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.

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.

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 of Relevance for Oestrogen and Oxytocin Pathways and Risk of Barrett's Oesophagus and Oesophageal Adenocarcinoma: A Pooled Analysis from the BEACON Consortium.

BACKGROUND: The strong male predominance in oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC) and Barrett's oesophagus (BO) continues to puzzle. Hormonal influence, e.g. oestrogen or oxytocin, might contribute. METHODS: This genetic-epidemiological study pooled 14 studies from three continents, Australia, Europe, and North America. Polymorphisms in 3 key genes coding for the oestrogen pathway (receptor alpha (ESR1), receptor beta (ESR2), and aromatase (CYP19A1)), and 3 key genes of the oxytocin pathway (the oxytocin receptor (OXTR), oxytocin protein (OXT), and cyclic ADP ribose hydrolase glycoprotein (CD38)), were analysed using a gene-based approach, versatile gene-based test association study (VEGAS). RESULTS: Among 1508 OAC patients, 2383 BO patients, and 2170 controls, genetic variants within ESR1 were associated with BO in males (p = 0.0058) and an increased risk of OAC and BO combined in males (p = 0.0023). Genetic variants within OXTR were associated with an increased risk of BO in both sexes combined (p = 0.0035) and in males (p = 0.0012). We followed up these suggestive findings in a further smaller data set, but found no replication. There were no significant associations between the other 4 genes studied and risk of OAC, BO, separately on in combination, in males and females combined or in males only. CONCLUSION: Genetic variants in the oestrogen receptor alpha and the oxytocin receptor may be associated with an increased risk of BO or OAC, but replication in other large samples are needed.

MiRNA-Related SNPs and Risk of Esophageal Adenocarcinoma and Barrett's Esophagus: Post Genome-Wide Association Analysis in the BEACON Consortium.

Incidence of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EA) has increased substantially in recent decades. Multiple risk factors have been identified for EA and its precursor, Barrett's esophagus (BE), such as reflux, European ancestry, male sex, obesity, and tobacco smoking, and several germline genetic variants were recently associated with disease risk. Using data from the Barrett's and Esophageal Adenocarcinoma Consortium (BEACON) genome-wide association study (GWAS) of 2,515 EA cases, 3,295 BE cases, and 3,207 controls, we examined single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) that potentially affect the biogenesis or biological activity of microRNAs (miRNAs), small non-coding RNAs implicated in post-transcriptional gene regulation, and deregulated in many cancers, including EA. Polymorphisms in three classes of genes were examined for association with risk of EA or BE: miRNA biogenesis genes (157 SNPs, 21 genes); miRNA gene loci (234 SNPs, 210 genes); and miRNA-targeted mRNAs (177 SNPs, 158 genes). Nominal associations (P<0.05) of 29 SNPs with EA risk, and 25 SNPs with BE risk, were observed. None remained significant after correction for multiple comparisons (FDR q>0.50), and we did not find evidence for interactions between variants analyzed and two risk factors for EA/BE (smoking and obesity). This analysis provides the most extensive assessment to date of miRNA-related SNPs in relation to risk of EA and BE. While common genetic variants within components of the miRNA biogenesis core pathway appear unlikely to modulate susceptibility to EA or BE, further studies may be warranted to examine potential associations between unassessed variants in miRNA genes and targets with disease risk.

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.

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.

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.

Obesity and risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma and Barrett's esophagus: a Mendelian randomization study.

BACKGROUND: Data from observational studies suggest that body mass index (BMI) is causally related to esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) and its precursor, Barrett's esophagus (BE). However, the relationships may be affected by bias and confounding. METHODS: We used data from the Barrett's and Esophageal Adenocarcinoma Genetic Susceptibility Study: 999 patients with EAC, 2061 patients with BE, and 2169 population controls. We applied the two-stage control function instrumental variable method of the Mendelian randomization approach to estimate the unbiased, unconfounded effect of BMI on risk of EAC and BE. This was performed using a genetic risk score, derived from 29 genetic variants shown to be associated with BMI, as an instrument for lifetime BMI. A higher score indicates propensity to obesity. All tests were two-sided. RESULTS: The genetic risk score was not associated with potential confounders, including gastroesophageal reflux symptoms and smoking. In the instrumental variable analyses (IV), EAC risk increased by 16% (IV-odds ratio [OR] = 1.16, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.01 to 1.33) and BE risk increased by 12% (IV-OR = 1.12, 95% CI = 1.00 to 1.25) per 1kg/m(2) increase in BMI. BMI was statistically significantly associated with EAC and BE in conventional epidemiologic analyses. CONCLUSIONS: People with a high genetic propensity to obesity have higher risks of esophageal metaplasia and neoplasia than people with low genetic propensity. These analyses provide the strongest evidence to date that obesity is independently associated with BE and EAC, and is not due to confounding or bias inherent in conventional epidemiologic analyses.

