Long-Lasting Dissociation of Esophageal Eosinophilia and Symptoms After Dilation in Adults With Eosinophilic Esophagitis

Etrasimod as a treatment for eosinophilic oesophagitis (VOYAGE): a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised, phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND

Novel treatments are needed for eosinophilic oesophagitis. Etrasimod is an oral, once-daily, selective sphingosine 1-phosphate (S1P)1,4,5 receptor modulator in development for the treatment of immune-mediated inflammatory diseases. We assessed efficacy and safety of etrasimod versus placebo in adults with eosinophilic oesophagitis.

METHODS

In this double-blind, randomised, phase 2 trial, patients aged 18-65 years with a previous diagnosis of eosinophilic oesophagitis and histologically active disease from 64 clinical sites (in Australia, Belgium, Spain, Switzerland, and the USA) were randomly assigned (3:3:2) using an interactive web response system to receive oral etrasimod 2 mg or 1 mg or matching placebo for 24 weeks (centrally randomly assigned and double-blind; placebo-controlled period); they continued assigned etrasimod doses or were randomly assigned (1:1) from placebo to etrasimod 2 mg or 1 mg for 28 weeks (extension period). Randomisation was stratified by history of oesophageal dilation and concurrent proton pump inhibitor therapy. The full analysis set and safety set consisted of all randomly assigned patients who received at least one study treatment dose. The primary endpoint was percentage change from baseline in oesophageal peak eosinophil count (PEC) at week 16. Safety was assessed up to week 52. Patients were analysed according to treatment received in the placebo-controlled period and extension period. The trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04682639, and EudraCT, 2020-003226-23; completed on June 30, 2023.

FINDINGS

Between Dec 15, 2020, and May 27, 2022, 41 patients were randomly assigned to etrasimod 2 mg (20 [49%] females and 21 [51%] males), 39 to etrasimod 1 mg (17 [44%] females and 22 [56%] males), and 28 to placebo (14 [50%] females and 14 [50%] males). 85 (79%) of 108 patients completed the double-blind period, entering the extension period. Median percentage changes from baseline in PEC at week 16 were -58·4% (IQR -86·2 to -26·3) for etrasimod 2 mg (p=0·010 vs placebo), -39·4% (-71·1 to 79·0) for etrasimod 1 mg (p=0·29 vs placebo) and -21·5% (-57·2 to 55·4) for placebo. In the placebo-controlled period, the most common treatment-emergent adverse events were gastrointestinal disorders (11 [27%] of 41 patients in the etrasimod 2 mg group, 13 [33%] of 39 patients in the etrasimod 1 mg group, and 14 [50%] of 28 patients in the placebo group). Bradycardia events, reported by three patients (two [5%] patients in the etrasimod 2 mg group and one [4%] in the placebo group) in the placebo-controlled period, were mild or moderate in severity. No serious treatment-emergent adverse events or deaths occurred.

INTERPRETATION

Etrasimod led to sustained histological and endoscopic improvements in eosinophilic oesophagitis over 52 weeks, symptom improvement in patients without dilation, and was well tolerated. This trial provides the first evidence that targeting the S1P pathway can improve disease activity in patients with eosinophilic oesophagitis and that S1P receptor modulation is a viable treatment target for this disease.

FUNDING

Pfizer.

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Benign Esophageal Disorders

Patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures are essential tools for assessing a patient's subjective experience related to disease and health. PROs measure symptom severity and evaluate treatment efficacy across a range of conditions at a particular point in time. Although PROs focusing on esophageal symptoms and esophageal hypervigilance exist, disease-specific PROs for commonly encountered benign esophageal disorders such as gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), and achalasia are limited. Most GERD-specific PROs fail to address the complete spectrum of GERD presentations and those that provide daily assessment are more suited for research. Similarly, many EoE-specific PROs were designed for clinical trials. Comprehensive instruments incorporating EoE symptoms, as well as endoscopic and histologic features of active inflammation and fibrostenotic changes are needed. The psychometric properties of the Eckardt Score used for achalasia have significant limitations, stemming primarily from the dominance of dysphagia in scoring. Newer achalasia-specific PROs attempt to overcome this by capturing nuanced patient experiences. Broader symptom PROs are often used to assess esophageal symptoms across the spectrum of benign esophageal disorders, including a PRO that assesses esophageal hypervigilance and symptom-specific anxiety. Future efforts should focus on creating user-friendly PROs that comprehensively evaluate not just clinical presentation but also the disease state, which will enhance clinical symptom follow-up, quality of life assessment, and research applications. Assessments of hypervigilance and visceral anxiety will complement these applications as these measures are both a PRO and an important moderator of symptom severity and quality of life.

Insights into the natural history and disease course of eosinophilic esophagitis

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic, immune-mediated disease marked by eosinophilic inflammation and esophageal dysfunction, with a significant impact on morbidity, quality of life, and health care utilization. Once considered rare, EoE has become increasingly prevalent, with global estimates exceeding 140 cases per 100,000 individuals. This rise highlights the need to better understand the natural history and disease course to inform diagnosis and management strategies. Evidence suggests that EoE is a progressive condition, such that untreated inflammation contributes to esophageal remodeling and fibrotic complications over years to decades. Patients can develop esophageal food impactions, leading to emergency department utilization and the need for emergent endoscopy. In addition, patients with fibrostenotic disease can require serial dilations. Long-term management, including dietary therapy, proton pump inhibitors, topical corticosteroids, and newer therapies such as dupilumab, demonstrate promise in altering the disease course. However, variability exists in the strength of evidence regarding each therapy's ability to halt or reverse fibrosis. Knowledge gaps persist, particularly in defining fibrosis, identifying phenotypes prone to progression, and tailoring therapies to individual patients. Addressing these gaps will require continued research into understanding fibrosis progression and how therapies alter this trajectory. These efforts are poised to significantly improve clinical care and enhance outcomes for patients with EoE.

Real-world Effectiveness of Dupilumab in Eosinophilic Esophagitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Dupilumab is the only FDA-approved medication for eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). Clinical trials have shown its effectiveness in alleviating symptoms and decreasing inflammation associated with EoE. However, real-world data on its efficacy is still limited.

