Proton pump inhibitor-responsive esophageal eosinophilia: still a valid diagnosis?

Proton pump inhibitor effect on esophageal protein signature of eosinophilic esophagitis, prediction, and evaluation of treatment response

BACKGROUND

Recently, we have identified a dysregulated protein signature in the esophageal epithelium of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) patients including proteins associated with inflammation and epithelial barrier function; however, the effect of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) treatment on this signature is unknown. Herein, we used a proteomic approach to investigate: (1) whether PPI treatment alters the esophageal epithelium protein profile observed in EoE patients and (2) whether the protein signature at baseline predicts PPI response.

METHODS

We evaluated the protein signature of esophageal biopsies using a cohort of adult EoE (n = 25) patients and healthy controls (C) (n = 10). In EoE patients, esophageal biopsies were taken before (pre) and after (post) an 8-week PPI treatment, determining the histologic response. Eosinophil count PostPPI was used to classify the patients: ≥15 eosinophils/hpf as non-responders (non-responder) and < 15 eosinophils/hpf as responders (R). Protein signature was determined and differentially accumulated proteins were characterized to identify altered biological processes and signaling pathways.

RESULTS

Comparative analysis of differentially accumulated proteins between groups revealed common signatures between three groups of patients with inflammation (responder-PrePPI, non-responder-PrePPI, and non-responder-PostPPI) and without inflammation (controls and responder-PostPPI). PPI therapy almost reversed the EoE specific esophageal protein signature, which is enriched in pathways associated with inflammation and epithelial barrier function, in responder-PostPPI. Furthermore, we identified a set of candidate proteins to differentiate responder-PrePPI and non-responder-PrePPI EoE patients before treatment.

CONCLUSION

These findings provide evidence that PPI therapy reverses the alterations in esophageal inflammatory and epithelial proteins characterizing EoE, thereby providing new insights into the mechanism of PPI clinical response. Interestingly, our results also suggest that PPI response could be predicted at baseline in EoE.

ACCURACY OF THE EOSINOPHILIC ESOPHAGITIS ENDOSCOPIC REFERENCE SCORE IN CHILDREN

BACKGROUND

To assess the efficacy of applying the endoscopic reference score for EoE (EREFS) in children with symptoms of esophageal dysfunction naïve to proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy.

METHODS

An observational cross-sectional study was conducted by reviewing reports and photographs of upper gastrointestinal endoscopies (UGE) and esophageal biopsies of patients with symptoms of esophageal dysfunction. Patients who were treated with PPI or had other conditions that may cause esophageal eosinophilia were excluded.

RESULTS

Of the 2,036 patients evaluated, endoscopic findings of EoE were identified in 248 (12.2%) and more than one abnormality was observed in 167 (8.2%). Among all patients, 154 (7.6%) presented esophageal eosinophilia (≥15 eosinophils per high power field) (P<0.01). In this group, 30 patients (19.5%) had normal endoscopy. In patients with EoE, edema (74% vs 6.5%, P<0.01) and furrows (66.2% vs 2.4%, P<0.01) were more prevalent than in the control group. Association of edema and furrows was more frequent in patients with EoE than in the control group (29.2% vs 1.6%, P<0.01, OR=24.7, CI=15.0-40.5). The presence of more than one endoscopic finding had sensitivity of 80.5%, specificity of 93.4%, positive predictive value (PPV) of 50%, negative predictive value (NPV) of 98.3%, and accuracy of 92.4%.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, this study showed that endoscopic features suggestive of EoE had high specificity and NPV for diagnosing EoE in children naïve to PPI therapy. These findings highlight the importance of the EREFS in contributing to early identification of inflammatory and fibrostenosing characteristics of EoE, making it possible to identify and to avoid progression of the disease.

BACKGROUND

• The EoE endoscopic reference score (EREFS) was developed and validated in adults and has been demonstrated to be an adequate tool for diagnosing and assessing treatment response in children.

BACKGROUND

• The presence of more than one endoscopic finding stronglysuggests EoE.

BACKGROUND

• The EoE endoscopic reference score presents high specificity and negative predictive value for diagnosing EoE in children naïve to proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy.

BACKGROUND

• Endoscopic findings suggestive of EoE in patients naïve to treatment may be useful to characterize disease phenotype and individualize treatment according to the initial clinical presentation.

