Mast Cell and Eosinophil Counts in Gastric and Duodenal Biopsy Specimens From Patients With and Without Eosinophilic Gastroenteritis

A Pilot Study of Ketotifen in Patients Aged 8-17 Years with Functional Dyspepsia Associated with Mucosal Eosinophilia

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Mast cells have been implicated in abdominal pain-associated disorders of gut-brain interaction, such as functional dyspepsia. As such, ketotifen, a second-generation antihistamine and mast cell stabilizer, could represent a viable treatment option in these conditions. The primary aim of the current pilot study was to assess clinical response to ketotifen and assess pharmacokinetics in youth with functional dyspepsia.

METHODS

We conducted a pilot randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, cross-over trial of ketotifen in 11 youth with functional dyspepsia and duodenal mucosal eosinophilia with 4 weeks of active treatment at a dose of 1 mg twice daily. Global clinical response was graded on a 5-point Likert Scale. A single plasma sample was obtained at steady state for pharmacokinetic analysis.

RESULTS

Ketotifen was not superior to placebo with regard to global clinical response. Only 18% of patients demonstrated a complete or near-complete clinical response. The estimated half-life was 3.3 h.

CONCLUSIONS

While ketotifen was not superior to placebo, this study highlights several important challenges for developing drug trials for youth with chronic abdominal pain. Recommendations are made for designing a larger treatment trial for ketotifen in this patient group.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02484248.

Common and disparate clinical presentations and mechanisms in different eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases

Eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases (EGIDs) are a group of diseases characterized by selective eosinophil infiltration of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract in the absence of other causes of eosinophilia. These diseases are generally driven by type 2 inflammation, often in response to food allergen exposure. Among all EGIDs, the clinical presentation often includes a history of atopic disease with a variety of GI symptoms. EGIDs are traditionally separated into eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) and non-EoE EGIDs. EoE is relatively better understood and now associated with clinical guidelines and 2 US Food and Drug Administration-approved treatments, whereas non-EoE EGIDs are rarer and less well-understood diseases without US Food and Drug Administration-approved treatments. Non-EoE EGIDs are further subclassified by the area of the GI tract that is involved; they comprise eosinophilic gastritis, eosinophilic enteritis (including eosinophilic duodenitis), and eosinophilic colitis. As with other GI disorders, the disease presentations and mechanisms differ depending on the involved segment of the GI tract; however, the differences between EoE and non-EoE EGIDs extend beyond which GI tract segment is involved. The aim of this article is to summarize the commonalities and differences between the clinical presentations and disease mechanisms for EoE and non-EoE EGIDs.

The Natural History of Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Diseases Is Influenced by Age of Onset and Location of Involvement

INTRODUCTION

It is unknown whether concomitant esophageal involvement or anatomic location of eosinophilic infiltration affects the natural history of eosinophilic gastrointestinal disease (EGID).

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was performed using the University of North Carolina EGID Clinicopathologic Database. Patients were adults and children with a prior EGID diagnosis based on clinicopathologic features. Demographics, clinical characteristics, treatment information, and procedural data were extracted from medical records. Clinical course and flare history were characterized.

RESULTS

Among 97 patients, 43% had EGID + esophageal involvement and 57% had EGID only. Patients with esophageal involvement had a longer diagnostic delay preceding diagnosis (36.6 vs 11.6 months, P = 0.001), more dysphagia (50% vs 18%; P = 0.001), required more chronic therapy (77% vs 52%, P = 0.016), and exhibited more progressive disease (25% vs 6%, P = 0.027). A continuous disease course was most common in eosinophilic gastritis (78%) while patients with eosinophilic gastritis + eosinophilic enteritis (29%) and eosinophilic enteritis + eosinophilic colitis (50%) had the highest proportion of progressive and relapsing disease, respectively ( P = 0.045). A continuous disease course occurred more frequently in children (71%, P = 0.03) and those with single organ involvement (65%), whereas adults had more relapsing (39%) or progressive disease (18%).

DISCUSSION

EGIDs with and without esophageal involvement display many similarities, although patients with esophageal involvement more frequently had dysphagia, had progressive disease courses, and required more chronic therapy. Location of involvement and age of onset affected the natural history with higher proportions of relapsing or progressive disease seen in adults and patients with small bowel or multiorgan involvement while a continuous disease course was more common in children and patients with gastric-only involvement.

Dietary Management of Non-EoE Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Diseases

Patients with non-eosinophilic esophagitis eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases (non-EoE EGIDs) are prone to nutritional deficiencies due to food-avoidant behaviors, malabsorption, and high nutrition impact symptoms. Nutrient deficiencies correspond to the segment, depth, and extent of the gastrointestinal tract involved and can impact organs distant from the gut. Patients with non-EoE EGIDs are often atopic, and some appear to respond to dietary avoidance of specific food allergens. Tests to identify food triggers other than response to elimination diets are lacking. Dietary restriction therapy should be considered in such patients and is best implemented through a multidisciplinary approach to avoid nutritional complications.

Minimally Invasive Approaches to Diagnose and Monitor Eosinophilic GI Diseases

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review seeks to understand novel avenues for eosinophilic GI disease management. Biomarkers offer a unique and non-invasive approach to tracking EoE disease progression. While no biomarkers have definitively met the diagnostic criteria for eosinophilic GI diseases, some biomarkers have been shown to be associated with disease activity. Here, we examine the potential of recently studied biomarkers.

RECENT FINDINGS

Current research shows advancements in blood, luminal fluid, and breath testing. Particular areas of interest include mRNA analyses, protein fingerprinting, amplicon sequence variants (ASVs), T cells and IgE receptors, eosinophilic cationic proteins, cytokines, and nitric oxide exhalation. Preliminary results showed that mucosal biomarkers, directly captured from the esophagus, may reflect the best representation of biopsy-based results, in contrast to biomarkers obtained from indirect or peripheral (blood, breath) methods. However, this is based on limited clinical studies without sufficient numbers to evaluate true diagnostic accuracy. Large-scale randomized trials are needed to fully ascertain both the optimal sampling technique and the specific biomarkers that reflect diagnostic status of the disease.

Role of Mast Cells in Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Diseases

Mast cells play a central role in the pathogenesis of eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorders (EGIDs), including eosinophilic esophagitis. Their interactions with immune and structural cells, involvement in tissue remodeling, and contribution to symptoms make them attractive targets for therapeutic intervention. More is being discovered regarding the intricate interplay of mast cells and eosinophils. Recent studies demonstrating that depletion of eosinophils is insufficient to improve symptoms of EGIDs have raised the question of whether other cells may play a role in symptomatology and pathogenesis of EGIDs.

