Search

Background: Primary eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorders (EGIDs) constitute chronic allergic inflammation. The number of eosinophils is one of the diagnostic criteria; more than 20 eosinophils per high-power field (HPF) in the gastrointestinal (GI) tract are considered abnormal in Japan. However, the quantity of eosinophils considered normal varies according to anatomical location and geographical region; such values have not been reported in Japanese pediatric patients, nor have the numbers of lymphocytes in the normal pediatric stomach. To establish a reference for defining diagnostic criteria for EGIDs, we evaluated the number of eosinophils in the normal Japanese pediatric GI tract., Methods: We examined 131 biopsy cases without significant clinical history, endoscopic abnormality, or histological abnormality. Immunohistochemical analysis of CD3 and CD20 was performed., Results: The mean eosinophil density was highest in the cecum (49.5 ± 22.4 per HPF). Counts of more than 20 eosinophils per HPF were observed in the duodenum [bulb (20.0 ± 9.6) and second portion (30.0 ± 15.8)], terminal ileum (38.3 ± 22.7), cecum (49.5 ± 22.4), ascending colon (42.3 ± 25.3), transverse colon (29.4 ± 17.0), and descending colon (32.2 ± 17.9). Counts of fewer than 10 eosinophils per HPF were observed in the stomach and rectum; a count of fewer than one eosinophil per HPF was observed in the esophagus. More than 100 CD3-positive T cells per HPF were observed in the stomach., Conclusions: The mean numbers of eosinophils in the bowel were greater than 20 per HPF. For Japanese pediatrics, the current threshold eosinophil count should be revised., (© 2022. Children's Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine.)

Summary: Background: Data on the role of the microbiome in adult patients with eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE) are limited. Aims: To prospectively collect and characterise the salivary, oesophageal and gastric microbiome in patients with EoE, further correlating the findings with disease activity. Methods: Adult patients with symptoms of oesophageal dysfunction undergoing upper endoscopy were consecutively enrolled. Patients were classified as EoE patients, in case of more than 15 eosinophils per high‐power field, or non‐EoE controls, in case of lack of eosinophilic infiltration. Before and during endoscopy, saliva, oesophageal and gastric fundus biopsies were collected. Microbiota assessment was performed by 16 s rRNA analysis. A Sparse Partial Least Squares Discriminant Analysis (sPLS‐DA) was implemented to identify biomarkers. Results: Saliva samples were collected from 29 EoE patients and 20 non‐EoE controls;, biopsies from 25 EoE and 5 non‐EoE controls. In saliva samples, 23 Amplicon Sequence Variants (ASVs) were positively associated with EoE and 27 ASVs with controls, making it possible to discriminate between EoE and non‐EoE patients with a classification error (CE) of 24%. In a validation cohort, the accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of this model were 78.6%, 80%, 75%, 80% and 60%, respectively. Moreover, the analysis of oesophageal microbiota samples observed a clear microbial pattern able to discriminate between active and inactive EoE (CE = 8%). Conclusion: Our preliminary data suggest that salivary metabarcoding analysis in combination with machine learning approaches could become a valid, cheap, non‐invasive test to segregate between EoE and non‐EoE patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Gastrointestinal adverse events are common during oral immunotherapy (OIT) for food allergy and range from immediate IgE-mediated reactions to non-anaphylactic clinical presentations. This review aims to summarize recent findings on non-anaphylactic eosinophil-associated gastrointestinal adverse events during OIT. Two clinical presentations of non-anaphylactic eosinophil-associated gastrointestinal adverse events during OIT are identified, each with a different paradigm for treatment, and distinguished by their time of onset. In the first clinical entity, characterized by its onset early in the course of treatment, patients present with abdominal pain, nausea, and/or vomiting. The symptoms become evident typically within weeks to months of starting OIT. These symptoms, however, are not temporally related to the time of dose administration, as in the case of immediate IgE-mediated anaphylactic reactions. While esophageal biopsies, when performed, can demonstrate eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), baseline esophageal eosinophilia has also been observed in food allergic patients prior to OIT. A potential non-invasive biomarker, the peripheral absolute eosinophil count (AEC), often rises during these reactions and subsides after dose reduction and subsequent resolution of symptoms. OIT can usually then be resumed, albeit at a slower pace, without a recurrence of symptoms. Risk factors for development