Analysis of local expression of inflammatory cytokines genes in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease and its association with types and number of gastroesophageal refluxes

The aim of the study was to evaluate gene expression of proinflammatory cytokines in esophageal mucosa in patients with erosive esophagitis (EE) and non-erosive form (NERD) of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and perform correlation analysis between the genes expression and types and number of gastroesophageal refluxes. Methods. This was a single-center prospective study. Esophageal mucosa samples were taken from lower part of the esophagus during endoscopy. Expression of IL-1b, IL-10, IL-18, TNFA, TLR4, GATA3, CD68 and beta-2 macroglobulin genes was assessed with ImmunoQuantex assays. Multichannel intraluminal esophageal pH-impedance studies were performed with Ohmega recorder and 2pH-6impedance catheters. Results. Data of 60 patients (females - 34; mean age (M±SD) 54.6 years, 20 - with erosive esophagitis) were available for the analysis. In those with EE, there was higher expression of IL-18 (5.89±0.4 vs 5.28±1.1, p=0.04), GATA3 (2.92±0.86 vs 2.23±0.96, p=0.03) genes, and inflammatory index (92.12±32.41% vs 70.1±30.8%, p=0.02) compared to NERD. Direct correlation was found between acid exposure time and expression of IL-1b (Spearman rank R = 0.29), IL-18 (R=0.31), TNFA (R=0.35), GATA3 (R=0.34), TLR4 (R=0.29), CD68 (R=0.37) genes and inflammatory index (R=0.3). Indirect correlation was revealed between mean рН and expressions of IL-18 (R= -0.28), TNFA (R= -0.33), GATA3 (R= -0.28), TLR4 (R= -0.28), CD68 (R= -0.39) genes and inflammatory index (R= -0.17). No correlation was found between the genes’ expression and number of gastroesophageal refluxes. Conclusions: Expression of proinflammatory cytokines’ genes differ in patients with EE and NERD. There is a correlation between expression of studied genes and esophageal acidity.

Local inflammatory response to gastroesophageal reflux: Association of gene expression of inflammatory cytokines with esophageal multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH data

BACKGROUND

Gene expression of inflammatory cytokines may take part in the pathophysiology of different forms of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD).

AIM

To explore gene expression of inflammatory cytokines in esophageal mucosa in patients with erosive esophagitis (EE) and non-erosive forms of GERD (NERD) and its association with data of esophageal multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH (MII-pH) measurements.

METHODS

This was a single-center prospective study. Esophageal mucosa samples were taken from the lower part of the esophagus during endoscopy. Expression of interleukin (IL)-1β, IL-10, IL-18, tumor necrosis factor α (TNFA), toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4), GATA binding protein 3 (GATA3), differentiation cluster 68 (CD68) and β-2 microglobulin genes in esophageal mucosa was assessed with ImmunoQuantex assays. MII-pH measurements were performed on all the participants. Diagnosis of GERD was confirmed by the results of the MII-pH data. Based on the endoscopy, patients were allocated to the groups of EE and NERD. The control group consisted of non-symptomatic subjects with normal endoscopy and MII-pH results. We used nonparametric statistics to compare the differences between the groups. Association of expression of the mentioned genes with the results of the MII-pH data was assessed with Spearman’s rank method.

RESULTS

Data from 60 patients with GERD and 10 subjects of the control group were available for the analysis. Higher expression of IL-18 (5.89 ± 0.4 vs 5.28 ± 1.1, P = 0.04) and GATA3 (2.92 ± 0.86 vs 2.23 ± 0.96, P = 0.03) was found in the EE group compared to NERD. Expression of IL-1β, IL-18, TNFA, and TLR4 was lower (P < 0.05) in the control group compared to EE and NERD. Esophageal acid exposure correlated with the expression of IL-1β (Spearman’s rank r = 0.29), IL-18 (r = 0.31), TNFA (r = 0.35), GATA3 (r = 0.34), TLR4 (r = 0.29), and CD68 (r = 0.37). Mean esophageal рН correlated inversely with the expression of IL-18, TNFA, GATA3, TLR4, and CD68. No association of gene expression with the number of gastroesophageal refluxes was found.

