Anti-eosinophil activity and clinical efficacy of the CRTH2 antagonist OC000459 in 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.

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.

Evolving strategies: Enhancements in managing eosinophilic esophagitis in pediatric patients

Eosinophilic esophagitis is a newly recognized disease first described about 50 years ago. The definition, diagnosis, and management have evolved with new published consensus guidelines and newly approved treatment available to pediatricians, enabling a better understanding of this disease and more targeted treatment for patients. We describe the definition, presentation, and diagnosis of eosinophilic esophagitis including management, challenges, and future directions in children. The definition, diagnosis, and management of eosinophilic esophagitis have evolved over the last 50 years. Consensus guidelines and newly approved biologic treatment have enabled pediatricians to better understand this disease and allow for more targeted treatment for patients. We describe the definition, presentation, diagnosis, management, and treatment in addition to the challenges and future directions of eosinophilic esophagitis management in children.

Vasoactive Intestinal Peptide Receptor, CRTH2, Antagonist Treatment Improves Eosinophil and Mast Cell-Mediated Esophageal Remodeling and Motility Dysfunction in Eosinophilic Esophagitis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Ultrasonography has shown that eosinophils accumulate in each segment of the esophageal mucosa in human EoE, ultimately promoting esophageal motility dysfunction; however, no mechanistic evidence explains how or why this accumulation occurs.

METHODS

Quantitative PCR, ELISA, flow cytometry, immunostaining, and immunofluorescence analyses were performed using antibodies specific to the related antigens and receptors.

RESULTS

In deep esophageal biopsies of EoE patients, eosinophils and mast cells accumulate adjacent to nerve cell-derived VIP in each esophageal segment. qRT-PCR analysis revealed five- to sixfold increases in expression levels of VIP, CRTH2, and VAPC2 receptors and proteins in human blood- and tissue-accumulated eosinophils and mast cells. We also observed a significant correlation between mRNA CRTH2 levels and eosinophil- and nerve cell-derived VIPs in human EoE (p < 0.05). We provide evidence that eosinophil and mast cell deficiency following CRTH2 antagonist treatment improves motility dysfunction in a chronic DOX-inducible CC10-IL-13 murine model of experimental EoE.

CONCLUSIONS

CRTH2 antagonist treatment is a novel therapeutic strategy for inflammatory cell-induced esophageal motility dysfunction in IL-13-induced chronic experimental EoE.

Lipid mediators of inhalation exposure-induced pulmonary toxicity and inflammation

Many inhalation exposures induce pulmonary inflammation contributing to disease progression. Inflammatory processes are actively regulated via mediators including bioactive lipids. Bioactive lipids are potent signaling molecules involved in both pro-inflammatory and resolution processes through receptor interactions. The formation and clearance of lipid signaling mediators are controlled by multiple metabolic enzymes. An imbalance of these lipids can result in exacerbated and sustained inflammatory processes which may result in pulmonary damage and disease. Dysregulation of pulmonary bioactive lipids contribute to inflammation and pulmonary toxicity following exposures. For example, inhalation of cigarette smoke induces activation of pro-inflammatory bioactive lipids such as sphingolipids, and ceramides contributing to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Additionally, exposure to silver nanoparticles causes dysregulation of inflammatory resolution lipids. As inflammation is a common consequence resulting from inhaled exposures and a component of numerous diseases it represents a broadly applicable target for therapeutic intervention. With new appreciation for bioactive lipids, technological advances to reliably identify and quantify lipids have occurred. In this review, we will summarize, integrate, and discuss findings from recent studies investigating the impact of inhaled exposures on pro-inflammatory and resolution lipids within the lung and their contribution to disease. Throughout the review current knowledge gaps in our understanding of bioactive lipids and their contribution to pulmonary effects of inhaled exposures will be presented. New methods being employed to detect and quantify disruption of pulmonary lipid levels following inhalation exposures will be highlighted. Lastly, we will describe how lipid dysregulation could potentially be addressed by therapeutic strategies to address inflammation.

Eosinophils-from cradle to grave: An EAACI task force paper on new molecular insights and clinical functions of eosinophils and the clinical effects of targeted eosinophil depletion

Over the past years, eosinophils have become a focus of scientific interest, especially in the context of their recently uncovered functions (e.g. antiviral, anti-inflammatory, regulatory). These versatile cells display both beneficial and detrimental activities under various physiological and pathological conditions. Eosinophils are involved in the pathogenesis of many diseases which can be classified into primary (clonal) and secondary (reactive) disorders and idiopathic (hyper)eosinophilic syndromes. Depending on the biological specimen, the eosinophil count in different body compartments may serve as a biomarker reflecting the underlying pathophysiology and/or activity of distinct diseases and as a therapy-driving (predictive) and monitoring tool. Personalized selection of an appropriate therapeutic strategy directly or indirectly targeting the increased number and/or activity of eosinophils should be based on the understanding of eosinophil homeostasis including their interactions with other immune and non-immune cells within different body compartments. Hence, restoring as well as maintaining homeostasis within an individual's eosinophil pool is a goal of both specific and non-specific eosinophil-targeting therapies. Despite the overall favourable safety profile of the currently available anti-eosinophil biologics, the effect of eosinophil depletion should be monitored from the perspective of possible unwanted consequences.

