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

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

Symptoms Have Modest Accuracy in Detecting Endoscopic and Histologic Remission in Adults With Eosinophilic Esophagitis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: It is not clear whether symptoms alone can be used to estimate the biologic activity of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). We aimed to evaluate whether symptoms can be used to identify patients with endoscopic and histologic features of remission. METHODS: Between April 2011 and June 2014, we performed a prospective, observational study and recruited 269 consecutive adults with EoE (67% male; median age, 39 years old) in Switzerland and the United States. Patients first completed the validated symptom-based EoE activity index patient-reported outcome instrument and then underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy with esophageal biopsy collection. Endoscopic and histologic findings were evaluated with a validated grading system and standardized instrument, respectively. Clinical remission was defined as symptom score <20 (range, 0-100); histologic remission was defined as a peak count of <20 eosinophils/mm(2) in a high-power field (corresponds to approximately <5 eosinophils/median high-power field); and endoscopic remission as absence of white exudates, moderate or severe rings, strictures, or combination of furrows and edema. We used receiver operating characteristic analysis to determine the best symptom score cutoff values for detection of remission. RESULTS: Of the study subjects, 111 were in clinical remission (41.3%), 79 were in endoscopic remission (29.7%), and 75 were in histologic remission (27.9%). When the symptom score was used as a continuous variable, patients in endoscopic, histologic, and combined (endoscopic and histologic remission) remission were detected with area under the curve values of 0.67, 0.60, and 0.67, respectively. A symptom score of 20 identified patients in endoscopic remission with 65.1% accuracy and histologic remission with 62.1% accuracy; a symptom score of 15 identified patients with both types of remission with 67.7% accuracy. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with EoE, endoscopic or histologic remission can be identified with only modest accuracy based on symptoms alone. At any given time, physicians cannot rely on lack of symptoms to make assumptions about lack of biologic disease activity in adults with EoE. ClinicalTrials.gov, Number: NCT00939263.

Polymorphisms in genes in the androgen pathway and risk of Barrett's esophagus and esophageal adenocarcinoma.

The strong male predominance in Barrett's esophagus (BE) and esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) remains inadequately explained, but sex hormones might be involved. We hypothesized that single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in the androgen pathway influence risk of developing BE and EAC. This genetic-epidemiological analysis included 14 studies from Australia, Europe and North America. Polymorphisms in 16 genes coding for the androgen pathway were analyzed using a gene-based approach: versatile gene-based test association study. This method evaluates associations between a trait and all SNPs within a specific gene rather than each SNP marker individually as in a conventional GWAS. The data were stratified for sex, body-mass index, waist-to-hip ratio, tobacco smoking and gastroesophageal reflux status. Included were data from 1,508 EAC patients, 2,383 BE patients and 2,170 control participants. SNPs within the gene CYP17A1 were associated with risk of BE in the sexes combined (p = 0.002) and in males (p = 0.003), but not in females separately (p = 0.3). This association was found in tobacco smokers (p = 0.003) and in BE patients without reflux (p = 0.004), but not in nonsmokers (p = 0.2) or those with reflux (p = 0.036). SNPs within JMJD1C were associated with risk of EAC in females (p = 0.001). However, none of these associations replicated in a subsequent sample. Fourteen other genes studied did not reach statistically significant levels of association with BE, EAC or the combination of BE and EAC, after correcting for the number of genes included in the analysis. In conclusion, genetic variants in the androgen-related genes CYP17A1 and JMJD1C might be associated with risk of BE and EAC, respectively, but replication data with larger sample sizes are needed.

Development and validation of a symptom-based activity index for adults with eosinophilic esophagitis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Standardized instruments are needed to assess the activity of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) and to provide end points for clinical trials and observational studies. We aimed to develop and validate a patient-reported outcome (PRO) instrument and score, based on items that could account for variations in patient assessments of disease severity. We also evaluated relationships between patient assessment of disease severity and EoE-associated endoscopic, histologic, and laboratory findings. METHODS: We collected information from 186 patients with EoE in Switzerland and the United States (69.4% male; median age, 43 y) via surveys (n = 135), focus groups (n = 27), and semistructured interviews (n = 24). Items were generated for the instruments to assess biologic activity based on physician input. Linear regression was used to quantify the extent to which variations in patient-reported disease characteristics could account for variations in patient assessment of EoE severity. The PRO instrument was used prospectively in 153 adult patients with EoE (72.5% male; median age, 38 y), and validated in an independent group of 120 patients with EoE (60.8% male; median age, 40.5 y). RESULTS: Seven PRO factors that are used to assess characteristics of dysphagia, behavioral adaptations to living with dysphagia, and pain while swallowing accounted for 67% of the variation in patient assessment of disease severity. Based on statistical consideration and patient input, a 7-day recall period was selected. Highly active EoE, based on endoscopic and histologic findings, was associated with an increase in patient-assessed disease severity. In the validation study, the mean difference between patient assessment of EoE severity (range, 0-10) and PRO score (range, 0-8.52) was 0.15. CONCLUSIONS: We developed and validated an EoE scoring system based on 7 PRO items that assess symptoms over a 7-day recall period. Clinicaltrials.gov number: NCT00939263.

