Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) shows characteristic microscopic pathologic features in endoscopically obtained esophageal biopsies, including an eosinophil-rich inflammatory infiltrate in esophageal ...epithelium, but other inflammatory cells are also increased. Additional alterations are found in epithelium and lamina propria. Esophageal biopsy pathology is a sensitive but not specific marker for EoE related to antigen exposure. Several of the pathologic features of EoE correlate with dysregulated genes in the EoE transcriptome. Eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases affecting the remainder of the gastrointestinal tract are less well characterized; this article discusses pathologic features in mucosal biopsies that could form the basis for diagnosis and future study.
Background Eosinophilic esophagitis is a chronic, immune-mediated inflammatory disorder that responds to dietary therapy; however, data evaluating the effectiveness of dietary therapeutic strategies ...are limited. Objective This study compared the effectiveness of 3 frequently prescribed dietary therapies (elemental, 6-food elimination, and skin prick and atopy patch–directed elimination diets) and assessed the remission predictability of skin tests and their utility in directing dietary planning. Methods A retrospective cohort of proton-pump inhibitor–unresponsive, non–glucocorticoid-treated patients with eosinophilic esophagitis who had 2 consecutive endoscopic biopsy specimens associated with dietary intervention was identified. Biopsy histology and remissions (<15 eosinophils/high-power field) after dietary therapy and food reintroductions were evaluated. Results Ninety-eight of 513 patients met the eligibility criteria. Of these 98 patients, 50% (n = 49), 27% (n = 26), and 23% (n = 23) received elemental, 6-food elimination, and directed diets, respectively. Remission occurred in 96%, 81%, and 65% of patients on elemental, 6-food elimination, and directed diets, respectively. The odds of postdiet remission versus nonremission were 5.6-fold higher ( P = .05) on elemental versus 6-food elimination diets and 12.5-fold higher ( P = .003) on elemental versus directed diets and were not significantly different ( P = .22) on 6-food elimination versus directed diets. After 116 single-food reintroductions, the negative predictive value of skin testing for remission was 40% to 67% (milk, 40%; egg, 56%; soy, 64%; and wheat, 67%). Conclusion All 3 dietary therapies are effective; however, an elemental diet is superior at inducing histologic remission compared with 6-food elimination and skin test–directed diets. Notably, an empiric 6-food elimination diet is as effective as a skin test–directed diet. The negative predictive values of foods most commonly reintroduced in single-food challenges are not sufficient to support the development of dietary advancement plans solely based on skin test results.
No treatment has been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). We investigated the efficacy and safety of a new formulation of oral budesonide suspension ...(OBS), a corticosteroid, in a prospective, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging study.
Subjects 2-18 years old with symptoms of EoE and peak eosinophil counts ≥20/high-power field at ≥2 levels of the esophagus were randomly assigned to groups given placebo or low-dose, medium-dose, or high-dose OBS for 12 weeks. Doses and volumes were adjusted on the basis of patients' age to cover the entire esophagus. The primary efficacy end point was compound response to therapy (peak eosinophil counts ≤6/high-power field at all levels of the esophagus and ≥50% reduction in EoE symptom score). Multiple safety parameters were evaluated.
Data from 71 subjects who completed all efficacy assessments were included in the primary efficacy analysis. At the end of 12 weeks, there were significantly greater percentages of responders in groups given medium-dose OBS (52.6%, P = .0092) and high-dose OBS (47.1%, P = .0174) than in the group given placebo (5.6%); there was no significant difference in percentages of responders between the low-dose OBS (11.8%) and placebo groups (P = .5282). The significant compound responses noted in the medium-dose and high-dose OBS groups were accounted for by the significant histologic responses; in contrast, all 4 groups (including the placebo group) had large symptom responses, and there was no significant difference in the percentage of subjects with a symptom response in either OBS group compared with the placebo group (P ≥ .1235). There were no unexpected safety concerns or signals.
Peak eosinophil counts were significantly reduced throughout the esophagus in pediatric patients with EoE who were given medium-dose and high-dose OBS. There was a large symptom response to placebo that was similar to symptom responses in the OBS groups; symptom response did not distinguish OBS from placebo. ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00762073.
Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is an allergen-mediated inflammatory disease with no approved treatment in the United States. Dupilumab, a VelocImmune-derived human monoclonal antibody against the ...interleukin (IL) 4 receptor, inhibits IL4 and IL13 signaling. Dupilumab is effective in the treatment of allergic, atopic, and type 2 diseases, so we assessed its efficacy and safety in patients with EoE.
