Treatment Trends for Eosinophilic Esophagitis and the Other Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Diseases: Systematic Review of Clinical Trials

Biologics for eosinophilic oesophagitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Advancing the understanding of the pathophysiology of eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE) and other eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases (EGIDs) has spurred research into targeted biological therapies, while the conclusive therapeutic efficacy of biologics remains uncertain. In this review, we conducted a meta-analysis of all RCTS of biologics in the treatment of EoE to evaluate their efficacy and safety and discussed their treatment of non-EoE EGIDs.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases. Double-blind randomized controlled trials comparing biologics with placebo in patients with EoE and non-EoE EGIDs were collected and further screened for inclusion and exclusion. The caliber of the included literature was evaluated using the Cochrane risk assessment tool findings. Data extraction and meta-analysis were conducted using RevMan 5.4 and Stata 17.0. Clinical response and histological remission were the major endpoints.

RESULTS

Our search retrieved 3,237 articles. There were seven trials in total, comprising 792 people with EoE. Key outcomes of this meta-analysis include the following: Anti-IL-5 biologics exhibited statistically significant benefits in histological remission (RR 2.03 [CI 1.45-2.85]; p < 0.0001) compared to the placebo, but there was no significant difference in symptom relief (RR 1.06 [CI 0.88 to 1.28]; p = 0.53); anti-IL-4/13 biologics had significant effects on histologic improvement (RR 10.48 [CI 5.54-19.82]; p < 0.00001) and symptom related score reduction (RR 1.44 [CI 1.08-1.93]; p = 0.01), with a better outcome for endoscopic remission than with placebo (SMD-1.06 [CI-1.26-0.86], p < 0.00001); no statistically significant differences in adverse effects were observed between the intervention and control groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that the biologics currently being investigated are considered safe and effective treatments for EoE, while their efficiency varies. However, the discussion of biologics in non-pharyngitis EGID is hampered by a lack of research, necessitating more research in high-quality trials.

Clinical Characteristics, Endoscopic Findings, and Treatment Outcomes in Lymphocytic Esophagitis Compared With Eosinophilic Esophagitis

INTRODUCTION

Lymphocytic esophagitis (LyE) and eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) are immune-mediated esophageal diseases. Clinical characteristics, endoscopic findings, and treatment outcomes of LyE were compared with EoE.

METHODS

This was an international retrospective study on adults enrolled at 3 centers in Europe. We recorded clinical characteristics and endoscopy findings at baseline and symptoms, histology, and endoscopy outcomes after treatment of patients with LyE and EoE.

RESULTS

Demographics, clinical presentation, comorbidities, and endoscopy findings were largely different in 35 patients with LyE compared with 59 patients with EoE. Proton pump inhibitor response was generally lower in LyE.

DISCUSSION

LyE is clinically different from EoE, but differences in treatment response need further investigation.

The Effectiveness of Budesonide Once Daily as Maintenance Treatment of Eosinophilic Esophagitis

BACKGROUND

Swallowed topical corticosteroids (STC) are an effective first-line therapy for patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), both for induction and maintenance of remission. All interventional trials with STC used twice-daily dosing regimens. However, in other inflammatory gastrointestinal disorders, corticosteroids are given once daily (OD) with equal outcomes and improved compliance.

GOALS

To evaluate the effectiveness of topical budesonide maintenance treatment in a once-daily dosing schedule.

STUDY

Retrospective analysis of confirmed patients with EoE, treated with topical budesonide as maintenance therapy OD, with adequate follow-up available. Patients currently treated with budesonide were contacted to fill out online questionnaires regarding symptoms and health-related quality of life (HRQOL). The primary end point was histologic remission, defined as peak eosinophil count (PEC) <15 eosinophils per high power field (HPF) after >12 weeks of budesonide OD.

RESULTS

We included 29 patients on STC OD (1 mg, N=28; 0.5 mg, N=1), either budesonide orodispersible tablet (BOT, Jorveza, Dr. Falk Pharma; N=12) or budesonide viscous solution (BVS; N=17). After a median follow-up of 767 days on OD dosing (range: 103 to 2396), 86% of patients were in histologic remission. Four patients had histologic disease activity, of which one was treated with BOT. Two patients experienced a slight increase in PEC after dose reduction of BVS to OD (to PEC of 25 and 35/HPF, respectively). However, after switching the formulation to BOT OD they achieved histologic remission.

