Practice patterns and adherence to clinical guidelines for diagnosis and management of eosinophilic esophagitis among gastroenterologists

Measuring and improving quality in esophageal care and swallowing disorders

Evaluating clinical care through quality-related metrics is increasingly common. There are now numerous quality statements and indicators related to the medical management of benign and pre-malignant esophageal diseases. Expert consensus leveraging evidence-based recommendations from published society guidelines has been the most frequently used basis for developing esophageal quality statements. While surgical care of patients with esophageal malignancies, including squamous cell carcinoma, has also been developed, those related to benign esophageal disease now include domains of diagnosis, treatment, and monitoring for gastroesophageal reflux disease, eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), achalasia, and Barrett's esophagus (BE). Several recent studies evaluating adherence to quality metrics affirm substantial variation in practice patterns with opportunities for improvement in care across esophageal diseases. In particular, patient education regarding treatment options in achalasia, frequency of esophageal biopsies among patients with dysphagia to evaluate for EoE, and endoscopic evaluation within a BE segment are areas identified to have need for improvement. As the management of esophageal diseases becomes more complex and interdisciplinary, adherence to quality metrics may be a source of standardization and improvement in delivery and ultimately patient outcomes. Indeed, the development of national quality databases has resulted in a significant growth in the use of these metrics for quality improvement activities and may form the basis for future inclusion in quality reporting and payment programs.

Improved Outcomes in Eosinophilic Esophagitis with Higher Medication Possession Ratio

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) disease activity can be caused by treatment non-adherence. Medication possession ratio (MPR) is an established metric of medication adherence. A higher MPR correlates with better outcomes in several chronic diseases, but MPR has not been investigated with respect to EoE. A retrospective cohort study was performed using an established EoE registry for the years 2005 to 2020. Treatment periods were identified, MPRs were calculated, and medical records were assessed for histologic remission (<15 eos/hpf), dysphagia, food impaction, stricture occurrence, and esophageal dilation that corresponded to each treatment period. In total, 275 treatment periods were included for analysis. The MPR in the histologic remission treatment period group was 0.91 (IQR 0.63-1) vs. 0.63 (IQR 0.31-0.95) for the non-remission treatment period group (p < 0.001). The optimal MPR cut-point for histologic remission was 0.7 (Sen 0.66, Spec 0.62, AUC 0.63). With MPRs ≥ 0.7, there were significantly increased odds of histologic remission (odds ratio 3.05, 95% confidence interval 1.79-5.30) and significantly decreased odds of dysphagia (OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.15-0.45), food impaction (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.11-0.55), stricture occurrence (OR 0.52 95% CI 0.29-0.92), and esophageal dilation (OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.15-0.54). Assessing MPR before repeating an esophagogastroduodenoscopy may decrease unnecessary procedures in the clinical management of eosinophilic esophagitis.

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.

A New Tool to Assess Disease Severity in Eosinophilic Esophagitis

The presentation of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is heterogeneous with varied clinical, endoscopic, and histologic features impacting the severity of the condition. Until recently, however, and in contrast with many other conditions, there has been no standardized way to measure disease severity in EoE. A clinically applicable method for assessing severity in routine practice has been recognized as necessary to standardize assessment and management of EoE. Therefore, the American Gastroenterological Association has sponsored a consensus conference to determine elements of severity in EoE and develop the first tool to measure severity. This article presents details of this severity metric, which is known as the Index of Severity in EoE (I-SEE), and outlines the elements within I-SEE and how to categorize EoE as mild, moderate, severe, or inactive. The domains of I-SEE include symptoms and complications, inflammatory features (both endoscopic and histologic), and fibrostenotic features (both endoscopic and histologic). The article also provides an update on emerging data related to I-SEE and discusses the future studies necessary to implement I-SEE as part of a treatment framework in EoE.

Addressing educational gaps through multidisciplinary team education in eosinophilic oesophagitis management

Once considered a rare disease, eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE) is becoming increasingly prevalent, yet many healthcare professionals (HCPs) remain unfamiliar with the underlying pathophysiology and optimal management approaches. For this study, we developed a faculty-led, online, continuing medical education activity on EoE. The effectiveness of this activity was evaluated according to Moore's framework, with changes in knowledge and competence (Moore's Levels 3 and 4) assessed for a cohort of gastroenterologists, dietitians, allergists and immunologists (N = 300), using questionnaires completed before and after participation. Changes in HCP confidence in treating EoE were also reported and remaining educational gaps were identified. The activity was viewed by a global audience of 5,330 participants within 6 months, and significant improvements in knowledge and competence were reported following participation in the activity across all specialities, regions and experience (mean [standard deviation] score pre- versus post-activity: 4.32 [1.38] versus 5.46 [0.82]; p < 0.001). Confidence in treating EoE also increased from pre- to post-activity, with the proportion of participants reporting that they felt moderately or extremely confident increasing from 53% to 82%. Several educational unmet needs were identified, which can be used to inform the design of future educational activities in EoE.

