Eosinophilic Esophagitis: Once vs Twice Daily Steroid Treatment

CC Reed et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2025; 23: 946-953. Open Access! Daily or Twice Daily Treatment With Topical Steroids Results in Similar Responses in Eosinophilic Esophagitis

Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study using the UNC EoE Clinicopathologic Database of newly diagnosed patients with EoE treated with a tCS who had a follow-up endoscopy with biopsy. In total, there were 522 patients, including 195 pediatric patients (<18 yr). 122 patients received once daily dosing and 400 patients received twice daily dosing.

At our center, patients are typically treated on a clinical basis with either oral viscous budesonide or fluticasone from a multidose inhaler, with daily doses ranging from 1–2 mg for budesonide and 440–1760 μg for fluticasone based on patient size and at the discretion of the provider.

Key findings:

  • Global symptomatic response (78% vs 76%; P = .82), posttreatment eosinophil count (20.8 vs 25.6; P = .21), posttreatment EoE Endoscopic Reference Score (2.2 vs 2.2; P = .92), and histologic response (<15 eos/hpf; 56% vs 58%; P = .66) did not differ by dosing frequency
  • Candida was less frequent with daily dosing (2% vs 8%; P = .04)

My take: This study suggests that once daily dosing can be as effective as twice daily dosing. It may be that the total dose administered may be more important than the frequency. More studies are needed to confirm these results.

Related blog posts:

But How Well Does It Work in Theory and Eosinophilic Esophagitis Treatments

C Mayerhofer et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2023; 21: 2197-2210. Open Access! Efficacy of Elimination Diets in Eosinophilic Esophagitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

“That’s all well and good in practice… but how does it work in theory?” I saw this quote many years ago when I was visiting the University of Chicago.

This quote came to mind as I was reading this article which showed relatively little change in the efficacy between more and less stringent elimination diets for eosinophilic esophagitis. This meta-analysis included 915 children and 847 adults and assessed the efficacy rates of 4 major dietary treatment regimens in eosinophilic esophagitis: 6-food (SFED), 4-food (FFED), 1-food (OFED), and a targeted elimination diet (TED).

Key findings:

  • The overall rate of histologic remission was 53.8% and in the individual dietary groups was 61.3% for SFED, 49.4% for FFED, 51.4% for OFED, and 45.7% for TED.
  • The overall rate of clinical response was 80.8%, with response rates of 92.8% for SFED, 74.1% for FFED, 87.1% for OFED, and 69.0% for TED.
Percentage of food antigen triggers identified via endoscopic
and clinical evaluation after food re-introduction.

My take: It is clear to me that more restrictive diets can yield better response rates; however, in clinical practice they are difficult to maintain and this study shows that the improvement with more food restrictions may be quite limited.

Another reference on eosinophilic esophagitis: CJ Ketchem et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2023 Aug;21(9):2252-2259. Open Access! Higher Body Mass Index Is Associated With Decreased Treatment Response to Topical Steroids in Eosinophilic Esophagitis. Key finding: Histologic response (n=296) to topic steroids was higher for those who were nonobese compared with obese at fewer than 15 eosinophils per high-power field (61% vs 47%; P = .049); in addition, nonobese patients had significantly greater endoscopic and symptomatic responses.

Related blog posts: