Tag Archives: Eosinophilic esophagitis

Lessons on Stature from Asthma Treated with Steroids

Posted on by

A study of the effects of budesonide for the treatment of asthma should be carefully considered by those of us who treat eosinophilic esophagitis with “topical” steroids; also, this study has applicability to Crohn’s disease patients receiving chronic glucocorticoids.  Mean adult height was 1.2 cm lower in the budesonide-treated asthmatics than in the placebo group (NEJM 2012; 367: 904-12).

This was the main finding at the end of the Childhood Asthma Management Program (CAMP) clinical trial.  This report examined 943 of 1041 (90.6%) participants  who had received either 0.4 mg of budesonide, 16 mg of nedocromil or placebo daily for 4 to 6 years.  Treatment with these agents began between ages 5 to 13.

The reduction in adult height was to similar in adulthood as it was after 2 years of treatment; there was not catch up growth.  With regard to the adult measurements, 96.8% of the adult women were at least 18 years and the adult men were at least 20 years of age.

Other findings:

  • Larger daily dose: each microgram per kilogram was associated with -0.1 cm drop
  • Other risk groups: Hispanic ethnic group, female sex, greater body mass index, longer duration of asthma, and higher Tanner stage at initiation

The authors note that 0.2 mg dosage of budesonide has been shown to be effective to control asthma symptoms in children 5-11 years.  The “lowest effective dose” should be used; “the effect on adult height must be balance against the large and well-established benefit of these drugs in controlling persistent asthma.”

Related links:

Looking better or feeling better in EoE?

Guidelines for Eosinophilic Esophagitis

Choosing topical therapy for EoE

The undiscovered country

Choosing topical therapy for EoE

Posted on by

A brief report adds useful information for topical therapy for eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) (Gastroenterol 2012; 143: 321-24).  This study involved 25 subjects in a prospective randomized open label design that compared budesonide delivered via either as a metered nebulized form (NEB) or as oral viscous solution (1 mg BID).  The mean age of the subjects was 35 years, 60% were male, 88% were caucasian, and all had dysphagia.

Findings:

  • Orally administered viscous budesonide (OVB) was more effective at lowering esophageal eosinophilia.  After treatment, eosinophil count per high power field was 11 for OVB compared with 89 for NEB formulation.
  • Nuclear scintigraphy showed that OVB had a significantly higher level of esophageal exposure to the therapeutic agent than NEB and did not result in lung exposure (which occurred in NEB group)
  • Both groups had improvement in dysphagia.  Poor correlation of symptoms and histology has frequently been reported.

These findings along with the fact that budesonide has less systemic corticosteroid effects, due to a high first-pass metabolism, makes OVB a logical choice for patients treated with topical steroids.

Previous related blog entries:

Guidelines for Eosinophilic Esophagitis

Looking better or feeling better in EoE?

Look of improvement on an EoE diet

Eosinophilic Esophagitis -Six Food Group Diet

MicroRNA signature for eosinophilic esophagitis

The undiscovered country

Comparing diets in EoE

Posted on by

There remains a limited number of therapeutic options with EoE.  Dietary therapy can be effective as well as burdensome.  A closer look at dietary treatment effectiveness was recently published (J Allergy Clin Immunol 2012; 129: 1570-8 –thanks to Seth Marcus for alerting me to this article).

Due to eligibility requirements, only 98 patients of an initial 513 met criteria.  The findings from this study may be difficult to generalize because of the following:

  • Highly selected patient population
  • Retrospective study.   Dietary therapy was NOT chosen randomly.
  • Study originates from a specialized center (Cincinnati) which attracts atypical cases of EoE

That being said, the study asks some important questions. What is the remission rate for skin test-directed elimination diet in comparison to six food group elimination diet (SFED) and to an elemental diet?  The SFED actually composed two groups (in my opinion, this is a significant flaw in the study design & has a limiting effect on the conclusions).  The ‘classical’ SFED (42% or 11/26) eliminated the six most common food groups (milk, soy, wheat, egg, nuts, fish/shellfish) whereas a ‘modified’ SFED (58% or 15/26)  combined the classical SFED with foods eliciting positive skin-testing.