Development of a Practical Guide to Implement and Monitor Diet Therapy for Eosinophilic Esophagitis

Dietary therapy for short- and long-term management of eosinophilic esophagitis is an effective yet poorly understood and underutilized treatment strategy. Despite several prospective trials demonstrating the efficacy of dietary therapies, successful clinical implementation is hampered by the need for a multidisciplinary approach including dietitian support and provider expertise. The availability of these resources is not readily available to most gastroenterologists. Without standardized guidance on starting or completing the diet for gastrointestinal providers and/or consulting dietitians, provider attitudes toward dietary therapy vary greatly depending on familiarity and knowledge gaps in using diet therapy. This review aims to summarize evidence in support of dietary therapy in eosinophilic esophagitis while providing guidance on initiation and implementation of dietary therapy for providers.

Quality Indicators for the Diagnosis and Management of Eosinophilic Esophagitis

INTRODUCTION

Despite best practice recommendations for managing eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), variation in care exists.

METHODS

We used established methodology for quality indicator development to identify metrics to define quality for the treatment of EoE.

RESULTS

Among 29 proposed quality indicator statements, 9 (31%) were adopted as highly valid across all categories. Two (22%) of these statements were identified as having existing or suspected quality gaps.

DISCUSSION

We identified highly valid EoE quality indicators for adult gastroenterologists, which can be used for quality improvement with resulting benefits for patient outcomes.

Eosinophilia attention, diagnosis, treatment, and awareness in physicians: a cross-sectional survey

Background

Patients with incidental eosinophilia is becoming increasingly common in clinical practice. But it remains challenging to diagnose and treat owing to its complex etiology. The awareness of physicians and the strategies of diagnosis and treatment toward eosinophilia are still unclear.

Objective

We aimed to evaluate attention, diagnosis, treatment, and awareness of eosinophilia among physicians, as well as factors influencing clinical practice, and to find ways to improve the efficacy of this disease.

Design

This is a cross-sectional survey.

Methods

A cross-sectional study was conducted from 1 to 4 June 2021 in a tertiary hospital. Self-administered and validated electronic questionnaire was used to investigate the attention toward eosinophilia, the strategies of diagnosis and treatment, and the awareness in physicians.

Results

A total of 607 valid questionnaires were collected, with a response rate of 84.5%. Among the responders, 65.4% of physicians claimed to be familiar with patients with eosinophilia but only 11.0% of them had read the relevant guidelines or expert consensus. Among 207 physicians who had ever diagnosed patients with eosinophilia, only 19.4% had performed detailed examinations. The accuracy of awareness questions was 1.6-53.5%, and only 26.5% of physicians had high levels of awareness. An increase in the awareness level of up to 2.82 folds was seen among physicians with factors such as job title, encountering patients with eosinophilia, linking patients' conditions to peripheral blood eosinophil count, and paying attention to guidelines.

Conclusion

This study highlighted the importance of raising awareness and knowledge of eosinophilia among physicians in China. More works on education about eosinophilia guideline are needed, which may help physicians make decision with more benefits to patients.

Provider Beliefs, Practices, and Perceived Barriers to Dietary Elimination Therapy in Eosinophilic Esophagitis

INTRODUCTION

Despite effective dietary treatments, physicians prefer medications for eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE).

METHODS

We conducted a web-based survey of providers to assess the perceived effectiveness, practice patterns, and barriers to EoE dietary therapy.

RESULTS

Providers view diet as the least effective treatment. The greatest barrier was the belief that patients are disinterested and unlikely to adhere (58%). With less access to dietitians (56%), nonacademic providers often manage diets without dietitian guidance (41%).

DISCUSSION

Given high patient acceptance for diets and multiple treatment options for EoE, clinicians need evidence-based knowledge on EoE diets, access to dietitians, and awareness of patient preferences.

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.

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.

What patients with eosinophilic esophagitis may not share with their providers: a qualitative assessment of online health communities

BACKGROUND

Little is known about how patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) experience their symptoms, receive care, and cope with their disease. Patients commonly seek peer support from online communities, which provide insights on unmet needs and barriers to care. We performed a qualitative analysis of electronic health forums to characterize patient-to-patient conversations about EoE symptoms and the experience of disease.

