Esophageal Lichen Planus: A Descriptive Multicenter Report

GOALS

To better understand the characteristics, treatment approaches, and outcomes of patients with esophageal lichen planus (ELP).

BACKGROUND

ELP is a rare, often unrecognized and misdiagnosed disorder. Data on this unique patient population are currently limited to small, single-center series.

STUDY

A multicenter, retrospective descriptive study was conducted of adults diagnosed with ELP over a 5-year period, between January 1, 2015, and October 10, 2020, from 7 centers across the United States.

RESULTS

Seventy-eight patients (average age 65 y, 86% female, 90% Caucasian) were included. Over half had at least 1 extraesophageal manifestation. Esophageal strictures (54%) and abnormal mucosa (50%) were frequent endoscopic findings, with the proximal esophagus the most common site of stricture. Approximately 20% had normal endoscopic findings. Topical steroids (64%) and/or proton pump inhibitors (74%) dominated management; endoscopic response favored steroids (43% vs. 29% respectively). Almost half of the patients required switching treatment modalities during the study period. Adjunctive therapies varied significantly between centers.

CONCLUSIONS

Given its at times subtle clinical and endoscopic signs, a high index of suspicion and biopsy will improve ELP diagnosis, especially in those with extraesophageal manifestations. Effective therapies are lacking and vary significantly. Prospective investigations into optimal treatment regimens are necessary.

Number of Older Biologic Siblings and Early-Onset Colorectal Cancer Risk

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer in the United States.1 Although CRC incidence has declined in individuals >50 years, incidence is rising in adults <50 years (early onset).1 By 2027, CRC is projected to become the leading cause of cancer mortality in US adults <50 years.2 To combat the rising incidence of early onset CRC (EOCRC), national guidelines recently lowered the screening age from 50 to 45 years for average-risk individuals.3 Understanding the risk profile of EOCRC can help combat the rising burden in young adults, especially in those ineligible for screening.

Monitoring and modulating the trajectory of eosinophilic esophagitis

Current treatments of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) aim to eliminate esophageal mucosal inflammation and attenuate, stabilize, or reverse stricture formation. However, our ability to study the long-term course of esophageal strictures in patients with EoE is hampered by the short-term existence of this disease. It is unclear to what degree of control of inflammation is needed to prevent stricture formation. Additionally, identified phenotypes of EoE may ultimately dictate different levels of concern and time intervals for developing fibrosis. Currently, multiple methods are used to monitor patients' disease progression to fibrosis, as symptoms alone do not correlate with disease activity. Endoscopic findings and mucosal histology are used to monitor disease activity, but these focus on improvements in inflammation with inconsistent evaluation of underlying fibrosis. The use of functional lumen impedance planimetry, barium esophagraphy, and endoscopic ultrasound continues to expand in EoE. The rapid advancements in EoE have led to an armamentarium of measuring tools and therapies that holistically characterize disease severity and response to therapy. Nevertheless, our ability to evaluate gross esophageal fibrosis and stricture formation from a transmural rather than mucosal view should be a focus of future investigations because it is essential to monitoring and modulating the trajectory of EoE.

Questionnaire for diagnosis and response to therapy in rumination syndrome

Rumination is a behavioral disorder characterized by regurgitation of food without retching. It is diagnosed clinically by the Rome Criteria and treated primarily by diaphragmatic breathing. Despite diagnosis and follow-up being based on symptomatic responses to therapies, there are no published or validated questionnaires. To address this care-gap, a rumination questionnaire was developed and reviewed by two expert esophagologists and five patients diagnosed with rumination. Ultimately, an eight-point questionnaire with scoring ranging from -1 to 10 was finalized. This newly developed questionnaire was implemented on five additional patients diagnosed clinically with rumination syndrome with improvement after interventions noted.

A Delphi Method for Development of a Barrett's Esophagus Question Prompt List as a Communication Tool for Optimal Patient-physician Communication

BACKGROUND METHODS

The question prompt list content was derived through a modified Delphi process consisting of 3 rounds. In round 1, experts provided 5 answers to the prompts "What general questions should patients ask when given a new diagnosis of Barrett's esophagus" and "What questions do I not hear patients asking, but given my expertise, I believe they should be asking?" Questions were reviewed and categorized into themes. In round 2, experts rated questions on a 5-point Likert scale. In round 3, experts rerated questions modified or reduced after the previous rounds. Only questions rated as "essential" or "important" were included in Barrett's esophagus question prompt list (BE-QPL). To improve usability, questions were reduced to minimize redundancy and simplified to use language at an eighth-grade level (Fig. 1).

RESULTS

Twenty-one esophageal medical and surgical experts participated in both rounds (91% males; median age 52 years). The expert panel comprised of 33% esophagologists, 24% foregut surgeons, and 24% advanced endoscopists, with a median of 15 years in clinical practice. Most (81%), worked in an academic tertiary referral hospital. In this 3-round Delphi technique, 220 questions were proposed in round 1, 122 (55.5%) were accepted into the BE-QPL and reduced down to 76 questions (round 2), and 67 questions (round 3). These 67 questions reached a Flesch Reading Ease of 68.8, interpreted as easily understood by 13 to 15 years olds.

CONCLUSIONS

With multidisciplinary input, we have developed a physician-derived BE-QPL to optimize patient-physician communication. Future directions will seek patient feedback to distill the questions further to a smaller number and then assess their usability.

Quality Indicator Development for the Approach to Ineffective Esophageal Motility: A Modified Delphi Study

GOALS

Develop quality indicators for ineffective esophageal motility (IEM).

BACKGROUND

IEM is identified in up to 20% of patients undergoing esophageal high-resolution manometry (HRM) based on the Chicago Classification. The clinical significance of this pattern is not established and management remains challenging.

STUDY

Using RAND/University of California, Los Angeles Appropriateness Methods, we employed a modified-Delphi approach for quality indicator statement development. Quality indicators were proposed based on prior literature. Experts independently and blindly scored proposed quality statements on importance, scientific acceptability, usability, and feasibility in a 3-round iterative process.

RESULTS

All 10 of the invited esophageal experts in the management of esophageal diseases invited to participate rated 12 proposed quality indicator statements. In round 1, 7 quality indicators were rated with mixed agreement, on the majority of categories. Statements were modified based on panel suggestion, modified further following round 2's virtual discussion, and in round 3 voting identified 2 quality indicators with comprehensive agreement, 4 with partial agreement, and 1 without any agreement. The panel agreed on the concept of determining if IEM is clinically relevant to the patient's presentation and managing gastroesophageal reflux disease rather than the IEM pattern; they disagreed in all 4 domains on the use of promotility agents in IEM; and had mixed agreement on the value of a finding of IEM during anti-reflux surgical planning.

CONCLUSION

Using a robust methodology, 2 IEM quality indicators were identified. These quality indicators can track performance when physicians identify this manometric pattern on HRM. This study further highlights the challenges met with IEM and the need for additional research to better understand the clinical importance of this manometric pattern.

Roles of swallowing and belching in different phenotypes of gastroesophageal reflux disease

BACKGROUND

The contributions of swallowing and belching to specific gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) phenotypes are unclear.

METHODS

This study retrospectively analyzed esophageal pH/impedance studies, comparing reflux events preceded by gastric belching (GB), supragastric belching (SGB), air swallowing, and liquid/solid swallowing based on reflux position, lower esophageal sphincter (LES) pressure, and acid exposure time (AET).