Pathophysiology of Non-Esophageal Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Disorders

Eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorder (EGID) is an umbrella term encompassing a group of chronic, immune-mediated disorders characterized by eosinophil-rich inflammation affecting one or more segments of the gastrointestinal tract. A recent consensus in nomenclature and emerging data made possible through multi-center consortia are beginning to unravel the molecular and cellular underpinnings of EGIDs below the esophagus. These emerging findings are revealing both overarching commonalities related to a food allergen-driven, chronic, Th2-mediated immune response as well as location-specific nuances in the pathophysiology of the collective EGIDs. Altogether, these advances offer promise for improved diagnoses and more efficacious interventional strategies.

The Dual Lens of Endoscopy and Histology in the Diagnosis and Management of Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Disorders-A Comprehensive Review

Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Disorders (EGIDs) are a group of conditions characterized by abnormal eosinophil accumulation in the gastrointestinal tract. Among these EGIDs, Eosinophilic Esophagitis (EoE) is the most well documented, while less is known about Eosinophilic Gastritis (EoG), Eosinophilic Enteritis (EoN), and Eosinophilic Colitis (EoC). The role of endoscopy in EGIDs is pivotal, with applications in diagnosis, disease monitoring, and therapeutic intervention. In EoE, the endoscopic reference score (EREFS) has been shown to be accurate in raising diagnostic suspicion and effective in monitoring therapeutic responses. Additionally, endoscopic dilation is the first-line treatment for esophageal strictures. For EoG and EoN, while the literature is more limited, common endoscopic findings include erythema, nodules, and ulcerations. Histology remains the gold standard for diagnosing EGIDs, as it quantifies eosinophilic infiltration. In recent years, there have been significant advancements in the histological understanding of EoE, leading to the development of diagnostic scores and the identification of specific microscopic features associated with the disease. However, for EoG, EoN, and EoC, precise eosinophil count thresholds for diagnosis have not yet been established. This review aims to elucidate the role of endoscopy and histology in the diagnosis and management of the three main EGIDs and to analyze their strengths and limitations, their interconnection, and future research directions.

Alpha-Tryptase as a Risk-Modifying Factor for Mast Cell-Mediated Reactions

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide an overview on the current understanding of genetic variability in human tryptases and summarize the literature demonstrating the differential impact of mature tryptases on mast cell-mediated reactions and associated clinical phenotypes.

RECENT FINDINGS

It is becoming increasingly recognized that tryptase gene composition, and in particular the common genetic trait hereditary alpha-tryptasemia (HαT), impacts clinical allergy. HαT has consistently been associated with clonal mast cell disorders (MCD) and has also been associated with more frequent anaphylaxis among these patients, and patients in whom no allergic trigger can be found, specifically idiopathic anaphylaxis. Additionally, more severe anaphylaxis among Hymenoptera venom allergy patients has been linked to HαT in both retrospective and prospective studies. An increased relative number of α-tryptase-encoding gene copies, even in the absence of HαT, has also been associated with systemic mastocytosis and has been shown to positively correlate with the severity of mast cell-mediated reactions to vibration and food. These findings may be due to increased generation of α/β-tryptase heterotetramers and differences in their enzymatic activity relative to β-tryptase homotetramers. HαT is a naturally occurring overexpression model of α-tryptase in humans. Increased relative α-tryptase expression modifies immediate hypersensitivity symptoms and is associated with more frequent and severe mast cell-mediated reactions, ostensibly due to increased α/β-tryptase heterotetramer production.

Eosinophilic enterocolitis in duodenum, ileum, and colon: A case report

Eosinophilic gastroenteritis (EGE) is a rare disease which mainly consists of an abnormal eosinophile infiltration of the gastrointestinal tract. It's classified according to its location: eosinophilic esophagitis, eosinophilic gastritis, eosinophilic enteritis (including duodenum, jejunum and/or ileum) and eosinophilic colitis and degree of infiltration (mucosal, muscular, serosal). Depending on eosinophile concentration, type of EGE and the patient's condition it may manifest with different clinical presentations such as functional dyspepsia, abdominal pain, irritability, hypoproteinemia, diarrhea, anemia, among others. Few research has been done on such an uncommon pathology to the extent that treatment evidence is mostly limited to small case series. This case study reports an infrequent presentation of EGE in the small and large intestine as an undifferentiated gastrointestinal disease and successful corticoid management given to the patient in order to further broaden knowledge on this subject and facilitate an established clinical conduct for the treating physician.

Detecting Changes in Mast Cell Numbers Versus Activation in Human Disease: A Roadblock for Current Biomarkers?

The pathophysiology of mast cell (MC)-driven disorders is diverse, ranging from localized reactions to systemic disorders caused by abnormal accumulation and activation in multiorgan systems. Prompt and accurate diagnosis is critically important, both for informing treatment and objective assessment of treatment outcomes. As new therapeutics are being developed to deplete MCs or silence them (eg, by engaging inhibitory receptors that block activation), new biomarkers are needed that can distinguish between MC activation versus burden. Serum tryptase is the gold standard for assessing both MC burden and activation; however, commercial tryptase assays have limitations related to timing of release, lack of discernment between inactive (α) and active (β) forms of tryptase, and interpatient variability of baseline levels. Alternative approaches to measuring MC activation include urinary MC mediators, flow cytometry-based assays or gene expression profiling. Additional markers of MC activation are needed for use in clinical diagnostics, to help selection of treatment of MC diseases, and for assessing outcomes of therapy. We review the spectrum of disorders with known or suspected MC contribution, describe the utility and limitations of current MC markers and assays, and discuss the need for new markers that can differentiate between MC activation and burden.

Review article: Emerging insights into the epidemiology, pathophysiology, diagnostic and therapeutic aspects of eosinophilic oesophagitis and other eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases

BACKGROUND

Eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases (EGIDs) are chronic, immune-mediated disorders characterised clinically by gastrointestinal symptoms and histologically by a pathologic increase in eosinophil-predominant inflammation in the gastrointestinal tract, in the absence of secondary causes of eosinophilia.

AIMS

To highlight emerging insights and research efforts into the epidemiology, pathophysiology, diagnostic and therapeutic aspects of eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE) and non-EoE EGIDs, and discuss key remaining knowledge gaps.

METHODS

We selected and reviewed original research, retrospective studies, case series, randomised controlled trials, and meta-analyses.

RESULTS

Standardised nomenclature classifies EGIDs as EoE, eosinophilic gastritis (EoG), eosinophilic enteritis (EoN), and eosinophilic colitis (EoC). Incidence and prevalence of EoE are rising, emphasising the need to better understand how environmental risk factors and genetic features interact. Advances in understanding EoE pathophysiology have led to clinical trials of targeted therapy and the approval (in the United States) of dupilumab for EoE. Several therapies that are under investigation hope to satisfy both histologic and clinical targets. For non-EoE EGIDs, efforts are focused on better defining clinical and histopathologic disease determinants and natural history, as well as establishing new therapies.

CONCLUSIONS

Unmet needs for research are dramatically different for EoE and non-EoE EGIDs. In EoE, non-invasive diagnostic tests, clinicopathologic models that determine the risk of disease progression and therapeutic failure, and novel biologic therapies are emerging. In contrast, in non-EoE EGIDs, epidemiologic trends, diagnostic histopathologic thresholds, and natural history models are still developing for these more rare disorders.

