Eosinophil Quantitated Urine Kinetic: A novel assay for assessment of eosinophilic esophagitis. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2016;116:435-439. [PMID: 27017558 DOI: 10.1016/j.anai.2016.02.011]

Diagnosis and management of eosinophilic esophagitis in children: An update from the European Society for Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition (ESPGHAN)

INTRODUCTION

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic inflammatory disease of the esophagus characterized by symptoms of esophageal dysfunction and histologically by predominantly eosinophilic infiltration of the squamous epithelium. European Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition (ESPGHAN) published a guideline in 2014; however, the rapid evolution of knowledge about pathophysiology, diagnostic criteria, and therapeutic options have made an update necessary.

METHODS

A consensus group of pediatric gastroenterologists from the ESPGHAN Working Group on Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Diseases (ESPGHAN EGID WG) reviewed the recent literature and proposed statements and recommendations on 28 relevant questions about EoE. A comprehensive electronic literature search was performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases from 2014 to 2022. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation system was used to assess the quality of evidence and formulate recommendations.

RESULTS

A total of 52 statements based on the available evidence and 44 consensus-based recommendations are available. A revision of the diagnostic protocol, options for initial drug treatment, and the new concept of simplified empiric elimination diets are now available. Biologics are becoming a part of the potential armamentarium for refractory EoE, and systemic steroids may be considered as the initial treatment for esophageal strictures before esophageal dilation. The importance and assessment of quality of life and a planned transition to adult medical care are new areas addressed in this guideline.

CONCLUSION

Research in recent years has led to a better understanding of childhood EoE. This guideline incorporates the new findings and provides a practical guide for clinicians treating children diagnosed with EoE.

Blood-Based Biomarkers for Eosinophilic Esophagitis and Concomitant Atopic Diseases: A Look into the Potential of Extracellular Vesicles

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic, Th2-inflammatory disease of the esophagus that can severely affect food intake. Currently, diagnosis and assessing response to treatment of EoE is highly invasive and requires endoscopy with esophageal biopsies. Finding non-invasive and accurate biomarkers is important for improving patient well-being. Unfortunately, EoE is usually accompanied by other atopies, which make it difficult to identify specific biomarkers. Providing an update of circulating EoE biomarkers and concomitant atopies is therefore timely. This review summarizes the current knowledge in EoE blood biomarkers and two of its most common comorbidities, bronchial asthma (BA) and atopic dermatitis (AD), focusing on dysregulated proteins, metabolites, and RNAs. It also revises the current knowledge on extracellular vesicles (EVs) as non-invasive biomarkers for BA and AD, and concludes with the potential use of EVs as biomarkers in EoE.

Noninvasive biomarkers identify eosinophilic esophagitis: A prospective longitudinal study in children

BACKGROUND

Esophageal histology is critical for diagnosis and surveillance of disease activity in eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). A validated noninvasive biomarker has not been identified. We aimed to determine the utility of blood and urine eosinophil-associated proteins to diagnose EoE and predict esophageal eosinophilia.

METHODS

Blood and urine were collected from children undergoing endoscopy with biopsy. Absolute eosinophil count (AEC), plasma eosinophil-derived neurotoxin (EDN), eosinophil cationic protein (ECP), major basic protein-1 (MBP-1), galectin-10 (CLC/GAL-10), Eotaxin-2 and Eotaxin-3, and urine osteopontin (OPN) and matrix metalloproteinase-9 (MMP-9) were determined. Differences were assessed between EoE and control, and with treatment response. The capacity to predict EoE diagnosis and esophageal eosinophil counts was assessed.

RESULTS

Of 183 specimens were collected from 56 EoE patients and 15 non-EoE controls with symptoms of esophageal dysfunction; 33 EoE patients had paired pre- and post-treatment specimens. Plasma (CLC/GAL-10, ECP, EDN, Eotaxin-3, MBP-1) and urine (OPN) biomarkers were increased in EoE compared to control. A panel comprising CLC/GAL-10, Eotaxin-3, ECP, EDN, MBP-1, and AEC was superior to AEC alone in distinguishing EoE from control. AEC, CLC/GAL-10, ECP, and MBP-1 were significantly decreased in patients with esophageal eosinophil counts <15/hpf in response to treatment. AEC, CLC/GAL-10, ECP, EDN, OPN, and MBP-1 each predicted esophageal eosinophil counts utilizing mixed models controlled for age, gender, treatment, and atopy; AEC combined with MBP-1 best predicted the counts.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified novel panels of eosinophil-associated proteins that along with AEC are superior to AEC alone in distinguishing EoE from controls and predicting esophageal eosinophil counts.

