Category Archives: Uncategorized

Natural History of EoE -Journal Club (Part 3)

Posted on by

This posting reviews the final article for our eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) journal club: Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2013; 37: 114-21.

Design: Cross-sectional study of adult EoE patients (≥ 18 years) who were diagnosed at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia.  Patients underwent dysphagia questionnaire, Mayo Dysphagia Questionnaire (MDQ-30), and a patient assessment of upper gastrointestinal disorders quality of life questionnaire (PAGI-QOL). Of 140 eligible patients, 53 completed the questionnaires, 66 were unable to be contacted, and 21 refused to participate.

The MDQ-30 has been validated as a tool for esophageal strictures of 15 mm or smaller.  It has not been confirmed as a EoE dysphagia tool.

Diagnosis: According to the authors, a diagnosis of EoE required a >20 eosinohils/hpf after a 2-month therapeutic trial of proton pump inhibitors.

Results:

  • Mean age 20.5 years.  98% were caucasian and 75% were male.  15% had a history of esophageal dilatation.
  • 6/53 had positive dysphagia scores.  However, 18/47 with negative scores reported ongoing difficulty swallowing.
  • 26 (49.1%) of subjects were receiving proton pump inhibitor therapy and 40 (76%) were following allergy-directed dietary elimination.  Most common allergy in this cohort was dairy (49%) followed by peanuts/tree nuts (23%), eggs (9%), wheat (9%), soy (8%), and seafood (2%).**
  • Overall, dietary QOL scores, but not overall QOL scores, were adversely affected by ongoing EoE.

**With regard to dietary therapy, there is a significant discrepancy in reported allergy avoidance in this cohort compared with some previous data published by this center. For example, Liacouras et al (Clin Gastro Hepatol 2006; 3: 1198) reported a  98% improvement with diet treatment (n=351) (2/3rds were treated with elemental diet, mostly NG, with food reintroduction).  Their protocol included rebiopsy after introduction of last new food.  75/242 responded to elimination of specific foods.  Overall pattern of food avoidance after biopsy: milk 45%, eggs 45%, soy 38%, corn 38%, wheat 30%, beef 30%, chicken 20%, potato /oats/peanuts 15%, turkey/barley 11%, pork 8%, rice 5%, green beans 3%, apples /pineapple 1%.*  The reported allergens in this study match up much more closely to a highly-selected group of patients that was more recently reported from their database and is reviewed separately (Picking the right diet for EoE | gutsandgrowth).  In this group, the authors stated that the most common foods by biopsy were the following: milk (35%), egg (13%), wheat (12%), soy (9%), corn (6%).

Study limitations:

  1. Small number of patients
  2. Low response rate/responder bias
  3. Retrospective cross-sectional study -does not provide longitudinal data
  4. Young age of subjects
  5. MDQ-30 not validated for dysphagia in EoE
  6. Tertiary children’s hospital with research focus on EoE
  7. No recent endoscopies in research cohort

Take-home message: EoE is a chronic disease with “little resolution of either symptoms or oesophageal eosinophilia without ongoing treatment.”

 

EoE -Journal Club (Part 2)

Posted on by

The third article for our journal club: Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2013; 37: 1157-64.

This study involved a literature search which identified 10 articles which described the impact of proton pump inhibitor therapy for suspected eosinophilic esophagitis.  In total, these articles describe 258 patients (152 children and 106 adults).  Five of the studies were retrospective series.  The others included two randomized controlled trials, one randomized noncontrolled trial, and two prospective series.

Results: after PPI treatment, a clinical response was noted in 69% overall and histologic remission was evident in a mean of 44%.  Histologic remission was lower in children (23%-40%).  In two adult studies, both randomized controlled trials, PPI therapy (esomeprazole 40 mg/day) outperformed topical steroids (fluticasone 440 mcg bid); histologic remission was seen in 33% with PPI in both trials compared with 15% and 19% with fluticasone.

Key points in discussion:

  • PPI trial “is mandatory not only to confirm the presence of EoE, but to evaluate for PPI responsiveness.”  Yet, in surveys, …”only one-third of physicians thought it is necessary to initiate a PPI trial before diagnosing EoE.”
  • No clinical, endoscopic, histologic features nor pH testing “have demonstrated capacity to predict response to PPI therapy.”
  • PPI-REE “occurs in at least one-third of patients with suspected EoE, with response rates lower in children.”  Adults may have a higher response due to coexisting gastroesophageal reflux disease.