KEY RESULTS

20 GERD patients and 10 controls were studied. Upright GERD patients and controls had a higher proportion of reflux events with a preceding swallow or belch (0.64, 0.64) than the supine group (0.38, p = 0.043). The upright group and controls trended toward a higher proportion of reflux events preceded by overall swallowing (0.61, 0.50) and air swallowing (0.55, 0.48) than the supine group (0.32, 0.31 p = 0.064, p = 0.11), but the three groups had similar rates of liquid/solid swallowing (0.032, 0.024, 0.017, p = 0.69). LES pressure did not correlate with reflux events preceded by swallowing (R2  = 0.021, p = 0.44). There was a higher rate of events preceded by gastric belching in the control group (0.14) than in the upright (0.032) and supine groups (0.066, p = 0.049). LES pressure did not correlate with the rate of events preceded by belching (R2  = 0.000093, p = 0.96). Normal AET patients had a higher rate of events preceded by GB (0.12) than those with increased acid exposure (0.030, p = 0.0083), but the two groups had similar rates of preceding air (0.43, 0.47, p = 0.68), liquid/solid (0.018, 0.032, p = 0.30), and overall swallowing (0.44, 0.53, p = 0.38).

CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES

Swallowing more than belching is a dominant mechanism for reflux irrespective of GERD position, LES pressure, and AET.

Development of a model to identify patients who do not need oesophageal biopsies when eosinophilic oesophagitis is suspected

BACKGROUND

Predictive models for eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE) may not fully rule in the diagnosis.

AIM

To develop a reverse model that predicts against EoE to eliminate the need for oesophageal biopsies.

METHODS

In this two-centre study, a predictive model was developed (Mayo Clinic) and validated (University of North Carolina [UNC]). Cross-sectional data from consecutive adult patients without prior EoE who underwent upper enoscopy with oesophageal biopsies were used. EoE cases had ≥15 eosinophils/high-power field while controls had no eosinophils. Data were collected on patient clinical and endoscopic features. Multiple variable logistic regression was used to identify predictors of non-EoE status while maintaining specificity ≥95%. A secondary model was developed to predict against the need for endoscopy in patients suspected of having EoE without alarm symptoms.

RESULTS

The Mayo and UNC cohorts consisted of 345 (EoE = 94, non-EoE = 251) and 297 patients (EoE = 84, non-EoE = 213), respectively. A primary model based on clinical and endoscopic features predicted against EoE with c-statistic 0.92 (95% CI: 0.88-0.96), specificity 95%, and sensitivity 65%. This model was validated (UNC) with c-statistic 0.87 (95% CI: 0.82-0.92). A simplified scoring system was created and a threshold of ≥12 points excluded EoE with 95% specificity and 50% sensitivity. A secondary model based on clinical characteristics alone predicted against EoE with c-statistic 0.86 (95% CI: 0.82-0.90), specificity 95% and sensitivity 39% and validated (UNC) with c-statistic 0.78 (95% CI: 0.71-0.85).

CONCLUSION

A simplified scoring system accurately identified a group of patients with a low likelihood of EoE where unnecessary oesophageal biopsies can be avoided, potentially resulting in resource and cost savings.

Barrier Dysfunction in Eosinophilic Esophagitis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Compelling evidence over the past decade supports the central role of epithelial barrier dysfunction in the pathophysiology of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). The purpose of this review is to summarize the genetic, environmental, and immunologic factors driving epithelial barrier dysfunction, and how this impaired barrier can further promote the inflammatory response in EoE.

RECENT FINDINGS

Common environmental exposures, such as detergents, may have a direct impact on the esophageal epithelial barrier. In addition, the effects of IL-13 on barrier dysfunction may be reduced by 17β-estradiol, Vitamin D, and the short chain fatty acids butyrate and propionate, suggesting novel therapeutic targets. There are many genetic, environmental, and immunologic factors that contribute to epithelial barrier dysfunction in EoE. This leads to further skewing of the immune response to a "Th2" phenotype, alterations in the esophageal microbiome, and penetration of relevant antigens into the esophageal mucosa, which are central to the pathophysiology of EoE.

Pooled Phase 2 and 3 Efficacy and Safety Data on Budesonide Oral Suspension in Adolescents with Eosinophilic Esophagitis

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of budesonide oral suspension (BOS) in adolescents with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE).

METHODS

This post hoc analysis pooled data from two 12-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of BOS 2.0 mg twice daily (b.i.d.) (phase 2, NCT01642212; phase 3, NCT02605837) in patients aged 11-17 years with EoE and dysphagia. Efficacy endpoints included histologic (≤6, ≤1, and <15 eosinophils per high-power field [eos/hpf]), dysphagia symptom (≥30% reduction in Dysphagia Symptom Questionnaire [DSQ] scores from baseline), and clinicopathologic (≤6 eos/hpf and ≥30% reduction in DSQ scores from baseline) responses at week 12. Change from baseline to week 12 in peak eosinophil counts, DSQ scores, EoE Histology Scoring System (EoEHSS) grade (severity) and stage (extent) total score ratios (TSRs), and total EoE Endoscopic Reference Scores (EREFS) were assessed. Safety outcomes were also examined.

RESULTS

Overall, 76 adolescents were included (BOS, n = 45; placebo, n = 31). Significantly more patients who received BOS than placebo achieved histologic responses (≤6 eos/hpf: 46.7% vs 6.5%; ≤1 eos/hpf: 42.2% vs 0.0%; <15 eos/hpf: 53.3% vs 9.7%; P < 0.001) and a clinicopathologic response (31.1% vs 3.2%; P = 0.003) at week 12. More BOS-treated than placebo-treated patients achieved a dysphagia symptom response at week 12 (68.9% vs 58.1%; not statistically significant P = 0.314). BOS-treated patients had significantly greater reductions in EoEHSS grade and stage TSRs ( P < 0.001) and total EREFS ( P = 0.021) from baseline to week 12 than placebo-treated patients. BOS was well tolerated, with no clinically meaningful differences in adverse events versus placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

BOS 2.0 mg b.i.d. significantly improved most efficacy outcomes in adolescents with EoE versus placebo.

A perspective on the clinical relevance of weak or nonacid reflux

BACKGROUND

Advances in ambulatory esophageal reflux monitoring that incorporated impedance electrodes to pH catheters have resulted in better characterization of retrograde bolus flow in the esophagus. With pH-impedance monitoring, in addition to acid reflux episodes identified by pH drops below 4.0, weakly acid reflux (WAR, pH 4-7) and nonacid reflux (NAR, pH >7.0) are also recognized, although both may be included under the umbrella term NAR. However, despite identification of ambulatory pH-impedance monitoring, data on clinical relevance and prognostic value of NAR are limited. The Lyon Consensus, an international expert review that defines conclusive metrics for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), identifies NAR as "supportive" but not conclusive for GERD.

PURPOSE

This review provides perspectives on whether NAR fulfills three criteria for clinical relevance: whether NAR sufficiently explains pathogenesis of symptoms, whether it is associated with meaningful manifestations of GERD, and whether it can predict treatment efficacy.

H influenzae LPS colocalization with Toll-like receptor 4 in eosinophilic esophagitis

Background

Patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) have a unique esophageal microbiome with increased presence of Haemophilus influenzae, but its role in the disease is unclear.

Objective

Microbiome-derived bacterial LPS activation of Toll-like receptors (TLR) is a potential mechanism for inducing inflammation in other chronic inflammatory diseases, but it has not been studied in EoE. Our aim was therefore to study microbiome-derived bacterial LPS activation of TLRs in EoE.

Methods

We studied 10 patients with active EoE, 9 patients with inactive EoE, and 10 control patients. Esophageal biopsy samples from the controls, patients with active EoE (>15 eosinophils/hpf), and patients with inactive EoE were immunostained for the presence of H influenzae LPS, presence of TLR4, and colocalization of LPS and TLR4. Staining intensity was measured by using confocal laser microscopy and scored on a scale from 0 to 3 as the average score assigned by 2 blinded observers.