CONCLUSIONS

In this retrospective study, we demonstrated favorable results in the majority of patients treated with budesonide 1 mg OD as maintenance treatment for eosinophilic esophagitis.

The Dynamic Evolution of Eosinophilic Esophagitis

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic, immune-mediated inflammatory condition of the esophagus characterized by eosinophilic infiltration, and hallmark symptoms of esophageal dysfunction such as dysphagia and food impaction. Over the past three decades, EoE has been recognized as a distinct clinical entity, distinguished from gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) through advancements in diagnostic techniques, particularly endoscopy with biopsy. The rising global prevalence of EoE reflects enhanced diagnostic awareness, evolving criteria, and environmental along with lifestyle changes. The etiology of EoE is multifactorial, involving genetic predispositions, immune dysregulation, the gut microbiome, and environmental triggers, including dietary allergens and aeroallergens. Key mechanisms include a type 2 helper T-cell (Th2)-driven immune response, epithelial barrier dysfunction, and genetic variants such as CAPN14 and TSLP. Chronic inflammation leads to tissue remodeling, fibrosis, and esophageal narrowing, contributing to disease progression and complications. Management strategies have evolved to include dietary elimination, proton pump inhibitors, topical corticosteroids, biologics, and endoscopic interventions for fibrostenotic complications. Emerging therapies targeting cytokines such as interleukin (IL)-4, IL-5, and IL-13, alongside novel diagnostic tools like the esophageal string test and Cytosponge, offer promising avenues for improved disease control and non-invasive monitoring. Long-term surveillance combining endoscopic and histological evaluations with biomarkers and non-invasive tools is critical to optimizing outcomes and preventing complications. Future research should address gaps in understanding the role of the esophageal microbiome, refine therapeutic approaches, and develop personalized strategies to improve disease management and patient quality of life.

Exploring X: barriers to care for eosinophilic esophagitis

Patients with chronic diseases have increasingly turned to social media to discuss symptoms and share the challenges they face with disease management. The primary aim of this study is to use naturally occurring data from X (formerly known as Twitter) to identify barriers to care faced by individuals affected by eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). For this qualitative study, the X application programming interface with academic research access was used to search for posts that referenced EoE between 1 January 2019 and 10 August 2022. The posts were identified as being either related to barriers to care for EoE or not. Those related to barriers to care were further categorized by the type of barrier that was expressed. A total of 8636 EoE-related posts were annotated of which 12.1% were related to barriers to care in EoE. The themes that emerged about barriers to care included: dietary challenges, limited treatment options, lack of community support, lack of physician awareness of disease, misinformation, cost of care, lack of patient belief in disease or trust in physician, and limited access to care. Saturation of themes was achieved. This study highlights barriers to care in EoE using readily accessible social media data that is not derived from a curated research setting. Identifying these obstacles is key to improving care for this chronic disease.

Adaptive Behaviors, Esophageal Anxiety, and Hypervigilance Modify the Association Between Dysphagia Perception and Histological Disease Activity in Eosinophilic Esophagitis

INTRODUCTION

Adaptive behaviors at mealtime, esophageal symptom-specific anxiety and hypervigilance may affect dysphagia reporting in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), but this has not been investigated. Moreover, the relationship between such confounding factors and histological disease activity (HDA) is unclear.

METHODS

This was a prospective study on adults with EoE. Dysphagia, anxiety, and hypervigilance were assessed using specific questionnaires (i.e., modified dysphagia symptom questionnaire [mDSQ], Dysphagia Symptom Score [DSS], and Esophageal Hypervigilance and Anxiety Scale). Adaptive behaviors were assessed using the Pisa EoE Adaptation Questionnaire. Appropriate statistics was used to investigate correlation between dysphagia, anxiety, hypervigilance, adaptive behaviors, and HDA.

RESULTS

Ninety-five patients were included. Esophageal anxiety, hypervigilance, and use of adaptive behaviors were found in about 50% of patients with EoE. Esophageal anxiety and hypervigilance were significantly higher ( P = 0.03 for both), and adaptive behaviors were significantly more prevalent in histologically active EoE compared with EoE in remission (76.8% vs 25.6%, P < 0.001). As a standalone measurement, mDSQ and DSS had area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 77.7% and 75.3% for predicting HDA. Adjustments of mDSQ and DSS based on individual Esophageal Hypervigilance and Anxiety Scale scores and adaptive behaviors at mealtime significantly improved the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of mDSQ and DSS to 86.6% and 84.3%, respectively ( P < 0.05 for both).

