Joint ESPGHAN/NASPGHAN Guidelines on Childhood Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Disorders Beyond Eosinophilic Esophagitis.

INTRODUCTION: Eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorders beyond eosinophilic esophagitis (non-EoE EGIDs) are rare chronic inflammatory disorders of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract. Diagnosis is based on clinical symptoms and histologic findings of eosinophilic inflammation after exclusion of a secondary cause or systemic disease. Currently, no guidelines exist for the evaluation of non-EoE EGIDs. Therefore, the European Society for Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition (ESPGHAN) and the North American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition (NASPGHAN) formed a task force group to provide consensus guidelines for childhood non-EoE EGIDs. METHODS: The working group was composed of pediatric gastroenterologists, adult gastroenterologists, allergists/immunologists, and pathologists. An extensive electronic literature search of the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases was conducted up to February 2022. General methodology was used in the formulation of recommendations according to the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to meet current standards of evidence assessment. RESULTS: The guidelines provide information on the current concept of non-EoE EGIDs, disease pathogenesis, epidemiology, clinical manifestations, diagnostic and disease surveillance procedures, and current treatment options. Thirty-four statements based on available evidence and 41 recommendations based on expert opinion and best clinical practices were developed. CONCLUSION: Non-EoE EGIDs literature is limited in scope and depth, making clear recommendations difficult. These consensus-based clinical practice guidelines are intended to assist clinicians caring for children affected by non-EoE EGIDs and to facilitate high-quality randomized controlled trials of various treatment modalities using standardized, uniform disease definitions.

Variation in access and prescription of vedolizumab and ustekinumab in paediatric patients with inflammatory bowel disease: a UK-wide study.

BACKGROUND: Therapeutic options for paediatric inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are limited, especially for younger children. Unlike in adults, vedolizumab and ustekinumab are not licensed for paediatric use in the UK. We aimed to understand the real-world access to, and use of, these therapies in the paediatric population. METHODS: We surveyed UK IBD centres to assess the incident use of vedolizumab and ustekinumab from 1 January 2021 to 31 December 2021. We collected information on funding, dose escalations and therapeutic drug monitoring. RESULTS: 18 of 21 centres responded, covering an estimated 5260 patients. One hundred and thirteen were started on vedolizumab, prescription incidence 2.2%, median prescriptions per centre was 4 (range 1-20). Considering ustekinumab, 73 patients were commenced, prescription incidence 1.4%. Median prescription per centre was 3.5 (range 1-13). Prescription rates at each centre were not predicted by patient number cared for at that centre (p=0.2). Dose escalation was common in vedolizumab (66.7% centres) and ustekinumab (55.5%).Funding strategies varied substantially, and multiple funding sources were used; 12 of 18 centres (66.7%) reported funding through routine National Health Service (NHS) England/Scottish arrangements. There was local NHS trust funding in 8 of 18 centres (44.4%). Individual funding requests (IFRs) were used in 5 of 18 (27.8%), although IFRs are reserved for patients with unique additional characteristics. Four centres were unable to achieve funding in pre-pubescent children. CONCLUSIONS: There is widespread use of vedolizumab and ustekinumab across the UK, although practice is highly variable. Access to therapy appeared to differ substantially. There is a growing disparity between international guidelines and real-world practice. Establishing early and effective therapy in all patients remains a priority.

Joint ESPGHAN/NASPGHAN Guidelines on Childhood Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Disorders beyond Eosinophilic Esophagitis.

INTRODUCTION: Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Disorders beyond Eosinophilic Esophagitis (non-EoE EGIDs) are rare chronic inflammatory disorders of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract. Diagnosis is based on clinical symptoms and histologic findings of eosinophilic inflammation after exclusion of a secondary cause or systemic disease. Currently, no guidelines exist for the evaluation of non-EoE EGIDs. Therefore, the European Society for Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition (ESPGHAN) and the North American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition (NASPGHAN) formed a task force group to provide consensus guidelines for childhood non-EoE EGIDs. METHODS: The working group was composed of pediatric gastroenterologists, adult gastroenterologists, allergists/immunologists, and pathologists. An extensive electronic literature search of the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases was conducted up to February 2022. General methodology was used in the formulation of recommendations according to the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to meet current standards of evidence assessment. RESULTS: The guidelines provide information on the current concept of non-EoE EGIDs, disease pathogenesis, epidemiology, clinical manifestations, diagnostic and disease surveillance procedures, and current treatment options. Thirty-four statements based on available evidence and 41 recommendations based on expert opinion and best clinical practices were developed. CONCLUSION: Non-EoE EGIDs literature is limited in scope and depth, making clear recommendations difficult. These consensus-based clinical practice guidelines are intended to assist clinicians caring for children affected by non-EoE EGIDs and to facilitate high-quality randomized controlled trials of various treatment modalities using standardized, uniform disease definitions.