Related blog entry: gutsandgrowth | Pediatric Gastroenterology

EoE -Journal Club (Part 1)

Posted on by

This week our Eosinophilic Esophagitis (EoE) journal club is meeting.  The first article had previously been reviewed on this blog: SFED works for EoE! | gutsandgrowth.

The second article examines the “Effect of Proton Pump Inhibitor on Esophageal Eosinophilia” (JPGN 2013; 56: 166-72). PPI responsive esophageal eosinophilia (PPI-REE) has also been discussed previously on this blog (EoE: Drugs, Diets, Dilatation and PPI–REE | gutsandgrowth); this article adds additional information to this subject and highlights the possibility of transient PPI-REE.

Design: retrospective review of 204 children with EoE (criteria included ≥15 dos/hpf) over an 11 year time span.  Only 35 subjects met the criteria of having an endoscopy before and after an exclusive 8-week trial of PPI (1-2 mg/kg/day).

Results: 8 of 35 subjects had clinical response and 7 had biopsy-confirmed response to PPIs ( 23%).  In five patients with durable response, mean eosinophil count decreased from 92 to 5 eos/hpf.  In addition, eosinophil peroxidase index (EPX) declined from 39.2 to 14.6.  Two patients experienced relapse despite initial PPI-responsiveness.  Clinical and histologic relapse occurred at 17 and 23 months respectively.  However, of the 5 subjects who did not experience relapse, average followup reported in study was only 8 months.

Study limitations: small number of patients, limited geographical area, tertiary medical center study, retrospective study, uncertain compliance with therapy, and variable dosing of PPIs

Take-home points:

  • No clinicopathologic features distinguished patients with PPI-REE from EoE patients or patients with transient PPI-REE. Yet, 23% (8/35) of initial cohort showed resolution of symptoms and 7/35 had resolution of esophageal inflammation after PPI treatment.
  • Potential explanations for transient PPI-REE: lack of PPI adherence, missed detection of EoE after PPI trial (patchy disease), variation in allergenic exposure, diminished effect of PPIs over time, fluctuation in EoE disease course unrelated to PPI usage

Related blog entries:

Also, for those of you who read all the way to the bottom, here’s a link to a culturally significant (aka viral video) advertisement that I thought was amusing (potty humor):

Kmart Big Gas Savings Ad (Video) – Daily Picks and Flicks

Anxiety and Functional Abdominal Pain

Posted on by

A recent review highlights the importance of anxiety and functional abdominal pain (FAP) (JPGN 2013; 56: 469-74).

“Preliminary evidence suggests that anxiety frequently co-occurs with FAP.  This is not to suggest that FAP is a manifestation of a psychological disorder, but rather that anxiety and FAP may frequently co-occur because of potentially shared etiological factors (eg. heightened physiological arousal) or as a consequence of coping with recurrent pain.”

“Anxiety disorders are estimated to affect 42-85% of youth with FAP.”

Proposed guidelines for assessment and treatment of youth with FAP and anxiety:

Initial evaluation: build rapport between family and medical provider, assess for red flags, perform standard testing, anticipate and predict normal testing results, validate the pain experience is real, educate regarding pain sensation via brain-gut axis, administer anxiety screener (see below)

Management: reassure family that FAP is not a failure to identify an organic condition, avoid extensive testing, consider a low-dose antidepressant when appropriate

Psychosocial: if elevated levels of anxiety, refer for assessment by a psychologist, educate families about cognitive-behavioral treatment

With regard to screening, the authors propose the Screen for Child Anxiety and Related Disorders (SCARED) tool.  From the University of Pittsburgh website,

http://www.psychiatry.pitt.edu/sites/default/files/Documents/assessments/SCARED%20Child.pdf:

  • Target Population: Children ages 8-18 years
  • Intended Users: Clinicians and psychiatrists
  • Time to Administer: 10 minutes
  • Completed By: Children and parents
  • Modalities Available: Handwritten
  • Scoring Information: Severity of symptoms for the past three months is rated using a 0 to 2-point rating scale with 0 meaning not true or hardly ever true, 1 meaning sometimes true, and 2 meaning true or often true.

Many other subspecialists joke about the need for a psychiatry degree to be an effective pediatric gastroenterologist; this review suggests that they are not far off the mark.

Take-home message: the review covers important aspects of this ubiquitous problem.  Trying to get patients (and their parents) to address anxiety will likely improve outcomes of children with FAP.

