Cohort Profile: The Swiss Eosinophilic Esophagitis Cohort Study (SEECS).
ABSTRACT: Background and Aims:The prospective, observational Swiss Eosinophilic Esophagitis Cohort Study (SEECS) was set up in 2015 with the following goals in mind: (1) to provide up-to-date epidemiologic data; (2) to assess the appropriateness of care; (3) to evaluate the psychosocial impact; and (4) to foster translational research projects. Data capture relies on validated instruments to assess disease activity and focuses on epidemiologic variables and biosamples (esophageal biopsies and blood specimens). An annual inclusion of 70 new patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) or proton pump inhibitor-responsive esophageal eosinophilia (PPI-REE) is intended. We herein describe the SEECS cohort profile. Methods:The SEECS includes adult patients (age ≥18 years) with EoE or PPI-REE diagnosed according to published criteria. After inclusion, the patients are typically seen once a year for a clinical and endoscopic/histologic follow-up examination. Data are captured using validated questionnaires. Biosamples from patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and controls with a healthy esophagus are collected as well. Results:From January 2016 to July 2017, a total of 111 patients with EoE and 10 patients with PPI-REE were recruited. In addition, esophageal biopsies and blood samples from 11 patients with GERD and 20 controls with a healthy esophagus were collected. The mean age of the patients with EoE and those with PPI-REE was 39.6 ± 12.9 and 44.6 ± 15.6 years, respectively. A male predominance was found among both the patients with EoE (77.5%) and those with PPI-REE (70%). Concomitant allergic disorders were found in 79.3% of the patients with EoE and 90% of the patients with PPI-REE. At inclusion, the EoE patients were treated with the following therapeutic regimens: no therapy (0.9%), PPI (36%), swallowed topical corticosteroids (82.9%), elimination diets (15.3%), and esophageal dilation (19.8%). Conclusions:The SEECS is the first national cohort study of patients with EoE or PPI-REE. The SEECS will provide up-to-date epidemiologic data and foster translational research projects.
Project description:Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is an allergy-mediated disease culminating in severe eosinophilic inflammation and dysfunction of the esophagus. This chronic disorder of the esophagus causes significant morbidity, poor quality of life, and complications involving fibrosis and esophageal remodeling. Overlapping features between EoE and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) pose great challenges to differentiating the two conditions, although the two disorders are not mutually exclusive. Recent findings suggest that the confounding condition proton pump inhibitor - responsive esophageal eosinophilia (PPI-REE) is likely a subset of EoE. Since PPIs have therapeutic properties that can benefit EoE, PPIs should be considered as a therapeutic option for EoE rather than a diagnostic screen to differentiate GERD, PPI-REE, and EoE. Other current treatments include dietary therapy, corticosteroids, and dilation. Immunomodulators and biologic agents might have therapeutic value, and larger trials are needed to assess efficacy and safety. Understanding the pathophysiology of EoE is critical to the development of novel therapeutics.
Project description:OPINION STATEMENT:New developments in eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) pathogenesis are shaping our current therapeutic and management strategies. EoE is a chronic allergic inflammatory disease with progression to fibrostenotic disease. The disease warrants early diagnosis and long-term maintenance therapy. The diagnosis of EoE should be based on the concept of an allergy-mediated disease with esophageal dysfunction and esophageal eosinophilia. Recent findings suggest that proton pump inhibitor (PPI)-responsive esophageal eosinophilia (PPI-REE) is likely a continuum of EoE or a similar T-helper 2 (Th2)-mediated allergic process. PPIs have therapeutic properties that can benefit both gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and EoE. Therefore, PPIs should be considered not a diagnostic tool but, rather, a therapeutic option for EoE. If patients are PPI nonresponsive, then dietary therapy or steroid therapy should be considered. Dilation can be reserved as adjuvant therapy for severe fibrostenotic lesions.