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.

Mechanistic Insights into Eosinophilic Esophagitis: Therapies Targeting Pathophysiological Mechanisms

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic inflammatory disease characterized by eosinophilic infiltration of the esophagus. It arises from a complex interplay of genetic predisposition (susceptibility loci), environmental triggers (allergens and dietary antigens), and a dysregulated immune response, mainly mediated by type 2 T helper cell (Th2)-released cytokines, such as interleukin (IL)-4, IL-5, and IL-13. These cytokines control eosinophil recruitment and activation as well as tissue remodeling, contributing to the characteristic features of EoE. The pathogenesis of EoE includes epithelial barrier dysfunction, mast cell activation, eosinophil degranulation, and fibrosis. Epithelial barrier dysfunction allows allergen penetration and promotes immune cell infiltration, thereby perpetuating the inflammatory response. Mast cells release proinflammatory mediators and promote eosinophil recruitment and the release of cytotoxic proteins and cytokines, causing tissue damage and remodeling. Prolonged inflammation can lead to fibrosis, resulting in long-term complications such as strictures and dysmotility. Current treatment options for EoE are limited and mainly focus on dietary changes, proton-pump inhibitors, and topical corticosteroids. Novel therapies targeting key inflammatory pathways, such as monoclonal antibodies against IL-4, IL-5, and IL-13, are emerging in clinical trials. A deeper understanding of the complex pathogenetic mechanisms behind EoE will contribute to the development of more effective and personalized therapeutic strategies.

Current and Novel Therapies for Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Diseases

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

The evolving landscape of immunotherapy for the treatment of allergic conditions

Allergic conditions, such as asthma, chronic urticaria, atopic dermatitis (AD), and eosinophilic esophagitis, have long been treated with oral and topical steroids which resulted in negative off-target effects. However, newer biologic medications are increasingly being developed and approved for treatment of these conditions. These medications have a variety of mechanisms of action to target pathophysiology specific to these diseases. As biologics become more targeted, fewer off-target effects are seen improving tolerability for patients as well as expanded options for treatment of these conditions. This review discusses monoclonal antibody therapies (omalizumab, mepolizumab, reslizumab, benralizumab, dupilumab, tezepelumab, and tralokinumab) including their safety and use in asthma, chronic urticaria, AD, and eosinophilic esophagitis.

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.

[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.

Eosinophilic gastroenteritis: Pathogenesis, diagnosis, and treatment

ABSTRACT

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

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.

The randomized, single- and multiple- ascending dose studies of the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics of CSPCHA115 in healthy Chinese subjects

CSPCHA115 is a highly selective and potent antagonist of chemoattractant receptor-homologous molecule expressed on TH2 cells (CRTH2). This study aimed to evaluate the pharmacokinetics (PKs), safety, and tolerability of single and multiple ascending doses of CSPCHA115 in Chinese healthy subjects. Two phase I studies both adopted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, single-center, and ascending-dose design. In the single ascending dose (SAD) study, subjects were randomly allocated to receive a single dose of CSPCHA115 (25-1000 mg) or a placebo. In the multiple ascending dose (MAD) study, 100, 200, 400, or 600 mg of CSPCHA115 or placebo were given to subjects once daily for 7 days. PK parameters were estimated by noncompartmental analysis. Safety was assessed by monitoring treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), clinical laboratory tests, electrocardiograms, vital signs, and physical examinations throughout the study period. Forty-eight healthy subjects were enrolled in the SAD study, and 40 healthy subjects were in the MAD study. Following single and multiple administrations, CSPCHA115 was rapidly absorbed with a median time to maximum concentration of ~0.5-3.5 h; and the systemic exposure of CSPCHA115 generally increased dose-proportionally within the dose range studied. Steady-state was approximately achieved by day 5, and <1.5-fold accumulation was observed following multiple doses. Mean terminal half-life was ~8.16-16.43 h after a single dose. CSPCHA115 was well-tolerated in both studies, with a low overall incidence of TEAEs. The most common TEAE related to CSPCHA115 was hypertriglyceridemia. No significant safety concerns were identified in healthy subjects.

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.

Effect of CRTH2 antagonism on the response to experimental rhinovirus infection in asthma: a pilot randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The chemoattractant receptor-homologous molecule expressed on T helper type 2 cells (CRTH2) antagonist timapiprant improved lung function and asthma control in a phase 2 study, with evidence suggesting reduced exacerbations. We aimed to assess whether timapiprant attenuated or prevented asthma exacerbations induced by experimental rhinovirus (RV) infection. We furthermore hypothesised that timapiprant would dampen RV-induced type 2 inflammation and consequently improve antiviral immune responses.

METHODS

Atopic patients with partially controlled asthma on maintenance inhaled corticosteroids were randomised to timapiprant (n=22) or placebo (n=22) and challenged with RV-A16 3 weeks later. The primary endpoint was the cumulative lower respiratory symptom score over the 14 days post infection. Upper respiratory symptoms, spirometry, airway hyperresponsiveness, exhaled nitric oxide, RV-A16 virus load and soluble mediators in upper and lower airways samples, and CRTH2 staining in bronchial biopsies were additionally assessed before and during RV-A16 infection.

RESULTS

Six subjects discontinued the study and eight were not infected; outcomes were assessed in 16 timapiprant-treated and 14 placebo-treated, successfully infected subjects. There were no differences between treatment groups in clinical exacerbation severity including cumulative lower respiratory symptom score day 0-14 (difference 3.0 (95% CI -29.0 to 17.0), p=0.78), virus load, antiviral immune responses, or RV-A16-induced airway inflammation other than in the bronchial biopsies, where CRTH2 staining was increased during RV-A16 infection in the placebo-treated but not the timapiprant-treated group. Timapiprant had a favourable safety profile, with no deaths, serious adverse events or drug-related withdrawals.

CONCLUSION

Timapiprant treatment had little impact on the clinicopathological changes induced by RV-A16 infection in partially controlled asthma.

Efficacy of an oral CRTH2 antagonist (AZD1981) in the treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps in adults: A randomized controlled clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) is a type 2 inflammatory disease of the upper airways. AZD1981 is a selective antagonist of chemoattractant receptor-homologous molecule expressed on T helper type 2 and other type 2 cells, including innate lymphoid cells type 2, eosinophils, and basophils.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of AZD1981 in reducing nasal polyp size when added to intranasal corticosteroids in adult patients with CRSwNP.

METHODS

Eighty-one subjects (18-70 years of age) with CRSwNP were recruited and screened for trial eligibility from allergy and otolaryngology clinics from a single tertiary care site between June 2016 and August 2019. Eligible patients were randomized in a double-blind fashion to receive either AZD1981 (n = 22) or placebo (n = 21) orally three times a day for 12 weeks, added to intranasal corticosteroids. The primary endpoint was a change in nasal polyp score (NPS) at 12 weeks. Secondary endpoints included improvement in sinus computed tomography using Lund Mackay scoring, symptoms using visual analog scale, quality of life using Sino Nasal Outcome Test-22, and the Brief Smell Identification Test.

RESULTS

Forty-three patients met the inclusion criteria and were enrolled. At 12 weeks, there was no difference in NPS change in the AZD1981 arm (mean 0, standard error 0.34, n = 15) compared with placebo (mean 0.20, standard error 0.36, n = 17); mean difference -0.20 (95% confidence interval: -1.21, 0.81; p = .69). No significant differences were observed for Lund Mackay score, symptoms, quality of life, or smell test. AZD1981 was well tolerated except for one case of hypersensitivity reaction.

CONCLUSION

In patients with CRSwNP, the addition of AZD1981 to intranasal corticosteroids did not change nasal polyp size, radiographic scores, symptoms, or disease-specific quality of life.

Current and emerging therapies for eosinophilic esophagitis

Background: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a Type-2 chronic inflammatory food antigen-driven disease of the esophagus, characterized by eosinophilic predominant inflammation and a constellation of symptoms. The incidence and prevalence of EoE has increased over the past 2 decades. There is an unmet need for approved less burdensome treatment options. Objective: To describe the underlying pathophysiology and diagnosis of EoE and discuss the currently available treatment options. We also aim to review the new and emerging therapies for EoE. Methods: A search of a medical literature data base was performed for articles that discuss treatment for EoE. Results: A comparison of current therapies showed that dietary elimination, swallowed topical corticosteroids, and proton-pump inhibitor therapy are all effective for different populations. Emerging therapies that were reviewed include new topical corticosteroids and biologics directed against Type 2 inflammation. Conclusion: EoE is a chronic inflammatory disorder that can be debilitating, with long-term sequelae. There are no current approved therapies in the United States. Numerous new treatments are on the horizon. Increasing amounts of data are helping to tailor treatment for each patient. Ultimately, shared decision-making is the best approach to guide treatment choices with patients to manage the ever-increasing burden of this disease.

[Diagnosis and Treatment of Eosinophilic Esophagitis]

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic, immune/antigen-mediated esophageal disease characterized by symptoms of esophageal dysfunction and eosinophil-predominant inflammation. The diagnostic criteria for EoE have changed with our growing knowledge over the past two decades. Esophageal eosinophilia, which responds histologically to a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) is not a distinct disease but a subset of EoE. An endoscopic scoring system that relies on the assessment of exudates, rings, edema, furrows, and strictures is a useful tool for assessing endoscopic severity. PPIs are regarded as safe and effective first-line treatments for EoE. Oral topical corticosteroids or dietary therapy are also options for first-line treatment. Endoscopic dilation is effective for relieving the dysphagia symptoms of a patient with an esophageal stricture.

Eosinophilic esophagitis: New molecules, better life?