Some of the authors terminology:

  • Complete remission: 1 or fewer eosinophils/hpf
  • Partial remission: 2-5 eos/hpf
  • Partial resolution: 6-14 eos/hpf
  • Remission: <15 eos/hpf
  • Non-remission: >15 eos/hpf

Skin prick tests (SPFs) were performed to as many as 62 foods and 11 environmental allergens and graded 0-4.  0 equated to negative control & 4 equated to histamine control -all interpreted at 15 minutes after placement.

Atopy patch tests (APTs) were interpreted at 48 hours with scoring between 0-4.  A score of 2 indicated “erythematous with generalized induration.”  Any score of 2 or higher was considered positive.

Food reintroduction process: “Food reintroductions were initiated only when the peak eosinophil count was less than 15 eosinophils/hpf. If symptoms occurred after reintroduction of a food, patients were instructed to discontinue that food, wait approximately 10 to 14 days, and then reintroduce another food…. A food reintroduction was considered successful if no symptoms were reported and the postpeak eosinophil count was less than 15 eosinophils/hpf.”

Why were so many patients excluded?  The main causes were 181 patients did not meet strict EoE criteria, 122 patients received glucocorticoids, and 52 patients had another eosinophilia-associated condition; less common reasons included patient age >21, being part of a separate drug trial, obvious noncompliance, different diet regimen, and not having 2 consecutive EGDs separated by dietary intervention.

How many endoscopies are needed for dietary therapy?   In this study, the average patient had 8.5 EGDs at Cincinnati.  The greatest number of EGDs took place among patients assigned to an elemental diet (average >11); these patients also had a longer followup period compared to the other two groups: 2.9 years compared with 1.1 for SFED and 2.1 for directed diet.

  • All three diets resulted in improvement in eosinophil count.
  • Overall Remission rates: 96% elemental, 81% SFED, 65% directed diet
  • Complete Remission rates:  59% elemental, 39% SFED, 30% directed diet

One interesting set of data is in Table 4.  This gives the pass rate for various foods with single and multiple food reintroductions.  Milk for example had a pass rate of 35% among the 17 patients who had this as a single food reintroduction.  The values ranged from a low pass rate of 29% for strawberries to a high pass rate of 78% for cocoa and 75% for pork. Soy, eggs, and wheat all hovered near 60% pass rate.

Conclusions by authors:

1. “SFED is no less successful than directed diet and consistent with unreliability of skin testing …Our data…undermine the value of skin test-directed dietary management. ” This is due to the fact that the disease mechanism is not an IgE-mediated disease (skin testing primarily detects IgE-mediated allergens).

2. Elemental diet is superior at inducing histologic remission. However, “multiple studies indicate that adherence is inversely related to the number of foods eliminated.”

Previous related posts:

Guidelines for Eosinophilic Esophagitis

Looking better or feeling better in EoE?

Look of improvement on an EoE diet

Eosinophilic Esophagitis -Six Food Group Diet

MicroRNA signature for eosinophilic esophagitis

The undiscovered country

 

Looking better or feeling better in EoE?

Posted on by

When seeing a new diagnosis of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), I often try to explain that there are two potential goals of treatment: clinical remission (improvement in symptoms) and histologic remission (improvement in appearance of esophagus with microscope).  Unfortunately, these two outcomes are not always synchronous; more proof of this comes from a recent study (Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2012; 10: 742-49, 750-52 [editorial]).

In this double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study of fluticasone in adult patients with a new diagnosis of EoE, 19 patients were treated with fluticasone (880 μg BID) and 15 patients were treated with placebo inhaler –for six weeks.  Initially, 21 patients were assigned to each group; 2 dropped out of treatment group and 6 dropped out of placebo group before completion of followup EGD.   The average age in the treatment group was 37 years versus 38 years in the placebo group.  A complete histologic response was defined as >90% reduction in mean eosinophil count; this occurred in 62% of fluticasone patients and in none of the placebo group, based on an intention-to-treat analysis.  Another measure of eosinophil activity, eosinophil-derived neurotoxin (EDN), was reduced by 81% on intracellular staining in the treatment group compared with 8% in the placebo group.  Figures 1 through 3 show this staining –it’s pretty cool!