Project description:Esophageal eosinophilia can be proton pump inhibitor (PPI) resistant or responsive, representing 2 entities known as eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) and PPI-responsive esophageal eosinophilia (PPI-REE), respectively. Although they present with similar clinical features, EoE is accepted to be an antigen-driven, TH2-associated allergic disorder, whereas the cause of PPI-REE remains a mystery.In this study, our aim was to investigate the pathogenesis of PPI-REE by using a recently described EoE diagnostic panel (EDP) composed of a set of 94 esophageal transcripts and to determine whether PPI therapy reverses any esophageal transcriptional abnormalities.We evaluated the EDP signature in biopsy samples obtained from adult and pediatric patients with PPI-REE from 4 institutions and compared the pre- and post-PPI therapy expression profiles of these subjects with those of patients with active EoE.The EDP differentiated patients with EoE from control subjects with 100% accuracy among the 4 clinical sites. Bioinformatics analysis revealed largely overlapping transcriptomes between patients with PPI-REE and those with EoE, including the genes for eosinophil chemotaxis (eotaxin 3, CCL26), barrier molecules (desmoglein 1, DSG1), tissue remodeling (periostin, POSTN), and mast cells (carboxypeptidase A, CPA3). PPI monotherapy alone almost completely reversed the allergic inflammatory transcriptome of patients with PPI-REE. Furthermore, we identified a set of candidate genes to differentiate patients with EoE from those with PPI-REE before treatment.These findings provide definitive evidence that PPI-REE is a disease entity with significant molecular overlap with EoE, suggesting that many patients with PPI-REE represent a continuum of the same pathogenic allergic mechanisms that underlie EoE and thus might constitute a subphenotype of patients with EoE. The ability of PPI therapy to nearly entirely reverse gene expression associated with PPI-REE, particularly that associated with classic features of allergic inflammation, provides new insight into potential disease etiology and management strategies for patients with significant esophageal eosinophilia.
Project description:OBJECTIVE:Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are an effective treatment for eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE); however, only 30% to 60% of patients respond. Common genetic variants in CYP2C19 and STAT6 associate with PPI plasma concentration and magnitude of inflammatory response, respectively. Our objective was to determine if genetic variation in the genes for CYP2C19 and STAT6 influence differentiation between PPI responsive esophageal eosinophilia versus PPI nonresponsive EoE (PPI-REE, PPI-nonresponsive EoE). METHODS:Genomic DNA was isolated from 92 esophageal tissue biopsies collected from participants of a prospective clinical trial of high-dose PPI therapy for esophageal eosinophilia in children. RESULTS:Of the 92 patients examined, 57 (62%) were PPI-REE and 35 (38%) were PPI-nonresponsive EoE. Forty-six of the 92 patients were further characterized by pH probe monitoring; there was no association between reflux index and carriage of CYP2C1917 (P = 0.35). In children who received a PPI dose between ?1.54 and ?2.05?mg/kg/day, binary logistic regression modeling showed that carriage of CYP2C1917 associated with PPI-nonresponsive EoE (odds ratio (OR) [95% confidence interval (CI)] = 7.71 [1.21, 49.11], P = 0.031). Carriage of STAT6 allelic variant rs1059513 predicts PPI-REE (OR [95% CI] = 6.16 [1.44, 26.4], P = 0.028), whereas carriage of STAT6 rs324011 synergizes with CYP2C1917 to predict PPI-nonresponsive EoE (rs324011 OR [95% CI] = 5.56 [1.33, 20.72], P?=?0.022; CYP2C1917 OR [95% CI]?=?8.19[1.42, 50.57], P = 0.023). CONCLUSIONS:Common variants in CYP2C19 and STAT6 associate with a PPI-nonresponsive EoE outcome of PPI therapy for esophageal eosinophilia suggesting that response rates may be improved by adopting a genotype-guided approach to PPI dosing.
Project description:<h4>Objective</h4>The microbiome has been implicated in the pathogenesis of a number of allergic and inflammatory diseases. The mucosa affected by eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is composed of a stratified squamous epithelia and contains intraepithelial eosinophils. To date, no studies have identified the esophageal microbiome in patients with EoE or the impact of treatment on these organisms. The aim of this study was to identify the esophageal microbiome in EoE and determine whether treatments change this profile. We hypothesized that clinically relevant alterations in bacterial populations are present in different forms of esophagitis.<h4>Design</h4>In this prospective study, secretions from the esophageal mucosa were collected from children and adults with EoE, Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease (GERD) and normal mucosa using the Esophageal String Test (EST). Bacterial load was determined using quantitative PCR. Bacterial communities, determined by 16S rRNA gene amplification and 454 pyrosequencing, were compared between health and disease.<h4>Results</h4>Samples from a total of 70 children and adult subjects were examined. Bacterial load was increased in both EoE and GERD relative to normal subjects. In subjects with EoE, load was increased regardless of treatment status or degree of mucosal eosinophilia compared with normal. Haemophilus was significantly increased in untreated EoE subjects as compared with normal subjects. Streptococcus was decreased in GERD subjects on proton pump inhibition as compared with normal subjects.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Diseases associated with mucosal eosinophilia are characterized by a different microbiome from that found in the normal mucosa. Microbiota may contribute to esophageal inflammation in EoE and GERD.
