Budesonide Oral Suspension Improves Symptomatic, Endoscopic, and Histologic Parameters Compared With Placebo in Patients With Eosinophilic Esophagitis

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

INTRODUCTION

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Identification of gaps in the delivery of high-quality care of patients with eosinophilic esophagitis

Quality indicators (QIs) are standardized metrics that can be used to quantify health care delivery and identify important areas for practice improvement. Nine QIs pertaining to the diagnosis and management of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) were recently established. We therefore aimed to identify existing gaps in care using these QIs. This is a retrospective, multicenter study utilizing recently established EoE QIs to evaluate practice patterns among adult gastroenterologists in the diagnosis and management of EoE. Three patient cohorts of 30 patients each presenting with dysphagia, food impaction, and new diagnosis of EoE, respectively, were obtained, yielding 120 patients per site to assess for every QI. Summary statistics were reported across two main themes: diagnosis and management. Subsequent analysis of gaps in care was then performed. The domain of diagnosis of EoE (QI 1 and 2) had the most notable gap in care with only 55% of the presenting patients undergoing appropriate evaluation for EoE. The domain of management of EoE had overall higher QI fulfillment-however it also contained significant intra-category variation in care. Notably, while 79% of patients had clinical follow-up within 1 year from remission, only 54% underwent surveillance endoscopy within 2 years of remission. In contrast, 100% of patients with symptomatic strictures independent of histologic response underwent endoscopic dilation (QI 4). Management approaches for EoE are evolving and variation in care delivery exists. We identified significant gaps in both diagnosis of EoE especially amongst patients presenting with index food impaction and long term management of EoE, when retrospectively evaluating care patterns using newly established QIs. This is the first study of its kind to utilize these previously established QIs to objectively identify care gaps that exist in EoE amongst several institutions. These findings also highlight the importance of QIs and standardization of management of complex chronic diseases like EoE to help bridge these gaps and provide a framework to measure adherence to these best practices.

The 1st EoETALY Consensus on the Diagnosis and Management of Eosinophilic Esophagitis-Current Treatment and Monitoring

The present document constitutes Part 2 of the EoETALY Consensus Statements guideline on the diagnosis and management of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) developed by experts in the field of EoE across Italy (i.e., EoETALY Consensus Group). Part 1 was published as a different document, and included three chapters discussing 1) definition, epidemiology, and pathogenesis; 2) clinical presentation and natural history and 3) diagnosis of EoE. The present work provides guidelines on the management of EoE in two final chapters: 4) treatment and 5) monitoring and follow-up, and also includes considerations on knowledge gaps and a proposed research agenda for the coming years. The guideline was developed through a Delphi process, with grading of the strength and quality of the evidence of the recommendations performed according to accepted GRADE criteria.This document has received the endorsement of three Italian national societies including the Italian Society of Gastroenterology (SIGE), the Italian Society of Neurogastroenterology and Motility (SINGEM), and the Italian Society of Allergology, Asthma, and Clinical Immunology (SIAAIC). The guidelines also involved the contribution of members of ESEO Italia, the Italian Association of Families Against EoE.

Eosinophilic esophagitis: Current concepts in diagnosis and management

ABSTRACT

Eosinophilic esophagitis is an antigen-mediated chronic inflammatory disorder that has risen in incidence and prevalence over the past 2 decades. The clinical presentation is variable and consists of mainly esophageal symptoms such as dysphagia, heartburn, food impaction, and vomiting. Current management relies on dietary elimination, proton-pump inhibitors, and topical corticosteroids with different response rates and relapses after treatment discontinuation. With a better understanding of the underlying pathophysiology, many molecules emerged recently as targeted treatment including dupilumab (IL4/IL13 blocker), as the first FDA-approved biological treatment, which has changed the management paradigm.

Esophageal remodeling in eosinophilic esophagitis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a Th2 immune/antigen-mediated disorder characterized by esophageal dysfunction and eosinophilic inflammation. Worsening dysphagia and food impactions are significant complications associated with esophageal remodeling and fibrostenotic disease. This review highlights the most recent research findings pertaining to mechanisms of sub-epithelial fibrosis in EoE, current diagnostic tools, and therapeutic approaches.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent studies leveraging publicly available single cell sequencing databases and comparative proteomics have furthered our understanding of the mechanisms mediating fibrosis. Fibroblast crosstalk with the extracellular matrix and with epithelial, endothelial, and T cells have been implicated, with the likely existence of multiple fibroblast sub-types. Accurate diagnosis of remodeling with biopsies remains a challenge due to inadequate depth of sampling. Web-based tools incorporating epithelial findings show promise in predicting subepithelial fibrosis. Impedance planimetry with esophageal distensibility measurements are increasingly utilized tools to assess fibrostenotic severity. Immunostaining and luminal captured proteins associated with remodeling show promise as potential molecular markers of fibrosis. Anti-inflammatory therapy may improve esophageal fibrosis and distensibility, although specific fibrosis-targeted therapy is lacking.

SUMMARY

Recent studies highlight novel mechanisms of fibrosis in EoE. Improved understanding of these mechanisms may lead to novel diagnostic strategies and therapies, and thereby inform treatment decisions.

Pharmacokinetic Evaluation of Oral Viscous Budesonide in Paediatric Patients with Eosinophilic Oesophagitis in Repaired Oesophageal Atresia

Eosinophilic oesophagitis is a long-term complication of oesophageal atresia (EA), an uncommon condition that affects approximately 1 in 3500 infants. An exploratory, open-label phase 2 clinical trial was conducted in paediatric eosinophilic oesophagitis after oesophageal atresia (EoE-EA) to assess the safety, pharmacokinetics, and efficacy of oral viscous budesonide (OVB). In total, eight patients were enrolled in the study and assigned to a twice-daily dosing regimen of either 0.8 or 1 mg OVB, depending on age and height, administered for 12 weeks. OVB was safe and effective in the treatment of EoE-EA. The current investigation focuses on the pharmacokinetics of budesonide and the impact of an oral viscous formulation on its absorption and bioavailability. Using a non-linear mixed effects approach, two distinct absorption profiles were identified, despite marked interindividual variability in drug concentrations. Budesonide exposure was higher than previously reported in children following oral inhalation. Even though no significant effect has been observed on serum cortisol levels, future studies should consider exploring different doses, schedules, and/or treatment durations, as there may be an opportunity to reduce the risk of cortisol suppression.

Reducing Eosinophil Counts in Eosinophilic Esophagitis in Children Is Associated With Reduction in Later Stricture Development

INTRODUCTION

There are limited longitudinal data on the impact of chronic therapy on the natural history of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), a chronic allergic disease of the esophagus. The purpose of this study was to evaluate if patients with well-controlled EoE were less likely to develop fibrostenotic complications.

METHODS

Subjects were identified from a database of pediatric patients with EoE at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia started in 2000. Patients were then searched in adult medical records to identify patients who transitioned care. All office visits, emergency department visits, and endoscopic, histologic, and imaging reports were reviewed for the primary outcome of strictures and the secondary outcomes of food impactions and dysphagia. Cox proportional hazard regression was performed for outcomes.

RESULTS

One hundred five patients were identified with the mean follow-up of 11.4 ± 4.9 years. 52.3% (n = 55) had a period of histologic disease control defined as ≥2 consecutive endoscopies with histologic remission. These patients were less likely to develop strictures compared with patients who did not have a period of histologic control (HR 0.232; 95% CI 0.084-0.64, P = 0.005). Patients who were diagnosed at younger ages were less likely to develop strictures. Presentation with dysphagia or impaction was associated with higher rate of stricture development.

DISCUSSION

In this cohort study with > 10 years of follow-up, children with EoE with a period of histologic disease control and diagnosed at younger ages were less likely to develop esophageal strictures. While this suggests histologic remission is associated with reduction of remodeling complications, additional prospective data with long-term follow-up are needed.

Histological Outcomes of Pharmacological Interventions in Eosinophilic Esophagitis for Adults and Children: A Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

INTRODUCTION

Multiple pharmacological interventions have been studied for managing eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). We performed a comprehensive systematic review and network meta-analysis of all available randomized controlled trials (RCT) to assess the efficacy and safety of these interventions in EoE in adults and children.

METHODS

We performed a comprehensive review of Embase, PubMed, MEDLINE OVID, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science through May 10, 2023. We performed frequentist approach network meta-analysis using random effects model. We calculated the odds ratio (OR) with 95% CI for dichotomous outcomes.

RESULTS

Our search yielded 25 RCTs with 25 discrete interventions and 2067 patients. Compared with placebo, the following interventions improved histology (using study definitions) in decreasing order on ranking: orodispersible budesonide (ODB) low dose, ODB high dose, oral viscous budesonide (OVB) high dose, fluticasone tablet 1.5 mg twice daily, fluticasone 3 mg twice daily, esomeprazole, dupilumab every 2 weeks, dupilumab weekly, OVB medium dose, fluticasone 3 mg daily, cendakimab 180 mg, prednisone, swallowed fluticasone, fluticasone tablet 1.5 mg daily, OVB low dose, reslizumab 3 mg/kg, reslizumab 1 mg/kg, and reslizumab 2 mg/kg.

