Katzka, David A.

AimsBarrett's oesophagus with indefinite for dysplasia (BE‐IND) is a subjective diagnosis with a low interobserver agreement (IOA) among pathologists and uncertain clinical implications. This study aimed to assess the utility of p53 immunohistochemistry (p53‐IHC) in assessing BE‐IND specimens.Methods and resultsArchive endoscopic biopsies with a BE‐IND diagnosis from two academic centres were analysed. First, haematoxylin and eosin‐stained slides (H&E) were reviewed by four expert gastrointestinal (GI) pathologists allocated into two groups (A and B). After a washout period of at least 8 weeks, H&E slides were reassessed side‐to‐side with p53‐IHC available. We compared the rate of changed diagnosis and the IOA for all BE grades before and after p53‐IHC. We included 216 BE‐IND specimens from 185 patients, 44.0 and 32.9% of which were confirmed after H&E slide revision by groups A and B, respectively. More than half the cases were reclassified to a non‐dysplastic BE (NDBE), while 5.6% of cases in group A and 7.4% in group B were reclassified to definite dysplasia. The IOA for NDBE, BE‐IND, low‐grade dysplasia (LGD) and high‐grade dysplasia (HGD)/intramucosal cancer (IMC) was 0.31, 0.21, −0.03 and −0.02, respectively. Use of p53‐IHC led to a >40% reduction in BE‐IND diagnoses (P < 0.001) and increased IOA for all BE grades [κ = 0.46 (NDBE), 0.26 (BE‐IND), 0.49 (LGD), 0.35 (HGD/IMC)]. An aberrant p53‐IHC pattern significantly increased the likelihood of reclassifying BE‐IND to definite dysplasia (odds ratio = 44.3, 95% confidence interval = 18.8–113.0).ConclusionP53‐IHC reduces the rate of BE‐IND diagnoses and improves the IOA among pathologists when reporting BE with equivocal epithelial changes.

Background: Question prompt lists (QPLs) are structured sets of disease-specific questions that enhance patient-physician communication by encouraging patients to ask questions during consultations. Aim: The aim of this study was to develop a preliminary achalasia-specific QPL created by esophageal experts. Methods: The QPL content was derived through a modified Delphi method consisting of 2 rounds. In round 1, experts provided 5 answers to the prompts “What general questions should patients ask when given a new diagnosis of achalasia” and “What questions do I not hear patients asking, but given my expertise, I believe they should be asking?” In round 2, experts rated questions on a 5-point Likert scale. Questions considered “essential” or “important” were accepted into the QPL. Feedback regarding the QPL was obtained in a pilot study wherein patients received the QPL before their consultation and completed surveys afterwards. Results: Nineteen esophageal experts participated in both rounds. Of 148 questions from round 1, 124 (83.8%) were accepted into the QPL. These were further reduced to 56 questions to minimize redundancy. Questions were categorized into 6 themes: “What is achalasia,” “Risks with achalasia,” “Symptom management in achalasia,” “Treatment of achalasia,” “Risk of reflux after treatment,” and “Follow-up after treatment.” Nineteen patients participated in the pilot, most of whom agreed that the QPL was helpful (84.2%) and recommended its wider use (84.2%). Conclusions: This is the first QPL developed specifically for adults with achalasia. Although well-received in a small pilot, follow-up studies will incorporate additional patient feedback to further refine the QPL content and assess its usability, acceptability, and feasibility.

Klinefelter syndrome (KS) is a sex aneuploidy abnormality comprised by one additional X chromosome. It occurs in 1:500–1000 male births. As with women, an increased susceptibility to autoimmune diseases is present. We report three cases of coexisting EoE and KS for a prevalence of 2% in our EoE clinic. Possible changes in gene expression in KS are reviewed, some of which may be related to activation of genes located on the X chromosome. We postulate that these X-activated genes in patients with KS yield a greater likelihood of developing EoE because of their genetic predisposition to autoimmune diseases.