Results

H influenzae LPS was detected by positive staining in 20 of the 29 patients (69.0%), including 9 of the 10 patients with active EoE (90.0%), 8 of the 9 patients with inactive EoE (89.9%), and 3 of the 10 controls (30%); its level was greater in the patients with active EoE than in the controls (P = .063). TLR4 was detected by positive staining in 19 of the 29 patients (65.5%), including 9 of the 10 patients with active EoE (90.0%), 4 of the 9 patients with inactive EoE (44.4%), and 6 of the 10 controls (60.0%); its level was higher in the patients with active EoE than in those with inactive EoE (P = .096). The result of testing for colocalization of LPS and TLR4 was positive in 8 of 10 patients with active EoE (80.0%), 1 of 9 patients with inactive EoE (11.1%), and 1 of 10 control patients (10.0%), with greater colocalization of H influenzae LPS and TLR4 staining density in the samples from patients with active EoE than in the controls or the patients with inactive EoE (P = .009 and P = .018, respectively).

Conclusion

Esophageal microbiome-rich H influenzae LPS colocalizes to TLR4 in active EoE. These data lend further support to a role for the esophageal microbiome in modulating the activity of EoE.

Eosinophilic Esophagitis Histologic Scoring System: Correlation with Histologic, Endoscopic, and Symptomatic Disease and Clinical Use

BACKGROUND

The eosinophilic esophagitis histologic scoring system (EoEHSS) was developed to enhance the diagnostic standard of peak eosinophil count (PEC) in evaluating disease activity in EoE.

AIMS

(1) Correlate the EoEHSS and PEC to measures of symptomatic and endoscopic disease activity, (2) Correlate EoEHSS grade and stage subcomponents to clinical, radiology, and endoscopic markers of fibrotic disease, (3) Evaluate EoEHSS remission in asymptomatic patients with PEC < 15 eosinophils per high powered field (eos/hpf).

METHODS

Secondary analysis of prospective cohort data of 22 patients with EoE that underwent dietary therapy and endoscopy at 3 time points. Active disease was defined by EoEHSS grade or stage > 0.125, symptomatic disease by EoE symptom activity index > 20, endoscopic disease by endoscopic reference score > 2, and histologic disease by PEC ≥ 15 eos/hpf. EoEHSS remission was defined by esophageal inflammation (EI) grade of 0-1, EI stage of 0, total grade ≤ 3, and total stage ≤ 3.

RESULTS

EoEHSS grade and stage did not correlate with symptomatic disease but did with endoscopic and histologic disease. PEC showed similar correlation pattern. Abnormal grade and stage had strong sensitivity (87-100%) but poor specificity (11-36%) to detect symptomatic, endoscopic, and histologic disease activity. Lamina propria fibrosis was evaluated in 36% of biopsies and did not correlate with minimum esophageal diameter. Out of 14 patients who were in complete symptomatic, endoscopic, and histologic remission, 8 met criteria for EoEHSS remission.

CONCLUSION

The positive and negative correlations of EoEHSS to specific measures of symptomatic, histologic, and endoscopic activity suggest that it provides complementary information in EoE.

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

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

Quality Indicators for the Diagnosis and Management of Eosinophilic Esophagitis

INTRODUCTION

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

DISCUSSION

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

One-food versus six-food elimination diet therapy for the treatment of eosinophilic oesophagitis: a multicentre, randomised, open-label trial

BACKGROUND

Empirical elimination diets are effective for achieving histological remission in eosinophilic oesophagitis, but randomised trials comparing diet therapies are lacking. We aimed to compare a six-food elimination diet (6FED) with a one-food elimination diet (1FED) for the treatment of adults with eosinophilic oesophagitis.

METHODS

We conducted a multicentre, randomised, open-label trial across ten sites of the Consortium of Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Disease Researchers in the USA. Adults aged 18-60 years with active, symptomatic eosinophilic oesophagitis were centrally randomly allocated (1:1; block size of four) to 1FED (animal milk) or 6FED (animal milk, wheat, egg, soy, fish and shellfish, and peanut and tree nuts) for 6 weeks. Randomisation was stratified by age, enrolling site, and gender. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with histological remission (peak oesophageal count <15 eosinophils per high-power field [eos/hpf]). Key secondary endpoints were the proportions with complete histological remission (peak count ≤1 eos/hpf) and partial remission (peak counts ≤10 and ≤6 eos/hpf) and changes from baseline in peak eosinophil count and scores on the Eosinophilic Esophagitis Histology Scoring System (EoEHSS), Eosinophilic Esophagitis Endoscopic Reference Score (EREFS), Eosinophilic Esophagitis Activity Index (EEsAI), and quality of life (Adult Eosinophilic Esophagitis Quality-of-Life and Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Information System Global Health questionnaires). Individuals without histological response to 1FED could proceed to 6FED, and those without histological response to 6FED could proceed to swallowed topical fluticasone propionate 880 μg twice per day (with unrestricted diet), for 6 weeks. Histological remission after switching therapy was assessed as a secondary endpoint. Efficacy and safety analyses were done in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population. This trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02778867, and is completed.

FINDINGS

Between May 23, 2016, and March 6, 2019, 129 patients (70 [54%] men and 59 [46%] women; mean age 37·0 years [SD 10·3]) were enrolled, randomly assigned to 1FED (n=67) or 6FED (n=62), and included in the ITT population. At 6 weeks, 25 (40%) of 62 patients in the 6FED group had histological remission compared with 23 (34%) of 67 in the 1FED group (difference 6% [95% CI -11 to 23]; p=0·58). We found no significant difference between the groups at stricter thresholds for partial remission (≤10 eos/hpf, difference 7% [-9 to 24], p=0·46; ≤6 eos/hpf, 14% [-0 to 29], p=0·069); the proportion with complete remission was significantly higher in the 6FED group than in the 1FED group (difference 13% [2 to 25]; p=0·031). Peak eosinophil counts decreased in both groups (geometric mean ratio 0·72 [0·43 to 1·20]; p=0·21). For 6FED versus 1FED, mean changes from baseline in EoEHSS (-0·23 vs -0·15; difference -0·08 [-0·21 to 0·05]; p=0·23), EREFS (-1·0 vs -0·6; difference -0·4 [-1·1 to 0·3]; p=0·28), and EEsAI (-8·2 vs -3·0; difference -5·2 [-11·2 to 0·8]; p=0·091) were not significantly different. Changes in quality-of-life scores were small and similar between the groups. No adverse event was observed in more than 5% of patients in either diet group. For patients without histological response to 1FED who proceeded to 6FED, nine (43%) of 21 reached histological remission; for patients without histological response to 6FED who proceeded to fluticasone propionate, nine (82%) of 11 reached histological remission.

INTERPRETATION

Histological remission rates and improvements in histological and endoscopic features were similar after 1FED and 6FED in adults with eosinophilic oesophagitis. 6FED had efficacy in just less than half of 1FED non-responders and steroids had efficacy in most 6FED non-responders. Our findings indicate that eliminating animal milk alone is an acceptable initial dietary therapy for eosinophilic oesophagitis.

FUNDING

US National Institutes of Health.

Development and modification of a dysphagia question prompt list to improve patient-physician communication: Incorporating both esophageal expert and patient perspectives

BACKGROUND

Question prompt lists (QPLs) are structured sets of disease-specific questions, intended to encourage question-asking by patients and enhance patient-physician communication. To date, a dysphagia-specific QPL has not been developed for patients with esophageal dysphagia symptoms. We aim to develop a dysphagia-specific QPL incorporating both esophageal expert and patient perspectives, applying rigorous methodology.

METHODS

The QPL content was generated applying a two-round modified Delphi (RAND/UCLA) method among 11 experts. In round one, experts provided five answers to the prompts: "What general questions should patients ask when being seen for dysphagia?" and "What questions do I not hear patients asking but, given my experience, I believe they should be asking?" In round two, experts rated proposed questions on a 5-point Likert scale. Responses rated as "essential" or "important", determined by an a priori median threshold of ≥4.0, were accepted for inclusion. Subsequently, 20 patients from Stanford Health Care were enrolled to modify the preliminary QPL, to incorporate their perspectives and opinions. Patients independently rated questions applying the same 5-point Likert scale. At the end, patients were encouraged to propose additional questions to incorporate into the QPL by open-endedly asking "Are there questions we didn't ask, that you think we should?"

KEY RESULTS

Eleven experts participated in both voting rounds. Of 85 questions generated from round one, 60 (70.6%) were accepted for inclusion, meeting a median value of ≥4.0. Questions were combined to reduce redundancy, narrowing down to 44 questions. Questions were categorized into the following six themes: 1. "What is causing my dysphagia?"; 2. "Associated symptoms"; 3. "Testing for dysphagia"; 4. "Lifestyle modifications"; 5. "Treatment for dysphagia"; and 6. "Prognosis". The largest number of questions covered "What is causing my dysphagia" (27.3%). Twenty patients participated and modified the QPL. Of the 44 questions experts agreed were important, only 30 questions (68.2%) were accepted for inclusion. Six patients proposed 10 additional questions and after incorporating the suggested questions, the final dysphagia-specific QPL created by esophageal experts and modified by patients consisted of 40 questions.

CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES

Incorporating expert and patient perspectives, we developed a dysphagia-specific QPL to enhance patient-physician communication. Our study highlights importance of incorporating patient perspective when developing such a communication tool. Further studies will measure the impact of this communication tool on patient engagement.

Safety of an investigational formulation of budesonide (budesonide oral suspension) for eosinophilic oesophagitis: an integrated safety analysis of six phase 1-3 clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Questions remain regarding the safety of swallowed topical corticosteroids in eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE).

AIM

To assess the safety of an investigational formulation of budesonide (budesonide oral suspension; BOS) from six trials.

METHODS

Safety data were integrated from six trials (healthy adults: SHP621-101 [phase 1]; patients with EoE: MPI 101-01 and MPI 101-06 [phase 2]; SHP621-301, SHP621-302 and SHP621-303 [phase 3]) for participants who received ≥1 dose of study drug (BOS 2.0 mg twice daily [b.i.d.], BOS any dose [including BOS 2.0 mg b.i.d.] and placebo). Adverse events (AEs), laboratory testing, bone density and adrenal AEs were assessed. Exposure-adjusted incidence rates were calculated for AEs and AEs of special interest (AESIs).

RESULTS

Overall, 514 unique participants were included (BOS 2.0 mg b.i.d., n = 292; BOS any dose, n = 448; placebo, n = 168). The BOS 2.0 mg b.i.d., BOS any dose and placebo groups totalled 93.7, 122.4 and 25.0 participant-years of exposure (PY), respectively. Proportions of treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs) and AESIs (any) reported were higher for BOS than placebo; however, most were mild/moderate in severity. The most commonly reported AESIs (exposure-adjusted incidence rates [per 100 PY]) in the BOS 2.0 mg b.i.d., BOS any dose and placebo groups were infections (133.5, 154.4 and 136.2, respectively) and gastrointestinal AEs (84.3, 80.9 and 92.1, respectively). Adrenal AEs were more frequent with BOS 2.0 mg b.i.d. and BOS any dose than placebo (44.8, 34.3 and 24.0, respectively). TEAEs and AESIs related to study drug or leading to discontinuation were infrequent.

CONCLUSIONS

BOS was well-tolerated; most TEAEs with BOS were mild/moderate in severity.

CLINICALTRIALS

GOV NUMBERS

SHP621-101 (no clinical trials registration number), MPI 101-01 (NCT00762073), MPI 101-06 (NCT01642212), SHP621-301 (NCT02605837), SHP621-302 (NCT02736409) and SHP621-303 (NCT03245840).

Use of the Esophageal Sponge in Directing Food Reintroduction in Eosinophilic Esophagitis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Dietary therapy is successful in eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) but requires multiple upper endoscopies. The aim of this study was to determine if food reintroduction in EoE can be directed by minimally-invasive esophageal sponge cytology.

METHODS

In this prospective non-blinded trial, 22 responders to 6-food elimination diets underwent sequential food reintroduction guided by esophageal sponge cytology. Foods were reintroduced followed by unsedated esophageal sponge cytology assessment. A food trigger was defined by sponge cytology peak eosinophil count of ≥15 eos/high-powered field (hpf). Symptoms (EoE symptom activity index [EEsAI]), endoscopic score (EoE endoscopic reference score [EREFS]), and biopsy histology (peak eosinophil count) were collected pre-dietary therapy and post-dietary therapy, and then 4 weeks post food reintroduction.

RESULTS

The EEsAI and EREFS were similar post-dietary therapy to post-food reintroduction: 12.0 (interquartile range [IQR], 0.0-27.0) vs 16.5 (IQR, 9.0-28.8) (P = .265) and 1.5 (IQR, 0.2-3.0) vs 1.0 (IQR, 0.0-2.0) (P = .185). However, the peak eosinophil count was increased post-food reintroduction compared with post-dietary therapy: 20.0 (IQR, 5.0-51.5) vs 2.0 (IQR, 1.0-4.0) (P < .001), suggesting a failure of identification of all food triggers. The peak eosinophil count was lower post-food reintroduction compared with pre-dietary therapy: 20.0 (IQR, 5.0-51.5) vs 52.0 (IQR, 30.8-76.2) (P = .008). At the post food reintroduction evaluation, sponge cytology and biopsy histology were in agreement in 59% (13/22) of cases using a cutoff of <15 eos/hpf and 68% (15/22) of cases using a cutoff of <6 eos/hpf.

CONCLUSIONS

In the first study to evaluate a non-endoscopic technique in the clinical management of EoE, the esophageal sponge was moderately successful at guiding food reintroduction in EoE dietary responders in the outpatient setting.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov, Number NCT02599558.

Histologic response to steroids in eosinophilic esophagitis is dependent on delivery compound

Topical steroids are commonly used in treatment of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), but currently there is lack of data to clarify most effective regimen. We aimed to study the achievement of histologic remission using the same dose of budesonide in two different delivery formulations. Patients with established EoE treated with pharmacy compounded budesonide capsule or budesonide Rincinol gel (both 3 mg twice daily) were studied retrospectively. Those with pre-treatment and post-treatment histologic assessment were included with main endpoint being histologic remission. 103 patients (62 gel, 41 capsule) were included, with higher rate of histologic remission with gel (84 vs. 59%, P=0.004). A subset of patients in both groups had lack of steroid response (<50% drop in eosinophils) (15% for gel, 32% for capsule). Formulation/delivery vehicle of steroid treatments to esophageal mucosa in EoE appears important for treatment efficacy, with budesonide gel having higher likelihood of histologic remission compared to budesonide capsules in our population. A truly steroid refractory group appears likely in our population. Larger, prospective studies may help clarify best regimen of topical steroids in EoE and may work to identify patients likely to benefit from alternative therapies.

Development of a deep learning model for the histologic diagnosis of dysplasia in Barrett's esophagus

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The risk of progression in Barrett's esophagus (BE) increases with development of dysplasia. There is a critical need to improve the diagnosis of BE dysplasia, given substantial interobserver disagreement among expert pathologists and overdiagnosis of dysplasia by community pathologists. We developed a deep learning model to predict dysplasia grade on whole-slide imaging.

METHODS

We digitized nondysplastic BE (NDBE), low-grade dysplasia (LGD), and high-grade dysplasia (HGD) histology slides. Two expert pathologists confirmed all histology and digitally annotated areas of dysplasia. Training, validation, and test sets were created (by a random 70/20/10 split). We used an ensemble approach combining a "you only look once" model to identify regions of interest and histology class (NDBE, LGD, or HGD) followed by a ResNet101 model pretrained on ImageNet applied to the regions of interest. Diagnostic performance was determined for the whole slide.