Quantification of Mucosal Mast Cells in the Gastrointestinal Tract: A Primer for Practicing Pathologists

CONTEXT.—

Mast cells are essential components of the immune system and play crucial pathogenetic roles in several digestive diseases, including mastocytic enterocolitis and eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorders. Pathologists have rarely been asked to evaluate the distribution and density of mast cells in gastrointestinal (GI) biopsy specimens. However, such requests are becoming more common because of an increasing awareness of the role of mast cells in functional GI disease and in both esophageal and nonesophageal eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorders.

OBJECTIVE.—

To provide pathologists with tools to incorporate the assessment of mast cells in the evaluation of esophageal, gastric, and intestinal specimens by developing a systematic approach to their evaluation, counting, and reporting.

DESIGN.—

This study consisted of a review of the literature followed by multiple consensus sessions to decide where to count mast cells and what a countable mast cell is.

RESULTS.—

We reviewed 135 papers addressing the content of mast cells in the digestive tract, selected 21 that detailed how cells were counted (microscope lens, area of high-power fields, locations evaluated, type of cells considered as countable), and summarized their data in a table. Then, drawing from both the acceptable literature and our own extensive experience, we reached a tentative consensus on: (1) the normal numbers in the different segments of the GI tract; (2) the morphology of countable mast cells; and (3) the locations and strategies for counting them.

CONCLUSIONS.—

The result is a set of suggestions for reporting mast cell counts, their distribution, and their location in a way clinicians can understand and use for management decisions.

Standardized Quantification of Mast Cells in the Gastrointestinal Tract in Adults

BACKGROUND

Current data on the normal quantity of mast cells throughout the adult gastrointestinal tract are limited in several domains. These include microanatomic localization of mast cells, standardization of staining and counting methods, and reporting of microscope field of view.

OBJECTIVE

To address this lack of reliable reference ranges to facilitate the study of and diagnosis of emerging mast cell-mediated diseases.

METHODS

We examined biopsies obtained from the esophagus, stomach, duodenum, and colon from an unselected cohort. Mean and peak mast cell density were determined on slides stained for tryptase and CD117, and were expressed per high power field (hpf) and surface area (mm2), thus deriving reference ranges (average ± 2 SDs).

RESULTS

For the most common hpf surface area (0.238 mm2), upper limits of the derived reference ranges for average/peak mast cells were 0.15/3.67 (esophagus, tryptase), 0.70/5.98 (esophagus, CD117), 22.56/35.30 (stomach, tryptase), 31.32/53.10 (stomach, CD117), 30.28/49.77 (duodenal crypts, tryptase), 41.96/65.26 (duodenal crypts, CD117), 4.98/11.56 (duodenal villi, tryptase), 8.38/14.17 (duodenal villi, CD117), 26.58/41.08 (colon, tryptase), and 35.57/57.92 (colon, CD117). Interobserver variability was moderate to good. There was significant correlation between average and peak mast cell counts.

CONCLUSIONS

These data help standardize mast cell reference ranges throughout the gastrointestinal tract in adults, which can be used to determine whether abnormal levels of mast cells are present in patients with suspected mast cell-mediated disease. Our data show that the commonly used cutoff of 20 mast cells per hpf irrespective of the gastrointestinal tract segment is an underestimate of an appropriate cutoff in stomach, duodenum (crypt area), and colon.

Joint ESPGHAN/NASPGHAN Guidelines on Childhood Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Disorders Beyond Eosinophilic Esophagitis

INTRODUCTION

Eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorders beyond eosinophilic esophagitis (non-EoE EGIDs) are rare chronic inflammatory disorders of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract. Diagnosis is based on clinical symptoms and histologic findings of eosinophilic inflammation after exclusion of a secondary cause or systemic disease. Currently, no guidelines exist for the evaluation of non-EoE EGIDs. Therefore, the European Society for Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition (ESPGHAN) and the North American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition (NASPGHAN) formed a task force group to provide consensus guidelines for childhood non-EoE EGIDs.

METHODS

The working group was composed of pediatric gastroenterologists, adult gastroenterologists, allergists/immunologists, and pathologists. An extensive electronic literature search of the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases was conducted up to February 2022. General methodology was used in the formulation of recommendations according to the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to meet current standards of evidence assessment.

RESULTS

The guidelines provide information on the current concept of non-EoE EGIDs, disease pathogenesis, epidemiology, clinical manifestations, diagnostic and disease surveillance procedures, and current treatment options. Thirty-four statements based on available evidence and 41 recommendations based on expert opinion and best clinical practices were developed.

CONCLUSION

Non-EoE EGIDs literature is limited in scope and depth, making clear recommendations difficult. These consensus-based clinical practice guidelines are intended to assist clinicians caring for children affected by non-EoE EGIDs and to facilitate high-quality randomized controlled trials of various treatment modalities using standardized, uniform disease definitions.

Determination of Optimal Eosinophil Thresholds for Diagnosis of Eosinophilic Gastritis and Duodenitis: A Pooled Analysis of 4 Prospective Studies

INTRODUCTION

Consensus is lacking regarding the number of eosinophils (eos) required for the diagnosis of eosinophilic gastritis (EoG) and eosinophilic duodenitis (EoD). In addition, thresholds that require multiple high-power fields (HPFs) may not be practical for clinical use, resulting in delayed or missed diagnoses. This pooled analysis of 4 prospective studies assessed thresholds for multiple and single HPFs used to diagnose EoG and EoD.

METHODS

Studies included the phase 2 ENIGMA1, the phase 3 ENIGMA2, an EoG/EoD prevalence study and a healthy volunteer study. Eos were quantified in the epithelium and lamina propria for controls and symptomatic participants. Symptomatic participants were further divided by histologic diagnosis of EoG/EoD. Peak eos counts were assessed, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was analyzed to identify eos cutoffs for detection of EoG/EoD using the Youden index and sensitivity and specificity equality approaches.

RESULTS

Based on the highest specificity analysis in 740 patients, the optimal eos threshold was determined to be 20 eos/HPF in 5 gastric HPFs for EoG (71% sensitivity and 94% specificity) and 33 eos/HPF in 3 duodenal HPFs for EoD (49% sensitivity and 100% specificity). For single-field analysis, the optimal eos thresholds were 33 eos/HPF (EoG) and 37 eos/HPF (EoD), both corresponding to 93% sensitivity and 93% specificity.

DISCUSSION

Highly specific single gastric and duodenal HPF thresholds may have more clinical applicability than thresholds requiring multiple HPFs and could better facilitate development of practical histopathologic guidelines to aid pathologists and clinicians in the detection and diagnosis of EoG and/or EoD.

