Effect of amino acid-based formula added to four-food elimination in adult eosinophilic esophagitis patients: A randomized clinical trial

Efficacy of Dietary Therapy for Eosinophilic Esophagitis in Children and Adults: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Several dietary approaches have been used to induce remission in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), yielding varied results.

METHODS

We searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Scopus databases up to May 2024 to identify studies including dietary interventions for EoE used as monotherapy. Summary estimates with 95% CIs for achieving <15 eosinophils/HPF were calculated for each approach. Fixed or random effects models were used depending on heterogeneity (I2); publication bias risks were assessed using funnel plot analyses. Subgroup analyses results were compared using meta-regression.

RESULTS

Forty-three studies with 2825 patients were included in quantitative summaries. The overall rate of histologic remission was 60.6% (95% CI, 54.6-66.5%). Effectiveness rates were 94.5% (95% CI, 92.3-96.4%) for elemental diets, 63.9% (95% CI, 58.5-69.2%) for six-food elimination diets, 54.7% (95% CI, 45.7-63.6%) for four-food elimination diets, 44.3% (95% CI, 36.1-52.8%) for two-food elimination diets, 46.4% (95% CI, 40-52.9%) for one-food elimination diets, and 39.5% (95% CI, 30.3-49.2%) for allergy testing-directed food elimination diets. Overall, superior efficacy was noted in children than in adults and in retrospective compared to prospective studies.

CONCLUSION

Diet therapy remains an effective therapeutic asset for pediatric and adult patients with EoE, with increasing efficacy noted as the levels of dietary restriction increase.

Dietary composition of adult eosinophilic esophagitis patients is related to disease severity

BACKGROUND

In addition to the elimination diet, dietary composition may influence disease severity in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) through modulation of the immune response.

AIM

To explore the immunomodulatory role of nutrition before and during elimination diet in adult EoE patients.

METHODS

Nutritional intake was assessed in 39 Dutch adult EoE patients participating in the Supplemental Elemental Trial (Dutch trial registry NL6014, NTR6778) using 3-day food diaries. In this randomized controlled trial, diagnosed patients received either a four-food elimination diet alone (FFED) or FFED with addition of an amino acid-based formula for 6 weeks. Multiple linear regression analyses were performed to assess associations between the intake of nutrients and food groups per 1000 kCal and peak eosinophil count/high power field (PEC), both at baseline and after 6 weeks.

RESULTS

At baseline, we found a statistically significant negative (thus favorable) relationship between the intake of protein, total fat, phosphorus, zinc, vitamin B12, folate, and milk products and PEC (p < .05), while calcium (p = .058) and full-fat cheese/curd (p = .056) were borderline (favorably) significant. In contrast, total carbohydrates, prepacked fruit juice, and white bread were significantly positively (unfavorable) related to PEC (p < .05), while ultra-processed meals (p = .059) were borderline (unfavorably) significant. After dietary intervention, coffee/tea were significantly negatively (favorably) related to PEC, hummus/legumes were significantly positively (unfavorably) related with PEC, while peanuts were borderline significantly positively related (p = .058).

CONCLUSION

Dietary composition may be related to inflammation in adult EoE patients. High-quality and anti-inflammatory diets may be a promising adjuvant therapy in the dietary management of EoE.

Review article: Emerging insights into the epidemiology, pathophysiology, diagnostic and therapeutic aspects of eosinophilic oesophagitis and other eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases

BACKGROUND

Eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases (EGIDs) are chronic, immune-mediated disorders characterised clinically by gastrointestinal symptoms and histologically by a pathologic increase in eosinophil-predominant inflammation in the gastrointestinal tract, in the absence of secondary causes of eosinophilia.

AIMS

To highlight emerging insights and research efforts into the epidemiology, pathophysiology, diagnostic and therapeutic aspects of eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE) and non-EoE EGIDs, and discuss key remaining knowledge gaps.

METHODS

We selected and reviewed original research, retrospective studies, case series, randomised controlled trials, and meta-analyses.

RESULTS

Standardised nomenclature classifies EGIDs as EoE, eosinophilic gastritis (EoG), eosinophilic enteritis (EoN), and eosinophilic colitis (EoC). Incidence and prevalence of EoE are rising, emphasising the need to better understand how environmental risk factors and genetic features interact. Advances in understanding EoE pathophysiology have led to clinical trials of targeted therapy and the approval (in the United States) of dupilumab for EoE. Several therapies that are under investigation hope to satisfy both histologic and clinical targets. For non-EoE EGIDs, efforts are focused on better defining clinical and histopathologic disease determinants and natural history, as well as establishing new therapies.

CONCLUSIONS

Unmet needs for research are dramatically different for EoE and non-EoE EGIDs. In EoE, non-invasive diagnostic tests, clinicopathologic models that determine the risk of disease progression and therapeutic failure, and novel biologic therapies are emerging. In contrast, in non-EoE EGIDs, epidemiologic trends, diagnostic histopathologic thresholds, and natural history models are still developing for these more rare disorders.