How do gastroenterologists assess overall activity of eosinophilic esophagitis in adult patients?

OBJECTIVES: There is no "gold standard" for assessing disease activity in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). We aimed to compare physicians' judgment of EoE activity with patients' judgment of symptom severity. We also aimed to examine the relative contribution of symptoms as well as endoscopic and histologic findings in shaping physicians' judgment of EoE activity. METHODS: Six gastroenterologists (all EoE experts) assessed EoE-associated symptoms in adult patients. Patients completed a symptom instrument and provided global assessment of EoE symptom severity (PatGA) (Likert scale: 0 (inactive) to 10 (most active)). Following esophagogastroduodenoscopy with biopsy sampling, gastroenterologists provided a global assessment of EoE activity (PhysGA) (Likert scale from 0 to 10) based on patient history and endoscopic and histologic findings. Linear regression and analysis of variance was used to quantify the extent to which variations in severity of EoE symptoms and endoscopic and histologic findings explain variations in PhysGA. RESULTS: A total of 149 EoE patients were prospectively included (71.8% male, median age at inclusion 38 years, 71.8% with concomitant allergies). A moderate positive correlation between PhysGA and PatGA (rho=0.442, P<0.001) was observed and the mean difference in the Bland-Altman plot was 1.77. Variations in severity of endoscopic findings, symptoms, and histologic findings alone explained 53%, 49%, and 30%, of the variability in PhysGA, respectively. Together, these findings explained 75% of variability in PhysGA. CONCLUSIONS: Gastroenterologists rate EoE activity mainly on the basis of endoscopic findings and symptoms and, to a lesser extent, on histologic findings.

BOB CAT: A Large-Scale Review and Delphi Consensus for Management of Barrett's Esophagus With No Dysplasia, Indefinite for, or Low-Grade Dysplasia.

OBJECTIVES: Barrett's esophagus (BE) is a common premalignant lesion for which surveillance is recommended. This strategy is limited by considerable variations in clinical practice. We conducted an international, multidisciplinary, systematic search and evidence-based review of BE and provided consensus recommendations for clinical use in patients with nondysplastic, indefinite, and low-grade dysplasia (LGD). METHODS: We defined the scope, proposed statements, and searched electronic databases, yielding 20,558 publications that were screened, selected online, and formed the evidence base. We used a Delphi consensus process, with an 80% agreement threshold, using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) to categorize the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. RESULTS: In total, 80% of respondents agreed with 55 of 127 statements in the final voting rounds. Population endoscopic screening is not recommended and screening should target only very high-risk cases of males aged over 60 years with chronic uncontrolled reflux. A new international definition of BE was agreed upon. For any degree of dysplasia, at least two specialist gastrointestinal (GI) pathologists are required. Risk factors for cancer include male gender, length of BE, and central obesity. Endoscopic resection should be used for visible, nodular areas. Surveillance is not recommended for <5 years of life expectancy. Management strategies for indefinite dysplasia (IND) and LGD were identified, including a de-escalation strategy for lower-risk patients and escalation to intervention with follow-up for higher-risk patients. CONCLUSIONS: In this uniquely large consensus process in gastroenterology, we made key clinical recommendations for the escalation/de-escalation of BE in clinical practice. We made strong recommendations for the prioritization of future research.

Once-daily omeprazole/sodium bicarbonate heals severe refractory reflux esophagitis with morning or nighttime dosing.