Noninvasive tests for eosinophilic esophagitis: Ready for use?

OBJECTIVE

To summarize the existing literature for several promising minimally invasive tests to measure disease activity in eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE).

DATA SOURCES

Literature searches were performed using PubMed. Keyword combinations included eosinophilic esophagitis and minimally invasive techniques, including the esophageal string test, Cytosponge, transnasal endoscopy, technetium-labeled heparin, and noninvasive biomarkers.

STUDY SELECTIONS

Retrospective and prospective observational studies, peer-reviewed reviews, and systematic reviews were selected. Data were reviewed and summarized.

RESULTS

Various techniques have been developed in recent years to measure disease activity in EoE without the need for conventional endoscopy. Our review summarizes the data on these techniques, the benefits and limitations, and future directions for implementation in both research and clinical care.

CONCLUSION

Tremendous progress has been made toward developing minimally invasive techniques to measure disease activity in EoE. Each of the techniques mentioned in this review has advantages and disadvantages, and some are closer to widespread use than others.

EoE disease monitoring: Where we are and where we are going

OBJECTIVE

To review literature on various methods of monitoring and characterizing eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) with respect to their validity as well as risk to the patient.

DATA SOURCES

A literature search was performed using PubMed with keyword combinations of EoE and monitoring as well as various techniques used for monitoring, including but not limited to, symptoms, endoscopy, histology, fluoroscopy, FLIP, noninvasive monitoring, and biomarkers.

STUDY SELECTIONS

Case-control studies, observational studies, peer-reviewed reviews and guidelines, and systematic reviews were selected, reviewed, and summarized here.

RESULTS

A wealth of research regarding monitoring of EoE is currently being undertaken and published. Our review highlights those that have been validated and are currently being used, as well as some that show promise for future monitoring and disease characterization.

CONCLUSION

Eosinophilic esophagitis is a chronic condition that at this time requires upper endoscopy as the gold standard of diagnosis and monitoring. There is a great need in the field for less invasive monitoring tools and better ways to characterize disease to allow for personalization of therapies.

A Conceptual Approach to Understanding Treatment Response in Eosinophilic Esophagitis

While the diagnosis and initial treatment of eosinophilic esophagitis are becoming more standardized, there are still major gaps in knowledge related to measuring treatment response. One such question centers on how to measure treatment response and what treatment endpoints should be. This impacts not only patient care and engagement in decision-making, but also the field of drug development. In addition, studies so far have use a myriad of treatment endpoints including over a dozen histologic endpoint criteria. This review will discuss the various stakeholders involved in assessment of treatment endpoints of a complex condition, including patients, practitioners and regulatory agencies, and the care settings in which treatment response is assessed, including routine clinical care, clinical trials, and observational studies. Potential parameters or treatment endpoints such as histology, symptoms, patient-reported outcomes, endoscopy, and biomarkers are discussed along with associated challenges and opportunities. A framework on how to define treatment outcomes is discussed and a conceptual approach treatment response is proposed. This takes into account histology, symptoms, and endoscopic findings and harnesses existing, validated tools. It includes definitions of nonresponse, complete normalization, and a graded response category between these 2 extremes, and also permits flexibility and latitude for modifications as newer knowledge emerges. In addition, ways to position the pediatric population in these endeavors are discussed as are future research directions.

One-Hour Esophageal String Test: A Nonendoscopic Minimally Invasive Test That Accurately Detects Disease Activity in Eosinophilic Esophagitis

OBJECTIVES

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), a chronic food allergic disease, lacks sensitive and specific peripheral biomarkers. We hypothesized that levels of EoE-related biomarkers captured using a 1-hour minimally invasive Esophageal String Test (EST) would correlate with mucosal eosinophil counts and tissue concentrations of these same biomarkers. We aimed to determine whether a 1-hour EST accurately distinguishes active from inactive EoE or a normal esophagus.

METHODS

In a prospective, multisite study, children and adults (ages 7-55 years) undergoing a clinically indicated esophagogastroduodenoscopy performed an EST with an esophageal dwell time of 1 hour. Subjects were divided into 3 groups: active EoE, inactive EoE, and normal esophageal mucosa. Eosinophil-associated protein levels were compared between EST effluents and esophageal biopsy extracts. Statistical modeling was performed to select biomarkers that best correlated with and predicted eosinophilic inflammation.

