With Eosinophilic Esophagitis: Results of a Web-Based Survey in the United States.

GOALS: We assessed satisfaction with and adherence to off-label corticosteroids in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) in the United States. BACKGROUND: EoE is a chronic inflammatory disease for which there are currently no US Food and Drug Administration-approved swallowed topical corticosteroids. STUDY: This noninterventional, cross-sectional, web-based survey included caregivers of adolescents (aged 11 to 17 y) and adults (aged 18 years or older) with a self-reported [or caregiver-reported (adolescents)] physician diagnosis of EoE who were receiving corticosteroids. Participants were recruited through 2 nonprofit, patient advocacy groups. The 9-item Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM-9) was used to assess satisfaction across effectiveness, convenience, and global satisfaction domains (scale: 1 to 100 per domain); higher scores indicated greater satisfaction. The 4-item Morisky Green Levine Medication Adherence Scale (MGL-4) was used to assess adherence; an MGL-4 score of <3 indicated adherence. Participants also reported reasons for nonadherence. RESULTS: Overall, 201 participants (caregivers of adolescents, n=98; adults, n=103) were included in this study. Mean TSQM-9 scores indicated low satisfaction with off-label corticosteroids across all 3 satisfaction domains in adolescents (≤61.1) and adults (≤55.7). Slightly fewer adolescents (37.1%) than adults (40.8%) were considered adherent. Forgetfulness was the most frequently reported reason for nonadherence; some patients chose not to take their medications, owing to poor palatability (adolescents), difficulty taking medications at specific times (adults), or feeling depressed/overwhelmed (adolescents and adults). CONCLUSIONS: Satisfaction with and adherence to off-label corticosteroids were low in this web-based survey of adolescents and adults with EoE in the United States.

Quality Indicator Development for the Approach to Ineffective Esophageal Motility: A Modified Delphi Study.

GOALS: Develop quality indicators for ineffective esophageal motility (IEM). BACKGROUND: IEM is identified in up to 20% of patients undergoing esophageal high-resolution manometry (HRM) based on the Chicago Classification. The clinical significance of this pattern is not established and management remains challenging. STUDY: Using RAND/University of California, Los Angeles Appropriateness Methods, we employed a modified-Delphi approach for quality indicator statement development. Quality indicators were proposed based on prior literature. Experts independently and blindly scored proposed quality statements on importance, scientific acceptability, usability, and feasibility in a 3-round iterative process. RESULTS: All 10 of the invited esophageal experts in the management of esophageal diseases invited to participate rated 12 proposed quality indicator statements. In round 1, 7 quality indicators were rated with mixed agreement, on the majority of categories. Statements were modified based on panel suggestion, modified further following round 2's virtual discussion, and in round 3 voting identified 2 quality indicators with comprehensive agreement, 4 with partial agreement, and 1 without any agreement. The panel agreed on the concept of determining if IEM is clinically relevant to the patient's presentation and managing gastroesophageal reflux disease rather than the IEM pattern; they disagreed in all 4 domains on the use of promotility agents in IEM; and had mixed agreement on the value of a finding of IEM during anti-reflux surgical planning. CONCLUSION: Using a robust methodology, 2 IEM quality indicators were identified. These quality indicators can track performance when physicians identify this manometric pattern on HRM. This study further highlights the challenges met with IEM and the need for additional research to better understand the clinical importance of this manometric pattern.

Esophageal Lichen Planus: A Descriptive Multicenter Report.

GOALS: To better understand the characteristics, treatment approaches, and outcomes of patients with esophageal lichen planus (ELP). BACKGROUND: ELP is a rare, often unrecognized and misdiagnosed disorder. Data on this unique patient population are currently limited to small, single-center series. STUDY: A multicenter, retrospective descriptive study was conducted of adults diagnosed with ELP over a 5-year period, between January 1, 2015, and October 10, 2020, from 7 centers across the United States. RESULTS: Seventy-eight patients (average age 65 y, 86% female, 90% Caucasian) were included. Over half had at least 1 extraesophageal manifestation. Esophageal strictures (54%) and abnormal mucosa (50%) were frequent endoscopic findings, with the proximal esophagus the most common site of stricture. Approximately 20% had normal endoscopic findings. Topical steroids (64%) and/or proton pump inhibitors (74%) dominated management; endoscopic response favored steroids (43% vs. 29% respectively). Almost half of the patients required switching treatment modalities during the study period. Adjunctive therapies varied significantly between centers. CONCLUSIONS: Given its at times subtle clinical and endoscopic signs, a high index of suspicion and biopsy will improve ELP diagnosis, especially in those with extraesophageal manifestations. Effective therapies are lacking and vary significantly. Prospective investigations into optimal treatment regimens are necessary.