CONCLUSIONS

Network meta-analysis demonstrates histological efficacy of multiple medications for EoE. Because of the heterogeneity and large effect size, we recommend more trials comparing pharmacotherapeutic interventions with each other and placebo. An important limitation of this study is absence of clinical efficacy data due to insufficient data. Other limitations include heterogeneity of operator, population, and outcome analysis.

Pediatric asthma comorbidities: Global impact and unmet needs

Real-world data on the range and impact of comorbid health conditions that affect pediatric asthma are scant, especially from developing countries. Lack of data hinders effective diagnosis, treatment, and overall management of these complex cases. We, hereby, describe the common pediatric asthma comorbid conditions in terms of evidence for association, potential mechanisms of impact on asthma control, and treatment benefit. Obesity, upper airway allergies, dysfunctional breathing, multiple sensitizations, depressive disorders, food allergy, and gastro-esophageal reflux are common associations with difficult-to-treat asthma. On the other hand, asthma symptoms and/or management may negatively impact the well-being of children through drug adverse effects, worsening of anaphylaxis symptoms, and disturbing mental health. Awareness of these ailments may be crucial for designing the optimum care for each asthmatic child individually and may ultimately improve the quality of life of patients and their families. A multidisciplinary team of physicians is required to identify and manage such comorbidities aiming to mitigate the over-use of asthma pharmacotherapy. Asthma research should target relevant real-world difficulties encountered at clinical practice and focus on interventions that would mitigate the impact of such comorbidities. Finally, policymakers and global healthcare organizations are urged to recognize pediatric asthma control as a healthcare priority and allocate resources for research and clinical interventions. In other words, global asthma control needs support by compassionate scientific partnership.

Mucoadhesive Budesonide Solution for the Treatment of Pediatric Eosinophilic Esophagitis

Eosinophilic Esophagitis is an antigen-mediated inflammatory disease characterized by thickening of the esophageal wall, leading to dysphagia, vomiting, reflux, and abdominal pain. This disease can be treated with a therapeutic approach ranging from diet to pharmacological therapy. Jorveza® (budesonide) and Dupixent® (dupilumab) are treatments for Eosinophilic Esophagitis approved by the European Medicines Agency in adults but not in children. Budesonide-based extemporaneous oral liquid suspensions could be prepared for pediatric use. The main limit of this formulation is that budesonide needs a longer residence time on the esophageal mucosa to solubilize and diffuse in it to exert its local anti-inflammatory effect. Herein, we propose the development of an extemporaneous mucoadhesive oral budesonide solution for the pediatric population. A liquid vehicle containing hydroxypropyl-beta-cyclodextrin as a complexing agent and carboxymethylcellulose sodium as a mucoadhesive excipient was used to prepare budesonide-based formulations. A stable solution at a concentration of 0.7 mg/mL was successfully prepared and characterized. The formulation showed rheological and mucoadhesive properties suitable for an Eosinophilic Esophagitis local prolonged treatment. In this way, pharmacists can prepare stable budesonide-based mucoadhesive solutions, providing both patients and physicians with a new therapeutic option for Eosinophilic Esophagitis pediatric treatment.

Eosinophilic Esophagitis: The Role of Steroids and the Dose, Duration, and Delivery of Steroid Therapy

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic immune-mediated condition characterized by the eosinophil infiltration of the esophagus (>15 per high power field). Recently, there has been an increase in both the incidence and prevalence of the disease. The common modalities of treatment are dietary modification, proton pump inhibitors, and steroids. However, the United States Food and Drug Administration has not approved any drugs for the treatment of EoE. This review has discussed the role of steroids in the treatment of EoE, focusing on the various formulations of the drug, its dosage, drug delivery, and duration of therapy. The study also covers the common outcomes of steroid therapy and its side effects.

Assessment of the Severity and the Remission Criteria in Eosinophilic Esophagitis

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is an immune-mediated disease that manifests with dysphagia and is characterized by the predominantly eosinophilic infiltration of the esophageal mucosa. Several instruments have been developed to assess the symptoms of EoE: the Daily Symptom Questionnaire (DSQ), EoE Activity Index (EEsAI), Pediatric EoE Symptom Severity (PEESSv2), etc. The use of the EREFS is a gold standard for endoscopic diagnosis. The EoE histologic scoring system (EoEHSS) was elaborated for the assessment of histological features in EoE. However, the remission criteria are not clearly defined and vary greatly in different studies. Gastroenterologists establish the severity of EoE mainly based on endoscopic findings. At the same time, EoE requires a multidisciplinary approach. The recently developed Index of Severity of Eosinophilic Esophagitis (I-SEE) that is built on symptoms, endoscopic findings, and histological features is promising.

Treatment of Pediatric Eosinophilic Esophagitis: Traditional and Novel Therapies

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review presents and summarizes the existing studies on the treatment goals and options for pediatric eosinophilic esophagitis utilizing rigorous peer-reviewed literature.

RECENT FINDINGS

In addition to traditional treatments, emerging biologic therapies continue to evolve the approach to treating pediatric eosinophilic esophagitis. Well defined treatment goals will aid the continued development of new therapies. Further, innovative assessment tools have changed how the clinician is able to assess the effectiveness of therapies with a trend toward less invasive options. The management of pediatric eosinophilic esophagitis continues to evolve with the advent of both novel treatment options and assessment tools. Treatment choices, with benefits and risks involved, should be presented to families upon diagnosis and tailored towards the individual patient and likelihood of adherence and success. Biologic therapy for EoE presents an exciting option for both first line therapy and escalation for those with severe or unresponsive disease.

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.

Qualitative assessment of the suitability of the Dysphagia Symptom Questionnaire to monitor dysphagia in children aged 7-10 years with eosinophilic esophagitis

BACKGROUND

The Dysphagia Symptom Questionnaire (DSQ) is a patient-reported outcome measure that assesses the frequency and severity of dysphagia in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE); however, it has only been validated for use in patients with EoE aged 11-40 years. This study examined the content validity of the DSQ and its usability on an electronic handheld device in children aged 7-10 years with EoE.

METHODS

In this qualitative, observational cohort study, participants were recruited to partake in two rounds of interviews. During visit 1, a cognitive interview examined EoE-associated concepts and the appropriateness of the DSQ for assessing dysphagia. Participants completed the DSQ daily for 2 weeks, and DSQ scores were calculated. After 2 weeks, a second interview assessed the usability of the DSQ on the electronic device and the burden associated with completing it daily.

RESULTS

Overall, 16 participants were included (aged 7-8 years: n = 8; aged 9-10 years: n = 8); most were male (75%) and white (81%), and the mean (standard deviation [SD]) age was 8.4 (1.3) years. The most commonly reported EoE-associated concept was 'trouble with swallowing' (63% [10/16]). Most participants reported that the questions were 'easy to complete' and 'relevant to someone with EoE and dysphagia'. Overall, participants reported understanding the questions and associated responses; however, further probing demonstrated inconsistent comprehension. Key challenging concepts included 'solid food', 'trouble swallowing', 'vomit', and 'relief'; some participants also reported difficulty differentiating between pain levels (31% [4/13]). Most caregivers reported that their child had experienced dysphagia (94% [15/16]); however, mean (SD) DSQ scores over the study period were low (7.3 [7.4]), suggesting infrequent and mild dysphagia, or a lack of comprehension of the questions. Most participants reported that completing the DSQ on the electronic device was easy (93% [14/15]) and they would be willing to complete it for longer than 2 weeks (73% [11/15]).

CONCLUSIONS

Difficulties with comprehension and comprehensiveness suggest that the DSQ may not be sufficiently comprehensive for use in all patients in this population, and wording/phrasing changes are required before use in a clinical trial setting.

Validation of Epigenetic Markers for the Prediction of Response to Topical Corticosteroid Treatment in Eosinophilic Esophagitis

INTRODUCTION

We previously identified 18 CpG methylation biomarkers associated with treatment response to topical corticosteroids (tCS) in eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). In this study, in an independent cohort, we assessed the validity of these CpG sites as treatment response biomarkers.

METHODS

DNA was extracted from prospectively biobanked esophageal biopsies from patients with newly diagnosed EoE enrolled in a randomized trial of 2 tCS formulations. Histologic response was defined as <15 eosinophils per high-power field. Pretreatment DNA methylation was assayed on the Illumina Human MethylationEPIC BeadChip. Logistic regression and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve analyses, adjusting for chip, position on the chip, age, sex, and baseline eosinophil count, were computed to test for an association between DNA methylation and treatment response at the 18 previously identified CpG sites.

RESULTS

We analyzed 88 patients (58 histologic responders, 30 nonresponders), with a mean age of 38 ± 16 years, 64% male, 97% White race. Of the 18 CpG sites, 13 met quality control criteria, and 3 were associated with responder status ( P < 0.012), including sites within UNC5B (cg26152017), ITGA6 (cg01044293), and LRRC8A (cg13962589). All 3 showed evidence of reduced methylation in treatment responders, consistent with the original discovery associations. The predictive probability for nonresponse with all 3 CpG sites was strong (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve = 0.79).

DISCUSSION

We validated epigenetic biomarkers (CpG methylation sites) for the prediction of tCS response in patients with EoE in an independent population. While not all previously identified markers replicated, 3 demonstrated a relatively high predictive probability for response to treatment and hold promise for guiding tCS treatment in EoE.

