Disease associations in eosinophilic oesophagitis and oesophageal eosinophilia

Increase in distal esophageal wall thickness with time in adult patients with eosinophilic esophagitis

Background and Aim

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic disease which may progress to a fibro-stenotic phenotype due to esophageal sub-epithelial fibrosis. Esophageal wall thickening in patients with EoE has been demonstrated in a few studies using endoscopic ultrasound (EUS). The aim of this study was to longitudinally assess the endoscopic appearance, wall thickness, histology, and dysphagia score of EoE patients.

Methods

Patients with EoE were recruited and studied between February 2012 and April 2021. Patients were evaluated on two separate occasions at least 12 months apart with endoscopy, EUS, and esophageal mucosal biopsies. The dysphagia score and epidemiology data were also assessed.

Results

A total of 16 EoE patients were included with a mean follow-up duration of 2.2 ± 1.2 years. In 14/16 (88%) patients, the total wall thickness of the distal esophagus significantly increased (P = 0.0012) as a result of thickening of the muscularis propria (P = 0.0218). However, only 1/14 (7%) patient had an increase in the dysphagia score, while 8/14 (57%) and 5/14 (36%) had a stable and reduced dysphagia score, respectively. No differences were found in the total thickness of other esophageal regions, dysphagia score, endoscopic appearance, and eosinophil count over time.

Conclusion

Distal esophageal wall thickness increases with time in EoE patients, independent of the dysphagia score and eosinophil count.

Distal esophageal wall thickness correlates with dysphagia in adult patients with eosinophilic esophagitis

BACKGROUND

Thickening of the esophageal wall in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) and gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD) has been shown in studies using endoscopic ultrasound (EUS). We hypothesise that transmural inflammation in EoE results in prominent esophageal wall thickening compared with the mucosal inflammation in GERD. The aim of this study was to compare the relationship among dysphagia, endoscopic appearance, wall thickness, histology, and motility in EoE and GORD.

METHODS

EoE and GERD patients were prospectively studied between February 2012 and April 2021. Patients were studied on 2 separate occasions with endoscopy, EUS and mucosal biopsies, followed by high-resolution manometry. Epidemiology and dysphagia data were obtained.

RESULTS

A total of 45 patients (31 EoE, 14 GERD) were included. There were no significant differences in age, sex, duration of disease and presence of esophageal motility disorders. EoE patients had a higher dysphagia score (P < 0.001), EREFS score (P < 0.001) and peak eosinophil count (P < 0.001) compared with GERD patients. Thickness of the submucosa in the distal esophagus in EoE was significantly higher than GERD (P = 0.003) and positively correlated with duration of disease (P = 0.01, R = 0.67). Positive correlation was also found between dysphagia score and distal total esophageal wall thickness (P = 0.03, R = 0.39) in EoE patients. No correlation was found between these variables in GERD patients.

CONCLUSION

Distal esophageal wall thickness positively correlates with dysphagia score in EoE but not GERD. This appears to be related to the composition of the submucosa which can be identified using EUS.

Distal esophageal wall thickness correlates with dysphagia in adult patients with eosinophilic esophagitis

BACKGROUND

Thickening of the esophageal wall in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) and gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD) has been shown in studies using endoscopic ultrasound (EUS). We hypothesise that transmural inflammation in EoE results in prominent esophageal wall thickening compared with the mucosal inflammation in GERD. The aim of this study was to compare the relationship among dysphagia, endoscopic appearance, wall thickness, histology, and motility in EoE and GORD.

METHODS

EoE and GERD patients were prospectively studied between February 2012 and April 2021. Patients were studied on 2 separate occasions with endoscopy, EUS and mucosal biopsies, followed by high-resolution manometry. Epidemiology and dysphagia data were obtained.

RESULTS

A total of 45 patients (31 EoE, 14 GERD) were included. There were no significant differences in age, sex, duration of disease and presence of esophageal motility disorders. EoE patients had a higher dysphagia score (P < 0.001), EREFS score (P < 0.001) and peak eosinophil count (P < 0.001) compared with GERD patients. Thickness of the submucosa in the distal esophagus in EoE was significantly higher than GERD (P = 0.003) and positively correlated with duration of disease (P = 0.01, R = 0.67). Positive correlation was also found between dysphagia score and distal total esophageal wall thickness (P = 0.03, R = 0.39) in EoE patients. No correlation was found between these variables in GERD patients.

CONCLUSION

Distal esophageal wall thickness positively correlates with dysphagia score in EoE but not GERD. This appears to be related to the composition of the submucosa which can be identified using EUS.

Low Prevalence of Extraesophageal Gastrointestinal Pathology in Patients with Eosinophilic Esophagitis

BACKGROUND

Limited data are available to support current guidelines recommendations on obtaining gastric and duodenal biopsies of patients with clinical and histologic manifestations consistent with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) to rule out eosinophilic gastritis (EG) or duodenitis (EoD). Our study examined the prevalence of concomitant extraesophageal, gastrointestinal pathology to better characterize the diagnostic yield of additional biopsies.