A Delphi Method for Development of a Barrett's Esophagus Question Prompt List as a Communication Tool for Optimal Patient-physician Communication.

BACKGROUND METHODS: The question prompt list content was derived through a modified Delphi process consisting of 3 rounds. In round 1, experts provided 5 answers to the prompts "What general questions should patients ask when given a new diagnosis of Barrett's esophagus" and "What questions do I not hear patients asking, but given my expertise, I believe they should be asking?" Questions were reviewed and categorized into themes. In round 2, experts rated questions on a 5-point Likert scale. In round 3, experts rerated questions modified or reduced after the previous rounds. Only questions rated as "essential" or "important" were included in Barrett's esophagus question prompt list (BE-QPL). To improve usability, questions were reduced to minimize redundancy and simplified to use language at an eighth-grade level (Fig. 1). RESULTS: Twenty-one esophageal medical and surgical experts participated in both rounds (91% males; median age 52 years). The expert panel comprised of 33% esophagologists, 24% foregut surgeons, and 24% advanced endoscopists, with a median of 15 years in clinical practice. Most (81%), worked in an academic tertiary referral hospital. In this 3-round Delphi technique, 220 questions were proposed in round 1, 122 (55.5%) were accepted into the BE-QPL and reduced down to 76 questions (round 2), and 67 questions (round 3). These 67 questions reached a Flesch Reading Ease of 68.8, interpreted as easily understood by 13 to 15 years olds. CONCLUSIONS: With multidisciplinary input, we have developed a physician-derived BE-QPL to optimize patient-physician communication. Future directions will seek patient feedback to distill the questions further to a smaller number and then assess their usability.

Esophageal Self-Dilation in Benign Refractory Esophageal Strictures: Outcomes from a Randomized Controlled Trial and a Prospective Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with benign esophageal strictures may not maintain a response to endoscopic dilation, stenting, incisional or injectional therapies. For patients with these refractory esophageal strictures, esophageal self-dilation therapy (ESDT), performed to maintain luminal patency, may provide persistent symptomatic benefit while reducing patients' reliance on healthcare services and the risk associated with repeated endoscopic procedures. AIMS: The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of EDST in a randomized controlled trial and prospective observational study. METHODS: Twenty-five patients with refractory benign esophageal strictures were recruited at two esophageal clinics between November 2018 and June 2021. Twelve patients participated in the randomized trial and 13 in the prospective observational study. The number of endoscopic dilations, impact of therapy on dysphagia, adverse events, and complications were recorded. RESULTS: In the randomized study, 50% of patients performing ESDT and 100% of controls required endoscopic dilation during follow-up (P = 0.02). In the observational study, the median (IQR) number of endoscopic dilations fell from 7 [7-10] in the 6 months prior to commencing ESDT to 1 [0-2] in the 6 months after (P < 0.0001). Most patients (22/25) were able to learn self-dilation. Few serious adverse events were noted. Dysphagia severity remained unchanged or improved. CONCLUSIONS: ESDT appears to be a safe effective therapy for benign esophageal strictures refractory to endoscopic treatment. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: NCT03738566.

Current state of rumination syndrome.

