Monitoring Patients With Eosinophilic Esophagitis in Routine Clinical Practice - International Expert Recommendations

BACKGROUND & AIMS

There are no studies or recommendations on optimal monitoring strategies for patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). Our objective was to develop guidance on how to monitor patients with EoE in routine clinical practice, on the basis of available clinical evidence and expert opinion.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary, international group of EoE experts identified the following important 3 questions during several consensus meetings: why, by what means, and when to monitor patients with EoE. A steering committee was named, and 3 teams were formed to review literature and to formulate statements for each topic. In a Delphi survey, a level of agreement of ≥75% was defined as threshold value for acceptance. In a final conference, results were presented, critical points and comments on the statements were discussed, and statements were rephrased/rewritten if necessary.

RESULTS

Eighteen EoE experts (14 adult and pediatric gastroenterologists, 2 pathologists and 2 allergists) with a median of 21.7 years in clinical practice, mostly academic or university-based, completed the Delphi survey, which included 11 statements and a proposed algorithm for monitoring patients with EoE. Each statement attained ≥75% agreement. Participants discussed and debated mostly about the statement concerning surveillance intervals for EoE patients with stable disease.

CONCLUSIONS

It was concluded that effective maintenance treatment probably reduces the development of EoE complications, and regular, structured, and, under certain conditions, individualized clinical follow-up is recommended to assess disease activity while opening a window to monitoring side effects, adjusting therapy, and encouraging adherence to treatment. Follow-up should comprise symptom assessment and periodic or repeated endoscopy with histological assessment in specific EoE settings.

Disease Monitoring in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Evolving Principles and Possibilities

Inflammatory bowel disease is a progressive and debilitating condition. Early and effective treatment using a treat-to-target approach is key to improving patient outcomes. Therefore, proactive monitoring is essential to ensure that treatment strategies are working and targets are being met. In this review we discuss the current monitoring tools available to us and how they can be used. We also discuss the importance of monitoring during key phases of the disease and propose an optimum treat-to-target monitoring strategy for Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis. Regarding the advent of new technology, we discuss how this may improve our monitoring capabilities and how we envisage future monitoring strategies of inflammatory bowel diseases.

How Do We Treat Inflammatory Bowel Diseases to Aim For Endoscopic Remission?

Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis are heterogeneous conditions which may manifest with 1 or more of a constellation of abnormal symptoms, elevated biomarkers, and/or objective evidence of inflammation on endoscopic or cross-sectional evaluation. Whilst resolution of symptoms and restoration of quality of life is the primary goal for patients following a disease flare, there may be discordance between resolution of symptoms, biomarkers, and endoscopy. Increased emphasis is placed on the achievement of endoscopic remission, given it is associated with improved outcomes and reduction in hospitalization and surgeries. As the therapeutic armamentarium for inflammatory bowel disease does not achieve remission in all patients, there is greater emphasis on repetitive interval-based assessment of disease activity with sequential algorithmic treatment adjustments until endoscopic remission is achieved, in a so-called treat-to-target approach. We review the role of symptoms, biomarkers, imaging and endoscopy within treat-to-target algorithms and provide a practical guidance to their use in clinical practice.

Symptoms Have Modest Accuracy in Detecting Endoscopic and Histologic Remission in Adults With Eosinophilic Esophagitis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

It is not clear whether symptoms alone can be used to estimate the biologic activity of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). We aimed to evaluate whether symptoms can be used to identify patients with endoscopic and histologic features of remission.

METHODS

Between April 2011 and June 2014, we performed a prospective, observational study and recruited 269 consecutive adults with EoE (67% male; median age, 39 years old) in Switzerland and the United States. Patients first completed the validated symptom-based EoE activity index patient-reported outcome instrument and then underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy with esophageal biopsy collection. Endoscopic and histologic findings were evaluated with a validated grading system and standardized instrument, respectively. Clinical remission was defined as symptom score <20 (range, 0-100); histologic remission was defined as a peak count of <20 eosinophils/mm(2) in a high-power field (corresponds to approximately <5 eosinophils/median high-power field); and endoscopic remission as absence of white exudates, moderate or severe rings, strictures, or combination of furrows and edema. We used receiver operating characteristic analysis to determine the best symptom score cutoff values for detection of remission.

RESULTS

Of the study subjects, 111 were in clinical remission (41.3%), 79 were in endoscopic remission (29.7%), and 75 were in histologic remission (27.9%). When the symptom score was used as a continuous variable, patients in endoscopic, histologic, and combined (endoscopic and histologic remission) remission were detected with area under the curve values of 0.67, 0.60, and 0.67, respectively. A symptom score of 20 identified patients in endoscopic remission with 65.1% accuracy and histologic remission with 62.1% accuracy; a symptom score of 15 identified patients with both types of remission with 67.7% accuracy.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with EoE, endoscopic or histologic remission can be identified with only modest accuracy based on symptoms alone. At any given time, physicians cannot rely on lack of symptoms to make assumptions about lack of biologic disease activity in adults with EoE. ClinicalTrials.gov, Number: NCT00939263.