DISCUSSION

Use of adaptive behaviors, higher esophageal anxiety and hypervigilance are associated with active EoE and represent clinical markers of HDA. Adaptive behaviors provide complementary clinical information that is not detected by symptoms alone. The assessment of adaptive behaviors, anxiety, and hypervigilance improves the correlation between clinical and HDA in EoE.

Associations of Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Disorders with Other Gastrointestinal and Allergic Diseases

Eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorders (EGIDs) are becoming more common causing significant suffering and reduced quality of life. These conditions can affect different parts of the digestive system, either individually or in combination. Recognition of their link to allergic disorders or other gastrointestinal (GI) diseases has raised questions about their shared underlying mechanisms, which has had implications for diagnosis and management. The authors critically examine the current understanding of the connection between EGIDs and allergic conditions (ie, atopic dermatitis, allergic rhinitis, asthma, and food allergy) and GI diseases (ie, inflammatory bowel disease, celiac disease, gastroesophageal reflux disease, and motility disorders).

Dupilumab Can Induce Remission of Eosinophilic Gastritis and Duodenitis: A Retrospective Case Series

INTRODUCTION

Noneosinophilic esophagitis eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorders (non-EoE-EGIDs) have limited treatment options to induce histologic and clinical remission. Dupilumab is a human monoclonal antibody against the interleukin-4 receptor ɑ subunit, which has been reported to induce improvement in pediatric patients with non-EoE-EGIDs.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective chart review to identify if patients with eosinophilic gastritis (EoG) and/or eosinophilic duodenitis (EoD) experience clinical and histologic remission with dupilumab.

RESULTS

Twelve patients were included (2 patients with EoG and EoD, 3 patients with EoG only, and 7 patients with EoD only). All patients experienced improvement of at least 1 symptom on dupilumab, 3 patients (25%) had no change in severity of 1 or more of their symptoms, and no patients had worsening symptoms. On dupilumab, 2 patients with EoG (40%) and 3 patients with EoD (33.3%) were completely asymptomatic. Histologic changes were investigated in a subanalysis including 8 patients (2 patients with EoG and EoD, 2 patients with EoG only, and 4 patients with EoD only). Median peak gastric eosinophil counts in patients with EoG reduced from 80.5 eos/hpf (min-max 32-150, Q1-Q3 45.5-111) to 7.5 eos/hpf (min-max 0-28, Q1-Q3 1.5-16.8). Median peak duodenal eosinophil counts in patients with EoD reduced from 39 eos/hpf (min-max 30-50, Q1-Q3 37.3-46.3) to 16.5 eos/hpf (min-max 0-50, Q1-Q3 8-38.5). All 4 patients (100%) with EoG and 4 patients (66.6%) with EoD had histologic remission on dupilumab.

DISCUSSION

In this retrospective case series, we showed preliminary evidence that dupilumab may be effective in inducing histologic and symptomatic remission in patients with non-EoE-EGIDs.

Comparison of drugs for active eosinophilic oesophagitis: systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

There is currently no recommendation regarding preferred drugs for active eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE) because their relative efficacy is unclear. We conducted an up-to-date network meta-analysis to compare proton pump inhibitors, off-label and EoE-specific topical steroids, and biologics in EoE.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Embase Classic and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception to June 2023. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing efficacy of all drugs versus each other, or placebo, in adults and adolescents with active EoE. Results were reported as pooled relative risks with 95% CIs to summarise effect of each comparison tested, with drugs ranked according to P score RESULTS: Seventeen RCTs were eligible for systematic review. Of these, 15 studies containing 1813 subjects with EoE reported extractable data for the network meta-analysis. For histological remission defined as ≤6 eosinophils/high-power field (HPF), lirentelimab 1 mg/kg monthly ranked first. For histological remission defined as ≤15 eosinophils/HPF, budesonide orally disintegrating tablet (BOT) 1 mg two times per day ranked first. For failure to achieve symptom improvement, BOT 1 mg two times per day and budesonide oral suspension (BOS) 2 mg two times per day were significantly more efficacious than placebo. For failure to achieve endoscopic improvement based on the EoE Endoscopic Reference Score, BOT 1 mg two times per day and BOS 1 mg two times per day or 2 mg two times per day were significantly more efficacious than placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

Although this network meta-analysis supports the efficacy of most available drugs over placebo for EoE treatment, significant heterogeneity in eligibility criteria and outcome measures among available trials hampers the establishment of a solid therapeutic hierarchy.