Related blog links:

Additional references:

  • -JPGN 2011; 53: 200. n=98. 79% of FAP responded to low dose tricyclics
  • -Gastroenterol 2009; 137: 1261, 1207– Editorial. Amitriptyline helped in 66% vs 58% w placebo. n=90. dose 10mg <35kg, 20mg >35kg. 89% had failed Rx prior to study. ‘inability to use placebo.. in practice may justify amitriptyline Rx. Consider hypnotherapy/CBT first.’
  • Distraction/ignoring important: Pain 2006; 122: 43-52. (Walker LS et al), J Pain 2006; 7: 319-26.
  • -J Peds 2009; 154: 313 (editorial), 322. Prospective school study. n=237. Weekly prevalence of abd pain was 38%. 18% with persistence for >12 weeks. FAP persists into adulthood in 1/3 to 1/2 of cases (Clin Gastro Hepatol 2008; 6: 329-32).
  • -Acta Paediatr 2007; 96: 697-701. Maternal anxiety is most consistent predictor of outcome.

Newsflash: constipation frequently causes abdominal pain

Posted on by

From the following link (forwarded to me by Mike Hart) http://www.dailyrx.com/abdominal-pain-children-emergency-room-was-most-commonly-constipation:

A recent study found that constipation is the most common reason for abdominal pain among children going to one emergency room.

Appendicitis was diagnosed in only about 4 percent of children who went to the ER.

In addition, the researchers did not find any major differences in the treatment or outcomes of children based on their race.

“Call the pediatrician if your child has severe abdominal pain.”

The study, led by Kerry Caperell, MD, of the Department of Pediatrics at the University of Louisville in Kentucky, looked at the outcomes of children who went to the emergency room for abdominal pain.

The researchers investigated the medical records of 9,424 children, aged 1 to 18, who went to the Children’s Hospital of Pittsburgh emergency department for abdominal pain during a two-year period.

More than half of these children, a total of 5,493, ended up receiving multiple diagnoses for their complaints.

The researchers found that 1.9 percent of the African American children and 5.1 percent of the white children who visited the ER were diagnosed with appendicitis. Overall, 4.3 percent of the children had appendicitis.

Appendicitis was less common among younger children, but constipation was commonly diagnosed for all ages.

Almost 20 percent of the children were diagnosed with constipation, and more than 25 percent of the children aged 5 to 12 had constipation.

Constipation, gastroenteritis and urinary tract infections were more common among the African American patients than the white patients.

“Diagnosing causes of abdominal pain in children can often be difficult, especially the younger they are,” said Chris Galloway, MD, a dailyRx expert who specializes in emergency medicine.

“Fortunately common causes are still common and constipation is a frequent diagnosis we make in the ER, and can be quite distressing for your child,” Dr. Galloway said. “Consult your pediatrician if your child has abdominal pain.”

Older children were more likely to remain in the hospital and have an operation related to the reason they went to the ER.

The researchers did not find any differences in children’s outcomes related to their race. This finding means that all the children who went to the ER received similar evaluation and treatment and had similar outcomes regardless of their ethnicity.

The study was published May 20 in the journal Pediatrics. The research did not receive external funding, and the authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Comment: While constipation is a common entity, many of these children have underlying functional problems that are not addressed in the ER setting.

Related blog links:

Overcoming ATIs

Posted on by

Usually, when antibodies to infliximab (ATI) develop in combination with a loss of clinical response in an individual with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), this often indicates a need to switch treatments.  A recent study suggests that some patients can eliminate ATIs with the addition of immunomodulators (Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2013; 11: 444-47).

In this small retrospective study, 5 patients (18-37 years of age) who developed ATIs were able to continue infliximab therapy after instituting immunomodulator treatment (3 with thiopurines, and 2 with methotrexate).  What makes this report interesting, was that these ATIs (prior to immunomodulator use) were identified multiple times and were associated with undetectable infliximab levels.  None of these patients had dose intensification of infliximab.  After instituting immunomodulator therapy, detectable infliximab was evident and the ATIs disappeared.  According to Figure 1, the timeframe for return of response was about 10 weeks in some of these patients.

The authors note that the addition of immunomodulators can gradually eliminate a preformed memory response to infliximab antigen.  They also note that ATIs can sometimes disappear spontaneously, though this had not been noted to occur previously when mulitple ATIs levels have been identified.

While these observations are important, a larger prospective study is needed to inform how frequently this strategy could be successful.