METHODS

We searched multiple databases for articles reporting the outcomes of dupilumab for the treatment of EoE and conducted a meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Five retrospective studies including 209 subjects (mean age: 22.12±12.01 y and 61.24% males) were analyzed. The pooled outcome for symptom improvement with dupilumab was 89.2% [95% Cl: 68.0%-97.0%; I2=58%]. Peak eosinophil count improved markedly postdupilumab [pre: 47.13 (95% Cl: 45.5-48.67; I2=98%) vs. post: 6.44 (95% Cl: 0.72-13.60; I2=98%) eos/hpf, P<0.001]. There was a significant reduction in Endoscopic Reference Score (EREFS) [pre: 4.10 (95% Cl: 1.74-6.43; I2=95%) vs. post: 0.77 (95% Cl: 0.14-1.7; I2=95%), P<0.001]. The mean duration of treatment and follow-up was 5.66±1.14 months. The most common adverse event reported was a pain due to injection, which was controlled with local anesthetics.

CONCLUSION

Our study shows that in a real-world scenario, administration of dupilumab for EoE induces histologic and endoscopic remission and symptomatic improvement. Hence, dupilumab can be considered a treatment option for EoE, especially in resistant cases. Future studies should evaluate its long-term effectiveness for preventing esophageal fibrosis/stricture and long-term side effect profile. Furthermore, cost-effectiveness analysis is warranted to help establish its role as a potential first-line treatment strategy.

[Eosinophilic esophagitis]

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) was first described in the early 1990s. Initially a rarity, it is now the most common cause of dysphagia for solid foods in young adults. Its prevalence is estimated to be 1:2000. Mechanistically, EoE is characterized by a chronic type‑2 T‑helper cell (Th2) inflammation of the esophagus which is triggered by food allergens. It often occurs in association with other Th2-mediated diseases, such as asthma, atopic dermatitis, and chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps. EoE is diagnosed based on an esophagogastroduodenoscopy with biopsies of the esophageal epithelium. The diagnosis can be established when both symptoms of esophageal dysfunction (usually dysphagia) and an eosinophilic infiltration of at least 15 eosinophils per high-power field (HPF) are present. EoE can be treated with drugs, diet, and endoscopic dilatation. In terms of diet, milk elimination appears most reasonable, particularly as first choice. Drug treatment includes proton pump inhibitors (PPI), topical steroids, and the biologic agent dupilumab. Endoscopic dilatation is effective but does not treat the underlying inflammation. Therefore, it should never be used alone, but rather as an add-on therapy. In cases where clinical suspicion of EoE is strong but no or only few eosinophils are detected in esophageal biopsies, the diagnosis of an EoE variant should be considered. This review article provides a detailed discussion of the epidemiology, clinical features, diagnosis, treatment, and variants of EoE.

Meta-Analysis: Evaluating Placebo Rates Across Outcomes in Eosinophilic Oesophagitis Randomised Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

High placebo responses have limited drug development in eosinophilic oesophagitis. The optimal configuration of trial outcomes is uncertain.

AIMS

To inform more efficient future trial designs, to characterise clinical, endoscopic and histologic placebo responses in eosinophilic oesophagitis randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

METHODS

We updated a Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis, searching multiple databases to January 1, 2024, to identify placebo-controlled RCTs evaluating medical therapies for patients with eosinophilic oesophagitis. The primary outcome was the pooled proportion of study-defined clinical, endoscopic and histologic responders and remitters randomised to placebo, using an intention-to-treat approach and random-effects model. Sources of heterogeneity were explored using meta-regression.

RESULTS

We included 25 RCTs. The pooled proportion of clinical response was 41.0% [95% CI: 29.7%-52.8%] with substantial heterogeneity (I2 = 74.9%). On meta-regression, older age and a higher probability of being randomised to placebo reduced the likelihood of clinical response to placebo. The pooled proportion of histologic remission defined as a peak eosinophil count [PEC] ≤ 6 eosinophils per high power field [HPF] or ≤ 1 eosinophil/HPF was 4.3% [95% CI: 2.6%-6.2%] (I2 = 23.6%) and 1.3% [95% CI: 0.5%-2.5%] (I2 = 0%), respectively. The standardised mean difference in the Eosinophilic Oesophagitis Endoscopic Reference Score to placebo was -0.25 [95% CI: -0.41, -0.10].

CONCLUSIONS

Over 40% of patients in eosinophilic oesophagitis trials respond clinically to placebo, and this is associated with trial design factors such as randomisation ratio and trial population. Objective endoscopic and histologic measures are associated with very low placebo responses.

Dupilumab is efficacious for eosinophilic esophagitis irrespective of prior swallowed budesonide or fluticasone, or prior treatments used alongside swallowed topical corticosteroids: results from the phase 3, randomized, placebo-controlled, LIBERTY EoE TREET trial

BACKGROUND

Standard treatments for eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) may present adherence, tolerance, and efficacy challenges. Dupilumab 300 mg weekly is approved for the treatment of EoE in patients ≥ 1 year old, weighing ≥ 15 kg. This analysis aimed to evaluate dupilumab efficacy in patients from the LIBERTY EoE TREET trial (NCT03633617), with prior history of different EoE interventions.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This analysis included patients from Parts B/B - C of LIBERTY EoE TREET. Dupilumab efficacy was analyzed according to prior swallowed budesonide or fluticasone use and in those patients with previously trialed food elimination diet, esophageal dilation, or baseline proton pump inhibitor use, as stratified by prior swallowed topical corticosteroid (STC) use or STC inadequate response/intolerance/contraindication.

RESULTS

Dupilumab improved the proportion of patients achieving peak intraepithelial eosinophil count ≤ 6 eosinophils/high-power field, absolute change in Dysphagia Symptom Questionnaire score, and other histologic, symptomatic, and endoscopic endpoints vs. placebo at Week (W) 24, irrespective of prior swallowed budesonide/fluticasone use. Improvements were maintained at W52. Similar results were observed across the other subgroups.

CONCLUSION

Dupilumab was efficacious in patients with EoE irrespective of prior treatments/interventions.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

www.clinicaltrials.gov identifier is NCT03633617.

Adaptive Behaviors, Esophageal Anxiety, and Hypervigilance Modify the Association Between Dysphagia Perception and Histological Disease Activity in Eosinophilic Esophagitis

INTRODUCTION

Adaptive behaviors at mealtime, esophageal symptom-specific anxiety and hypervigilance may affect dysphagia reporting in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), but this has not been investigated. Moreover, the relationship between such confounding factors and histological disease activity (HDA) is unclear.