Yet, the clinical response was not statistically different.  Dysphagia was reduced by 57% in the treated subjects compared to 33% in the placebo subjects in an intention-to-treat analysis.  Results were improved modestly in those who actually were treated: 63% (12 of 19) compared to 47% of placebo patients.  A complete response for dysphagia was noted in 42.9% of fluticasone group compared with 28.6% of control group based on an intention-to-treat analysis.  A fairly high rate of candidiasis was noted in treated patients 26%;  no placebo patients developed candida.

Another interesting finding was that among those who continued PPIs for heartburn symptoms the response to fluticasone was not improved.  40% of PPI users had a complete histologic response compared with 79% of non-PPI users.

So what are the reasons for the discrepancy between clinical and histologic response?

  • Established strictures and small-caliber esophagus may require dilation rather than medicines to relieve dysphagia
  • Esophageal fibrosis and subsequent esophageal compliance may not respond to topical therapy or take a lot longer to improve
  • Secondary candidiasis may reduce clinical response –though in this study, 5 of 6 patients with candida did in fact have symptom resolution
  • Compensatory behaviors may improve clinical symptoms –chewing food, cutting up food better, drinking more fluids, and avoiding some foods.  This may make it harder to detect important differences.

Patient information link: (Eosinophilic esophagitis – CCDHC Home)

Related posts:

Look of improvement on an EoE diet

Guidelines for Eosinophilic Esophagitis

Eosinophilic Esophagitis -Six Food Group Diet

The undiscovered country

MicroRNA signature for eosinophilic esophagitis

Look of improvement on an EoE diet

Posted on by

In this month’s Gastroenterology, 50 adults with Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) were treated with a 6-food elimination diet (SFED) (Gastroenterology 2012; 142: 1451-1459).  Repeat endoscopy after 6 weeks determined responsiveness.  Histologic response was defined by having <5 eosinophils/high power fields (eos/hpf).  In 20 patients, reintroduction of foods followed by repeat endoscopy was undertaken.

After SFED, 32 (64%) had peak eosinophil counts <5 eos/hpf.  Symptom scores decreased in 94%.  After trigger food reintroduction, eosinophil counts returned to pretreatment values.  The changes are clearly visible in Figure 5.  The pictures are almost like the weight loss commercials on TV –striking improvement.  I contemplated putting in a scan of the Gastroenterology cover, but have not received permission from the publisher.  Check out this link to view it yourself:

http://download.journals.elsevierhealth.com/pdfs/journals/0016-5085/PIIS0016508512006257.pdf

Based on reintroduction, the foods most commonly associated with EoE were wheat (60%), and milk (50%).  Skin-prick testing predicted only 13% of foods associated with EoE.  In general, these study results mirror results from pediatric studies, with the exception that milk allergy has been found to be more common in some pediatric studies.

Only 20 patients completed the reintroduction process.  This process involved adding 1 food group every 2 weeks.  If the patient had symptoms during reintroduction or remained on regimen for 4 weeks, then  endoscopy with biopsies was performed.  If recurrence noted based on symptoms or histology, this required a 6 week washout before additional food reintroduction.  Of note, median time for recurrence of symptoms was 3 days after reintroduction.

Six foods: milk, wheat, eggs, soy, shellfish/fish, nuts.

This study shows that, as in children, adult EoE is predominantly a food-allergy disease

Related blog entries:

Eosinophilic Esophagitis -Six Food Group Diet

Guidelines for Eosinophilic Esophagitis

MicroRNA signature for eosinophilic esophagitis

The undiscovered country

MicroRNA signature for eosinophilic esophagitis

Posted on by

In a previous post discussing MicroRNAs (miRNAs) (MicroRNAs and biliary atresia), I stated that “Despite this intriguing research, it not clear whether or when miRNAs will have an important role in bedside management.”  Well, as more articles emerge on miRNAs, it is becoming clear that miRNAs will have a role in clinical medicine; the questions are when and what cost.

The latest study (J Allergy Clin Immunol 2012; 129: 1064-75) by Lu et al from Cincinnati shows how this technique can identify a specific signature for eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) and how miRNAs can serve as a biomarker for disease response.  The investigators took plasma and esophageal biopsy specimens from patients with EoE, reflux esophagitis, and healthy controls; they used an array comprising 677 miRNAs.  254 miRNAs were expressed at greater than background levels, but 21 upregulated miRNAs and 11 downregulated miRNAs were markedly different.