of symptoms early during OIT include a high starting dose and a baseline AEC of greater than 600. The second, and much less frequently encountered, non-anaphylactic gastrointestinal adverse event related to OIT, presents months to years after initiating OIT. In this latter group, patients present with the classical clinical symptoms and endoscopic findings of EoE. In contrast to the acute onset group, peripheral eosinophilia is usually not observed in these cases. This OIT-associated EoE has shown good response to standard EoE treatment approaches of proton pump inhibitors or swallowed steroids. Most patients with eosinophil-associated adverse reactions are able to continue OIT and remain desensitized. Treatment approaches depend on the specific subtype of these reactions and relate to the stages of OIT treatment., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases (EGIDs) are an emerging group of pathological entities characterized by an eosinophil-predominant infiltration of different tracts of the gut in the absence of secondary causes of eosinophilia. According to the specific tract of the gut involved, EGIDs can be classified into eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), eosinophilic gastritis (EoG), eosinophilic enteritis (EoN), and eosinophilic colitis (EoC). The epidemiology of EGIDs is evolving rapidly. EoE, once considered a rare disease, now has an incidence and prevalence of 7.7 new cases per 100,000 inhabitants per years and 34.4 cases per 100,000 inhabitants per year, respectively. Fewer data are available regarding non-EoE EGIDs, whose prevalence are estimated to range between 2.1 and 17.6 in 100,000 individuals, depending on age, sex, and ethnicity. Diagnosis requires the presence of suggestive symptoms, endoscopic biopsies showing abnormal values of eosinophils infiltrating the gut, and exclusion of secondary causes of eosinophilia. EoE typically presents with dysphagia and episodes of food bolus impactions, while EoG, EoN, and EoC may all present with abdominal pain and diarrhea, with or without other non-specific symptoms. In addition, although different EGIDs are currently classified as different entities, there may be overlap between different diseases in the same patient. Despite EGIDs being relatively novel pathological entities, the research on possible treatments is rapidly growing. In this regard, several randomized controlled trials are currently ongoing to investigate novel molecules, including ad-hoc steroid formulations, immunosuppressants, and mostly monoclonal antibodies that target the specific molecular mediators of EGIDs. This narrative review provides an up-to-date overview of available and investigational drugs for different EGIDs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Eosinophils in the esophageal epithelium are unevenly distributed in eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). Esophageal eosinophilia (EE) may be observable by endocytoscopy (EC). This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of EC for the diagnosis of EE. Methods: A total of 33 EoE patients underwent EC with methylene blue staining from March 2020 to April 2021. A total of 194 EC images with corresponding biopsies were obtained. Three findings of EC, increased squamous cells (item I), increased inflammatory cells (item II), and cells with bilobed nuclei (item III), were established. These findings were reviewed by two endoscopists to diagnose EE. Another four endoscopists reviewed the images for interobserver agreement. Results: When all three items were met by EC, the sensitivity and the accuracy for the diagnosis of EE were 88% and 76%, respectively. The integrated diagnostic odds ratios (ORs) for the diagnosis of EE of the four endoscopists were significant (OR: 3.98, 95% CI: 2.94–5.40, p < 0.001). The results were similar when only item III was met. Interobserver agreement was good for item III to diagnose EE (kappa value = 0.653). Discussion/Conclusion: The diagnostic performance of EC for EE is acceptable and has good interobserver agreement. It may be useful for targeted biopsy in EoE patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Asymptomatic esophageal eosinophilia (aEE) is a rare presentation, where patients have increased eosinophils in esophageal mucosa but lack any esophagus-related symptoms. Cases of aEE have only been documented in adults, and little is known about its clinical significance and whether treatment is warranted. We report a case of an 11-year-old patient with uncontrolled severe persistent asthma who underwent flexible bronchoscopy and upper endoscopy as a part of complete aerodigestive evaluation. Elevated intraepithelial eosinophils in the esophageal mucosa were noted, suggesting an aEE-like presentation. This case documents a pediatric patient with aEE and highlights the importance of combined aerodigestive assessment with pulmonology and gastroenterology teams for the evaluation of severe asthma. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The prevalence of diseases characterised by eosinophilia is on the rise, emphasising the importance of understanding the role of eosinophils in these conditions. Eosinophils are a subset of granulocytes that contribute to the body's defence against bacterial, viral, and parasitic infections, but they are also implicated in haemostatic processes, including immunoregulation and allergic reactions. They contain cytoplasmic granules which can be selectively mobilised and secrete specific proteins, including chemokines, cytokines, enzymes, extracellular matrix, and growth factors. There are multiple biological and emerging functions of these specialised immune cells, including cancer surveillance, tissue remodelling and development. Several oral diseases, including oral cancer, are associated with either tissue or blood eosinophilia; however, their exact mechanism of action in the pathogenesis of these diseases remains unclear. This review presents a comprehensive synopsis of the most recent literature for both clinicians and scientists in relation to eosinophils and oral diseases and reveals a significant knowledge gap in this area of research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Asthma is one of the most common allergic diseases affecting millions of people of all ages worldwide and in- fluencing socioeconomic issues. Asthma, particularly uncontrolled asthma, not only reduces the quality of life but is also a major cause of disability for employment. The current pharmacologic strategy to therapy consists mostly of inhaled glucocorticoids and β-agonists, as well as leukotriene antagonists, long-acting muscarinic antagonists, and oral corticosteroids. However, the conventional therapy may provide insufficient control of severe asthma and may induce a number of adverse effects when used long-term. These limitations prompted the development of targeted biological drugs that inhibit the mediators involved in T helper 2-inflammation, which is linked to the pathogenesis of asthma, such as interleukin 4, 5, 9, 13 and immunoglobulin E. In many individuals, biological treatment provides significant relief and allows for the reduction or elimination of oral corticosteroids without compromising asthma control. However, some patients do not improve to their full potential. The cause of this phenomenon is unknown and requires further investigation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Eosinophils are a type of granulocyte key to immune system modulation seen in a number of disease processes. Nearly every major organ system can be connected to peripheral eosinophilia through a number of different disease processes, ranging from benign conditions to malignancy. In this paper, we review both common and rare causes of peripheral eosinophilia, their symptoms, and a framework for the workup of peripheral eosinophilia of unknown etiology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) is defined as a Type 2 eosinophilic disease, while CRSsNP is considered a Type 1 neutrophilic disease. Since neutrophils are also activated in eosinophilic CRSwNP, the eosinophil–neutrophil dualism has been revaluated. Among the inflammatory cells infiltrating sinus-nasal tissues, the role of mast cells (MCs) is not already recognized, although Clinical-Cytological Grading, which defines the severity of CRSwNP, attributes to mixed eosinophil-MC forms of CRSwNP a greater risk of recurrence. We aimed to examine nasal polyps from both a cytological and histopathological point of view, to evaluate the presence and localization of MCs. Cytological and histological examination of 39 samples of nasal polyps were performed. Immunohistochemistry was used to evaluate the presence of Tryptase + CD117 + MCs, which were counted both in the epithelial layer and in the lamina propria. A statistically significant correlation was found between intraepithelial MCs and CRSwNP severity (p < 0.001) and between the total eosinophil count and the total mast cell count (p < 0.001). Cytological examination and immunohistochemistry were comparable in detecting the presence of intraepithelial MCs (p = 0.002). The histological cut-off of 6 intraepithelial MCs was identified to detect severe CRSwNP (p < 0.001). MCs have been shown to be located in the lamina propria of almost all eosinophilic nasal polyps without significantly affecting their severity. Intraepithelial MCs are associated with greater severity of CRSwNP. Histopathological criteria of the eosinophil-MC form of CRSwNP in addition to the eosinophilic one, should be defined to guarantee patients effective and tailored treatments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Elevated eosinophil counts in blood and tissue are a feature of many pathological processes. Eosinophils can migrate and accumulate in a wide variety of tissues and, by infiltrating a target organ, can mediate the development of several inflammatory diseases. The