Mast cell silencing: A novel therapeutic approach for urticaria and other mast cell-mediated diseases

Chronic urticaria (CU) is a mast cell (MC)-dependent disease with limited therapeutic options. Current management strategies are directed at inhibiting IgE-mediated activation of MCs and antagonizing effects of released mediators. Due to the complexity and heterogeneity of CU and other MC diseases and mechanisms of MC activation-including multiple activating receptors and ligands, diverse signaling pathways, and a menagerie of mediators-strategies of MC depletion or MC silencing (i.e., inhibition of MC activation via binding of inhibitory receptors) have been developed to overcome limitations of singularly targeted agents. MC silencers, such as agonist monoclonal antibodies that engage inhibitory receptors (e.g., sialic acid-binding immunoglobulin-like lectin8 -[Siglec-8] [lirentelimab/AK002], Siglec-6 [AK006], and CD200R [LY3454738]), have reached preclinical and clinical stages of development. In this review, we (1) describe the role of MCs in the pathogenesis of CU, highlighting similarities with other MC diseases in disease mechanisms and response to treatment; (2) explore current therapeutic strategies, categorized by nonspecific immunosuppression, targeted inhibition of MC activation or mediators, and targeted modulation of MC activity; and (3) introduce the concept of MC silencing as an emerging strategy that could selectively block activation of MCs without eliciting or exacerbating on- or off-target, immunosuppressive adverse effects.

Review of Non-Eosinophilic Esophagitis-Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Disease (Non-EoE-EGID) and a Case Series of Twenty-Eight Affected Patients

Eosinophilic gastrointestinal disease (EGID) is divided into eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) and non-eosinophilic esophagitis eosinophilic gastrointestinal disease (non-EoE-EGID) based on the involved gastrointestinal segments. Reports regarding non-EoE-EGID are limited, in part because of its rarity. The present study was performed to review non-EoE-EGID, including its pathogenesis, diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis. Additionally, details regarding 28 cases of non-EoE-EGID recently diagnosed at our Japanese tertial medical center are presented and compared with 20 EoE cases diagnosed during the same period at the same medical center. Comparisons of the two groups clarified differences regarding age- and gender-dependent prevalence between the two conditions, and also showed that systemic involvement and disease severity were greater in the non-EoE-EGID patients. Notably, diagnosis of non-EoE-EGID is difficult because of its lack of specific or characteristic symptoms and endoscopic findings. The clinical characteristics of EoE and non-EoE-EGID differ in many ways, while they also share several genetic, clinical, laboratory, and histopathological features.

Do General Pathologists Assess Gastric and Duodenal Eosinophilia?

CONTEXT.—

Eosinophilic diseases of the gastrointestinal tract (EGIDs), eosinophilic gastritis (EoG), and eosinophilic duodenitis (EoD) are rarely suspected clinically and infrequently detected by pathologists.

OBJECTIVE.—

To determine whether histories of allergic or eosinophilic disorders and requests to rule out EoG and EoD affect pathologists' awareness of eosinophils in gastrointestinal biopsies.

DESIGN.—

Thirty-one community-based pathologists were given 16 sets of biopsies from gastric and duodenal mucosa with elevated eosinophils, Helicobacter pylori gastritis, atrophic gastritis, normal stomach and duodenum, lymphocytosis, and celiac disease. Participants were assigned to 3 groups: group A did not receive histories of allergic or eosinophilic conditions; group B received similar histories plus a clue of possible allergic or eosinophilic conditions; and group C received the same histories as B and was asked to rule out EoG/EoD. A list of gastric and duodenal diagnoses and a space for comments were provided. Results were analyzed descriptively.

RESULTS.—

Pathologists correctly diagnosed most noneosinophilic gastrointestinal disorders, indicating competence in gastrointestinal pathology. With respect to EoG and EoD, pathologists in group C performed significantly better that those in groups A and B. The combined odds ratio with 95% CI was 12.34 (2.87-53.04), P < .001, for A versus C and 4.02 (1.60-10.09), P < .02, for B versus C.

CONCLUSIONS.—

Most pathologists neither reported gastric/duodenal eosinophilia nor diagnosed EoG/EoD, even when provided histories of eosinophilic disorders. Requests to rule out EoG/EoD resulted in only 4 of 11 participants evaluating and counting eosinophils in some cases. Simple evidence-based histopathologic criteria are needed before pathologists can be expected to consider and diagnose EGIDs.

Nonatopic Eosinophilic Duodenitis in an Adult: A Case Report and Overview

Eosinophilic duodenitis is an inflammation of the duodenum, characterized by an abundance of eosinophils, typically triggered by hypersensitivity reactions. Typically, recurrent abdominal pain with eosinophilic duodenitis is rare in individuals without a history of atopic conditions like asthma. Here, we present the case of a 62-year-old man who experienced recurrent upper abdominal pain for 12 months and unintended weight loss for the past six months. The patient reported no allergies to food, drugs, or the environment, and has no history of other atopic conditions. Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) with biopsy of the duodenum and stomach revealed 32 eosinophils per high-power field (HPF), which is mild. Skin prick testing yielded negative results. Following initial treatment with H2 inhibitors, proton pump inhibitors, and budesonide for a total of 12 weeks, the patient reported an improvement in symptoms and subsequent weight gain. This report emphasizes a rare case of eosinophilic duodenitis in a nonatopic individual with a successful treatment regimen. His quality of life improved with weight gain, resolved abdominal pain, and improved appetite. Although the patient's condition lasted about 12 months, our report showcased the importance of timely clinical diagnosis and appropriate combination therapy to alleviate progressive pain associated with eosinophilic duodenitis.

A Marked Eosinophilic Infiltration in Mucosa Could Be a Better Predictive Factor for Intractable Non-Esophageal Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Disorders

INTRODUCTION

Non-esophageal eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorders (non-EoE EGIDs) are rare, but their prevalence has recently increased. Although it has been reported that one-half of patients with non-EoE EGIDs have intractable clinical courses, their clinical features are not fully understood.

METHODS

This is a multicenter retrospective study in which 10 institutions in Japan participated. Clinical databases from January 1998 to December 2020 were reviewed to identify patients with non-EoE EGIDs. A total of 44 patients were identified; they were divided into two groups based on their clinical course: an intractable group and a non-intractable group. The clinical features were compared between the two groups by a logistic regression analysis. Remarkable eosinophilic infiltration (REI) was defined histologically when the maximal counts of mucosal eosinophils reached a threshold level in the respective area of biopsy.

RESULTS

Prevalence of drug allergy and eosinophil counts more than 500/μL (EOS), vomiting symptoms, abnormalities of the stomach, duodenum, and jejunum on computed tomography (upper gastrointestinal abnormality on computed tomography [UACT]), and REI were significantly different between the two groups. Among the factors that were potentially associated with an intractable clinical course, logistic regression revealed that REI, EOS, and UACT were significant factors. Based on an analysis of the area under the receiver operator characteristic curve, a combination of REI and EOS had the lowest Akaike's information criterion, indicating the best model to predict an intractable clinical course.