BACKGROUND: Morning dose or twice-daily proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use is often prescribed to heal severe reflux esophagitis. AIM: Compare the effect of single dose morning (control arm) versus nighttime (experimental arm) omeprazole/sodium bicarbonate (Zegerid(®)) (IR-OME) on esophagitis and gastroesophageal reflux symptoms. METHODS: Adult outpatients with Los Angeles grade C or D esophagitis were allocated to open-label 40 mg IR-OME once a day for 8 weeks in a prospective, randomized, parallel design, single center study. Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and validated self-report symptom questionnaires were completed at baseline and follow-up. Intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses were performed. RESULTS: Ninety-two of 128 (72 %) eligible subjects participated [64 (70 %) male, mean age 58 (range 19-86), median BMI 29 (range 21-51), 58 C:34 D]. Overall, 81 (88 %) subjects healed [n = 70 (76 %)] or improved [n = 11 (12 %)] erosions. There was no significant difference (morning vs. night) in mucosal healing [81 vs. 71 %, (p = 0.44)] or symptom resolution [heartburn (77 vs. 65 %, p = 0.12), acid regurgitation (82 vs. 73 %, p = 0.28)]. Prevalence of newly identified Barrett's esophagus was 14 % with half diagnosed only after treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Once-daily IR-OME (taken morning or night) effectively heals severe reflux esophagitis and improves GERD symptoms. Results support the clinical practice recommendation to repeat EGD after 8 weeks PPI therapy in severe esophagitis patients to assure healing and exclude Barrett's esophagus.

Integrative post-genome-wide association analysis of CDKN2A and TP53 SNPs and risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma.

Incidence of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EA) in Western countries has increased markedly in recent decades. Although several risk factors have been identified for EA and its precursor, Barrett's esophagus (BE), including reflux, Caucasian race, male gender, obesity, and smoking, less is known about the role of inherited genetic variation. Frequent somatic mutations in the tumor suppressor genes CDKN2A and TP53 were recently reported in EA tumors, while somatic alterations at 9p (CDKN2A) and 17p (TP53) have been implicated as predictors of progression from BE to EA. Motivated by these findings, we used data from a genome-wide association study of 2515 EA cases and 3207 controls to analyze 37 germline single nucleotide polymorphisms at the CDKN2A and TP53 loci. Three CDKN2A polymorphisms were nominally associated (P < 0.05) with reduced risk of EA: rs2518720 C>T [intronic, odds ratio 0.90, P = 0.0121, q = 0.3059], rs3088440 G>A (3'UTR, odds ratio 0.84, P = 0.0186, q = 0.3059), and rs4074785 C>T (intronic, odds ratio 0.85, P = 0.0248, q = 0.3059). None of the TP53 single nucleotide polymorphisms reached nominal significance. Two of the CDKN2A variants identified were also associated with reduced risk of progression from BE to EA, when assessed in a prospective cohort of 408 BE patients: rs2518720 (hazard ratio 0.57, P = 0.0095, q = 0.0285) and rs3088440 (hazard ratio 0.34, P = 0.0368, q = 0.0552). In vitro functional studies of rs3088440, a single nucleotide polymorphism located in the seed sequence of a predicted miR-663b binding site, suggested a mechanism whereby the G>A substitution may attenuate miR-663b-mediated repression of the CDKN2A transcript. This study provides the first evidence that germline variation at the CDKN2A locus may influence EA susceptibility.

Risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma decreases with height, based on consortium analysis and confirmed by Mendelian randomization.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Risks for some cancers increase with height. We investigated the relationship between height and risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) and its precursor, Barrett's esophagus (BE). METHODS: We analyzed epidemiologic and genome-wide genomic data from individuals of European ancestry in the Barrett's and Esophageal Adenocarcinoma Consortium, from 999 cases of EAC, 2061 cases of BE, and 2168 population controls. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for associations between height and risks of EAC and BE. We performed a Mendelian randomization analysis to estimate an unconfounded effect of height on EAC and BE using a genetic risk score derived from 243 genetic variants associated with height as an instrumental variable. RESULTS: Height was associated inversely with EAC (per 10-cm increase in height: OR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.62-0.79 for men and OR, 0.57; 95% CI 0.40-0.80 for women) and BE (per 10-cm increase in height: OR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.62-0.77 for men and OR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.48-0.77 for women). The risk estimates were consistent across strata of age, education level, smoking, gastroesophageal reflux symptoms, body mass index, and weight. Mendelian randomization analysis yielded results quantitatively similar to those from the conventional epidemiologic analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Height is associated inversely with risks of EAC and BE. Results from the Mendelian randomization study showed that the inverse association observed did not result from confounding factors. Mechanistic studies of the effect of height on EAC and BE are warranted; height could have utility in clinical risk stratification.

