Natural history of primary eosinophilic esophagitis: a follow-up of 30 adult patients for up to 11.5 years

Gastro-oesophageal reflux disease and eosinophilic oesophagitis: What is the relationship?

Eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE) and gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD) are the most common causes of chronic oesophagitis and dysphagia associated with oesophageal mucosal eosinophilia. Distinguishing between the two is imperative but challenging due to overlapping clinical and histological features. A diagnosis of EoE requires clinical, histological and endoscopic correlation whereas a diagnosis of GORD is mainly clinical without the need for other investigations. Both entities may exhibit oesophageal eosinophilia at a similar level making a histological distinction between them difficult. Although the term proton-pump inhibitor responsive oesophageal eosinophilia has recently been retracted from the guidelines, a relationship between EoE and GORD still exists. This relationship is complex as they may coexist, either interacting bidirectionally or are unrelated. This review aims to outline the differences and potential relationship between the two conditions, with specific focus on histology, immunology, pathogenesis and treatment.

Pathophysiology of Eosinophilic Esophagitis

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic inflammatory disease of the esophagus associated with an atopic predisposition which appears to be increasing in prevalence over the last few decades. Symptoms stem from fibrosis, swelling, and smooth muscle dysfunction. In the past two decades, the etiology of EoE has been and is continuing to be revealed. This review provides an overview of the effects of genetics, environment, and immune function including discussions that touch on microbiome, the role of diet, food allergy, and aeroallergy. The review further concentrates on the pathophysiology of the disease with particular focus on the important concepts of the molecular etiology of EoE including barrier dysfunction and allergic hypersensitivity.

Medical and dietary treatments in eosinophilic esophagitis

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) refers to a relatively new chronic inflammatory disease of the esophagus, which according to the current understanding underlies an immune-mediated pathogenesis driven by exposure to allergens. While several open questions remain regarding ethiopathogenesis as well as treatment options and their positioning, one thing has increasingly been recognized. The disease is on the rise and will increasingly be of importance in everyday's clinical practice, not only in expert physicians but also gastroenterologists with a broad clinical spectrum, allergologists and even general practitioners. The aim of this review is to provide a current overview on EoE treatment, including the rationale and endpoints of treatment in EoE, medical treatment options - providing the standard of current care, second-line options and outlook to emerging therapies - as well as dietary elimination approaches.

Eosinophilic Esophagitis: Review and Update

Background: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) was first described in the 1990s, showing an increasing incidence and prevalence since then, being the leading cause of food impaction and the major cause of dysphagia. Probably, in a few years, EoE may no longer be considered a rare disease. Methods: This article discusses new aspects of the pathogenesis, symptoms, diagnosis, and treatment of EoE according to the last published guidelines. Results: The epidemiological studies indicate a multifactorial origin for EoE, where environmental and genetic factors take part. EoE affects both children and adults and it is frequently associated with atopic disease and IgE-mediated food allergies. In patients undergoing oral immunotherapy for desensitization from IgE-mediated food allergy the risk of developing EoE is 2.72%. Barrier dysfunction and T-helper 2 inflammation is considered to be pathogenetically important factors. There are different patterns of clinical presentation varying with age and can be masked by adaptation habits. Besides, symptoms do not usually correlate with histologic disease activity. The diagnostic criteria for EoE has evolved but mainly requires symptoms of esophageal dysfunction with histologic evidence of a peak value of at least 15 eosinophils per high-power field. Endoscopies have to be repeated in order to diagnose, monitor, and treat EoE. Treatment of EoE can be started either by drugs (PPIs and topical corticosteroids) or elimination diets. The multistage step-up elimination diet management approach of EoE is promising. Endoscopic dilation is used for patients with severe dysphagia/food impaction with inadequate response to anti-inflammatory treatment. Conclusions: Research in recent years has contributed to a better understanding of EoE's pathogenesis, genetic background, natural history, allergy workup, standardization in assessment of disease activity, evaluation of minimally invasive diagnostic tools, and new therapeutic approaches. However, several unmet needs are to be solved urgently, as finding a non-invasive disease-monitoring methods and biomarkers for routine practice, the development or new therapies, novel food allergy testing to detect triggering foods, drug, and doses required for initial therapy and safety issues with long-term maintenance therapy, amongst others. Besides, multidisciplinary management units of EoE, involving gastroenterologists, pediatricians, allergists, pathologists, dietitians, and ENT specialists are needed.

Successful Esophageal Dilation of Eosinophilic Esophagitis (EoE) Patients With a Previous Postdilation Complication: Start Low and Go Slow

INTRODUCTION

Esophageal dilation is an effective and safe treatment option for fibrostenotic eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). Despite the safety, adverse events occur, yet there is scarce literature on the best treatment postcomplications.

METHODS

Patients with diagnosis of EoE (≥15 eosinophils per high-power field) from 2011 to 2015 treated at our center were included. Thirty patients with fibrostenotic disease had records available regarding serial dilation therapy. Eight patients previously experienced complications by outside providers. Groups were created based on history of complication before our dilation versus a group without. Mean difference and odds ratio with 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated.

RESULTS

There were 8 complications, 7 occurred during dilation and 1 during passage of the endoscope. Esophageal diameter at initial dilation was lower in patients with prior complications 9.0±1.51 versus 11.73±2.98 mm (95% CI: -4.44, -1.02; P=0.003). However, end-esophageal diameter was similar across both groups 15.8±1.8 versus 16.1±2.0 mm. Total number of dilation sessions: 4.0±1.8 versus 2.32±1.0 (95% CI: 0.17, 3.19; P=0.03), as well as sessions to reach 17 mm diameter 3.8±1.0 versus 2.3±1.0 (95% CI: -0.08, 2.89; P=0.04), were higher in the patients with complications. The length of time in months to reach an esophageal diameter of 17 mm was longer in patients with complications, but the difference was not statistically significant 3.50±0.6 versus 2.3±2.3 months (P=0.09).

CONCLUSIONS

Esophageal dilation is a safe and effective modality to treat severe fibrostenotic EoE in patients with prior history of complications. The keys to success are: (1) start with lower diameter bougies and (2) dilate slowly over a longer time course to reach targeted diameter and symptom resolution.

A Prospective Study of Eosinophilic Esophagitis and the Expression of Tight Junction Proteins in Patients with Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Symptoms

Background/Aims

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is often erroneously diagnosed as gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). The aim of this study is to investigate the prevalence of EoE and the expression of tight junction (TJ) proteins in patients with GERD symptoms.