CONCLUSIONS

REI may predict an intractable course in patients with non-EoE EGIDs. In addition, the combination of REI and EOS was a better predictor than REI alone.

Eosinophilic gastroenteritis: Pathogenesis, diagnosis, and treatment

ABSTRACT

Eosinophilic gastroenteritis (EGE) is a gastrointestinal disorder of unclear etiology that is characterized by eosinophilic infiltration of the stomach and small intestine, and consists of mucosal, muscular, and serosal subtypes. Eosinophilic infiltration of the gastrointestinal tract is a fundamental histopathological characteristic of EGE and is driven by several T-helper type 2 (Th2)-dependent cytokines and induced by food allergy. Due to the lack of a diagnostic gold standard, EGE has a high rate of delayed diagnosis or misdiagnosis. However, several new diagnostic strategies have been developed, such as novel genetic biomarkers and imaging tests. Although dietary therapy and corticosteroids remain the common choices for EGE treatment, recent decades have seen the emergence of novel treatment alternatives, such as biologics that target particular molecules involved in the pathogenic process. Preliminary investigations and clinical trials have demonstrated the efficacy of biologics and provided additional insights for the era of refractory or corticosteroid-dependent EGE biologics.

Molecular analysis of duodenal eosinophilia

BACKGROUND

Eosinophilic duodenitis (EoD), characterized by nonspecific gastrointestinal symptoms and increased numbers of duodenal eosinophils, may be in the eosinophilic gastrointestinal disease spectrum. However, diagnostic thresholds and pathogenic processes of duodenal tissue eosinophilia are inadequately characterized.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to define an EoD transcriptome and pathologic pathways.

METHODS

RNA sequencing and histologic features of human duodenal biopsy samples were analyzed as a function of duodenal eosinophils levels. For analyses, we defined EoD as more than 52 peak eosinophils/hpf (n = 8), duodenal eosinophilia as 30 to 52 eosinophils/hpf (n = 11), and normal controls as fewer than 30 eosinophils/hpf (n = 8). Associations between gene expression and histologic features were analyzed with Spearman correlation.

RESULTS

We identified 382 differentially expressed genes (EoD transcriptome) between EoD and normal controls (>2-fold change [adjusted P < .05]). The EoD transcriptome distinguished EoD from controls (duodenal eosinophilia and normal controls). The duodenal eosinophil count was correlated with a distinct EoD transcriptome when 50 to 60 peak eosinophils/hpf were present. The EoD transcriptome was enriched in genes involved in IL-4/IL-13 signaling, mast cells, and myeloid progenitor cells. Among duodenal histologic features, lamina propria eosinophil sheets was the most associated with transcriptomic changes (r = 0.66; P < .01). EoD gene signatures were shared with eosinophilic esophagitis and eosinophilic gastritis but not with eosinophilic colitis or celiac disease.

CONCLUSION

We have identified an EoD transcriptomic signature that emerges at 50 to 60 peak eosinophils/hpf and established EoD as part of a spectrum of upper eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorder associated with type 2 immunity and distinct from eosinophilic colitis and celiac disease. These findings provide a basis for improving diagnosis and treatment.

"Tickle me pink": update in eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorders

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases (EGIDs) outside of the esophagus have been previously enigmatic and rare diagnoses. Fortunately, increasing research over the past few decades has led to an improved understanding of disease pathophysiology and epidemiology. This has been foundational for developing accurate nomenclature, diagnostic criteria, and therapeutics.

RECENT FINDINGS

This article will review recent updates in nonesophageal EGIDs. Accurate disease classification and nomenclature developed from international consensus are now available, as well as data challenging the notion that abnormal endoscopic findings are rare in this population. Studies on natural history, outcomes, and impact on patient quality of life are reviewed. Lastly, retrospective studies and clinical trials on EGID therapies are summarized.

SUMMARY

With a standardized nomenclature system for EGIDs now established, formal diagnostic guidelines and criteria for nonesophageal EGIDs are in active development. While management remains challenging compared with eosinophilic esophagitis, research and development of effective, steroid-sparing therapies (primarily through biologics and dietary therapy) remain underway. In eosinophilic colitis, the rarest EGID, research remains focused on illuminating pathophysiology. Ongoing research will continue to improve understanding of natural history, outcomes, and therapeutic options for these diseases.

A Method for Expanding the Training Set of White Blood Cell Images

In medicine, the count of different types of white blood cells can be used as the basis for diagnosing certain diseases or evaluating the treatment effects of diseases. The recognition and counting of white blood cells have important clinical significance. But the effect of recognition based on machine learning is affected by the size of the training set. At present, researchers mainly rely on image rotation and cropping to expand the dataset. These methods either add features to the white blood cell image or require manual intervention and are inefficient. In this paper, a method for expanding the training set of white blood cell images is proposed. After rotating the image at any angle, Canny is used to extract the edge of the black area caused by the rotation and then fill the black area to achieve the purpose of expanding the training set. The experimental results show that after using the method proposed in this paper to expand the training set to train the three models of ResNet, MobileNet, and ShuffleNet, and comparing the original dataset and the method trained by the simple rotated image expanded dataset, the recognition accuracy of the three models is obviously improved without manual intervention.

International Consensus Recommendations for Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Disease Nomenclature

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Substantial heterogeneity in terminology used for eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases (EGIDs), particularly the catchall term "eosinophilic gastroenteritis," limits clinical and research advances. We aimed to achieve an international consensus for standardized EGID nomenclature.

METHODS

This consensus process utilized Delphi methodology. An initial naming framework was proposed and refined in iterative fashion, then assessed in a first round of Delphi voting. Results were discussed in 2 consensus meetings, and the framework was updated and reassessed in a second Delphi vote, with a 70% threshold set for agreement.

RESULTS

Of 91 experts participating, 85 (93%) completed the first and 82 (90%) completed the second Delphi surveys. Consensus was reached on all but 2 statements. "EGID" was the preferred umbrella term for disorders of gastrointestinal (GI) tract eosinophilic inflammation in the absence of secondary causes (100% agreement). Involved GI tract segments will be named specifically and use an "Eo" abbreviation convention: eosinophilic gastritis (now abbreviated EoG), eosinophilic enteritis (EoN), and eosinophilic colitis (EoC). The term "eosinophilic gastroenteritis" is no longer preferred as the overall name (96% agreement). When >2 GI tract areas are involved, the name should reflect all of the involved areas.

CONCLUSIONS

This international process resulted in consensus for updated EGID nomenclature for both clinical and research use. EGID will be the umbrella term, rather than "eosinophilic gastroenteritis," and specific naming conventions by location of GI tract involvement are recommended. As more data are developed, this framework can be updated to reflect best practices and the underlying science.

Role of mast cells in eosinophilic esophagitis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review will present what is known from recent research on the involvement of mast cells in eosinophilic esophagitis and identify questions requiring further investigation.