Related blog links:

Anti-TNF Therapy for Eosinophilic Gastroenteritis

Posted on by

A recent report highlights the use of anti-TNF therapy (eg. infliximab (IFX) and adalimumab [ADA])  for eosinophilic enterocolitis/eosinophilic gastroenteritis in eight patients who had not responded to other treatments (JPGN 2013; 56: 492-97).

The mean age of these patients was 8 years with a range of 1 to 14 years.  Prior to use of IFX therapy, multiple therapies had been used.  Four patients had been treated with complete elemental diet; medications that were used included montelukast, hydroxyzine, sodium cromogylcate, budesonide, amitriptyline, prednisone, ketotifen, cyproheptadine, thiopurines, and methotrexate (Table 1 in study).

Complete clinical remission was noted to occur in 6 (75%) with IFX induction treatment; this was associated with mucosal healing in 3, mucosal improvement in 2, and unknown in 1 patient.

The six responders were followed for a median of 7 years.  During that timeframe, four of six had secondary loss of response and were switched to ADA.  Three of these four maintained a clinical response with ADA using high doses (80 mg EOW).

Additional References:

  • -Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2011; 9: 950.  40% of Eosinophili gastroenteritis resolved.
  • -JPGN 2010; 51: 723. n=91.  Incidental gastric eosinophils does not predict a worse response to fluticasone then isolated EoE.
  • -NEJM 2009; 361: 1387.  Description of a case of eosinophilic gastroenteritis.
  • -Gut 2009; 58: 721-32. Review of primary Eos d/o of GI tract.
  • -JPGN 2008; 47: 234-8.  EGIDs.

More HCV options -phase 3 for Sofosbuvir

Posted on by

The pace of research for HCV is incredible.  Two months ago phase 2 data for Sofosbuvir were reported and noted on this blog (More options for Hepatitis C | gutsandgrowth).  Now phase 3 data from multiple trials have emerged indicating the effectiveness of sofosbuvir for all HCV genotypes.

In the first study, NEJM 2013; 368: 1867-77, data from two trials (POSITRON and FUSION) of patients with HCV genotypes 2 and 3 are reported.  The POSITRON trial (63 sites, n=278 received treatment) was a blinded placebo-controlled study that evaluated 12 weeks of sofosbuvir/ribavirin compared with placebo in patients who discontinued interferon due to unacceptable adverse events or could not take interferon due to contraindications (most commonly psychiatric disorder or autoimmunity). Results: sustained virological response (SVR) in 78% of treatment group compared with 0% of placebo patients.  In addition, there was “complete concordance (100%) between rates of SVR at 12 weeks and at 24 weeks.”

The FUSION study (67 sites, n=201 received treatment) was a blinded, active-control study in patients who did not respond to a previous interferon-based regimen; one of two treatment regimens were administered: 12 weeks of sofosbuvir/ribavirin followed by placebo or 16 weeks of sofosbuvir/ribavirin. Results: 93% of genotype 2 patients had SVR and 61% of genotype 3 patients had SVR.  Among cirrhotic patients, 61% had SVR (94% of genotype 2, 21% of genotype 3); for those without cirrhosis, there was an 81% SVR (92% with genotype 2, 68% with genotype 3).  Thus, it is easy to conclude that genotype 3 patients with cirrhosis responded much less favorably.

Other important findings: rates of discontinuation among the treatment groups were similar to the placebo groups.  The most common adverse effect was anemia in the treatment groups.

In the second study, NEJM 2013; 368: 1878-87, an additional two phase 2 trials (NEUTRINO and FISSION) are reported from previously untreated chronic HCV patients.  The first trial (NEUTRINO) was an open-label study examining a 12-week regimen of sofosbuvir, peginterferon alfa-2a, and ribavirin in 327 HCV patients (98% genotypes 1 or 4).  Results: SVR noted in 90%. The second trial (FISSION) enrolled 499 patients with genotypes 2 and 3 who randomly received either peginterferon alfa-2a/ribavirin for 24 weeks or sofosbuvir/ribavirin for 12 weeks. Results: SVR noted to be 67% in both groups.  Genotype 2 patients again fared better than genotype 3 among the sofosbuvir/ribavirin group (97% versus 56%).  Some adverse events like fatigue, headache and nausea were common.  Overall, side effects were much lower in those not receiving peginterferon (see Table 3).

Take home message: From the editorial (pg 1931-32 in same issue): “a radical change in clinical practice is imminent…the low incidence of side effects, the relatively short duration of treatment, and the pangenotypic properties of the drugs are strong selling points of a sofosbuvir-ribavirin regimen and will probably lower the threshold for HCV treatment for both patients and physicians.”

