Search

Background: Although empiric exclusion from the diet of the 6 food groups most likely to trigger allergies achieves eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) remission in children, data on its prolonged efficacy and effects on adults are lacking. Objective: We sought to evaluate the efficacy of a 6-food elimination diet in inducing and maintaining prolonged remission in patients with adult EoE. Methods: Sixty-seven consecutive patients with adult EoE were prospectively recruited and treated exclusively with a diet avoiding cereals, milk, eggs, fish/seafood, legumes/peanuts, and soy for 6 weeks. Subsequent challenge was undertaken by sequentially reintroducing all excluded single foods, followed by endoscopy and biopsies, which were developed every 6 weeks in case of response (eosinophil peak count reduction to <15/high-power field [hpf]). A food was considered a trigger for EoE and removed from the diet if pathologic eosinophilic infiltration (≥15 eosinophils/hpf) reappeared. Food-specific serum IgE measurements and skin prick tests were performed before initiating the diet. Results: Forty-nine (73.1%) patients exhibited significantly reduced eosinophil peak counts (<15 eosinophils/hpf) before sequential single-food reintroduction. A single offending food antigen was identified in 35.71% of patients, 2 food triggers were identified in 30.95%, and 3 or more food triggers were identified in 33.3%. Cow''s milk was the most common food antigen (61.9%), followed by wheat (28.6%), eggs (26.2%), and legumes (23.8%). Prior allergy tests showed no concordance with food-reintroduction challenge results. All patients who continued to avoid the offending foods maintained histopathologic and clinical EoE remission for up to 3 years. Conclusions: An empiric 6-food elimination diet effectively induced remission of active adult EoE, which was maintained for up to 3 years with individually tailored, limited exclusion diets. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic inflammatory condition characterized by esophageal dysfunction and eosinophilic infiltrate in the esophageal epithelium in the absence of other potential causes of eosinophilia. EoE is increasing in incidence and prevalence, and is a major cause of gastrointestinal morbidity among children and adults. EoE is thought to be immune mediated, with food or environmental antigens stimulating a T-helper (Th)-2 inflammatory response. An increased understanding of the pathogenesis of EoE has led to the evolution of diagnostic and treatment paradigms. We review the latest approach to diagnosis of EoE and present consensus diagnostic guidelines. We also discuss the clinical, endoscopic, and histologic features of EoE and challenges to diagnosis. Finally, we present the 3 major treatment options for EoE: pharmacologic therapy, dietary modification, and endoscopic dilation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Like many rare diseases, eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a poorly understood disorder, and assessment tools to accurately determine disease activity, remission, and natural history have long been inadequate. Clinical outcome end points able to assess the effectiveness of candidate therapeutic agents in clinical trials have been a particular deficiency and are urgently needed. With no approved therapy available to patients and with the prevalence of EoE on the increase, collaborative approaches to drug development are becoming ever more important. We describe a collaborative effort mobilized across institutions, including both the public and private sectors, that was initiated within the past 18 months expressly to address the need for further clinical research into the cause and treatment of EoE. Collaborators include the North American Society of Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition; the International Gastrointestinal Eosinophilic Researchers; and the US Food and Drug Administration. This effort has resulted in the elucidation of several parameters essential for effective EoE registration trials, including the need for clinically meaningful end points that measure changes in clinical symptoms in addition to the assessment of intraepithelial mucosal eosinophilia. The development and use of biomarkers, particularly in early-phase drug development, have become an important focus for investigations that might reduce clinical reliance on serial invasive monitoring. The concerted efforts described here to develop rational therapeutics and drug development paradigms in EoE also appear to provide a model for effective collaboration in the context of drug development for rare diseases and perhaps more generally for public health initiatives. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background & Aims: It can be a challenge to differentiate individuals with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) from those with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). We investigated differences in histologic and eosinophil patterns and numbers of mast cells between patients with these disorders. Methods: We performed histologic analyses and immunohistochemical assays for eosinophil-derived neurotoxin (EDN), major basic protein (MBP), and tryptase, using biopsy samples from 10 patients with GERD (positive results from a pH study and response to proton pump inhibitors), Barrett''s esophagus, or EoE (negative results from a pH study and positive response to budesonide). Patients were matched for degree of eosinophilia. Results: Samples from patients with EoE, GERD, or Barrett''s esophagus had similar increases in concentrations of eosinophils. Patients with GERD or EoE did not differ in amount of basal zone hyperplasia, microabscesses, spongiosis, eosinophil distribution, maximum eosinophils/high-power field (HPF), or composite histologic scores. Samples from all 3 groups had high levels of EDN and MBP; the levels of eosinophil products were correlated (ρ = 0.93). Extracellular staining for EDN was greater than intracellular staining (2.67 of 3 vs 1.86 of 3); levels tended to be greater in samples from patients with EoE than GERD (P = .05) or Barrett''s esophagus (P = .06). Detection of EDN correlated with peak numbers of eosinophils/HPF (ρ = 0.6 for intracellular and extracellular staining). Peak numbers of tryptase-positive mast cells/HPF were significantly greater in samples from patients with EoE than GERD or Barrett''s esophagus (P = .01 and .005, respectively). The Spearman correlation between eosinophil and mast cell density was a ρ value of 0.2. Conclusions: Biopsy samples from patients with GERD and EoE, matched for esophageal eosinophilia, have similar changes in histology and levels of EDN and MBP, whereas mast cells from patients with EoE have higher levels of these products. The presence of esophageal eosinophils, rather than etiology, could be the most important determinant of epithelial response. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background & Aims: The rapid response to topical corticosteroids makes it hard to implicate fibrosis as the cause of dysphagia in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). We examined surrogates of esophageal expansion using minimal and maximal esophageal diameter (EDmin and EDmax) in barium swallow examinations. Methods: Eleven patients evaluated at Mayo Clinic, Rochester (8 female, median age 40, median diagnosis 36 months, median symptom duration 132 months) underwent barium esophagrams to determine EDmin and EDmax before and after 6 weeks of topical corticosteroid therapy. We assessed parameter reproducibility (in healthy volunteers), baseline EDmin and EDmax, postcorticosteroid changes in EoE patients, and correlation with clinical response. Results: EDmin and EDmax were reproducible, with nonsignificant variance in the 2 esophagrams in control subjects (P = .44 and P = .66, respectively). Baseline EDmax was reduced in EoE at 19 mm (range, 13–26 mm) vs 24 mm (range, 19–29 mm) in controls (P = .004). About 50% of the EoE patients had EDmax and min values within the 10th to 90th percentile of controls (45% and 55%, respectively). Clinical improvement by Mayo Dsyphagia Questionnaire did not correlate with postcorticosteroid luminal change (P = .19 for EDmax; P = .75 for EDmin). Median increases in postcorticosteroid EDmax and EDmin were not statistically significant (P = .15 and .1, respectively). However, they were significant in patients with abnormal baseline EDmax (n = 6; 2 mm; P = .01) and EDmin (n = 5; 3 mm; P = .02). Conclusions: Esophageal diameter is a reproducible parameter that is frequently decreased in EoE, but normal in approximately 50% of patients. Those with narrowing might respond to steroids, but it is unclear if narrowing causes dysphagia. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background: Diagnosis of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) currently requires endoscopic biopsy and histopathologic analysis of the biopsy specimens to count intraepithelial eosinophils. Reflectance confocal microscopy (RCM) is an endomicroscopy technology that is capable of obtaining high-resolution, optically sectioned images of esophageal mucosa without the administration of exogenous contrast. Objective: In this study, we investigated the capability of a high-speed form of RCM, termed spectrally encoded confocal microscopy (SECM), to count intraepithelial esophageal eosinophils and characterize other microscopic findings of EoE. Design: A total of 43 biopsy samples from 35 pediatric patients and 8 biopsy samples from 8 adult patients undergoing EGD for EoE were imaged by SECM immediately after their removal and then processed for routine histopathology. Two SECM readers, trained on adult cases, prospectively counted intraepithelial eosinophils and detected the presence of abscess, degranulation, and basal cell hyperplasia on SECM images from the pediatric patients. A pathologist blinded to the SECM data analyzed the same from corresponding slides. Setting: The Gastrointestinal Unit, Massachusetts General Hospital. Results: Eosinophils by SECM demonstrated a higher reflectance than the surrounding cells and other inflammatory cells. There was good correlation between SECM and histology maximum eosinophil counts/high-power field (R = 0.76, P < .0001). Intra- and interobserver correlations for SECM counts were very good (R = 0.93 and R = 0.92, respectively; P < .0001). For the commonly used eosinophil count cutoff of 15 per high-power field, the sensitivity and specificity of SECM for EoE were 100%. The sensitivity and specificity for abscess, degranulation, and basal cell hyperplasia were 100% and 82%, 91% and 60%, and 94% and 80%, respectively. Intra- and interobserver agreements for these microscopic features of EoE were very good (κ = 0.9/0.9, 0.84/1.0, 0.91/0.81, respectively). Limitation: Ex vivo study. Conclusions: This study demonstrates that RCM can be used to accurately count intraepithelial eosinophils and identify other microscopic abnormalities associated with EoE on freshly excised biopsy samples. These findings suggest that RCM may be developed into a tool for assessing eosinophilic infiltration in the esophagus in vivo. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background: The epidemiology of esophageal foreign-body impaction (EFBI) is poorly described, and the impact of the increasing prevalence of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) on this is unknown. Objective: To assess the characteristics of patients with EFBI, to determine whether EFBI cases increased in proportion to EoE cases, and to identify predictors of EFBI. Design: Retrospective study. Setting: Tertiary care center. Patients: Cases of EFBI from 2002 to 2009 were identified by querying billing, clinical, and endoscopy databases for the International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification code 935.1, “foreign body in the esophagus.” Charts were reviewed to confirm EFBI and to extract pertinent data. Cases of EoE were defined per guidelines. Results: Of 548 patients with EFBI (59% male, 68% white, bimodal age distribution), 482 (88%) required a procedure, 347 (63%) had food impactions, and 51 (9%) had EoE. EFBIs increased over the study time frame, and the number of EGDs performed for EFBI nearly quadrupled. Increasing diagnosis of EoE did not fully account for this trend, but only 27% of patients who underwent EGD had esophageal biopsies. Of patients who underwent biopsy, 46% had EoE. EoE was the strongest predictor of multiple EFBIs (odds ratio 3.5; 95% CI, 1.8-7.0). Limitations: Retrospective, single-center study. Conclusions: The number of EGDs performed for EFBI has increased dramatically at our center, but increasing EoE prevalence only partially explains this trend. Because only a minority of EFBI patients underwent biopsies and because nearly half of those who did undergo biopsy had EoE, the incidence of EoE may be substantially underestimated. Physician education is needed to increase the proportion of subjects with EFBI who undergo biopsies. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background: Recent research shows that both pediatric and adult patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) experience esophageal remodeling marked by increased collagen deposition in which TGF-β plays an important role. However, limited data are available on the intensity and reversibility of fibrous remodeling in adults with EoE. Objective: We sought to analyze differences in collagen deposition in the lamina propria (LP) and profibrogenic cytokine gene expression along with other changes induced by prolonged treatment with fluticasone propionate in adults with EoE. Methods: Ten adults given consecutive diagnoses of EoE were studied prospectively. Deep esophageal biopsy specimens were obtained before and after 1 year of treatment with fluticasone propionate. Collagen deposition in the LP was assessed in tissue sections with the aid of the Masson trichrome technique. IL5, TGFB1, fibroblast growth factor 9 (FGF9), and CCL18 gene expression was quantified through real-time PCR. EoE results were compared among samples from 10 adult patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease and 10 control subjects with healthy esophagi. Results: Patients with EoE showed a significant increase in subepithelial collagen deposition; this correlated positively with eosinophil density in the LP and the patient’s age. Prolonged steroid treatment induced a nonsignificant reduction in subepithelial fibrosis, which remained significantly higher than in control subjects. Profibrogenic cytokine gene expression also increased in patients with EoE, with IL5 (P < .001), FGF9 (P = .005), and CCL18 (P = .008) all significantly upregulated. After 1 year of treatment, a reduction was observed in gene expression; for CCL18 expression, this decrease was statistically significant (P < .001). Conclusions: Esophageal remodeling is associated with upregulated gene expression of profibrogenic cytokines in adults with EoE. Prolonged treatment with fluticasone propionate leads to a nonsignificant reduction in subepithelial collagen deposition accompanied by downregulation of profibrogenic cytokine gene expression, with that of CCL18 being especially significant. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background & Aims: The role of interleukin (IL)-5 in the pathogenesis of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) has been established in animal models; anti–IL-5 therapy has been reported to be effective in adults. We investigated whether IL-5 has a role in accumulation of esophageal eosinophils in children with EoE and whether therapy with mepolizumab, an antibody against IL-5, reduces the number of esophageal intraepithelial eosinophils in children with EoE. Methods: We performed an international, multicenter, double-blind, randomized, prospective study of 59 children with EoE, defined as baseline peak count of esophageal intraepithelial eosinophils of ≥20 in at least 1 high-power field (hpf). Patients received an infusion every 4 weeks (a total of 3 infusions) of 0.55, 2.5, or 10 mg/kg mepolizumab. No placebo group was used. Results: Baseline peak and mean esophageal intraepithelial eosinophil counts were (mean ± SE) 122.5 ± 8.78 and 39.1 ± 3.63 per hpf, respectively. Four weeks after the third infusion, peak eosinophil counts were <5 per hpf in 5 of 57 children (8.8%); we did not observe differences among groups given different doses of mepolizumab. Reduced peak and mean eosinophil counts, to <20 per hpf, were observed in 18 of 57 (31.6%) and 51 of 57 (89.5%) children, respectively. Peak and mean esophageal intraepithelial eosinophil counts decreased significantly to 40.2 ± 5.17 and 9.3 ± 1.25 per hpf, respectively (P < .0001). An analysis to evaluate predictors of response associated a higher mean baseline esophageal intraepithelial eosinophil count with a greater reduction in mean count (P < .0001). Conclusions: IL-5 is involved in the pathogenesis of EoE in children. Mepolizumab, an antibody against IL-5, reduces esophageal eosinophilic inflammation in these patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background & Aims: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is of increasing prevalence and believed to result from allergic processes. Helicobacter pylori has been inversely associated with allergic diseases, but there is no known relationship between H pylori, EoE, and esophageal eosinophilia. We investigated the association between esophageal eosinophilia and H pylori infection. Methods: We performed a cross-sectional study of data, collected from a US pathology database, on 165,017 patients in the United States who underwent esophageal and gastric biopsies from 2008 through 2010. Patients with and without H pylori on gastric biopsy were compared, and odds of esophageal eosinophilia were determined. Results: From the data analyzed, 56,301 (34.1%) had normal esophageal biopsy specimens, 5767 (3.5%) had esophageal eosinophilia, and 11,170 (6.8%) had H pylori infection. Esophageal eosinophilia was inversely associated with H pylori (odds ratio [OR], 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69–0.87). Compared with patients with normal esophageal biopsy specimens, odds of H pylori were reduced among patients with ≥15 eosinophils per high-power field (eos/hpf) (OR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.70–0.88), ≥45 eos/hpf (OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.61–0.93), ≥75 eos/hpf (OR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.50–1.03), and ≥90 eos/hpf (OR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.31–0.87) (P for trend <.001). A similar dose-response trend was observed for increasing clinical suspicion for EoE and decreasing prevalence of H pylori. Additionally, severity of histologic effects of H pylori was inversely associated with esophageal eosinophilia. All trends held in multivariate analysis. Conclusions: In a large cross-sectional analysis, H pylori infection was inversely associated with esophageal eosinophilia. This relationship could have implications for the pathogenesis and epidemiology of EoE. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Pediatric eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a newly recognized antigen-induced form of chronic esophagitis (CE). Objective: Characterization of long-term clinical outcomes in patients with pediatric EoE is needed. Methods: From histologic review of 3817 pediatric esophageal biopsy specimens from 1982-1999, we conducted a nested case-control study of patients with retrospectively identified histologic eosinophilic esophagitis (rEoE) and CE, as well as an age-matched control cohort. Participants were asked to complete validated health-related outcome questionnaires. Results: At an average of 15 years after initial endoscopy, both cohorts (42/198 patients with rEoE and 67/468 patients with CE, as well as 100 age-matched control subjects) completed questionnaires. Compared with control subjects, quality of life was significantly decreased among patients with rEoE (P < .001) and patients with CE (P < .001). Rates of dysphagia (patients with rEoE, 49%; patients with CE, 37%; control subjects, 6%) and food impaction (patients with rEoE, 40%; patients with CE, 14%; control subjects, 3%) were significantly increased in the rEoE cohort compared with those seen in control subjects (P < .001 and P < .001, respectively). Increased esophageal eosinophil counts (odds ratio [OR], 1.6; 95% CI, 1.1-2.5; P < .05) during childhood were predictive of dysphagia during early adulthood. Food allergy (OR, 2.7; 95% CI, 1.2-6.0; P < .01), allergic rhinitis (OR, 3.5; 95% CI, 1.8-6.8; P < .001), and asthma (OR, 2.1; 95% CI, 1.04-4.3; P = .04) were associated with dysphagia. Food impaction was more common among patients with reported food allergy than among those without (OR, 3.1; 95% CI, 1.2-7.8; P = .02). Conclusions: Esophageal eosinophilia is associated with reduced quality of life and persistent symptoms 15 years after presentation. Increased esophageal eosinophil counts and the occurrence of food allergy and atopy in childhood increase the rate of dysphagia in young adulthood. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic inflammatory disorder of the esophagus that is compounded by both genetic predisposition and aberrant responses to environmental antigens, particularly those that are food derived. Data have indicated a unique transcriptional response in vivo that defines EoE and that appears to be partially attributable to the TH2 cytokine IL-13. Moreover, a number of genetic risk variants in proinflammatory and epithelial cell genes associate with EoE susceptibility, demonstrating novel heritable mechanisms that contribute to disease risk. Here we discuss recent advances in our understanding of the intrinsic (genetic) and extrinsic (environmental) components that illustrate the complex nature of EoE. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background & Aims: Endoscopic findings have been used to support a diagnosis of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) and to assess response to therapy, but their reliability is unknown. The aim of the study was to assess inter- and intraobserver reliability of endoscopic findings with white-light endoscopy and to assess changes in interobserver reliability when narrow band imaging (NBI) was added to white light. Methods: We collected data from 35 academic and 42 community adult gastroenterologists using 2 self-administered, online assessments of endoscopic images in patients with suspected EoE. First, gastroenterologists evaluated 35 single white light images. Next, they examined 35 paired images of the initial white light image and its NBI counterpart. To assess intraobserver reliability, a second survey to re-examine the single white light images was performed ≥2 weeks later. Agreement was determined by calculating κ values for multiple observers. Results: Among all gastroenterologists, interobserver agreement was fair to good when white light was used to identify rings (κ = 0.56) and furrows (κ = 0.48). Interobserver agreement was poor for identification of plaques (κ = 0.29) and for images with no findings (κ = 0.34). Levels of agreement did not change in an analysis stratified by practice setting or patient volume. Agreement did not improve when NBI images were added to white light images. Levels of intraobserver agreement varied greatly and in some cases were not greater than those expected by chance. Conclusions: Using white light endoscopy and NBI to analyze EoE, gastroenterologists identified rings and furrows with fair to good reliability, but did not reliably identify plaques or normal