Extracellular matrix remodeling proteins as biomarkers for clinical assessment and treatment outcomes in eosinophilic esophagitis

BACKGROUND

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic progressive inflammatory disease of the esophagus, characterized by extracellular matrix remodeling and fibrotic stricture formation. Disease monitoring requires multiple re-endoscopies with esophageal biopsies. Hence non-invasive methods for determining tissue fibrosis and treatment efficacy are warranted.

AIMS

To investigate the ability of extracellular matrix proteins in serum as potential biomarkers of tissue remodeling and clinical, endoscopic, and histological disease outcomes in adult EoE patients.

METHODS

Protein-fingerprint assays were used to measure neo-epitope specific fragments of collagen remodeling, human-neutrophil elastase degraded calprotectin, and citrullinated or non-citrullinated vimentin in the serum of an adult EoE-cohort. Biomarker analysis, symptoms, endoscopic features and histological disease activity (eosinophils(eos) per high-power-field(hpf)) were evaluated at baseline and after six weeks of dietary intervention.

RESULTS

Patients with a baseline (Endoscopic Reference score) EREFS fibrosis subscore ≥ 2 presented with increased fibrolysis of cross-linked type III collagen (CTX-III) (p < 0.01), whereas low CTX-III levels were observed in patients achieving histological remission (< 15 eos/hpf) (vs. no histological remission (p < 0.05). Progression of endoscopic fibrosis after intervention was associated with increased levels of type-III (PRO-C3) and -VI collagen (PRO-C6) formation (all; p < 0.05). A baseline EREFS inflammatory subscore ≥ 2 correlated with higher neutrophilic activity (Cpa9-HNE) at week 6 (p < 0.05). Moreover, increased degradation of type-III (C3M) and -IV (C4M/PRO-C4) collagens were associated with remission of food impaction after intervention (all; p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Serum extracellular matrix remodeling proteins demonstrated potential as surrogate biomarkers for assessing histological disease remission, endoscopic fibrosis, and remission of symptoms of food impaction after diet intervention in adult EoE patients.

[Esofagitis eosinofílica, eficacia de las alternativas terapéuticas en el adulto: revisión sistemática.]

OBJECTIVE

Eosinophilic esophagitis is actually the main cause of dysphagia in adults. The choise of therapy must be agreed with the patient. The objective of this study was to review the scientific literature to determine the efficacy of the different therapeutic options for eosinophilic esophagitis in adults.

METHODS

A search for articles was carried out during the month of February 2023 in the databases PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus and Scielo using the search terms: eosinophilic esophagitis, therapeutics and treatment. Clinical trials and observational studies published in the last ten years in adults were selected.

RESULTS

A total of 1,138 articles were obtained, of which 41 were selected after applying the eligibility criteria. Of the available therapies, the most frequently analyzed treatment was swallowed corticosteroids, followed by elimination diets and proton pump inhibitors. Clinical trials predominated. The studies show results on the efficacy of these therapies in histological and clinical remission, both in induction and in the long-term.

CONCLUSIONS

There are basically three therapies for eosinophilic esophagitis in adults, all of them are superior to placebo in histological and clinical response.

Recent Trends in the Management of Eosinophilic Esophagitis: A Systematic Review

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic immune-mediated condition characterized by inflammation and eosinophilic accumulation of the esophagus, resulting in dysphagia and food impaction. While the exact etiology of EoE remains unclear, it is believed to be triggered by food allergens and dynamic environmental factors, resulting in various clinical manifestations, from inflammation to fibrosis. Although clinical presentation varies with age, the number of eosinophils in esophagogastroduodenal endoscopy remains the diagnostic gold standard. While diet elimination, proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), topical corticosteroids, and biological therapy are promising treatment options for EoE, there are insufficient data to determine the optimal therapeutic treatment approach. Combination therapies - the use of dietary therapies in conjunction with other treatment modalities, such as PPIs, topical corticosteroids, or biologic agents - have also emerged as a potential management strategy for EoE. In this systematic review, we attempt to highlight the recent advances in EoE therapies and provide updated guidance to their management. From 2017 to 2022, we conducted a comprehensive electronic search of PubMed (MEDLINE) using specific keywords related to our objective and eventually included a total of 44 articles.

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.

Food allergy: cause or consequence of pediatric eosinophilic esophagitis? Potential implications of ultraprocessed foods in prevention and management

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic, immune-mediated disease characterized by eosinophilic infiltration, leading to esophageal dysfunction, inflammation, and fibrotic remodeling. In the last few decades, there has been an increased prevalence of EoE at an alarming rate in the pediatric age. The pathogenesis of EoE is still largely undefined, and this limits the definition of effective strategies for the prevention and management of this condition. EoE is considered a multifactorial disease arising from a negative interaction between environmental factors and genetic background, causing an impaired esophageal epithelial barrier with subsequent abnormal allergen exposure activating type 2 (Th2) inflammation. Food antigens have been suggested as key players in Th2 inflammation in pediatric patients with EoE, but emerging evidence suggests a potential role of other dietary factors, including ultraprocessed foods, as possible triggers for the occurrence of EoE. In this paper, we discuss the potential role of these dietary factors in the development of the disease, and we propose a new approach for the management of pediatric patients with EoE.