Methods

One hundred patients with GERD symptoms and 10 healthy controls were prospectively studied. Sixty-two patients had symptoms refractory to proton pump inhibitors (PPI). All patients underwent esophageal biopsy. Patients were diagnosed with EoE if the number of eosinophil granulocytes per high-power field was ≥15. Immunohistochemical analysis of TJ proteins (claudin-1, claudin-4, occludin, and zonula occludin-1 [ZO-1]) was performed.

Results

EoE was diagnosed in six of 100 patients (6%) with GERD symptoms and in six patients (9.7%) of 62 patients with PPI-refractory GERD. Only one had typical EoE endoscopic findings. The proportion of ZO-1-positive cells was significantly lower in the lower than in the middle esophagus (56.0%±14.0% vs 66.0%±11.5%, p＜0.05). There were no significant correlations between TJ protein expression and GERD symptoms.

Conclusions

The prevalence of EoE among patients with PPI-refractory GERD is approximately 10%. Regardless of endoscopic findings, esophageal biopsy is crucial in diagnosing EoE. The disruption of ZO-1 expression in the lower esophagus is significantly associated with GERD symptoms.

The natural course of eosinophilic esophagitis and long-term consequences of undiagnosed disease in a large cohort

BACKGROUND

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic esophageal inflammation that may lead to stricture formation. This narrowing can cause major complications including food impactions. Despite increasing interest in EoE accurate data on its natural course is scarce. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the natural course of EoE and to evaluate the association between undiagnosed disease and the occurrence of complications over two decades in a large cohort.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed charts of patients diagnosed with EoE between 1996 and 2015, collected from 15 hospitals throughout the Netherlands. Histologic, clinical, and endoscopic characteristics were identified and stratified by age and diagnostic delay.

RESULTS

We included 721 patients (524 males, 117 children (≤18 years)). Dysphagia and food impactions were more common in adults whereas children more often presented with vomiting and abdominal pain (all p < 0.001). The prevalence of fibrotic endoscopic features was higher in adults (76%) than in children (39%) (p < 0.001). As time with undiagnosed disease progressed the percentage of patients with strictures and food impactions increased from 19% and 24% (diagnostic delay ≤ 2 years) to 52% and 57% (diagnostic delay ≥ 21 years) (p < 0.001), respectively. In a multivariate logistic regression model, diagnostic delay (odds ratio (OR) = 1.09; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.05-1.13) and male gender (OR = 2.69, 95% CI = 1.61-4.50) were the major risk factors for stricture presence.

CONCLUSION

During the natural course of EoE, progression from an inflammatory to a fibrostenotic phenotype occurs. With each additional year of undiagnosed EoE the risk of stricture presence increases with 9%.

Esophageal Mucosal Impedance Patterns Discriminate Patients With Eosinophilic Esophagitis From Patients With GERD

BACKGROUND & AIMS

It is a challenge to make a diagnosis of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) because its symptoms and histologic features overlap with those of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). A minimally invasive device was recently developed to detect mucosal impedance (MI) that measures epithelial integrity during upper endoscopy. We aimed to quantify MI along the esophagus and identify patterns that differentiated patients with and without GERD from those with EoE, and determine whether MI values and patterns are sufficient to identify patients with EoE using histologic findings as a reference.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of 91 patients with upper gastrointestinal symptoms referred for diagnostic testing for GERD and EoE from 2012 through 2014 (discovery set). During the first endoscopy, MI measurements were obtained at 2, 5, and 10 cm from the squamocolumnar junction. GERD was confirmed by ambulatory pH tests, and histologic analyses of biopsies were used to confirm EoE. We then used statistical modeling to identify MI patterns along the esophagus (at 10 cm, 5 cm, and 2 cm) that associated with GERD vs EoE. We validated our findings in a prospective cohort of 49 patients undergoing elective upper endoscopy for dysphagia, from 2015 through 2016, testing the ability of MI patterns to identify patients with vs. without EoE.

RESULTS

We found patients with EoE to have a unique MI pattern, with low values along the esophageal axis. MI measurements at 5 cm could discern patients with normal vs abnormal mucosa with 83% sensitivity and 79% specificity, and patients with EoE vs GERD with 84% sensitivity and 70% specificity; these measurements differentiated the patient populations with the highest level of accuracy of any of the 6 measurements tested. In the validation study, a rater using the esophageal MI pattern identified patients with EoE with 100% sensitivity and 96% specificity.

CONCLUSION

We identified and validated a pattern of MI along the esophagus that can identify patients with EoE vs normal mucosa or GERD with high levels of sensitivity.

Comparison of endoscopy and radiographic imaging for detection of esophageal inflammation and remodeling in adults with eosinophilic esophagitis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Eosinophil predominant mucosal inflammation is central to the diagnosis and activity assessment of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). Esophageal mural remodeling is an important consequence of EoE that is responsible for adverse events of dysphagia, food impaction, and esophageal stenosis. The aim of this study was to compare upper endoscopy (EGD) with barium upper GI study (UGI) for the detection of esophageal inflammation and remodeling in adults with EoE.

METHODS

A retrospective review on a single-center database of adults with confirmed EoE identified those with EGD and UGI performed within 6 months of each another. Studies were reviewed for mucosal inflammatory and remodeling abnormalities.

RESULTS

Seventy patients were included. Initial UGI results were consistent with EoE in 10% and suggestive of EoE in 39%. Review of UGI by a senior GI radiologist increased detection of changes consistent with EoE (34%). EGD identified characteristic abnormalities in 93%, which was significantly greater than UGI (67%). Inflammatory features were more frequently appreciated on EGD (74%) compared with UGI (21%). There was no significant difference in fibrostenotic changes observed on EGD (84%) versus UGI (73%).

CONCLUSIONS

EGD and UGI have similar sensitivity for identifying the remodeling consequences of EoE; however, inflammatory features are better assessed on EGD. Inadequate sensitivity of UGI for composite features of EoE limits its capabilities as a diagnostic test, although radiologists' awareness significantly increases the diagnostic yield of UGI. UGI and EGD may identify fibrostenotic changes unappreciated by its counterpart and thus provide complementary information in select patients.