CONCLUSION

In patients with EE, local expression of IL-18 and GATA3 was higher compared to subjects with NERD. Esophageal acid exposure correlated directly with expression of IL-1β, IL-18, TNFA, TLR4, CD68, and β-2 microglobulin genes. Inverse correlation was revealed between expression of IL-18, TNFA, GATA3, TLR4, and CD68 and mean esophageal pH.

Endoscopic and histological characteristics in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis responsive and non-responsive to proton pump inhibitors

OBJECTIVE

To compare endoscopic and histologic features of pediatric patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) responding to proton pump inhibitor (PPI) to those not responding to PPI.

METHODS

Endoscopic reports and photographs of patients with symptoms of esophageal dysfunction and ≥15 eosinophils per high-powered field (eos/hpf) in esophageal biopsies prior to PPI trial were reviewed. Patients were classified as responsive to PPI (PPIREoE) or non-responsive to PPI (PPINREoE) according to response totreatment (<15 eos/hpf) at second endoscopy after 8 weeks.

RESULTS

Of the 231 patients (72.3% male), 64 (27.7%) were responsive to the proton pump inhibitors. Edema (77.3% vs. 62.5%, p=0.031) and vertical lines (69.5% vs. 51.6%, p=0.014) were more frequent in PPINREoE patients. An eosinophil count in the mid-esophagus ≥ 35 eos/HPF (25.1% vs. 12.5%) was more frequent in these patients (p=0.001). Those with eosinophil count < 15 eos/HPF in the mid-esophagus at the first endoscopy were more likely to respond to treatment with proton pump inhibitors compared to patients with 15-34 eos/HPF (p=0.004, OR: 3.26, 95% CI: 1.46-7.24) and to patients with ≥ 35 eos/HPF (p=0.006, OR: 3.20, 95% CI: 1.39-7.41).

CONCLUSION

Edema and vertical lines at the endoscopy and a higher eosinophil count in the mid-esophagus were more frequent in patients who were non-responsive to proton pump inhibitors. As there were no significant differences in the other findings between the groups, it cannot be affirmed that these characteristics are sufficient to differentiate between PPINREoE and PPIREoE patients.

The Clinician's Guide to Proton-Pump Inhibitor Discontinuation

There is increasing concern among patients and health care providers about the associations between PPI use and a multitude of potential adverse outcomes. Therefore, clinicians need to have a rational approach both to identifying PPI users who may not have an ongoing indication for their use and on how to encourage discontinuation of unnecessary PPI use. In this paper, we will provide a detailed review of the specific indications where the benefits of ongoing PPI use is of questionable value and will review the evidence on how to maximize the likelihood of being able to successfully discontinue PPI use while minimizing symptom recurrence.

How I Approach Dysphagia

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review presents an overview of the diagnostic approach to esophageal dysphagia and summarizes recent epidemiological trends and technical advancements.

RECENT FINDINGS

The evaluation of dysphagia begins with a detailed history followed by endoscopy to evaluate for any structural abnormalities including malignancy. This is especially true given the emergence of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) as a dominant cause of esophageal dysphagia. In fact, it is now standard practice to obtain esophageal biopsies during endoscopy performed to evaluate dysphagia, since EoE can present without the characteristic mucosal features of rings, furrows, and exudate. Achalasia is also more frequently encountered since the introduction of high-resolution manometry (HRM) and the Chicago Classification into clinical practice. The Chicago Classification provides a stepwise diagnostic algorithm for evaluating HRM studies and systematically diagnosing esophageal motility disorders. Lastly, the functional lumen imaging probe (FLIP) is a novel technology that has added insight into both achalasia and EoE. Measuring esophageal distensibility with FLIP has useful prognostic implications for both diseases, and FLIP can identify motility abnormalities in achalasics not detected with HRM. A careful history is key to the efficient evaluation of dysphagia, and endoscopy is usually the first diagnostic study to obtain. For patients with prominent reflux symptoms, an empiric trial with proton pump inhibitors is reasonable then because reflux disease is such a common cause of dysphagia. Thereafter, patients should undergo HRM to evaluate for a motility disorder, and FLIP can provide complementary data to guide management.

Eosinophilic esophagitis in children: doubts and future perspectives

Background

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic immune-mediated inflammatory disorder and represents the leading cause of food impaction. The pathogenesis of EoE is the result of an interplay between genetic, environmental and host immune system factors. New therapeutic approaches for EoE have been proposed. In this manuscript we review the current evidence regarding EoE management in pediatric age, with a particular focus on new findings related to the efficacy and safety of monoclonal antibodies.

