How Effective Are PPIs for Eosinophilic Esophagitis?

Emilio J. Laserna‐Mendieta et al. AP&T 2020; https://doi.org/10.1111/apt.15957.  Full article link: Efficacy of proton pump inhibitor therapy for eosinophilic oesophagitis in 630 patients: results from the EoE connect registry

“This cross‐sectional study collected data on PPI efficacy from the multicentre EoE CONNECT database.” Overall, 630 patients (76 children) received PPI as initial therapy (n = 600) or after failure to respond to other therapies (n = 30)

Key findings:

  • PPI therapy achieved eosinophil density below 15 eosinophils per high‐power field in 48.8% and a decreased symptom score ≥50% from baseline in 71.0% of patients.
  • More EoE patients with an inflammatory rather than stricturing phenotype accomplished clinico‐histological remission after PPI therapy (OR 3.7; 95% CI, 1.4‐9.5)
  • PPI treatment is more effective in achieving clinico‐histological remission of the disease when used in higher instead of standard or lower doses (50.8% vs 35.8%), and when the duration of therapy is prolonged from 8 to 12 weeks (50.4% vs. 65.2%)

My take: This study confirms previous studies which have generally found that PPIs are effective in 40-50% of patients with eosinophilic esophagitis.  Higher doses of PPIs are needed to achieve the highest response rates.

“Bar chart for histological (A) and symptomatic (B) responses for proton pump inhibitor (PPI) mono‐therapy to induce and maintain remission in patients with eosinophilic oesophagitis. For induction of remission, patients were classified according to the PPI dosage prescribed: high dose was double dosage or higher, and low dose was standard dosage or lower. For maintenance therapy, only patients with dosage reduction from that used for induction were included. eos/hpf: eosinophils per high power field”

Related blog posts:

Job Security Study: Lots of People Have Reflux Symptoms & COVID-19 Due To Singing

A recent study (SD Delshad, CV Almario et al. Gastroenterol 2020; 158: 1250-61) used survey data from an APP, MyGiHealth, to assess prevalence of reflux symptoms and symptoms that had not responded to proton pump inhibitor treatment.

Key findings:

  • In 2015, among 71,812 participants, 32,878 (44.1%) reported reflux symptoms previously and 23,039 (30.9%) reported reflux symptoms in previous week
  • 35% with reflux symptoms were currently receiving treatment: 55% PPIs, 24% H2RAs, and 24% antacids
  • Of the 3229 taking daily PPIs, 54% reported persistent reflux symptoms (≥2 days per week)
  • Age range of respondents was 33% for 18-29, 27% for 30-39, 17% for 40-49, 15% for 50-59, and 8% ≥60

Limitations: 

  • Potential selection bias as there was only a 5.5% response rate among the entire eligible population of 1.3 million
  • Reflux symptoms frequently is not due to reflux disease

My take: There are a lot of folks with reflux symptoms and many have ongoing symptoms despite treatment; hence, lots of opportunity to help (and job security)

Related blog posts:

Also from NY Times: Coronavirus Ravaged a Choir. But Isolation Helped Contain It.

“One sick singer attended choir practice, infecting 52 others, two of whom died. A study released by the C.D.C. shows that self-isolation and tracing efforts helped contain the outbreak.”  Only 8 of the 61 choir members did not get sick.

Graphical Abstract

Reducing Inappropriate Proton Pump Inhibitor Usage & U.S. Children with COVID-19

D Lin et atl. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2020; 18: 763-6.  In a retrospective chart review, the authors examined pharmacy data from patients in the Harris Health System (Harris county -Houston, TX) which had more than 1.9 million outpatient clinic visits in 2017.

In January 2018, multiple efforts were made to try to reduce inappropriate proton pump inhibitor (PPI) usage.  This included grand rounds and system-wide emails to providers.  In addition, a suggested tapering algorithm (order in EPIC) was given to reduce the likelihood of rebound acid hypersecretion which could undermine the goal of stopping PPI.