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is an antigen-mediated chronic T helper type 2 (Th2)-associated inflammatory disorder that has emerged in the last three decades as an increasingly common cause of esophageal symptoms. Despite rising incidence and prevalence, there are currently no approved therapies for EoE in the United States and only one oral topical corticosteroid approved in Europe and Canada. Current management relies on labor- and endoscopy-intensive dietary elimination, proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) with only moderate efficacy, and use of inhaled or nebulized topical corticosteroids designed for asthma and limited by accessibility. Fortunately, progress in elucidating the underlying pathophysiology of EoE has led to the development of new therapies derived from molecular targets necessary for disease pathogenesis. We summarize established and emerging medical therapies for EoE, with a focus on new treatments with specific molecular targets that are likely to change EoE management paradigms in the next decade.

Type 2 Inflammation in Eosinophilic Esophagitis: From Pathophysiology to Therapeutic Targets

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic immune-mediated disease of the esophagus characterized clinically by symptoms related to esophageal dysfunction and histologically by eosinophil-predominant inflammation, whose incidence is rising. It significantly affects patients’ quality of life and, if left untreated, results in fibrotic complications. Although broad consensus has been achieved on first-line therapy, a subset of patients remains non-responder to standard therapy. The pathogenesis of EoE is multifactorial and results from the complex, still mostly undefined, interaction between genetics and intrinsic factors, environment, and antigenic stimuli. A deep understanding of the pathophysiology of this disease is pivotal for the development of new therapies. This review provides a comprehensive description of the pathophysiology of EoE, starting from major pathogenic mechanisms (genetics, type 2 inflammation, epithelial barrier dysfunction, gastroesophageal reflux, allergens, infections and microbiota) and subsequently focusing on the single protagonists of type 2 inflammation (involved cells, cytokines, soluble effectors, surface proteins and transcription factors) that could represent present and future therapeutic targets, while summarizing previous therapeutic approaches in literature.

Pathophysiology of Non-IgE-Mediated Food Allergy

Non-IgE-mediated food allergies are a group of disorders characterized by subacute or chronic inflammatory processes in the gut. Unlike IgE mediated food allergies that may result in multi-organ system anaphylaxis, the non-IgE mediated food allergies primarily affect the gastrointestinal tract. This review outlines the clinical manifestations, epidemiology, pathophysiology, and management of non-IgE-mediated food allergies. An updated literature search of selected non-IgE-mediated food allergies was conducted for this review using PubMed database to the current year (2021). Reviewed disorders include food protein-induced enterocolitis syndrome (FPIES), food-protein enteropathy (FPE), food protein-induced allergic proctocolitis (FPIAP), and eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorders (EGIDs) such as eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). While extensive gains have been made in understanding FPIES, FPIAP, FPE, and EoE, more information is needed on the pathophysiology of these food allergies. Similarities among them include involvement of innate immunity, T-lymphocyte processes, alteration of the intestinal lumen at the cellular level with the appearance of inflammatory cells and associated histologic changes, and specific cytokine profiles suggesting food-specific, T-cell, and immune-mediated responses. While FPIES and FPIAP typically resolve in early childhood, EGIDs typically do not. Emerging new therapies for EoE offer promise of additional treatment options. Further studies identifying the immunopathogenesis, associated biomarkers, and mechanisms of tolerance are needed to inform prevention, diagnosis and management.

[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.

Eosinophilic Gastritis/Gastroenteritis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Eosinophilic gastritis/gastroenteritis (EG/EGE) are rare eosinophilic infiltrative disorders in children and adults that fall under the umbrella term eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorders (EGIDs). EGIDs also include eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) and eosinophilic colitis. In this article, we present the current literature regarding the clinical presentation, diagnostic criteria, and management of EG/EGE.

RECENT FINDINGS

The underlying complex pathophysiology remains unknown, yet hypersensitivity response is a central component. Unlike EoE, standardized diagnostic criteria are lacking but, promising research employing tissue-based and blood-based methods of diagnosis have been reported. Non-EoE EGIDs are more challenging to treat than EoE. More than a third of patients may achieve spontaneous remission. Still, most will require dietary elimination and/or pharmaceutical interventions, mainly corticosteroids, but also biologics (monoclonal antibodies against IL-4, IL-5, TNFα, integrin α4β7, and IgE), mast-cell stabilizers, leukotriene (LT)-receptor antagonists, and antihistamines. Promising research suggests the role of AK002, an anti-siglec antibody, in clinical and histological improvement. Given the rarity and underdiagnosis of EG/EGE, different natural progression compared to EoE, heterogeneous clinical manifestations, and probable normal endoscopic appearance, it is vital to maintain a high suspicion index in atopic patients, obtain at least 5-6 random biopsies from each site for gastro/duodenal eosinophilic infiltrate with the subsequent exclusion of inflammatory, allergic and infectious differential diagnoses to increase the yield of an accurate diagnosis. Corticosteroids remain the mainstay of treatment, often requiring long-term use. Steroid-sparing agents remain experimental. Goals of therapy move beyond clinical remission but lack evidence to support histological remission.