METHODS

This was a prospective study on adults with EoE. Dysphagia, anxiety, and hypervigilance were assessed using specific questionnaires (i.e., modified dysphagia symptom questionnaire [mDSQ], Dysphagia Symptom Score [DSS], and Esophageal Hypervigilance and Anxiety Scale). Adaptive behaviors were assessed using the Pisa EoE Adaptation Questionnaire. Appropriate statistics was used to investigate correlation between dysphagia, anxiety, hypervigilance, adaptive behaviors, and HDA.

RESULTS

Ninety-five patients were included. Esophageal anxiety, hypervigilance, and use of adaptive behaviors were found in about 50% of patients with EoE. Esophageal anxiety and hypervigilance were significantly higher ( P = 0.03 for both), and adaptive behaviors were significantly more prevalent in histologically active EoE compared with EoE in remission (76.8% vs 25.6%, P < 0.001). As a standalone measurement, mDSQ and DSS had area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 77.7% and 75.3% for predicting HDA. Adjustments of mDSQ and DSS based on individual Esophageal Hypervigilance and Anxiety Scale scores and adaptive behaviors at mealtime significantly improved the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of mDSQ and DSS to 86.6% and 84.3%, respectively ( P < 0.05 for both).

DISCUSSION

Use of adaptive behaviors, higher esophageal anxiety and hypervigilance are associated with active EoE and represent clinical markers of HDA. Adaptive behaviors provide complementary clinical information that is not detected by symptoms alone. The assessment of adaptive behaviors, anxiety, and hypervigilance improves the correlation between clinical and HDA in EoE.

Efficacy and Safety of Budesonide Orodispersible Tablets for Eosinophilic Esophagitis up to 3 Years: An Open-Label Extension Study

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Budesonide orodispersible tablets (BOT) have been shown to be safe and effective in phase III double-blind trials of induction and 48-week maintenance therapy of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). We now analyzed the long-term efficacy and safety of BOT in a 96-week open-label extension (OLE) study.

METHODS

All patients with EoE in the 48-week double-blind maintenance study were eligible to receive BOT treatment for up to 96 weeks. Dosage was 0.5 or 1.0 mg BOT, twice daily, at investigator's discretion. Clinical, histologic, endoscopic, quality of life, and safety measures were assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 186 patients participated in the OLE up to 96 weeks. At week 96, 81.9% of patients had clinical remission, defined as an EoE Symptom Activity Index (EEsAI) score of ≤20 vs 77.7% at OLE baseline. A further 80.1% of patients were in histologic remission, defined as peak eosinophils per high-power field of <5, at week 96 vs 91.8% at OLE baseline. Mean EoE endoscopic reference scores (EREFS) were 1 at all time points measured. Mean EoE Quality of Life (EoE-QoL-A) Scale scores improved from 3.3 at OLE baseline to 3.5 at week 96. No new safety concerns were observed across 96 weeks of treatment. Suspected symptomatic candidiasis occurred at similar rates to prior BOT studies and was predominantly mild and resolved with treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical and histologic remission of EoE could be maintained with BOT in a large majority of patients for up to 96 weeks, and for up to 144 weeks in patients with uninterrupted BOT therapy across all trials. No additional safety concerns were identified with long-term BOT treatment (ClinicalTrials.gov, Number: NCT02493335).

Nonepithelial Gene Expression Correlates With Symptom Severity in Adults With Eosinophilic Esophagitis

BACKGROUND

The mechanistic basis of the variable symptomatology seen in eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) remains poorly understood.

OBJECTIVE

We examined the correlation of a validated, patient-reported outcome metric with a broad spectrum of esophageal transcripts to uncover potential symptom pathogenesis.

METHODS

We extracted data from 146 adults with EoE through the Consortium of Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Disease Researchers. Patients were subgrouped by esophageal dilation history. We compared a validated patient-reported outcome metric, the EoE Activity Index (EEsAI), with a set of transcripts expressed in the esophagus of patients with EoE, the EoE Diagnostic Panel (EDP). We used single-cell RNA sequencing data to identify the cellular source of EEsAI-related EDP genes and further analyzed patients with mild and severe symptoms.

RESULTS

The EEsAI correlated with the EDP total score, especially in patients without recent esophageal dilation (r = -0.31; P = .003). We identified 14 EDP genes that correlated with EEsAI scores (r ≥ 0.3; P < .05). Of these, 11 were expressed in nonepithelial cells and three in epithelial cells. During histologic remission, only four of 11 nonepithelial genes (36%) versus all three epithelial genes (100%) had decreased expression to less than 50% of that in active EoE. Fibroblasts expressed five of 11 nonepithelial EEsAI-associated EDP genes (45%). A subset of nonepithelial genes (eight of 11; 73%), but not EoE-representative genes (none of four; 0%; CCL26, CAPN14, DSG1, and SPINK7), was upregulated in patients with EoE with the highest versus lowest symptom burden.

CONCLUSION

The correlation of symptoms and nonepithelial esophageal gene expression substantiates that nonepithelial cells (eg, fibroblasts) likely contribute to symptom severity.

Effect of Esophageal Dilation History on Efficacy Outcomes in Patients With Eosinophilic Esophagitis Receiving Budesonide Oral Suspension

INTRODUCTION

The effect of esophageal dilation history on efficacy outcomes in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) receiving swallowed corticosteroids is not well established.

METHODS

This post hoc analysis assessed data from a 12-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 study (NCT02605837) of budesonide oral suspension (BOS) 2.0 mg twice daily in patients aged 11-55 years with EoE and dysphagia. Coprimary efficacy outcomes were histologic (≤ 6 eosinophils per high-power field [eos/hpf]) and dysphagia symptom (≥ 30% reduction in Dysphagia Symptom Questionnaire scores from baseline) responses at week 12. Secondary efficacy outcomes included histologic response (< 15 eos/hpf) and change from baseline to week 12 in Dysphagia Symptom Questionnaire scores and EoE Endoscopic Reference Scores. Data were analyzed post hoc by esophageal dilation history (dilation history vs no dilation history).