Oral Viscous Budesonide in Children With Eosinophilic Esophagitis After Repaired Esophageal Atresia: A Clinical Trial

OBJECTIVES

A high prevalence of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) has been reported in children with repaired esophageal atresia (EA). Topical steroids proved to be an effective and safe therapy in EoE, although not approved in pediatrics. We report the results of the first clinical trial of oral viscous budesonide (OVB) performed in children with EoE after repaired esophageal atresia (EoE-EA).

METHODS

This open-label, single-arm, phase 2 clinical trial with randomized pharmacokinetic sampling, was conducted at the Bambino Gesù Children's Hospital between September 2019 and June 2021. EoE-EA patients received an age-banded dose of OVB twice daily for 12 weeks and were endoscopically evaluated. The primary endpoint was the rate of patients achieving histological remission. Secondary endpoints included clinical and endoscopic benefit after treatment, and safety assessments.

RESULTS

Eight consecutive EA-EoE patients were enrolled (median age 9.1 years, interquartile range 5.5). Of these, 5 received 0.8 mg and 3 received 1.0 mg twice daily of OVB. Histological remission was obtained in all but 1 patient (87.5%). The clinical score showed significant improvement at the end of treatment in all patients. No endoscopic features of EoE were found after treatment. No treatment-emergent adverse event occurred.

CONCLUSION

OVB is an effective, safe, and well-tolerated formulation of budesonide for use in pediatric patients with EoE-EA.

Medical treatment of eosinophilic esophagitis

BACKGROUND

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic antigen-mediated eosinophilic inflammatory disease isolated to the esophagus. As a clinicopathologic disorder, a diagnosis of EoE requires a constellation of clinical symptoms of esophageal dysfunction and histologic findings (at least 15 eosinophils/high-powered microscope field (eos/hpf)). Current guidelines no longer require the failure of response to proton pump inhibitor medications to establish a diagnosis of EoE, but continue to suggest the exclusion of other etiologies of esophageal eosinophilia. The treatment goals for EoE are improvement in clinical symptoms, resolution of esophageal eosinophilia and other histologic abnormalities, endoscopic improvement, improved quality of life, improved esophageal function, minimized adverse effects of treatment, and prevention of disease progression and subsequent complications. Currently, there is no cure for EoE, making long-term treatment necessary. Standard treatment modalities include dietary modifications, esophageal dilation, and pharmacologic therapy. Effective pharmacologic therapies include corticosteroids, rapidly emerging biological therapies, and proton pump inhibitor medications.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of medical interventions for people with eosinophilic esophagitis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, and WHO ICTRP to 3 March 2023.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any medical intervention or food elimination diet for the treatment of eosinophilic esophagitis, either alone or in combination, to any other intervention (including placebo).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Pairs of review authors independently selected studies and conducted data extraction and risk of bias assessment. We expressed outcomes as a risk ratio (RR) and as the mean or standardized mean difference (MD/SMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI). We assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE. Our primary outcomes were: clinical, histological, and endoscopic improvement, and withdrawals due to adverse events. Secondary outcomes were: serious and total adverse events, and quality of life.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 41 RCTs with 3253 participants. Eleven studies included pediatric patients while the rest recruited both children and adults. Four studies were in patients with inactive disease while the rest were in patients with active disease. We identified 19 intervention comparisons. In this abstract we present the results of the primary outcomes for the two main comparisons: corticosteroids versus placebo and biologics versus placebo, based on the prespecified outcomes defined of the primary studies. Fourteen studies compared corticosteroids to placebo for induction of remission and the risk of bias for these studies was mostly low. Corticosteroids may lead to slightly better clinical improvement (20% higher), measured dichotomously (risk ratio (RR) 1.74, 95% CI 1.08 to 2.80; 6 studies, 583 participants; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) = 4; low certainty), and may lead to slightly better clinical improvement, measured continuously (standard mean difference (SMD) 0.51, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.85; 5 studies, 475 participants; low certainty). Corticosteroids lead to a large histological improvement (63% higher), measured dichotomously (RR 11.94, 95% CI 6.56 to 21.75; 12 studies, 978 participants; NNTB = 3; high certainty), and may lead to histological improvement, measured continuously (SMD 1.42, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.82; 5 studies, 449 participants; low certainty). Corticosteroids may lead to little to no endoscopic improvement, measured dichotomously (RR 2.60, 95% CI 0.82 to 8.19; 5 studies, 596 participants; low certainty), and may lead to endoscopic improvement, measured continuously (SMD 1.33, 95% CI 0.59 to 2.08; 5 studies, 596 participants; low certainty). Corticosteroids may lead to slightly fewer withdrawals due to adverse events (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.96; 14 studies, 1032 participants; low certainty). Nine studies compared biologics to placebo for induction of remission. Biologics may result in little to no difference in clinical improvement, measured dichotomously (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.52; 5 studies, 410 participants; low certainty), and may result in better clinical improvement, measured continuously (SMD 0.50, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.78; 7 studies, 387 participants; moderate certainty). Biologics result in better histological improvement (55% higher), measured dichotomously (RR 6.73, 95% CI 2.58 to 17.52; 8 studies, 925 participants; NNTB = 2; moderate certainty). We could not draw conclusions for this outcome when measured continuously (SMD 1.01, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.66; 6 studies, 370 participants; very low certainty). Biologics may result in little to no difference in endoscopic improvement, measured dichotomously (effect not estimable, low certainty). We cannot draw conclusions for this outcome when measured continuously (SMD 2.79, 95% CI 0.36 to 5.22; 1 study, 11 participants; very low certainty). There may be no difference in withdrawals due to adverse events (RR 1.55, 95% CI 0.88 to 2.74; 8 studies, 792 participants; low certainty).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Corticosteroids (as compared to placebo) may lead to clinical symptom improvement when reported both as dichotomous and continuous outcomes, from the primary study definitions. Corticosteroids lead to a large increase in histological improvement (dichotomous outcome) and may increase histological improvement (continuous outcome) when compared to placebo. Corticosteroids may or may not increase endoscopic improvement (depending on whether the outcome is measured dichotomously or continuously). Withdrawals due to adverse events (dichotomous outcome) may occur less frequently when corticosteroids are compared to placebo. Biologics (as compared to placebo) may not lead to clinical symptom improvement when reported as a dichotomous outcome and may lead to an increase in clinical symptom improvement (as a continuous outcome), from the primary study definitions. Biologics lead to a large increase in histological improvement when reported as a dichotomous outcome, but this is uncertain when reported as a continuous outcome, as compared to placebo. Biologics may not increase endoscopic improvement (dichotomous outcome), but this is uncertain when measured as a continuous outcome. Withdrawals due to adverse events as a dichotomous outcome may occur as frequently when biologics are compared to placebo.

Novel corticosteroid formulations in the treatment of eosinophilic esophagitis: what is the evidence?

Background and study aims

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a food allergen-induced disease of the esophagus. Chronic, eosinophil-predominant inflammation eventually leads to fibrosis, esophageal dysfunction and severe morbidity. Swallowed topical corticosteroids (STCs) are a mainstay of anti-inflammatory therapy in the treatment of active EoE. Data on the efficacy of novel corticosteroid formulations, developed specifically for esophageal delivery, have recently become available.

Methods

A comprehensive review was performed aiming to summarize evidence on the role of STCs in the treatment of EoE. Two biomedical bibliographic databases (PubMED, EMBASE) were searched for articles providing original information on the efficacy and safety of STCs in adult EoE patients.

Results

Budesonide orodispersible tablet (BOT) and budesonide oral suspension (BOS) both surpassed placebo formulations regarding the efficacy of inducing and maintaining histologic, symptomatic and endoscopic remission. Overall, BOT displayed the highest grade of efficacy with clinico-histologic remission rates up to 75% after 1 year. Fluticasone propionate (APT-1011) achieved and maintained histologic and endoscopic responses in the majority of patients, whereas only a positive trend was demonstrated for symptomatic improvement. Mometasone and ciclesonide were studied in a limited number of smaller-scale trials and placebo-controlled data are required to substantiate the promising findings. All STCs displayed a similar side effects profile and were generally considered safe and well-tolerated.

Conclusions

Current evidence supports long-term treatment with novel corticosteroid formulations, challenging the established treatment paradigm of EoE. BOT appears to be the most effective steroid therapy, although head-to-head comparative trials between STCs are needed.

[Treatment of eosinophilic esophagitis - advancements and perspectives]

In recent years significant progress has been made in the treatment of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), especially in the area of topical corticosteroids. Novel EoE-specific formulations have been developed and first approvals have been obtained for induction and maintenance of remission in adult EoE patients with the orodispersible budesonide tablet in Germany and other European and non-EU countries. A novel budesonide oral suspension is currently under priority review by the FDA for first approval in the U.S. In contrast, the scientific evidence on the efficacy of proton pump inhibitors remains limited. Moreover, new biologicals have been identified which showed promising results in phase 2 trials and are now being studied in phase 3. This article aims to summarize and discuss recent advances and perspectives in the treatment of EoE.