We performed a phase 2 study of adults with active EoE (2 episodes of dysphagia/week with peak esophageal eosinophil density of 15 or more eosinophils per high-power field), from May 12, 2015, through November 9, 2016, at 14 sites. Participants were randomly assigned to groups that received weekly subcutaneous injections of dupilumab (300 mg, n = 23) or placebo (n = 24) for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was change from baseline to week 10 in Straumann Dysphagia Instrument (SDI) patient-reported outcome (PRO) score. We also assessed histologic features of EoE (peak esophageal intraepithelial eosinophil count and EoE histologic scores), endoscopically visualized features (endoscopic reference score), esophageal distensibility, and safety.
The mean SDI PRO score was 6.4 when the study began. In the dupilumab group, SDI PRO scores were reduced by a mean value of 3.0 at week 10 compared with a mean reduction of 1.3 in the placebo group (P = .0304). At week 12, dupilumab reduced the peak esophageal intraepithelial eosinophil count by a mean 86.8 eosinophils per high-power field (reduction of 107.1%; P < .0001 vs placebo), the EoE-histologic scoring system (HSS) severity score by 68.3% (P < .0001 vs placebo), and the endoscopic reference score by 1.6 (P = .0006 vs placebo). Dupilumab increased esophageal distensibility by 18% vs placebo (P < .0001). Higher proportions of patients in the dupilumab group developed injection-site erythema (35% vs 8% in the placebo group) and nasopharyngitis (17% vs 4% in the placebo group).
In a phase 2 trial of patients with active EoE, dupilumab reduced dysphagia, histologic features of disease (including eosinophilic infiltration and a marker of type 2 inflammation), and abnormal endoscopic features compared with placebo. Dupilumab increased esophageal distensibility and was generally well tolerated. ClinicalTrials.gov, Number: NCT02379052
Background Eosinophilic esophagitis is a chronic allergic disease with insufficient treatment options. Results from animal studies suggest that IL-5 induces eosinophil trafficking in the esophagus. ...Objective We sought to evaluate the effect of reslizumab, a neutralizing antibody against IL-5, in children and adolescents with eosinophilic esophagitis. Methods Patients with symptom severity scores of moderate or worse and an esophageal biopsy specimen with 24 or more intraepithelial eosinophils per high-power field were randomly assigned to receive infusions of 1, 2, or 3 mg/kg reslizumab or placebo at weeks 0, 4, 8, and 12. The coprimary efficacy measures were changes in peak esophageal eosinophil count and the physician’s global assessment score at week 15 (end of therapy). Results Two-hundred twenty-six patients received study medication. Median reductions from baseline to the end of therapy in peak esophageal eosinophil counts were 59%, 67%, 64%, and 24% in the 1, 2, and 3 mg/kg reslizumab (all P < .001) and placebo groups, respectively. All treatment groups, including the placebo group, showed improvements in physician’s global assessment scores; the differences between the reslizumab and placebo groups were not statistically significant. The most common adverse events in the reslizumab groups were headache, cough, nasal congestion, and upper respiratory tract infection. One patient in each reslizumab group and 2 in the placebo group had serious adverse events; none were considered related to the study medication. Conclusion Reslizumab significantly reduced intraepithelial esophageal eosinophil counts in children and adolescents with eosinophilic esophagitis. However, improvements in symptoms were observed in all treatment groups and were not associated with changes in esophageal eosinophil counts.
During the last decade, clinical practice saw a rapid increase of patients with esophageal eosinophilia who were thought to have gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) but who did not respond to ...medical and/or surgical GERD management. Subsequent studies demonstrated that these patients had a “new” disease termed eosinophilic esophagitis (EE). As recognition of EE grew, so did confusion surrounding diagnostic criteria and treatment. To address these issues, a multidisciplinary task force of 31 physicians assembled with the goal of determining diagnostic criteria and making recommendations for evaluation and treatment of children and adults with suspected EE. Consensus recommendations were based upon a systematic review of the literature and expert opinion. EE is a clinicopathological disease characterized by (1) Symptoms including but not restricted to food impaction and dysphagia in adults, and feeding intolerance and GERD symptoms in children; (2) ≥ 15 eosinophils/HPF; (3) Exclusion of other disorders associated with similar clinical, histological, or endoscopic features, especially GERD. (Use of high dose proton pump inhibitor treatment or normal pH monitoring). Appropriate treatments include dietary approaches based upon eliminating exposure to food allergens, or topical corticosteroids. Since EE is a relatively new disease, the intent of this report is to provide current recommendations for care of affected patients and defining gaps in knowledge for future research studies.
Dupilumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody, blocks interleukin-4 and interleukin-13 signaling, which have key roles in eosinophilic esophagitis.