RESULTS

Of 318 patients who received ≥ 1 dose of study drug, 42.8% had a history of esophageal dilation (dilation history: BOS, n = 91; placebo, n = 45; no dilation history: BOS, n = 122; placebo, n = 60). Histologic responses (≤ 6 and < 15 eos/hpf) were similar regardless of dilation history. Fewer BOS-treated patients with dilation history than no dilation history achieved a dysphagia symptom response (44.0% vs 59.0%); conversely, a slightly greater improvement from baseline in total EoE Endoscopic Reference Scores was observed for BOS-treated patients with dilation history than no dilation history (least-squares mean [SE of the mean]: -4.1 [0.3] vs -3.4 [0.4]).

DISCUSSION

Esophageal dilation history may confound the association between histologic outcomes and dysphagia symptom or endoscopic efficacy outcomes in patients with EoE receiving swallowed corticosteroids.

Rationale for an Eosinophilic Esophagitis Treat-to-Target Concept

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic T helper 2-mediated inflammatory disorder of the esophagus defined clinically by the presence of symptoms of esophageal dysfunction and histologically by an eosinophil-predominant infiltration. Correspondingly, treatment has aimed at controlling both symptom severity and histologic activity. However, with emerging clinical and pathophysiologic understanding of the disease, it has become increasingly apparent that other disease aspects need to be targeted as well, such as endoscopic severity and quality of life. Moreover, with the role of eosinophils having been questioned lately, histologic changes beyond eosinophil infiltration have come to attention and are captured by newly validated scores. In addition, EoE is being increasingly considered a transmural disease that cannot be assessed by simple endoscopy but needs measurement of esophageal distensibility, a surrogate marker for fibrosis. Finally, novel tools such as measurement of esophageal impedance could make it possible to assess for complete restoration of the esophageal epithelium, potentially corresponding to disease clearance. This article reviews the various outcome parameters in adult EoE management and proposes an algorithm for a treat-to-target concept, in analogy to what has been practiced in inflammatory bowel disease treatment for the last 10 years.

Reducing Eosinophil Counts in Eosinophilic Esophagitis in Children Is Associated With Reduction in Later Stricture Development

INTRODUCTION

There are limited longitudinal data on the impact of chronic therapy on the natural history of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), a chronic allergic disease of the esophagus. The purpose of this study was to evaluate if patients with well-controlled EoE were less likely to develop fibrostenotic complications.

METHODS

Subjects were identified from a database of pediatric patients with EoE at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia started in 2000. Patients were then searched in adult medical records to identify patients who transitioned care. All office visits, emergency department visits, and endoscopic, histologic, and imaging reports were reviewed for the primary outcome of strictures and the secondary outcomes of food impactions and dysphagia. Cox proportional hazard regression was performed for outcomes.

RESULTS

One hundred five patients were identified with the mean follow-up of 11.4 ± 4.9 years. 52.3% (n = 55) had a period of histologic disease control defined as ≥2 consecutive endoscopies with histologic remission. These patients were less likely to develop strictures compared with patients who did not have a period of histologic control (HR 0.232; 95% CI 0.084-0.64, P = 0.005). Patients who were diagnosed at younger ages were less likely to develop strictures. Presentation with dysphagia or impaction was associated with higher rate of stricture development.

DISCUSSION

In this cohort study with > 10 years of follow-up, children with EoE with a period of histologic disease control and diagnosed at younger ages were less likely to develop esophageal strictures. While this suggests histologic remission is associated with reduction of remodeling complications, additional prospective data with long-term follow-up are needed.

Esophageal Expert Development of a Preliminary Question Prompt List for Adults With Eosinophilic Esophagitis: A Modified Delphi Study

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, an EoE-specific QPL has not been developed for EoE patients.

AIM

To develop a preliminary QPL specific to adults with EoE by incorporating input from international esophageal experts.

METHODS

Sixteen experts were invited to generate QPL content through a modified Delphi (RAND/University of California, Los Angeles, CA) method consisting of 2 rounds of independent ratings. In round 1, experts provided 5 answers to the prompts "what general questions should patients ask when being seen for EoE?" and "what questions do I not hear patients asking but given my experience, I believe they should be asking?" In round 2, experts rated each question on a 5-point Likert scale, and responses rated as "essential" or "important" (determined by an a priori median threshold of ≥ 4.0) were accepted for the EoE QPL.

RESULTS

Ten esophageal experts participated in both rounds. Round 1 generated 100 questions. Questions were combined and modified to reduce redundancy, yielding 57 questions. After round 2, 51 questions (85%) were accepted for inclusion (median value ≥ 4.0) in the final QPL. Questions were then divided into 4 themes based on disease domains: (1) "What is EoE?," (2) "Treatment Options," (3) "Follow-up Surveillance and Long-term Risks," and (4) "Allergy and Genetic Testing." The largest number of questions covered was "What is EoE?" (16/51 or 31%). Questions with the highest agreement median (5.0) included examples such as "what should I do if I get a food impaction?" and "what are the treatment options?"

CONCLUSION

This is the first preliminary EoE QPL developed in the field of medicine. We hope implementation enhances effective patient-physician communication by encouraging patients to ask relevant questions that experts prioritized. Future studies will aim to modify this communication tool by incorporating patient perspectives.

Diagnosis and management of eosinophilic esophagitis and esophageal food impaction in adults : A position paper issued by the Austrian Society of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (ÖGGH)

This position paper deals with an expert consensus on diagnosis and management of eosinophilic esophagitis and esophageal food impaction issued by the Austrian Eosinophilic Esophagitis Network, a working group under the patronage of the Austrian Society of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (ÖGGH). In need of a standardized approach on the management of EoE, recommendations were made based on international guidelines and landmark studies.

Amphiregulin-producing TH2 cells facilitate esophageal fibrosis of eosinophilic esophagitis

Background

Massive eosinophil infiltration into the esophagus is associated with subepithelial fibrosis and esophageal stricture in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). However, the pathogenesis of esophageal fibrosis remains unclear.

Objective

We sought to elucidate the cellular and molecular mechanisms underlying the induction of esophageal fibrosis.

Methods

We established a murine model of EoE accompanied by fibrotic responses following long-term intranasal administration of house dust mite antigen. Using this murine model, we investigated the characteristics of immune cells infiltrating the fibrotic region of the inflamed esophagus using flow cytometry and histological analyses. We also analyzed the local inflammatory sites in the esophagus of patients with EoE using single-cell RNA sequencing, flow cytometry, and immunohistochemistry.