Rumination syndrome (RS) is an underdiagnosed behavioral disorder of recurrent regurgitation. Regurgitation occurs in RS due to increased gastric pressure achieved by subconscious contraction of the abdominal musculature wall, reversing the pressure gradient between the esophagus and the stomach. RS is mainly diagnosed clinically by the Rome Criteria with symptoms of regurgitation without retching of recently ingested food into the mouth and subsequent spitting or re-mastication. When the diagnosis is unable to be made clinically, supportive testing including fed impedance manometry can be considered. RS occurs worldwide, affecting patients of all ages, races, and genders with a prevalence of 3.1-5.8%. There is significant overlap with RS and disorders of a gut-brain interaction and upright gastroesophageal reflux driven by aerophagia and supragastric belching. There is also an association with mood disorder, fibromyalgia, and eating disorders. RS may be misdiagnosed as a variety of other syndromes including gastroesophageal reflux disease, gastroparesis, achalasia, and bulimia nervosa. Once RS is diagnosed, the mainstay of treatment is diaphragmatic breathing to lower the intragastric pressure and increase the lower esophageal pressure. Diaphragmatic breathing can be supported with biofeedback and cognitive behavioral therapy as well as medication options for more refractory cases. Response to therapy overtime and changes in symptoms overtime can now be tracked with a validated questionnaire.

Questionnaire for diagnosis and response to therapy in rumination syndrome.

Rumination is a behavioral disorder characterized by regurgitation of food without retching. It is diagnosed clinically by the Rome Criteria and treated primarily by diaphragmatic breathing. Despite diagnosis and follow-up being based on symptomatic responses to therapies, there are no published or validated questionnaires. To address this care-gap, a rumination questionnaire was developed and reviewed by two expert esophagologists and five patients diagnosed with rumination. Ultimately, an eight-point questionnaire with scoring ranging from -1 to 10 was finalized. This newly developed questionnaire was implemented on five additional patients diagnosed clinically with rumination syndrome with improvement after interventions noted.

Management of Adults With Esophageal Atresia.

Esophageal atresia (EA) with or without trachea-esophageal fistula is relatively common congenital malformation with most patients living into adulthood. As a result, care of the adult patient with EA is becoming more common. Although surgical repair has changed EA from a fatal to a livable condition, the residual effects of the anomaly may lead to a lifetime of complications. These include effects related to the underlying deformity such as atonicity of the esophageal segment, fistula recurrence, and esophageal cancer to complications of the surgery including anastomotic stricture, gastroesophageal reflux, and coping with an organ transposition. This review discusses the occurrence and management of these conditions in adulthood and the role of an effective transition from pediatric to adult care to optimize adult care treatment.

Development of a Practical Guide to Implement and Monitor Diet Therapy for Eosinophilic Esophagitis.

Dietary therapy for short- and long-term management of eosinophilic esophagitis is an effective yet poorly understood and underutilized treatment strategy. Despite several prospective trials demonstrating the efficacy of dietary therapies, successful clinical implementation is hampered by the need for a multidisciplinary approach including dietitian support and provider expertise. The availability of these resources is not readily available to most gastroenterologists. Without standardized guidance on starting or completing the diet for gastrointestinal providers and/or consulting dietitians, provider attitudes toward dietary therapy vary greatly depending on familiarity and knowledge gaps in using diet therapy. This review aims to summarize evidence in support of dietary therapy in eosinophilic esophagitis while providing guidance on initiation and implementation of dietary therapy for providers.