Main body

Conventional therapies have failed in treating some patients with EoE, which then requires aggressive procedures such as esophageal dilatation. The most effective available medical therapy for EoE is swallowed topic corticosteroids (fluticasone propionate and budesonide), which have two main drawbacks: they are related to well-known adverse effects (especially in the paediatric population), and there are not enough long-term data to confirm that they are able to reverse the remodelling process of the esophageal mucosa, which is the major cause of EoE symptoms (including dysphagia, abdominal pain, nausea, obstruction, perforation and vomiting). The monoclonal antibodies appear to be an interesting therapeutic approach. However, the studies conducted until now have shown substantial histological improvement not coupled with significant clinical improvements and no significant relationship between a decreasing number of eosinophils and clinical symptoms, highlighting the importance in the pathogenesis of EoE of cells such as T-helper cells, mast cells, B cells, epithelial cells and natural killer cells.

Conclusions

Monoclonal antibodies targeting a signal involved in the pathogenesis of EoE may not break the complex self-propagating inflammatory activation responsible for perpetuation of the inflammatory response and the development of symptoms and complications. We speculate that combined biological therapies targeting more than one molecule or cell may provide better results, with conventional therapies potentially enhancing the effects of antibodies. However, further studies should aim to find the best therapeutic approach to target the cells involved in the remodelling process and to reverse the histological changes in this complex clinical condition.

Eosinophilic esophagitis-Where are we today?

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this review is to provide an overview of the practical diagnostic and therapeutic approaches to eosinophilic esophagitis and to increase the visibility of the disease among pediatricians.

SOURCES

A search of the MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL databases and recent consensus statements and guidelines were performed.

SUMMARY OF THE FINDINGS

The definition of eosinophilic esophagitis is based on symptoms and histology. It is important to rule out other diseases associated with esophageal eosinophil-predominant inflammation. It is not yet clear whether the increased prevalence is due to a real increase in incidence or a result of increased awareness of the disease. Various options for management have been used in pediatric patients, including proton pump inhibitors, dietary restriction therapies, swallowed topical steroids, and endoscopic dilations. More recently, proton pump inhibitor-responsive esophageal eosinophilia and eosinophilic esophagitis have been contemplated on the same spectrum, and proton pump inhibitors should be considered the initial step in the treatment of these patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Eosinophilic esophagitis is a relatively new disease with a remarkable progression of its incidence and prevalence in the past two to three decades, and diagnostic criteria that are constantly evolving. It is important to better understand the pathogenesis of the disease, the predisposing factors, the natural history, and the categorization of varying phenotypes to develop diagnostic and therapeutic strategies that meet the clinical needs of patients.

Gastro-oesophageal reflux disease and eosinophilic oesophagitis: What is the relationship?

Eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE) and gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD) are the most common causes of chronic oesophagitis and dysphagia associated with oesophageal mucosal eosinophilia. Distinguishing between the two is imperative but challenging due to overlapping clinical and histological features. A diagnosis of EoE requires clinical, histological and endoscopic correlation whereas a diagnosis of GORD is mainly clinical without the need for other investigations. Both entities may exhibit oesophageal eosinophilia at a similar level making a histological distinction between them difficult. Although the term proton-pump inhibitor responsive oesophageal eosinophilia has recently been retracted from the guidelines, a relationship between EoE and GORD still exists. This relationship is complex as they may coexist, either interacting bidirectionally or are unrelated. This review aims to outline the differences and potential relationship between the two conditions, with specific focus on histology, immunology, pathogenesis and treatment.

Pediatric Eosinophilic Esophagitis Endotypes: Are We Closer to Predicting Treatment Response?