Results

Enhanced infiltration of both amphiregulin-producing and IL-5-producing TH2 cells was detected in the fibrotic area of the esophagus in mice subjected to repeated house dust mite exposure. Deletion of amphiregulin in CD4+ T cells ameliorates esophageal fibrosis. An analysis of human esophageal biopsy samples showed that the infiltration of amphiregulin-producing CD4+ T cells was higher in patients with EoE than in control patients. Furthermore, the number of infiltrated amphiregulin-producing CD4+ T cells was associated with the degree of esophageal fibrosis in patients with EoE.

Conclusions

Amphiregulin, produced by TH2 cells, contributes to esophageal fibrosis in EoE and may be a therapeutic target.

Clinical and molecular correlates of the Index of Severity for Eosinophilic Esophagitis

BACKGROUND

The Index of Severity for Eosinophilic Esophagitis (I-SEE) is a new expert-defined clinical tool that classifies disease severity of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE).

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to determine whether I-SEE is associated with patient characteristics, molecular features of EoE, or both.

METHODS

We analyzed a prospective cohort of patients with EoE from the Consortium of Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Disease Researchers (CEGIR). Associations between I-SEE and clinical and molecular features (assessed by an EoE diagnostic panel [EDP]) were assessed.

RESULTS

In 318 patients with chronic EoE (209 adults, 109 children), median total I-SEE score was 7.0, with a higher symptoms and complications score in children than adults (4.0 vs 1.0; P < .001) and higher inflammatory and fibrostenotic features scores in adults than children (3.0 vs 1.0 and 3.0 vs 0, respectively; both P < .001). Total I-SEE score had a bimodal distribution with the inactive to moderate categories and severe category. EDP score correlated with total I-SEE score (r = -0.352, P < .001) and both inflammatory and fibrostenotic features scores (r = -0.665, P < .001; r = -0.446, P < .001, respectively), but not with symptoms and complications scores (r = 0.047, P = .408). Molecular severity increased from inactive to mild and moderate, but not severe, categories. Longitudinal changes of modified I-SEE scores and inflammatory and fibrostenotic features scores reflected histologic and molecular activity.

CONCLUSIONS

I-SEE score is associated with select clinical features across severity categories and with EoE molecular features for nonsevere categories, warranting further validation.

Optimal Assessment, Treatment, and Monitoring of Adults with Eosinophilic Esophagitis: Strategies to Improve Outcomes

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic type 2 inflammation-mediated disease characterized by an eosinophil-predominant inflammation of the esophagus and symptoms of esophageal dysfunction. Relevant treatment outcomes in the setting of EoE include the improvement of histology, symptoms, and endoscopy findings, quality of life (QoL), and the psychological burden of the disease. Established validated tools for the assessment of EoE include questionnaires on dysphagia and QoL (ie, DSQ, EEsAI, and EoE-IQ). More recently, esophageal symptom-specific anxiety and hypervigilance, assessed using the esophageal hypervigilance and anxiety scale (EHAS), have emerged as contributors to disease burden, confirming the importance of psychological aspects in EoE patients. The EoE endoscopic reference score (EREFS) is the only validated endoscopy score in EoE and can quantify mucosal disease burden. However, esophageal panometry using the functional lumen imaging probe (FLIP) and high-resolution manometry (HRM) have shown potential to optimize the assessment of fibrostenotic features of EoE, providing novel insights into the pathophysiology of symptoms. There is a growing number of licenced and off-label therapeutic options in EoE, with various randomized controlled trials demonstrating the efficacy of proton pump inhibitors, topical steroids, food elimination diets, biological drugs, and esophageal dilatation. However, standardized optimal management strategies of EoE are currently lacking. In this review, we provide an overview of established and novel assessment tools in EoE including patient reported outcomes, FLIP panometry, HRM, endoscopy, and histology outcome measures to improve the outcomes of EoE patients. In addition, we summarize available therapeutic options for EoE based on the most recent evidence.

The 1st EoETALY Consensus on the Diagnosis and Management of Eosinophilic Esophagitis-Current Treatment and Monitoring

The present document constitutes Part 2 of the EoETALY Consensus Statements guideline on the diagnosis and management of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) developed by experts in the field of EoE across Italy (i.e., EoETALY Consensus Group). Part 1 was published as a different document, and included three chapters discussing 1) definition, epidemiology, and pathogenesis; 2) clinical presentation and natural history and 3) diagnosis of EoE. The present work provides guidelines on the management of EoE in two final chapters: 4) treatment and 5) monitoring and follow-up, and also includes considerations on knowledge gaps and a proposed research agenda for the coming years. The guideline was developed through a Delphi process, with grading of the strength and quality of the evidence of the recommendations performed according to accepted GRADE criteria.This document has received the endorsement of three Italian national societies including the Italian Society of Gastroenterology (SIGE), the Italian Society of Neurogastroenterology and Motility (SINGEM), and the Italian Society of Allergology, Asthma, and Clinical Immunology (SIAAIC). The guidelines also involved the contribution of members of ESEO Italia, the Italian Association of Families Against EoE.

Esophageal Remodeling Correlates With Eating Behaviors in Pediatric Eosinophilic Esophagitis

INTRODUCTION

There are limited data characterizing eating habits among pediatric patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). We compared eating behaviors in pediatric patients with EoE with healthy controls and assessed the degree of correlation with symptomatology, endoscopic and histologic findings, and esophageal distensibility.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective, observational study where subjects consumed 4 food textures (puree, soft solid, chewable, and hard solid) and were scored for eating behaviors including number of chews per bite, sips of fluid per food, and consumption time. Symptomatic, endoscopic, histologic, and esophageal distensibility data were collected for case subjects.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven case subjects and 25 healthy controls were enrolled in our study (mean age 11.0 years, 63.5% male). Compared with healthy controls, pediatric patients with EoE demonstrated more chews per bite with soft solid (13.6 vs 9.1, P = 0.031), chewable (14.7 vs 10.7, P = 0.047), and hard solid foods (19.0 vs 12.8, P = 0.037). Patients with EoE also demonstrated increased consumption time with soft solid (94.7 vs 58.3 seconds, P = 0.002), chewable (90.0 vs 65.1 seconds, P = 0.005), and hard solid foods (114.1 vs 76.4 seconds, P = 0.034) when compared with healthy controls. Subgroup analysis based on disease status showed no statistically significant differences in eating behaviors between active and inactive EoE. Total endoscopic reference score positively correlated with consumption time ( r = 0.53, P = 0.008) and number of chews ( r = 0.45, P = 0.027) for chewable foods and with number of chews ( r = 0.44, P = 0.043) for hard solid foods. Increased consumption time correlated with increased eosinophil count ( r = 0.42, P = 0.050) and decreased esophageal distensibility ( r = -0.82, P < 0.0001).