A combination of esomeprazole and aspirin reduces tissue concentrations of prostaglandin E(2) in patients with Barrett's esophagus.

UNLABELLED: BACKGROUND& AIMS: Proton pump inhibitors and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs might prevent esophageal adenocarcinoma in patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE), but there are limited data from clinical trials to support this concept. We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial to assess the effects of the combination of aspirin (3 different doses) and esomeprazole on tissue concentrations of prostaglandin (PG) E(2) in patients with BE with no dysplasia or low-grade dysplasia. METHODS: Participants were recruited through the multicenter Cancer Prevention Network and randomly assigned to groups that were given 40 mg esomeprazole twice daily in combination with an aspirin placebo once daily (arm A; n = 30), with 81 mg aspirin once daily (arm B; n = 47), or with 325 mg aspirin once daily (arm C; n = 45) for 28 days. We collected esophageal biopsy specimens before and after the intervention period to determine the absolute change in mean concentration of PGE(2) (the primary end point). RESULTS: Based on data from 114 patients, baseline characteristics were similar among groups. The absolute mean tissue concentration of PGE(2) was reduced by 67.6 ± 229.68 pg/mL in arm A, 123.9 ± 284.0 pg/mL in arm B (P = .10 vs arm A), and 174.9 ± 263.62 pg/mL in arm C (P = .02 vs arm A). CONCLUSIONS: In combination with esomeprazole, short-term administration of higher doses of aspirin, but not lower doses or no aspirin, significantly reduced tissue concentrations of PGE(2) in patients with BE with either no dysplasia or low-grade dysplasia. These data support further evaluation of higher doses of aspirin and esomeprazole to prevent esophageal adenocarcinoma in these patients. Clinical trial registration number NCT00474903.

Consensus statements for management of Barrett's dysplasia and early-stage esophageal adenocarcinoma, based on a Delphi process.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Esophageal adenocarcinoma (EA) is increasingly common among patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE). We aimed to provide consensus recommendations based on the medical literature that clinicians could use to manage patients with BE and low-grade dysplasia, high-grade dysplasia (HGD), or early-stage EA. METHODS: We performed an international, multidisciplinary, systematic, evidence-based review of different management strategies for patients with BE and dysplasia or early-stage EA. We used a Delphi process to develop consensus statements. The results of literature searches were screened using a unique, interactive, Web-based data-sifting platform; we used 11,904 papers to inform the choice of statements selected. An a priori threshold of 80% agreement was used to establish consensus for each statement. RESULTS: Eighty-one of the 91 statements achieved consensus despite generally low quality of evidence, including 8 clinical statements: (1) specimens from endoscopic resection are better than biopsies for staging lesions, (2) it is important to carefully map the size of the dysplastic areas, (3) patients that receive ablative or surgical therapy require endoscopic follow-up, (4) high-resolution endoscopy is necessary for accurate diagnosis, (5) endoscopic therapy for HGD is preferred to surveillance, (6) endoscopic therapy for HGD is preferred to surgery, (7) the combination of endoscopic resection and radiofrequency ablation is the most effective therapy, and (8) after endoscopic removal of lesions from patients with HGD, all areas of BE should be ablated. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a data-sifting platform and used the Delphi process to create evidence-based consensus statements for the management of patients with BE and early-stage EA. This approach identified important clinical features of the diseases and areas for future studies.