METHODS

We identified three publicly accessible electronic health forums hosting EoE communities. Conversation threads posted between July 2018 and June 2020 were coded using emergent and a priori codes based on the THRIVE conceptual framework of coping with chronic illness.

RESULTS

Of 659 threads (4,933 posts) collected over two years, a random sample of 240 threads (30 per 3-month quarter) were selected for analysis. Thematic saturation was reached after 172 threads. Patient experience of EoE was driven by their perspectives in four key domains: (i) perception of EoE as episodic rather than chronic, (ii) treatment choices, (iii) personal definitions of success in the disease, and (iv) views of providers.

CONCLUSION

Online health communities are a valuable and unfiltered source of patient perspectives that can be used to understand patient needs and goals. EoE patients interpret their disease as sporadic events and lack reliable sources of knowledge, which may influence how patients prioritize treatment. If providers are to succeed in providing high-quality EoE care, they need to equip themselves with evidence-based knowledge, engage in shared decision making, and look outside of clinical settings to recognize barriers to disease management.

EoE Down Under Is Still EoE: Variability in Provider Practice Patterns in Australia and New Zealand Among Pediatric Gastroenterologists

BACKGROUND

There is likely variation in approach and management of patient with EoE due to lack of standardized care and variation in guidelines. We aimed to identify current practices regarding diagnosis and treatment in children with eosinophillic esophagitis (EoE) in Australia and New Zealand (ANZ).

METHODS

Information on current diagnostic and management approaches for pediatric EoE was collected via an online survey sent to pediatric gastroenterologists (pGE) in ANZ. We performed a cross-sectional study of pGE using a 49-question instrument regarding evaluation, diagnostic, and therapeutic aspects of EoE between October 2019 and December 2019.

RESULTS

Eighty-five percent of the survey responders were from Australia, and 66% were academic. 30% pGE perform > 3 esophageal biopsies for diagnosis of EoE, 40% involve an allergist, 30% use a twice daily PPI trial, and 70% do not exclude other cause of esophageal eosinophilia. For management, only 3% use dietary elimination as an initial therapy, and 24% use less than the recommended doses of swallowed fluticasone. Forty-nine percent were likely to stop treatment in after remission is achieved for 12 months. The EoE endoscopic reference score (EREFS) was not routinely used (49%). Two-thirds of pGE are concerned about long-term effects of recurrent need of general anesthesia.

CONCLUSIONS

Diagnostic and management strategies for EoE differed widely among pGE in ANZ, including in diagnostic biopsies, assessing competing causes of esophageal eosinophilia, initials selection of treatments, and maintenance strategies. This variability likely reflects continued uncertainty regarding optimal management strategies and stresses the need for pediatric-specific ANZ guidelines to standardize EoE care.

Motivations, Barriers, and Outcomes of Patient-Reported Shared Decision Making in Eosinophilic Esophagitis

BACKGROUND

Little is known about patient choice in treatment of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE).

AIM

Determine motivators and barriers to using common EoE therapies and describe patient-reported shared decision making (SDM) and satisfaction with treatment.

METHODS

We developed and administered a Web-based survey on factors influencing EoE treatment choice, SDM, and satisfaction. Adults with EoE and adult caregivers of pediatric EoE patients were recruited via patient advocacy groups and at two centers. Descriptive statistics of multiple response questions and multivariable logistic regression were performed to identify predictors of SDM and satisfaction with treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 243 adults (mean age 38.7 years) and 270 adult caregivers of children (mean age 9.5 years) completed the survey. Preventing worsening disease was the most common motivator to treat EoE. Barriers to topical steroids were potential side effects, cost, and preferring a medication-free approach. Inconvenience and quality of life were barriers to diet. Potential adverse events, discomfort, and cost were barriers to dilation. Nearly half (42%) of patients experienced low SDM, but those followed by gastroenterologists were more likely to experience greater SDM compared to non-specialists (OR 1.81; 95% CI 1.03-3.15). Patients receiving more SDM were more satisfied with treatment, regardless of provider or treatment type (OR 2.62, 95% CI 1.76-3.92).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with EoE pursue treatment mostly to prevent worsening disease. Common barriers to treatment are inconvenience and financial costs. SDM is practiced most by gastroenterologists, but nearly half of patients do not experience SDM, indicating a substantial area of need in EoE.

Epidemiology and risk factors for eosinophilic esophagitis: lessons for clinicians

INTRODUCTION

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

AREAS COVERED

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

EXPERT OPINION

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