Key points:

  • Taper: When ready to taper, start with “a PPI every other day for 2 weeks, followed by a PPI every 4 days for 2 additional weeks before discontinuation.”
  • De-escalation: Before educational intervention, in 2017, there were 66,261 unique PPI prescriptions. After educational intervention, in 2018, there were 55,322 unique PPI prescriptions (16.5% decrease). This equates to ~800,000 fewer capsules or pills dispensed in 1 calendar year
  • The most “important driver” for de-escalation was the initiation of the discussion by the ambulatory primary care provider
  • The authors recommend clinic followup within a month after starting de-escalation and gastroenterology evaluation for patients with severe symptoms or those refractory to PPI treatment

My take: This study indicates that 1 in 6 PPI users were able to de-escalate off treatment.  Physician initiative is crucial to improve appropriate medication use.

Related blog posts:

Recent study from JAMA Pediatrics (5/11/20) -Full text: Characteristics and Outcomes of Children With Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Infection Admitted to US and Canadian Pediatric Intensive Care Units

Of the 48 children with COVID-19 admitted to participating PICUs (14 hospitals)… Forty patients (83%) had significant preexisting comorbidities; 35 (73%) presented with respiratory symptoms and 18 (38%) required invasive ventilation….At the completion of the follow-up period, 2 patients (4%) had died and 15 (31%) were still hospitalized, with 3 still requiring ventilatory support and 1 receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. The median (range) PICU and hospital lengths of stay for those who had been discharged were 5 (3-9) days and 7 (4-13) days, respectively.

NY Times Summary of Study: Details of U.S. Children Severely Affected by Coronavirus

Disclaimer: This blog, gutsandgrowth, assumes no responsibility for any use or operation of any method, product, instruction, concept or idea contained in the material herein or for any injury or damage to persons or property (whether products liability, negligence or otherwise) resulting from such use or operation. These blog posts are for educational purposes only. Specific dosing of medications (along with potential adverse effects) should be confirmed by prescribing physician.  Because of rapid advances in the medical sciences, the gutsandgrowth blog cautions that independent verification should be made of diagnosis and drug dosages. The reader is solely responsible for the conduct of any suggested test or procedure.  This content is not a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis or treatment provided by a qualified healthcare provider. Always seek the advice of your physician or other qualified health provider with any questions you may have regarding a condition

Year in Review: My Favorite 2019 Posts

Yesterday, I listed the posts with the most views.  The posts below were the ones I like the most.

General/General Health:

Nutrition:

Liver:

Endoscopy:

Intestinal Disorders:

 

Disclaimer: This blog, gutsandgrowth, assumes no responsibility for any use or operation of any method, product, instruction, concept or idea contained in the material herein or for any injury or damage to persons or property (whether products liability, negligence or otherwise) resulting from such use or operation. These blog posts are for educational purposes only. Specific dosing of medications (along with potential adverse effects) should be confirmed by prescribing physician.  Because of rapid advances in the medical sciences, the gutsandgrowth blog cautions that independent verification should be made of diagnosis and drug dosages. The reader is solely responsible for the conduct of any suggested test or procedure.  This content is not a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis or treatment provided by a qualified healthcare provider. Always seek the advice of your physician or other qualified health provider with any questions you may have regarding a condition.

 

How Genetics Influence Response to PPIs in Eosinophilic Esophagitis

About two years ago, James Franciosi presented research at NASPGHAN meeting indicating that the main difference between children with eosiniophilic esophagitis (EoE) who respond to proton pump inhibitiors (PPIs) compared to those who do not was related to their metabolism of PPIs and not related to the nature of their underlying EoE.

Related blog: #NASPGHAN17 Eosionophilic Esophagitis Session

Now, more has been published on this topic: EB Mougey et al. JPGN 2019; 69: 581-7.

In this study with 92 patients, data was collected from participants in a prospective clinical trial of high-dose PPI for EoE.

Key findings:

  • 57 (62%) were responsive to PPIs and 35 (38%) were not responsive to PPIs
  • Carriage of STAT6 allele variant rs1059513 predicted responsiveness to PPIs with OR of 6.16
  • Carriage of STAT6 rs324011 synergizes with CYP2C19*17 to predict PPI-nonresponsive EoE

Discussion: 

  • Carriers of CYP2C19*17 are more likely to fail PPIs for EoE.  Children with CYP2C19*17 gain of function “have a 7.7 fold better odds of failing PPI therapy” than noncarriers.
  • CYP2C19*17 effects “appears to be exerted within a specific range of PPI doses…and does not appear to exert influence at the low and high ends of this dose range.”
  • STAT6, which in this study is a cofactor, “upregulates transcription of CCL26 (eostaxin-3) 53-fold in esophageal eosinophilia relative to levels in peptic esophagitis and 490-fold over levels found in normal esophageal biopsies.”
  • PPIs effectiveness “does not correlate with esophageal” acid exposure; thus, its effects are mediated via an anti-inflammatory mechanism.

My take: This study indicates that genotype-guided dosing of PPIs for the treatment of EoE is likely to be worthwhile.

 

View from Yonah Mountain, GA

Esophagitis in Pediatric Esophageal Atresia

A recent study (JL Yasuda et al. JPGN 2019; 69: 163-70) shows that esophagitis is common with and without proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy in children with esophageal atresia (EA).

Background: This study encompassed 310 patients (34% long gap EA) and 576 endoscopies (median age 3.7 years)

Key findings:

  • Erosive esophagitis was found in 8.7% of patients.
  • 15.2% of patients had esophagitis with >15 eos/hpf; 49% of patients had ≥1 eos/hpf (histologic eosinophilia)
  • 87% of endoscopies were preceded by acid suppression therapy; being on acid suppression reduced the odds for abnormal esophageal biopsy (P=0.011).
  • Histologic esophagitis was “highly prevalent even with high rates of acid suppressive medications use.”
  • For example, among those receiving PPI monotherapy, 150 had normal biopsy and 136 had abnormal biopsy.  Among those off all acid suppression, 30 had normal biopsy and 45 had abnormal biopsy.
  • For erosive esophagitis, this occurred in 12 on PPI and was not present in 274 on PPI therapy. Among those off all acid suppression, 4 had erosive esophagitis and 70 did not.
  • Presence or integrity of fundoplication was not significantly associated with esophagitis.

While this is a large study, the findings have several limitations. This is a single center retrospective study and this center attracts highly complex cases of EA.

My take: In addition to fairly high rates of erosive esophagitis and eosinophilic esophagitis, this study shows a high incidence of microscopic esophagitis, the significance of this is unclear.   This study supports the current recommendations of 3 endoscopies in childhood and perhaps more frequent surveillance in those with more complex EA.

Related blog posts:

Sign in Hood River, OR

 

What’s Going On in Patients with Reflux Who Fail Proton Pump Inhibitors

A recent prospective study (J Abdallah et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2019; 17: 1073-80) examined adults patients with documented reflux at baseline.  Patients who reported heartburn and/or regurgitation at least twice a week for 3 months (n=16) despite proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy were considered PPI failures. Those (n=13) who responded to standard dose PPI for at least 4 weeks were in the “PPI success” group.

Standard PPI dosing in this study:

  • Omeprazole 20 mg per day
  • Esomeprazole 40 mg per day
  • Pantoprazole 40 mg per day

Methods: Both groups (PPI Failure group, PPI Success group) underwent EGD and pH-MII studies. Abnormal acid exposure was considered if pH <4 was present for >4.2%.

