Disease Burden and Unmet Need in Eosinophilic Esophagitis

Eosinophilic esophagitis in adults and adolescents: epidemiology, diagnostic challenges, and management strategies for a type 2 inflammatory disease

Background

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is recognized as a chronic type 2 inflammatory disease characterized by the eosinophilic infiltration of the esophageal tissue, posing a significant disease burden and highlighting the necessity for novel management strategies to address unmet clinical needs.

Objectives

To critically evaluate the existing literature on the epidemiology and management of EoE, identify evidence gaps, and assess the efficacy of current and emerging treatment modalities.

Design

An extensive literature review was conducted, focusing on the epidemiological trends, diagnostic challenges, and therapeutic interventions for EoE. This was complemented by a survey among physicians and consultations with a scientific expert panel, including a patient's association (ESEO Italia), to enrich the study findings.

Data sources and methods

The review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, scrutinizing epidemiological studies and management research to compile comprehensive insights into the disease's landscape. The physician survey and expert panel discussions aimed to bridge identified evidence gaps.

Results

The review included 59 epidemiological and 51 management studies, uncovering variable incidence and prevalence rates of EoE globally, with an estimated diagnosed prevalence of 41 per 100,000 in Italy. Diagnostic challenges were identified, including nonspecific symptoms and the lack of definitive biomarkers, which complicate the use of endoscopy. Treatment options such as elimination diets, proton-pump inhibitors, and swallowed corticosteroids were found to have varying success rates, while Dupilumab, an emerging therapy targeting interleukin (IL)-4 and IL-13, shows promise.

Conclusion

Despite advancements in understanding and managing EoE, significant unmet clinical needs remain, particularly in biomarker identification, therapy personalization, and cost-effectiveness evaluation. A comprehensive, multidimensional approach to patient management is required, emphasizing the importance of early symptom recognition, accurate diagnosis, and tailored treatment strategies. Dupilumab offers potential as a novel treatment, underscoring the need for future research to explore the economic and social dimensions of EoE care pathways.

Expression of Immunoglobulin G4 in Eosinophilic Esophagitis

Background: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a disease that has been subcategorized into two endoscopic phenotypes: inflammatory and fibrostenotic. Moreover, studies have shown a link between EoE and immunoglobulin G4 (IgG4), a subclass of the immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibody. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the relationship between histologic IgG4 expression and endoscopic phenotypes in patients with EoE. Methods: This case-control study included patients diagnosed with EoE (n = 19) and patients with non-obstructive dysphagia without abnormal findings as controls (NOD; n = 12). The EoE group was further divided into three subgroups based on endoscopic phenotype: inflammatory, fibrostenotic, or combined. Retrospective examination of endoscopic findings and pathological slides was performed to analyze IgG4 staining. Results: Histological analysis revealed a significant difference in IgG4 cell count (15.00 vs. 0.58, p = 0.003) and eosinophil cell count (84.67 vs. 0.08, p < 0.001) between the EoE and NOD groups. Symptom manifestation and blood test results were similar across all three endoscopic EoE phenotypes. However, histological analysis revealed a significant difference in IgG4 cell count between the inflammatory, fibrostenotic, and combined phenotypes (4.13 vs. 17.6 vs. 59.7, p = 0.030). Conclusions: IgG4 expression was higher in EoE patients than in those with NOD, the highest being in the combined phenotype subgroup. These findings emphasize the important role of endoscopic and histological examination in diagnosing EoE and the need for further research in this area.

Responses of Proton Pump Inhibitors and Potassium-Competitive Acid Blockers According to Outcomes of Symptom, Endoscopy, and Histology in Patients With Eosinophilic Esophagitis

GOALS

We aimed to examine the response rate to proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and potassium-competitive acid blockers and the prevalence of topical corticosteroid (TCS) therapy as the second-line treatment for eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE).

BACKGROUND

Acid-suppressive drugs such as PPIs and potassium-competitive acid blockers are often used to treat EoE. Treatment response is based on outcomes including symptoms, endoscopy, and histology; however, the detailed response rate to PPI/P-CAB is unknown.

STUDY

In total, 236 patients with histologically confirmed EoE who received PPI/P-CAB as the first-line treatment were included. We assessed the symptoms, endoscopic reference score (EREFS), and histology [eosinophils per high-power field (eos/hpf)] 8 weeks after PPI/P-CAB administration. Complete normalization was defined as the disappearance of symptoms, EREFS score 0, or 0-1 eos/hpf, and response as disappearance or improvement of symptoms, EREFS score ≤2, or <15 eos/hpf. The prevalence of TCS therapy in each response group was assessed.