RESULTS

One hundred thirty-four subjects (74 children, 60 adults) with active EoE (n = 62), inactive EoE (n = 37), and patient controls with a normal esophagus (n = 35) completed the study. EST-captured eosinophil-associated biomarkers correlated significantly with peak eosinophils/high-power field, endoscopic visual scoring, and the same proteins extracted from mucosal biopsies. Statistical modeling, using combined eotaxin-3 and major basic protein-1 concentrations, led to the development of EoE scores that distinguished subjects with active EoE from inactive EoE or normal esophagi. Eighty-seven percent of children, 95% of parents, and 92% of adults preferred the EST over endoscopy if it provided similar information.

DISCUSSION

The 1-hour EST accurately distinguishes active from inactive EoE in children and adults and may facilitate monitoring of disease activity in a safe and minimally invasive fashion.

The role of endogenous bromotyrosine in health and disease

Bromotyrosine is a stable by-product of eosinophil peroxidase activity, a result of eosinophil activation during an inflammatory immune response. The elevated presence of bromotyrosine in tissue, blood, and urine in medical conditions involving eosinophil activation has highlighted the potential role of bromotyrosine as a medical biomarker. This is highly beneficial in a paediatric setting as a urinary noninvasive biomarker. However, bromotyrosine and its derivatives may exert biological effects, such as protective effects in the brain and pathogenic effects in the thyroid. Understanding these pathways may yield therapeutic advancements in medicine. In this review, we summarize the existing evidence present in literature relating to bromotyrosine formation and metabolism, identify the biological actions of bromotyrosine and evaluate the feasibility of bromotyrosine as a medical biomarker.

Eosinophilic esophagitis: Current concepts in diagnosis and treatment

Eosinophilic esophagitis is an immune-allergic pathology of multifactorial etiology (genetic and environmental) that affects both pediatric and adult patients. Its symptoms, which include heartburn, regurgitation, and esophageal stenosis (with dysphagia being more frequent in eosinophilic esophagitis in young adults and children), are similar to those of gastroesophageal reflux disease, causing delays in diagnosis and treatment. Although endoscopic findings such as furrows, esophageal mucosa trachealization, and whitish exudates may suggest its presence, this diagnosis should be confirmed histologically based on the presence of more than 15 eosinophils per high-power field and the exclusion of other causes of eosinophilia (parasitic infections, hypereosinophilic syndrome, inflammatory bowel disease, among others) for which treatment could be initiated. Currently, the 3 “D”s (“Drugs, Diet, and Dilation”) are considered the fundamental components of treatment. The first 2 components, which involve the use of proton pump inhibitors, corticosteroids, immunosuppressants and empirical diets or guided food elimination based on allergy tests, are more useful in the initial phases, whereas endoscopic dilation is reserved for esophageal strictures. Herein, the most important aspects of eosinophilic esophagitis pathophysiology will be reviewed, in addition to evidence for the various treatments.

Minimally invasive biomarker studies in eosinophilic esophagitis: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic, inflammatory disease of the esophagus that currently requires repeated endoscopic biopsies for diagnosis and monitoring because no reliable noninvasive markers have been identified.

OBJECTIVE

To identify promising minimally invasive EoE biomarkers and remaining gaps in biomarker validation.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of EMBASE, Ovid MEDLINE, PubMed, and Web of Science from inception to June 6, 2017. Studies were included if patients met the 2007 consensus criteria for EoE diagnosis, a minimally invasive biomarker was assessed, and the study included at least 1 control for comparison.

RESULTS

The search identified 2094 studies, with 234 reviewed at full-text level, and 49 included in the analysis (20 adult, 19 pediatric, 7 pediatric and adult, and 3 not stated). Most (26 of 49) were published after 2014. Thirty-five studies included healthy controls, 9 analyzed atopic controls, and 29 compared samples from patients with active and inactive EoE. Minimally invasive biomarkers were obtained from peripheral blood (n = 41 studies), sponge or string samples (n = 3), oral or throat swab secretions (n = 2), breath condensate (n = 2), stool (n = 2), and urine (n = 2). The most commonly reported biomarkers were peripheral blood eosinophils (n = 16), blood and string eosinophil granule proteins (n = 14), and eosinophil surface or intracellular markers (n = 12). EoE biomarkers distinguished active EoE from healthy controls in 23 studies, atopic controls in 2 studies, and inactive EoE controls in 20 studies.

CONCLUSION

Several promising minimally invasive biomarkers for EoE have emerged; however, few are able to differentiate EoE from other atopic diseases.