RESULTS

We included slides from 542 patients (164 NDBE, 226 LGD, and 152 HGD) yielding 8596 bounding boxes in the training set, 1946 bounding boxes in the validation set, and 840 boxes in the test set. When the ensemble model was used, sensitivity and specificity for LGD was 81.3% and 100%, respectively, and >90% for NDBE and HGD. The overall positive predictive value and sensitivity metric (calculated as F1 score) was .91 for NDBE, .90 for LGD, and 1.0 for HGD.

CONCLUSIONS

We successfully trained and validated a deep learning model to accurately identify dysplasia on whole-slide images. This model can potentially help improve the histologic diagnosis of BE dysplasia and the appropriate application of endoscopic therapy.

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

INTRODUCTION

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

DISCUSSION

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

Prognostic Impact of the Presence of Barrett's Esophagus and Intestinal Metaplasia on Esophageal Adenocarcinoma Survival

Background/Aims

Barrett's esophagus (BE), defined by the presence of intestinal metaplasia (IM) on histology, is thought to be the only identifiable precursor lesion for esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Recent studies have suggested the possibility of an alternate, non-IM associated EAC that is a more aggressive form of EAC with worse survival. Among EAC patients, we aimed to compare survival of patients with and without IM at the time of diagnosis.

Methods

This was a retrospective cohort study of all patients with histologic confirmed EAC evaluated at a tertiary care center from 2013 to 2019. Cases were categorized according to the presence or absence of IM on histologic specimens (Group I-IM-EAC and Group II-non-IM-EAC). We compared demographic characteristics, clinical stage, therapy, and survival between the 2 groups using the Chi-square and ANOVA tests (for categorical and continuous variables, respectively). We used Cox proportional hazards regression to determine the association of IM with overall survival, adjusting for sex, age at diagnosis, tumor location, histologic grade, and clinical stage.

Results

A total of 475 patients were included in this analysis (mean age 64.8 years [SD 10.8], 89% white) and 109 (23.0%) had no evidence of IM. Compared with IM-EAC (Group I), individuals in the non-IM-EAC group were younger (P = .01) and had a greater proportion of patients diagnosed with advanced disease (49.5 vs 20.2% for stage 4, P < .001). These patients were less likely to undergo endoscopic therapy alone (0.92% vs 29.78%, P < .001) or surgery alone (0 vs 9.84%, P = .001). On multivariable analysis, the presence of IM-EAC was associated with improved overall survival compared to non-IM-EAC (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.49-0.96). Additional factors associated with poor survival was increasing stage of diagnosis (HR 6.49: 95% CI 3.77-11.15 for stage 4, HR 2.19: 95% CI 1.25-3.84 for stage 3, HR 2.04: 95% CI 0.98-4.25 for stage 2 compared to stage 1) and more advanced histologic stage (HR 2.00, 95% CI 1.26-3.19) for poorly/undifferentiated compared to well differentiated).

Conclusions

EAC without the presence of IM on histology was associated with worse survival compared to those with IM. Future prospective studies with detailed molecular sequencing are required to clarify if 2 separate phenotypes of EAC exist (IM-EAC and non-IM-EAC). If confirmed, this may have significant implications for screening and management strategies.

International Consensus Recommendations for Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Disease Nomenclature

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Substantial heterogeneity in terminology used for eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases (EGIDs), particularly the catchall term "eosinophilic gastroenteritis," limits clinical and research advances. We aimed to achieve an international consensus for standardized EGID nomenclature.

METHODS

This consensus process utilized Delphi methodology. An initial naming framework was proposed and refined in iterative fashion, then assessed in a first round of Delphi voting. Results were discussed in 2 consensus meetings, and the framework was updated and reassessed in a second Delphi vote, with a 70% threshold set for agreement.

RESULTS

Of 91 experts participating, 85 (93%) completed the first and 82 (90%) completed the second Delphi surveys. Consensus was reached on all but 2 statements. "EGID" was the preferred umbrella term for disorders of gastrointestinal (GI) tract eosinophilic inflammation in the absence of secondary causes (100% agreement). Involved GI tract segments will be named specifically and use an "Eo" abbreviation convention: eosinophilic gastritis (now abbreviated EoG), eosinophilic enteritis (EoN), and eosinophilic colitis (EoC). The term "eosinophilic gastroenteritis" is no longer preferred as the overall name (96% agreement). When >2 GI tract areas are involved, the name should reflect all of the involved areas.

CONCLUSIONS

This international process resulted in consensus for updated EGID nomenclature for both clinical and research use. EGID will be the umbrella term, rather than "eosinophilic gastroenteritis," and specific naming conventions by location of GI tract involvement are recommended. As more data are developed, this framework can be updated to reflect best practices and the underlying science.

Eosinophil Peroxidase Staining Enhances the Diagnostic Utility of the Cytosponge in Eosinophilic Esophagitis

INTRODUCTION

We aimed to assess the diagnostic utility of eosinophil peroxidase (EPX) staining on Cytosponge (CS) samples in eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE).

METHODS

Esophageal biopsy (BX) samples from adult subjects with EoE were assessed using peak eosinophils per high-power field (eos/hpf), EPX, and the EoE histologic scoring system. EPX staining and eos/hpf were compared (BX vs CS).

RESULTS

CS EPX positivity correlated with eos/hpf (CS [ r = 0.82, P < 0.0001]; BX [ r = 0.65, P < 0.0001]) and EoE histologic scoring system (grade [ r = 0.62, P < 0.00001]; stage [ r = 0.61, P < 0.0001]). CS EPX identified subjects with active EoE (area under the curve = 0.86, P < 0.0001).

DISCUSSION

The correlation of CS EPX with eosinophilic inflammation and histologic disease severity supports its diagnostic utility in EoE.

Predictors of histologic response to dietary therapy in eosinophilic oesophagitis

BACKGROUND

Dietary therapy successfully treats eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE), but limited data exist on predictors of patient response.

AIMS

To determine response rates and to identify predictors of histologic response to elimination diets in adults with EoE METHODS: This was a retrospective, single-centre study of adults with PPI-refractory EoE undergoing dietary therapy with six food elimination diet (SFED) or extended six food elimination diet (ExSFED) in an outpatient setting from January 2012 to January 2019. Patient demographics, radiologic and endoscopic findings, endoscopic reference (EREF) scores, histology and symptoms were evaluated before and after food elimination. Histologic response was assessed via tissue obtained from endoscopically-guided biopsy or Cytosponge. Dietary therapy adherence was assessed via structured phone interview. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify predictors of dietary response.

RESULTS

We included 68 patients, of whom 62% had a histologic response to dietary therapy (81% to SFED, 19% to ExSFED). Median duration of follow-up was 45 months (IQR, 34-53 months). On multivariable analysis, higher pre-SFED EREF score was the only variable associated with dietary non-response (OR 0.07, 95% CI 0.49, 0.98; p = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

In adults with EoE, histologic dietary non-response to SFED was associated with a higher pre-SFED EREF score, suggesting that fixed structural disease may predict dietary non-response. Our additional observations of poor correlation between symptomatic and histologic flares, and identification of ExSFED responders, suggest that histologic confirmation should be sought before committing patients to lifelong dietary changes. We also recommend the consideration of restricting legumes and corn in SFED non-responders as ExSFED detected additional dietary responders.

Association of Incidental Positron Emission Tomography Uptake in the Esophagus to Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease

The Los Angeles (LA) classification is the most accurate means of assessing esophageal injury from caustic gastric acid with focused and greater concentrations in areas of erosive disease.¹ However, data from animal models and patients have proposed that an initial diffuse inflammatory pathway contributes to injury in gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) mediated by interleukin (IL) 8, IL1β,^2,3 and hypoxia-inducible factors.^4,5 These observations demonstrate a lymphocyte predominant inflammatory process over course of 1-2 weeks associated with basal zone hyperplasia and dilation of intercellular spaces.⁶ In cultured human esophageal epithelial cells and patients, it is further suggested that acid causes this chronic inflammatory reaction.

Imaging Review of Gastrointestinal Motility Disorders

The motor function of the gastrointestinal tract relies on the enteric nervous system, which includes neurons spanning from the esophagus to the internal anal sphincter. Disorders of gastrointestinal motility arise as a result of disease within the affected portion of the enteric nervous system and may be caused by a wide array of underlying diseases. The etiology of motility disorders may be primary or due to secondary causes related to infection or inflammation, congenital abnormalities, metabolic disturbances, systemic illness, or medication-related side effects. The symptoms of gastrointestinal dysmotility tend to be nonspecific and may cause diagnostic difficulty. Therefore, evaluation of motility disorders requires a combination of clinical, radiologic, and endoscopic or manometric testing. Radiologic studies including fluoroscopy, CT, MRI, and nuclear scintigraphy allow exclusion of alternative pathologic conditions and serve as adjuncts to endoscopy and manometry to determine the appropriate diagnosis. Additionally, radiologist understanding of clinical evaluation of motility disorders is necessary for guiding referring clinicians and appropriately imaging patients. New developments and advances in imaging techniques have allowed improved assessment and diagnosis of motility disorders, which will continue to improve patient treatment options. Online supplemental material is available for this article. ^©RSNA, 2022.

Acute Esophageal Necrosis: A Retrospective Cohort Study Highlighting the Mayo Clinic Experience

OBJECTIVE

To describe the clinical, endoscopic, and histologic features in patients with acute esophageal necrosis (AEN).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, patients who were diagnosed as having AEN at Mayo Clinic sites in Minnesota, Florida, and Arizona between January 1, 1996, and January 31, 2021, were included. Data were collected on patient clinical characteristics and endoscopic and pathologic findings.

RESULTS

The study included 79 patients with AEN with a median (range) age of 64 years (12 to 91 years); 53 (67.1%) were men. Predominant presenting symptoms were hematemesis (49 of 79 [62.0%]), abdominal pain (29 [36.7%]), and melena (20 [25.3%]). Shock was the triggering event for AEN in 49 (62.0%). The 30- and 90-day mortality were 24.0% (19 of 79) and 31.6% (25), respectively. The presence of coexisting infection or bacteremia was significantly associated with 90-day mortality (P<.01). Endoscopically, involvement of the distal third only, distal two-thirds only, and entire esophagus was observed in 31.6% (24 of 76), 39.5% (30), and 29.0% (22), respectively. The length of esophageal involvement correlated with duration of hospitalization (P=.05). The endoscopic appearance of the esophageal mucosa ranged from predominantly white (21 of 44 [47.7%]) to mixed white and black (13 [29.6%]) to predominantly black (10 [22.7%]), and sloughing was present in 18 (40.9%). In the 26 patients with histopathologic findings available for review, 25 (96.1%) had necrosis and/or ulceration with abundant pigmentation. Among the 79 patients, 39 (49.4%) had a follow-up esophagogastroduodenoscopy; 26 of these 39 patients (66.7%) had resolution while 5 had persistent AEN, 4 of whom had improvement. Esophageal strictures developed in 7 of the 39 patients (18.0%).

CONCLUSION

Acute esophageal necrosis is a serious condition observed in critically ill patients. Its endoscopic appearance can be highly variable. In patients with an unclear diagnosis, esophageal biopsies may be helpful given the characteristic histologic findings.

Endoscopic approach to eosinophilic esophagitis: American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Consensus Conference

Endoscopy plays a critical role in caring for and evaluating the patient with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). Endoscopy is essential for diagnosis, assessment of response to therapy, treatment of esophageal strictures, and ongoing monitoring of patients in histologic remission. To date, less-invasive testing for identifying or grading EoE severity has not been established, whereas diagnostic endoscopy as integral to both remains the criterion standard. Therapeutic endoscopy in patients with adverse events of EoE may also be required. In particular, dilation may be essential to treat and attenuate progression of the disease in select patients to minimize further fibrosis and stricture formation. Using a modified Delphi consensus process, a group of 20 expert clinicians and investigators in EoE were assembled to provide guidance for the use of endoscopy in EoE. Through an iterative process, the group achieved consensus on 20 statements yielding comprehensive advice on tissue-sampling standards, gross assessment of disease activity, use and performance of endoscopic dilation, and monitoring of disease, despite an absence of high-quality evidence. Key areas of controversy were identified when discussions yielded an inability to reach agreement on the merit of a statement. We expect that with ongoing research, higher-quality evidence will be obtained to enable creation of a guideline for these issues. We further anticipate that forthcoming expert-generated and agreed-on statements will provide valuable practice advice on the role and use of endoscopy in patients with EoE.

Clinical role of ambulatory reflux monitoring in PPI non-responders: recommendation statements

BACKGROUND

Optimal ambulatory reflux monitoring methodology in symptomatic reflux patients continues to be debated.

AIMS

To utilise published literature and expert opinion to develop recommendation statements addressing use of ambulatory reflux monitoring in clinical practice METHODS: The RAND Appropriateness Method (RAM) was utilised among 17 experts with discussion, revision and two rounds of ranking of recommendation statements. Ambulatory reflux monitoring protocol, methodology and thresholds ranked as appropriate by ≥80% of panellists met the criteria for appropriateness.

RESULTS

Prolonged (96-h recommended) wireless pH monitoring off proton pump inhibitor (PPI) was identified as the appropriate diagnostic tool to assess the need for acid suppression in patients with unproven gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and persisting typical reflux symptoms despite once-daily PPI. Acid exposure time (AET) <4.0% on all days of monitoring with negative reflux-symptom association excludes GERD and does not support ongoing PPI treatment. Conversely, AET >6.0% across ≥2 days is conclusive evidence for GERD and supports treatment for GERD, while AET >10% across ≥2 days identifies severe acid burden that supports escalation of anti-reflux treatment. In previously proven GERD, impedance-pH monitoring on PPI is helpful in defining refractory GERD and mechanisms of continued symptoms; the presence of <40 reflux events, AET <2.0% and a negative reflux-symptom association does not support escalation of anti-reflux treatment. In contrast, AET > 4.0% and positive reflux-symptom association support escalation of anti-reflux treatment, including use of invasive therapeutics.

CONCLUSIONS

Statements meeting appropriateness for average clinical care have been identified when utilising reflux monitoring in patients with typical reflux symptoms and PPI non-response.

Management of eosinophilic esophagitis associated food impaction in Europe and the United States

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is the most common cause of esophageal food impaction (EFI). Approaches to management of EFI due to EoE have not been well characterized. We conducted a web-based survey to understand approaches to management of EFI due to EoE among endoscopists. Questions focused on management of patients from presentation to post-endoscopy follow-up. The survey was administered to a list of eligible candidates provided by societies of gastroenterology. A total of 308 endoscopists completed the questionnaire. The majority (83%) practiced in Europe and treated adults (78%). Most agreed patients should be advised to seek emergency care (66%) within 1 to 2 hours (41% agreement). There was agreement that medications to induce vomiting should be avoided (84%) and that blood tests or imaging studies were usually not required before endoscopy. By contrast, there was more variability in the type of sedation recommended and the need for endotracheal intubation, especially when comparing more experienced with less experienced EoE-endoscopists. Overall, fewer than half (43%) respondents recommended obtaining esophageal biopsies during the initial endoscopy. However, there were significant differences in the proportion who recommended biopsies based on level of EoE-experience (25, 52, 77%, P < 0.001; less vs. moderate vs. very experienced) and comparing pediatric and adult endoscopists (32, vs. 79%, P < 0.001; adult vs. pediatric). There exists heterogeneity among endoscopists in recommendations to manage EFI in patients with EoE. These findings support development of clinical guidelines and new studies to clarify the rationale for best practices. Key summary: Established knowledge-The optimal management of patients with esophageal food impaction due to eosinophilic esophagitis from presentation at the emergency department to postendoscopy care is unclear. New findings-Considerable recommendation variation exists in the management of EFI in patients with EoE. Our findings provide a rationale for the creation of consensus practice guidelines and further study into best practices.

Limitations of Heartburn and Other Societies' Criteria in Barrett's Screening for Detecting De Novo Esophageal Adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Despite extensive Barrett's esophagus (BE) screening efforts, most patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) present de novo. It is unclear how much of this problem is the result of insensitivity or poor applications of current screening guidelines. We aimed to evaluate the sensitivity of guidelines by determining the proportion of prevalent EAC cases that meet the American College of Gastroenterology (ACG) or the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) guidelines for BE screening and determine whether changes to criteria would enhance detection.

METHODS

A retrospective single-center cohort from the United States (n = 663) and a prospective multicenter cohort from the United Kingdom (n = 645) were collected and analyzed independently. Screening eligibility was determined as patients with chronic reflux and at least 2 or more risk factors as defined by the guidelines. We calculated the proportion of screening-eligible patients and then compared BE/EAC risk factors between screening-eligible and screening-ineligible patients using the chi-squared or Student t test as appropriate.

RESULTS

In the Mayo clinic cohort there were 54.9% EAC cases and in the UK cohort there were 38.9% EAC cases that were not identified by ACG or BSG screening criteria, respectively. Among patients who did not meet the screening criteria, lack of heartburn was observed in 86.5% in the Mayo clinic cohort and in 61.4% in the UK cohort. Other risk factors that were lacking included obesity (defined as a body mass index of ≥30 kg/m²) and family history of EAC. Eliminating chronic reflux from the ACG/BSG criteria improved eligibility for screening from 45.1% to 81.3% (P < .001) in the Mayo Clinic cohort and from 61.1% (n = 394) to 81.5% (n = 526; P < .001) in the UK cohort. However, reflux may be difficult to ascertain from the history, and by including proton pump inhibitor use status in addition to the BSG criteria, screening eligibility improved by 10.0% in the UK cohort (n = 459; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

ACG/BSG BE screening guidelines have limited our ability to detect prevalent EAC. An optimized approach to identifying the individuals most suitable for EAC screening needs to be implemented, particularly one that does not rely on chronic reflux symptoms.

Characterization of Prevalent, Post-Endoscopy, and Incident Esophageal Cancer in the United States: A Large Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Efforts to assess and improve the effectiveness of Barrett's esophagus (BE) screening and surveillance are ongoing in the United States. Currently, there are limited population-based data in the United States to guide these efforts.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study using data from large commercial and Medicare Advantage health plans in the United States from 2004 - 2019. We identified individuals with BE and analyzed the proportion who developed EAC. EACs were classified as prevalent EAC (diagnosed within 30 days of index endoscopy), post-endoscopy esophageal adenocarcinoma (PEEC, diagnosed 30 - 365 days after index endoscopy), and incident EAC (diagnosed 365 days or more after index endoscopy). Using this cohort, we performed a nested case-control study to identify factors associated with prevalent EAC at BE diagnosis and study healthcare utilization prior to BE diagnosis.

RESULTS

We identified 50,817 individuals with incident BE. Of the 366 who developed EAC, 67.2%, 13.7%, and 19.1% were diagnosed with prevalent EAC, PEEC, and incident EAC respectively. Factors positively associated with prevalent EAC versus BE without prevalent EAC included male sex, dysphagia, weight loss, and Charlson-Deyo comorbidity score. In those with prevalent EAC, most patients with dysphagia or weight loss had their symptoms first recorded within three months of EAC diagnosis. Healthcare utilization rates were similar between those with and without prevalent EAC.

CONCLUSIONS

Two-thirds of EACs among individuals with BE are diagnosed at the time of BE diagnosis. Additionally, PEEC accounts for 14% of these EACs. These results may guide future research studies that investigate novel BE diagnostic strategies that reduce the morbidity and mortality of EAC.

A Clinical Severity Index for Eosinophilic Esophagitis: Development, Consensus, and Future Directions

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Disease activity and severity of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) dictate therapeutic options and management, but the decision-making process for determining severity varies among practitioners. To reduce variability in practice patterns and help clinicians monitor the clinical course of the disease in an office setting, we aimed to create an international consensus severity scoring index for EoE.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary international group of adult and pediatric EoE researchers and clinicians, as well as non-EoE allergy immunology and gastroenterology experts, formed 3 teams to review the existing literature on histology, endoscopy, and symptoms of EoE in the context of progression and severity. A steering committee convened a 1-day virtual meeting to reach consensus on each team's opinion on salient features of severity across key clinicopathologic domains and distill features that would allow providers to categorize disease severity.

RESULTS

Symptom features and complications and inflammatory and fibrostenotic features on both endoscopic and histologic examination were collated into a simplified scoring system-the Index of Severity for Eosinophilic Esophagitis (I-SEE)-that can be completed at routine clinic visits to assess disease severity using a point scale of 0-6 for mild, 7-14 for moderate, and ≥15 for severe EoE.

CONCLUSIONS

A multidisciplinary team of experts iteratively created a clinically usable EoE severity scoring system denominated "I-SEE" to guide practitioners in EoE management by standardizing disease components reflecting disease severity beyond eosinophil counts. I-SEE should be validated and refined using data from future clinical trials and routine clinical practice to increase its utilization and functionality.

A Clinical Severity Index for Eosinophilic Esophagitis: Development, Consensus, and Future Directions

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Disease activity and severity of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) dictate therapeutic options and management, but the decision-making process for determining severity varies among practitioners. To reduce variability in practice patterns and help clinicians monitor the clinical course of the disease in an office setting, we aimed to create an international consensus severity scoring index for EoE.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary international group of adult and pediatric EoE researchers and clinicians, as well as non-EoE allergy immunology and gastroenterology experts, formed 3 teams to review the existing literature on histology, endoscopy, and symptoms of EoE in the context of progression and severity. A steering committee convened a 1-day virtual meeting to reach consensus on each team's opinion on salient features of severity across key clinicopathologic domains and distill features that would allow providers to categorize disease severity.

RESULTS

Symptom features and complications and inflammatory and fibrostenotic features on both endoscopic and histologic examination were collated into a simplified scoring system-the Index of Severity for Eosinophilic Esophagitis (I-SEE)-that can be completed at routine clinic visits to assess disease severity using a point scale of 0-6 for mild, 7-14 for moderate, and ≥15 for severe EoE.

CONCLUSIONS

A multidisciplinary team of experts iteratively created a clinically usable EoE severity scoring system denominated "I-SEE" to guide practitioners in EoE management by standardizing disease components reflecting disease severity beyond eosinophil counts. I-SEE should be validated and refined using data from future clinical trials and routine clinical practice to increase its utilization and functionality.

Long-Term Treatment of Eosinophilic Esophagitis With Budesonide Oral Suspension

BACKGROUND & AIMS

We evaluated treatment withdrawal, long-term outcomes, and safety of budesonide oral suspension (BOS) 2.0 mg twice daily in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis who completed a 12-week induction study.

METHODS

Induction full responders (≤6 eosinophils per high-power field [eos/hpf] and ≥30% reduction in the Dysphagia Symptom Questionnaire score) to BOS 2.0 mg twice daily (ORBIT1/SHP621-301/NCT02605837) were randomized to continue BOS (BOS-BOS) or withdraw to placebo (BOS-PBO) for 36 weeks (ORBIT2/SHP621-302/NCT02736409). Induction partial responders and nonresponders, and patients who received induction placebo, received BOS for 36 weeks. The primary end point was the proportion of BOS-BOS and BOS-PBO patients who relapsed (≥15 eos/hpf and ≥4 days of dysphagia [Dysphagia Symptom Questionnaire] over 2 weeks) by week 36. The key secondary end point was the proportion of induction partial responders and nonresponders who fully responded after 52 weeks of total BOS therapy. Other secondary end points included the proportion of induction full responders with histologic responses (≤1, ≤6, <15 eos/hpf) at week 12 of the extension study, and safety outcomes.