normalization of eosinophilia is a common biomarker of a treatable trait and can also be used as a prognostic and predictive biomarker since it implies a reduction in type 2 inflammation that contributes to disease pathogenesis. Biological therapies targeting this cell type and its proinflammatory mediators have been shown to be effective in the management of a number of eosinophilic diseases, and for this reason they constitute a potential common strategy in the treatment of patients with various multimorbidities that present with type 2 inflammation. Various biological options are available that could be used to simultaneously treat multiple target organs with a single drug, bearing in mind the need to offer personalized treatments under the umbrella of precisionmedicine in all patients with eosinophil-associated diseases (EADs). In addition to reviewing these issues, we also discuss a series of perspectives addressing the management of EAD patients from a multidisciplinary approach, with the collaboration of health professionals from different specialties who manage the different multimorbidities that frequently occur in these patients. We examine the basic principles of care that this multidisciplinary approach must cover and present a multidisciplinary expert opinion regarding the ideal management of patients with EADs, from diagnosis to therapeutic approach and follow-up. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Biomarkers of eosinophilic disease activity, especially in the context of novel therapies that reduce blood eosinophil counts, are an unmet need. Absolute eosinophil count (AEC) does not accurately reflect tissue eosinophilia or eosinophil activation. Therefore, the aims of this study were to compare the reliability of plasma and urine eosinophil major basic protein 1, eosinophil cationic protein, eosinophil‐derived neurotoxin (EDN), and eosinophil peroxidase measurement and to evaluate the usefulness of eosinophil granule protein (EGP) measurement for the assessment of disease activity in patients with eosinophil‐associated diseases treated with mepolizumab, benralizumab, or dexpramipexole. Methods: Eosinophil granule protein concentrations were measured in serum, plasma, and urine from healthy volunteers and patients with hypereosinophilic syndrome (HES), eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (EGPA), and eosinophilic asthma using a multiplex assay. Results: Urine EGP concentrations remained stable, whereas serum and plasma EGP concentrations increased significantly with delayed processing. Plasma (p) EDN, but not urine (u) EDN, concentration correlated with AEC and negatively correlated with prednisone dose. Both pEDN and uEDN decreased significantly following treatment of HES patients with benralizumab and EGPA patients with mepolizumab. uEDN appeared to increase with clinical relapse in both patient groups. Conclusions: Measurement of EGP in urine is noninvasive and unaffected by cellular lysis. Although plasma and urine EDN concentrations showed a similar pattern following benralizumab and mepolizumab treatment, the lack of correlation between AEC or prednisone dose and uEDN concentrations suggests that measurement of uEDN may provide a potential biomarker of disease activity in patients with HES and EGPA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The concept of gut‐to‐brain communication via microbial or inflammatory pathways is gaining increased attention but genuine pathology directly linking gut perturbation to anxiety is lacking. We hypothesized that duodenal eosinophilia, as known to occur in functional dyspepsia (FD), may be an underlying cause of anxiety and may help explain the striking association between FD and anxiety. Methods: Randomly selected subjects from the national population register of Sweden completed the validated Abdominal Symptom Questionnaire; 1000 completed esophagogastroduodenoscopy and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale questionnaire. Duodenal biopsies were obtained from 1st (D1) and 2nd portion (D2). Eligible subjects who underwent endoscopy (n = 887) were invited to participate in a 10‐year follow‐up study with the same questionnaires. Among endoscopy normal subjects, FD was identified by Rome criteria, and controls were symptom free. Duodenal eosinophilia was based on pre‐defined cut‐offs. Finding are reported as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence interval and p‐value. Results: The study population comprised 89 cases with FD and 124 healthy controls (mean age 62 years, SD 12, 34% male). Clinical anxiety at follow‐up was elevated in those with D1 eosinophilia at baseline considering either new‐onset anxiety (OR = 4.5, 95% CI 0.8, 23.8; p = 0.08) or follow‐up anxiety adjusting for baseline anxiety (OR = 4.51 (95% CI 1.03, 19.81; p = 0.046). Conclusion: Duodenal eosinophilia may potentially be a mechanism linked to anxiety independent of FD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]