To quickly understand how useful this technology could become requires a glance at the “heat maps” showing the expression profile of the 21 upregulated miRNAs and the 11 downregulated miRNAs, comparing EoE with healthy controls (Figures 1 & 3).  In addition, in Figure 3, it is readily apparent that the expression pattern is completely different from reflux esophagitis.  Furthermore, this figure demonstrates visually a normal-appearing pattern in patients who respond to fluticasone.

Other figures in the article and in the appendix demonstrate the complex relationships between these specific miRNAs and target genes.

Key points:

  • miRNAs from tissue or blood could serve as biomarkers for the presence of EoE and response to therapy
  • Of the identified miRNAs, miR-21 and miR-223 strongly correlate with esophageal eosinophilia as well as previously described EoE transcriptome
  • Plasma miRNAs that are most differentiated in EoE include miR-146a, miR-146b, and miR-223.

Related posts:

Guidelines for Eosinophilic Esophagitis

Eosinophilic Esophagitis -Six Food Group Diet

The undiscovered country

Guidelines for Eosinophilic Esophagitis

Posted on by

For a little while, I’ve meant to complete a post on the EoE guidelines published last fall (J Allergy Clin Immunol 2011; 128: 3-20).  This article, based on the input of 33 physicians with EoE expertise, provides a lot of depth to this unfolding area in pediatric gastroenterology.

Diagnosis of EoE. The authors caution that this diagnosis is not a histologic diagnosis as a number of entities can cause esophageal eosinophilia; at the same time, a minimum number of eosinophils, 15/hpf, is a necessary diagnostic threshold.  A small number of patients may have EoE with fewer than 15/hpf, including PPI-responsive EoE, inadequate biopsy sampling, seasonal variation, or partial treatment (eg. patient on corticosteroids).

How many biopsies?  In one cited study in the article, 2, 3, and 6 biopsies had sensitivity of 84%, 97%, and 100% respectively.  Endoscopic biopsies remain the only reliable diagnostic test.

Why are there a subset of PPI-responsive EoE patients?  Potential explanations include improvement in immune-activation after healing of esophageal mucosa, inherent anti-inflammatory property of PPIs, or due to pitfalls in current diagnostic testing.  Due to recognition of this disorder, pH testing may be needed in many patients with suspected EoE.  Even still, the authors note that “PPI responsiveness or diagnostic testing (pH monitoring) might not adequately distinguish GERD and EoE.”

How useful are genotypic features?  Clinical  use of genotypes is not feasible at this time.  However, it is anticipated that esophageal gene expression will emerge as one way to differentiate EoE from other conditions and to determine optimal treatments.

What type of allergy evaluation? The majority of EoE patients have concurrent atopic diseases, including rhinitis, asthma, and eczema.  Thorough evaluation by an allergist (or immunologist) is recommended.  Specific recommendations: skin prick testing (SPT), serum IgE for immediate-type food allergy.  Atopy patch testing (APT) has high negative predictive values, >90%, except for milk which is ~50%.  APT needs to “be standardized and validated.”

Biomarkers? “Insufficient evidence to support any peripheral marker” including cytokines, and IgE (total).

Treatment –PPI: PPIs are useful to distinguish GERD as well as PPI-responsive EoE from EoE requiring other treatments.  They also help with symptomatic treatment in some patients who have secondary GERD.  Recommended dose in children 1 mg/kg/dose BID.

Treatment –Dietary: Three dietary regimens have potential effectiveness: 1) selective food diet based on allergy testing, 2) dietary restriction of the most likely food antigens (eg. six food group diet elimination) and 3) strict amino acid based diet.  Tolerance of foods that have been shown previously to provoke EoE is unlikely to develop in the majority of EoE patients.

Treatment –Corticosteroids: Corticosteroids are effective but when discontinued EoE almost always recurs.  Systemic corticosteroids can be particularly useful when severe dysphagia is present.  With severe endoscopic findings, a course of corticosteroids may help reduce the need for dilatation or lessen the risk.  Long-term use of systemic steroids is not recommended.  Topical steroids should be considered in all patients with EoE.  Recommended doses are given.