RECENT FINDINGS

In the adults and children with eosinophilic esophagitis, there is increasing evidence that mastocytosis can persist, despite resolution of eosinophilia and is associated with persistent mucosal abnormalities and symptoms. Despite, treatment mast cells have an activated transcriptome. Mast cells likely contribute to epithelial barrier dysfunction, smooth muscle hypertrophy and contraction, and subepithelial fibrosis. It remains unclear whether targeting MCs alone has therapeutic efficacy to improve tissue damage.

SUMMARY

Mast cells appear to play a key role in eosinophilic esophagitis and serve as a biomarker of mucosal healing in conjunction with eosinophils. Excessive mast cell activation likely contributes to tissue damage in eosinophilic esophagitis and need to be considered as a target of therapy along with eosinophils.

Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Diseases Beyond the Esophagus: An Evolving Field and Nomenclature

The eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases (EGIDs) are a group of chronic, immune-mediated gastrointestinal (GI) diseases characterized by GI symptoms and pathologic eosinophilic infiltration of specific areas within the GI tract in the absence of secondary causes of eosinophilia. The non-eosinophilic esophagitis EGIDs remain understudied and likely underdiagnosed, owing in part to the lack of clarity in the terminology previously used to describe these diseases. The newly established EGID nomenclature framework includes a first-tier description of the specific location of GI tract involvement and a second-tier description with more granular characterizations of disease involvement. EGIDs can involve any segment or layer of the GI tract, so patients can present with a wide array of common, nonspecific GI symptoms. Diagnosing EGIDs requires endoscopic evaluation and biopsies showing increased eosinophilic tissue infiltration in the correct clinical context after ruling out other causes of eosinophilia. Although the pathogenesis is not yet fully understood, EGIDs are likely allergic conditions triggered by food antigen exposure. Most patients are currently treated with corticosteroids, but investigations of other pharmacologic and dietary therapies are ongoing. This article highlights the recently updated EGID nomenclature and summarizes the current understanding of the diagnosis, pathogenesis, and treatment of EGIDs.

Non-oesophageal eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases are undersuspected clinically and underdiagnosed pathologically

BACKGROUND

Non-oesophageal gastrointestinal eosinophilic diseases (EGID) are considered rare. However, low disease awareness among clinicians and pathologists may contribute to underdiagnosis.

AIMS

To determine how frequently requests to evaluate for EGID accompany gastrointestinal biopsies and in what proportion of suspected cases pathologists address these requests, either confirming or refuting the clinical suspicion.

METHODS

All cases in which biopsy requisitions included an explicit suspicion of EGID were extracted from a large clinicopathologic database and manually reviewed for accuracy. The diagnoses for these cases were then analysed to determine whether clinical suspicions were confirmed, refuted or ignored.

RESULTS

Eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE) was suspected in 12.8% of 903,516 patients with biopsies and confirmed in 14.9% of them. A suspicion of eosinophilic gastritis accompanied <0.001% of 1,438,206 gastric biopsy sets and was confirmed in 11.5% of them; eosinophilic duodenitis was suspected in 0.02% of ~675,519 patients with duodenal biopsies and confirmed in 8.0% of these; eosinophilic colitis was mentioned in <0.001% of 2,504,485 patients with colonic biopsies and confirmed in 0.1% of them. Less than 3% of endoscopists mentioned non-oesophageal EGID in the requisition, while most expressed a clinical suspicion of Barrett oesophagus, Helicobacter pylori gastritis, celiac disease and microscopic colitis (in 21.2%, 49.2%, 1% and 6.4% of the cases, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Gastroenterologists and pathologists commonly address and diagnose EoE. In contrast, both clinical suspicion and diagnosis of non-oesophageal EGID are extremely rare. Increased clinical awareness might result in a better understanding of the epidemiology and improved diagnosis of these still elusive conditions.

Benralizumab Completely Depletes Gastrointestinal Tissue Eosinophils and Improves Symptoms in Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Disease

BACKGROUND

Previous studies of targeted eosinophil biologics in eosinophilic esophagitis have yielded mixed results. Possible explanations include incomplete eosinophil depletion with anticytokine (anti-IL-5) treatments and/or irreversible fibrotic tissue changes contributing to symptomatology.

OBJECTIVE

To characterize the therapeutic effect of eosinophil depletion in patients with hypereosinophilic syndrome with varied eosinophilic gastrointestinal (GI) disorders.

METHODS

Hematologic, histologic, endoscopic, and clinical symptoms for a subset (n = 7) of hypereosinophilic syndrome patients with GI tissue eosinophilia enrolled in a phase 2 clinical trial of benralizumab (anti-IL-5RA) were assessed before and after treatment (NCT02130882).

RESULTS

Blood and GI tissue eosinophils were completely depleted in all segments of the GI tract, and all patients reported improved GI symptoms, in some cases as early as after the first monthly dose. Some patients had recurrent symptomatic flares without recurrent peripheral or tissue eosinophilia, in most cases after prolonged symptomatic remission and in the setting of liberalization of dietary restrictions and/or tapering of background therapy. Although eosinophil-associated histologic changes improved in all segments, epithelial changes persisted in the esophagus and stomach in patients with recurrent disease flares even after 1 year of treatment. Serum tryptase and GI mast cells were generally unchanged with treatment, and increases were not associated with disease flares. Serum levels of IL-4 and IL-5 increased with benralizumab treatment (both P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Benralizumab treatment completely depleted blood and GI tissue eosinophilia in patients with eosinophilic GI disorders, but clinical response, while encouraging, was heterogeneous. Residual symptoms in some patients may reflect persistent epithelial changes in the upper GI tract.

Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Diseases Beyond Eosinophilic Esophagitis

The eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases (EGIDs) are chronic, immune-mediated conditions characterized clinically by GI symptoms and histologically by pathologic infiltration of the GI tract by eosinophils. The most well-studied is eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), but non-EoE EGIDs are becoming more frequently encountered. These have traditionally been classified by the predominant location inflammation, including eosinophilic gastritis (EoG; stomach only), eosinophilic enteritis (EoN; small bowel only), and eosinophilic colitis (EoC; colon only).(1 , 2 ) However, multiple locations can be involved (e.g. gastric and small bowel involvement), specific segments of the small bowel can be named (e.g. eosinophilic duodenitis; EoD), and efforts are underway to standardize this nomenclature. The non-EoE EGIDs are considered rare diseases, with studies of administrative databases estimating the prevalence to be approximately 3–8/100,000, or ~50,000 cases in the United States.(3 ) However, recent data suggest these conditions may be under diagnosed.(4 ) In this paper, I will review my approach to the diagnosis and management of the non-EoE EGIDs, highlighting a number of principles that can be applied in most settings.