Pre-treatment differential correlation of gene expression and response to topical steroids in eosinophilic esophagitis

Few predictors of response to topical corticosteroid (tCS) treatment have been identified in eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). We aimed to determine whether baseline gene expression predicts histologic response to tCS treatment for EoE. We analyzed prospectively collected samples from incident EoE cases who were treated with tCS for 8 weeks in a development cohort (prospective study) or in an independent validation cohort (clinical trial). Whole transcriptome RNA expression was determined from a baseline (pre-treatment) RNA-later preserved esophageal biopsy. Baseline expression was compared between histologic responders (<15 eos/hpf) and non-responders (≥15 eos/hpf), and differential correlation was used to assess baseline gene expression by response status. In 87 EoE cases analyzed in the development set, there were no differentially expressed genes associated with treatment response (at false discovery rate = 0.1). However, differential correlation identified a module of 22 genes with statistically significantly high pairwise correlation in non-responders (mean correlation coefficient = 0.7) compared to low correlation in responders (coefficient = 0.3). When this 22-gene module was applied to the 89 EoE cases in the independent cohort, it was not validated to predict tCS response at the 15 eos/hpf threshold (mean correlation coefficient = 0.32 in responders and 0.25 in nonresponders). Exploration of other thresholds also did not validate any modules. Though we identified a 22 gene differential correlation module measured pre-treatment that was strongly associated with subsequent histologic response to tCS in EoE, this was not validated in an independent population. Alternative methods to predict steroid response should be explored.

Eosinophilic Esophagitis—What Do We Know So Far?

Eosinophilic esophagitis is a Th-2 antigen-mediated disease in which there is an influx of eosinophils to all layers of the esophagus, triggering an inflammatory response. Chronic inflammatory process causes esophageal remodeling, leading to difficulties in swallowing. Food impaction, heartburn, and chest pain are other characteristic (but not pathognomonic) symptoms in adults. Although the disease has only been described since in the early 1970s, its incidence and prevalence are rapidly growing, especially in Western countries. According to the diagnostic guidelines, there should be at least 15 eosinophils visible per high-power field in biopsies obtained from different sites in the esophagus upon endoscopy with relevant esophageal symptoms. Other diseases that can cause esophageal eosinophilia should be ruled out. Eosinophilic esophagitis treatment may be challenging; however, new methods of management have recently emerged. The currently used proton pump inhibitors, topical corticosteroids, and elimination diet are combined with biological treatment. New methods for disease diagnostics and clinical course assessment are also available. This review presents current knowledge about the disease, supported by the latest research data.

Safety of an investigational formulation of budesonide (budesonide oral suspension) for eosinophilic oesophagitis: an integrated safety analysis of six phase 1-3 clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Questions remain regarding the safety of swallowed topical corticosteroids in eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE).

AIM

To assess the safety of an investigational formulation of budesonide (budesonide oral suspension; BOS) from six trials.

METHODS

Safety data were integrated from six trials (healthy adults: SHP621-101 [phase 1]; patients with EoE: MPI 101-01 and MPI 101-06 [phase 2]; SHP621-301, SHP621-302 and SHP621-303 [phase 3]) for participants who received ≥1 dose of study drug (BOS 2.0 mg twice daily [b.i.d.], BOS any dose [including BOS 2.0 mg b.i.d.] and placebo). Adverse events (AEs), laboratory testing, bone density and adrenal AEs were assessed. Exposure-adjusted incidence rates were calculated for AEs and AEs of special interest (AESIs).

RESULTS

Overall, 514 unique participants were included (BOS 2.0 mg b.i.d., n = 292; BOS any dose, n = 448; placebo, n = 168). The BOS 2.0 mg b.i.d., BOS any dose and placebo groups totalled 93.7, 122.4 and 25.0 participant-years of exposure (PY), respectively. Proportions of treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs) and AESIs (any) reported were higher for BOS than placebo; however, most were mild/moderate in severity. The most commonly reported AESIs (exposure-adjusted incidence rates [per 100 PY]) in the BOS 2.0 mg b.i.d., BOS any dose and placebo groups were infections (133.5, 154.4 and 136.2, respectively) and gastrointestinal AEs (84.3, 80.9 and 92.1, respectively). Adrenal AEs were more frequent with BOS 2.0 mg b.i.d. and BOS any dose than placebo (44.8, 34.3 and 24.0, respectively). TEAEs and AESIs related to study drug or leading to discontinuation were infrequent.

CONCLUSIONS

BOS was well-tolerated; most TEAEs with BOS were mild/moderate in severity.

CLINICALTRIALS

GOV NUMBERS

SHP621-101 (no clinical trials registration number), MPI 101-01 (NCT00762073), MPI 101-06 (NCT01642212), SHP621-301 (NCT02605837), SHP621-302 (NCT02736409) and SHP621-303 (NCT03245840).

Outcomes reported in randomized controlled trials for mixed and non-IgE-mediated food allergy: Systematic review

BACKGROUND

Mixed and non-IgE-mediated food allergy is a subset of immune-mediated adverse food reactions that can impose a major burden on the quality of life of affected patients and their families. Clinical trials to study these diseases are reliant upon consistent and valid outcome measures that are relevant to both patients and clinicians, but the degree to which such stringent outcome reporting takes place is poorly studied.

OBJECTIVE

As part of the Core Outcome Measures for Food Allergy (COMFA) project, we identified outcomes reported in randomized clinical trials (RCT) of treatments for mixed or non-IgE-mediated food allergy.

DESIGN

In this systematic review, we searched the Ovid, MEDLINE and Embase databases for RCTs in children or adults investigating treatments for food protein-induced enterocolitis syndrome, food protein-induced allergic proctocolitis, food protein-induced enteropathy and eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorders including eosinophilic esophagitis [EoE], eosinophilic gastritis and eosinophilic colitis published until 14 October 2022.

RESULTS

Twenty-six eligible studies were identified, with 23 focused on EoE (88%). Most interventions were corticosteroids or monoclonal antibodies. All EoE studies assessed patient-reported dysphagia, usually using a non-validated questionnaire. Twenty-two of 23 EoE studies used peak tissue eosinophil count as the primary outcome, usually using a non-validated assessment method, and other immunological markers were only exploratory. Thirteen (57%) EoE studies reported endoscopic outcomes of which six used a validated scoring tool recently recommended as a core outcome for EoE trials. Funding source was not obviously associated with likelihood of an RCT reporting mechanistic versus patient-reported outcomes. Only 3 (12%) RCTs concerned forms of food allergy other than EoE, and they reported on fecal immunological markers and patient-reported outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Outcomes measured in clinical trials of EoE and non-IgE-mediated food allergy are heterogeneous and largely non-validated. Core outcomes for EoE have been developed and need to be used in future trials. For other forms of mixed or non-IgE-mediated food allergies, core outcome development is needed to support the development of effective treatments.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

OSF public registry DOI:10.17605/OSF.IO/AZX8S.

Mechanisms and clinical management of eosinophilic oesophagitis: an overview

Since the first description of eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE) less than three decades ago, we have observed a striking increase in the number of patients diagnosed with EoE and the understanding of its clinical and immunopathogenic background. Nonetheless, a plethora of open questions await elucidation. In this Review, we discuss the current state of knowledge regarding the underlying mechanisms, particularly environmental factors and their interaction with genetic susceptibility. Subsequently, we discuss how to translate these factors into the diagnostic and therapeutic management of this chronic, immune-mediated disorder. Finally, we dissect the still long list of unmet needs, such as reasons for and handling refractory EoE and atypical clinical presentations. These open questions can guide us through future research steps and potentially foster reconsideration of the diagnostic guidelines of EoE.

Histologic response to steroids in eosinophilic esophagitis is dependent on delivery compound

Topical steroids are commonly used in treatment of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), but currently there is lack of data to clarify most effective regimen. We aimed to study the achievement of histologic remission using the same dose of budesonide in two different delivery formulations. Patients with established EoE treated with pharmacy compounded budesonide capsule or budesonide Rincinol gel (both 3 mg twice daily) were studied retrospectively. Those with pre-treatment and post-treatment histologic assessment were included with main endpoint being histologic remission. 103 patients (62 gel, 41 capsule) were included, with higher rate of histologic remission with gel (84 vs. 59%, P=0.004). A subset of patients in both groups had lack of steroid response (<50% drop in eosinophils) (15% for gel, 32% for capsule). Formulation/delivery vehicle of steroid treatments to esophageal mucosa in EoE appears important for treatment efficacy, with budesonide gel having higher likelihood of histologic remission compared to budesonide capsules in our population. A truly steroid refractory group appears likely in our population. Larger, prospective studies may help clarify best regimen of topical steroids in EoE and may work to identify patients likely to benefit from alternative therapies.

Dupilumab in Adults and Adolescents with Eosinophilic Esophagitis

BACKGROUND

Dupilumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody, blocks interleukin-4 and interleukin-13 signaling, which have key roles in eosinophilic esophagitis.

METHODS

We conducted a three-part, phase 3 trial in which patients 12 years of age or older underwent randomization in a 1:1 ratio to receive subcutaneous dupilumab at a weekly dose of 300 mg or placebo (Part A) or in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive 300 mg of dupilumab either weekly or every 2 weeks or weekly placebo (Part B) up to week 24. Eligible patients who completed Part A or Part B continued the trial in Part C, in which those who completed Part A received dupilumab at a weekly dose of 300 mg up to week 52 (the Part A-C group); Part C that included the eligible patients from Part B is ongoing. The two primary end points at week 24 were histologic remission (≤6 eosinophils per high-power field) and the change from baseline in the Dysphagia Symptom Questionnaire (DSQ) score (range, 0 to 84, with higher values indicating more frequent or more severe dysphagia).