Key findings:

  • 12 patients (75%) in the PPI failure group had either functional heartburn or reflux hypersensitivity
  • 4 patients in both groups had abnormal pH test result.
  • There was no statistically significant differences in the number of reflux events, acid exposure or nonacid reflux parameters between patients who failed or those who were successfully treated with PPIs.
  • In the PPI failure group: 25% had persistent GERD, 12.% had overlap with reflux hypersensitivity, and 62.5% had overlap with functional heartburn

My take: The difference between PPI failure and PPI success largely is due to the overlapping presence of functional esophageal disorders.

Related blog posts:

Royal Palace, Madrid

How Important Are Proton Pump Inhibitors for Intensive Care Patients?

A recent randomized, blinded study (M Krag et al. NEJM 2018; 379: 2199-2208, editorial 2263-4) describes the use of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy in adults (n=3298) in the ICU at high risk for gastrointestinal bleeding. High risk features included liver disease, coagulopathy, shock, anticoagulant therapy, renal replacement treatment, and mechanical ventilation.

Key findings:

  • Stress-ulcer bleeding may be less prevalent than in the past, perhaps due to improved ICU care. GI bleeding occurred in 4.2% of placebo-treated patients compared to 2.5% of pantoprazole-treated patients
  • Overall outcomes were essentially identical. At 90 days, 510 patients (31.1%) in the pantoprazole group and 49 (30.4%) in the placebo group had died (RR 1.02).
  • Using a composite event score to weight potential good and adverse effects (eg C diff infection, myocardial infarction, bleeding, pneumonia) of PPI therapy, the authors found that this occurred in 21.9% of pantoprazole group compared with 22.6% of placebo group (22.6%).

Reduction in GI bleeding could be related in part to the more frequent use of enteral feedings.  And, the combination of enteral feeding with the use of PPI treatment may increase the risk of pneumonia.

In the associated commentary, the authors note that “prophylaxis with a PPI, if initiated, should be reserved for seriously ill patients who are at high risk for this complication.” They acknowledge a lack of a uniform definition of high risk and the “admittedly small (1.7%) difference in bleeding rates.”

 

Updated Consensus Guidelines for Eosinophilic Esophagitis

Full text: ES Dellon, CA Liacouras,  J Molina-Infante, GT Furuta et al. Gastroenterol 2018; 155: 1022-33.

This article provides a thorough review of EoE -including clinical features, differential diagnosis, diagnostic criteria, and treatments.

Key point: “The evidence suggests that PPIs are better classified as a treatment for esophageal eosinophilia that may be due to EoE than as a diagnostic criterion, and we have developed updated consensus criteria for EoE that reflect this change.”

Related blog posts:

Which Proton Pump Inhibitor is the Most Potent?

A recent study (DY Graham, A Tansel. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2018; 16: 800-808) analyzed 56 randomized trials to determine relative potency of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) based on time in which intragastric pH was 4 or less (pH4time).

Key findings:

  • Pantoprazole 20 mg was equivalent to 4.5 mg of omeprazole
  • Lansoprazole 15 mg was equivalent to 13.5 mg of omeprazole
  • Esomeprazole 20 mg was equivalent to 32 mg of omeprazole
  • Rabeprazole 20 mg was equivalent to 36 mg of omeprazole

The authors note that peak effectiveness for PPIs was at ‘approximately 70 mg of omeprazole equivalents’.  In addition, they state that twice a day dosing was more effective than increasing once a day dosing; however, three times a day dosing was not more effective than twice a day. “Dexlansoprazole, a quasi-twice-a-day formulation produced similar acid suppression to the lowest twice-daily PPI regimen and 20 mg vonoprazan once daily provided similar efficacy aas high-dose twice-daily PPI.” The authors also compare costs; generics of pantoprazole, omeprazole, and esomeprazole cost as little as $0.02-0.04 per omeprazole equivalent.  Thus, 20 mg of omeprazole would be as little as 40 cents.

My take: Using the lowest effective dose of a PPI is recommended.  In patients needing higher dosing or with suboptimal response to acid suppression, this data can be very helpful.

 

Proctor Creek Trail