RESULTS

Complete normalization was achieved in 25%, 50%, 36%, and 8% of patients for symptoms, endoscopy, histology, and all 3 outcomes, respectively. The response rates were 81%, 87%, 87%, 75%, and 60% for symptoms, endoscopy, histology, and all 3 outcomes, respectively. TCS use was significantly lower (8%) in patients who achieved response of all 3 outcomes than in other groups and was dependent on the number of outcomes with nonresponse.

CONCLUSIONS

Complete normalization of symptoms, endoscopy, and histology using PPI/P-CAB is uncommon. Based on treatment efficacy by response/nonresponse, TCS was the secondary treatment in cases with an increase in the number of nonresponse outcomes.

Sleep, Anxiety, Somatization, Quality of Life, and Resilience in Pediatric Patients With Eosinophilic Esophagitis

INTRODUCTION

Emerging evidence suggests a high burden of psychosocial comorbidities in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), although factors associated with this burden have not been explored. We aimed to increase understanding of the psychosocial burden of EoE and assess factors that are associated with disease burden.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional study of patients with EoE (n = 87) recruited from a single-center, multidisciplinary pediatric eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorders clinic (2019-2021). Participants (aged 8-18 years) completed validated assessments during routine clinic visit to assess EoE symptoms (Pediatric Eosinophilic Esophagitis Symptom Score version 2.0), quality of life (Pediatric Quality of LIfe- Eosinophilic Esophagitis), anxiety state and trait (State-Trait Anxiety Score for Children), somatization (Child Somatic Symptoms Inventory 24), sleep disordered breathing (Pediatric Sleep Questionnaire) and, in a subset (n = 35), resilience (Connor Davidson Resilience Scale). Clinical and demographic data were collected.

RESULTS

Participants were at a mean (SD) age of 12.8 (3.1) years, and 26% (n = 23) were female. Shorter disease duration (6-12 months) was associated with higher symptom burden ( P = 0.03), somatization ( P < 0.01), and anxiety (State-Trait Anxiety Score for Children Trait P < 0.01) scores. Participants with neurodevelopmental comorbidities had higher anxiety trait, somatization, sleep disordered breathing, and lower quality of life ( P < 0.01 for all). Symptom burden was significantly associated with increased somatic symptoms (adjusted β [aβ] = 0.34; 95% confidence interval 0.23-0.45) and decreased quality of life (aβ = -0.42; 95% confidence interval -0.59 to -0.25) but not state anxiety, trait anxiety, or disordered sleep breathing.

DISCUSSION

Pediatric patients with a recent diagnosis of EoE can experience higher EoE symptoms, somatization, and anxiety when compared with those with a longer-standing diagnosis. Patients earlier in their diagnosis and with neurodevelopmental disorders may experience increased somatization and anxiety that may warrant additional support services.

Expert Recommendations on the Diagnosis of Eosinophilic Esophagitis in the United Arab Emirates

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic, progressive, type 2 inflammatory esophageal disease presenting as dysphagia to solid food and non-obstructive food impaction. Knowledge gaps exist in its diagnosis and management. These expert recommendations focused on the diagnosis of EoE in the United Arab Emirates. An electronic search of PubMed and Embase databases was used to gather evidence from systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, consensus papers, and expert opinions from the last five years on the diagnosis of EoE. The evidence was graded using the Oxford system. Literature search findings were shared with the expert panel. A 5-point scale (strongly agree, agree, neither agree nor disagree, disagree, and strongly disagree) was used, and a concordance rate of >75% among experts indicated agreement. Using a modified Delphi technique, 18 qualified experts provided 17 recommendations. Eleven statements achieved high agreement, four got moderate agreement, and two got low agreement. Challenges exist in diagnosing EoE, particularly in children. Esophageal biopsies were crucial in diagnosis, irrespective of visible mucosal changes. Further research on diagnostic tools like endoscopic mucosal impedance and biomarkers is needed. Diagnosis relies on esophageal biopsies and symptom-histology correlation; however, tools like EoE assessment questionnaires and endoscopic mucosal impedance could enhance the accuracy and efficiency of EoE diagnosis. The diagnosis of EoE is challenging since the symptoms seldom correlate with the histological findings. Currently, diagnosis is based on patient symptoms and endoscopic and histological findings. Further research into mucosal impedance tests and the role of biomarkers is needed to facilitate diagnosis.

Eosinophilic esophagitis: does age matter?

INTRODUCTION

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic inflammatory disease of the esophagus with increasing prevalence worldwide. It is a multifactorial disease caused by a combination of immunologic, genetic, and environmental factors. The clinical presentation of EoE varies largely, especially between different age groups. While diagnostic criteria and therapeutic goals are similar in children and adults, there are differences in treatment, with a more cautious approach in children to avoid growth disturbances. In addition, close monitoring and follow-up are essential in children to ensure uninterrupted growth.

AREAS COVERED

A search in PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and SCOPUS databases was conducted to identify relevant studies published between January 2010 and January 2023 to give an overview of the state-of-the-art of EoE epidemiology, diagnosis, and treatment while focusing on similarities and differences between the adult and the pediatric population.

EXPERT OPINION

The current state of research indicates that while significant progress has been made in understanding and treating EoE, further research and advances are needed to optimize diagnostic strategies, tailored treatment approaches, monitoring, and follow-up, and improve long-term outcomes for patients. With further innovation, the management of EoE can become more precise and tailored, leading to better patient outcomes and improved quality of life.

Changes in mucosal IgG4+- and IL-10+-cell frequencies in adults with eosinophilic esophagitis on a two-food elimination diet

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is increasingly diagnosed in patients with dysphagia. Type-2 immunity can induce EoE histopathology via non-IgE-dependent mechanisms, possibly involving IgG4 and IL-10. To elucidate the contribution of this response to EoE pathogenesis, we examined its association with clinical and histologic endpoints in adult EoE patients given a two-food elimination diet. IgG4- and IL-10-expressing cells were counted in esophageal biopsies and serum food-specific IgG4 measured at baseline and follow-up. Variables were correlated with histologic measures of disease activity. Patients exhibited significant reduction in esophageal eosinophilia and overall histology. A significant decrease in IL-10+-cell frequencies correlated with histologic changes. In contrast, a decline in serum and esophageal IgG4, while substantial, did not correlate with IL-10+-cell frequencies or histologic parameters. These results suggest a critical role of IL-10 in EoE pathogenesis. Conversely, IgG4 expression, while reflecting exposure to food antigens, is not obviously related to EoE histopathology or IL-10 expression.

Efficacy and safety of dupilumab up to 52 weeks in adults and adolescents with eosinophilic oesophagitis (LIBERTY EoE TREET study): a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Long-term management options that specifically target the underlying inflammation in eosinophilic oesophagitis are needed. Dupilumab blocks the shared receptor component for interleukin (IL)-4/IL-13; we aimed to assess its long-term efficacy and safety in adults and adolescents with eosinophilic oesophagitis enrolled in part B of the LIBERTY EoE TREET study who continued to part C (part B-C).

METHODS

LIBERTY EoE TREET was a three-part, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study conducted at 65 hospitals and private clinics across ten countries in Australia, Canada, Europe, and the USA. Adults or adolescents (aged ≥12 years) with a diagnosis of eosinophilic oesophagitis by endoscopic biopsy (peak oesophageal intraepithelial eosinophil count ≥15 eosinophils per high-power field [eos/hpf]) from at least one oesophageal region despite 8 weeks of high-dose proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) and a Dysphagia Symptom Questionnaire (DSQ) score of at least 10 at baseline were eligible. In part B, patients were randomly (1:1:1) assigned to receive subcutaneous dupilumab 300 mg either weekly or every 2 weeks or weekly placebo until week 24. Randomisation was done centrally by interactive voice response system/web response system (IVRS/IWRS) in blocks and stratified according to age (<18 years vs ≥18 years) and use of PPI at randomisation (yes vs no). Patients, study sponsors, and investigators involved in the study were masked to the randomisation outcome. Eligible patients who received placebo in part B and continued to part C were randomly assigned again (1:1) to either weekly dupilumab (placebo/weekly dupilumab group) or dupilumab every 2 weeks (placebo/dupilumab every 2 weeks), with matching placebo alternating with dupilumab doses. Patients who were randomly assigned to one of the dupilumab dose regimens in part B remained on the same regimen in part C for an additional 28 weeks (weekly dupilumab/weekly dupilumab group or dupilumab every 2 weeks/dupilumab every 2 weeks group). Treatment assignment in part C was managed by IVRS/IWRS to maintain blinding of treatment assignment in part B. The primary endpoint of this trial has been reported; here, we report the week 52 outcomes of part B-C. Efficacy and safety analyses were done in the part C safety-analysis set, which included all patients who were randomised in part B, entered part C, and received any study drug in part C. This completed trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT03633617.