Characterization of Eosinophilic Esophagitis From the European Pediatric Eosinophilic Esophagitis Registry (pEEr) of ESPGHAN.

OBJECTIVES: Few pediatric data on phenotypic aspects of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) are available. The pEEr registry was developed to prospectively characterize children with EoE from Europe and Israel. METHODS: pEEr is an ongoing prospective registry enrolling children with esophageal eosinophilia (≥15 eos/HPF). Anonymized data were collected from 19 pediatric centers. Data regarding demographics, clinical manifestations, endoscopy, histology, and therapies were collected. RESULTS: A total of 582 subjects (61% male) were analyzed. The median age at diagnosis was 10.5 years [interquartile range (IQR): 5.7-17.7], whereas the age at symptom onset was 9.2 years (IQR: 4.3-16.4), resulting in a median diagnostic delay of 1.2 years (IQR: 0.7-2.3). The diagnostic delay was longer below age <6 years. Shorter diagnostic delays were associated with the presence of food allergy or a family history for EoE. Symptoms varied by age with dysphagia and food impaction more common in adolescents, while vomiting and failure to thrive more common in younger children ( P < 0.001). Among endoscopic findings, esophageal rings were more common in adolescents, whereas exudates were more frequent in younger children( P < 0.001). Patients who responded to proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) were more likely to be older, males, and less often presented severe endoscopic findings. Patients unresponsive to PPIs received topical steroids (40%), elimination diet (41%), or a combined therapy (19%). CONCLUSIONS: EoE findings vary according to age in pediatric EoE. Young children are commonly characterized by non-specific symptoms, atopic dermatitis, food allergy, and inflammatory endoscopic lesions. Adolescents usually have dysphagia or food impaction, fibrostenotic lesions, and a better PPI response.

Safety, Tolerability, and Pharmacokinetics of Oral Ferric Maltol in Children With Iron Deficiency: Phase 1 Study.

Iron deficiency is common in children and can have negative effects on behavior and function. Standard oral ferrous iron replacement is poorly absorbed and can cause treatment-limiting gastrointestinal adverse events (AEs). Ferric maltol is formulated to improve gastrointestinal absorption and tolerability versus oral ferrous compounds. In adult phase 3 trials, it increased hemoglobin and iron stores versus placebo, with a gastrointestinal AE profile similar to placebo. Here, we assess different doses of ferric maltol in children with iron deficiency. Methods: This phase 1 trial involved children of age 10 to 17 years with ferritin <30 µg/L (or <50 µg/L with transferrin saturation [TSAT] <20%). Children were randomized 1:1:1 to oral ferric maltol 7.8 mg, 16.6 mg, or 30 mg twice daily for 9 days and once on day 10. The primary outcomes were iron uptake measures (serum iron and TSAT) and population pharmacokinetic analyses. Results: The trial included 37 children (mean age 14.0 years; baseline mean ± standard deviation ferritin 16.3 ± 8.02 µg/L). Ferric maltol increased iron uptake nondose-proportionally: serum iron and TSAT plateaued between the 2 higher doses on day 1 and were comparable across all doses on day 10. Twenty children (54%) experienced AEs (all mild/moderate, gastrointestinal 32%), with similar frequencies in each group. Conclusions: All 3 ferric maltol doses increased iron uptake in children with iron deficiency, even over the short study duration, and were well tolerated. Nondose-dependent changes in serum iron and TSAT indicate physiologic regulation of iron uptake to meet the body's needs.

Systemic steroids have a role in treating esophageal strictures in pediatric eosinophilic esophagitis.

BACKGROUND: The role of systemic steroids in the treatment of esophageal strictures in children with Eosinophilic Esophagitis (EoE) is poorly defined. AIMS: To describe a cohort of children with EoE-associated esophageal strictures responding to systemic steroids. METHODS: Retrospective review of medical records of children with EoE and moderate (<9 mm) to severe (<6 mm) strictures, who responded clinically and endoscopically to systemic steroids. RESULTS: Twenty children (median age 10.6 ±â€¯4.2 years; 17 males) from nine centers in six countries were included in the analysis; 16 had moderate and four, severe strictures; 18 had dysphagia or bolus impaction; median diagnostic delay was 8 months (IQR 3.5-35). Eighteen patients received oral systemic steroids (mean dose 1.4 mg/kg/day) for a median of 4 weeks, while two initially received IV steroids. All patients showed clinical improvement and 15/20 became asymptomatic. Stricture resolution at endoscopy was found in 19/20, while histological resolution of EoE (<15 eos/hpf) in 13/20. Only minor side effects were reported: hyperphagia (10/20); weight gain (5/20); hyperactivity (2/20) and acne (1/20). Esophageal dilation was required in 3/20 patients during a median follow-up of 48.5 months (IQR 26.7-73.2). CONCLUSION: Children with EoE and esophageal strictures, may benefit from the use of a short course of systemic steroids, avoiding mechanical dilation.

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

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