RESULTS

The randomized withdrawal period enrolled 48 patients (BOS-BOS, n = 25; BOS-PBO, n = 23); 106 induction partial responders and nonresponders, and 65 induction placebo patients received BOS. More BOS-PBO than BOS-BOS patients relapsed over 36 weeks (43.5% vs 24.0%; P = .131) and had histologic responses at week 12 of therapy (P < .001). Overall, 13.2% of induction partial responders and nonresponders fully responded at week 36. BOS was well tolerated; therapy duration was not associated with new safety concerns.

CONCLUSIONS

For induction full responders, continuing BOS numerically improved maintenance of efficacy vs withdrawal. A longer therapy duration did not raise safety concerns. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02736409.).

Clinical, Endoscopic, and Histopathology Features of Esophageal Graft-vs-Host Disease

INTRODUCTION

To describe the clinical, endoscopic, and histopathology features of esophageal graft-vs-host disease (GVHD).

METHODS

Patients with biopsy-proven esophageal GVHD diagnosed at Mayo Clinic between 2000 and 2021 were included.

RESULTS

In 43 esophageal patients, other organ GVHD was present in 58% before and 86% at esophageal GVHD diagnosis. Esophageal specific symptoms were uncommon (dysphagia 26% and odynophagia/heartburn 5%). Esophagogastroduodenoscopy was abnormal in 72% patients demonstrating erosive esophagitis, ulceration, desquamation, or rings/furrows in a diffuse or focal pattern.

DISCUSSION

There should be a low threshold for esophageal biopsies for GVHD because esophageal symptoms and endoscopic findings may be nonspecific or absent.

Candida Infection Associated with Anti-IL-17 Medication: A Systematic Analysis and Review of the Literature

Anti-interleukin (IL)-17 agents have shown excellent therapeutic efficacy in patients with psoriasis and are expected to be expanded to other chronic inflammatory diseases. However, patients receiving anti-IL-17 agents are at an increased risk of developing Candida infection, with some agents reported to increase the incidence in a dose-dependent manner. Interleukin-17 is secreted by the Th17 subset of CD4+ lymphocytes, CD8+ T cells, and innate cells, including natural killer T cells, lymphoid tissue inducer cells, innate lymphoid cells, and γδ-T cells, and plays an important role in antifungal defense. Genetic defects in the IL-17-signaling pathway in both humans and animal models render susceptibility to candidiasis caused by Candida albicans. The purpose of this narrative review is to evaluate the literature on the role of IL-17 in protection against candidiasis, the prevalence of candidiasis in anti-IL-17 agent use, and to offer clinical recommendations on the diagnosis and management of anti-IL-17 medication-associated candidiasis.

Severity of dysphagia is associated with hospitalizations and mortality in patients with Parkinson's disease

BACKGROUND

Aspiration pneumonia is the commonest cause of hospitalizations and death in patients with Parkinson's disease (PD). Among these patients, the relationships between severity of dysphagia, hospitalizations for related complications, and death are not robustly defined. Our aim was to characterize the relationship between PD-related oropharyngeal dysfunction and clinically relevant outcomes.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study of 312 patients with PD at a tertiary center who underwent videofluoroscopic swallow studies conducted by expert therapists between 2010 and 2015. Level of swallowing function was represented using the 7-point Functional Oral Intake Scale (FOIS) (7 = normal function). Significance and relative risk calculations utilized Poisson regression. Time to composite outcome of first hospitalization or death was summarized using Kaplan-Meier curve with log-rank test.

KEY RESULTS

One hundred thirty eight patients had a recorded FOIS score. The prevalence of oropharyngeal dysfunction was 76.1%. The median duration of follow-up was 26.8 months. In multivariate analyses, patients with FOIS 5 (RR = 2.01 [95% CI: 1.22, 3.32]), FOIS 3 (RR = 2.78 [95% CI: 1.75, 4.40]), and FOIS 1 (RR = 2.50 [95% CI: 1.49, 4.20]) were significantly associated with increased risk of hospitalization or death compared to FOIS 7 after co-variate adjustments. GERD was also associated with a significant increased risk of hospitalization or death (RR = 1.28 [95% CI: 1.01, 1.64]). Time to first hospitalization or death was shorter in patients with lower FOIS scores (p < 0.00005).

CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES

Severity of oropharyngeal dysphagia, as measured by the FOIS, is associated with poorer survival and shorter time to hospitalization for dysphagia-related complications, pneumonia, or death in PD.

Reliability and responsiveness of endoscopic disease activity assessment in eosinophilic esophagitis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic outcomes have become important measures of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) disease activity, including as an endpoint in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We evaluated the operating properties of endoscopic measures for use in EoE RCTs.

METHODS

Modified Research and Development/University of California Los Angeles appropriateness methods and a panel of 15 international EoE experts identified endoscopic items and definitions with face validity that were used in a 2-round voting process to define simplified (all items graded as absent or present) and expanded versions (additional grades for edema, furrows, and/or exudates) of the EoE Endoscopic Reference Score (EREFS). Inter- and intrarater reliability of these instruments (expressed as intraclass correlation coefficients [ICC]) were evaluated using paired endoscopy video assessments of 2 blinded central readers in patients before and after 8 weeks of proton pump inhibitors, swallowed topical corticosteroids, or dietary elimination. Responsiveness was measured using the standardized effect size (SES).

RESULTS

The appropriateness of 41 statements relevant to EoE endoscopic activity (endoscopic items, item definitions and grading, and other considerations relevant for endoscopy) was considered. The original and expanded EREFS demonstrated moderate-to-substantial inter-rater reliability (ICCs of .472-.736 and .469-.763, respectively) and moderate-to-almost perfect intrarater reliability (ICCs of .580-.828 and .581-.828, respectively). Strictures were least reliably assessed (ICC, .072-.385). The original EREFS was highly responsive (SES, 1.126 [95% confidence interval {CI}, .757-1.534]), although both expanded versions of EREFS, scored based on worst affected area, were numerically most responsive to treatment (expanded furrows: SES, 1.229 [95% CI, .858-1.643]; all items expanded: SES, 1.252 [95% CI, .880-1.667]). The EREFS and its modifications were not more reliably scored by segment and also not more responsive when proximal and distal EREFSs were summed.

CONCLUSIONS

EREFS and its modifications were reliable and responsive, and the original or expanded versions of the EREFS may be preferred in RCTs. Disease activity scored based on the worst affected area optimizes reliability and responsiveness.

Transition of care of patients with eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases: Challenges and opportunities

Eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorders (EGID) are a group of allergen-mediated conditions which are characterized by eosinophilic inflammation affecting one or more parts of the gastrointestinal tract. A disproportionately higher number of EGID patients are diagnosed in the pediatric age group. Given the chronic course of EGIDs and lack of curative therapies at this time, majority of the pediatric EGID patients may require continued care well into their adulthood. However, to date, scant data are available regarding the health care transition (HCT), the transition of care (TC), and the effectiveness of transfer of care EGID patients from pediatric-oriented to adult-oriented providers. Herein, we review the lessons learnt from transfer of care of children with other chronic gastrointestinal and allergic conditions, analyze the current knowledge, potential barriers, the role of various stakeholders in successful transfer of care of EGID patients, propose a conceptual framework for HCT and TC of EGID patients, and identify outcome measures to ensure the quality of progression of care.