Swallowed topical corticosteroids for eosinophilic esophagitis: Utilization and real-world efficacy from the EoE CONNECT registry.

BACKGROUND: Swallowed topical corticosteroids (tC) are common therapy for patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). Widely heterogeneous results have occurred due to their active ingredients, formulations and doses. OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of topical corticosteroid therapy for EoE in real-world practice. METHODS: Cross-sectional study analysis of the multicentre EoE CONNECT registry. Clinical remission was defined as a decrease of ≥50% in dysphagia symptom scores; histological remission was defined as a peak eosinophil count below 15 per high-power field. The effectiveness in achieving clinico-histological remission (CHR) was compared for the main tC formulations. RESULTS: Overall, data on 1456 prescriptions of tC in monotherapy used in 866 individual patients were assessed. Of those, 904 prescriptions with data on formulation were employed for the induction of remission; 234 reduced a previously effective dose for maintenance. Fluticasone propionate formulations dominated the first-line treatment, while budesonide was more common in later therapies. A swallowed nasal drop suspension was the most common formulation of fluticasone propionate. Doses ≥0.8 mg/day provided a 65% CHR rate and were superior to lower doses. Oral viscous solution prepared by a pharmacist was the most common prescription of budesonide; 4 mg/day provided no benefit over 2 mg/day (CHR rated being 72% and 80%, respectively). A multivariate analysis revealed budesonide orodispersible tablets as the most effective therapy (OR 18.9, p < 0.001); use of higher doses (OR 4.3, p = 0.03) and lower symptom scores (OR 0.9, p = 0.01) were also determinants of effectiveness. CONCLUSION: Reduced symptom severity, use of high doses, and use of budesonide orodispersible tablets particularly were all independent predictors of tC effectiveness.

Differences between childhood- and adulthood-onset eosinophilic esophagitis: An analysis from the EoE connect registry.

BACKGROUND: Direct comparisons of childhood- and adulthood-onset eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) are scarce. AIM: To compare disease characteristics, endoscopic and histological features, allergic concomitances and therapeutic choices across ages. METHODS: Cross-sectional analysis of the EoE CONNECT registry. RESULTS: The adulthood-onset cohort (those diagnosed at ≥18y) comprised 1044 patients and the childhood-onset cohort (patients diagnosed at <18 y), 254. Vomiting, nausea, chest and abdominal pain, weight loss, slow eating and food aversion were significantly more frequent in children; dysphagia, food bolus impaction and heartburn predominated in adults. A family history of EoE was present in 16% of pediatric and 8.2% of adult patients (p<0.001). Concomitant atopic diseases did not vary across ages. Median±IQR diagnostic delay (years) from symptom onset was higher in adults (2.7 ± 6.1) than in children (1 ± 2.1; p<0.001). Esophageal strictures and rings predominated in adults (p<0.001), who underwent esophageal dilation more commonly (p = 0.011). Inflammatory EoE phenotypes were more common in children (p = 0.001), who also presented higher eosinophil counts in biopsies (p = 0.015) and EREFS scores (p = 0.017). Despite PPI predominating as initial therapy in all cohorts, dietary therapy and swallowed topical corticosteroids were more frequently prescribed in children (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Childhood-onset EoE has differential characteristics compared with adulthood-onset, but similar response to treatment.

Accurate and timely diagnosis of Eosinophilic Esophagitis improves over time in Europe. An analysis of the EoE CONNECT Registry.

BACKGROUND: Poor adherence to clinical practice guidelines for eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) has been described and the diagnostic delay of the disease continues to be unacceptable in many settings. OBJECTIVE: To analyze the impact of improved knowledge provided by the successive international clinical practice guidelines on reducing diagnostic delay and improving the diagnostic process for European patients with EoE. METHODS: Cross-sectional analysis of the EoE CONNECT registry based on clinical practice. Time periods defined by the publication dates of four major sets of guidelines over 10 years were considered. Patients were grouped per time period according to date of symptom onset. RESULTS: Data from 1,132 patients was analyzed and median (IQR) diagnostic delay in the whole series was 2.1 (0.7-6.2) years. This gradually decreased over time with subsequent release of new guidelines (p < 0.001), from 12.7 years up to 2007 to 0.7 years after 2017. The proportion of patients with stricturing of mixed phenotypes at the point of EoE diagnosis also decreased over time (41.3% vs. 16%; p < 0.001), as did EREFS scores. The fibrotic sub-score decreased from a median (IQR) of 2 (1-2) to 0 (0-1) when patients whose symptoms started up to 2007 and after 2017 were compared (p < 0.001). In parallel, symptoms measured with the Dysphagia Symptoms Score reduced significantly when patients with symptoms starting before 2007 and after 2012 were compared. A reduction in the number of endoscopies patients underwent before the one that achieved an EoE diagnosis, and the use of allergy testing as part of the diagnostic workout of EoE, also reduced significantly over time (p = 0.010 and p < 0.001, respectively). CONCLUSION: The diagnostic work-up of EoE patients improved substantially over time at the European sites contributing to EoE CONNECT, with a dramatic reduction in diagnostic delay.