images. Intraobserver agreement varied. Endoscopic findings might not be reliable for supporting a diagnosis of EoE or for making treatment decisions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background & Aims: Despite consensus recommendations, eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is commonly diagnosed upon esophageal eosinophilic infiltration (EEI; based on ≥15 eosinophils per high power field; eo/HPF). We evaluated the prevalence of EEI before and after proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy and assessed the accuracy of EEI and pH monitoring analyses. Methods: Biopsies were taken from the upper-middle esophagus of 712 adults with upper gastrointestinal symptoms who were referred for endoscopy due to upper gastrointestinal symptoms. Patients with EEI were treated with rabeprazole (20 mg, twice daily) for 2 months. EoE was defined by persistent symptoms and >15 eo/HPF following PPI therapy. Results: Thirty-five patients (4.9%) had EEI, of whom 55% had a history of allergies, and 70% had food impaction or dysphagia as their primary complaint. Twenty-six EEI patients (75%) achieved clinicopathological remission with PPI therapy; of these, 17 had GERD-like profile (EEI <35 eo/HPF and objective evidence of reflux, based on endoscopy or pH monitoring), and 9 had EoE-like profile (EEI 35–165 eo/HPF, typical EoE symptoms and endoscopic findings). The PPI response was 50% in the EoE-like profile patients. The PPI-response was 50% in EoE-like profile patients. Likewise, PPI-responsive EEI occurred with normal (33%) and pathologic (80%) pH monitoring. Higher histologic cut-off values improved specificity and positive predictive for EoE (35%–35% for >20 eo/HPF; 46%–39% for >24 eo/HPF; 65%–50% for 35 eo/HPF). Conclusions: In adults with EEI, 75% of unselected patients and 50% with an EoE phenotype respond to PPI therapy; pH monitoring is poorly predictive of response. Patients with PPI-responsive EEI >35 eo/HPF are phenotypically undistinguishable from EoE patients. EoE might be overestimated without clinical and pathologic follow-up of patient response to PPI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic inflammatory condition that can be complicated by esophageal strictures requiring endoscopic dilation. Whereas recent data have advanced the notion that dilation can be done effectively with minimal morbidity, issues concerning safety and tolerability remain. Objective: To review our initial experience with a novel esophageal balloon pull-through technique for sizing and dilation in EoE as well as to present a illustrating the methodology. Design: Case series. Setting: Tertiary-care referral center. Patients: Thirteen patients with EoE. Intervention: Balloon pull-through technique for esophageal dilation. Main Outcome Measurements: Dilation effect, size, and complications (esophageal perforation, bleeding requiring endoscopic hemostasis, or severe chest pain requiring hospitalization). Results: Thirteen patients (7 men, 6 women; mean age 40 years, range 19-66 years) with EoE underwent dilation with the esophageal balloon pull-through technique. Resistance during the pull-through was encountered in 11 patients (85%), even though no discrete areas of narrowing were encountered. A tear was achieved in 9 patients (69%). Nine patients (69%) reported improvement in their dysphagia after dilation. There were no serious complications from the procedure. Limitations: Retrospective, single center, small patient numbers in this initial report. Conclusions: The esophageal balloon pull-through technique for esophageal dilation in patients with EoE appears to be safe and effective. It is a rational approach to gauging the luminal diameter of the esophagus and treating strictures in patients with EoE and dysphagia, but further prospective study is required to confirm these initial results. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background: Several small series have suggested an increased risk of complications associated with esophageal dilation in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). Objective: To quantitate the risk and identify risk factors for esophageal complications in dilation in EoE patients. Design: Retrospective, uncontrolled, single-center study. Setting: Tertiary referral hospital. Patients: A total of 161 EoE patients (mean ± standard deviation age 44.3 ± 15.3 years, 112 men, 49 women, 150 white patients, 10 unknown, 1 Asian). Interventions: Through-the-scope balloon or Savary dilation of EoE. Main Outcome Measurements: The rate of complications defined as deep mucosal tear, major bleeding, or perforation, and determination of risk factors for complications. Results: A total of 293 dilations were performed in 161 patients. Complications reported were deep mucosal tear in 9.2% (n = 27), major bleeding in 0.3% (n = 1), and immediate perforation in 1.0% (n = 3). All patients with perforations were successfully treated medically without surgery (mean ± standard deviation hospital stay 5.3 ± 3.2 days). Factors associated with an increased risk of complications were luminal narrowing in the upper (odds ratio [OR], 5.62; 95% CI, 2.07-15.26; P < .001) and middle third of the esophagus (OR, 4.93; 95% CI, 1.64-14.83; P < .005) compared with lower third, luminal stricture unable to be traversed with a standard upper endoscope (OR, 2.48; 95% CI, 1.06-5.83; P = .037), and use of Savary dilator (OR, 2.63; 95% CI, 1.18-5.83; P = .018). Limitations: Retrospective design, uncontrolled study. Conclusions: Deep mucosal tears are common after dilation (9%), but the risk of immediate transluminal perforation with EoE is approximately 1%. The risk of severe complications is increased in patients with more proximal stricture and strictures that initially prevent endoscope passage. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background & Aims: This study aimed to analyze the mechanical properties of the esophagus in eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) using the functional luminal imaging probe (EndoFLIP; Crospon Medical Devices, Galway, Ireland). Methods: Thirty-three EoE patients (22 male; age range, 23–67 years) and 15 controls (6 male; age range, 21–68 years) were included. Subjects were evaluated during endoscopy with the EndoFLIP probe, comprised of a compliant cylindrical bag (maximal diameter 25 mm) with 16 impedance planimetry segments. Stepwise bag distensions from 2 to 40 mL were conducted and the associated intrabag pressure and intraluminal geometry were analyzed. Results: The EndoFLIP clearly displayed the tubular esophageal geometry and detected esophageal narrowing and localized strictures. Stepwise distension progressively opened the esophageal lumen until a distension plateau was reached such that the narrowest cross-sectional area (CSA) of the esophagus maximized despite further increases in intra-bag pressure. The esophageal distensibility (CSA vs pressure) was reduced in EoE patients (P = .02) with the distension plateau of EoE patients substantially lower than that of controls (median: CSA 267 mm2 vs 438 mm2; P < .01). Mucosal eosinophil count, age, sex, and current proton pump inhibitor treatment did not predict this limiting caliber of the esophagus (P ≥ 0.20). Conclusions: Esophageal distensibility, defined by the change in the narrowest measurable CSA within the distal esophagus vs intraluminal pressure was significantly reduced in EoE patients compared with controls. Measuring esophageal distensibility may be an important adjunct to the management of EoE, as it is capable of providing an objective means to measure the outcomes of medical or dilation therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background & Aims: Features of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) overlap; because they cannot be differentiated on the basis of eosinophil counts alone, it can be a challenge to distinguish these disorders. We aimed to