Swallowed fluticasone improves histologic but not symptomatic response of adults with eosinophilic esophagitis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: We evaluated the effect of aerosolized fluticasone therapy on symptomatic dysphagia and histologic eosinophilia in adults with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). METHODS: We performed a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of fluticasone in 42 adult patients with a new diagnosis of EoE (30 men; mean age, 37.5 y). Participants were assigned randomly to groups that swallowed 880 µg of aerosolized fluticasone twice daily (n = 21), or took a placebo inhaler twice daily (n = 15) for 6 weeks. End points of the study were symptomatic and histologic response. RESULTS: A complete histologic response (>90% decrease in mean eosinophil count) was observed in 11 of 15 subjects who received 6 weeks of fluticasone (62%), compared with none of the 15 subjects who received placebo (P < .001), based on intention-to-treat analysis; histologic responses were observed in 68% of subjects who received fluticasone (13 of 19) compared with none of those who received placebo (0 of 15) by per-protocol analysis (P < .001). Intracellular staining for eosinophil-derived neurotoxin was reduced in 81% of subjects who received fluticasone (13 of 16) compared with 8% who received placebo (1 of 13) (P < .001). Dysphagia was reduced in 57% of subjects who received fluticasone (12 of 21) compared with 33% who received placebo (7 of 21) (P = .22) by intention-to-treat analysis; dysphagia was reduced in 63% of patients who received fluticasone (12 of 19) and 47% of those who received placebo (7 of 15) (P = .49) based on per-protocol analysis. Esophageal candidiasis developed in 26% of subjects who received fluticasone (5 of 19), but in none of the subjects in the placebo group (P = .05). CONCLUSIONS: Aerosolized, swallowed fluticasone leads to a histologic but not a symptomatic response in adults with 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.

Factors that predict relief from upper abdominal pain after cholecystectomy.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Upper abdominal pain (UAP) in patients with gallstones is often treated by cholecystectomy but it frequently persists. We aimed to identify symptoms associated with relief. METHODS: We followed 1008 patients who received cholecystectomy for gallstones and UAP at the Mayo Clinic (Rochester, Minnesota) or Kaiser Permanente (San Diego, California) for 12 months. A validated, self-completed biliary symptoms questionnaire identified features of UAP, gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), and irritable bowel syndrome (IBS); the questionnaire was given initially and 3 and 12 months after cholecystectomy, to identify features that predicted sustained relief of UAP. RESULTS: Five hundred ninety-four patients (59%) reported relief from UAP. Factors associated univariately (P < .05) with relief included frequency of UAP ≤1 per month, onset ≤1 year preoperatively, usual duration (30 minutes to 24 hours, most often in the evening or night), and severity >5/10. Compared to no features, multiple predictive features of UAP (frequency, onset, duration, or timing) were associated with increasing odds ratios (95% confidence interval) for relief: 1, 2, or 3 features (4.2 [1.1-16]; P = .03) and 4 features (6.3 [1.6-25]; P = .008). Negative univariate associations included lower abdominal pain (LAP), usual bowel pattern, nausea ≥1 per week, often feeling bloated or burpy, GERD, and/or IBS. There was an inverse association between relief and somatization; relief was not associated with postprandial UAP. Multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed independent associations (P < .05) with UAP frequency, onset, and nocturnal awakening, but inverse associations with lower abdominal pain, abnormal bowel pattern, and frequent bloated or burpy feelings. CONCLUSIONS: UAP features and concomitant GERD, IBS, and somatization determine the odds for relief from UAP after cholecystectomy.

Prevalence of esophageal eosinophils in patients with Barrett's esophagus.

OBJECTIVES: Recent studies have demonstrated high esophageal eosinophil counts in patients with GERD similar to eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) yet the frequency of esophageal eosinophilia in GERD is unknown. Our aim was to determine the prevalence of dense esophageal eosinophilia in patients with Barrett's esophagus as a manifestation of GERD. METHODS: The Mayo Clinic pathology database was reviewed for patients diagnosed with Barrett's esophagus from January to December 2008 with squamous mucosa obtained during endoscopic surveillance. Clinical, endoscopic, and histologic findings were reviewed. Patients with ≥15 eosinophils per high powered field were identified and compared to those without esophageal eosinophilia. RESULTS: Two hundred patients with Barrett's esophagus and squamous tissue obtained at the time of biopsy were identified. Fourteen of the 200 patients (7%) had ≥15 eosinophils per high powered field. Demographics, symptoms, and proton pump inhibitor therapies were similar between those with and without esophageal eosinophilia. Endoscopic features suggestive of EoE were found in the squamous mucosa of 2 patients with and 7 patients without esophageal eosinophilia. Use of photodynamic, radiofrequency ablation, or monopolar electrocoagulation therapy for ablation of Barrett's mucosa was not associated with a higher rate of esophageal eosinophilia. Basal cell hyperplasia, papillary elongation, and spongiosis occurred frequently in association with esophageal eosinophilic infiltration. CONCLUSIONS: High esophageal eosinophil counts were found in 7% of this cohort of 200 patients with Barrett's esophagus and likely underestimates prevalence. The finding of esophageal eosinophilia in this cohort was independent of proton pump inhibitor use, features of EoE, or endoscopic therapy for Barrett's esophagus. Further studies are needed to assess if these findings are applicable to all patients with GERD.