RESULTS

In Part A, histologic remission occurred in 25 of 42 patients (60%) who received weekly dupilumab and in 2 of 39 patients (5%) who received placebo (difference, 55 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 40 to 71; P<0.001). In Part B, histologic remission occurred in 47 of 80 patients (59%) with weekly dupilumab, in 49 of 81 patients (60%) with dupilumab every 2 weeks, and in 5 of 79 patients (6%) with placebo (difference between weekly dupilumab and placebo, 54 percentage points; 95% CI, 41 to 66 [P<0.001]; difference between dupilumab every 2 weeks and placebo, 56 percentage points; 95% CI, 43 to 69 [not significant per hierarchical testing]). The mean (±SD) DSQ scores at baseline were 33.6±12.41 in Part A and 36.7±11.22 in Part B; the scores improved with weekly dupilumab as compared with placebo, with differences of -12.32 (95% CI, -19.11 to -5.54) in Part A and -9.92 (95% CI, -14.81 to -5.02) in Part B (both P<0.001) but not with dupilumab every 2 weeks (difference in Part B, -0.51; 95% CI, -5.42 to 4.41). Serious adverse events occurred in 9 patients during the Part A or B treatment period (in 7 who received weekly dupilumab, 1 who received dupilumab every 2 weeks, and 1 who received placebo) and in 1 patient in the Part A-C group during the Part C treatment period who received placebo in Part A and weekly dupilumab in Part C.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with eosinophilic esophagitis, subcutaneous dupilumab administered weekly improved histologic outcomes and alleviated symptoms of the disease. (Funded by Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03633617.).

A meta-analysis on randomized controlled trials of treating eosinophilic esophagitis with budesonide

OBJECTIVE

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic, local immune-mediated inflammatory oesophageal disease. Although Budesonide is recommended as one of the first-line drugs for EoE treatment, its efficacy is still controversial in multiple studies. Due to the continuous emergence of new and reliable research evidence in recent years, we updated the meta-analysis using RCT trial results to evaluate the efficacy and safety of budesonide.

MATERIALS AND METHOD

Retrieve the data of the randomised controlled trial literature from 2000 to June 20, 2021, on using Budesonide in the treatment of eosinophilic esophagitis from the three major databases. Based on the results achieved with the Cochrane risk assessment tool, evaluate the quality of the included literature to extract the data, and perform the Meta-analysis with RevMan5.4 and Stata15.0.

RESULTS

A total of 958 articles were retrieved, with 10 articles finally included, thus forming a sample size of 712 cases. The main outcome indicators of the meta-analysis are as follows: (1) Histological remission: the Budesonide group performs better than the placebo control group when it comes to histological remission of injuries [RR = 23.82, 95%CI = (13.46, 42.21), p < .001]; (2) Eosinophil count: the Budesonide group is superior to the control group in terms of reduced eosinophil count [SMD = -1.34, 95%CI = (-1.52, -1.15), p < .001].

CONCLUSION

More and more high-quality randomised controlled trials show that oral budesonide in the treatment of eosinophils esophagitis was better than the placebo group. Mounting high-quality RCTs have confirmed the efficacy of oral budesonide in the treatment of eosinophilic esophagitis and that the effects of this drug may not be so dose-dependent. It is safe to take budesonide for a long time, and this drug is a relatively ideal option for drug treatment of eosinophilic esophagitis at present, so it is worthy of clinical application.Key MessagesWe used high-quality randomised controlled trials to meta-update the previous results to further confirm the clinical efficacy and safety of budesonide.Oral budesonide in the treatment of eosinophilic esophagitis is significantly better than the placebo control group. We have confirmed the value of its clinical application and promotion by including more high-quality randomised controlled trials.We also found that the efficacy of budesonide in patients is not dose-dependent, and more research is needed to confirm this.

Eosinophilic esophagitis: Comparison of clinical, endoscopic and histological scoring systems

Background Eosinophilic Esophagitis (EoE) has received increasing attention as a disease entity, and it is now recognized as an important disorder of the Upper Gastrointestinal Tract. Topical corticosteroids (tCS) are effective in clinical-pathological remission induction (RI) and remission maintenance (RM) of active EoE. With scoring systems, such as clinical (SDI), endoscopic (EREFS), and histological (EoEHSS) systems, EoE can be graded, and its disease activity can be assessed.

Objective To discover how closely results within each of the three scoring systems SDI, EREFS, and EoEHSS are correlated between initial diagnosis (ID), RI, and RM, and to determine how well scores from the three systems are intercorrelated at each time point.

Methods Retrospective cohort analysis of patients with active EoE was performed between 2006 and 2020, with follow-up for up to 6 years. SDI, EREFS and EoEHSS scores were recorded at ID, at RI, and in RM. Evaluation employed descriptive statistics, the Friedman test, and Bonferroni-corrected post hoc pairwise comparisons.

Results At RI 29 and at RM 19 EoE patients provided data. Significant correlations were found between EREFS and EoEHSS at RI and in RM. Pairwise comparisons showed significant differences between ID and RI for SDI, for EREFS, and for EoEHSS.

Conclusion The scoring systems tested did not show intercorrelation at ID. Comparison revealed significant differences for SDI, EREFS, and EoEHSS between the systems at ID und RI, but not in RM, during tCS treatment. These results underline the efficacy of tCS (at RI and RM) in the treatment of active EoE.

A New Viscous Budesonide Formulation for the Treatment of Eosinophilic Esophagitis in Children: A Preliminary Experience and Review of the Literature

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic disease, characterized clinically by esophageal disfunction. Topical corticosteroids (tCS), predominantly fluticasone and budesonide, are considered the effective first line treatment, as well as an option of maintenance therapy in EoE. The way that tCS are administered significantly affects their effectiveness. There is still no ready-to-use steroid drug to be applied topically to the esophagus in children-a few experimental viscous slurries (mainly of budesonide) have been shown in trials to be more effective than steroids administered via metered dose inhalers (MDIs) and swallowed. The best examined steroid solvent of all is sucralose, a high-intensity artificial sweetener. Although it has been shown in a critical review that it is non-toxic and safe for all consumers, there are still some concerns among patients about its potential adverse effect on humans. Due to that fact, we developed a new viscous formulation and evaluated its effectiveness in the treatment of children with EoE. In an open, prospective, single-center study, we administered our new formulation of viscous budesonide twice daily for 8 weeks in patients with an active EoE. After treatment, we performed a control gastroscopy with the collection and evaluation of histopathological samples. We have proven our formulation effectiveness at 64%, as far as histological remission is concerned. We have also shown a reduction in the mean endoscopic reference score (EREFS) from 3.1 points at the beginning of the study to 1.6 points at the end of the study. Bearing in mind how important the acceptance of the solvent is for long-time compliance, especially among children, we also decided to assess the taste of the formulation. Therefore, we asked 46 adults and 10 children to swallow a sample of the solvent and fill in a short anonymous questionnaire about its taste, smell, consistency and easiness of swallowing. General acceptance for the proprietary solvent was high, reaching 7.5/10 among adults and 6.5/10 in children. To be able to compare the results of our preliminary experience, we reviewed the studies which evaluated substances that have been used so far as steroid solvents for the treatment of EoE. The overall effectiveness of the oral viscous budesonide (OVB) ranged from 65% to 90%, which is consistent with the results obtained in our study. Unfortunately, the high heterogeneity of the studies did not allow us to draw reliable conclusions.

Fluticasone Propionate Orally Disintegrating Tablet (APT-1011) for Eosinophilic Esophagitis: Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Topical steroids are effective treatments for eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). The FLUTE (Fluticasone in EoE) trial evaluated safety and efficacy of APT-1011 (fluticasone propionate oral disintegrating tablet) vs placebo for treatment of EoE.

METHODS

In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-finding, phase 2b trial, 106 adults with EoE received 1 of 4 APT-1011 doses or placebo for a 12-week induction period and 40 weeks of maintenance. Primary outcome was histologic response (≤6 eosinophils per high-power field) at Week 12. Secondary outcomes included endoscopic features and dysphagia frequency.

RESULTS

Histologic response rates were 0% for placebo, 80% for APT-1011 3 mg twice daily (BID), 67% for 3 mg at bedtime (HS), 86% for 1.5 mg BID, 48% for 1.5 mg HS (P &lt; .001 for all groups vs placebo). At Week 12, mean Edema/Rings/Exudates/Furrows/Strictures (EoE Endoscopic Reference Score) total score (max, 9.0) improved from 4.5 to 2.3 for 3 mg BID, 5.3 to 2.1 for 3 mg HS, 4.6 to 1.7 for 1.5 mg BID, 5.3 to 2.9 for 1.5 mg HS vs 5.2 to 4.5 for placebo. Mean dysphagia frequency over 14 days improved from baseline to Week 12 with all active groups improving more than placebo. Improvements were sustained to Week 52. APT-1011 was safe and well-tolerated, with higher incidence of candidiasis noted at the higher twice daily doses.