FINDINGS

Between Aug 12, 2019, and March 11, 2021, 240 patients were randomly assigned into part B, of whom 227 (74 in placebo group, 74 in weekly dupilumab group, and 79 in dupilumab every 2 weeks group) continued into part B-C and were included in the current analysis. 37 patients switched from placebo to weekly dupilumab, and 37 from placebo to dupilumab every 2 weeks; 74 patients continued on weekly dupilumab and 79 continued on dupilumab every 2 weeks. Of the patients who entered part B-C, 75 (33%) were adolescents, 145 (64%) male, 82 (36%) female, and 206 (91%) White. At week 52, 55 (85%) patients in the weekly dupilumab/weekly dupilumab group, 25 (68%) in the placebo/weekly dupilumab group, 54 (74%) in the every 2 weeks dupilumab/every 2 weeks dupilumab group, and 23 (72%) in the placebo/every 2 weeks dupilumab group achieved a peak oesophageal intraepithelial eosinophil count of 6 eos/hpf or less. Mean percent change from part B baseline in peak eosinophil count was -95·9% (95% CI -96·9 to -94·9) in the weekly dupilumab/weekly dupilumab group, -84·2% (-98·3 to -70·2) in the placebo/weekly dupilumab group, -84·8% (-94·3 to -75·2) in the every 2 weeks dupilumab/every 2 weeks dupilumab group, and -91·2% (-95·9 to -86·5) in the placebo/every 2 weeks dupilumab group at week 52. At week 52, mean change from part B baseline in eosinophilic oesophagitis Histology Scoring System (HSS) grade score was -1·0 point (95% CI -1·1 to -0·9) in the weekly dupilumab/weekly dupilumab group and -0·9 points (-1·0 to -0·8) in the placebo/weekly dupilumab group; mean change in eosinophilic oesophagitis HSS stage score was -0·9 points (-1·0 to -0·8) in the weekly dupilumab/weekly dupilumab group and -0·9 points (-1·0 to -0·8) in the placebo/weekly dupilumab group. Similar improvements were observed in the every 2 weeks dupilumab groups. Mean absolute change from part B baseline in DSQ score was -30·3 points (95% CI -34·5 to -26·1) in the weekly dupilumab/weekly dupilumab group, -27·3 points (-32·1 to -22·4) in the placebo/weekly dupilumab group, -20·9% (-25·4 to -16·3) in the every 2 weeks dupilumab/every 2 weeks dupilumab group, and -23·7% (-29·1 to -18·3) in the placebo/every 2 weeks dupilumab group at week 52. Mean change from part B baseline in endoscopic reference score was -5·4 points (95% CI -6·1 to -4·6) in the weekly dupilumab/weekly dupilumab group, -6·1 points (-7·3 to -4·9) in the placebo/weekly dupilumab group, -5·2% (-6·0 to -4·4) in the every 2 weeks dupilumab/every 2 weeks dupilumab group, and -4·3% (-5·4 to -3·1) in the placebo/every 2 weeks dupilumab group at week 52. During part B-C, one (3%) patient in the placebo/weekly dupilumab group, one (1%) in the weekly dupilumab/weekly dupilumab group, and one (3%) in the placebo/every 2 weeks dupilumab group received rescue medication. One (3%) patient in the placebo/every 2 weeks dupilumab group and one (1%) in the dupilumab every 2 weeks/dupilumab every 2 weeks group underwent a rescue oesophageal dilation procedure. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were injection-site reactions (ten [14%] in the weekly dupilumab/weekly dupilumab group and four [11%] in the placebo/weekly dupilumab group).

INTERPRETATION

Improvements in histological, symptomatic, endoscopic, and molecular features of eosinophilic oesophagitis observed after 24 weeks of weekly dupilumab treatment were maintained or continued to improve to week 52. These findings reinforce the importance of weekly dupilumab, rather than every 2 weeks, for the improvement of symptoms in adults and adolescents with eosinophilic oesophagitis.

FUNDING

Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc.