Project description:BACKGROUND & AIMS:Diagnostic testing for chronic esophageal disorders relies on histopathology analysis of biopsies or uncomfortable transnasal catheters or wireless pH monitoring, which capture abnormal intraluminal refluxate. We therefore developed a balloon mucosal impedance (MI) catheter system that instantly detects changes in esophageal mucosal integrity during endoscopy over a long segment of the esophagus. We performed a prospective study to evaluate the ability of a balloon-incorporated MI catheter to detect and evaluate esophageal disorders, including gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). METHODS:We performed a prospective study of 69 patients undergoing esophagogastroduodenoscopy with or without wireless pH monitoring. Patients were classified as having GERD (erosive esophagitis or abnormal pH; n = 24), EoE (confirmed with pathology analysis of tissues from both distal and proximal esophagus; n = 21), or non-GERD (normal results from esophagogastroduodenoscopy and pH tests; n = 24). Receiver operating characteristic curves and area under the operating characteristic curve (AUC) were used to compare the accuracy of balloon MI in diagnosis. Probabilities of assignment to each group (GERD, non-GERD, or EoE) were estimated using multinomial logistic regression. Association between MI patterns and diagnoses were validated using data from patients seen at 3 separate institutions. RESULTS:MI pattern along the esophageal axis differed significantly (P < .01) among patients with GERD, EoE, and non-GERD. Patients with non-GERD had higher MI values along all measured segments. The MI pattern for GERD was easily distinguished from that of EoE: in patients with GERD, MI values were low in the distal esophagus and normalized along the proximal esophagus, whereas in patients with EoE, measurements were low in all segments of the esophagus. Intercept and rate of rise of MI value (slope) as distance increased from the squamocolumnar junction identified patients with GERD with an AUC = 0.67, patients with EoE with an AUC = 0.84, and patients with non-GERD with an AUC = 0.83 in the development cohort. One patient had an adverse event (reported mild chest pain after the procedure) and was discharged from the hospital without further events. CONCLUSIONS:We developed a balloon MI catheter system that instantly detects changes in esophageal mucosal integrity during endoscopy and found it to be safe and able to identify patients with GERD, EoE, or non-GERD. We validated our findings in a separate cohort for patients. ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT03103789.
Project description:Esophageal food impaction (EFI) can be the initial presentation of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). EoE is characterized by persistent esophageal eosinophilia (EE). Both EFI and EE are related to a variety of conditions. To date, the relationship between EFI, EE, and EoE remains unclear.To review our institutional experience with EFIs and combine our knowledge with the existing literature to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis for delineating the relationship between EFI, EE, and EoE.We reviewed medical records of 72 children with EFI presenting to our emergency center between 2007 and 2013. PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus databases were screened from inception until July 2014 to identify studies linking EFI and EoE. Included studies were methodically assessed for the quality and strength of association between EFI and EoE.Our institutional experience highlighted the possibility of proton-pump inhibitor therapy-responsive EE (PPI-REE) as an underrecognized risk factor for EFI. A systematic review of 14 studies, including ours, revealed that most studies did not eliminate other causes of EFI or EE. The meta-analysis revealed that esophageal biopsies were obtained from 54% (40-68) of individuals presenting with EFI, and the overall EoE-attributable EFI among those who were biopsied was 54% (43-65). Substantial heterogeneity was noted among the studies.PPI-REE is an underestimated risk factor for EFI. The quality of existing evidence linking EFI and EoE is limited by several important factors. Future studies with robust design are warranted to delineate the relationship between EFI, EE, and EoE.