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic, food antigen-driven gastrointestinal disease that is characterized by esophageal eosinophilia. Currently, there are no Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved treatments for EoE, but the two most commonly prescribed therapies include topical corticosteroids and food elimination diets. Clinical trials have revealed a significant proportion of cases that are resistant to topical corticosteroids, and although we define EoE as a food antigen-driven disease, not all patients with EoE respond to elimination diets or even elemental diets. The varied response to treatments highlights the heterogeneity of EoE and the need for new treatment strategies. Despite the clinical differences in treatment response, predicting the outcome remains difficult since factors including age, histologic severity at diagnosis, atopic history, and anthropometrics are not predictive of treatment response. In our practice at an academic pediatric referral center, we observe distinct clinical EoE phenotypes, including cases with atopy, connective tissue disorders, or responsiveness to a proton pump inhibitor. Similar to the work in progress with asthma, stratification of patients with EoE by clinical phenotypes and/or molecular endotypes will likely assist with therapy selection and prediction of natural history. Molecular analysis with gene expression panels also shows promise in helping us classify patients based on molecular endotypes. In additional to the clinical and molecular classifications, more accurate histologic diagnostic criteria for EoE may help us tease out small differences between patient cohorts. Despite the leaps in knowledge over the past decade regarding EoE pathogenesis, it remains a challenge to predict the response to treatment. Future studies focused on molecular, genetic, and immunologic analyses of larger patient cohorts are needed to assist in identifying EoE phenotypes and endotypes as we attempt to improve patient outcomes in pediatric EoE.

Eosinophilic Esophagitis: Review and Update

Background: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) was first described in the 1990s, showing an increasing incidence and prevalence since then, being the leading cause of food impaction and the major cause of dysphagia. Probably, in a few years, EoE may no longer be considered a rare disease. Methods: This article discusses new aspects of the pathogenesis, symptoms, diagnosis, and treatment of EoE according to the last published guidelines. Results: The epidemiological studies indicate a multifactorial origin for EoE, where environmental and genetic factors take part. EoE affects both children and adults and it is frequently associated with atopic disease and IgE-mediated food allergies. In patients undergoing oral immunotherapy for desensitization from IgE-mediated food allergy the risk of developing EoE is 2.72%. Barrier dysfunction and T-helper 2 inflammation is considered to be pathogenetically important factors. There are different patterns of clinical presentation varying with age and can be masked by adaptation habits. Besides, symptoms do not usually correlate with histologic disease activity. The diagnostic criteria for EoE has evolved but mainly requires symptoms of esophageal dysfunction with histologic evidence of a peak value of at least 15 eosinophils per high-power field. Endoscopies have to be repeated in order to diagnose, monitor, and treat EoE. Treatment of EoE can be started either by drugs (PPIs and topical corticosteroids) or elimination diets. The multistage step-up elimination diet management approach of EoE is promising. Endoscopic dilation is used for patients with severe dysphagia/food impaction with inadequate response to anti-inflammatory treatment. Conclusions: Research in recent years has contributed to a better understanding of EoE's pathogenesis, genetic background, natural history, allergy workup, standardization in assessment of disease activity, evaluation of minimally invasive diagnostic tools, and new therapeutic approaches. However, several unmet needs are to be solved urgently, as finding a non-invasive disease-monitoring methods and biomarkers for routine practice, the development or new therapies, novel food allergy testing to detect triggering foods, drug, and doses required for initial therapy and safety issues with long-term maintenance therapy, amongst others. Besides, multidisciplinary management units of EoE, involving gastroenterologists, pediatricians, allergists, pathologists, dietitians, and ENT specialists are needed.

What Is the Relationship Between Eosinophilic Esophagitis (EoE) and Aeroallergens? Implications for Allergen Immunotherapy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Observations suggesting that aeroallergens trigger eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) in a subset of patients raise questions about the implications this finding has on the evaluation and management of patients with EoE, including a potential role for allergen immunotherapy.

RECENT FINDINGS

The majority of studies evaluating the potential role of aeroallergens as provocateurs of EoE have addressed this issue by assessing the seasonal variation in EoE diagnosis and/or symptom onset or worsening, with mixed results. For various reasons, reaching accurate conclusions based on this methodology is potentially fraught with error. In addition, studies examining the even harder to assess role of perennial aeroallergens in triggering EoE are lacking. Although clearly not the majority, there may be a subset of patients with EoE and allergic rhinitis in whom exposure to aeroallergens to which they are sensitized contributes to esophageal eosinophilia either through direct chronic esophageal mucosal contact with pollen allergens or from repetitive exposure of the esophageal mucosa to pollen allergens, mediators, and eosinophils in swallowed nasal secretions. Therefore, evaluation for and optimal treatment of comorbid allergic rhinitis in EoE patients are clearly indicated. Recognition of the potential role of aeroallergens as triggers of EoE also raises the question of whether allergen immunotherapy might be an effective form of EoE treatment. Reports of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) inducing EoE support the notion that aeroallergens can trigger EoE, but negate this approach as a potential form of EoE therapy. In fact, the use of SLIT is contraindicated in patients with EoE. The literature regarding the role of subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) in patients with EoE is limited. Current evidence indicates that it should not be typically recommended; however, SCIT might benefit a subset of patients with EoE and uncontrolled allergic rhinitis on conventional therapies in whom SCIT would otherwise be indicated for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis, particularly in those with sensitizations to pollens containing allergens that cross react with food allergens. The purpose of this review is to discuss the current literature examining the role of aeroallergens in triggering EoE with a focus on the potential clinical implications of this finding on managing patients with EoE.