DISCUSSION

Altered eating behaviors including increased chewing and increased consumption time can be seen in pediatric patients with EoE, can persist despite histologic remission, and may be driven by changes in esophageal distensibility.

Histopathology of Eosinophilic Esophagitis

Microscopic examination of esophageal biopsies is essential to diagnose eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). Eosinophil inflammation is the basis for the diagnosis, but additional abnormalities may contribute to persistent symptoms and epithelial barrier dysfunction. Both peak eosinophil count and assessments of additional features should be included in pre-therapy and post-therapy pathology reports. Pathologic abnormalities identified in esophageal biopsies of EoE are reversible in contrast to esophageal strictures.

Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients with Eosinophilic Esophagitis

Measuring health-related quality of life (HRQOL) gained relevance in research and clinical practice in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis. The physical discomfort and social and psychological consequences of this food-related disease substantially affect HRQOL. Determinant of an impaired HRQOL include symptom severity, disease duration, biological disease activity, and psychological factors. Patients prioritize symptom relief and improved HRQOL as treatment objectives. Available treatment options can address these goals; however, there is a suboptimal adherence to treatment. There is a need for enhanced patient guidance and education. The assessment of HRQOL will help to prioritize patient's needs in management.

Pathophysiology and Clinical Impact of Esophageal Remodeling and Fibrosis in Eosinophilic Esophagitis

Most of the major clinical signs and consequences of eosinophilic esophagitis seem to be related to tissue remodeling. Important data on remodeling activity in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis are provided by a range of current and new biologic markers and diagnostics. To completely clarify the possible advantages and restrictions of therapeutic approaches, clinical studies should take into consideration the existence and reversibility of esophageal remodeling. The degree of mucosal or submucosal disease activity may not be reflected by epithelial eosinophilic inflammation, which is used to define one criterion of disease activity".

Endoscopic Features of Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Diseases

Endoscopic evaluation with biopsies is a mainstay of the diagnosis of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) and non-EoE eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases (EGIDs). Increasing knowledge has resulted in the development of 2 standardized scoring systems: the Endoscopic REFerence Score (EREFS) for EoE and the EG-REFS for eosinophilic gastritis, although the latter has not been validated. In EGIDs, diagnosis and follow-up focus on eosinophil infiltration in biopsies. In this article, we will discuss the most commonly used endoscopic scores in EoE and non-EoE EGIDs, their validity for the diagnosis and follow-up of disease activity, as well as endoscopic interventions and areas of uncertainty.

Endoscopic and histologic utility of transnasal endoscopy in pediatric eosinophilic esophagitis

Unsedated transnasal endoscopy (TNE) is an alternative method of examining the esophageal mucosa in pediatric patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), reducing cost, time, and risk associated with frequent surveillance esophagogastroduodenoscopies (EGD). Adequacy of transnasal esophageal biopsies for the evaluation of eosinophilic esophagitis histologic scoring system (EoEHSS) has not yet been evaluated. We compared procedure times, endoscopic findings, and EoEHSS scoring for EoE patients undergoing TNE versus standard EGD. Sixty-six TNE patients and 132 EGD controls matched for age (mean age 14.0 years) and disease status (29.3% active) were included. Compared to patients undergoing standard EGD, patients undergoing TNE spent 1.94 h less in the GI suite (p < 0.0001), with comparable occurrence rates of all visual endoscopic findings and most EoEHSS components. TNE serves as a useful tool for long-term disease surveillance, and consideration should be given to its use in clinical trials for EoE.

Real-World Efficacy of Dupilumab in Severe, Treatment-Refractory, and Fibrostenotic Patients With Eosinophilic Esophagitis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Dupilumab is approved for treatment of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), but real-world data are lacking. We aimed to determine the real-world efficacy of dupilumab in patients with severe, treatment-refractory, and fibrostenotic EoE.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of EoE patients prescribed dupilumab and who were treatment-refractory to standard modalities. Patient demographics, clinical characteristics, EoE history, and procedural data (including the histologically worst, predupilumab, and postdupilumab endoscopies) were extracted from medical records. Symptomatic, endoscopic, and histologic responses were assessed for the worst and predupilumab endoscopies compared with the postdupilumab endoscopy.

RESULTS

We identified 46 patients with refractory fibrostenotic EoE who were treated with dupilumab. Patients showed endoscopic, histologic, and symptomatic improvement on dupilumab compared with both the worst and the predupilumab esophagogastroduodenoscopies. The peak eosinophil counts decreased markedly, and postdupilumab histologic response rates were 80% and 57% for fewer than 15 eosinophils per high-power field and 6 or fewer eosinophils per high-power field, respectively, and the Endoscopic Reference Score decreased from 5.01 to 1.89 (P < .001 for all). Although the proportion of strictures was stable, there was a significant increase in the predilation esophageal diameter (from 13.9 to 16.0 mm; P < .001). Global symptom improvement was reported in 91% (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

In this population of severe, refractory, and fibrostenotic EoE patients, most achieved histologic, endoscopic, and symptom improvement with a median of 6 months of dupilumab, and esophageal stricture diameter improved. Dupilumab has real-world efficacy for a severe EoE population, most of whom would not have qualified for prior clinical trials.

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.

Assessment of the Severity and the Remission Criteria in Eosinophilic Esophagitis

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is an immune-mediated disease that manifests with dysphagia and is characterized by the predominantly eosinophilic infiltration of the esophageal mucosa. Several instruments have been developed to assess the symptoms of EoE: the Daily Symptom Questionnaire (DSQ), EoE Activity Index (EEsAI), Pediatric EoE Symptom Severity (PEESSv2), etc. The use of the EREFS is a gold standard for endoscopic diagnosis. The EoE histologic scoring system (EoEHSS) was elaborated for the assessment of histological features in EoE. However, the remission criteria are not clearly defined and vary greatly in different studies. Gastroenterologists establish the severity of EoE mainly based on endoscopic findings. At the same time, EoE requires a multidisciplinary approach. The recently developed Index of Severity of Eosinophilic Esophagitis (I-SEE) that is built on symptoms, endoscopic findings, and histological features is promising.