Diagnosis and Treatment of Eosinophilic Esophagitis

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a new disease. It is caused by a T-helper type 2 cell response to food antigens in contact with the esophageal mucosa. Although no single feature defines EoE, a constellation of compatible demographic, clinical, endoscopic, and histologic findings establish the diagnosis. Children present with symptoms and endoscopic patterns characteristic of inflammation, whereas adolescents and adults have manifestations of fibrosis and gross esophageal strictures. Clinical and endoscopic scoring systems have helped to standardize diagnosis. There is controversy in EoE research over the optimal endpoint for treatment. Although the most common endpoint is a reduced number of eosinophils in biopsies, changes in symptoms and endoscopic features are becoming important targets of therapy. We should improve our understanding of EoE progression and the need for maintenance therapy, and continue development of diagnostic tools that avoid endoscopy and biopsy analyses to more easily monitor disease activity.

Latest Insights on the Relationship Between Symptoms and Biologic Findings in Adults with Eosinophilic Esophagitis

Patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) present with symptoms accompanied by behavioral adaptions to living with this condition. These include swallowing- and nonswallowing-associated pain in adulthood. In children, EoE symptoms vary with age and include vomiting, abdominal pain, and dysphagia. Studies using validated patient-reported outcome measures have demonstrated that symptoms in EoE are associated with severe biologic alterations and that patients on the low biologic severity spectrum have few symptoms. This nonlinear nature of the relationship between symptoms and biologic findings has important implications for among other things the length of diagnostic delay, selection of patients for clinical trials, trial duration, and long-term management of EoE patients.

Promising Modalities to Identify and Monitor Eosinophilic Esophagitis

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is an allergen-mediated condition characterized by symptoms of esophageal dysfunction and histologic evidence of intense eosinophilic inflammation involving the esophagus in the absence of overlapping conditions such as gastroesophageal reflux disease. Since the initial description as a distinct entity approximately 2 decades ago, there has been a remarkable increase in the recognition of this clinicopathologic entity. The current approach to diagnose and monitor EoE requires repeated esophagogastroduodenoscopies, with associated sedation/anesthesia, to visualize mucosal abnormalities, and to obtain multiple biopsy specimens for histologic assessment and to evaluate treatment response. Frequent esophagogastroduodenoscopies with multiple biopsies can increase the risk of procedural complications, place significant financial burden on families, and escalate health care costs. In addition, this burdensome approach may contribute toward delayed diagnosis and suboptimal monitoring, thereby increasing the likelihood of complications such as esophageal narrowing and stricture formation, which may require escalation of care including endoscopic interventions. Clinical progression and complications associated with EoE can be attenuated through early identification and optimal management. Therefore, developing reliable, safe, less-cumbersome, and cost-effective modalities for early diagnosis and effective monitoring of EoE is an area of active research. These efforts have been substantially supported by the development of new biomaterials, analytic methodologies, and the application of novel concepts. Herein, we summarize modalities that have shown promise to advance the diagnosis and monitoring of EoE and could improve the care of affected individuals and advance the field.

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.

Accuracy and Safety of the Cytosponge for Assessing Histologic Activity in Eosinophilic Esophagitis: A Two-Center Study

OBJECTIVES

Management of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) requires repeated endoscopic mucosal sampling to assess disease activity. A less invasive and expensive means of monitoring of EoE is required. The objective of this study was to assess the accuracy, safety, and tolerability of the cytosponge compared to endoscopy and biopsy for histologic assessment of EoE.

METHODS

In this prospective two-center cross-sectional study, patients with known EoE underwent cytosponge sampling followed by endoscopy and biopsy. Sample adequacy and eosinophil counts (eos/HPF) were determined for both cytosponge and endoscopic samples. The cytosponge was assessed for diagnostic accuracy, safety, and patient preference as compared to endoscopy.

RESULTS

Six patients (7%) failed to swallow the sponge. One hundred and five procedures were successfully performed in 80 patients (66% male, 100% white, 19% stricture). The cytosponge sample was adequate in 102 and the biopsy in 104; 101 procedures had adequate samples by both techniques. Fifty-seven biopsies were graded as active EoE with ≥15 eos/HPF as the gold standard. Eosinophil counts highly correlated between the biopsy and cytosponge (r=0.78, P<0.0001). Using a cutoff of ≤15 eos/HPF for inactive disease, the sensitivity and specificity of the cytosponge was 75% and 86%, respectively. Six patients had active EoE on cytosponge not found on biopsy. For biopsies with inactive EoE, the cytosponge identified 38/44. No complications occurred, and cytosponge endoscopic abrasion scores were low (0.34/4). Patients preferred cytosponge to endoscopy with higher rating scores (7.27 vs. 6.11, P=0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to endoscopy with biopsy, cytosponge provided a minimally invasive, safe, well tolerated, and accurate method to assess EoE histologic activity. (ClinicalTrial.gov number NCT01585103).