METHODS

This was a single-center, retrospective study which utilized ICD 9 codes (530.13) and search queries of pathology reports ("Eosinophilic esophagitis," "EoE") to identify EoE patients. Patient endoscopy reports, pathology reports, and office notes were manually reviewed to characterize cases.

RESULTS

The electronic health record search yielded 1,688 EoE adults. In those who had extra-esophageal biopsies obtained, EG was identified in 34 (3.4%), H. pylori in 45 (4.6%), EoD in 27 (3.3%), and histology consistent with celiac disease in 20 (2.5%). Endoscopic abnormalities were found in the stomach of 92% of patients with EoE and EG and in the duodenum of 50% of patients with EoE and EoD. Symptoms of dyspepsia and/or abdominal pain occurred in a significantly greater proportion of patients with extraesophageal disease (64% vs. 19% in EoE group, p < 0.001). Overall, extraesophageal pathology would have been missed in 1.4% of patients lacking either symptoms or endoscopic signs suggestive of extraesophageal disease.

CONCLUSIONS

The yield of gastric and duodenal biopsies in adults with EoE is low, with 6.5% of patients demonstrating histologic features of celiac disease, Helicobacter pylori, EG, and/or EoD. Biopsies of extraesophageal, gastrointestinal sites in patients with suspected or previously diagnosed EoE should consider symptom and endoscopy manifestations as well as the potential impact of histopathologic findings on clinical management.

The Clinical Characteristics and Treatment Outcomes of Concomitant Eosinophilic Esophagitis and Inflammatory Bowel Disease

Background

The clinical characteristics and treatment outcomes in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) have not been extensively investigated.

Methods

We determined treatment outcomes and frequencies of disease-related complications in patients with EoE and IBD.

Results

Among 69 patients who met inclusion criteria, 39 (56.5%) had a diagnosis of Crohn disease. Clinical and histologic response rates to proton pump inhibitors and topical steroids were 25.9% and 24.4%, respectively.

Conclusions

Lower than expected clinical and histologic response rates for EoE suggest the combination of EoE and IBD is a medically refractory phenotype with more difficult to treat EoE.

Epidemiology and risk factors for eosinophilic esophagitis: lessons for clinicians

INTRODUCTION

The rapid expansion in the epidemiology of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is being documented, along with cumulative research assessing environmental exposures associated with EoE and susceptibility due to genetic variants.

AREAS COVERED

Incidence rates for EoE of 5-10 new cases per 100,000 inhabitants annually have shown an increase in recent reports of up to 20 in some countries; the highest prevalence being reported for Europe and North America, where EoE now affects more than 1 out of 1,000 people. EoE has been shown to be associated with several disorders, Th2-mediated atopies being the most common. Patients with EoE exhibit increased frequency of asthma, allergic rhinitis and eczema, and EoE has been considered as a late component of the atopic march. Risk variants in TSLP, CAPN14 and LRCC32 genes, among others, have all been related to EoE, and interact with prenatal and early life exposure potentially modifying abundance and composition of gut microbiome. Dysregulated interactions between bacteria and mucosal immunity emerge as leading causes of EoE.

EXPERT OPINION

The expanding epidemiology of EoE, the resources needed and subsequent increasing healthcare costs require additional effort to optimize cost-effective management and unveil mechanisms that enhance the development of future preventive strategies.

Distinguishing gastroesophageal reflux disease and eosinophilic esophagitis in adults: The role of esophageal mucosal immunoglobulin G4

Background and Aim

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) can be difficult to distinguish as many of their clinical and histological features overlap. Preliminary data suggest a potential association between EoE and immunoglobulin G4 (IgG4) but not GERD. This study aimed to examine the role of esophageal mucosal IgG4 staining when differentiating EoE from GERD.

Methods

Esophageal biopsy specimens from patients with proven EoE and GERD were evaluated, and immunohistochemical staining for IgG4 was performed by an experienced gastrointestinal pathologist blinded to the clinical and endoscopic data. The results on IgG4 staining were then correlated with clinical, endoscopic, and histological features.

Results

Sixty patients were included in the study, with 30 EoE (38.8 ± 12.8 years, 23 M:7 F) and 30 GERD (50.7 ± 14.3 years, 14 M:16 F) patients. The prevalence of a positive intercellular IgG4 stain was significantly higher in the EoE patients than those with GERD (23/29 vs 2/30; P < 0.0001). Positive IgG4 stain had the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of 77%, 93%, 92%, and 80% for predicting the diagnosis of EoE, respectively. In both EoE and GERD patients, correlation was found between positive IgG4 staining and food bolus obstruction, dysphagia to solids, reflux, fixed rings, Barrett's esophagus, hiatus hernia, and esophagitis. In EoE patients, positive IgG4 staining was not correlated with the type of symptoms, endoscopic findings, histological findings, proton pump inhibitor therapy, or history of allergy/atopy.