Psychiatric Comorbidities Are Highly Prevalent in Nonesophageal Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Diseases

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The prevalence of psychiatric comorbidity in nonesophageal eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorders (EGIDs) has not been studied. We aimed to ascertain the prevalence of psychiatric diagnoses and psychiatric medication use in children, adolescents, and adults with EGIDs and to assess whether psychiatric comorbidity affects clinical presentation.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of newly diagnosed patients with a nonesophageal EGID at the University of North Carolina from 2008 to 2020. Psychiatric diagnoses and medications were extracted from medical records. We compared the clinical and demographic features of EGID patients with and without psychiatric diagnoses.

RESULTS

Of 79 patients (mean 23.3 years of age, 53% male, 78% White) with a nonesophageal EGID diagnosis, 40 (51%) were diagnosed with a comorbid psychiatric disease. Anxiety (37%) and depression (28%) were most common. There were also 40 (51%) patients treated medically for a psychiatric diagnosis. Patients with a psychiatric diagnosis were more commonly ≥18 years of age at the time of EGID diagnosis (odds ratio [OR], 3.95, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.20-13.02) and had endorsed symptoms of nausea (OR, 5.31; 95% CI, 1.33-21.22) and dysphagia (OR, 4.24; 95% CI, 1.18-15.26).

CONCLUSION

Psychiatric diagnoses were very common in nonesophageal EGID patients with approximately 7 in 10 adults and one-third of children diagnosed. Similar proportions were found for psychiatric medication use. We also found that psychiatric illness may influence age of clinical presentation and symptoms. Providers should assess for concomitant psychiatric comorbidities in EGID patients.

Quantification of Mucosal Eosinophils for the Histopathologic Diagnosis of Eosinophilic Gastritis and Duodenitis: A Primer for Practicing Pathologists

Eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases, specifically eosinophilic gastritis and duodenitis, are chronic inflammatory conditions characterized by persistent gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms and elevated levels of activated eosinophils in the GI tract. Both clinical and endoscopic findings are nonspecific, no clinical or histopathologic diagnostic guidelines are published, and disease awareness is low, both among clinicians and amongst pathologists, who tend to overlook mild or moderate increases in the density of eosinophils in GI biopsy specimens. Yet, evaluating and, at times, counting eosinophils in GI biopsies may have important clinical implications: the numbers of tissue eosinophils correlate with clinical manifestations, can be used as determinants of effective management, and are used to assess the effects of treatment. A most persuasive argument for providing a count rather than a value judgment is that patients read reports, understand numbers, and use them to help to understand the course of their disease. The objective of this primer is to provide pathologists with the tools to incorporate a quantitative assessment of eosinophilia in the diagnosis of gastric and duodenal biopsy specimens and to develop a systematic approach to their evaluation, counting, and reporting. To achieve this aim, we present our general approach to the biopsy (where to count), followed by details on the characteristics of a countable eosinophil (what to count), and provide with a set of suggestions on the counting methods (how to count). We conclude with suggestions on how to report GI tissue eosinophilia in a manner that alerts clinicians and prompts pertinent management steps.

Eosinophilic Esophagitis Symptom Scores Are High in Children Without Eosinophilic Disease

OBJECTIVES

The Pediatric Eosinophilic Esophagitis (EoE) Symptom Score version 2 (PEESSv2.0) is an EoE-specific validated metric for disease monitoring, but its use has not been explored outside of EoE. Our aim was to determine if PEESSv2.0 scores differentiate between children with EoE and non-EoE esophageal dysfunction undergoing initial esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD).

METHODS

A prospective cohort study of pediatric subjects was conducted. Children ages 1-18 undergoing initial EGD for esophageal dysfunction were enrolled. Demographics, clinical history, and child self-report and parent-proxy report PEESSv2.0 symptom scores were collected at the time of EGD. Esophageal biopsies were reviewed, and EoE was defined as >15 eosinophils/high powered field (hpf) seen in any level of the esophagus. Non-EoE was defined as <15 eosinophils/hpf.

RESULTS

Seventy-one children were included in the study from 2015 to 2018 [59% (42/71) males; mean age 9.2 years; range 1-17 years]. Fifty-eight percent (41/71) met criteria for EoE, and 42% (30/71) were labeled non-EoE. Non-EoE children and their parents had higher/worse median PEESSv2.0 total scores than those with EoE [47.0 vs 28.0 (P = 0.001) and 40.5 vs 26.5 (P = 0.012), respectively]. Non-EoE children reported higher median GERD [9.0 vs 4.0 (P = 0.003)], nausea/vomiting [9.0 vs 4.0 (P = 0.003)], and pain [11.0 vs 6.0 (P = 0.001)] subdomain scores compared to those with EoE. PEESSv2.0 dysphagia subdomain scores (child and parent-proxy) did not differ between EoE and non-EoE groups [22.0 vs 15.0 (P = 0.184) and 18.5 vs 17.4 (P = 0.330), respectively].

DISCUSSION

Total PEESSv2.0 scores were worse in non-EoE group compared to EoE group. Although PEESSv2.0 is validated for use in monitoring EoE therapy, it does not distinguish children with EoE from non-EoE esophageal dysfunction at the time of diagnostic EGD.

Impressions and aspirations from the FDA GREAT VI Workshop on Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Disorders Beyond Eosinophilic Esophagitis and Perspectives for Progress in the Field

The US Food and Drug Administration hosted a workshop on July 21, 2021, to discuss the disease characteristics, natural history, and end points to assess treatment benefit in patients with eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorders (EGIDs) beyond eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). Notably, EGIDs beyond EoE, such as eosinophilic gastritis, eosinophilic enteritis, and eosinophilic colitis, herein referred to as non-EoE EGIDs, are understudied relative to EoE. This workshop provided a forum for open discussion among stakeholders-medical professionals (including their societies and research groups), Food and Drug Administration representatives, an industry representative, and a patient representative-to facilitate drug development. Experts in many disciplines related to EGIDs, including allergy, immunology, epidemiology, gastroenterology, and pathology, and both adult and pediatric clinicians contributed. Herein, we discuss some of the insights of the material presented at the meeting and present perspectives on moving the field forward toward drug approval.

Determination of Biopsy Yield That Optimally Detects Eosinophilic Gastritis and/or Duodenitis in a Randomized Trial of Lirentelimab

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Eosinophilic gastritis (EG) and eosinophilic duodenitis (EoD), characterized by chronic gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms and increased numbers or activation of eosinophils and mast cells in the GI tract, are likely underdiagnosed. We aimed to determine rates of EG and EoD and number of biopsies required to optimize detection using screening data from a randomized trial of lirentelimab (AK002), an antibody against siglec-8 that depletes eosinophils and inhibits mast cells. We also characterized endoscopic features and symptoms of EG and EoD.

METHODS

Subjects with moderate-to-severe GI symptoms, assessed daily through a validated patient-reported outcome questionnaire, underwent endoscopy with a systematic gastric and duodenal biopsy protocol and histopathologic evaluation. EG diagnosis required presence of ≥30 eosinophils/high-power field (eos/hpf) in ≥5 hpfs and EoD required ≥30 eos/hpf in ≥3 hpfs. We analyzed diagnostic yields for EG and EoD and histologic, endoscopic, and clinical findings.