Prospective assessment of disease-specific quality of life in adults with eosinophilic esophagitis

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is an important cause of upper gastrointestinal dysfunction in children and adults. The EoE-quality of life (QOL)-A was validated as a disease-specific measure of quality of life in EoE. This study characterized the extent of QOL concerns in a cohort of adult EoE patients and delineated the relationships between QOL and other disease activity measures. One hundred sixty-seven patients enrolled in this prospective cohort study. Patients with established and suspected EoE undergoing endoscopy at a single university-based medical center were recruited. EoE was diagnosed on the basis of the clinical criteria and histologic demonstration of ≥15 eos/hpf while on proton pump inhibition therapy. Sixty five patients undergoing repeat endoscopy during the enrollment period participated twice. Patients provided demographic information and completed symptom assessments and the EoE-QOL-A. Analyses included comparisons with overall QOL as well as QOL subscales. Outcome measures included endoscopic activity using a validated instrument, the EoE Endoscopic Reference Score, and histology. Overall QOL was significantly correlated with dysphagia frequency, intensity, and severity (P < 0.001). Patients who experienced a food impaction in the last 30 days had significantly worse overall QOL (P = 0.009). There was no correlation between overall QOL and years since diagnosis, symptom duration, endoscopic features, or histologic findings. Patient symptoms correlated with endoscopic features of edema, rings, and stricture severity. Histologic activity was highly correlated with severity of endoscopic features. Patients who underwent repeat endoscopy with histologic response demonstrated improved eating and social QOL; however, overall QOL was unchanged. In adults with EoE, patient reported QOL is associated with symptom severity but not endoscopic or histologic features. Disease-specific QOL may complement parameters of biologic activity in the assessment of overall disease burden in EoE.

Natural history of eosinophilic esophagitis: a systematic review of epidemiology and disease course

Eosinophilic esophagitis is a chronic immune-mediated esophageal disorder. For its timely diagnosis, clinicians must recognize common symptoms, and understand differences in symptoms across patient groups. The aim of this study is to systematically review the epidemiology and natural history of eosinophilic esophagitis. The MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched from 1974 to February 2017 for studies describing the epidemiology and natural history of eosinophilic esophagitis. Congress abstracts from 2014 to 2016 were also searched. Search results were screened against predetermined inclusion/exclusion criteria by two independent reviewers, and data extraction was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Of 1376 articles identified, 47 met the inclusion criteria: 20 on epidemiology and 27 on natural history. Incidence and prevalence of eosinophilic esophagitis varied widely across North America and Europe, and increased over time. Incidence increased 131-fold in the Netherlands (1996-2010), 20-fold in Denmark (1997-2006), and 5.1-fold in Calgary, Canada (2004-2008). The most commonly reported symptoms were emesis and abdominal pain in children, and dysphagia and food impaction in adults. Age at diagnosis was 5.9-12.0 years in children, and approximately 30 years in adults. Time between symptom onset and diagnosis was 1.2-3.5 years in children and 3.0-8.0 years in adults. Diagnostic delay was associated with an increased risk of endoscopic features of fibrostenosis. Symptoms of eosinophilic esophagitis differed significantly by age and race. In conclusion, there is an increasing incidence and prevalence of eosinophilic esophagitis. The considerable delay between symptom onset and diagnosis suggests that clinicians do not readily recognize the disease, which may have important clinical ramifications.

Management of eosinophilic esophagitis in daily clinical practice

In recent years, new guidelines and recommendations have been published regarding the diagnostic criteria and therapeutic management of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). The aim of this study is to assess the diagnostic and therapeutic management of patients diagnosed with EoE in daily clinical practice and whether this was performed according to current guidelines and recommendations. A population-based, multicenter retrospective cohort study was conducted using data from the national pathology registry (PALGA), medical records, and telephone interviews of patients diagnosed with EoE in two academic and two nonacademic hospitals in the period 2004 to 2014. The study was approved by all involved ethical committees. Data regarding demographics, clinical manifestations, endoscopic results, histologic samples, and therapeutic strategies were collected. Standard statistical analyses were performed to summarize patient characteristics. We included 119 patients diagnosed with EoE in this study. The median age at onset of symptoms was 29 years (IQR: 15-42) and the median age at diagnosis was 38 years (IQR: 23-51 years), leading to a median diagnostic patients' delay of 6.5 years (IQR: 2-14 years). The median physicians' delay in diagnosis between first contact in the hospital and diagnosis was 1.0 year (IQR: 1-7 years). The incidence of newly diagnosed patients with EoE increased steadily over a period of 11 years. Criteria for the microscopic diagnosis of EoE varied between pathologists in each hospital. Initial treatment included topical corticosteroids (TCS) (30.3%), proton pump inhibitors (PPI) (29.4%), or a combination (10.1%). A follow-up endoscopy was performed in 40.3% of patients. During follow-up, treatment included PPIs (76.0%), TCS (59.6%), a combination of PPIs and TCS (45.4%), and endoscopic dilations (6.7%). Diagnostic and therapeutic discrepancies between daily clinical practice and recommendations from current and past guidelines were observed. Apart from developing guidelines, efforts should be undertaken to implement these in daily clinical practice.

Cohort Profile: The Swiss Eosinophilic Esophagitis Cohort Study (SEECS)

Background and Aims

The prospective, observational Swiss Eosinophilic Esophagitis Cohort Study (SEECS) was set up in 2015 with the following goals in mind: (1) to provide up-to-date epidemiologic data; (2) to assess the appropriateness of care; (3) to evaluate the psychosocial impact; and (4) to foster translational research projects. Data capture relies on validated instruments to assess disease activity and focuses on epidemiologic variables and biosamples (esophageal biopsies and blood specimens). An annual inclusion of 70 new patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) or proton pump inhibitor-responsive esophageal eosinophilia (PPI-REE) is intended. We herein describe the SEECS cohort profile.

Methods

The SEECS includes adult patients (age ≥18 years) with EoE or PPI-REE diagnosed according to published criteria. After inclusion, the patients are typically seen once a year for a clinical and endoscopic/histologic follow-up examination. Data are captured using validated questionnaires. Biosamples from patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and controls with a healthy esophagus are collected as well.

Results

From January 2016 to July 2017, a total of 111 patients with EoE and 10 patients with PPI-REE were recruited. In addition, esophageal biopsies and blood samples from 11 patients with GERD and 20 controls with a healthy esophagus were collected. The mean age of the patients with EoE and those with PPI-REE was 39.6 ± 12.9 and 44.6 ± 15.6 years, respectively. A male predominance was found among both the patients with EoE (77.5%) and those with PPI-REE (70%). Concomitant allergic disorders were found in 79.3% of the patients with EoE and 90% of the patients with PPI-REE. At inclusion, the EoE patients were treated with the following therapeutic regimens: no therapy (0.9%), PPI (36%), swallowed topical corticosteroids (82.9%), elimination diets (15.3%), and esophageal dilation (19.8%).

Conclusions

The SEECS is the first national cohort study of patients with EoE or PPI-REE. The SEECS will provide up-to-date epidemiologic data and foster translational research projects.