Hopefully, we will see pediatric studies soon.

Related blog entries:

Simponi (Golimumab) Approved for Ulcerative Colitis

Posted on by

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration on 5/15/13 approved a new use for Simponi (golimumab) injection to treat adults with moderate to severe ulcerative colitis.

Here’s the link:

FDA approves Simponi to treat ulcerative colitis

From the link:

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration today approved a new use for Simponi (golimumab) injection to treat adults with moderate to severe ulcerative colitis.

Simponi works by blocking tumor necrosis factor (TNF), which plays an important role in causing abnormal inflammatory and immune responses. Previously approved to treat rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis and ankylosing spondylitis (arthritis affecting the joints in the spine and the pelvis), Simponi is now approved to treat adults with moderate to severe ulcerative colitis that is resistant (refractory) to prior treatment or requires continuous steroid therapy.

Ulcerative colitis is a chronic disease that affects about 620,000 Americans. It causes inflammation and ulcers in the inner lining of the large intestine and is one of two main forms of chronic inflammatory bowel disease. The inflammation can lead to abdominal discomfort, gastrointestinal bleeding, production of pus and diarrhea.

“Simponi is an important new treatment option for patients with moderate to severe ulcerative colitis,” said Andrew E. Mulberg, M.D., deputy director of the Division of Gastroenterology and Inborn Errors Products in the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. “It is critical that patients suffering from the serious and painful symptoms of ulcerative colitis have additional treatment options since patients experience the effects of the disease and respond to treatments differently.”

The safety and effectiveness of Simponi for ulcerative colitis were established in two clinical studies. Evaluations of patients included measures of stool frequency, rectal bleeding, endoscopic findings and a physician’s overall assessment.

In the first study, 513 patients with moderate to severe ulcerative colitis who could not tolerate or failed to respond to other therapies were randomly assigned to receive Simponi or a placebo. Results showed that a greater proportion of Simponi-treated patients achieved clinical response, clinical remission and, as seen during endoscopy, had improved appearance of the colon after six weeks compared with the placebo group.

In the second study, 310 patients with moderate to severe ulcerative colitis who were responders to Simponi were randomly assigned to receive Simponi or placebo. A greater proportion of Simponi-treated patients maintained clinical response through week 54 and had clinical remission at both weeks 30 and 54.  

The most common side effects in patients treated with Simponi are upper respiratory infection and redness at the site of injection. Patients treated with Simponi are at increased risk of developing serious infections, invasive fungal infections, reactivation of Hepatitis B infection, lymphoma, heart failure, nervous system disorders and allergic reactions.

What is the risk with Rifaximin?

Posted on by

While no one knows how quickly resistance of gut microbes will develop in response to rifaximin, the likelihood of resistance is high and this should temper its usage (J Clin Gastroenterol 2013; 47: 205-11).

Rifaximin, along with other antibiotics, has been shown to relieve symptoms in certain cohorts of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) patients.  Generally, the results of these studies have been modest (see below); however, because it is a “gut specific” antibiotic with minimal systemic absorption (<1%) and therefore minimal adverse effects, it has been considered a reasonable and safe treatment by many.  It has been useful as well for traveler’s diarrhea, hepatic encephalopathy, and colonic diverticular disease.  With regard to IBS, the major concern is that this is a chronic disorder and repeated usage will result in antimicrobial resistance.

Resistance to rifaximin could result in serious consequences if it provoked a class effect resistance.  Rifaximin belongs to the rifamycin class of antibiotics which treat numerous diseases including tuberculoses, meningococcal disease, Clostridium difficile, and methicillin-resistance Staphylococcus aureus.

Given the limited number of suitable alternatives and emerging resistance patterns, wise stewardship of our current antibiotics is essential, though unlikely.  It is not difficult to foresee a rise in mortality from some infectious problems that are easily treated currently.

Related references:

  • -JPGN 2011; 52: 382.  Double-blind, placebo-controlled study of rifaximin in children with RAP.  n=75.  Not effective in this study.
  • -NEJM 2011; 364: 22 (pg 81-editorial). About 10% improvement over placebo in pts with IBS-D. Effects lasted up to 3 months.
  • -DDW 2010, 475 abstract. Target 1 & Target 2. n=623, n=637. Relief of IBS in ~41% vs ~32% placebo. 550mg TID x 14days.

Related blog posts: