The Index of Severity for Eosinophilic Esophagitis (I-SEE) Reflects Longitudinal Clinicopathologic Changes in Children

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The Index of Severity for Eosinophilic Esophagitis (I-SEE) was recently developed. We aimed to understand I-SEE scores in a longitudinal pediatric cohort and to determine the relationship between I-SEE and clinical features in children.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis on a prospectively enrolled cohort of children at a single center who were treated as part of routine clinical care. I-SEE was calculated at the diagnostic and follow-up endoscopies over a mean of 6.6 years. Scoring was 0 for inactive, 1-6 for mild, 7-14 for moderate, and ≥15 for severe eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). We analyzed clinical, endoscopic, and histologic features at each instance. Symptoms were analyzed at the baseline, first follow-up, and last endoscopic instance.

RESULTS

Of 67 children who met study criteria of at least 3 endoscopies over at least 2 years of follow-up time, 43%, 36%, and 21% had mild, moderate, and severe I-SEE scores at baseline, respectively. Between the first and second endoscopic instances, there was a decrease in the group mean I-SEE from 9.7 ± 7.2 to 6.1 ± 5.9 (P < .001). By the last instance, the overall I-SEE score dropped to 3.9 (P < .001). Body mass index <5% and poor feeding were more common in the children with severe I-SEE scores at baseline, and both improved by the last instance. Fibrosis was improved by the last instance biopsy (P < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

I-SEE is a responsive severity metric in children treated long term during routine clinical care. Baseline low body mass index and poor feeding were more common in children with severe I-SEE scores.

Esophageal Eosinophilia Is Common Among Relatives of Eosinophilic Esophagitis Patients

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Familial clustering of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) has been described, and we report on the biopsy-assessed prevalence of esophageal eosinophilia (EE) in first-degree family members. The aim was to determine the prevalence of EE in first-degree adult relatives (FDRs) of EoE patients.

METHODS

Index EoE patients diagnosed by EE (>15 eosinophils per high-power field) and proton pump inhibitor nonresponsiveness were identified and family trees were constructed. Adult FDRs were invited to undergo upper endoscopy with esophageal biopsies and to complete reflux, dysphagia, and allergy/atopy questionnaires. Questionnaire information was gathered only for those who responded as per institutional review board purview. Records from other children and adult FDRs with prior EoE diagnoses also were obtained when permission was obtained. Simple and multivariable logistic regression models were used to evaluate the unadjusted and odds ratios of EoE for demographic and clinical variables.

RESULTS

A total of 239 FDRs from 37 index EoE patients were identified. Seventy-one of 239 adult (age, >18 y) FDRs completed endoscopy and questionnaires and 18 of 71 FDRs had EE. An additional 17 FDRs were confirmed to have EE after external medical record retrieval, resulting in a total of 35 of 239 (14.6%) FDRs with EE. Significantly more male FDRs had EE compared with female FDRs (P = .027). Proton pump inhibitors, dysphagia, gastroesophageal reflux disease, asthma, and reflux symptoms predicted EE in FDRs. FDRs who had EE reported hay fever, allergic eye symptoms, and food allergy more frequently than those without EE (P = .03, P = .001, and P = .02, respectively). Specifically, younger age, higher serum eosinophils, being male, and having food allergies all were associated with higher odds of EoE (P = .0211, P = .0031, P = .0362, and P = .0089, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of esophageal eosinophilia is extremely high and male-predominant in first-degree relatives of EoE patients. Symptoms of hay fever, allergic eye symptoms, and food allergy were predictors of EE in FDRs. Dysphagia did not predict esophageal eosinophilia. Family members of EoE patients are at risk for EE, particularly those who have atopic symptoms.

Budesonide Oral Suspension Improves Outcomes in Patients With Eosinophilic Esophagitis: Results from a Phase 3 Trial

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic, immune-mediated disease for which there is currently no pharmacologic therapy approved by the US Food and Drug Administration.

METHODS

In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial, patients 11-55 years of age with EoE and dysphagia were randomized 2:1 to receive budesonide oral suspension (BOS) 2.0 mg twice daily or placebo for 12 weeks at academic or community care practices. Co-primary endpoints were the proportion of stringent histologic responders (≤6 eosinophils/high-power field) or dysphagia symptom responders (≥30% reduction in Dysphagia Symptom Questionnaire [DSQ] score) over 12 weeks. Changes in DSQ score (key secondary endpoint) and EoE Endoscopic Reference Score (EREFS) (secondary endpoint) from baseline to week 12, and safety parameters were examined.