Epidemiology and natural history of intestinal metaplasia of the gastroesophageal junction and Barrett's esophagus: a population-based study.

OBJECTIVES: Population-based data on the epidemiology and outcomes of subjects with intestinal metaplasia of the gastroesophageal junction (IMGEJ) and Barrett's esophagus (BE) are limited. The objectives of this study were to (i) estimate the incidence of IMGEJ and BE diagnosed from clinically indicated endoscopy in Olmsted County, MN, over three decades (1976-2006) and prevalence as of 1 January 2007, (ii) compare baseline characteristics of subjects with IMGEJ and BE, and (iii) study the natural history and survival of both cohorts. METHODS: This was a population-based cohort study. The study setting was Olmsted County, MN. Patients with BE (columnar segment >1 cm with intestinal metaplasia) and IMGEJ (intestinal metaplasia in biopsies from the gastroesophageal junction) from 1976 to 2006 in Olmsted County, MN, were identified using Rochester Epidemiology Project resources. Demographic and clinical data were abstracted from medical records and pathology confirmed by gastrointestinal pathologists. The association of baseline characteristics with overall and progression-free survival was assessed using proportional hazards regression models. Outcome measures were baseline characteristics and overall survival of subjects with IMGEJ compared to those with BE. RESULTS: In all, 487 patients (401 with BE and 86 with IMGEJ) were identified and followed for a median interval of 7 (BE subjects) to 8 (IMGEJ subjects) years. Subjects with BE were older, heavier, reported reflux symptoms more often, and had higher prevalence of advanced neoplasia than those with IMGEJ. No patient with IMGEJ progressed to esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) in contrast to BE subjects who had a cumulative risk of progression of 7% at 10 years and increased risk of death from EAC (standardized mortality ratio 9.62). The overall survival of subjects with BE and IMGEJ did not differ from that expected in similar age- and sex-distributed white Minnesota populations. CONCLUSIONS: Subjects with IMGEJ appear to have distinct clinical characteristics and substantially lower cancer progression risk compared to those with BE.

Occurrence of and risk factors for complications after endoscopic dilation in eosinophilic esophagitis.

BACKGROUND: Several small series have suggested an increased risk of complications associated with esophageal dilation in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). OBJECTIVE: To quantitate the risk and identify risk factors for esophageal complications in dilation in EoE patients. DESIGN: Retrospective, uncontrolled, single-center study. SETTING: Tertiary referral hospital. PATIENTS: A total of 161 EoE patients (mean ± standard deviation age 44.3 ± 15.3 years, 112 men, 49 women, 150 white patients, 10 unknown, 1 Asian). INTERVENTIONS: Through-the-scope balloon or Savary dilation of EoE. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: The rate of complications defined as deep mucosal tear, major bleeding, or perforation, and determination of risk factors for complications. RESULTS: A total of 293 dilations were performed in 161 patients. Complications reported were deep mucosal tear in 9.2% (n = 27), major bleeding in 0.3% (n = 1), and immediate perforation in 1.0% (n = 3). All patients with perforations were successfully treated medically without surgery (mean ± standard deviation hospital stay 5.3 ± 3.2 days). Factors associated with an increased risk of complications were luminal narrowing in the upper (odds ratio [OR], 5.62; 95% CI, 2.07-15.26; P < .001) and middle third of the esophagus (OR, 4.93; 95% CI, 1.64-14.83; P < .005) compared with lower third, luminal stricture unable to be traversed with a standard upper endoscope (OR, 2.48; 95% CI, 1.06-5.83; P = .037), and use of Savary dilator (OR, 2.63; 95% CI, 1.18-5.83; P = .018). LIMITATIONS: Retrospective design, uncontrolled study. CONCLUSIONS: Deep mucosal tears are common after dilation (9%), but the risk of immediate transluminal perforation with EoE is approximately 1%. The risk of severe complications is increased in patients with more proximal stricture and strictures that initially prevent endoscope passage.

Low grade esophageal eosinophilia in adults: an unrecognized part of the spectrum of eosinophilic esophagitis?