  • For fluticasone:  88-440 μg 2-4 times per day (max 880 μg BID)
  • For budesonide: 1mg daily (<10 y) and 2 mg daily (≥10 y)
Treatment –Dilation:  Dilation can provide relief of dysphagia.  In most cases, medical or dietary therapy should be attempted prior to use of dilation.  Goal of 15-18 mm.  Practical advice (not validated in studies): Limit dilation progression per session to 3 mm or less after resistance has been encountered.
Treatment –Alternatives:  Cromolyn, leukotriene receptor antagonists, or immunosuppressive agents (eg azathioprine, 6-mercaptopurine) are “not recommended.”
Complications: Perforations (spontaneous & procedure-related), food impactions, strictures, and narrow caliber esophagus.  There has not been evidence of an increased esophageal cancer risk in EoE patients to date.
Unresolved issues: Despite the extensive consensus on many of these issues, the conclusions inform the reader of how far we need to go.  Some of the unresolved questions include such basic problems:
  • “Importance of treating asymptomatic patients”
  • “Natural history of EoE and rates and predictive indexes of complications”
  • “Accuracy of skin prick and patch testing”
  • “Optimal end points of treatment”

Previous related blog posts:

The undiscovered country

Eosinophilic Esophagitis -Six Food Group Diet

Practical information on EoE for families:

http://www.ccdhc.org/diseases/EoE.html

The undiscovered country

Posted on by

The title of this blog is derived from a Star Trek movie.  I think that when we see patients with eosinophilic esophagitis that we are often seeing something new and poorly characterized.

Despite so many unanswered questions, particularly on an individual basis, this topic has seen a lot of interest and there are many advances in both bedside and basic research.  The review article  (Allergy 2012; DOI: 10: 10.1111/j.1398-9995.2012.02787.x) focuses on many of the similarities and differences between pediatric and adult patients.  Is it the same disease? (Probably yes)

With regard to medical history, the article reminds clinicians to ask about coping strategies:

  • do you wash food down with liquid?
  • are you the last one to finish your food?
  • do you chew your food a long time?
  • do you avoid foods like meats or breads?

Clinical features –main difference is greater presentation variety in children.  Adults almost always have long-standing dysphagia.  In pediatrics, painful symptoms, reflux symptoms, and feeding refusal are often seen in early stages.  In both populations, other atopic diseases are very common.

Immunopathogenesis (same in pediatrics and adults):  Th2-type inflammatory response; not just eosinophils but also IL-5-expressing T-cells, B cells, and IgE-bearing mast cells.  A break-down of all the types of quantified cells from a large number of studies is detailed (Table 2).

Allergic profile –main difference is much higher aeroallergen sensitization in adolescent & adult patients than in pediatric patients.  In children, top four allergens: milk, wheat, egg, and soy.  In older patients/adults, nuts are frequent food allergens.

Treatment strategies –basic question of whether to treat for symptomatic relief or histologic response is still debated.  Three goals of treatment are the same:

  • improve quality of life
  • reduce the risk of severe esophageal injury
  • prevent esophageal damage

3 D’s of treatment drugs, diet, dilatation:

Drugs: topical steroids (fluticasone, budesonide) are effective in ~50% of children & these agents may reverse subepithelial fibrosis, PPIs -small percentage have EoE PPI-responsive disease, & systemic steroids.  Lower doses of budesonide may be effective as maintenance treatment (0.25mg BID).  Interestingly, infliximab has not been effective clinically or histologically despite the high amounts of TNF.  Azathioprine (or 6-MP) was effective in three steroid-dependent patients in a pilot study.

Diet –review does not cover new territory (see previous blog: Eosinophilic Esophagitis -Six Food Group Diet).  States that elemental diets are not practical in adults.  Discusses the fact that food allergy identification is difficult & remains a pressing research need.

Dilatation –can provide long-lasting symptom relief.  Dilatation is infrequently utilized in pediatrics and virtually never in absence of other therapies.

On a side note, in my training I was taught that there were 3D’s to treating every patient: diet, drugs, and demeanor — a good attitude goes a long way, particularly in an uncertain world.