Project description:<h4>Background & aims</h4>Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is characterized by medically/surgically-resistant gastroesophageal reflux symptoms and dense squamous eosinophilia. Studies suggest that histologic assessment of esophageal eosinophilia alone cannot reliably separate patients with EoE from those with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Our goal was to develop an assay to identify EoE patients and perhaps differentiate EoE from other causes of esophageal eosinophilia.<h4>Methods</h4>A monoclonal antibody specific for an eosinophil secondary granule protein (eosinophil peroxidase [EPX]) was developed and shown to specifically identify intact eosinophils and detect eosinophil degranulation in formalin-fixed specimens. A histopathologic scoring algorithm was developed to analyze data from patient evaluations; the utility of this algorithm was assessed by using archived esophageal tissues from patients with known diagnoses of EoE and GERD as well as controls from 2 tertiary care centers.<h4>Results</h4>Intraobserver/interobserver blinded evaluations demonstrated a significant difference (P < .001) between scores of samples taken from control subjects, from patients with esophageal eosinophilia who had a diagnosis of EoE, and from patients with GERD (P < .001). This algorithm also was able to identify patients whose clinical course was suggestive of a diagnosis of EoE, but that nonetheless failed to reach the critical threshold number of > or =15 eosinophils in a high-power (40x) microscopy field.<h4>Conclusions</h4>A novel immunohistochemical scoring system was developed to address an unmet medical need to differentiate histologic specimens from patients with EoE relative to those with GERD. The availability of a unique anti-EPX-specific monoclonal antibody, combined with the ease/rapidity of this staining method and scoring system, will provide a valuable strategy for the assessment of esophageal eosinophilia.
Project description:A new gene expression profile test may distinguish eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), but the optimal tissue preparation and biopsy location are unknown. We aimed to determine if formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) and RNA-later (RNAL) preserved specimens from newly diagnosed EoE patients have equivalent gene expression scores and whether scores vary by esophageal biopsy location.We analyzed prospectively collected and banked esophageal biopsies from EoE patients and GERD controls. Paired FFPE and RNAL samples from the distal, mid, and proximal esophagus were used. RNA was extracted, and gene expression for a previously constructed 96 gene panel was quantified with a summary expression score. Scores were compared between EoE and GERD patients, between FFPE and RNAL samples, and between the different esophageal locations.A total of 72 samples, representing paired FFPE and RNAL specimens from 9 EoE cases and 3 GERD controls, were analyzed. Overall median gene expression scores were similar between FFPE and RNAL (238 vs 227; p=0.64), correlation was excellent between FFPE and RNAL (Spearman's rho=0.90; p<0.001), and there were no differences by biopsy level. Median gene scores distinguished EoE from controls (134 vs 402; p=0.02), and overall agreement between preservation methods and EoE case status was perfect (kappa=1.0; p<0.001).Gene expression scores were equivalent in FFPE and RNAL, and were also similar across three esophageal locations. This implies that a single biopsy in either FFPE or RNAL from anywhere in the esophagus may have the potential for genetic diagnosis of EoE.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Although current American guidelines distinguish proton pump inhibitor-responsive oesophageal eosinophilia (PPI-REE) from eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE), these entities are broadly similar. While two microarray studies showed that they have similar transcriptomes, more extensive RNA sequencing studies have not been done previously. AIM:To determine whether RNA sequencing identifies genetic markers distinguishing PPI-REE from EoE. METHODS:We retrospectively examined 13 PPI-REE and 14 EoE biopsies, matched for tissue eosinophil content, and 14 normal controls. Patients and controls were not PPI-treated at the time of biopsy. We did RNA sequencing on formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue, with differential expression confirmation by quantitative polymerase chain reaction (PCR). We validated the use of formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded vs RNAlater-preserved tissue, and compared our formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded EoE results to a prior EoE study. RESULTS:By RNA sequencing, no genes were differentially expressed between the EoE and PPI-REE groups at the false discovery rate (FDR) ?0.01 level. Compared to normal controls, 1996 genes were differentially expressed in the PPI-REE group and 1306 genes in the EoE group. By less stringent criteria, only MAPK8IP2 was differentially expressed between PPI-REE and EoE (FDR = 0.029, 2.2-fold less in EoE than in PPI-REE), with similar results by PCR. KCNJ2, which was differentially expressed in a prior study, was similar in the EoE and PPI-REE groups by both RNA sequencing and real-time PCR. CONCLUSION:Eosinophilic oesophagitis and PPI-REE have comparable transcriptomes, confirming that they are part of the same disease continuum.