Clinical Features and Treatment Response to Topical Steroids in Ethnic and Racial Minority Patients With Eosinophilic Esophagitis.

INTRODUCTION: Differences in eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) presentation and outcomes by ethnicity or race remain understudied. We aimed to determine whether EoE patients of Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity or non-White race have differences in presentation at diagnosis or response to topical corticosteroid (tCS) treatment. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included subjects of any age with a new diagnosis of EoE and documentation of ethnicity or race. For those who had treatment with tCS and follow-up endoscopy/biopsy, we assessed histologic response (<15 eosinophils/hpf), global symptom response, and endoscopic response. Hispanic EoE patients were compared with non-Hispanics at baseline and before and after treatment. The same analyses were repeated for White vs non-Whites. RESULTS: Of 1,026 EoE patients with ethnicity data, just 23 (2%) were Hispanic. Most clinical features at presentation were similar to non-Hispanic EoE patients but histologic response to tCS was numerically lower (38% vs 57%). Non-White EoE patients (13%) were younger at diagnosis and had less insurance, lower zip code-level income, shorter symptom duration, more vomiting, less dysphagia and food impaction, fewer typical endoscopic features, and less dilation. Of 475 patients with race data treated with tCS, non-Whites had a significantly lower histologic response rate (41% vs 59%; P = 0.01), and odds of histologic response remained lower after controlling for potential confounders (adjusted odds ratio 0.40, 95% confidence intervals: 0.19-0.87). DISCUSSION: Few EoE patients at our center were Hispanic, and they had similar clinical presentations as non-Hispanics. The non-White EoE group was larger, and presentation was less dysphagia-specific. Non-White patients were also less than half as likely to respond to tCS.

Eosinophilic esophagitis patients with multiple atopic conditions: Clinical characteristics and treatment response to topical steroids.

BACKGROUND: Patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) typically have concomitant atopic conditions, but whether there are differences in presentation or treatment response by the number of atopic diseases is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether patients with EoE having multiple atopic conditions have differences in presentation or response to topical corticosteroid (TCS) treatment. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of adults and children with newly diagnosed EoE. The total number of atopic comorbidities (allergic rhinitis, asthma, eczema, food allergy) was calculated. Patients with at least 2 atopic conditions other than allergic rhinitis were defined as having multiple atopic conditions and their baseline characteristics were compared with those with less than 2 atopic conditions. Histologic, symptom, and endoscopic responses to TCS treatment were also compared with bivariable and multivariable analyses. RESULTS: Of the 1020 patients with EoE having atopic disease information, 235 (23%) had 1 atopic comorbidity, 211 (21%) had 2, 113 (11%) had 3, and 34 (3%) had 4. At baseline, the 180 (18%) patients with 2 or more atopic diseases were younger and had more vomiting, less abdominal pain, more exudates and edema on endoscopy, and higher peak eosinophil counts. Among those treated with TCS, there was a trend toward better global symptom response in patients with less than 2 atopic conditions, but there was no difference in histologic or endoscopic response compared with those with 2 or more atopic conditions. CONCLUSION: There were differences in the initial presentation of EoE between those with and without multiple atopic conditions, but there were no major differences in histologic treatment response to corticosteroids by atopic status.

Higher Body Mass Index Is Associated With Decreased Treatment Response to Topical Steroids in Eosinophilic Esophagitis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Understanding which eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) patients will respond to treatment with topical corticosteroids (tCS) remains challenging, and it is unknown whether obesity impacts treatment response. This study aimed to determine whether treatment outcomes to tCS in EoE patients vary by body mass index (BMI). METHODS: This retrospective cohort study of the University of North Carolina EoE Clinicopathologic database assessed subjects age 14 years or older with a new diagnosis of EoE. Their BMI was calculated and histologic, symptom, and endoscopic responses were recorded after tCS treatment. The treatment response of obese (BMI, ≥30 kg/m2) and nonobese EoE status was compared using bivariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: We identified 296 EoE patients treated with tCS. Baseline characteristics were similar, although obese EoE patients had more heartburn and hiatal hernias. Histologic response was higher for those who were nonobese compared with obese at fewer than 15 (61% vs 47%; P = .049) and 6 or fewer (54% vs 38%; P = .02) eosinophils per high-power field, respectively. In addition, nonobese patients had significantly greater endoscopic and symptomatic responses. On multivariate analysis, increasing BMI was associated independently with decreased histologic response after accounting for age, heartburn, dilation, and hiatal hernia whether BMI was assessed as a continuous variable (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.93; 95% CI, 0.89-0.98), as nonobese vs obese (aOR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.21-0.68), or in 4 categories (overweight vs normal [aOR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.26-0.84] or obese vs normal [aOR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.13-0.51]). CONCLUSIONS: As BMI increases in EoE patients, the odds of histologic, symptomatic, and endoscopic responses to tCS decreases, with obese patients having an approximately 40% decrease in odds of response.