Lessons learned from targeting eosinophils in human disease

Eosinophils are a minor subset of the granulocyte lineage distinguished by their unique morphology, phenotype, cytoplasmic contents, and function. Evolutionarily, these are ancient cells whose existence has been conserved within vertebrates for millions of years, suggesting that their contribution to innate immunity and other pathologic and homeostatic responses are important to the host. Knowledge regarding the role of eosinophils in health and disease took a leap forward in 2004 with the creation of mouse strains deficient in eosinophils. This advance was paralleled in humans using pharmacology, namely, with the development of drugs capable of selectively reducing and sometimes even eliminating human eosinophils in those receiving these agents. As a result, a more definitive picture of what eosinophils do, and do not do, is emerging. This review will summarize recent advances in our understanding of the role of eosinophils in human disease by focusing mainly on data from clinical studies with anti-eosinophil therapies, even though the first of such agents, mepolizumab, was only approved in the USA in November 2015. Information regarding both efficacy and safety will be highlighted, and where relevant, intriguing data from animal models will also be mentioned, especially if there are conflicting effects seen in humans.

Eosinophilic esophagitis. What diet? How to treat it? The point of view of a gastroenterologist working in a department of allergology

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) belongs to a broad group of allergic gastrointestinal diseases. More narrowly, it is classified as an eosinophilic gastrointestinal disease and is its most common representative. Until recently, this disease was extremely rare, but the last 3 decades have seen a rapid increase in its prevalence to such an extent that in some recent studies it has been named the most common esophageal disease after reflux disease. EoE is an interdisciplinary disorder on the borderline between gastrointestinal and allergologic diseases, requiring cooperation of these two branches of medicine in diagnostics and treatment. Despite the development of medical science it remains a poorly known disease, difficult to diagnose and even more difficult to treat. Recent years have seen the emergence of new studies and guidelines, both American and European, that have radically changed our approach to the diagnosis and treatment of EoE.

Targeted Therapies for Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Disorders

The growing recognition of eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorders has revealed the limitations of current treatment (mainly based on dietary modification and corticosteroids), and include refractoriness, high recurrence rates, and the need for long-term therapy. Research efforts, mainly in eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), have unveiled essential pathophysiological mechanisms leading to these disorders, which bear some similarities to those of atopic manifestations and are shared by eosinophilic gastroenteritis (EGE) and eosinophilic colitis (EC). Novel targeted therapies, some imported from bronchial asthma and atopic dermatitis, are currently being assessed in EoE. The most promising are monoclonal antibodies, including those targeting interleukin (IL)-13 (cendakimab) and IL-4 (dupilumab), with phase 3 trials currently ongoing. The potential of anti-integrin therapy (vedolizumab) and Siglec-8 blockers (antolimab) in EGE are also promising. Non-biological therapies for eosinophilic gut disorders, which include preventing the activation of Janus kinase (JAK)-signal transducer and activator of transcription (STAT) and chemoattractant receptor expressed on T helper 2 cells (CRTH2) signaling pathways, and other potential targets that deserve investigation in eosinophilic gut disorders, are reviewed.

Eosinophilic Esophagitis: Etiology and Therapy

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a relatively recently identified but now frequently encountered antigen/immune-mediated disease which places significant burden on patients and the healthcare system. With its growing prevalence and recognition by healthcare providers in multiple disciplines, substantial progress has been made regarding the diagnostic criteria, clinical evaluation, tools for disease assessment, and immune pathways related to pathogenesis. Current treatment goals focus on the amelioration of inflammation and prevention of remodeling consequences using proton pump inhibitors, swallowed topical steroids, elimination diets, and esophageal dilation. Ongoing research holds promise for more efficacious and targeted therapies as well as a personalized approach to the care of patients with 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.

Management of Eosinophilic Esophagitis: Dietary and Nondietary Approaches

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is an allergen-driven chronic inflammatory condition, characterized by symptoms related to esophageal dysfunction and confirmed histologically by esophageal mucosal eosinophilia. Since its first description in the 1990s, the incidence and prevalence of EoE have been on the rise. It is known to affect all ages of various ethnic backgrounds and both sexes; however, it is most seen in White males. Children with EoE often present with abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting, and failure to thrive, whereas adults with EoE typically present with dysphagia and food impaction. Diagnosis of EoE requires histologic confirmation of elevated esophageal eosinophils in a symptomatic patient, and only after secondary causes have been excluded. Because EoE is a chronic and progressively fibrostenotic disease, treatment goals include resolution of symptoms, induction and maintenance of disease remission, and prevention and possibly reversal of fibrostenotic complications, while minimizing treatment-related adverse effects and improving quality of life. Treatment strategies include the "3 D's"-drugs, diet, and dilation. Standard drug therapies include proton-pump inhibitors and topical corticosteroids. Dietary therapies include elemental diet, allergy testing-directed elimination diet, and empiric elimination diets. Endoscopic esophageal dilation for EoE strictures can alleviate esophageal symptoms but has no effect on mucosal inflammation. Recent progress in EoE research has made possible evidence-based clinical guidelines. Ongoing pharmacologic trials show promise for novel biologic agents in the treatment of refractory EoE.

Duodenal inflammation: an emerging target for functional dyspepsia?