Use of the Esophageal Sponge in Directing Food Reintroduction in Eosinophilic Esophagitis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Dietary therapy is successful in eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) but requires multiple upper endoscopies. The aim of this study was to determine if food reintroduction in EoE can be directed by minimally-invasive esophageal sponge cytology. METHODS: In this prospective non-blinded trial, 22 responders to 6-food elimination diets underwent sequential food reintroduction guided by esophageal sponge cytology. Foods were reintroduced followed by unsedated esophageal sponge cytology assessment. A food trigger was defined by sponge cytology peak eosinophil count of ≥15 eos/high-powered field (hpf). Symptoms (EoE symptom activity index [EEsAI]), endoscopic score (EoE endoscopic reference score [EREFS]), and biopsy histology (peak eosinophil count) were collected pre-dietary therapy and post-dietary therapy, and then 4 weeks post food reintroduction. RESULTS: The EEsAI and EREFS were similar post-dietary therapy to post-food reintroduction: 12.0 (interquartile range [IQR], 0.0-27.0) vs 16.5 (IQR, 9.0-28.8) (P = .265) and 1.5 (IQR, 0.2-3.0) vs 1.0 (IQR, 0.0-2.0) (P = .185). However, the peak eosinophil count was increased post-food reintroduction compared with post-dietary therapy: 20.0 (IQR, 5.0-51.5) vs 2.0 (IQR, 1.0-4.0) (P < .001), suggesting a failure of identification of all food triggers. The peak eosinophil count was lower post-food reintroduction compared with pre-dietary therapy: 20.0 (IQR, 5.0-51.5) vs 52.0 (IQR, 30.8-76.2) (P = .008). At the post food reintroduction evaluation, sponge cytology and biopsy histology were in agreement in 59% (13/22) of cases using a cutoff of <15 eos/hpf and 68% (15/22) of cases using a cutoff of <6 eos/hpf. CONCLUSIONS: In the first study to evaluate a non-endoscopic technique in the clinical management of EoE, the esophageal sponge was moderately successful at guiding food reintroduction in EoE dietary responders in the outpatient setting. CLINICALTRIALS: gov, Number NCT02599558.

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.

Quality Indicators for the Diagnosis and Management of Eosinophilic Esophagitis.

INTRODUCTION: Despite best practice recommendations for managing eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), variation in care exists. METHODS: We used established methodology for quality indicator development to identify metrics to define quality for the treatment of EoE. RESULTS: Among 29 proposed quality indicator statements, 9 (31%) were adopted as highly valid across all categories. Two (22%) of these statements were identified as having existing or suspected quality gaps. DISCUSSION: We identified highly valid EoE quality indicators for adult gastroenterologists, which can be used for quality improvement with resulting benefits for patient outcomes.

Development of a Preliminary Question Prompt List as a Communication Tool for Adults With Achalasia: A Modified Delphi Study.

BACKGROUND: Question prompt lists (QPLs) are structured sets of disease-specific questions that enhance patient-physician communication by encouraging patients to ask questions during consultations. AIM: The aim of this study was to develop a preliminary achalasia-specific QPL created by esophageal experts. METHODS: The QPL content was derived through a modified Delphi method consisting of 2 rounds. In round 1, experts provided 5 answers to the prompts "What general questions should patients ask when given a new diagnosis of achalasia" and "What questions do I not hear patients asking, but given my expertise, I believe they should be asking?" In round 2, experts rated questions on a 5-point Likert scale. Questions considered "essential" or "important" were accepted into the QPL. Feedback regarding the QPL was obtained in a pilot study wherein patients received the QPL before their consultation and completed surveys afterwards. RESULTS: Nineteen esophageal experts participated in both rounds. Of 148 questions from round 1, 124 (83.8%) were accepted into the QPL. These were further reduced to 56 questions to minimize redundancy. Questions were categorized into 6 themes: "What is achalasia," "Risks with achalasia," "Symptom management in achalasia," "Treatment of achalasia," "Risk of reflux after treatment," and "Follow-up after treatment." Nineteen patients participated in the pilot, most of whom agreed that the QPL was helpful (84.2%) and recommended its wider use (84.2%). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first QPL developed specifically for adults with achalasia. Although well-received in a small pilot, follow-up studies will incorporate additional patient feedback to further refine the QPL content and assess its usability, acceptability, and feasibility.