RESULTS

Of 88 subjects meeting symptom criteria, 72 were found to have EG and/or EoD (EG/EoD), including patients with no prior diagnosis of EG/EoD. We found that GI eosinophilia was patchy and that examination of multiple biopsies was required for diagnosis-an average of only 2.6 per 8 gastric biopsies and 2.2 per 4 duodenal biopsies per subject met thresholds for EG/EoD. Evaluation of multiple nonoverlapping hpfs in each of 8 gastric and 4 duodenal biopsies was required to capture 100% of EG/EoD cases. Neither endoscopic findings nor symptom severity correlated with eosinophil counts.

CONCLUSIONS

In an analysis of patients with moderate-to-severe GI symptoms participating in a clinical trial of lirentelimab for EG/EoD, we found eosinophilia to be patchy in gastric and duodenal biopsies. Counting eosinophils in at least 8 gastric and 4 duodenal biopsies is required to identify patients with EG/EoD, so they can receive appropriate treatment. (ClinicalTrials.gov, Number: NCT03496571).

Histopathology of non-coeliac gluten sensitivity

Diagnosis of non-coeliac gluten sensitivity (NCGS) remains still problematic due to the subjectiveness and lack of a specific biomarker. We aimed to compare NCGS duodenal mucosae with healthy individuals and Marsh type 1 coeliac disease (CD), to determine whether NCGS has characteristic histological features. A total of 44 healthy controls, 42 NCGS, and 44 type 1 CD patients were selected according to clinical, serological, and laboratory data. Duodenal biopsies were evaluated on H&E, CD, and CD117 for villus/crypt ratio, IEL counts/100 enterocytes, uneven distribution pattern with clusters of IELs in the villous epithelium, linear distribution of T lymphocytes in the basal lamina propria, and eosinophils and mast cells in the lamina propria. IEL counts were within normal range in controls (13 ± 7.65), normal or mildly increased in NCGS (24.7 ± 10.46), and increased in CD (58.79 ± 14.97) on CD3. The presence of uneven distribution pattern of IELs in the villous epithelium was significantly higher in NCGS (90.5%), in contrast to controls (27.3%) and CD (34.1%). The presence of linear distribution of T lymphocytes in the basal lamina propria (68.2%, 76.2%, 78.1%), eosinophil counts (6.85 ± 3.42, 6.21 ± 2.8, 7.62 ± 3.89), and mast cell counts (25.1 ± 5.1, 26 ± 2.9, 30.3 ± 4.4) was similar in controls, NCGS, and CD, respectively. In conclusion, duodenal mucosae in NCGS are characterized by preserved villous architecture, normal or mildly increased IELs with clusters, and eosinophils and mast cells within normal limits. We believe uneven distribution of IELs with clusters in the villous epithelium can be used as a supportive histopathological tool for NCGS in the right clinical setting.

Peripheral eosinophilia and hypoalbuminemia are associated with a higher biopsy diagnostic yield for eosinophilic gastroenteritis

BACKGROUND

Gastric and duodenal mucosa may appear normal in eosinophilic gastroenteritis (EGE). Adult gastroenterologists typically biopsy only in the setting of mucosal abnormalities or symptoms, while pediatric providers biopsy all patients. The biopsy yield of EGE has not been adequately evaluated.

AIMS

To evaluate the biopsy yield of EGE in a pediatric cohort and assess predictors of increased biopsy yield.

METHODS

We identified patients age 0-18 who underwent upper endoscopy. We recorded endoscopic findings, pathology, demographics, and clinical and laboratory characteristics. We identified EGE cases (>20 eosinophils per high-power field on stomach and/or duodenum biopsy). We compared characteristics between EGE and non-EGE cases, calculated biopsy diagnostic yield, and performed multivariate analysis for predictors of increased biopsy yield.

RESULTS

In 509 patients (55.6% female, mean age 10.3 years, 69.7% white, 58.7% atopic), biopsy diagnostic yield for EGE was 1.2% (6/509) among all subjects, 7.7% (3/39) for those with peripheral eosinophilia (≥500 eos/uL), 9.1% (3/33) for those with hypoalbuminemia (<3.5 g/dL), and 25.0% (3/12) for those with peripheral eosinophilia and hypoalbuminemia. The odds of EGE were 27.8 (95% CI 3.3-231.8) times greater among those with peripheral eosinophilia. The mean total biopsy surface area and number of fragments was similar between patients with and without EGE. The area under the ROC curve for blood eosinophil counts and albumin level for predicting EGE was 0.926.

CONCLUSIONS

The biopsy diagnostic yield for EGE is low but increases with peripheral eosinophilia and hypoalbuminemia. Patients with these features should have biopsies obtained, regardless of endoscopic appearance.

Anti-Siglec-8 Antibody for Eosinophilic Gastritis and Duodenitis

BACKGROUND

Eosinophilic gastritis and duodenitis are characterized by gastrointestinal mucosal eosinophilia, chronic symptoms, impaired quality of life, and a lack of adequate treatments. Mast-cell activity may contribute to the pathogenesis of the conditions. AK002 (lirentelimab) is an anti-Siglec-8 antibody that depletes eosinophils and inhibits mast cells and that has shown potential in animal models as a treatment for eosinophilic gastritis and duodenitis.

METHODS

In this phase 2 trial, we randomly assigned adults who had symptomatic eosinophilic gastritis, eosinophilic duodenitis, or both conditions in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive four monthly infusions of low-dose AK002, high-dose AK002, or placebo. The primary end point was the change in gastrointestinal eosinophil count from baseline to 2 weeks after the final dose; to maximize statistical power, we evaluated this end point in the placebo group as compared with the combined AK002 group. Secondary end points were treatment response (>30% reduction in total symptom score and >75% reduction in gastrointestinal eosinophil count) and the change in total symptom score.

RESULTS

Of the 65 patients who underwent randomization, 43 were assigned to receive AK002 and 22 were assigned to receive placebo. The mean percentage change in gastrointestinal eosinophil count was -86% in the combined AK002 group, as compared with 9% in the placebo group (least-squares mean difference, -98 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -121 to -76; P<0.001). Treatment response occurred in 63% of the patients who received AK002 and in 5% of the patients who received placebo (difference, 58 percentage points; 95% CI, 36 to 74; P<0.001). The mean change in total symptom score was -48% with AK002 and -22% with placebo (least-squares mean difference, -26 percentage points; 95% CI, -44 to -9; P = 0.004). Adverse events associated with AK002 were similar to those with placebo, with the exception of higher percentages of patients having mild-to-moderate infusion-related reactions with AK002 (60% in the combined AK002 group and 23% in the placebo group).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with eosinophilic gastritis or duodenitis, AK002 reduced gastrointestinal eosinophils and symptoms. Infusion-related reactions were more common with AK002 than with placebo. (Funded by Allakos; ENIGMA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03496571.).