The impact of COVID-19 on Japanese patients with eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorders during the vaccination era

Background

Eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorders (EGIDs) are chronic allergic diseases categorized as eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) and non-EoE EGIDs. Few studies regarding the association between EGIDs and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have been reported. Although most Japanese individuals received the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccine, the incidence of COVID-19 remained high in 2022. This study examines the incidence of COVID-19 in patients with EGIDs during the vaccination era.

Methods

Patients with EGIDs who visited our department between October and December 2022 were enrolled in the study. The incidence and severity of COVID-19 prior to October 1, 2022 were determined. Patients who reported having COVID-19 also reported their hospitalization history, intensive care unit admissions, and EGID flares. The number of SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations received and treatment for EGIDs were obtained from the patients' medical records.

Results

Of 111 patients with EGIDs (65 with EoE and 46 with non-EoE EGIDs) included in this study, 31 (28%) patients reported having COVID-19, including 14 (22%) with EoE and 17 (37%) with non-EoE EGIDs. Fifty-nine (84%) patients received two or more vaccinations, and 11 (16%) patients received no vaccinations. COVID-19 was mild in all but one patient who had moderate symptoms. COVID-19 was not associated with EGID flares. EGID treatments and an unvaccinated status were not associated with an increased risk of COVID-19.

Conclusion

COVID-19 was mild in patients with EGIDs and not associated with EGIDs flares during the vaccination era. There was a relatively high incidence of COVID-19 among patients with non-EoE EGIDs.

Prenatal, Intrapartum, and Neonatal Factors Increase the Risk of Eosinophilic Esophagitis

INTRODUCTION

Early-life exposures have been associated with an increased risk of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE); however, most studies to date have been conducted at referral centers and are subject to recall bias. By contrast, we conducted a nationwide, population-based and registry-based case-control study of prenatal, intrapartum, and neonatal exposures, using data collected prospectively through population-based Danish health and administrative registries.

METHODS

We ascertained all EoE cases in Denmark (birth years 1997-2018). Cases were sex and age matched to controls (1:10) using risk-set sampling. We obtained data on prenatal, intrapartum, and neonatal factors, i.e., pregnancy complications, mode of delivery, gestational age at delivery, birthweight (expressed as a z-score), and neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission. We used conditional logistic regression to compute the crude and adjusted odds ratios (aOR) of EoE in relation to each prenatal, intrapartum, and neonatal factor, thus providing an estimate of incidence density ratios with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

In the 393 cases and 3,659 population controls included (median age at index date, 11 years [interquartile range, 6-15]; 69% male), we observed an association between gestational age and EoE, peaking at 33 vs 40 weeks (aOR 3.6 [95% CI 1.8-7.4]), and between NICU admission and EoE (aOR 2.8 [95% CI 1.2-6.6], for a NICU hospitalization of 2-3 weeks vs no admission). In interaction analyses, we observed a stronger association between NICU admission and EoE in infants born at term than in preterm infants (aOR 2.0 [95% CI 1.4-2.9] for term infants and aOR 1.0 [95% CI 0.5-2.0] for preterm infants). We also observed an association between pregnancy complications and EoE (aOR 1.4 [95% CI 1.0-1.9]). Infants who were very growth restricted at birth had an increased rate of EoE (aOR 1.4 [95% CI: 1.0-1.9] for a z-score of -1.5 vs a z-score of 0). Mode of delivery was not associated with EoE.

DISCUSSION

Prenatal, intrapartum, and neonatal factors, particularly preterm birth and NICU admission, were associated with development of EoE. Further research is needed to elucidate the mechanisms underlying the observed associations.

Prevalence of elderly eosinophilic esophagitis and their clinical characteristics

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is predominantly found in middle-aged men among adults. There are few reports about EoE in the elderly, despite an ageing population. The study aimed to define the prevalence and clinical characteristics of EoE amongst older adults.

METHODS

Elderly patients (defined as those ≥65 years) were compared to younger adults (18-64) in terms of clinical characteristics (age, gender, presenting symptoms, comorbidities), histological activity (eosinophil count), treatment modality and response to treatment. A pre- existing prospectively generated database of all EoE patients presenting to our department between February 2010 and December 2022 was interrogated. 309 patients who underwent endoscopy and esophageal biopsy and were found to have ≥15 eosinophils/HPF were defined as having EoE and were included for study. Statistical analyses were performed using Fisher's extract test or Mann-Whitney U test.