Additional references:

  • -Gastroenterology 2011; 141: 1593.  anti-IL-5.  partially effective for EoE.
  • -JPGN 2010; 51: 723. n=91.  Incidental gastric eosinophils does not predict a worse response to fluticasone then isolated EoE.
  • -Clin Gastro & Hepatology 2011; 9: 400 (editorial 370). Budesonide at dose of 0.25mg BID was partially effective in adult cohort of n=28.
  • -Aceves SS et al. Allergy 2010; 65: 109-116. 3 month course of budesonide can lead to resolution of esophageal remodeling. Lamina propria fibrosis resolution correlates with response to topical steroids. Examined effect on lamina propria after 3 months of Rx.
  • -Gastroenterology 2010; 139: 1526. n=36. (summary pg 1429) 15 day course of budesonide (1mg BID). 13/18 in Rx group had improved dysphagia, 72% wiht histologic remission, 92% reduction in eosinophil count. Did not seem to matter if “allergic” or not. 3 pts developed mild candida.
  • -Gastroenterology 2010; 139: 418. Randomized placebo study showed effectiveness.n=15 Rx (n=9 placebo). 87% of Rx group responded.  2ml of water with 0.5gm pulmicort and mixed it with 4-5 packets of splenda.
  • -JPGN 2007; 45: 281/370/319. Review/research symposium/subepithelial fibrosis associated with EoE & dysphagia.
  • -JPGN 2007; 45: 22-31. Th2 Immunity w Eotaxin-3/ C-C chemokine receptor in EoE.
  • -Gastroenterology 2006; 131: 1381-1391. Randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of fluticasone for EoE: 880mcg divided bid; n=21 Rx, n=15 placebo. 50% (vs 9% controls) achieved histologic remission; Rx more effective in those w/o detectable food allergies. 67% (vs. 27% controls) resolution of vomiting.
  • -Clin Gastro & Hep 2007; 5: xxiv. EoE causing Boerhaave’s syndrome (spontaneous rupture)
  • INCREASED FRAGILITY: -Gastrointest Endosc 2003; 57: 407-12. -Clin Gastro Hepatolo 2003; 1: 433-37.
  • -Clin Gastro & Hep 2006; 4: 1328. absolute eosinophilia (AEC 440 vs 140 controls), eosinophil-derived neurotoxin, and eotaxin-3 act as biomarkers of EE activity.
  • -Gastroenterology2006; 131: 2018 (-J Clin Invest 2006; 116: 536-547. ) Eostaxin-3/EcE transcript signature.
  • -J Pediatr 2005; 147: 540 Picture of ringed esophagitis.
  • -JPGN 2004; 39: S8 [abstract 0005]. CHOP experience in 250 pts. NG elemental diet was most effective. ~6% of pts presenting with GER. Strict avoidance of allergens needed.

Eosinophilic Esophagitis -Six Food Group Diet

Posted on by

One of the topics that continues to have a number of important articles each month is eosinophilic esophagitis. One of the most important recent articles is the following:
**Kagalwalla AF, et al. JPGN 2011;53: 145–149. Identification of Specific Foods Responsible for Inflammation in Children With Eosinophilic Esophagitis Successfully Treated With Empiric Elimination Diet.

Results: A total of 36/46 (25 M/11F) children who were initially successfully treated with SFED completed this trial; the mean age was 7.6 years. The most common foods identified were 25 to cow’s milk (74%), 8 to wheat (26%), 4 to eggs (17%), 3 to soy (10%), and 1 to peanut (6%). Milk was 8 times more likely to cause EoE compared with wheat, the next most common food (95% confidence interval 2.41–26.62, P1⁄4 0.0007).

Previous articles in this area include the following:
–Immunol Allergy Clin N Am; 2009; 29: 77-84. Review article.
–Clinical Gastroenterology & Hepatology 2006; 4: 1097.
–Clinical Gastroenterology & Hepatology 2006; 3: 1198.

These studies identify the divergent approaches to dietary treatment in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis. Some patients can be managed with elimination diet based on allergy testing. However, due to the difficulty of allergy testing and its potential flaws in this population, some patients need to resort to a so-called six-food group elimination diet (Milk, wheat, eggs, nuts, shellfish, and soy) and some even need a complete elemental diet. Almost all patients managed with dietary restriction require followup endoscopy to determine the effectiveness of this dietary approach. In subsequent posts, some of the references regarding medical treatments (eg. budesonide) and biomarkers will be reviewed.