BACKGROUND: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is defined by a minimum of 15 eosinophils (eos) per high-powered field (HPF) on esophageal biopsy, along with esophageal symptoms and the exclusion of gastroesophageal reflux (GERD). The clinical significance of fewer eosinophils is unknown. METHODS: Fifty-nine adult patients without a previous diagnosis of EoE with esophageal biopsies containing 1-14 eos per HPF (low grade eosinophilia) and 418 adult patients with ≥15 eos per HPF were identified by retrospective review. Patients were divided into group A (1-9 eos per HPF), group B (10-14 eos per HPF), and group C (≥15 eos per HPF) with a chart review of clinical and demographic data. RESULTS: While dysphagia and atopy (asthma and allergic rhinitis) were more common in patients with ≥15 eos per HPF (group C) than those with low grade esophageal eosinophilia (groups A and B) (93 vs. 88%, P = 0.02), food impaction and heartburn occurred at an equal frequency across all patient groups. Endoscopic findings were likewise similar between groups. Of the 14 patients with low grade esophageal eosinophilia who underwent repeat endoscopy a mean interval of 42 weeks (range 8-118 weeks) later, five (36%) met conventional diagnostic criteria for EoE of 15 or greater eos per HPF. Follow-up in ten patients treated with topical corticosteroids noted improvement in nine, with mean follow-up of 8 weeks (range 4-12 weeks). CONCLUSION: Some adult patients with dysphagia and less than 15 eos per HPF have similar endoscopic findings and clinical course to patients meeting the consensus definition of EoE. Further evaluation of patients with low grade esophageal eosinophilia is needed.

Variations in presentations of esophageal involvement in lichen planus.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Lichen planus is a relatively uncommon, presumed autoimmune disease that affects middle-aged patients and is manifested in the skin, nails, and mucous membranes. Reports of esophageal involvement have been rare, despite the classification of the esophagus as a mucous membrane. METHODS: Assuming esophageal involvement might not be as rare as expected, we reviewed the Mayo Clinic Pathology Database for all cases from 2000 to the present. RESULTS: Twenty-seven cases were identified, with a mean age of 64 years; 25 were women. Patients presenting with esophageal lichen planus as the initial manifestation and those with a diagnosis of lichen planus involving other sites were equal in number. Many patients had received multiple dilations and reflux treatments before diagnosis. All patients presented with dysphagia. Endoscopy and radiology studies demonstrated a wide range of abnormalities, including strictures of varying length and location, small-caliber esophagus, and a mucosal appearance of sloughing, white discoloration, erythema, thickening, and superficial ulceration. Treatment regimens varied markedly, with some patients responding to topical or systemic corticosteroids. CONCLUSIONS: Esophageal lichen planus is rare but probably more common than previously suspected. It presents with a wide range of endoscopic signs and is commonly the presenting sign of lichen planus. In evaluating middle-aged patients with strictures, particularly proximal esophageal strictures in women, physicians should consider a diagnosis of lichen planus even in the absence of extraesophageal manifestations.

Marked deposition of eosinophil-derived neurotoxin in adult patients with eosinophilic esophagitis.

OBJECTIVES: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is characterized by infiltration of eosinophils into esophageal epithelium. Blood levels of an eosinophil granule protein, eosinophil-derived neurotoxin (EDN), have been proposed as a biomarker for EoE. However, information regarding localization of EDN in the diseased tissues has not been available. The goal of this study was to evaluate the magnitude and distribution of EDN deposition in tissue specimens from the esophagus of EoE patients. METHODS: We studied specimens from 10 adult EoE patients and eight histologically normal controls (three under age 17). Sections from mid-esophageal biopsy specimens were stained for EDN by immunofluorescence, using a polyclonal rabbit antibody to EDN. Cellular staining (i.e., infiltration of intact eosinophils) and extracellular staining (i.e., deposition of released EDN) were scored in a blinded manner on an established 7-point scale. RESULTS: Esophageal biopsy specimens from histologically normal controls showed no or few intact eosinophils and no or minimal extracellular EDN deposition. In contrast, EDN staining was clearly observed in specimens from all EoE patients. In some EoE patients, marked extracellular EDN deposition was observed despite relatively small numbers of intact eosinophils. Overall, there was no correlation between the eosinophil infiltration and the extracellular EDN staining scores. CONCLUSIONS: Marked tissue deposition of extracellular EDN is present in the esophagus of EoE patients. Tissue eosinophil counts may underestimate how extensively eosinophils are involved, particularly in individuals with marked eosinophil degranulation. Evaluation of EDN staining in esophageal biopsy specimens may be useful to diagnose and manage patients with EoE.