Eosinophil-Derived Neurotoxin Predicts Response to Proton-Pump Inhibitor Treatment in Pediatric Eosinophilic Esophagitis

Proton-Pump Inhibitors in Eosinophilic Esophagitis: A Review Focused on the Role of Pharmacogenetics

Proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) are the most administered first-line treatment for eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). However, only around half of EoE patients respond histologically to a double dosage of PPI. In addition, 70% of responders maintain EoE in remission after tapering the PPI dose. In order to avoid endoscopy with biopsies-the only accurate method of assessing PPI response-efforts have been made to identify PPI responder patients. The clinical or endoscopic features and biomarkers evaluated so far, however, have not proven to be sufficient in predicting PPI response. Although new approaches based on omics technologies have uncovered promising biomarkers, the specialized and complex procedures required are difficult to implement in clinical settings. Alternatively, PPI pharmacogenetics based on identifying variations in CYP2C19 and STAT6 genes have shown promising results in EoE, and could easily be performed in most laboratories. Other genetic variations have also been associated with PPI response and may explain those cases not related to CYP2C19 or STAT6. Here, we provide an overview of PPI treatment in EoE and evidence of how genetic variations in CYP2C19 and other genes could affect PPI effectiveness, and also discuss studies evaluating the role of pharmacogenetics in predicting PPI response in patients with EoE.

Addressing diagnostic dilemmas in eosinophilic esophagitis using esophageal epithelial eosinophil-derived neurotoxin

OBJECTIVES

Eosinophil-derived neurotoxin (EDN) is a viable marker of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) disease activity. We studied the utility of measuring EDN from esophageal epithelial brushings for diagnosing EoE, focusing on two scenarios: (1) cases of exclusive distal eosinophilia and (2) cases of discrepancy between endoscopy and histology.

METHODS

Records of patients who underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) with EDN measured via esophageal brushings at Arnold Palmer Hospital for Children in Orlando, Florida from January 2014 to October 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Demographics, clinical, endoscopic, and histologic data were collected.

RESULTS

We reviewed 231 patient records (66.7% male, mean age 10.3 years, range 1-22 years). EDN values correlated with endoscopic reference score (EREFS) and peak eosinophil count (PEC) (Spearman's rho = 0.756 (p < 0.001) and 0.824 (p < 0.001) respectively). Average PEC, EREFS, and EDN concentrations were higher in patients with active EoE than in controls or patients with EoE in remission (inactive). When grouping patients based on esophageal eosinophilia distribution, EDN mirrored PEC, and EREFS. Patients with exclusive distal eosinophilia had lower EDN concentrations than those with eosinophilia in >1 level of the esophagus (23.8 ± 46.1 mcg/mL vs. 171.3 ± 205.8 mcg/mL respectively, p < 0.001). EDN values were more consistent with EREFS in cases of discrepancies between endoscopic findings and pathology (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

EDN measured in esophageal brushing samples reflects disease activity objectively and accurately. It also offers significant value in cases of exclusive distal esophageal eosinophilia and when discrepancies exist between endoscopy and histology.

Non-Invasive and Minimally Invasive Biomarkers for the Management of Eosinophilic Esophagitis beyond Peak Eosinophil Counts: Filling the Gap in Clinical Practice

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic esophageal disease that needs lifelong management and follow-up. The diagnosis requires an upper endoscopy with at least one esophageal biopsy demonstrating >15 eosinophils/high-power field, and often occurs with a diagnostic delay of up to ten years, partly due to the absence of valid non-invasive screening tools. In addition, serial upper endoscopies with esophageal biopsies are mandatory to assess the efficacy of any ongoing treatment in patients with EoE. These procedures are invasive, costly, and, when performed without sedation, are often poorly tolerated by patients. Therefore, there is the clinical need to identify reliable non-invasive or minimally invasive biomarkers that could be used to assess disease activity in clinical practice as a surrogate of peak eosinophil counts on esophageal biopsies. This review summarizes evidence on investigational non-invasive or minimally invasive biomarkers for the diagnosis and follow-up of EoE to report on the state of the art in the field and support future research. We discussed eosinophil-derived mediators including eosinophil cationic protein (ECP), eosinophil-derived neurotoxin (EDN, also known as eosinophil protein X), eosinophil peroxidase (EPO), and major basic protein (MBP) as well as other promising non-eosinophil-derived biomarkers. Although several studies have shown the utility of most biomarkers collected from the serum, esophageal luminal secretions, and feces of EoE patients, numerous limitations currently hamper the integration of such biomarkers in clinical practice. Future studies should aim at validating the utility of non-invasive and minimally invasive biomarkers using rigorous protocols and updated consensus criteria for EoE.