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.

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.

Germline genetic contributions to risk for esophageal adenocarcinoma, Barrett's esophagus, and gastroesophageal reflux.

BACKGROUND: Esophageal adenocarcinoma (EA) is an increasingly common cancer with poor survival. Barrett's esophagus (BE) is the main precursor to EA, and every year 0.12% to 0.5% of BE patients progress to EA. BE typically arises on a background of chronic gastroesophageal reflux (GERD), one of the risk factors for EA. METHODS: We used genome-wide association data to investigate the genetic architecture underlying GERD, BE, and EA. We applied a method to estimate the variance explained (array heritability, h(2)g) and the genetic correlation (rg) between GERD, BE, and EA by considering all single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) simultaneously. We also estimated the polygenic overlap between GERD, BE, and EA using a prediction approach. All tests were two-sided, except in the case of variance-explained estimation where one-sided tests were used. RESULTS: We estimated a statistically significant genetic variance explained for BE (h(2)g = 35%; standard error [SE] = 6%; one-sided P = 1 × 10(-9)) and for EA (h(2)g = 25 %; SE = 5%; one-sided P = 2 × 10(-7)). The genetic correlation between BE and EA was found to be high (rg = 1.0; SE = 0.37). We also estimated a statistically significant polygenic overlap between BE and EA (one-sided P = 1 × 10(-6)), which suggests, together with the high genetic correlation, that shared genes underlie the development of BE and EA. Conversely, no statistically significant results were obtained for GERD. CONCLUSIONS: We have demonstrated that risk to BE and EA is influenced by many germline genetic variants of small effect and that shared polygenic effects contribute to risk of these two diseases.

A genome-wide association study identifies new susceptibility loci for esophageal adenocarcinoma and Barrett's esophagus.

Esophageal adenocarcinoma is a cancer with rising incidence and poor survival. Most such cancers arise in a specialized intestinal metaplastic epithelium, which is diagnostic of Barrett's esophagus. In a genome-wide association study, we compared esophageal adenocarcinoma cases (n = 2,390) and individuals with precancerous Barrett's esophagus (n = 3,175) with 10,120 controls in 2 phases. For the combined case group, we identified three new associations. The first is at 19p13 (rs10419226: P = 3.6 × 10(-10)) in CRTC1 (encoding CREB-regulated transcription coactivator), whose aberrant activation has been associated with oncogenic activity. A second is at 9q22 (rs11789015: P = 1.0 × 10(-9)) in BARX1, which encodes a transcription factor important in esophageal specification. A third is at 3p14 (rs2687201: P = 5.5 × 10(-9)) near the transcription factor FOXP1, which regulates esophageal development. We also refine a previously reported association with Barrett's esophagus near the putative tumor suppressor gene FOXF1 at 16q24 and extend our findings to now include esophageal adenocarcinoma.

Fecal calprotectin more accurately reflects endoscopic activity of ulcerative colitis than the Lichtiger Index, C-reactive protein, platelets, hemoglobin, and blood leukocytes.

BACKGROUND: The correlation between noninvasive markers with endoscopic activity according to the modified Baron Index in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) is unknown. We aimed to evaluate the correlation between endoscopic activity and fecal calprotectin (FC), C-reactive protein (CRP), hemoglobin, platelets, blood leukocytes, and the Lichtiger Index (clinical score). METHODS: UC patients undergoing complete colonoscopy were prospectively enrolled and scored clinically and endoscopically. Samples from feces and blood were analyzed in UC patients and controls. RESULTS: We enrolled 228 UC patients and 52 healthy controls. Endoscopic disease activity correlated best with FC (Spearman's rank correlation coefficient r = 0.821), followed by the Lichtiger Index (r = 0.682), CRP (r = 0.556), platelets (r = 0.488), blood leukocytes (r = 0.401), and hemoglobin (r = -0.388). FC was the only marker that could discriminate between different grades of endoscopic activity (grade 0, 16 [10-30] µg/g; grade 1, 35 [25-48] µg/g; grade 2, 102 [44-159] µg/g; grade 3, 235 [176-319] µg/g; grade 4, 611 [406-868] µg/g; P < 0.001 for discriminating the different grades). FC with a cutoff of 57 µg/g had a sensitivity of 91% and a specificity of 90% to detect endoscopically active disease (modified Baron Index ≥ 2). CONCLUSIONS: FC correlated better with endoscopic disease activity than clinical activity, CRP, platelets, hemoglobin, and blood leukocytes. The strong correlation with endoscopic disease activity suggests that FC represents a useful biomarker for noninvasive monitoring of disease activity in UC patients.

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.