Eosinophilic Esophagitis Clinical Manifestations and Differential Diagnosis

As a chronic inflammatory disease with eosinophilic infiltrate of the esophagus, eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) causes a variety of gastrointestinal (GI) clinical manifestations. None of the symptoms, endoscopic features, or biopsy findings is pathognomonic of the disease, even with high degrees of esophageal eosinophilia. The pathogenesis has been explored by several studies, yet it still far from being completely understood. Evidence supports a role of allergen-driven Th2 lymphocyte mechanism, though not in every patient. This article addresses the disease's clinical manifestations, endoscopic findings, diagnosis, and differential diagnoses. In addition to the current diagnostic criteria, we summarize some recently emerging procedures that promise of enhancing more precise diagnosis and institution of early appropriate management, with consequent better quality of life and reduction of complications.

Endoscopic and Radiologic Findings in Eosinophilic Esophagitis

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) was first described by Landis in 1978. The disease is characterized by esophageal symptoms, primarily dysphagia in adult patients, and esophageal eosinophilic infiltration. The disease is associated with characteristic endoscopic findings, including edema, rings, furrows, exudates, and strictures. The typical radiographic findings of this disorder are rings, strictures, and small-caliber esophagus. The endoscopic and radiographic findings of EoE are the topic of this review.

Epidemiology and Natural History of Eosinophilic Esophagitis

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) has emerged over the past 2 decades as a major cause of upper gastrointestinal morbidity. Over this time, the epidemiology of EoE has also rapidly evolved. EoE has transformed from a rare case-reportable condition to disease that is commonly encountered in the gastroenterology clinic, hospital emergency room, and endoscopy suite. The incidence and prevalence are increasing at rates that outpace increased disease recognition. Current incidence estimates range from 5 to 10 cases per 100,000, and current prevalence estimates range from 0.5 to 1 case per 1000. We review the data and potential reasons behind this increase, examine risk factors, and identify important areas for research into disease etiology. The article also discusses the progression of EoE from an inflammatory to fibrostenotic phenotype. An accurate view of the natural history of EoE is central to discussions with patients regarding disease prognosis and decisions about long-term use of medical, endoscopic, and diet therapies. Progressive remodelling appears to be gradual, but not universal, and the duration of untreated disease is the best predictor of stricture risk. Ultimately, prospective, long-term outcome studies focusing on multiple aspects of disease activity are needed to fully understand the natural history of EoE.

Pharmacologic Treatment of Eosinophilic Esophagitis: An Update

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is defined as a chronic, immune-medicated or antigen-mediated, esophageal disease, characterized clinically by symptoms related to esophageal dysfunction and histologically by eosinophil-predominant inflammation. Food allergens are identified in most patients. Treatment strategies include elimination diets, drugs, and esophageal dilation. This article focuses on pharmacologic treatment. Currently, there is no pharmacologic treatment that has been approved by regulatory authorities. Established pharmacologic options to treat EoE include proton pump inhibitors and swallowed topical steroids. Several biologic therapies are currently under evaluation and some of them have shown promising results in improving biologic endpoints and patient-reported outcomes.

Eosinophilic Esophagitis in Children and Adults

Adults and children with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) have distinct clinical and endoscopic presentations. Recognition of clinical signs, along with laboratory and endoscopic findings, is critical for the identification of patients with EoE because delay in diagnosis has been associated with esophageal remodeling and stricture formation. Clinical presentation varies considerably between adults and children. This is less due to differences in the disease and more due to patient differences. This article describes the similarities and differences in clinical presentation of children and adults with EoE, including areas of epidemiology, clinical and endoscopic presentation, pathophysiology, and treatment.

Endoscopic Treatment of Eosinophilic Esophagitis

In eosinophilic esophagitis, the main cause of solid-food dysphagia is tissue remodeling resulting in strictures and narrowed esophagus. Endoscopy and biopsies help to identify the degree of inflammation but often miss the fibrosis. Although initially considered dangerous, esophageal dilation has evolved into an extremely effective and safe treatment in fibrostenotic disease. The key is starting low with small-diameter bougies or balloons, and gradually dilating the esophagus and strictures to 16 to 18 mm. Results in more than 1000 adults and children have shown low rates of complications, especially perforations, and no deaths, but postprocedure chest pain is common.

Mouse Eosinophils: Identification, Isolation, and Functional Analysis

Eosinophils are bone marrow-derived cells that differentiate in the bone marrow and migrate into the peripheral blood primarily under the regulation of interleukin (IL)-5. Eosinophil levels in the blood are relatively low. However, under steady-state conditions and in settings of allergic inflammation, parasite infections, or even cancer, they migrate and mainly reside in mucosal tissues where they have key effector and immune-modulating functions. Functional studies using eosinophils are not simple, since these cells are terminally differentiated and rapidly die in vitro. Thus, establishing simple methods to characterize, obtain, and functionally assess eosinophil activities is important. In this unit, we describe methodology for identifying tissue eosinophils by flow cytometry. In addition, we provide detailed methods for isolating eosinophils and for differentiating them from bone marrow cells for further functional studies. © 2017 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Long-Term Treatment of Eosinophilic Esophagitis With Swallowed Topical Corticosteroids: Development and Evaluation of a Therapeutic Concept

OBJECTIVES

Swallowed topical corticosteroids (STCs) are efficacious in inducing and presumably maintaining remission in patients with active eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). Hitherto, it has not been evaluated whether long-lasting remission can be achieved, and whether treatment can be stopped once patients have achieved this remission.

METHODS

Since 2007, EoE patients included into a large database at the Swiss EoE Clinics were put on STCs as induction/maintenance therapy. Disease activity was assessed on an annual basis. In patients who achieved long-lasting (≥6 months) clinical, endoscopic, and histological (=deep) remission, treatment was stopped. Data on all patients treated using this therapeutic strategy were analyzed retrospectively.

RESULTS

Of the 351 patients, 33 (9.4%) who were treated with STCs achieved deep remission. Median age of remitters at disease onset was 32.6 years (interquartile range (IQR) 19.1-49.3), and diagnostic delay was 5.4 years (IQR 1.2-11.4). Deep remission was achieved after 89.0 weeks (IQR 64.6-173.8). Female gender was the only independent prognostic factor for achieving deep remission (odds ratio (OR) 2.518, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.203-5.269). Overall, STCs were stopped after 104.7 weeks (IQR 65.5-176.6). No mucosal damage was observed upon histological examination. In 27 of the 33 remitters (81.8%), a clinical relapse occurred after a median of 22.4 weeks (95% CI 5.1-39.7). Six remitters (18.2%) did not experience a clinical relapse during a follow-up of 35.1 weeks (IQR 18.3-44.9). Hence, a total of 1.7% (6/351) patients were able to discontinue STCs in the long term.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term EoE treatment with STCs was well tolerated, but only a minority achieved deep remission. Female gender is the only prognostic factor for attainment of such remission. After treatment cessation, the majority experienced a clinical relapse.