Pooled Phase 2 and 3 Efficacy and Safety Data on Budesonide Oral Suspension in Adolescents with Eosinophilic Esophagitis.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of budesonide oral suspension (BOS) in adolescents with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). METHODS: This post hoc analysis pooled data from two 12-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of BOS 2.0 mg twice daily (b.i.d.) (phase 2, NCT01642212; phase 3, NCT02605837) in patients aged 11-17 years with EoE and dysphagia. Efficacy endpoints included histologic (≤6, ≤1, and <15 eosinophils per high-power field [eos/hpf]), dysphagia symptom (≥30% reduction in Dysphagia Symptom Questionnaire [DSQ] scores from baseline), and clinicopathologic (≤6 eos/hpf and ≥30% reduction in DSQ scores from baseline) responses at week 12. Change from baseline to week 12 in peak eosinophil counts, DSQ scores, EoE Histology Scoring System (EoEHSS) grade (severity) and stage (extent) total score ratios (TSRs), and total EoE Endoscopic Reference Scores (EREFS) were assessed. Safety outcomes were also examined. RESULTS: Overall, 76 adolescents were included (BOS, n = 45; placebo, n = 31). Significantly more patients who received BOS than placebo achieved histologic responses (≤6 eos/hpf: 46.7% vs 6.5%; ≤1 eos/hpf: 42.2% vs 0.0%; <15 eos/hpf: 53.3% vs 9.7%; P < 0.001) and a clinicopathologic response (31.1% vs 3.2%; P = 0.003) at week 12. More BOS-treated than placebo-treated patients achieved a dysphagia symptom response at week 12 (68.9% vs 58.1%; not statistically significant P = 0.314). BOS-treated patients had significantly greater reductions in EoEHSS grade and stage TSRs ( P < 0.001) and total EREFS ( P = 0.021) from baseline to week 12 than placebo-treated patients. BOS was well tolerated, with no clinically meaningful differences in adverse events versus placebo. CONCLUSIONS: BOS 2.0 mg b.i.d. significantly improved most efficacy outcomes in adolescents with EoE versus placebo.

Barrier Dysfunction in Eosinophilic Esophagitis.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Compelling evidence over the past decade supports the central role of epithelial barrier dysfunction in the pathophysiology of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). The purpose of this review is to summarize the genetic, environmental, and immunologic factors driving epithelial barrier dysfunction, and how this impaired barrier can further promote the inflammatory response in EoE. RECENT FINDINGS: Common environmental exposures, such as detergents, may have a direct impact on the esophageal epithelial barrier. In addition, the effects of IL-13 on barrier dysfunction may be reduced by 17ß-estradiol, Vitamin D, and the short chain fatty acids butyrate and propionate, suggesting novel therapeutic targets. There are many genetic, environmental, and immunologic factors that contribute to epithelial barrier dysfunction in EoE. This leads to further skewing of the immune response to a "Th2" phenotype, alterations in the esophageal microbiome, and penetration of relevant antigens into the esophageal mucosa, which are central to the pathophysiology of EoE.

Eosinophilic Esophagitis Histologic Scoring System: Correlation with Histologic, Endoscopic, and Symptomatic Disease and Clinical Use.

BACKGROUND: The eosinophilic esophagitis histologic scoring system (EoEHSS) was developed to enhance the diagnostic standard of peak eosinophil count (PEC) in evaluating disease activity in EoE. AIMS: (1) Correlate the EoEHSS and PEC to measures of symptomatic and endoscopic disease activity, (2) Correlate EoEHSS grade and stage subcomponents to clinical, radiology, and endoscopic markers of fibrotic disease, (3) Evaluate EoEHSS remission in asymptomatic patients with PEC < 15 eosinophils per high powered field (eos/hpf). METHODS: Secondary analysis of prospective cohort data of 22 patients with EoE that underwent dietary therapy and endoscopy at 3 time points. Active disease was defined by EoEHSS grade or stage > 0.125, symptomatic disease by EoE symptom activity index > 20, endoscopic disease by endoscopic reference score > 2, and histologic disease by PEC ≥ 15 eos/hpf. EoEHSS remission was defined by esophageal inflammation (EI) grade of 0-1, EI stage of 0, total grade ≤ 3, and total stage ≤ 3. RESULTS: EoEHSS grade and stage did not correlate with symptomatic disease but did with endoscopic and histologic disease. PEC showed similar correlation pattern. Abnormal grade and stage had strong sensitivity (87-100%) but poor specificity (11-36%) to detect symptomatic, endoscopic, and histologic disease activity. Lamina propria fibrosis was evaluated in 36% of biopsies and did not correlate with minimum esophageal diameter. Out of 14 patients who were in complete symptomatic, endoscopic, and histologic remission, 8 met criteria for EoEHSS remission. CONCLUSION: The positive and negative correlations of EoEHSS to specific measures of symptomatic, histologic, and endoscopic activity suggest that it provides complementary information in EoE.

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.