Dietary Management of Eosinophilic Esophagitis

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic immune-mediated food antigen-driven disease characterized by tissue eosinophilia and clinical symptoms of esophageal dysfunction. Medical and dietary therapies can be offered as treatment options in both pediatric and adult populations. Advances in nutritional research in EoE have produced different levels of dietary restriction, ranging from elimination of a single food group to more extensive restriction such as the two-food elimination diet, four-food elimination diet, or six-food elimination diet. Efficacy and outcomes vary for each level of restriction. The option of using dietary therapy allows clinicians to partner with patients in shared decision-making to balance the right level of food antigen restriction for the desired outcome. Key considerations when choosing dietary therapy hinge on patient preference and resources, food-related quality of life, and the ability to provide nutritional diversity and maintain nutritional parameters. This article highlights these considerations and offers clinical pearls to guide clinicians who wish to incorporate dietary therapy of EoE into their practice.

Mepolizumab for treatment of adolescents and adults with eosinophilic oesophagitis: a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to determine whether mepolizumab, an anti-IL-5 antibody, was more effective than placebo for improving dysphagia symptoms and decreasing oesophageal eosinophil counts in eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE).

METHODS

We conducted a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, trial. In the first part, patients aged 16-75 with EoE and dysphagia symptoms (per EoE Symptom Activity Index (EEsAI)) were randomised 1:1 to 3 months of mepolizumab 300 mg monthly or placebo. Primary outcome was change in EEsAI from baseline to month 3 (M3). Secondary outcomes included histological, endoscopic and safety metrics. In part 2, patients initially randomised to mepolizumab continued 300 mg monthly for 3 additional months (mepo/mepo), placebo patients started mepolizumab 100 mg monthly (pbo/mepo), and outcomes were reassessed at month 6 (M6).

RESULTS

Of 66 patients randomised, 64 completed M3, and 56 completed M6. At M3, EEsAI decreased 15.4±18.1 with mepolizumab and 8.3±18.0 with placebo (p=0.14). Peak eosinophil counts decreased more with mepolizumab (113±77 to 36±43) than placebo (146±94 to 160±133) (p<0.001). With mepolizumab, 42% and 34% achieved histological responses of <15 and ≤6 eos/hpf compared with 3% and 3% with placebo (p<0.001 and 0.02). The change in EoE Endoscopic Reference Score at M3 was also larger with mepolizumab. At M6, EEsAI decreased 18.3±18.1 points for mepo/mepo and 18.6±19.2 for pbo/mepo (p=0.85). The most common adverse events were injection-site reactions.

CONCLUSIONS

Mepolizumab did not achieve the primary endpoint of improving dysphagia symptoms compared with placebo. While eosinophil counts and endoscopic severity improved with mepolizumab at 3 months, longer treatment did not yield additional improvement.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03656380.

Prospective study of an amino acid-based elemental diet in an eosinophilic gastritis and gastroenteritis nutrition trial

BACKGROUND

Eosinophilic gastritis/gastroenteritis (EoG/EoGE) are rare disorders with pathologic gastric and/or small intestinal eosinophilia lacking an approved therapy. An allergic mechanism is postulated but underexplored mechanistically and therapeutically.

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated the effectiveness of a food allergen-free diet (elemental formula) in controlling gastrointestinal eosinophilia in adult EoG/EoGE.

METHODS

Adults aged 18 to 65 years with histologically active EoG/EoGE (≥30 eosinophils per high-power field) in the stomach and/or duodenum and gastrointestinal symptoms within the month preceding enrollment were prospectively enrolled onto a single-arm clinical trial to receive elemental formula for 6 consecutive weeks. The primary end point was percentage of participants with complete histologic remission (<30 eosinophils per high-power field in both stomach and duodenum). Exploratory outcomes were improvement in symptoms, endoscopy results, blood eosinophilia, quality of life, Physician Global Assessment score, and EoG-relevant gastric transcriptome and microbiome.

RESULTS

Fifteen adults (47% male, average age 37.7 years, average symptom duration 8.8 years) completed the trial. Multi-gastrointestinal segment involvement affected 87%. All subjects had complete histologic remission in the stomach (P = .002) and duodenum (P = .001). Scores improved in overall PhGA (P = .002); EGREFS (P = .003); EGDP (P = .002); SODA pain intensity (P = .044), non-pain (P = .039), and satisfaction (P = .0024); and PROMIS depression (P = .0078) and fatigue (P = .04). Food reintroduction reversed these improvements. The intervention was well tolerated in 14 subjects, with 1 serious adverse event reported in 1 subject.

CONCLUSION

An amino acid-based elemental diet improves histologic, endoscopic, symptomatic, quality-of-life, and molecular parameters of EoG/EoGE; these findings and disease recurrence with food trigger reintroduction support a dominant role for food allergens in disease pathogenesis.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov Identifier: NCT03320369.

Food-Specific IgG4 Is Elevated Throughout the Upper Gastrointestinal Tract in Eosinophilic Esophagitis

BACKGROUND

Food-specific immunoglobulin G4 (FS-IgG4) is associated with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE); however, it is not clear whether production is limited to the esophagus.

AIMS

To assess FS-IgG4 levels in the upper gastrointestinal tract and plasma and compare these with endoscopic disease severity, tissue eosinophil counts, and patient-reported symptoms.

METHODS

We examined prospectively banked plasma, throat swabs, and upper gastrointestinal biopsies (esophagus, gastric antrum, and duodenum) from control (n = 15), active EoE (n = 24), and inactive EoE (n = 8) subjects undergoing upper endoscopy. Patient-reported symptoms were assessed using the EoE symptom activity index (EEsAI). Endoscopic findings were evaluated using the EoE endoscopic reference score (EREFS). Peak eosinophils per high-power field (eos/hpf) were assessed from esophageal biopsies. Biopsy homogenates and throat swabs were normalized for protein content and assessed for FS-IgG4 to milk, wheat, and egg.