EoE CONNECT, the European Registry of Clinical, Environmental, and Genetic Determinants in Eosinophilic Esophagitis: rationale, design, and study protocol of a large-scale epidemiological study in Europe.

BACKGROUND: The growing prevalence of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) represents a considerable burden to patients and health care systems. Optimizing cost-effective management and identifying mechanisms for disease onset and progression are required. However, the paucity of large patient cohorts and heterogeneity of practice hinder the defining of optimal management of EoE. METHODS: EoE CONNECT is an ongoing, prospective registry study initiated in 2016 and currently managed by EUREOS, the European Consortium for Eosinophilic Diseases of the Gastrointestinal Tract. Patients are managed and treated by their responsible specialists independently. Data recorded using a web-based system include demographic and clinical variables; patient allergies; environmental, intrapartum, and early life exposures; and family background. Symptoms are structurally assessed at every visit; endoscopic features and histological findings are recorded for each examination. Prospective treatment data are registered sequentially, with new sequences created each time a different treatment (active principle, formulation, or dose) is administered to a patient. EoE CONNECT database is actively monitored to ensure the highest data accuracy and the highest scientific and ethical standards. RESULTS: EoE CONNECT is currently being conducted at 39 centers in Europe and enrolls patients of all ages with EoE. In its aim to increase knowledge, to date EoE CONNECT has provided evidence on the effectiveness of first- and second-line therapies for EoE in clinical practice, the ability of proton pump inhibitors to induce disease remission, and factors associated with improved response. Drug effects to reverse fibrous remodeling and endoscopic features of fibrosis in EoE have also been assessed. CONCLUSION: This prospective registry study will provide important information on the epidemiological and clinical aspects of EoE and evidence as to the real-world and long-term effectiveness and safety of therapy. These data will potentially be a vital benchmark for planning future EoE health care services in Europe.

Efficacy of Therapy for Eosinophilic Esophagitis in Real-World Practice.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Topical steroids, proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), and dietary interventions are recommended first- and second-line therapies for eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). We investigated differences in their effectiveness in a real-world, clinical practice cohort of patients with EoE. METHODS: We collected data on the efficacy of different therapies for EoE (ability to induce clinical and histologic remission) from the multicenter EoE CONNECT database-a database of patients with a confirmed diagnosis of EoE in Europe that began in 2016. We obtained data from 589 patients, treated at 11 centers, on sex, age, time of diagnosis, starting date of any therapy, response to therapy, treatment end dates, alternative treatments, and findings from endoscopy. The baseline endoscopy was used for diagnosis of EoE; second endoscopy was performed to evaluate response to first-line therapies. After changes in treatment, generally because lack of efficacy, a last endoscopy was performed. The time elapsed between endoscopies depended on the criteria of attending physicians. Clinical remission was defined by a decrease of more than 50% in Dysphagia Symptom Score; improvement in symptoms by less than 50% from baseline was considered as clinical response. Histologic remission was defined as a peak eosinophil count below 5 eosinophils/hpf. A peak eosinophil count between 5 and 14 eosinophils/hpf was considered histologic response. We identified factors associated with therapy selection and effectiveness using χ2 and multinomial logistic regression analyses RESULTS: PPIs were the first-line treatment for 76.4% of patients, followed by topical steroids (for 10.5%) and elimination diets (for 7.8%). Topical steroids were most effective in inducing clinical and histologic remission or response (in 67.7% of patients), followed by empiric elimination diets (in 52.0%), and PPIs (in 50.2%). Among the 344 patients who switched to a second-line therapy, dietary interventions were selected for 47.1% of patients, followed by PPIs (for 29.1%) and topical steroids (for 18.6%). Clinical and histologic remission or response was achieved by 80.7% of patients treated with topical steroids, 69.2% of patients given PPIs, and 41.7% of patients on empiric elimination diets. Multivariate analyses found the stricturing phenotype of EoE to be associated with selection of topical steroids over PPIs as the first-line therapy; lack of fibrotic features at initial endoscopy was associated with selection of elimination diets over topical steroids as a second-line therapy. The recruiting center was significantly associated with therapy choice; second-line treatment with topical steroids or PPIs were the only variables associated with clinical and histologic remission. CONCLUSIONS: In an analysis of data from a large cohort of patients with EoE in Europe, we found topical steroids to be the most effective at inducing clinical and histologic remission, but PPIs to be the most frequently prescribed. Treatment approaches vary with institution and presence of fibrosis or strictures.