Introduction: Functional dyspepsia (FD) is one of the most common functional gastrointestinal disorders and is classified into postprandial distress and epigastric pain syndrome. Despite the recognition of duodenal inflammation as a potential trigger of symptoms, only limited anti-inflammatory therapies exist.Areas covered: This narrative review summarizes the recent advances in the pathophysiology and treatment of FD; it identifies potential therapeutic targets and gaps in the field. An electronic literature search was conducted in Pubmed up to 31st of December 2019.Expert opinion: There is compelling evidence for the role of duodenal inflammation and the eosinophil-mast cell axis in the pathogenesis of dyspeptic symptoms. Traditional prokinetic drugs and neuromodulators target gastric dysmotility and visceral hypersensitivity but are hampered by limited efficacy and side effects. Independent of acid suppression, the anti-inflammatory action of proton pump inhibitors, which remain the first-line therapy in FD, may also explain their therapeutic effect. Other existing and newly established anti-inflammatory drugs should be investigated while trials including probiotics and selective antibiotics should examine the host microbiome and immune activation. Targeted treatments for potential causes of duodenal pathology, such as impaired permeability and dysbiosis, are likely to emerge in the future.

Challenges and updates in the management of eosinophilic esophagitis

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EE) is a chronic T helper cell-2 mediated inflammatory condition and is considered as a primary cause of dysphagia and foregut symptoms. There are many challenges regarding the treatment options of EE. Different therapeutic approaches are best at meeting different endpoints. There are unresolved questions such as whether the goal for treatment should be to control esophageal eosinophilia and inflammation or to achieve symptomatic improvement. Still, proton pump inhibitors are used in differential diagnosis, along with their anti-inflammatory and anti-acid properties. Conducted trials continue to recommend the use of topical corticosteroids and empiric food elimination diets as first-line therapeutic modalities. The growing knowledge on the pathogenesis of EE has allowed further progression of encouraging targeted biologic therapies. However, the guidelines for EE management should be updated accordingly in the coming years, including fast evolving data on non-invasive diagnostic strategies, new treatment modalities, and the long-term prognosis of the disease.

The Role of the Environment in Eosinophilic Esophagitis

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic, immune-mediated inflammatory disease with incompletely understood pathogenesis. Though disease manifestations were initially ascribed to a delayed reaction to food allergens, emerging evidence suggests that modifiable host factors and environmental allergen exposure may also play critical roles in the pathogenesis and ongoing manifestations of EoE. As with other atopic diseases, lack of early-life exposure to microbial pathogens leads to an immune tolerance defect and reprograms the commensal gut microflora toward a type 2 T helper (Th2) phenotype; the esophageal microbiota, a rich environment consisting of diverse bacterial species, is greatly altered by inflammation. Although multiple early life microbiome-altering factors are associated with EoE development, no causative, direct relationships have been identified. Interestingly, large, cross-sectional analyses of several populations identify an inverse relationship between Helicobacter pylori presence and EoE, likely via virulence factors that downregulate Th2 inflammation, though causality has not been proven. In regard to environmental allergens, some studies support seasonal variation in EoE diagnosis and flares, and EoE can be generated after a large, identifiable aeroallergen exposure. Examples include mouse models of intranasal Aspergillus dosing and following initiation of oral immunotherapy to foods or environmental allergens. Conversely, treatment of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis may improve EoE symptoms, though data is limited to case reports and small series. Unfortunately, biologic therapies for atopic conditions have failed to improve EoE symptoms despite improvement in esophageal eosinophil count, though dupilumab shows promise in ongoing studies. Overall, this chapter shows that EoE pathogenesis is likely multifactorial, and the environment is a key component in our understanding of EoE.

The Role of the Environment in Eosinophilic Esophagitis

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic, immune-mediated inflammatory disease with incompletely understood pathogenesis. Though disease manifestations were initially ascribed to a delayed reaction to food allergens, emerging evidence suggests that modifiable host factors and environmental allergen exposure may also play critical roles in the pathogenesis and ongoing manifestations of EoE. As with other atopic diseases, lack of early-life exposure to microbial pathogens leads to an immune tolerance defect and reprograms the commensal gut microflora toward a type 2 T helper (Th2) phenotype; the esophageal microbiota, a rich environment consisting of diverse bacterial species, is greatly altered by inflammation. Although multiple early life microbiome-altering factors are associated with EoE development, no causative, direct relationships have been identified. Interestingly, large, cross-sectional analyses of several populations identify an inverse relationship between Helicobacter pylori presence and EoE, likely via virulence factors that downregulate Th2 inflammation, though causality has not been proven. In regard to environmental allergens, some studies support seasonal variation in EoE diagnosis and flares, and EoE can be generated after a large, identifiable aeroallergen exposure. Examples include mouse models of intranasal Aspergillus dosing and following initiation of oral immunotherapy to foods or environmental allergens. Conversely, treatment of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis may improve EoE symptoms, though data is limited to case reports and small series. Unfortunately, biologic therapies for atopic conditions have failed to improve EoE symptoms despite improvement in esophageal eosinophil count, though dupilumab shows promise in ongoing studies. Overall, this chapter shows that EoE pathogenesis is likely multifactorial, and the environment is a key component in our understanding of EoE.