We conducted a three-part, phase 3 trial in which ...patients 12 years of age or older underwent randomization in a 1:1 ratio to receive subcutaneous dupilumab at a weekly dose of 300 mg or placebo (Part A) or in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive 300 mg of dupilumab either weekly or every 2 weeks or weekly placebo (Part B) up to week 24. Eligible patients who completed Part A or Part B continued the trial in Part C, in which those who completed Part A received dupilumab at a weekly dose of 300 mg up to week 52 (the Part A-C group); Part C that included the eligible patients from Part B is ongoing. The two primary end points at week 24 were histologic remission (≤6 eosinophils per high-power field) and the change from baseline in the Dysphagia Symptom Questionnaire (DSQ) score (range, 0 to 84, with higher values indicating more frequent or more severe dysphagia).
In Part A, histologic remission occurred in 25 of 42 patients (60%) who received weekly dupilumab and in 2 of 39 patients (5%) who received placebo (difference, 55 percentage points; 95% confidence interval CI, 40 to 71; P<0.001). In Part B, histologic remission occurred in 47 of 80 patients (59%) with weekly dupilumab, in 49 of 81 patients (60%) with dupilumab every 2 weeks, and in 5 of 79 patients (6%) with placebo (difference between weekly dupilumab and placebo, 54 percentage points; 95% CI, 41 to 66 P<0.001; difference between dupilumab every 2 weeks and placebo, 56 percentage points; 95% CI, 43 to 69 not significant per hierarchical testing). The mean (±SD) DSQ scores at baseline were 33.6±12.41 in Part A and 36.7±11.22 in Part B; the scores improved with weekly dupilumab as compared with placebo, with differences of -12.32 (95% CI, -19.11 to -5.54) in Part A and -9.92 (95% CI, -14.81 to -5.02) in Part B (both P<0.001) but not with dupilumab every 2 weeks (difference in Part B, -0.51; 95% CI, -5.42 to 4.41). Serious adverse events occurred in 9 patients during the Part A or B treatment period (in 7 who received weekly dupilumab, 1 who received dupilumab every 2 weeks, and 1 who received placebo) and in 1 patient in the Part A-C group during the Part C treatment period who received placebo in Part A and weekly dupilumab in Part C.
Among patients with eosinophilic esophagitis, subcutaneous dupilumab administered weekly improved histologic outcomes and alleviated symptoms of the disease. (Funded by Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03633617.).
Background & Aims Gene expression profiling provides an opportunity for definitive diagnosis but has not yet been well applied to inflammatory diseases. Here we describe an approach for diagnosis of ...an emerging form of esophagitis, eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), which is currently diagnosed by histology and clinical symptoms. Methods We developed an EoE diagnostic panel (EDP) comprising a 96-gene quantitative polymerase chain reaction array and an associated dual-algorithm that uses cluster analysis and dimensionality reduction using a cohort of randomly selected esophageal biopsy samples from pediatric patients with EoE (n = 15) or without EoE (non-EoE controls, n = 14) and subsequently vetted the EDP using a separate cohort of 194 pediatric and adult patient samples derived from both fresh or formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue: active EoE (n = 91), control (non-EoE and EoE remission, n = 57), histologically ambiguous (n = 34), and reflux (n = 12) samples. Results The EDP identified adult and pediatric patients with EoE with approximately 96% sensitivity and approximately 98% specificity, and distinguished patients with EoE in remission from controls, as well as identified patients exposed to swallowed glucorticoids. The EDP could be used with formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue RNA and distinguished patients with EoE from those with reflux esophagitis, identified by pH-impedance testing. Preliminary evidence showed that the EDP could identify patients likely to have disease relapse after treatment. Conclusions We developed a molecular diagnostic test (referred to as the EDP) that identifies patients with esophagitis in a fast, objective, and mechanistic manner, offering an opportunity to improve diagnosis and treatment, and a platform approach for other inflammatory diseases.
Malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors (MPNSTs) are sarcomas of Schwann cell lineage origin that occur sporadically or in association with the inherited syndrome neurofibromatosis type 1. To ...identify genetic drivers of MPNST development, we used the Sleeping Beauty (SB) transposon-based somatic mutagenesis system in mice with somatic loss of transformation-related protein p53 (Trp53) function and/or overexpression of human epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR). Common insertion site (CIS) analysis of 269 neurofibromas and 106 MPNSTs identified 695 and 87 sites with a statistically significant number of recurrent transposon insertions, respectively. Comparison to human data sets identified new and known driver genes for MPNST formation at these sites. Pairwise co-occurrence analysis of CIS-associated genes identified many cooperating mutations that are enriched in Wnt/β-catenin, PI3K-AKT-mTOR and growth factor receptor signaling pathways. Lastly, we identified several new proto-oncogenes, including Foxr2 (encoding forkhead box R2), which we functionally validated as a proto-oncogene involved in MPNST maintenance.
PDF