Esophageal dilation with either bougie or balloon technique as a treatment for eosinophilic esophagitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Esophageal dilation is a now recognized to be an important therapeutic modality in eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). We aimed to evaluate the safety of esophageal dilation in EoE, especially regarding perforation risk, and to examine perforation risk by dilator type.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of the published literature from January 1, 1950 to June 30, 2016 using PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science. Studies were included if they described patients with EoE who underwent elective esophageal dilation and also reported the presence or absence of at least 1 adverse event (eg, perforation, bleeding, pain, or hospitalization). We used random-effects meta-analysis to estimate the frequency of each adverse event.

RESULTS

Of 923 identified articles, 37 met inclusion criteria and represented 2034 dilations in 977 patients. On meta-analysis, postprocedure hospitalization occurred in .689% of dilations (95% confidence interval [CI], 0%-1.42%), clinically significant GI hemorrhage in .028% (95% CI, 0%-.217%), and clinically significant chest pain in 3.64% (95% CI, 1.73%-5.55%). Nine perforations were documented, at a rate of .033% (95% CI, 0%-.226%) per procedure after meta-analysis. None of the perforations resulted in surgical intervention or mortality. Most (5/9) were reported before 2009 (rate, .41% [95% CI, 0%-2.75%]); from 2009 forward the rate was .030% (95% CI, 0%-.225%). Dilation method was described in 30 studies (1957 dilations), in which 4 perforations were detected. The estimated perforation rate for bougies was .022% (95% CI, 0%-.347%) and for balloons was .059% (95% CI, 0%-.374%).

CONCLUSIONS

Perforation from esophageal dilation in EoE is rare, and there is no evidence of a significant difference in perforation risk related to dilator type. Esophageal dilation should be considered a safe procedure in EoE.

Management of Eosinophilic Esophagitis Based on Pathophysiological Evidence

Over the past decades eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) has been increasingly diagnosed, and significant progress has been made in our understanding of its pathophysiology. As EoE cannot be cured yet, treatment goals are suppression of disease activity and symptoms as well as the prevention of progression to a more severe disease phenotype. Disease-modifying treatment options can be divided into dietary therapy and immunosuppressive medications, of which topical steroids have been most investigated, yet are still prescribed off-label. In this review, we will summarize recent advances in our understanding of EoE and discuss the mechanisms of action of current treatment options, with emphasis on the role of the esophageal epithelial barrier and the effects of proton-pump inhibitors in the management of patients with EoE.

Prevalence of eosinophilic esophagitis in patients with gastroesophageal reflux symptoms: A cross-sectional study from a tertiary care hospital in North India

BACKGROUND

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is being recognized increasingly all over the globe; Indian data is however sparse. We screened patients with symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) for presence of EoE in them.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with symptoms suggestive of GERD underwent gastroduodenoscopy and esophageal biopsies, obtained from both the upper esophagus (5 cm below the upper esophageal sphincter) and lower esophagus (5 cm above gastroesophageal junction), as well as from any other endoscopically visible abnormal mucosa. Demographic and clinical characteristics, endoscopic findings, peripheral blood eosinophilic count, and history of use of proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) were analyzed. Stool examination was done to rule out parasitoids. EoE was diagnosed if number of mucosal eosinophil infiltrate was >20 per high-power field. In the latter, Warthin-Starry stain was performed to rule out presence of H elicobacter pylori.

RESULTS

Of 190 consecutive patients with symptoms of GERD screened, esophageal biopsies were available in 185 cases. Of them, 6 had EoE, suggesting a prevalence of 3.2% among patients with GERD. On univariate analysis, history of allergy, non-response to PPI, and absolute eosinophil counts and on multivariable analysis, history of allergy and no response to PPIs were significant predictors of EoE. Presence of EOE did not correlate with severity of reflux symptoms.

CONCLUSION

In this hospital-based study from northern part of India, prevalence of EoE in patients with GERD was 3.2%. EoE should be considered as a diagnostic possibility, especially in those with history of allergy, no-response to PPI, and absolute eosinophil count of ≥250/cumm.

Transcriptome profiling of mouse colonic eosinophils reveals a key role for eosinophils in the induction of s100a8 and s100a9 in mucosal healing

Eosinophils are bone marrow-derived cells that have been largely implicated in Th2-associated diseases. Recent data highlights a key role for eosinophils in mucosal innate immune responses especially in the gastrointestinal (GI) tract, which is one of the largest eosinophil reservoirs in the body. Although eosinophils express and synthesize a plethora of proteins that can mediate their effector activities, the transcriptome signature of eosinophils in mucosal inflammation and subsequent repair has been considerably overlooked. We demonstrate that eosinophils are recruited to the colon in acute inflammatory stages where they promote intestinal inflammation and remain in substantial numbers throughout the mucosal healing process. Microarray analysis of primary colonic eosinophils that were sorted at distinct stages of mucosal inflammation and repair revealed dynamic regulation of colonic eosinophil mRNA expression. The clinically relevant genes s100a8 and s100a9 were strikingly increased in colonic eosinophils (up to 550-fold and 80-fold, respectively). Furthermore, local and systemic expression of s100a8 and s100a9 were nearly diminished in eosinophil-deficient ΔdblGATA mice, and were re-constituted upon adoptive transfer of eosinophils. Taken together, these data may provide new insight into the involvement of eosinophils in colonic inflammation and repair, which may have diagnostic and therapeutic implications.

The relationship between eosinophilic esophagitis and esophageal cancer

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a disorder characterized by long-term chronic eosinophilic inflammation, which may predispose patients for malignant transformation. To determine if EoE is associated with an increased risk for esophageal cancer (EC) over time. This was a cross-sectional population-based study using the Explorys Platform. Data were collected from January 1999 to December 2014 and the search terms 'Eosinophlic esophagitis', gastroesophageal reflux disease, and Barrett's esophagus were used. The latter two served as comparison groups. The term 'malignant tumor of esophagus' was searched in Explorys and was accepted only if it was established after the aforementioned diagnoses. Analysis was performed using social science statistical software. A total of 27,183,310 subjects were included in the study. Of those 5,370 (0.02%) had the diagnosis of EoE, 25,610 (0.09%) BE, and 2,606,640 (9.59%) gastroesophageal reflux (GERD). In general, diagnosis of EC was rare prior to age 40. Therefore, subsequent analysis was done on subjects between 40 to 79 years of age (N = 20,257,480). The prevalence of EC was 0.05% (N = 2420), in BE (N = 19,640) 2.65%, and in GERD (N = 1,696,230) 0.22%. No cases of EC were identified among those with EoE. We found no significant difference or increased risk in the rate of EC in the EoE group (P = 0.575) when compared to the control population. In this largest study, we found no association between esophageal cancer and EoE. Further long-term prospective studies are needed to better characterize the relationship between EoE and esophageal malignancy.

Systematic review with meta-analysis: endoscopic dilation is highly effective and safe in children and adults with eosinophilic oesophagitis

BACKGROUND

Oesophageal dilation is frequently used as an adjunct treatment to alleviate symptoms that develop from fibrostenotic remodelling in eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE). Earlier reports described an increased risk of complications associated with dilation.

AIM

Perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of endoscopic dilation in children and adults with EoE.

METHODS

Professional librarians searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane library, Scopus, and Web of Science for articles in any language describing studies of dilation in EoE through December 2016. Studies were selected and data were abstracted independently and in duplicate. Random effects modelling was used to generate summary estimates for clinical improvement and complications (haemorrhage, perforation, hospitalisation, and death).

RESULTS

The search resulted in 3495 references, of which 27 studies were included in the final analysis. The studies described 845 EoE patients, including 87 paediatric patients, who underwent a total of 1820 oesophageal dilations. The median number of dilations was 3 (range: 1-35). Clinical improvement occurred in 95% of patients (95% CI: 90%-98%, I² : 10%, 17 studies). Perforation occurred in 0.38% (95% CI: 0.18%-0.85%, I² : 0%, 27 studies), haemorrhage in 0.05% (95% CI: 0%-0.3%, I² : 0%, 18 studies), and hospitalisation in 0.67% (95% CI: 0.3%-1.1%, I² : 44%, 24 studies). No deaths occurred (95% CI: 0%-0.2% I² : 0%, 25 studies).

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic dilation is consistently effective in children and adults with EoE, resulting in improvement in 95% of patients with very low rates (<1%) of major complications.

The Association Between Celiac Disease and Eosinophilic Esophagitis: Mayo Experience and Meta-analysis of the Literature

BACKGROUND

The association between celiac disease (CD) and eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) has been the focus of multiple studies with variable results. Both diseases are immune mediated, and dietary triggers play a role in their pathogenesis.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the study was to analyze the risk of EoE in children with CD, assess the magnitude of association between CD and EoE in children, and report the characteristics and outcomes of children with both conditions.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study of the Mayo Clinic Electronic medical records between January 1, 1998 and December 31, 2015. Systematic review and meta-analysis of multiple databases was conducted to include studies reporting on the same association. Random-effects model was used to report pooled odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

In this cohort study, of 10,201 children who underwent at least 1 endoscopy, 595 had EoE, and 546 had CD. The risk of having EoE was not increased in children with CD compared to those without CD (OR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.154-0.545). Nine of 10 children improved with gluten-free diet, topical glucocorticosteroid, and/or elimination diet. One child lost to follow-up.Meta-analysis of 5 studies showed similar results (OR, 0.525; 95% CI, 0.364-0.797). A total of 45 cases in the literature had both CD and EoE (mean age, 10 years; 64% boys; majority presenting with abdominal pain, vomiting, and diarrhea).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on our cohort and the observational data, the diagnosis of CD in children is not associated with increased risk of EoE.

Progression from an Inflammatory to a Fibrostenotic Phenotype in Eosinophilic Esophagitis

Previous studies have suggested that eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) progresses from chronic inflammation to fibrostenosis. However, natural history data illustrating this progression in individual patients are lacking. Here, we present 6 patients who progressed from an inflammatory to a fibrostenotic phenotype of EoE in the absence of treatment. At the time of diagnosis, none of the patients had significant evidence of fibrostenosis, but they did have other inflammatory findings of EoE such as edema, linear furrows, or exudates. After being lost to follow-up and treatment for an average of 7.8 ± 2.0 years, strictures (n = 5; 83%) or a small-caliber esophagus (n = 4; 67%) were present in a majority of the patients, and the majority required esophageal dilation. These cases confirm that EoE can progress from an inflammation-only phenotype to a fibrostenotic phenotype in certain patients.

Cost Utility Analysis of Topical Steroids Compared With Dietary Elimination for Treatment of Eosinophilic Esophagitis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Topical corticosteroids or dietary elimination are recommended as first-line therapies for eosinophilic esophagitis, but data to directly compare these therapies are scant. We performed a cost utility comparison of topical corticosteroids and the 6-food elimination diet (SFED) in treatment of eosinophilic esophagitis, from the payer perspective.

METHODS

We used a modified Markov model based on current clinical guidelines, in which transition between states depended on histologic response simulated at the individual cohort-member level. Simulation parameters were defined by systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the base-case estimates and bounds of uncertainty for sensitivity analysis. Meta-regression models included adjustment for differences in study and cohort characteristics.

RESULTS

In the base-case scenario, topical fluticasone was about as effective as SFED but more expensive at a 5-year time horizon ($9261.58 vs $5719.72 per person). SFED was more effective and less expensive than topical fluticasone and topical budesonide in the base-case scenario. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis revealed little uncertainty in relative treatment effectiveness. There was somewhat greater uncertainty in the relative cost of treatments; most simulations found SFED to be less expensive.

CONCLUSIONS

In a cost utility analysis comparing topical corticosteroids and SFED for first-line treatment of eosinophilic esophagitis, the therapies were similar in effectiveness. SFED was on average less expensive, and more cost effective in most simulations, than topical budesonide and topical fluticasone, from a payer perspective and not accounting for patient-level costs or quality of life.

A visual analogue scale and a Likert scale are simple and responsive tools for assessing dysphagia in eosinophilic oesophagitis

BACKGROUND

While symptom scores have been developed to evaluate dysphagia in eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE), their complexity may limit clinical use.

AIM

To evaluate a visual analogue scale (VAS) and a 10-point Likert scale (LS) for assessment of dysphagia severity before and after EoE treatment.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective cohort study enrolling consecutive adults undergoing out-patient endoscopy. Incident cases of EoE were diagnosed per consensus guidelines. At diagnosis and after 8 weeks of treatment, symptoms were measured using the VAS, LS and the Mayo Dysphagia Questionnaire (MDQ). The percentage change in scores before and after treatment were compared overall, in treatment responders (<15 eos/hpf) and non-responders, and in patients without baseline dilation.