Recent advances in potential targets for eosinophilic esophagitis treatments

Introduction: Diagnostic and therapeutic strategies in eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) are constantly evolving. Recently, the improved understanding of EoE pathogenesis has led to identification of a variety of other potential targets that have never been considered before.Areas covered: In September 2019, we performed structured literature searches in Medline and PubMed, Cochrane meta-analyses, and abstracts of international congresses to review new potential therapeutic approaches for EoE.Expert opinion: The advent of omics disciplines has been helping in finding new molecular targets in EoE pathogenesis and may provide future guidance for deep phenotyping of the disease and therefore facilitate the possibility of personalized medicine. Interestingly, these new treatments should be focused on the restoration of epithelial barrier dysfunction, downregulation of specific molecular pathways of eosinophilic inflammation, and finally, prevention of esophageal remodeling. In this review, we highlight the most recent insights in EoE pathogenesis, which open new pathways for developing new therapeutic targets for clinical practice.

Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Disorders

Eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorders (EGID) are a group of disorders characterized by pathologic eosinophilic infiltration of the esophagus, stomach, small intestine, or colon leading to organ dysfunction and clinical symptoms (J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr; Spergel et al., 52: 300-306, 2011). These disorders include eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), eosinophilic gastritis (EG), eosinophilic gastroenteritis (EGE), eosinophilic enteritis (EE), and eosinophilic colitis (EC). Symptoms are dependent not only on the location (organ) as well as extent (layer invasion of the bowel wall). Common symptoms of EoE include dysphagia and food impaction in adults and heartburn, abdominal pain, and vomiting in children. Common symptoms of the other EGIDs include abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting, early satiety, diarrhea, and weight loss. These disorders are considered immune-mediated chronic inflammatory disorders with strong links to food allergen triggers. Treatment strategies focus on either medical or dietary therapy. These options include not only controlling symptoms and bowel inflammation but also on identifying potential food triggers. This chapter will focus on the clinical presentation, pathophysiology, and treatment of these increasingly recognized disorders.

Proinflammatory Pathways in the Pathogenesis of Asthma

There are multiple proinflammatory pathways in the pathogenesis of asthma. These include both innate and adaptive inflammation, in addition to inflammatory and physiologic responses mediated by eicosanoids. An important component of the innate allergic immune response is ILC2 activated by interleukin (IL)-33, thymic stromal lymphopoietin, and IL-25 to produce IL-5 and IL-13. In terms of the adaptive T-lymphocyte immunity, CD4+ Th2 and IL-17-producing cells are critical in the inflammatory responses in asthma. Last, eicosanoids involved in asthma pathogenesis include prostaglandin D₂ and the cysteinyl leukotrienes that promote smooth muscle constriction and inflammation that propagate allergic responses.

Pharmacological treatments for eosinophilic esophagitis: current options and emerging therapies

Introduction: The epidemiology of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) has increased rapidly to represent a common cause of chronic and recurrent esophageal symptoms. Current treatment options have limitations so the development of novel therapies is a matter of growing interest.Areas covered: This article provides an up-to-date discussion of current therapies and investigational options for EoE. Established anti-inflammatory treatments for EoE at present include dietary therapy, proton pump inhibitors and swallowed topic steroids, which should be combined with endoscopic dilation in case of strictures. Refractoriness, high recurrence rates, and need for long-term therapies have promoted the investigation of novel, esophageal-targeted formulas of topic corticosteroids, and monoclonal antibodies (including mepolizumab, reslizumab, QAX576, RPC4046, dupilumab, omalizumab, infliximab, and vedolizumab) for EoE, with some having been demonstrated as effective and safe in the short term. Several additional promising therapies are also discussed.Expert opinion: Several therapeutic targets have shown efficacy and will be approved to treat EoE, especially corticosteroid-sparing options and those for patients with multiple Th2-associated diseases. Personalized therapeutic strategies for initial and maintenance treatments of EoE must be rationally designed, to reduce the burden of disease and answer meaningfully the needs of all stakeholders involved in EoE.

Non-IgE Mediated Food Allergy

Food allergies, defined as an immune response to food proteins, affect as many as 8% of young children and 2% of adults in western countries, and their prevalence appears to be rising like all allergic diseases. In addition to well-recognized urticaria and anaphylaxis triggered by IgE antibody- mediated immune responses, there is an increasing recognition of cell-mediated disorders, such as eosinophilic esophagitis and food protein-induced enterocolitis. Non-IgE-Mediated gastrointestinal food allergies are a heterogeneous group of food allergies in which there is an immune reaction against food but the primary pathogenesis is not a production of IgE and activation of mast cells and basophils. Those diseases tend to affect mainly the gastrointestinal tract and can present as acute (FPIES) or chronic reaction, such as Eosinophilic Esophagitis (EoE), Food Protein-Induced Allergic Proctocolitis (FPIAP). The role of food allergy in Non-EoE gastrointestinal Eosinophilic disorders (Non- EoE EGID) is poorly understood. In some diseases like EoE, T cell seems to play a major role in initiating the immunological reaction against food, however, in FPIES and FPIAP, the mechanism of sensitization is not clear. Diagnosis requires food challenges and/or endoscopies in most of the patients, as there are no validated biomarkers that can be used for monitoring or diagnosis of Non-IgE mediated food allergies. The treatment of Non-IgE food allergy is dependent on diet (FPIES, and EoE) and/or use of drugs (i.e. steroids, PPI) in EoE and Non-EoE EGID. Non-IgE mediated food allergies are being being investigated.

Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Diseases in Children: A Practical Review

Primary eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases (EGIDs) represent a heterogeneous group of disorders characterized by eosinophilic inflammation in the absence of known causes for eosinophilia, selectively affecting different segments of the gastrointestinal tract. While pediatric eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a well-defined disease with established guidelines, Eosinophilic Gastritis (EoG), Eosinophilic Gastroenteritis (EoGE) and Eosinophilic Colitis (EoC) remain a clinical enigma with evidence based on limited anecdotal case reports. Large cross-sectional studies in the US defined a prevalence of EoG and EoGE ranging from 1,5 to 6,4/100.000 and from 2,7 to 8,3/100.000 subjects respectively, while the prevalence of EoC ranges from 1,7 to 3,5/100.000 subjects. Regarding the pathogenesis, it is hypothesized that EGIDs result from the interplay between genetic predisposition, intestinal dysbiosis and environmental triggers. Clinically, EGIDs might present with different and nonspecific gastrointestinal symptoms depending on the involved intestinal tract and the extension of eosinophilic inflammatory infiltrate. The diagnosis of EGIDs requires: 1. recurrent gastrointestinal symptoms, 2. increased eosinophils for high power field in biopsy specimens, 3. absence of secondary causes of gastrointestinal eosinophilia. No validated guidelines are available on the clinical management of patients with EGIDs. Evidence from case reports and small uncontrolled case series suggests the use of dietary and corticosteroids as the first-line treatments. Considering the clinical follow-up of EGIDs, three different patterns of disease course are identified: single flare, recurring course-disease and chronic course-disease. This review will focus on pediatric EGIDs distal to esophagus, including Eosinophilic Gastritis (EoG), Eosinophilic Gastroenteritis (EoGE) and Eosinophilic Colitis (EoC).

Future therapies for eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorders

OBJECTIVE

To review novel therapeutics in development for treatment of eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorders (EGIDs).

DATA SOURCES

Clinical trial data (clinicaltrials.gov) and literature search on PubMed.

STUDY SELECTIONS

Studies on treatment and clinical trials in EGIDs were included in this review.

RESULTS

During the past decade, significant progress has been made in understanding disease mechanisms in EGIDs. As a result, a variety of novel therapeutics have been developed for treatment of these disorders. Several monoclonal antibodies against targets, including interleukin (IL) 4, IL-5, IL-13, integrins, and siglec-8, have shown promise in early trials. Novel formulations of corticosteroids are also in development.

CONCLUSION

The field of EGID research has advanced rapidly, and disease-modifying therapeutics are closer to clinical application.

Emerging therapies for eosinophilic esophagitis

Despite advances in the pathologic understanding of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), as of yet, no single agent has been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration to treat EoE. Off-label, EoE is currently treated by using the 3 Ds: drugs (particularly swallowed topical corticosteroids), dietary restriction, and endoscopic dilation. In the recent past, considerable progress in terms of EoE treatment has been made: (1) new EoE-specific steroid formulations optimizing mucosal deposition have been developed, which has culminated in recent approval of a budesonide effervescent tablet in Europe; (2) biologics used for other T_H2-mediated diseases, such as allergic asthma and atopic eczema, as well as purpose-developed biologics, have been studied in phase II trials in patients with EoE; and (3) novel dietary restriction strategies have evolved. Finally, further insights into the pathogenesis of EoE have revealed several novel disease mediators that might be targeted in the future. In the following article we will discuss recent advances in EoE treatment with regard to swallowed topical steroids, biological agents, dietary approaches, and novel molecular targets.

A Conceptual Approach to Understanding Treatment Response in Eosinophilic Esophagitis

While the diagnosis and initial treatment of eosinophilic esophagitis are becoming more standardized, there are still major gaps in knowledge related to measuring treatment response. One such question centers on how to measure treatment response and what treatment endpoints should be. This impacts not only patient care and engagement in decision-making, but also the field of drug development. In addition, studies so far have use a myriad of treatment endpoints including over a dozen histologic endpoint criteria. This review will discuss the various stakeholders involved in assessment of treatment endpoints of a complex condition, including patients, practitioners and regulatory agencies, and the care settings in which treatment response is assessed, including routine clinical care, clinical trials, and observational studies. Potential parameters or treatment endpoints such as histology, symptoms, patient-reported outcomes, endoscopy, and biomarkers are discussed along with associated challenges and opportunities. A framework on how to define treatment outcomes is discussed and a conceptual approach treatment response is proposed. This takes into account histology, symptoms, and endoscopic findings and harnesses existing, validated tools. It includes definitions of nonresponse, complete normalization, and a graded response category between these 2 extremes, and also permits flexibility and latitude for modifications as newer knowledge emerges. In addition, ways to position the pediatric population in these endeavors are discussed as are future research directions.