characterize the clinical, endoscopic, and histologic features of EoE and GERD and to identify factors that might be used to differentiate them. Methods: We performed a retrospective case-control study on data collected from 2000 to 2007. Cases were patients of any age with EoE, as defined by recent consensus guidelines; controls were patients of any age with GERD. Clinical and endoscopic data were collected, and all esophageal biopsy specimens were reassessed by gastrointestinal pathologists. Cases and controls were compared, unconditional logistic regression was performed to develop a model to predict EoE, and receiver operator characteristic curves were constructed. Results: Data from 151 patients with EoE and 226 with GERD were analyzed. Compared with GERD, features that independently predicted EoE included younger age; symptoms of dysphagia; documented food allergies; observations of esophageal rings, linear furrows, white plaques, or exudates by upper endoscopy; an absence of a hiatal hernia, observed by upper endoscopy; a higher maximum eosinophil count; and the presence of eosinophil degranulation observed in biopsy specimens. The area under the curve for this model was 0.934. Conclusions: We identified a set of readily available and routinely measured variables that differentiate EoE from GERD. Use of this type of analysis with patients suspected to have EoE might lead to more accurate diagnoses. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background & Aims: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) in adults, characterized by the triad of dysphagia, a ringed esophagus, and mucosal eosinophilic infiltration, has associated complications that include vertical mucosal lacerations, instrumental perforation, and emesis-induced rupture. The aim of this study was to determine whether clinical, endoscopic, and histologic features can be used to predict the risk for development of these complications. Methods: A review was conducted of 36 patients with EoE. Complications were defined as mucosal lacerations or radiographic evidence of perforation. Results: The mean age at presentation was 33.9 years. Twenty-eight (78%) patients were men. Complications occurred in 11 patients (31%). There were 7 mucosal lacerations, 3 perforations, and 1 emesis-induced rupture. Strictures were reported in 7 of 11 complicated cases compared with 2 of 25 of uncomplicated cases. Dilatation procedures had been performed in 6 of 7 complicated cases associated with stricture. Biopsy specimens obtained from 7 of 9 patients with complications showed 40 or more eosinophils/high-power field. There were no statistical differences between complicated and uncomplicated patients regarding demographics, clinical features, endoscopic characteristics, or histopathologic findings. Conclusions: EoE is a high-risk disorder with a range of complications. Although demographics, clinical presentation, and endoscopic features cannot distinguish risk, the presence of stricture, a longer duration of symptoms, and a greater density of eosinophilic infiltration suggest increased risk. The density of eosinophilic infiltration cannot be determined prospectively; therefore, the performance of endoscopy and subsequent dilatation should be deferred until biopsy specimens are reviewed or treatment is completed. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background & Aims: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a disorder characterized by a severe, isolated eosinophilic infiltration of the esophagus unresponsive to aggressive acid blockade but responsive to the removal of dietary antigens. We present information relating to our 10-year experience in children diagnosed with EoE. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study between January 1, 1994, and January 1, 2004, to evaluate all patients diagnosed with EoE. Clinical symptoms, demographic data, endoscopic findings, and the results of various treatment regimens were collected and evaluated. Results: A total of 381 patients (66% male, age 9.1 ± 3.1 years) were diagnosed with EoE: 312 presented with symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux; 69 presented with dysphagia. Endoscopically, 68% of patients had a visually abnormal esophagus; 32% had a normal-appearing esophagus despite a severe histologic esophageal eosinophilia. The average number of esophageal eosinophils (per 400× high power field) proximally and distally were 23.3 ± 10.5 and 38.7 ± 13.3, respectively. Corticosteroids significantly improved clinical symptoms and esophageal histology; however, upon their withdrawal, the symptoms and esophageal eosinophilia recurred. Dietary restriction or complete dietary elimination using an amino acid–based formula significantly improved both the clinical symptoms and esophageal histology in 75 and 172 patients, respectively. Conclusions: Medications such as corticosteroids are effective; however, upon withdrawal, EoE recurs. The removal of dietary antigens significantly improved clinical symptoms and esophageal histology in 98% of patients. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background & Aims: Endoscopic findings such as esophageal rings, strictures, narrow-caliber esophagus, linear furrows, white plaques, and pallor or decreased vasculature might indicate the presence of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). We aimed to determine the prevalence and diagnostic utility of endoscopic features of EoE. Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis. PubMed, EMBASE, and gastrointestinal meeting abstracts were searched to identify studies that included more than 10 patients with EoE and reported endoscopic findings. Pooled prevalence, sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values were calculated using random- and mixed-effects models. Results: The search yielded 100 articles and abstracts on 4678 patients with EoE and 2742 without (controls). In subjects with EoE, the overall pooled prevalence was as follows: esophageal rings, 44%; strictures, 21%; narrow-caliber esophagus, 9%; linear furrows, 48%; white plaques, 27%; and pallor/decreased vasculature, 41%. Substantial heterogeneity existed among studies. Results from endoscopy examinations were normal in 17% of patients, but this number decreased to 7% when the analysis was limited to prospective studies (P < .05). Overall levels of sensitivity were modest, ranging from 15% to 48%, whereas levels of specificity were greater, ranging from 90% to 95%. Positive predictive values ranged from 51% to 73% and negative predictive values ranged from 74% to 84%. Conclusions: There is heterogeneity among studies in the reported prevalence of endoscopic findings in patients with EoE, but in prospective studies at least 1 abnormality was detected by endoscopy in 93% of patients. The operating characteristics of endoscopic findings alone are inadequate for diagnosis of EoE. Esophageal biopsy specimens should be obtained from all patients with clinical features of EoE, regardless of the endoscopic appearance of the esophagus. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We performed a randomized trial to compare nebulized and viscous topical corticosteroid treatments for eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). Subjects with incident EoE (n = 25) received budesonide 1 mg twice daily, either nebulized and then swallowed (NEB) or as an oral viscous slurry (OVB), for 8 weeks. Baseline eosinophil counts for the NEB and OVB groups were 101 and 83 (P = .62). Posttreatment counts were 89 and 11 (P = .02). The mucosal medication contact time, measured by scintigraphy, was higher for the OVB group than the NEB group (P < .005) and was inversely correlated with eosinophil count (R = −0.67; P = .001). OVB was more effective than NEB in reducing numbers of esophageal eosinophils in patients with EoE. OVB provided a significantly higher level of esophageal exposure to the therapeutic agent, which correlated with lower eosinophil counts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic inflammatory disease with isolated eosinophils in the esophagus predominantly triggered by foods. The optimal testing to identify inciting foods remains unclear. Objectives: We sought to determine the effectiveness of allergy testing–directed diets in patients with EoE. Methods: A retrospective analysis of all children with EoE seen at the Children''s Hospital of Philadelphia between 2000 and 2011 identified 941 patients with EoE. Skin prick tests (SPTs) and atopy patch tests (APTs) were conducted, and predictive values were calculated. IgE-mediated food reactions were also identified. A food was considered to cause EoE if its elimination led to resolution of esophageal eosinophilia or reintroduction led to reoccurrence of EoE. The effectiveness of the various elimination diets was compared with targeted food antigen elimination. Results: Definitive foods causing EoE were identified, with milk, egg, wheat, and soy as the most common foods in 319 patients. IgE-mediated reactions (urticaria and anaphylaxis) were seen in 15%. The negative predictive value for the combination of SPTs and APTs averaged 92%, with the exception of milk at 44%, and the positive predictive value averaged 44%. An empiric 6-food elimination diet or removal of positive foods on allergy testing (SPTs/APTs) both had a histologic success rate of 53%. Removal of foods identified on SPTs/APTs plus empiric elimination of milk leads to resolution in 77% of patients. Conclusion: An elimination diet based on SPT/APT results leads to resolution of esophageal eosinophilia in a similar proportion of patients as empiric removal of foods but required that fewer foods be removed. These observations suggest that both methods are acceptable options. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background & Aims: We evaluated the effect of aerosolized fluticasone therapy on symptomatic dysphagia and histologic eosinophilia in adults with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). Methods: We performed a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of fluticasone in 42 adult patients with a new diagnosis of EoE (30 men; mean age, 37.5 y). Participants were assigned randomly to groups that swallowed 880 μg of aerosolized fluticasone twice daily (n = 21), or took a placebo inhaler twice daily (n = 15) for 6 weeks. End points of the study were symptomatic and histologic response. Results: A complete histologic response (>90% decrease in mean eosinophil count) was observed in 11 of 15 subjects who received 6 weeks of fluticasone (62%), compared with none of the 15 subjects who received placebo (P < .001), based on intention-to-treat analysis; histologic responses were observed in 68% of subjects who received fluticasone (13 of 19) compared with none of those who received placebo (0 of 15) by per-protocol analysis (P < .001). Intracellular staining for eosinophil-derived neurotoxin was reduced in 81% of subjects who received fluticasone (13 of 16) compared with 8% who received placebo (1 of 13) (P < .001). Dysphagia was reduced in 57% of subjects who received fluticasone (12 of 21) compared with 33% who received placebo (7 of 21) (P = .22) by intention-to-treat analysis; dysphagia was reduced in 63% of patients who received fluticasone (12 of 19) and 47% of those who received placebo (7 of 15) (P = .49) based on per-protocol analysis. Esophageal candidiasis developed in 26% of subjects who received fluticasone (5 of 19), but in none of the subjects in the placebo group (P = .05). Conclusions: Aerosolized, swallowed fluticasone leads to a histologic but not a symptomatic response in adults with EoE. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background & Aims: Adults with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) typically present with dysphagia and food impaction. A 6-food elimination diet (SFED) is effective in children with EoE. We assessed the effects of the SFED followed by food reintroduction on the histologic response, symptoms, and quality of life in adults with EoE. Methods: At the start of the study, 50 adults with EoE underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopies (EGDs), biopsies, and skin-prick tests for food and aeroallergens. After 6 weeks of SFED, patients underwent repeat EGD and biopsies. Histologic responders, defined by ≤5 eosinophils/high-power field (eos/hpf) (n = 32), underwent systematic reintroduction of foods followed by EGD and biopsies (n = 20). Symptom and quality of life scores were determined before and after SFED. Results: Common symptoms of EoE included dysphagia (96%), food impaction (74%), and heartburn (94%). The mean peak eosinophil counts in the proximal esophagus were 34 eos/hpf and 8 eos/hpf, before and after the SFED, and 44 eos/hpf and 13 eos/hpf in the distal esophagus, respectively (P < .0001). After the SFED, 64% of patients had peak counts ≤5 eos/hpf and 70% had peak counts of ≤10 eos/hpf. Symptom scores decreased in 94% (P < .0001). After food reintroduction, esophageal eosinophil counts returned to pretreatment values (P < .0001). Based on reintroduction, the foods most frequently associated with EoE were wheat (60% of cases) and milk (50% of cases). Skin-prick testing predicted only 13% of foods associated with EoE. Conclusions: An elimination diet significantly improves symptoms and reduces endoscopic and histopathologic features of EoE in adults. Food reintroduction re-initiated features of EoE in patients, indicating a role for food allergens in its pathogenesis. Foods that activated EoE were identified by systematic reintroduction analysis but not by skin-prick tests. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Mechanisms underlying esophageal remodeling with subepithelial fibrosis in subjects with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) have not been delineated. Objectives: We sought to explore a role for epithelial mesenchymal transition (EMT) in subjects with EoE and determine whether EMT resolves with treatment. Methods: Esophageal biopsy specimens from 60 children were immunostained for epithelial (cytokeratin) and mesenchymal (vimentin) EMT biomarkers, and EMT was quantified. Subjects studied had EoE (n = 17), indeterminate EoE (n = 15), gastroesophageal reflux disease (n = 7), or normal esophagus (n = 21). EMT was analyzed for relationships to diagnosis, eosinophil counts, and indices of subepithelial fibrosis, eosinophil peroxidase, and TGF-β immunostaining. EMT was assessed in pretreatment and posttreatment biopsy specimens from 18 subjects with EoE treated with an elemental diet, 6-food elimination diet, or topical corticosteroids (n = 6 per group). Results: TGF-β1 treatment of esophageal epithelial cells in vitro for 24 hours induced upregulation of mesenchymal genes characteristic of EMT, including N-cadherin (3.3-fold), vimentin (2.1-fold), and fibronectin (7.5-fold). EMT in esophageal biopsy specimens was associated with EoE (or indeterminate EoE) but not gastroesophageal reflux disease or normal esophagus and was correlated to eosinophil counts (r = 0.691), eosinophil peroxidase (r = 0.738), and TGF-β (r = 0.520) immunostaining and fibrosis (r = 0.644) indices. EMT resolved with EoE treatments that induced clinicopathologic remission with reduced eosinophil counts. EMT decreased significantly after treatment by 74.1% overall in the 18 treated subjects with EoE; pretreatment versus posttreatment EMT scores were 3.17 ± 0.82 versus 0.82 ± 0.39 (P < .001), with similar decreases within treatment groups. Pretreatment/posttreatment EMT was strongly correlated with eosinophil counts for combined (r = 0.804, P < .001) and individual treatment groups. Conclusions: EMT likely contributes to subepithelial fibrosis in subjects with EoE and resolves with treatments that decrease esophageal inflammation, and its resolution correlates with decreased numbers of esophageal eosinophils. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background: The role of microRNAs (miRNAs), a key class of regulators of mRNA expression and translation, in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) has not been explored. Objective: We aimed to identify miRNAs dysregulated in patients with EoE and assess the potential of these miRNAs as disease biomarkers. Methods: Esophageal miRNA expression was profiled in patients with active EoE and those with glucocorticoid-induced disease remission. Expression profiles were compared with those of healthy control subjects and patients with chronic (noneosinophilic) esophagitis. Expression levels of the top differentially expressed miRNAs from the plasma of patients with active EoE and patients with EoE remission were compared with those of healthy control subjects. Results: EoE was associated with 32 differentially regulated miRNAs and was distinguished from noneosinophilic forms of esophagitis. The expression levels of the most upregulated miRNAs (miR-21 and miR-223) and the most downregulated miRNA (miR-375) strongly correlated with esophageal eosinophil levels. Bioinformatic analysis predicted interplay of miR-21 and miR-223 with key roles in the polarization of adaptive immunity and regulation of eosinophilia, and indeed, these miRNAs correlated with key elements of the EoE transcriptome. The differentially expressed miRNAs were largely reversible in patients who responded to glucocorticoid treatment. EoE remission induced a single miRNA (miR-675) likely to be involved in DNA methylation. Plasma analysis of the most upregulated esophageal miRNAs identified miR-146a, miR-146b, and miR-223 as the most differentially expressed miRNAs in the plasma. Conclusions: We have identified a marked dysregulated expression of a select group of miRNAs in patients with EoE and defined their reversibility with glucocorticoid treatment and their potential value as invasive and noninvasive biomarkers. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a clinicopathologic condition of increasing recognition and prevalence. In 2007, a consensus recommendation provided clinical and histopathologic guidance for the diagnosis and treatment of EoE; however, only a minority of physicians use the 2007 guidelines, which require fulfillment of both histologic and clinical features. Since 2007, the number of EoE publications has doubled, providing new disease insight. Accordingly, a panel of 33 physicians with expertise in pediatric and adult allergy/immunology, gastroenterology, and pathology conducted a systematic review of the EoE literature (since September 2006) using electronic databases. Based on the literature review and expertise of the panel, information and recommendations were provided in each of the following areas of EoE: diagnostics, genetics, allergy testing, therapeutics, and disease complications. Because accumulating animal and human data have provided evidence that EoE appears to be an antigen-driven immunologic process that involves multiple pathogenic pathways, a new conceptual definition is proposed highlighting that EoE represents a chronic, immune/antigen-mediated disease characterized clinically by symptoms related to esophageal dysfunction and histologically by eosinophil-predominant inflammation. The diagnostic guidelines continue to define EoE as an isolated chronic disorder of the esophagus diagnosed by the need of both clinical and pathologic features. Patients commonly have high rates of concurrent allergic diatheses, especially food sensitization, compared with the general population. Proved therapeutic options include chronic dietary elimination, topical corticosteroids, and esophageal dilation. Important additions since 2007 include genetic underpinnings that implicate EoE susceptibility caused by polymorphisms in the thymic stromal lymphopoietin protein gene and the description of a new potential disease phenotype, proton pump inhibitor-responsive esophageal eosinophila. Further advances and controversies regarding diagnostic methods, surrogate disease markers, allergy testing, and treatment approaches are discussed. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Backround & Aims: Topical corticosteroids are effective in inducing clinical and histologic remission in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). However, the best long-term management strategy for this chronic inflammatory disease has not been determined. Methods: In a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 50-week trial, we evaluated in 28 patients the efficacy of twice-daily swallowed budesonide (0.25 mg each) to maintain quiescent EoE in remission. Pretreatment and posttreatment activity was assessed clinically, endoscopically, histologically, immunohistologically, and by endosonography. The primary end point was the therapy''s ability to maintain EoE in histologic remission. Secondary end points were efficacy in symptom control, prevention of tissue remodeling, and safety. Results: In patients given low-dose budesonide, the load of esophageal eosinophils increased from 0.4 to 31.8 eosinophils/high-power field (P = .017). In patients given placebo, the load increased from 0.7 to 65.0 eosinophils/high-power field (P = .0001); this increase was significantly greater than in patients given budesonide (P = .024). The symptom scores developed in a similar manner in the 2 groups. Budesonide, but not placebo, reduced noneosinophilic markers of inflammation, epithelial cell apoptosis, and remodeling events. Compared with control individuals, patients had significantly thickened esophageal walls, based on endosonography (3.05 vs 2.18 mm; P < .0001). Budesonide therapy was associated with a significant reduction in mucosal thickness (0.75–0.45 mm; P = .025), but epithelial thickness remained stable (261.22 vs 277.23 μm; P = .576). No serious adverse events occurred. Conclusions: Low-dose budesonide is more effective than placebo in maintaining EoE in histologic and clinical remission. Signs of esophageal remodeling showed a trend toward normalization. Long-term administration of topical corticosteroids was well tolerated without induction of epithelial atrophy. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background & Aims: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic inflammatory disease of the esophagus characterized by dense tissue eosinophilia; it is refractory to proton pump inhibitor therapy. EoE affects all age groups but most frequently individuals between 20 and 50 years of age. Topical corticosteroids are effective in pediatric patients with EoE, but no controlled studies of corticosteroids have been reported in adult patients. Methods: We performed a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to evaluate the effect of oral budesonide (1 mg twice daily for 15 days) in adolescent and adult patients with active EoE. Pretreatment and posttreatment disease activity was assessed clinically, endoscopically, and histologically. The primary end point was reduced mean numbers of eosinophils in the esophageal epithelium (number per high-power field [hpf] = esophageal eosinophil load). Esophageal biopsy and blood samples were analyzed using immunofluorescence and immunoassays, respectively, for biomarkers of inflammation and treatment response. Results: A 15-day course of therapy significantly decreased the number of eosinophils in the esophageal epithelium in patients given budesonide (from 68.2 to 5.5 eosinophils/hpf; P < .0001) but not in the placebo group (from 62.3 to 56.5 eosinophils/hpf; P = .48). Dysphagia scores significantly improved among patients given budesonide compared with those given placebo (5.61 vs 2.22; P < .0001). White exudates and red furrows were reversed in patients given budesonide, based on endoscopy examination. Budesonide, but not placebo, also reduced apoptosis of epithelial cells and molecular remodeling events in the esophagus; no serious adverse events were observed. Conclusions: A 15-day course of treatment with budesonide is well tolerated and highly effective in inducing a histologic and clinical remission in adolescent and adult patients with active EoE. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background & Aims: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is caused by immunologic reactions to ingested/inhaled allergens. The diagnosis is considered if ≥15 eosinophils per high-powered field (eos/hpf) are detected in mucosal biopsies. Placebo-controlled studies have not been conducted to evaluate the safety and efficacy of oral viscous budesonide (OVB). Methods: Children with EoE were randomly assigned to groups that were given OVB (n = 15) or placebo (n = 9). Patients <5 feet and ≥5 feet tall received 1 mg and 2 mg OVB daily, respectively. All patients received lansoprazole. Duration of treatment was 3 months, followed by repeat endoscopy and biopsies. Patients were classified as responders if their peak eosinophil counts were ≤6 eos/hpf, partial responders were 7–19 eos/hpf, and nonresponders were ≥20 eos/hpf. Baseline and post-treatment symptoms and endoscopic and histologic features were scored. Results: Thirteen (86.7%) children given OVB (P < .0001) and none who received placebo (P = .3) were classified as responders. Mean pre-/post-treatment peak eosinophil counts were 66.7 and 4.8 eos/hpf, respectively, in the group given OVB (P < .0001); they were 83.9 and 65.6 eos/hpf, respectively, in the group given placebo (P = .3). In the group given OVB, there were significant reductions from baseline values in proximal (P = .002), mid (P = .0003), and distal (P = .001) esophageal eosinophilia. After OVB therapy, compared with baseline, the mean symptom (P = .0007), endoscopy (P = .0005), and histology scores improved (P = .0035) significantly. Conclusions: OVB is an effective treatment of pan-esophageal disease in children with EoE. OVB improves symptoms and endoscopic and histologic features. Proton pump inhibitor single therapy did not significantly improve esophageal eosinophilia or symptoms of EoE. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background & Aims: Quantitative microarray analyses have shown increased expression of interleukin-15 (IL-15) messenger RNA in the esophagus of patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), a recently recognized allergic disorder with poorly understood pathogenesis. Methods: Quantitative polymerase chain reaction and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay analyses were performed to examine protein and transcript levels in tissue samples from patients with EoE. Tissues from IL-15Ra–deficient and wild-type (control) mice were also examined. Tissue eosinophilia was determined by immunostaining for major basic protein and flow cytometry for cell-surface receptors. Results: Quantitative polymerase chain reaction analyses showed that levels of IL-15 and its receptor IL-15Ra were increased ∼6- and ∼10-fold, respectively, in tissues from patients with EoE and ∼3- and ∼4-fold, respectively, in mice with allergen-induced EoE. A >2-fold increase in serum IL-15 protein levels was also detected in human EoE samples compared with those from healthy individuals. Human IL-15 messenger RNA levels correlated with esophageal eosinophilia (P < .001). IL-15Ra–deficient mice were protected from allergen-induced esophageal eosinophilia compared with controls (P < .001), even though similar levels of airway eosinophilia were observed in all mice. IL-15 activated STAT5 and CD4+ T cells to produce cytokines that act on eosinophils. Incubation of primary esophageal epithelial cells from mice and humans with IL-15 caused a dose-dependent increase in the mRNA expression and protein levels of eotaxin-1, -2, and -3. Conclusions: IL-15 mediates in the pathogenesis of EoE. IL-15 activates CD4+ T cells to produce cytokines that act on eosinophils. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background & Aims: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is characterized by medically/surgically-resistant gastroesophageal reflux symptoms and dense squamous eosinophilia. Studies suggest that histologic assessment of esophageal eosinophilia alone cannot reliably separate patients with EoE from those with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Our goal was to develop an assay to identify EoE patients and perhaps differentiate EoE from other causes of esophageal eosinophilia. Methods: A monoclonal antibody specific for an eosinophil secondary granule protein (eosinophil peroxidase [EPX]) was developed and shown to specifically identify intact eosinophils and detect eosinophil degranulation in formalin-fixed specimens. A histopathologic scoring algorithm was developed to analyze data from patient evaluations; the utility of this algorithm was assessed by using archived esophageal tissues from patients with known diagnoses of EoE and GERD as well as controls from 2 tertiary care centers. Results: Intraobserver/interobserver blinded evaluations demonstrated a significant difference (P < .001) between scores of samples taken from control subjects, from patients with esophageal eosinophilia who had a diagnosis of EoE, and from patients with GERD (P < .001). This algorithm also was able to identify patients whose clinical course was suggestive of a diagnosis of EoE, but that nonetheless failed to reach the critical threshold number of ≥15 eosinophils in a high-power (40×) microscopy field. Conclusions: A novel immunohistochemical scoring system was developed to address an unmet medical need to differentiate histologic specimens from patients with EoE relative to those with GERD. The availability of a unique anti-EPX–specific monoclonal antibody, combined with the ease/rapidity of this staining method and scoring system, will provide a valuable strategy for the assessment of esophageal eosinophilia. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background & Aims: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is characterized by eosinophilic infiltration of the esophagus. The purpose of this prospective study was to determine the prevalence and clinical predictors of EoE in patients undergoing elective upper endoscopy. Methods: We enrolled 400 consecutive adults (median age, 50 years; range, 19–92 years) who underwent routine upper endoscopy from March to September 2007 at a tertiary care military hospital. All patients completed a symptom questionnaire. All endoscopic findings were noted. Eight biopsies were obtained from proximal and distal esophagus and were reviewed by a blinded gastrointestinal pathologist. Patients had EoE if ≥20 eosinophils/high-power field were present. Results: The prevalence of EoE in this cohort was 6.5% (25/385; 95% confidence interval, 4.3%–9.4%). Compared with EoE negative patients, EoE positive patients were more likely to be male (80.0% vs 48.1%, P = .003), younger than 50 years (72.0% vs 48.9%, P = .037), and have asthma (32.0% vs 10.8%, P = .006), a food impaction (32.0% vs 8.9%, P = .002), dysphagia (64.0% vs 38.1%, P = .018), and classic endoscopic findings (rings, furrows, plaques, or strictures) of EoE (all P < .01). Logistic regression identified asthma (odds ratio [OR], 4.48), male gender (OR, 4.23), and esophageal rings (OR, 13.1) as independent predictors of EoE. The presence of classic endoscopic findings of EoE had a sensitivity of 72% (54%–88%), specificity of 89% (87%–90%), and negative predictive value of 98% (95.6%–99.1%). Conclusions: The prevalence of EoE in an outpatient population undergoing upper endoscopy was 6.5%. The characteristic findings of EoE patients included male gender, history of asthma, and the presence of classic findings of EoE on endoscopy, which is the strongest predictor of this disease process. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]