RESULTS

In 51 EoE cases, the median VAS decreased from 3.6 at baseline to 1.4 post-treatment (71% decrease), the LS decreased from 6 to 2 (67%) and the MDQ decreased from 20 to 10 (49%). The VAS correlated with both the LS (R = 0.77; P < 0.0001) and MDQ (R = 0.46, P = 0.001). After stratification by histological response, the LS decreased 70% in responders vs. 13% in non-responders (P = 0.02). In patients who did not receive baseline dilation, both the VAS and LS decreased significantly more in the histological responders.

CONCLUSIONS

Both the VAS and LS were responsive to successful treatment as measured by histologic improvement. Because the VAS and LS are simple to administer and are responsive to treatment, they can provide an efficient and objective method for assessing dysphagia severity in EoE in clinical practice.

Eosinophilic esophagitis: unclear roles of IgE and eosinophils

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic inflammatory disease of the oesophagus. Recognized as a distinct entity only two decades ago, the emergence of the disease along with the availability of new technologies has rapidly opened new research avenues and outlined the main features of the pathogenesis of EoE. Yet, each advance in our understanding of the disease has raised new questions about the previous consensus. Currently, new subsets of the disease challenge our diagnostic criteria. For instance, it was believed that EoE did not respond to proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy; however, it has now been shown that a substantial proportion of EoE patients indeed respond to PPIs. In addition, a new subset of patients not even presenting eosinophil infiltrates in the oesophagus has also been described. Moreover, approaches for better understanding the heritability of the disease bring into question the dogma of predominant genetic involvement. Furthermore, the specificity and sensitivity of allergy testing for targeted food avoidance is highly controversial, and the production of specific antibodies in EoE now includes IgG4 in addition to IgE. In conclusion, EoE is perceived as 'a moving target' and the aim of this review was to summarize the current understanding of EoE pathogenesis.

Eosinophilic esophagitis: Update in diagnosis and management. Position paper by the Italian Society of Gastroenterology and Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (SIGE)

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic immune-mediated disease of the esophagus characterized by symptoms related to esophageal dysfunction, as well as significant esophageal eosinophilia. The entity exists worldwide but has been most extensively studied in Western countries. However, a wide range of symptoms has been noticed such as chest pain or gastro-esophageal reflux disease-like symptoms. Upper gastro-intestinal endoscopy and esophageal biopsies are crucial for the diagnosis. Endoscopy might be normal or reveal typical patterns such as rings, furrows, exudates, edema, and stricture. Two to four biopsies should be performed both in the distal and in the proximal esophagus, and 15 eosinophils per high power field within the esophageal epithelium are the minimal threshold to diagnose eosinophilic esophagitis. Allergy testing is recommended, although its impact to orient treatment remains to be demonstrated. Eosinophilic esophagitis treatment includes medical treatment, diet and endoscopic dilation. Proton pump inhibitors are the first-line therapy as up to 50% of patients respond well to proton pump inhibitors irrespective of objective evidence of GERD. Topical viscous corticosteroids or elimination diet are the treatment of choice in case of unresponsiveness to proton pump inhibitors.

Montelukast Does not Maintain Symptom Remission After Topical Steroid Therapy for Eosinophilic Esophagitis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Montelukast, a cysteinyl leukotriene type-1 receptor blocker, has been shown in small retrospective studies to reduce symptoms in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). We performed a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial to determine whether montelukast maintains symptomatic remission induced by topical steroid therapy in patients with EoE.

METHODS

We performed a prospective study of adult patients with EoE (solid-food dysphagia and a peak esophageal eosinophil count of >20 cells/high-powered field) enrolled at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, from April 2008 through February 2015. All patients had been treated previously for at least 6 weeks with a topical steroid until their symptoms were in remission. Steroids were discontinued and patients then were assigned randomly to groups given montelukast (20 mg/day, n = 20) or placebo (n = 21) for 26 weeks (groups were matched for age, sex, history of allergic disease, reflux symptoms, and endoscopic findings of EoE). Study participants were assessed via a structured telephone interview at weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24. Remission was defined as the absence of solid-food dysphagia.

RESULTS

Based on an intention-to-treat analysis, after 26 weeks, 40.0% of subjects in the montelukast group and 23.8% in the placebo group were in remission. The odds ratio for remission in the montelukast group was 0.48 (95% confidence interval, 0.10-2.16) (P = .33). No side effects were reported from either group.

CONCLUSIONS

In a randomized controlled trial of the ability of montelukast to maintain remission in patients in remission from EoE after steroid therapy, we found montelukast to be well tolerated; 40% of patients remained in remission, but this proportion did not differ significantly from that of the placebo group. ClinicalTrials.gov no: NCT00511316.

Most children with eosinophilic esophagitis have a favorable outcome as young adults

The disease progression of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) from childhood into adulthood is unclear. To determine the clinical outcome of patients who were diagnosed with EoE as children, and who now are young adults. Children (<18 years old) diagnosed with EoE were enrolled in a prospective registry on demographics, presenting symptoms, and endoscopic/histologic findings. Subjects who now are adults (≥18 years old) were identified, and a structured telephone interview was conducted to obtain follow-up data on symptom prevalence (dysphagia to solids and liquids, nausea/vomiting, abdominal pain, and heartburn/regurgitation), food impaction, medication usage, health-care utilization, and resolution of atopy/food allergies. A favorable outcome was defined if EoE symptoms were resolved or improved by subjects' assessment. Unfavorable outcomes was defined as symptoms same or worse. Clinical variables that predicted a favorable outcome as an adult were examined. Mayo Dysphagia Scale (MDQ-30: scored 0-100) was administered to validate the outcome assessment. Mantel-Haenszel odds ratio and unpaired t-test were used. Fifty-eight subjects (64% male) who met study criteria were enrolled. Mean age at diagnosis was 12 years (range 4-17) and mean duration of follow-up was 8.3 years (2-16). As children, the most common presenting symptoms were abdominal pain (54%), dysphagia (33%), and vomiting (24%). As young adults, 47 subjects (81%) had a favorable outcome. Total MDQ-30 scores were 4.6 (0-30) and 14.1 (0-50) in subjects with favorable outcome and unfavorable outcome, respectively (P = 0.015). Two-thirds of subjects did not use steroids or proton pump inhibitors in the preceeding 12 months. Male children with EoE were four times more likely to have a favorable outcome as young adults compared with female children. Females were more likely to report nausea/vomiting as young adults (odds ratio 3.23, CI 0.97-10.60). Of all presenting symptoms in EoE children, dysphagia was the most likely to persist into adulthood (odds ratio 6.29, CI 1.85-21.38). Eighty one percent of EoE children had a favorable outcome as young adults. Most patients with symptom resolution did not require any form of steroid therapy or seek healthcare.