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.

Efficacy of Elimination Diets in Eosinophilic Esophagitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) can be treated by proton pump inhibitors, topical corticosteroids, or dietary measures. This study systematically assessed the efficacy of 4 major dietary treatment regimens in EoE, updating the evidence presented in a meta-analysis from 2014.

METHODS

Electronic databases such as PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science, and other sources were searched up to September 2022 to identify studies on dietary treatment of EoE. Based on histologic remission criteria, the efficacy of these treatments was pooled and analyzed with respect to the type of dietary regimen: 6-food elimination diet (SFED), 4-food elimination diet (FFED), 1-food elimination diet (OFED), and a targeted elimination diet (TED). Clinical response rates, food sensitization, and efficacies for a pediatric subpopulation were calculated. Influencing variables on efficacies were estimated via meta-regression analyses.

RESULTS

Thirty-four studies with 1762 patients met the inclusion criteria. The overall rate of histologic remission was 53.8% (95% CI, 48.0%-59.6%), and in the individual dietary groups was 61.3% (95% CI, 53.0%-69.3%) for SFED, 49.4% (95% CI, 32.5%-66.3%) for FFED, 51.4% (95% CI, 42.6%-60.1%) for OFED, and 45.7% (95% CI, 32.0%-59.7%) for TED. Dietary regimen and patient age did not significantly affect rates of histologic remission. The overall rate of clinical response was 80.8% (95% CI, 72.3%-88.2%), with response rates of 92.8% (95% CI, 81.2%-99.6%) for SFED, 74.1% (95% CI, 49.8%-92.6%) for FFED, 87.1% (95% CI, 58.4%-99.9%) for OFED, and 69.0% (95% CI, 50.2%85.3%) for TED.

CONCLUSIONS

Dietary therapy is an effective treatment for EoE patients of any age. The current results could support a trend toward less-restrictive dietary regimens as a primary treatment option.

Gene expression and clinical outcomes after dietary treatment for eosinophilic esophagitis: a prospective study

BACKGROUND

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is an allergen-mediated disease and elimination diets have proven to be effective to obtain clinical and histological remission. However, the effect of elimination diets on specific EoE transcripts and their clinical correlates is relatively unknown. The main aim of the study was to evaluate the effect of dietary treatment (four-food elimination diet [FFED]) with or without addition of amino acid-based formula (AAF) on a variety of pro-/anti-inflammatory, epithelial/barrier function and remodeling/fibrosis-related markers of disease activity and clinical correlates (eosinophils, symptoms, and endoscopic signs) in adult EoE patients.

METHODS

We conducted an analysis of biopsy samples and data collected during a randomized controlled trial with an elimination diet in adult patients with active EoE (≥15 eosinophils [eos] per high-power field [hpf]). Demographics, symptoms (SDI-score), endoscopic signs (EREFS) and peak eosinophil counts/hpf were recorded at baseline and after 6 weeks of treatment. Transcripts of 10 indicated genes were measured (qPCR) and compared to clinical correlates at baseline and after treatment.

KEY RESULTS

Forty patients (pooled FFED + FFED + AAF) (60% male, age 34.5 (interquartile range [IQR] 29-42.8 years) completed the diet. Peak eosinophil counts/hpf, symptoms and endoscopic signs were significantly decreased after 6 weeks dietary treatment. DSG-1 levels were significantly upregulated from baseline to week 6, whereas IL-13, CAPN-14, IL-5, IL-10, CCL-26, POSTN, TSLP, CPA-3, and TGF-β were significantly downregulated after 6 weeks of diet (all; <0.01). Prior to treatment, upregulation of CAPN-14 and lower levels of DSG-1 were associated with clinical fibrotic phenotypes, whereas upregulation of IL-10 was linked to food impaction phenotypes.

CONCLUSION

These findings strongly suggest that elimination diets, besides a clinical and histological response, are associated with a broad transcriptional response at the level of the esophageal epithelium.

The Relationship between Gastrointestinal Health, Micronutrient Concentrations, and Autoimmunity: A Focus on the Thyroid

Currently, there is a lack of understanding of why many patients with thyroid dysfunction remain symptomatic despite being biochemically euthyroid. Gastrointestinal (GI) health is imperative for absorption of thyroid-specific nutrients as well as thyroid function directly. This comprehensive narrative review describes the impact of what the authors have conceptualized as the “nutrient–GI–thyroid axis”. Compelling evidence reveals how gastrointestinal health could be seen as the epicenter of thyroid-related care given that: (1) GI conditions can lower thyroid-specific nutrients; (2) GI care can improve status of thyroid-specific nutrients; (3) GI conditions are at least 45 times more common than hypothyroidism; (4) GI care can resolve symptoms thought to be from thyroid dysfunction; and (5) GI health can affect thyroid autoimmunity. A new appreciation for GI health could be the missing link to better nutrient status, thyroid status, and clinical care for those with thyroid dysfunction.