Systematic review of histological remission criteria in eosinophilic esophagitis

Elemental diets, dietary elimination, and steroid therapies are the most common therapies in the clinical trials for eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). Histological findings (usually reported as eosinophils per microscopic high‐powered field [hpf]) remain the most common end‐point used to define response. Yet, the threshold for defining “response” and “remission” are ill‐defined among consensus guidelines and may vary from study to study. We conducted a systematic literature review of articles on eosinophilic esophagitis, published between January 2007 and November 2017, considering histological remission as the primary outcome. We abstracted treatment information and definitions of histological remission or response. A comparison of definitions of histological remission across and within institutions was performed. A total of 61 articles were included in this review, with approximately 60% of the studies published from centers in the United States. Histological definitions of remission of EoE ranged from 0 to ≤20 eosinophils/hpf. The most stringent criteria, ranging from 0 to ≤5 eosinophils/hpf, were commonly used in interventional trial studies that examined the effects of new treatments. We found remarkable variability in definitions between studies, treatment types, and regions. Age or epidemiological distribution of study subjects did not influence the criteria for histological remission. Clinical and histological improvements are important measures of the effects of treatment. Histological findings, the most objective measure of treatment, should provide an optimal method for comparing the effectiveness of various treatments. Yet, our findings suggest a lack of consistent remission criteria in published studies. Considering these inconsistencies, it is difficult to compare the effectiveness of various treatments.

Low Prevalence of Biopsy-Proven Eosinophilic Esophagitis in Patients with Esophageal Food Impaction in Mexican Population

BACKGROUND

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is the most common cause of dysphagia and esophageal food impaction (EFI) in the USA, Western Europe, and Australia. In Mexico, the uncomplicated form of this disease is infrequent, and prevalence in patients with EFI is unknown.

AIMS

To determine the prevalence and causes of EFI, endoscopic and therapeutic aspects, and establish the prevalence of biopsy-proven EoE in patients with EFI.

METHODS

Diagnostic upper gastrointestinal endoscopy reports from January 2011 to December 2016 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients with therapeutic procedures, gastrointestinal hemorrhage, or non-food foreign body impaction were excluded. The number of patients with EFI was determined. Additionally, patients with esophageal biopsy were retained for EoE prevalence calculation. The diagnosis of EoE was defined with the presence of eosinophil infiltration count ≥ 15/high-power field with or without typical endoscopic abnormalities.

RESULTS

A total of 4700 reports of the same number of patients were selected; 2209 were males (47%) with a mean age of 57.6 ± 12.3 years (range 14-93). We identified 36 patients with EFI (0.76, 95% CI 0.51-1.01), 16 males (44.4%) with a mean age of 54.9 ± 19.7 (range 22-92). Esophageal biopsies were obtained in 17/36 (47.2%) cases. The diagnosis of EoE was confirmed in 2 patients (11.7%). Peptic stenosis was the most frequent cause of EFI.

CONCLUSIONS

EoE is an infrequent cause of EFI in the Mexican population (11.7%). EoE had the lowest prevalence compared to that reported in Caucasian populations. The prevalence of EFI was also low.

An algorithm for the classification of mRNA patterns in eosinophilic esophagitis: Integration of machine learning

BACKGROUND

Diagnostic evaluation of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) remains difficult, particularly the assessment of the patient's allergic status.

OBJECTIVE

This study sought to establish an automated medical algorithm to assist in the evaluation of EoE.