Association of eosinophilic esophagitis with autoimmune and connective tissue disorders, and the impact on treatment response.

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) has been associated with autoimmune (AI) and connective tissue disorders (CTDs), but clinical correlates and treatment response to topical corticosteroids (tCS) for patients with both conditions are not well known. We aimed to determine the prevalence and clinical features of AI/CTDs in EoE patients, and assess the response to tCS. In this retrospective cohort study of adults and children newly diagnosed with EoE in the University of North Carolina EoE Clinicopathologic database, we extracted clinical characteristics and treatment response data. We compared EoE patients with and without AI/CTDs, identified independently associated factors, and explored treatment responses. Of 1029 EoE patients, 61 (5.9%) had an AI/CTDs. The most common AI/CTDs were psoriasis/psoriatic arthritis (P/PA) (1.7%), Hashimoto's (1.2%), and rheumatoid arthritis (RA) (1%). Compared to those without AI/CTDs, AI/CTDs patients were older (35 vs. 28 years, P = 0.004), more likely to be female (51% vs. 30%, P = 0.001), have insurance (93% vs. 78%, P = 0.004) and a longer symptom duration prior to EoE diagnosis (10 vs. 7 years, P = 0.02). Older age, female sex, having insurance, and having allergic rhinitis were independently associated with AI/CTDs. AI/CTD patients with EoE were less likely to have a symptom response (47% vs. 79%, P = 0.003). Overlap between EoE and AI/CTDs was uncommon, seen in approximately 6%, with P/PA, Hashimoto's, and RA being most frequent. In conclusion, older age, female sex, having insurance, and allergic rhinitis were independently associated with AI/CTDs. EoE patients with AI/CTDs had less symptom response, with trendtowards lower endoscopic and histologic responses, to tCS therapy.

Dilation-predominant approach versus routine care in patients with difficult-to-treat eosinophilic esophagitis: a retrospective comparison.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about esophageal dilation as a long-term treatment approach for eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). We examined the impact of a "dilate and wait" strategy on symptom management and safety of patients with EoE. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included two patient groups: those who underwent a dilation-predominant approach (≥ 3 dilations as sole therapy or for histologically refractory disease [> 15 eos/hpf]); and those who had routine care (< 3 dilations or histologic response). Group characteristics were compared and outcomes for the dilation-only group assessed. RESULTS: 53/205 patients (26 %) received the dilation-predominant strategy (total 408 dilations), predominantly for histologic treatment nonresponse (75 %). These patients were younger (33 vs. 41 years; P = 0.003), had a narrower baseline esophageal diameter (9.8 vs. 11.5 mm; P = 0.005), underwent more dilations (7.7 vs. 3.4; P < 0.001), but achieved a smaller final diameter (15.7 vs. 16.7 mm; P = 0.01) vs. routine care. With this strategy, 30 patients (57 %) had ongoing symptom improvement, with esophageal caliber change independently associated with symptom response (adjusted odds ratio 1.79, 95 % confidence interval 1.16-2.78); 26 (49 %) used the strategy as a bridge to clinical trials. Over a median follow-up of 1001 days (interquartile range 581-1710), no deaths or dilation-related perforations occurred, but there were nine emergency room visits, including one for post-dilation bleeding and four for food impaction. CONCLUSIONS: A dilation-predominant long-term treatment strategy allowed for symptom control or bridge to clinical trials for patients with difficult-to-treat EoE. Close follow-up and monitoring for complications are required.

Loss to Follow-Up and Health Care Utilization After Initial Diagnosis of Eosinophilic Esophagitis.

BACKGROUND: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic disease, but the extent of patient loss to follow-up (LTFU) and health care utilization has not been fully investigated. AIM: To determine frequency and predictors of LTFU and health care utilization in EoE patients. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, we extracted data from patients with a new diagnosis of EoE. Follow-up time for each patient was calculated as the time from the first diagnostic endoscopy to the last GI-related contact date in the medical record. Patients with and without LTFU were compared, and the volume of EoE-related health care interactions was recorded. RESULTS: Of 944 EoE cases, 249 (26%) met the definition for LTFU. Major reasons for LTFU were never being scheduled (45%) and inability to contact patients (40%). Factors independently associated with regular follow-up were having insurance (aOR 2.89; 95% CI 1.85-4.50), white race (aOR 2.16; 95% CI 1.37-3.41), and longer symptom length (aOR 1.04 per year; 95% CI 1.01-1.08). At the time of last contact, patients with follow-up had better symptom response (55% vs. 12%; p < 0.001), improved esophageal caliber (14.3 vs. 12.4 mm; p = 0.005), and more histologic response (45% vs. 4% at 15 eos/hpf; p < 0.001). Health care utilization was high, with an average of 4.6 endoscopies and 4.0 clinic visits over the follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: LTFU of newly diagnosed EoE cases was common and associated with lack of insurance, non-white race, and shorter symptom duration. Those who followed up had high health care utilization but improved response rates. Strategies are needed to help decrease LTFU in EoE.