Six-Food Elimination Diet Is Less Effective During Pollen Season in Adults With Eosinophilic Esophagitis Sensitized to Pollens

INTRODUCTION

The role of inhaled and swallowed aeroallergens in treatment outcomes of adult patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is unclear. We hypothesized that the pollen season contributes to the failure of the 6-food elimination diet (SFED) in EoE.

METHODS

We compared outcomes of patients with EoE who underwent SFED during vs outside of the pollen season. Consecutive adult patients with EoE who underwent SFED and skin prick test (SPT) for birch and grass pollen were included. Individual pollen sensitization and pollen count data were analyzed to define whether each patient had been assessed during or outside of the pollen season after SFED. All patients had active EoE (≥15 eosinophils/high-power field) before SFED and adhered to the diet under the supervision of a dietitian.

RESULTS

Fifty-eight patients were included, 62.0% had positive SPT for birch and/or grass, whereas 37.9% had negative SPT. Overall, SFED response was 56.9% (95% confidence interval, 44.1%-68.8%). When stratifying response according to whether the assessment had been performed during or outside of the pollen season, patients sensitized to pollens showed significantly lower response to SFED during compared with outside of the pollen season (21.4% vs 77.3%; P = 0.003). In addition, during the pollen season, patients with pollen sensitization had significantly lower response to SFED compared with those without sensitization (21.4% vs 77.8%; P = 0.01).

DISCUSSION

Pollens may have a role in sustaining esophageal eosinophilia in sensitized adults with EoE despite avoidance of trigger foods. The SPT for pollens may identify patients less likely to respond to the diet during the pollen season.

Current and Novel Therapies for Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Diseases

Eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases (EGIDs) are an emerging group of pathological entities characterized by an eosinophil-predominant infiltration of different tracts of the gut in the absence of secondary causes of eosinophilia. According to the specific tract of the gut involved, EGIDs can be classified into eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), eosinophilic gastritis (EoG), eosinophilic enteritis (EoN), and eosinophilic colitis (EoC). The epidemiology of EGIDs is evolving rapidly. EoE, once considered a rare disease, now has an incidence and prevalence of 7.7 new cases per 100,000 inhabitants per years and 34.4 cases per 100,000 inhabitants per year, respectively. Fewer data are available regarding non-EoE EGIDs, whose prevalence are estimated to range between 2.1 and 17.6 in 100,000 individuals, depending on age, sex, and ethnicity. Diagnosis requires the presence of suggestive symptoms, endoscopic biopsies showing abnormal values of eosinophils infiltrating the gut, and exclusion of secondary causes of eosinophilia. EoE typically presents with dysphagia and episodes of food bolus impactions, while EoG, EoN, and EoC may all present with abdominal pain and diarrhea, with or without other non-specific symptoms. In addition, although different EGIDs are currently classified as different entities, there may be overlap between different diseases in the same patient. Despite EGIDs being relatively novel pathological entities, the research on possible treatments is rapidly growing. In this regard, several randomized controlled trials are currently ongoing to investigate novel molecules, including ad-hoc steroid formulations, immunosuppressants, and mostly monoclonal antibodies that target the specific molecular mediators of EGIDs. This narrative review provides an up-to-date overview of available and investigational drugs for different EGIDs.

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.

Efficacy of a Second PPI Course After Steroid-Induced Remission in Eosinophilic Esophagitis Refractory to Initial PPI Therapy

INTRODUCTION

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) requires maintenance therapy to avoid recurrence. We investigated the efficacy of a second course of proton pump inhibitors (scPPIs) to maintain steroid-induced histological remission (HR) in patients with EoE who had previously failed induction of remission with PPIs.

METHODS

We retrospectively included 18 patients who achieved HR with topical steroids but could not be maintained on long-term topical steroids. Treatment outcomes were assessed after 12 weeks of scPPIs.

RESULTS

Most of the patients (67%) maintained HR with high-dose PPI monotherapy at week 12.

DISCUSSION

scPPIs might work as a maintenance strategy in primary PPI nonresponder EoE patients.