RESULTS

Overall, 318 patients (BOS, n = 213; placebo, n = 105) were randomized and received ≥1 dose of study treatment. More BOS-treated than placebo-treated patients achieved a stringent histologic response (53.1% vs 1.0%; Δ52% [95% confidence interval (CI), 43.3%-59.1%]; P < .001) or symptom response (52.6% vs 39.1%; Δ13% [95% CI, 1.6%-24.3%]; P = .024) over 12 weeks. BOS-treated patients also had greater improvements in least-squares mean DSQ scores and EREFS over 12 weeks than placebo-treated patients: DSQ, -13.0 (SEM 1.2) vs -9.1 (SEM 1.5) (Δ-3.9 [95% CI, -7.1 to -0.8]; P = .015); EREFS, -4.0 (SEM 0.3) vs -2.2 (SEM 0.4) (Δ-1.8 [95% CI, -2.6 to -1.1]; P < .001). BOS was well tolerated; most adverse events were mild or moderate in severity.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with EoE, BOS 2.0 mg twice daily was superior to placebo in improving histologic, symptomatic, and endoscopic outcomes over 12 weeks. BOS 2.0 mg twice daily was well tolerated. ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT02605837.

Improvements in Dysphagia and Pain With Swallowing in Patients With Eosinophilic Esophagitis Receiving Budesonide Oral Suspension

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Quantification of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) symptoms is crucial for assessing treatment outcomes. We aimed to explore the effect of budesonide oral suspension (BOS) on dysphagia and pain with swallowing.

METHODS

We performed a secondary analysis of data from a phase 2 multicenter, double-blind, trial (conducted from July 2012 through October 2014) of patients with EoE, 11-40 y old, who were randomly assigned to groups given placebo or BOS (2.0 mg twice daily) for 12 weeks. Symptoms were quantified using the Dysphagia Symptom Questionnaire (DSQ) from baseline to week 12 of therapy.

RESULTS

Overall, 93 patients were randomly assigned to groups; the prespecified modified intention-to-treat analysis set comprised 87 patients (38 from the placebo group and 49 from the BOS group). Improvements from baseline in least-squares mean (standard error) DSQ (Q2+Q3) scores were observed. The difference between groups was statistically significant only at week 12 (placebo vs BOS: week 4, -4.9 [1.7] vs -7.4 [1.5]; P = .265; week 8, -7.4 [2.1] vs -10.3 [1.8]; P = .288; week 12, -7.5 [1.9] vs -14.3 [1.7]; P = .01). Similar findings were observed for pain (Q4) scores (placebo vs BOS: week 4, -2.5 [0.8] vs -3.3 [0.7]; P = .484; week 8, -3.0 [0.8] vs -4.9 [0.7]; P = .066; week 12, -3.1 [0.8] vs -4.9 [0.7]; P = .109). More severe DSQ and DSQ+pain scores were associated with presence of other symptoms (such as regurgitation) and physician-rated severity. Improvements in DSQ and DSQ+pain scores were greater in patients with either a histologic or endoscopic response than in patients without a response.

CONCLUSIONS

In a secondary analysis of data from a phase 2 trial of patients with EoE, we found evidence for improvements in dysphagia and pain scores in patients who received BOS (2.0 mg twice daily) vs placebo. Pain with swallowing should be considered in the clinical assessment of patients with EoE. ClinicalTrials.gov no: NCT01642212.

Updated International Consensus Diagnostic Criteria for Eosinophilic Esophagitis: Proceedings of the AGREE Conference

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Over the last decade, clinical experiences and research studies raised concerns regarding use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) as part of the diagnostic strategy for eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). We aimed to clarify the use of PPIs in the evaluation and treatment of children and adults with suspected EoE to develop updated international consensus criteria for EoE diagnosis.

METHODS

A consensus conference was convened to address the issue of PPI use for esophageal eosinophilia using a process consistent with standards described in the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II. Pediatric and adult physicians and researchers from gastroenterology, allergy, and pathology subspecialties representing 14 countries used online communications, teleconferences, and a face-to-face meeting to review the literature and clinical experiences.

RESULTS

Substantial evidence documented that PPIs reduce esophageal eosinophilia in children, adolescents, and adults, with several mechanisms potentially explaining the treatment effect. Based on these findings, an updated diagnostic algorithm for EoE was developed, with removal of the PPI trial requirement.

CONCLUSIONS

EoE should be diagnosed when there are symptoms of esophageal dysfunction and at least 15 eosinophils per high-power field (or approximately 60 eosinophils per mm²) on esophageal biopsy and after a comprehensive assessment of non-EoE disorders that could cause or potentially contribute to esophageal eosinophilia. The evidence suggests that PPIs are better classified as a treatment for esophageal eosinophilia that may be due to EoE than as a diagnostic criterion, and we have developed updated consensus criteria for EoE that reflect this change.