A Gap in Care Leads to Progression of Fibrosis in Eosinophilic Esophagitis Patients.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: There are few data assessing disease progression in eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) after diagnosis. We aimed to determine outcomes and assess for progression of fibrosis in patients with EoE with a gap in their regular care. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study of newly diagnosed patients with EoE, a "gap" in care was defined as ≥2 years without medical contact for EoE. For inclusion, a gap in care and both pre- and post-gap endoscopies were required. Patients with and without a gap were compared. Data were also compared in gap patients before the gap and after EoE care resumed, and progression of fibrosis and predictors were assessed. RESULTS: Of 701 patients with EoE, 95 (14%) had a gap in care (mean time without care, 4.8 ± 2.3 years). Post-gap, 12% presented with food impaction requiring emergency evaluation. Compared with pre-gap, patients post-gap had higher endoscopic severity (2.4 vs 1.5; P < .001) and smaller esophageal diameters (11.0 vs 12.7 mm; P = .04). Strictures were more prevalent with longer gap time (P < .05 for trend). Each additional year of gap time increased odds of stricture by 26%, even after accounting for pre-gap dilation. Additionally, of 67 patients without pre-gap fibrosis, 25 (37%) had at least one fibrotic feature (stricture, narrowing, or requiring dilation) post-gap. CONCLUSIONS: A gap in care of ≥2 years in patients with EoE was associated with signs of increased disease activity, and progression to fibrostenosis was noted, particularly with longer gaps in care. Because EoE can progress to fibrosis even after diagnosis, regular care in patients with EoE is required, perhaps at intervals <2 years.

Older patients with eosinophilic esophagitis have high treatment response to topical steroids.

BACKGROUND: There are few data assessing treatment response in older eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) patients and we evaluated treatment outcomes to topical corticosteroids (tCS) in this older population. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study of the UNC EoE Clinicopathologic database included subjects with a new diagnosis of EoE treated with tCS. Histologic responses, global symptom response, and endoscopic changes were recorded. Older EoE patients (≥65 years) were compared to younger EoE patients (<65). RESULTS: We identified 467 EoE patients treated with tCS, 12 (3%) of whom were ≥65 years. Compared to those <65 years, patients ≥65 had longer symptom duration and worse endoscopy scores, but most clinical features were similar. Post-treatment peak eosinophil counts trended higher in the <65 group (25.0 vs 5.5; p = 0.07). Histological response was greater in the ≥65 population at <15 eos/hpf (92% vs 57%; p = 0.02), ≤6 eos/hpf (83% vs 50%; p = 0.02), and <1 eos/hpf (58% vs 29%; p = 0.03). Older age was independently associated with increased odds of histologic response (adjusted OR 8.48, 95% CI: 1.08-66.4). CONCLUSIONS: EoE patients ≥65 years had a higher likelihood of responding to tCS therapy, suggesting they should be studied more closely and included in future trials.

Peripheral eosinophilia and hypoalbuminemia are associated with a higher biopsy diagnostic yield for eosinophilic gastroenteritis.

BACKGROUND: Gastric and duodenal mucosa may appear normal in eosinophilic gastroenteritis (EGE). Adult gastroenterologists typically biopsy only in the setting of mucosal abnormalities or symptoms, while pediatric providers biopsy all patients. The biopsy yield of EGE has not been adequately evaluated. AIMS: To evaluate the biopsy yield of EGE in a pediatric cohort and assess predictors of increased biopsy yield. METHODS: We identified patients age 0-18 who underwent upper endoscopy. We recorded endoscopic findings, pathology, demographics, and clinical and laboratory characteristics. We identified EGE cases (>20 eosinophils per high-power field on stomach and/or duodenum biopsy). We compared characteristics between EGE and non-EGE cases, calculated biopsy diagnostic yield, and performed multivariate analysis for predictors of increased biopsy yield. RESULTS: In 509 patients (55.6% female, mean age 10.3 years, 69.7% white, 58.7% atopic), biopsy diagnostic yield for EGE was 1.2% (6/509) among all subjects, 7.7% (3/39) for those with peripheral eosinophilia (≥500 eos/uL), 9.1% (3/33) for those with hypoalbuminemia (<3.5 g/dL), and 25.0% (3/12) for those with peripheral eosinophilia and hypoalbuminemia. The odds of EGE were 27.8 (95% CI 3.3-231.8) times greater among those with peripheral eosinophilia. The mean total biopsy surface area and number of fragments was similar between patients with and without EGE. The area under the ROC curve for blood eosinophil counts and albumin level for predicting EGE was 0.926. CONCLUSIONS: The biopsy diagnostic yield for EGE is low but increases with peripheral eosinophilia and hypoalbuminemia. Patients with these features should have biopsies obtained, regardless of endoscopic appearance.