METHODS

Machine learning techniques were used to establish a diagnostic probability score for EoE, p(EoE), based on esophageal mRNA transcript patterns from biopsies of patients with EoE, gastroesophageal reflux disease and controls. Dimensionality reduction in the training set established weighted factors, which were confirmed by immunohistochemistry. Following weighted factor analysis, p(EoE) was determined by random forest classification. Accuracy was tested in an external test set, and predictive power was assessed with equivocal patients. Esophageal IgE production was quantified with epsilon germ line (IGHE) transcripts and correlated with serum IgE and the T_h2-type mRNA profile to establish an IGHE score for tissue allergy.

RESULTS

In the primary analysis, a 3-class statistical model generated a p(EoE) score based on common characteristics of the inflammatory EoE profile. A p(EoE) ≥ 25 successfully identified EoE with high accuracy (sensitivity: 90.9%, specificity: 93.2%, area under the curve: 0.985) and improved diagnosis of equivocal cases by 84.6%. The p(EoE) changed in response to therapy. A secondary analysis loop in EoE patients defined an IGHE score of ≥37.5 for a patient subpopulation with increased esophageal allergic inflammation.

CONCLUSIONS

The development of intelligent data analysis from a machine learning perspective provides exciting opportunities to improve diagnostic precision and improve patient care in EoE. The p(EoE) and the IGHE score are steps toward the development of decision trees to define EoE subpopulations and, consequently, will facilitate individualized therapy.

New Developments in the Diagnosis, Therapy, and Monitoring of Eosinophilic Esophagitis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) has transformed over the past two decades from a little-known entity to a significant cause of morbidity in the adult and pediatric population. We reviewed the most recent advancements in the diagnosis, therapy, and long-term monitoring of EoE.

RECENT FINDINGS

Based on clinical, endoscopic, histologic, immunologic, and genetic similarities, there is growing consensus to move away from distinguishing proton pump inhibitor responsive esophageal eosinophilia as an entity distinct from EoE. An increasing number of studies have identified duration of untreated disease as an important determinant of esophageal stricture formation. New approaches to the empiric elimination diet including one, two, four, and step-up protocols were developed to reduce the need for repeated endoscopies during reintroduction of food triggers. Topical steroids remain the mainstay of medical therapy but newer formulations are under development to optimize esophageal delivery. Novel, disease activity monitoring techniques are being evaluated that assess esophageal inflammatory activity without the need for endoscopy. Understanding of EoE has increased remarkably from the first identification of the disease. The underlying pathogenesis continues to be explored leading to shifts in diagnostic criteria as well as novel therapeutic targets. Innovative methods to monitor disease are under investigation and more research is needed to understand the natural history of EoE.

A Review of Tertiary Referrals for Management of Pediatric Esophageal Eosinophilia

Background: Eosinophilic esophagitis is a chronic, immune-mediated disease characterized by symptoms of esophageal dysfunction and ≥15 eosinophils/high-powered field (eos/hpf). Proton pump inhibitor responsive esophageal eosinophilia (1) is an entity of esophageal eosinophilia that responds to PPI therapy and is thought to be clinically and histologically similar to EoE. Current guidelines suggest therapy with PPI prior to endoscopy and use of PPI as first line for esophageal eosinophilia. In order to gain a better understanding of community practice patterns and to try differentiate between these two entities, we sought to evaluate the clinical presentations, treatment and final diagnoses of patients presenting to our institution for second opinions of esophageal eosinophilia. Methods: A search of our electronic medical record yielded a list of patients presenting for a second opinion of esophageal eosinophilia. Charts were reviewed for clinical information. Results: A total of 187 charts were included. Patients ranged from 1-19 years old with 75% being male and 74% being Caucasian. Of the patients who had documentation of their medications at the time of initial endoscopy, 70% were not on any PPI prior to their endoscopy, and 94% were on <2 mg/kg/day. Of the 19 patients who had full response to PPI therapy and were diagnosed with PPI-REE, close to half had previously been treated with diet, steroids, or both. Patients with final diagnosis of EoE had significantly higher eos/hpf on initial endoscopy compared to those with diagnosis of PPI-REE (51.9 ± 30.6 v. 35.8 ± 16.4. p = 0.027), as well as higher likelihood of having IgE-mediated food allergy (79 v. 47%, p = 0.003). Conclusions: Diagnostic and therapeutic algorithms are needed for esophageal eosinophilia to prevent misdiagnosis and unnecessary procedures and therapies.