The Endoscopic Reference Score shows modest accuracy to predict either clinical or histological activity in adult patients with eosinophilic oesophagitis

BACKGROUND

Conflicting results have been recently reported for the accuracy of the Endoscopic Reference Score (EREFS), an standardised endoscopic classification, to predict the histological activity of eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE).

AIM

To evaluate the accuracy of the EREFS to predict either histological or clinical activity of EoE.

METHODS

Prospective multicentre study conducted in eight Spanish centres evaluating adult EoE patients, either naïve or after treatment. Symptoms were evaluated before upper endoscopy through the Dysphagia Symptom Score, whereas researchers scored the EREFS immediately after the endoscopic procedure, unaware of the histological outcome.

RESULTS

One hundred and forty-five EoE patients undergoing 240 consecutive endoscopic procedures were included. Exudates (P = 0.03), furrows (P = 0.03) and a composite score of inflammatory signs (exudates, furrows and oedema) (P < 0.001) accurately predicted histological activity. Exudates were the only endoscopic sign showing a good correlation with histological outcome after therapy. Furrows and oedema persisted in 50% and 70% of patients despite histological remission. No endoscopic feature exceeded 70% accuracy to predict histological activity. Likewise, no endoscopic finding could adequately predict dysphagia severity. Crepe paper mucosa, diffuse exudates and severe rings correlated with higher symptom scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic findings assessed by the Endoscopic Reference Score did not correlate with histological or clinical disease activity in adult EoE patients. Only exudates correlated with peak eosinophil count and histological outcome, whereas furrows and oedema persisted in over half of patients despite histological remission.

The role of the otolaryngologist in the evaluation and diagnosis of eosinophilic esophagitis

OBJECTIVE

To describe the clinical presentation and role of the otolaryngologist in the evaluation of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) at a tertiary pediatric hospital.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective review.

METHODS

Records from pediatric patients with a diagnosis of EoE from 2003 to 2015 were reviewed. Study variables were analyzed to compare patients presenting to different specialties.

RESULTS

Two hundred and fifty-one patients with EoE were evaluated. The median age at diagnosis was 9.0 years (range 0.8-19.0); 73% were male. Sixty-seven percent of patients initially presented to gastroenterology and 18% to otolaryngology. Time from initial presentation to diagnosis did not differ between the patients presenting to the two specialties (median 2.3 vs. 2.0 months, P = 0.510). Overall, 26% presented with airway symptoms (stridor, chronic cough, croup, or dysphonia). Patients diagnosed by the otolaryngology service were younger (3.4 vs. 10.4 years, P < 0.0001), had a higher incidence of airway symptoms (68% vs. 15%, P < 0.001), and demonstrated fewer gastrointestinal symptoms (86% vs. 100%, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Patients with EoE frequently present to otolaryngology undiagnosed in the first 5 years of life, making esophagoscopy with biopsy an important adjunct to airway endoscopy in children with refractory aerodigestive symptoms. Otolaryngologists are uniquely poised to facilitate early diagnosis and initiation of therapy for these children, potentially reducing long-term sequelae.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4. Laryngoscope, 127:1459-1464, 2017.

How to measure disease activity in eosinophilic esophagitis

Activity of Eosinophilic Esophagitis (EoE) can be measured by patient reported outcomes (symptoms and quality of life) and clinician-reported outcomes (endoscopic, histologic, or biochemical alterations). Over the last years efforts have been underway to develop and validate instruments to assess EoE activity in the different domains. Such instruments are urgently needed to standardize the language of EoE activity assessment and, in so doing, to facilitate communication among various stakeholders. Such standardization will ultimately allow EoE researchers to define meaningful endpoints for use in clinical trials and observational studies, to compare the efficacy of different therapeutic modalities, and to develop algorithms in order to provide patients with the appropriate therapy. This review provides an overview of the current status of instruments that assess EoE activity in the different domains.

Randomized controlled trial comparing esophageal dilation to no dilation among adults with esophageal eosinophilia and dysphagia

The role of esophageal dilation in patients with esophageal eosinophilia with dysphagia remains unknown. The practice of dilation is currently based on center preferences and expert opinion. The aim of this study is to determine if, and to what extent, dysphagia improves in response to initial esophageal dilation followed by standard medical therapies. We conducted a randomized, blinded, controlled trial evaluating adult patients with dysphagia and newly diagnosed esophageal eosinophilia from 2008 to 2013. Patients were randomized to dilation or no dilation at time of endoscopy and blinded to dilation status. Endoscopic features were graded as major and minor. Subsequent to randomization and endoscopy, all patients received fluticasone and dexlansoprazole for 2 months. The primary study outcome was reduction in overall dysphagia score, assessed at 30 and 60 days post-intervention. Patients with severe strictures (less than 7-mm esophageal diameter) were excluded from the study. Thirty-one patients were randomized and completed the protocol: 17 randomized to dilation and 14 to no dilation. Both groups were similar with regard to gender, age, eosinophil density, endoscopic score, and baseline dysphagia score. The population exhibited moderate to severe dysphagia and moderate esophageal stricturing at baseline. Overall, there was a significant (P < 0.001) but similar reduction in mean dysphagia score at 30 and 60 days post-randomization compared with baseline in both groups. No significant difference in dysphagia scores between treatment groups after 30 (P = 0.93) or 60 (P = 0.21) days post-intervention was observed. Esophageal dilation did not result in additional improvement in dysphagia score compared with treatment with proton pump inhibitor and fluticasone alone. In patients with symptomatic esophageal eosinophilia without severe stricture, dilation does not appear to be a necessary initial treatment strategy.

Emerging Roles for Eosinophils in the Tumor Microenvironment

Eosinophils are evolutionary conserved cells largely studied in the context of allergy. Although eosinophils were first described in tumors more than 120 years ago, their roles in cancer are often overlooked. This is puzzling given their potent immune modulatory, cytotoxic, and/or tissue repair capabilities, and recent studies demonstrating key roles for eosinophils in contexts far beyond their 'classical' field (e.g., metabolism, thermogenesis, and tissue regeneration). Recent data suggest that this frequently ignored cell is emerging as a potent immune effector and immune modulator in the tumor microenvironment. This review discusses the relevance of eosinophils to tumorigenesis and the potential to harness their function in cancer therapies.