CONCLUSION

APT-1011 dosing regimens were superior for histologic and endoscopic responses, and for reduction in dysphagia frequency vs placebo. Based on the symptom improvement and assessment of adverse events together with the histologic response rate, 3 mg once daily at bedtime dose showed the most favorable risk-benefit profile.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov, Number: NCT03191864.

Endoscopic approach to eosinophilic esophagitis: American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Consensus Conference

Endoscopy plays a critical role in caring for and evaluating the patient with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). Endoscopy is essential for diagnosis, assessment of response to therapy, treatment of esophageal strictures, and ongoing monitoring of patients in histologic remission. To date, less-invasive testing for identifying or grading EoE severity has not been established, whereas diagnostic endoscopy as integral to both remains the criterion standard. Therapeutic endoscopy in patients with adverse events of EoE may also be required. In particular, dilation may be essential to treat and attenuate progression of the disease in select patients to minimize further fibrosis and stricture formation. Using a modified Delphi consensus process, a group of 20 expert clinicians and investigators in EoE were assembled to provide guidance for the use of endoscopy in EoE. Through an iterative process, the group achieved consensus on 20 statements yielding comprehensive advice on tissue-sampling standards, gross assessment of disease activity, use and performance of endoscopic dilation, and monitoring of disease, despite an absence of high-quality evidence. Key areas of controversy were identified when discussions yielded an inability to reach agreement on the merit of a statement. We expect that with ongoing research, higher-quality evidence will be obtained to enable creation of a guideline for these issues. We further anticipate that forthcoming expert-generated and agreed-on statements will provide valuable practice advice on the role and use of endoscopy in patients with EoE.

Subtyping of Eosinophilic Esophagitis Based on Disease Presentation in a pediatric Cohort

OBJECTIVE

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is an immune-mediated inflammatory disease characterized by eosinophilic infiltration of esophageal tissue. Subtyping of EoE patients could be useful in predicting therapeutic response. We propose clinical subtypes, apply them to our pediatric EoE population retrospectively, and assess therapy choices and remission at one year.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review of pediatric patients diagnosed with EoE was conducted. Patients were grouped into proposed subtypes (severe, allergic, fibrostenotic, inflammatory, unclassified) based on presenting characteristics. The primary outcome was histologic remission, which was defined &lt;15 eosinophils/high-powered-field (hpf) at the closest visit 1 year postdiagnosis.

RESULTS

Subtyping was possible in 242 of 256 patients and follow-up histological data were available in 75 subjects. The majority had an overlap in phenotype with 17% severe, 77% allergic, 15% fibrostenotic, 60% inflammatory, and 5% unclassified, whereas 45% of the cohort were assigned to a unique subtype. At 1 year, 43/75 (57%) of patients achieved histologic remission, with an overall average decrease of 33 (IQR -47, -12) eosinophils/hpf across the entire cohort. There was no difference in remission rates among subtypes. First-line therapy review revealed higher rates of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) ± topical steroids utilization in severe patients, while topical steroids were prescribed preferentially over dietary therapy in the fibrostenotic subtype.

CONCLUSION

There were no observed differences in remission rates at 1 year among clinically defined subtypes of EoE, although this could be attributed to overlapping subtypes. Most patients responded well to medical therapy. Larger scale prospective studies designed to subtype patients and protocolize treatment may help personalize the approach to EoE management.

Pediatric eosinophilic esophagitis outcomes vary with co-morbid eczema and pollen food syndrome

Background

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic immune-mediated inflammatory disease characterized by eosinophil inflammation of the esophagus. It has been described as a component of the Allergic March and is often seen with other atopic diseases. Some atopic diseases, including asthma, are known to be heterogenous with endotypes that guide treatment. Similarly, we propose that EoE is a heterogenous disease with varying phenotypes and endotypes that might impact response to therapy.

Methods

A single-center retrospective review of pediatric patients ≤18 years of age diagnosed with EoE was conducted. All gastrointestinal clinic visits and esophagogastroduodenoscopies (EGD) from disease presentation through the first three years after diagnosis were reviewed. Histologic remission rate and therapies utilized [proton pump inhibitor (PPI), topical steroid, dietary elimination] were assessed.

Results

One hundred and thirty-seven patients were included, 80% of whom had at least one concurrent atopic condition at diagnosis, with food allergies being the most common (57%) followed by eczema (34%), and asthma (29%). The remission rate of the overall cohort was 65%, and by concurrent allergy, comorbid pollen food syndrome and eczema had the highest remission rates at 100% and 81%, respectively followed by asthma (62%), food allergies (62%), seasonal allergic rhinitis (60%), and history of anaphylaxis (56%). Kaplan-Meier curves for each atopic condition show that patients with eczema and pollen food syndrome achieve histologic remission faster than those without. All treatment modalities were more successful in patients with eczema than those without, and PPI was most effective treatment at inducing remission.

Conclusions

In a real-world pediatric cohort, 80% of patients with EoE had an underlying atopic condition. Patients with eczema and pollen food syndrome had a swifter response and were more likely to achieve histologic remission than patients with other atopic conditions. This study suggests that EoE, like other allergic diseases, may have heterogenous phenotypes that could affect response to treatment. There is currently a knowledge gap in classifying EoE based on endotypes and phenotypes at diagnosis and correlating responses to various treatment modalities.

Long-term efficacy of proton pump inhibitors as a treatment modality for eosinophilic esophagitis

BACKGROUND

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are a first-line treatment for EoE, but data are limited concerning response durability. We aimed to determine long-term outcomes in EoE patients responsive to PPI-therapy.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of newly diagnosed adults with EoE who had initial histologic response (<15 eosinophils per high-power-field) to PPI-only therapy. We extracted data regarding their subsequent clinical course and outcomes. We compared findings between the initial PPI-response endoscopy and the final endoscopy, and assessed factors associated with loss of PPI response.

RESULTS

Of 138 EoE patients with initial histologic response to PPI, 50 had long-term endoscopic follow-up, 40 had clinical follow-up, 10 changed treatments, and 38 had no long-term follow-up. Of those with endoscopic follow-up, mean follow-up-time was 3.6 ± 2.9 years; 30 and 32 patients (60%; 64%) maintained histologic and symptom responses, respectively. However, fibrotic endoscopic findings of EoE were unchanged. Younger age (aOR 1.05, 95% CI: 1.01-1.11) and dilation prior to PPI treatment (aOR 0.21, 95% CI: 0.05-0.83) were the only factors associated with long-term loss of PPI response.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term histologic and clinical response rates for PPI therapy were 60% and 64%, respectively. Younger age and dilation at baseline were associated with histologic loss of response. These data can inform long-term EoE treatment selection.

Pharmacokinetics of Budesonide Oral Suspension in Children and Adolescents With Eosinophilic Esophagitis

The pharmacokinetic (PK) profile of budesonide oral suspension (BOS) was evaluated during a phase 2, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging study in pediatric patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) (MPI 101-01/NCT00762073). Non-compartmental methods were used to calculate PK parameters in 37 patients after receiving morning doses of BOS, with volume and dose adjusted for age (low dose: 0.35 or 0.5 mg; high dose: 1.4 or 2.0 mg [2-9 or 10-18 years old, respectively]). Relationships between apparent oral clearance and volume of distribution, and bodyweight and body mass index were also evaluated. Budesonide systemic exposure increased with BOS dose. After oral administration, time to maximum plasma budesonide concentration occurred ~1 hour post dose and the half-life of budesonide was 3.3-3.5 hours. PK parameters were similar between age groups for low- and high-dose BOS, indicating that volume and dose adjustments for age were appropriate for pediatric patients with EoE. BOS was well tolerated.

Current treatment options and long-term outcomes in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis

INTRODUCTION

Dietary and pharmacological (proton pump inhibitors, swallowed topical corticosteroids) therapies are effective for induction of clinical and histological remission of eosinophilic esophagitis. However, data evaluating their long-term efficacy and safety is limited.

AREAS COVERED

Since eosinophilic esophagitis is chronic, clinical, endoscopic, and histological features usually recur when successful treatments are stopped. In untreated patients, persistent esophageal eosinophilic inflammation may progress to fibrostenosis over time, giving place to strictures and narrow-caliber esophagi. This article comprehensively reviews available data on long-term maintenance of eosinophilic esophagitis with pharmacological and dietary treatment. It also discusses limitations re: available literature and outlines data gaps on adherence to therapy and monitoring disease activity in the long-term.

EXPERT OPINION

Evidence indicates that long-term maintenance therapy may decrease the risk of esophageal stricture, food bolus impaction, and need for dilation in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis. Further knowledge on eosinophilic esophagitis phenotypes is needed to ascertain who will benefit best from sustained therapy. Unanswered questions include an adequate definition for sustained remission, best strategies for maintenance drugs and diets, enhancement of treatment adherence, and proper monitoring for long-term surveillance.