Summary Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is the most common cause of esophageal food impaction (EFI). Approaches to management of EFI due to EoE have not been well characterized. We conducted a web-based survey to understand approaches to management of EFI due to EoE among endoscopists. Questions focused on management of patients from presentation to post-endoscopy follow-up. The survey was administered to a list of eligible candidates provided by societies of gastroenterology. A total of 308 endoscopists completed the questionnaire. The majority (83%) practiced in Europe and treated adults (78%). Most agreed patients should be advised to seek emergency care (66%) within 1 to 2 hours (41% agreement). There was agreement that medications to induce vomiting should be avoided (84%) and that blood tests or imaging studies were usually not required before endoscopy. By contrast, there was more variability in the type of sedation recommended and the need for endotracheal intubation, especially when comparing more experienced with less experienced EoE-endoscopists. Overall, fewer than half (43%) respondents recommended obtaining esophageal biopsies during the initial endoscopy. However, there were significant differences in the proportion who recommended biopsies based on level of EoE-experience (25, 52, 77%, P &lt; 0.001; less vs. moderate vs. very experienced) and comparing pediatric and adult endoscopists (32, vs. 79%, P &lt; 0.001; adult vs. pediatric). There exists heterogeneity among endoscopists in recommendations to manage EFI in patients with EoE. These findings support development of clinical guidelines and new studies to clarify the rationale for best practices. Key summary: Established knowledge—The optimal management of patients with esophageal food impaction due to eosinophilic esophagitis from presentation at the emergency department to postendoscopy care is unclear. New findings—Considerable recommendation variation exists in the management of EFI in patients with EoE. Our findings provide a rationale for the creation of consensus practice guidelines and further study into best practices.

INTRODUCTION: Eosinophilic gastritis (EG) is a chronic inflammatory disease of the stomach characterized by eosinophil-predominant gastric mucosal inflammation and gastrointestinal symptoms. The aim of this study was to prospectively evaluate endoscopic features in a large series of children and adults with EG to better understand the endoscopic manifestations and develop a standardized instrument for investigations. METHODS: Data were prospectively collected as part of the Consortium for Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Disease Researchers, a national collaborative network. Endoscopic features were prospectively recorded using a system specifically developed for EG, the EG Endoscopic Reference System (EG-REFS). Correlations were made between EG-REFS and clinical and histologic features. RESULTS: Of 98 patients with EG, 65 underwent assessments using EG-REFS. The most common findings were erythema (72%), raised lesions (49%), erosions (46%), and granularity (35%); only 8% of patients with active histology (≥30 eosinophils/high-power field) exhibited no endoscopic findings. A strong correlation between EG-REFS scores and physician global assessment of endoscopy severity was demonstrated (Spearman r = 0.84, P < 0.0001). The overall score and specific components of EG-REFS were more common in the antrum than in the fundus or body. EG-REFS severity was significantly correlated with active histology, defined by a threshold of ≥30 eosinophils/high-power field ( P = 0.0002). DISCUSSION: Prospective application of EG-REFS identified gastric features with a strong correlation with physician global assessment of endoscopic activity in EG. Endoscopic features demonstrated greater severity in patients with active histology and a predilection for the gastric antrum. Further development of EG-REFS should improve its utility in clinical studies.

INTRODUCTION: Treated patients with celiac disease (CeD) and nonceliac gluten sensitivity (NCGS) report acute, transient, incompletely understood symptoms after suspected gluten exposure. To determine whether (i) blinded gluten exposure induces symptoms, (ii) subjects accurately identify gluten exposure, and (iii) serum interleukin-2 (IL-2) levels distinguish CeD from NCGS subjects after gluten exposure. METHODS: Sixty subjects (n = 20 treated, healed CeD; n = 20 treated NCGS; n = 20 controls) were block randomized to a single, double-blind sham (rice flour) or 3-g gluten challenge with 72-hours follow-up. Twelve serial questionnaires (100 mm visual analog scale; pain, bloating, nausea, and fatigue) and 10 serial plasma samples were collected. Mucosal permeability was assessed using both urinary lactulose- 13 C mannitol ratios and endoscopic mucosal impedance. RESULTS: Thirty-five of 40 (83%) subjects with CeD and NCGS reported symptoms with gluten (8 CeD, 9 NCGS) and sham (9 CeD, 9 NCGS) compared with 9 of 20 (45%) controls after gluten (n = 6) and sham (n = 3). There was no significant difference in symptoms among groups. Only 2 of 10 subjects with CeD and 4 of 10 NCGS identified gluten, whereas 8 of 10 subjects with CeD and 5 of 10 NCGS identified sham. A significant plasma IL-2 increase occurred only in subjects with CeD after gluten, peaking at 3 hours and normalizing within 24 hours postchallenge despite no significant intestinal permeability change from baseline. DISCUSSION: Symptoms do not reliably indicate gluten exposure in either subjects with CeD or NCGS. IL-2 production indicates a rapid-onset gluten-induced T-cell activation in CeD despite long-standing treatment. The effector site is unknown, given no increased intestinal permeability after gluten.