Conclusion

Given the high specificity and PPV of positive IgG4 staining in esophageal biopsies for EoE, this can be a useful marker to distinguish the disease from GERD.

Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Diseases in Children: A Practical Review

Primary eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases (EGIDs) represent a heterogeneous group of disorders characterized by eosinophilic inflammation in the absence of known causes for eosinophilia, selectively affecting different segments of the gastrointestinal tract. While pediatric eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a well-defined disease with established guidelines, Eosinophilic Gastritis (EoG), Eosinophilic Gastroenteritis (EoGE) and Eosinophilic Colitis (EoC) remain a clinical enigma with evidence based on limited anecdotal case reports. Large cross-sectional studies in the US defined a prevalence of EoG and EoGE ranging from 1,5 to 6,4/100.000 and from 2,7 to 8,3/100.000 subjects respectively, while the prevalence of EoC ranges from 1,7 to 3,5/100.000 subjects. Regarding the pathogenesis, it is hypothesized that EGIDs result from the interplay between genetic predisposition, intestinal dysbiosis and environmental triggers. Clinically, EGIDs might present with different and nonspecific gastrointestinal symptoms depending on the involved intestinal tract and the extension of eosinophilic inflammatory infiltrate. The diagnosis of EGIDs requires: 1. recurrent gastrointestinal symptoms, 2. increased eosinophils for high power field in biopsy specimens, 3. absence of secondary causes of gastrointestinal eosinophilia. No validated guidelines are available on the clinical management of patients with EGIDs. Evidence from case reports and small uncontrolled case series suggests the use of dietary and corticosteroids as the first-line treatments. Considering the clinical follow-up of EGIDs, three different patterns of disease course are identified: single flare, recurring course-disease and chronic course-disease. This review will focus on pediatric EGIDs distal to esophagus, including Eosinophilic Gastritis (EoG), Eosinophilic Gastroenteritis (EoGE) and Eosinophilic Colitis (EoC).

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.

Analysis of eosinophilic esophagitis in children with repaired congenital esophageal atresia

BACKGROUND

A high prevalence of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) has been preliminarily reported in patients after repair of esophageal atresia (EA), but the basis of this association is unknown.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to (1) characterize the EoE transcriptome in patients with EA, (2) compare the EoE transcriptome in patients with EoE and EA with that in patients with EoE alone, and (3) identify transcripts that could predispose patients with EA to EoE.

METHODS

This single-center, population-based, retrospective study identified 4 EoE study cohorts: healthy control subjects, patients with EA and EoE (EA+EoE+), patients with EA without EoE (EA+EoE-), and patients with EoE without EA (EA-EoE+). Molecular signatures were assessed by using the EoE diagnostic panel, a 94-gene expression quantitative PCR array.

RESULTS

In a cohort of 110 pediatric patients with surgically repaired EA, 20 (18%) patients were given a diagnosis of EoE, representing a 364-fold enrichment of EoE in patients with EA compared with the general pediatric population. EoE diagnostic panel analyses revealed a major overlap between the EA+EoE+ and EA-EoE+ cohorts. A proportion (approximately 25%) of EoE signature genes were dysregulated in patients with EA+EoE- compared with healthy control subjects, including those involved in epithelial barrier function and type 2-associated inflammatory responses. Patients with EA+EoE+ exhibit a more severe EoE clinical phenotype than those with EA-EoE+ in terms of dysphagia and dilation need.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with EA have increased risk of EoE. Patients with EoE with EA have a similar molecular profile compared with that of patients with EoE without EA. Dysregulated baseline epithelial barrier and type 2-associated genes in EA monomorbidity might explain the higher EoE prevalence in patients with EA.

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.

Eosinophilic esophagitis: published evidences for disease subtypes, indications for patient subpopulations, and how to translate patient observations to murine experimental models

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic inflammatory disorder of the esophagus and commonly classified as a Th2-type allergy. Major advances in our understanding of the EoE pathophysiology have recently been made, but clinicians struggle with highly unpredictable therapy responses indicative of phenotypic diversity within the patient population. Here, we summarize evidences for the existence of EoE subpopulations based on diverse inflammatory characteristics of the esophageal tissue in EoE. Additionally, clinical characteristics of EoE patients support the concept of disease subtypes. We conclude that clinical and experimental evidences indicate that EoE is an umbrella term for conditions that are unified by esophageal eosinophilia but that several disease subgroups with various inflammatory esophageal patterns and/or different clinical features exist. We further discuss strategies to study the pathophysiologic differences as observed in EoE patients in murine experimental EoE. Going forward, models of EoE that faithfully mimic EoE subentities as defined in humans will be essential because mechanistic studies on triggers which regulate the onset of diverse EoE subpopulations are not feasible in patients. Understanding how and why different EoE phenotypes develop will be a first and fundamental step to establish strategies that integrate individual variations of the EoE pathology into personalized therapy.