A Clinical Severity Index for Eosinophilic Esophagitis: Development, Consensus, and Future Directions

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Disease activity and severity of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) dictate therapeutic options and management, but the decision-making process for determining severity varies among practitioners. To reduce variability in practice patterns and help clinicians monitor the clinical course of the disease in an office setting, we aimed to create an international consensus severity scoring index for EoE.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary international group of adult and pediatric EoE researchers and clinicians, as well as non-EoE allergy immunology and gastroenterology experts, formed 3 teams to review the existing literature on histology, endoscopy, and symptoms of EoE in the context of progression and severity. A steering committee convened a 1-day virtual meeting to reach consensus on each team's opinion on salient features of severity across key clinicopathologic domains and distill features that would allow providers to categorize disease severity.

RESULTS

Symptom features and complications and inflammatory and fibrostenotic features on both endoscopic and histologic examination were collated into a simplified scoring system-the Index of Severity for Eosinophilic Esophagitis (I-SEE)-that can be completed at routine clinic visits to assess disease severity using a point scale of 0-6 for mild, 7-14 for moderate, and ≥15 for severe EoE.

CONCLUSIONS

A multidisciplinary team of experts iteratively created a clinically usable EoE severity scoring system denominated "I-SEE" to guide practitioners in EoE management by standardizing disease components reflecting disease severity beyond eosinophil counts. I-SEE should be validated and refined using data from future clinical trials and routine clinical practice to increase its utilization and functionality.

An artificial intelligence algorithm is highly accurate for detecting endoscopic features of eosinophilic esophagitis

The endoscopic features associated with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) may be missed during routine endoscopy. We aimed to develop and evaluate an Artificial Intelligence (AI) algorithm for detecting and quantifying the endoscopic features of EoE in white light images, supplemented by the EoE Endoscopic Reference Score (EREFS). An AI algorithm (AI-EoE) was constructed and trained to differentiate between EoE and normal esophagus using endoscopic white light images extracted from the database of the University Hospital Augsburg. In addition to binary classification, a second algorithm was trained with specific auxiliary branches for each EREFS feature (AI-EoE-EREFS). The AI algorithms were evaluated on an external data set from the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill (UNC), and compared with the performance of human endoscopists with varying levels of experience. The overall sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of AI-EoE were 0.93 for all measures, while the AUC was 0.986. With additional auxiliary branches for the EREFS categories, the AI algorithm (AI-EoE-EREFS) performance improved to 0.96, 0.94, 0.95, and 0.992 for sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and AUC, respectively. AI-EoE and AI-EoE-EREFS performed significantly better than endoscopy beginners and senior fellows on the same set of images. An AI algorithm can be trained to detect and quantify endoscopic features of EoE with excellent performance scores. The addition of the EREFS criteria improved the performance of the AI algorithm, which performed significantly better than endoscopists with a lower or medium experience level.

A Clinical Severity Index for Eosinophilic Esophagitis: Development, Consensus, and Future Directions

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Disease activity and severity of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) dictate therapeutic options and management, but the decision-making process for determining severity varies among practitioners. To reduce variability in practice patterns and help clinicians monitor the clinical course of the disease in an office setting, we aimed to create an international consensus severity scoring index for EoE.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary international group of adult and pediatric EoE researchers and clinicians, as well as non-EoE allergy immunology and gastroenterology experts, formed 3 teams to review the existing literature on histology, endoscopy, and symptoms of EoE in the context of progression and severity. A steering committee convened a 1-day virtual meeting to reach consensus on each team's opinion on salient features of severity across key clinicopathologic domains and distill features that would allow providers to categorize disease severity.

RESULTS

Symptom features and complications and inflammatory and fibrostenotic features on both endoscopic and histologic examination were collated into a simplified scoring system-the Index of Severity for Eosinophilic Esophagitis (I-SEE)-that can be completed at routine clinic visits to assess disease severity using a point scale of 0-6 for mild, 7-14 for moderate, and ≥15 for severe EoE.

CONCLUSIONS

A multidisciplinary team of experts iteratively created a clinically usable EoE severity scoring system denominated "I-SEE" to guide practitioners in EoE management by standardizing disease components reflecting disease severity beyond eosinophil counts. I-SEE should be validated and refined using data from future clinical trials and routine clinical practice to increase its utilization and functionality.

Determination of a treatment response threshold for the Eosinophilic Esophagitis Endoscopic Reference Score

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic features of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) are measured using the validated EoE Endoscopic Reference Score (EREFS); however, a threshold for treatment response has not been defined. We aimed to determine a cut-point for endoscopic response as measured by EREFS.

METHODS

We performed a secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial comparing budesonide slurry with swallowed fluticasone multidose inhaler for initial treatment of EoE. In the parent trial, EREFS was determined before and after treatment (score range 0-9), as were histologic findings and dysphagia symptoms. We performed tabular, flexible trend, and dependent mixture analyses of measures of treatment response to select the best clinical EREFS threshold.

RESULTS

In the 111 included patients (mean age 39 years; 67 % male; 96 % white), an EREFS threshold of ≤ 2 was 80 % sensitive (95 % confidence interval [CI] 69 % to 88 %) and 83 % specific (95 %CI 67 % to 94 %) for histologic response (peak of < 15 eosinophils per high-power field). Flexible trend analysis and dependent mixture modeling similarly suggested that a threshold of ≤ 2 best captured the correlation of EREFS with histologic and symptomatic measures. Dependent mixture modeling found near-total membership in the response class at EREFS of 0 or 1 and > 75 % at EREFS of 2 or 3.

CONCLUSIONS

An EREFS of ≤ 2 was the best clinical threshold for endoscopic response to topical steroid treatment, and was consistent with clinical and histologic response. Therefore, future studies can report a binary outcome of endoscopic response when EREFS is 2 or less.

Long-Term Treatment of Eosinophilic Esophagitis With Budesonide Oral Suspension

BACKGROUND & AIMS

We evaluated treatment withdrawal, long-term outcomes, and safety of budesonide oral suspension (BOS) 2.0 mg twice daily in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis who completed a 12-week induction study.

METHODS

Induction full responders (≤6 eosinophils per high-power field [eos/hpf] and ≥30% reduction in the Dysphagia Symptom Questionnaire score) to BOS 2.0 mg twice daily (ORBIT1/SHP621-301/NCT02605837) were randomized to continue BOS (BOS-BOS) or withdraw to placebo (BOS-PBO) for 36 weeks (ORBIT2/SHP621-302/NCT02736409). Induction partial responders and nonresponders, and patients who received induction placebo, received BOS for 36 weeks. The primary end point was the proportion of BOS-BOS and BOS-PBO patients who relapsed (≥15 eos/hpf and ≥4 days of dysphagia [Dysphagia Symptom Questionnaire] over 2 weeks) by week 36. The key secondary end point was the proportion of induction partial responders and nonresponders who fully responded after 52 weeks of total BOS therapy. Other secondary end points included the proportion of induction full responders with histologic responses (≤1, ≤6, <15 eos/hpf) at week 12 of the extension study, and safety outcomes.

RESULTS

The randomized withdrawal period enrolled 48 patients (BOS-BOS, n = 25; BOS-PBO, n = 23); 106 induction partial responders and nonresponders, and 65 induction placebo patients received BOS. More BOS-PBO than BOS-BOS patients relapsed over 36 weeks (43.5% vs 24.0%; P = .131) and had histologic responses at week 12 of therapy (P < .001). Overall, 13.2% of induction partial responders and nonresponders fully responded at week 36. BOS was well tolerated; therapy duration was not associated with new safety concerns.

CONCLUSIONS

For induction full responders, continuing BOS numerically improved maintenance of efficacy vs withdrawal. A longer therapy duration did not raise safety concerns. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02736409.).

Reliability and responsiveness of endoscopic disease activity assessment in eosinophilic esophagitis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic outcomes have become important measures of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) disease activity, including as an endpoint in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We evaluated the operating properties of endoscopic measures for use in EoE RCTs.

METHODS

Modified Research and Development/University of California Los Angeles appropriateness methods and a panel of 15 international EoE experts identified endoscopic items and definitions with face validity that were used in a 2-round voting process to define simplified (all items graded as absent or present) and expanded versions (additional grades for edema, furrows, and/or exudates) of the EoE Endoscopic Reference Score (EREFS). Inter- and intrarater reliability of these instruments (expressed as intraclass correlation coefficients [ICC]) were evaluated using paired endoscopy video assessments of 2 blinded central readers in patients before and after 8 weeks of proton pump inhibitors, swallowed topical corticosteroids, or dietary elimination. Responsiveness was measured using the standardized effect size (SES).

RESULTS

The appropriateness of 41 statements relevant to EoE endoscopic activity (endoscopic items, item definitions and grading, and other considerations relevant for endoscopy) was considered. The original and expanded EREFS demonstrated moderate-to-substantial inter-rater reliability (ICCs of .472-.736 and .469-.763, respectively) and moderate-to-almost perfect intrarater reliability (ICCs of .580-.828 and .581-.828, respectively). Strictures were least reliably assessed (ICC, .072-.385). The original EREFS was highly responsive (SES, 1.126 [95% confidence interval {CI}, .757-1.534]), although both expanded versions of EREFS, scored based on worst affected area, were numerically most responsive to treatment (expanded furrows: SES, 1.229 [95% CI, .858-1.643]; all items expanded: SES, 1.252 [95% CI, .880-1.667]). The EREFS and its modifications were not more reliably scored by segment and also not more responsive when proximal and distal EREFSs were summed.