RESULTS

Median FS-IgG4 for milk and wheat was significantly increased in the plasma, throat swabs, esophagus, stomach, and duodenum of active EoE subjects compared to controls. No significant differences for milk- or wheat-IgG4 were observed between active and inactive EoE subjects. Among the gastrointestinal sites sampled, FS-IgG4 levels were highest in the esophagus. Esophageal FS-IgG4 for all foods correlated significantly across all sites sampled (r ≥ 0.59, p < 0.05). Among subjects with EoE, esophageal FS-IgG4 correlated significantly with peak eos/hpf (milk and wheat) and total EREFS (milk). EEsAI scores and esophageal FS-IgG4 levels did not correlate.

CONCLUSIONS

Milk and wheat FS-IgG4 levels are elevated in plasma and throughout the upper gastrointestinal tract in EoE subjects and correlate with endoscopic findings and esophageal eosinophilia.

Dupilumab in Adults and Adolescents with Eosinophilic Esophagitis

BACKGROUND

Dupilumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody, blocks interleukin-4 and interleukin-13 signaling, which have key roles in eosinophilic esophagitis.

METHODS

We conducted a three-part, phase 3 trial in which patients 12 years of age or older underwent randomization in a 1:1 ratio to receive subcutaneous dupilumab at a weekly dose of 300 mg or placebo (Part A) or in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive 300 mg of dupilumab either weekly or every 2 weeks or weekly placebo (Part B) up to week 24. Eligible patients who completed Part A or Part B continued the trial in Part C, in which those who completed Part A received dupilumab at a weekly dose of 300 mg up to week 52 (the Part A-C group); Part C that included the eligible patients from Part B is ongoing. The two primary end points at week 24 were histologic remission (≤6 eosinophils per high-power field) and the change from baseline in the Dysphagia Symptom Questionnaire (DSQ) score (range, 0 to 84, with higher values indicating more frequent or more severe dysphagia).

RESULTS

In Part A, histologic remission occurred in 25 of 42 patients (60%) who received weekly dupilumab and in 2 of 39 patients (5%) who received placebo (difference, 55 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 40 to 71; P<0.001). In Part B, histologic remission occurred in 47 of 80 patients (59%) with weekly dupilumab, in 49 of 81 patients (60%) with dupilumab every 2 weeks, and in 5 of 79 patients (6%) with placebo (difference between weekly dupilumab and placebo, 54 percentage points; 95% CI, 41 to 66 [P<0.001]; difference between dupilumab every 2 weeks and placebo, 56 percentage points; 95% CI, 43 to 69 [not significant per hierarchical testing]). The mean (±SD) DSQ scores at baseline were 33.6±12.41 in Part A and 36.7±11.22 in Part B; the scores improved with weekly dupilumab as compared with placebo, with differences of -12.32 (95% CI, -19.11 to -5.54) in Part A and -9.92 (95% CI, -14.81 to -5.02) in Part B (both P<0.001) but not with dupilumab every 2 weeks (difference in Part B, -0.51; 95% CI, -5.42 to 4.41). Serious adverse events occurred in 9 patients during the Part A or B treatment period (in 7 who received weekly dupilumab, 1 who received dupilumab every 2 weeks, and 1 who received placebo) and in 1 patient in the Part A-C group during the Part C treatment period who received placebo in Part A and weekly dupilumab in Part C.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with eosinophilic esophagitis, subcutaneous dupilumab administered weekly improved histologic outcomes and alleviated symptoms of the disease. (Funded by Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03633617.).

Role of mast cells in eosinophilic esophagitis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review will present what is known from recent research on the involvement of mast cells in eosinophilic esophagitis and identify questions requiring further investigation.

RECENT FINDINGS

In the adults and children with eosinophilic esophagitis, there is increasing evidence that mastocytosis can persist, despite resolution of eosinophilia and is associated with persistent mucosal abnormalities and symptoms. Despite, treatment mast cells have an activated transcriptome. Mast cells likely contribute to epithelial barrier dysfunction, smooth muscle hypertrophy and contraction, and subepithelial fibrosis. It remains unclear whether targeting MCs alone has therapeutic efficacy to improve tissue damage.

SUMMARY

Mast cells appear to play a key role in eosinophilic esophagitis and serve as a biomarker of mucosal healing in conjunction with eosinophils. Excessive mast cell activation likely contributes to tissue damage in eosinophilic esophagitis and need to be considered as a target of therapy along with eosinophils.

Disease Burden and Unmet Need in Eosinophilic Esophagitis

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic, progressive, type 2 inflammatory disease of increasing prevalence, characterized by symptoms of dysphagia and reduced quality of life. A dysregulated type 2 immune response to food and aeroallergen leads to barrier dysfunction, chronic esophageal inflammation, remodeling, and fibrosis. Patients with EoE have impaired quality of life because of dysphagia and other symptoms. They may also suffer social and psychological implications of food-related illness and expensive out-of-pocket costs associated with treatment. Disease burden in EoE is often compounded by the presence of comorbid type 2 inflammatory diseases. Current conventional treatments include elimination diet, proton pump inhibitors, and swallowed topical corticosteroids, as well as esophageal dilation in patients who have developed strictures. These treatments demonstrate variable response rates and may not always provide long-term disease control. There is an unmet need for long-term histologic, endoscopic, and symptomatic disease control; for targeted therapies that can normalize the immune response to triggers, reduce chronic inflammation, and limit or prevent remodeling and fibrosis; and for earlier diagnosis, defined treatment outcomes, and a greater understanding of patient perspectives on treatment. In addition, healthcare professionals need a better understanding of the patient perspective on disease burden, the disconnect between symptoms and disease activity, and the progressive nature of EoE and the need for continuous monitoring and maintenance treatment. In this review, we explore the progression of disease over the patient's lifespan, highlight the patient perspective on disease, and discuss the unmet need for effective long-term treatments.

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.

Medical Management of Eosinophilic Esophagitis in Pediatric Patients

Eosinophilic esophagitis is an immune-mediated allergic disease of the esophagus that affects pediatric patients of all ages. The diagnosis is made by esophagogastroduodenoscopy demonstrating eosinophilic infiltrate of the esophagus. Approaches to treatment involve proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), swallowed topical steroid preparations, as well as dietary elimination. In this review we discuss the evidence and efficacy of each of these approaches.