RESULTS

309 cases of EoE were recorded, mean age 45.7, range (21-88 years), of which20 patients were aged 65 years and over. Compared to younger patients, those aged ≥65 had more medical comorbidities (15 [75%] vs 111[38%], p = 0.002), and instead a non-significant trend toward less fibrosis (0.25 vs 0.46, p = 0.117). Although rate of cases required topical steroid (TCS) therapy was similar, none received repeated or maintenance TCS therapy in elderly.

CONCLUSION

In our cohort, only 20 patients (6%) were aged 65 years or older, suggesting that EoE is uncommon in the elderly. The clinical characteristics of EoE in the older age group were similar to the younger patients. Future studies with prospective data collection may determine if EoE disappears with age, or if the younger mean age is reflective of an increasing prevalence in recent years, that may be realized in the elderly EoE population in the future.

Dietary Strategies in Adult Patients with Eosinophilic Esophagitis: A State-of-the-Art Review

Allergen-free diets are a specific and effective anti-inflammatory therapy for eosinophilic esophagitis. They should be carried out by a multidisciplinary team to reduce side effects and improve adherence. According to recent guidelines and expert opinions, empirical diets with a reduced number of eliminated food categories and a step-up approach are the most encouraged strategy to reduce the number of endoscopies to identify food trigger(s) and maximize clinical results and adherence. Despite the fact that allergy testing-based diets are not recommended at a population level, geographical sensitization patterns may play a role in some patients in specific areas, such as in Southern and Central Europe.

The Role of Benralizumab in Eosinophilic Immune Dysfunctions: A Case Report-Based Literature Review

In the past years, the knowledge of eosinophils playing a primary pathophysiologic role in several associated conditions has led to the development of biologics targeting therapies aiming at normalizing the immune response, reducing chronic inflammation, and preventing tissue damage. To better illustrate the potential relationship between different eosinophilic immune dysfunctions and the effects of biological therapies in this scenario, here, we present a case of a 63-year-old male first referred to our department in 2018 with a diagnosis of asthma, polyposis, and rhinosinusitis and presenting a suspicion of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs' allergy. He also had a past medical history of eosinophilic gastroenteritis/duodenitis (eosinophilia counts >50 cells/high-power field HPF). The use of multiple courses of corticosteroid therapy failed to completely control these conditions. In October 2019, after starting benralizumab (an antibody directed against the alpha chain of the IL-5 cytokine receptor) as add-on treatment for severe eosinophilic asthma, important clinical improvements were reported both on the respiratory (no asthma exacerbations) and gastrointestinal systems (eosinophilia count 0 cells/HPF). Patients' quality of life also increased. Since June 2020, systemic corticosteroid therapy was reduced without worsening of gastrointestinal symptoms or eosinophilic inflammation. This case warns of the importance of early recognition and appropriate individualized treatment of eosinophilic immune dysfunctions and suggests the conduction of further larger studies on the use of benralizumab in gastrointestinal syndromes aiming at better understanding its relying mechanisms of action in the intestinal mucosa.

Enhancing diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility in eosinophilic gastrointestinal disease research: the consortium for eosinophilic gastrointestinal disease researchers' journey

In response to the social inequities that exist in health care, the NIH-funded Consortium of Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Disease Researchers (CEGIR) recently formed a diversity committee to examine systemic racism and implicit bias in the care and research of eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases (EGIDs). Herein, we describe our process, highlighting milestones and issues addressed since the committee's inception, which we hope will inspire other researchers to enhance diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (DEIA) in their fields. Our journey began by establishing mission and vision statements to define the purpose of the committee. Regular discussion of diversity-related topics was incorporated into existing meetings and web-based materials were shared. This was followed by educational initiatives, including establishing a library of relevant publications and a speaker series to address DEIA topics. We then established a research agenda focused on the following actionable items: (1) to define what is known about the demographics of EGIDs by systematic review of population-based studies; (2) to develop a practical tool for reporting participant demographics to reduce bias in EGID literature; (3) to examine health disparities in the care of individuals with eosinophilic esophagitis who present to the emergency department with an esophageal food impaction; (4) to examine how access to a gastroenterologist affects the conclusions of published research examining the prevalence of pediatric eosinophilic esophagitis; and (5) to develop a model for examining the dimensions of diversity, and provide a framework for CEGIR's ongoing projects and data capture. In addition to promoting consciousness of DEIA, this initiative has fostered inclusivity among CEGIR members and will continue to inspire positive changes in EGID care and research.