CONCLUSIONS

EREFS and its modifications were reliable and responsive, and the original or expanded versions of the EREFS may be preferred in RCTs. Disease activity scored based on the worst affected area optimizes reliability and responsiveness.

Close follow-up is associated with fewer stricture formation and results in earlier detection of histological relapse in the long-term management of eosinophilic esophagitis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

No recommendations exist regarding optimal follow-up schedule in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) under maintenance treatment.

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated a long-term surveillance concept at the Swiss EoE clinic, where clinical, endoscopic and histological disease activity is assessed annually regardless of EoE symptoms. Data on 159 adult patients under maintenance steroid treatment with available follow-up were analyzed. Patients were classified as having close (duration between visits <18 months) or non-close follow-up (≥18 months).

RESULTS

We analyzed a total of 309 follow-up visits of 159 patients (123 males, age at diagnosis 38.9 ± 15.4 years). 157 (51%) visits were within a close follow-up schedule (median duration between visits of 1.0 years (interquartile range (IQR) 0.9-1.2)), while 152 visits (49%) were not (median duration between visits 2.9 years (IQR 2.0-4.1)). There was no difference regarding ongoing clinical, endoscopic, and histological disease activity, and adherence to prescribed steroid treatment between the two groups. However, stricture formation was significantly less frequently observed at visits within a close follow-up schedule (22.9 vs. 33.6%, p = 0.038). Absence of close follow-up was a significant risk factor for stricture development in a multivariate regression model. Patients who achieved histological remission and were followed within a close-follow-up schedule had significantly earlier detection of histological relapse compared to patients not within such close follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Close follow-up is associated with fewer stricture formation and appears to result in earlier detection of histological relapse in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis. We advocate for regular assessment of disease activity (every 12-18 months) in order to detect relapsing disease as early as possible, and therefore potentially minimize the risk for EoE complications.

Drug treatment strategies for eosinophilic esophagitis in adults

INTRODUCTION

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a clinical and pathological disorder, characterized by symptoms of esophageal dysfunction, and eosinophil-predominant inflammation restricted to the esophagus. Treatment outcomes include symptomatic remission, histological and endoscopic normalization and improving quality of life. Besides dietary modifications and endoscopic dilation, drugs available are swallowed topical corticosteroids (STCs) with reduced bioavailability and proton pump inhibitors (PPI).

AREAS COVERED

Herein, the authors review the current treatment strategies for EoE in adults, providing the reader with their expert perspectives. The authors give discussion to the value of PPIs as a first-line therapy for EoE, in addition to the use of STCs. The current development of new formulations of STCs targeting the esophagus and novel therapies aimed at blocking molecular pathways are also discussed. Finally, the authors briefly look at the value of monoclonal antibodies targeting IL-5RA, IL-13, IL-4 or Siglec8, and oral S1PR agonists to the treatment of EoE.

EXPERT OPINION

Viscose formulations of STC designed to coat the esophagus and new effervescent orodispersible tablets provide increased effectiveness at low doses. Investigational therapies that target several Th2-associated diseases seem useful in EoE. Comparative effectiveness and cost-utility analyses will help to position them in a complex therapeutic scenario.

Long-Lasting Dissociation of Esophageal Eosinophilia and Symptoms After Dilation in Adults With Eosinophilic Esophagitis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Esophageal dilation improves dysphagia but not inflammation in eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) patients. We investigated if dilation modifies the association between symptoms and peak esophageal eosinophils per high-power field (eos/hpf).

METHODS

Adults enrolled in a multisite prospective Consortium of Gastrointestinal Eosinophilic Disease Researchers Outcome Measures for Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Diseases Across Ages observational study (NCT02523118) completed the symptom-based EoE activity index (EEsAI) patient-reported outcome instrument and underwent endoscopy with biopsy specimens. Patients were stratified based on dilation status as absent, performed 1 year or less before endoscopy, and performed more than 1 year before endoscopy. Assessments included Spearman correlations of the relationship between symptoms and eos/hpf and linear regression with EEsAI as the outcome, eos/hpf as predictor, and interaction for dilation and eos/hpf.

RESULTS

Among 100 patients (n = 61 males; median age, 37 y), 15 and 40 patients underwent dilation 1 year or less and more than 1 year before index endoscopy, respectively. In nondilated patients, the association between eos/hpf and symptoms was moderate (ρ = 0.49; P < .001); for a 10-eos/hpf increase, the predicted EEsAI increased by 2.69 (P = .002). In patients dilated 1 or less and more than 1 year before index endoscopy, this association was abolished (ρ = -0.38; P = .157 for ≤1 y and ρ = 0.02; P = .883 >1 y); for a 10-eos/hpf increase, the predicted EEsAI changed by -1.64 (P = .183) and 0.78 (P = .494), respectively. Dilation modified the association between symptoms and eos/hpf (P = .005 and P = .187 for interaction terms of eos/hpf and dilation 1 or less years before and more than 1 year before index endoscopy, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

In nondilated EoE adults, eos/hpf correlate modestly with symptoms; this correlation was no longer appreciated in dilated patients, and the dilation effects lasted longer than 1 year. Dilation status should be considered in studies evaluating EoE treatment and for clinical follow-up evaluation.

Older patients with eosinophilic esophagitis have high treatment response to topical steroids

BACKGROUND

There are few data assessing treatment response in older eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) patients and we evaluated treatment outcomes to topical corticosteroids (tCS) in this older population.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study of the UNC EoE Clinicopathologic database included subjects with a new diagnosis of EoE treated with tCS. Histologic responses, global symptom response, and endoscopic changes were recorded. Older EoE patients (≥65 years) were compared to younger EoE patients (<65).

RESULTS

We identified 467 EoE patients treated with tCS, 12 (3%) of whom were ≥65 years. Compared to those <65 years, patients ≥65 had longer symptom duration and worse endoscopy scores, but most clinical features were similar. Post-treatment peak eosinophil counts trended higher in the <65 group (25.0 vs 5.5; p = 0.07). Histological response was greater in the ≥65 population at <15 eos/hpf (92% vs 57%; p = 0.02), ≤6 eos/hpf (83% vs 50%; p = 0.02), and <1 eos/hpf (58% vs 29%; p = 0.03). Older age was independently associated with increased odds of histologic response (adjusted OR 8.48, 95% CI: 1.08-66.4).

CONCLUSIONS

EoE patients ≥65 years had a higher likelihood of responding to tCS therapy, suggesting they should be studied more closely and included in future trials.

Foundations of gastrointestinal-based drug delivery and future developments

Gastrointestinal-based drug delivery is considered the preferred mode of drug administration owing to its convenience for patients, which improves adherence. However, unique characteristics of the gastrointestinal tract (such as the digestive environment and constraints on transport across the gastrointestinal mucosa) limit the absorption of drugs. As a result, many medications, in particular biologics, still exist only or predominantly in injectable form. In this Review, we examine the fundamentals of gastrointestinal drug delivery to inform clinicians and pharmaceutical scientists. We discuss general principles, including the challenges that need to be overcome for successful drug formulation, and describe the unique features to consider for each gastrointestinal compartment when designing drug formulations for topical and systemic applications. We then discuss emerging technologies that seek to address remaining obstacles to successful gastrointestinal-based drug delivery.

Budesonide Oral Suspension Improves Outcomes in Patients With Eosinophilic Esophagitis: Results from a Phase 3 Trial

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic, immune-mediated disease for which there is currently no pharmacologic therapy approved by the US Food and Drug Administration.

METHODS

In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial, patients 11-55 years of age with EoE and dysphagia were randomized 2:1 to receive budesonide oral suspension (BOS) 2.0 mg twice daily or placebo for 12 weeks at academic or community care practices. Co-primary endpoints were the proportion of stringent histologic responders (≤6 eosinophils/high-power field) or dysphagia symptom responders (≥30% reduction in Dysphagia Symptom Questionnaire [DSQ] score) over 12 weeks. Changes in DSQ score (key secondary endpoint) and EoE Endoscopic Reference Score (EREFS) (secondary endpoint) from baseline to week 12, and safety parameters were examined.

RESULTS

Overall, 318 patients (BOS, n = 213; placebo, n = 105) were randomized and received ≥1 dose of study treatment. More BOS-treated than placebo-treated patients achieved a stringent histologic response (53.1% vs 1.0%; Δ52% [95% confidence interval (CI), 43.3%-59.1%]; P < .001) or symptom response (52.6% vs 39.1%; Δ13% [95% CI, 1.6%-24.3%]; P = .024) over 12 weeks. BOS-treated patients also had greater improvements in least-squares mean DSQ scores and EREFS over 12 weeks than placebo-treated patients: DSQ, -13.0 (SEM 1.2) vs -9.1 (SEM 1.5) (Δ-3.9 [95% CI, -7.1 to -0.8]; P = .015); EREFS, -4.0 (SEM 0.3) vs -2.2 (SEM 0.4) (Δ-1.8 [95% CI, -2.6 to -1.1]; P < .001). BOS was well tolerated; most adverse events were mild or moderate in severity.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with EoE, BOS 2.0 mg twice daily was superior to placebo in improving histologic, symptomatic, and endoscopic outcomes over 12 weeks. BOS 2.0 mg twice daily was well tolerated. ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT02605837.