Dellon, Evan S.

Summary The eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) Endoscopic Reference Score (EREFS) measures endoscopic severity. While a score of ≤2 has been proposed for endoscopic response, it is unknown whether achieving this threshold results in clinically important outcomes. We aimed to determine whether an EREFS response to topical steroids (tCS) is associated with a decreased need for future esophageal dilation. In this retrospective cohort study, we included patients with a new diagnosis of EoE who underwent esophageal dilation, were then treated with tCS, and had at least two follow-up endoscopies. Endoscopic response was defined as EREFS ≤2. Histological and global symptom responses were recorded. We compared patients with and without endoscopic response and calculated the number of subsequent dilations in each group. Of 113 EoE patients, 55 (49%) had endoscopic response post-tCS. Compared to endoscopic non-responders, responders were older (43.4 vs 34.4 years; p = 0.001) and had lower EREFS (4.4 ± 1.6 vs. 6.3 ± 1.5; p < 0.001) at baseline. EREFS responders required fewer dilations on their initial post-treatment endoscopy (65% vs 90%; p = 0.002) and had greater symptom (92% vs 64%; p = 0.005) and histologic responses (82% vs 24% <15 eos/hpf; p < 0.001). Over the median follow-up time of 1106 days, EREFS responders required fewer dilations than non-responders (4.5 ± 2.9 vs 6.2 ± 4.5; p = 0.03). Endoscopic responders to tCS required fewer esophageal dilations compared to non-responders. Responders also had better symptom and histologic responses. These results provide evidence that endoscopic response is associated with important clinical outcomes including a reduction in future esophageal dilations.

Summary While it is commonly known that patients with rheumatologic diseases can have esophageal dysfunction, this association is insufficiently understood. The aim is to determine the prevalence and characteristics of esophageal motility disorders in patients with rheumatic diseases. This is a single-center retrospective study of adults with rheumatologic disease who underwent high-resolution esophageal manometry (HREM). Those with and without a motility disorder (defined per Chicago classification CCv3.0 criteria, given the timing of the prior studies) were compared and multivariable logistic regression was used to determine odds of motility disorder by rheumatic disease. Of 289 patients, the mean age was 60.5 ± 13.8 years. Rheumatic diseases included Raynaud’s (42%), rheumatoid arthritis (RA) (39%), Sjogren’s (21%), systemic lupus erythematous (19%), systemic sclerosis (17%), and mixed connective tissue disease (13%). On HREM, 58% had an esophageal motility disorder: achalasia (5%), EGJ outflow obstruction (20%), jackhammer (8%), diffuse esophageal spasm (1%), ineffective esophageal motility (28%), and fragmented peristalsis (2%). Of note, 50% of the sample with a normal barium swallow had an esophageal dysmotility disorder on HREM. Those with psoriatic arthritis were less likely to have esophageal dysmotility (73% vs. 27%; P = 0.04). There was decreased odds of esophageal hypocontractility in those with RA (OR [95%CI]: 0.27 [0.12–0.58]) and increased odds (OR [95%CI]: 3.13 [1.16–8.41]) of esophageal hypocontractility among those with scleroderma. Esophageal motor disorders were found in more than half of patients with rheumatologic diseases who underwent HREM. HREM should be considered in patients with rheumatic conditions presenting with esophageal symptoms.

Goals: To determine long-term efficacy and safety of tCS for treatment of EoE. Background: Maintenance therapy with topical corticosteroids (tCS) is recommended for eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), but data for long-term use are still needed. Study: This retrospective cohort study assessed newly diagnosed patients with EoE who were treated with a tCS and had a follow-up endoscopy with biopsy after at least 5 years. Histologic symptomatic and endoscopic responses were extracted from medical records. Patients who did and did not have long-term tCS treatment were compared at baseline, and outcomes for patients were assessed at their last endoscopy while on tCS. Results: Of 431 patients with EoE treated with tCS, 104 met inclusion criteria for long-term use. For patients with long-term tCS use, the median time (IQR) on tCS was 6.5 years (5.4 to 8.8 y). At the last endoscopy, 54% had histologic response (<15 eos/hpf), but those with excellent adherence had a histologic response of 64%. Endoscopic severity also decreased with improved adherence which was strongly associated with EREFS (1.7 vs. 2.8 vs. 4.0 for excellent, good, and poor adherence; P<0.001). Symptomatic response was 68% overall, but only 40% in those with poor adherence (P=0.07). Complications of taking tCS were uncommon (adrenal insufficiency: 1%; osteopenia: 1%; and esophageal candidiasis: 4% at final endoscopy). Conclusions: Long-term tCS (median 6.5 y) were generally effective, especially with better adherence, and also safe, with only rare serious complications. These data can be used to help patients make clinical decisions about chronic tCS use in EoE.

Summary Cannabis use is becoming increasingly common, both for recreational and medical purposes. However, there is a paucity of data regarding cannabis use in the context of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). We aimed to determine the impact of cannabis use on presentation and treatment response in EoE. To this end, we conducted a retrospective cohort study at a large academic medical center of newly diagnosed EoE patients age ≥ 12 years. Self-reported cannabis use status, baseline characteristics, and treatment response to topical corticosteroids and dietary therapy data were extracted. Bivariate and multivariable analyses were used to compare cannabis users and non-users at time of EoE diagnosis and to assess treatment response. Of 983 EoE patients, 80 reported using cannabis, with the majority reporting daily use and administration by inhalation. Baseline symptoms and peak eosinophil count were similar between cannabis users and non-users; cannabis users were less likely to have baseline endoscopic findings of exudates, edema, and stricture, and lower total Endoscopic Reference Score. On multivariable analysis, younger age, male sex, non-White race, and psychiatric diagnosis were independently associated with history of cannabis use at EoE presentation and stricture was independently associated with cannabis non-use. Post-treatment symptom and histologic responses were similar between cannabis users and non-users though there was a higher odds of post-treatment endoscopic inflammatory features with cannabis use. In conclusion, despite presenting with milder initial endoscopic findings, cannabis users exhibited greater inflammatory findings after treatment, highlighting a potential negative influence of cannabis use on EoE management.

Background: Question prompt lists (QPLs) are structured sets of disease-specific questions intended to encourage question-asking by patients and enhance patient-physician communication. To date, an EoE-specific QPL has not been developed for EoE patients. Aim: To develop a preliminary QPL specific to adults with EoE by incorporating input from international esophageal experts. Methods: Sixteen experts were invited to generate QPL content through a modified Delphi (RAND/University of California, Los Angeles, CA) method consisting of 2 rounds of independent ratings. In round 1, experts provided 5 answers to the prompts “what general questions should patients ask when being seen for EoE?” and “what questions do I not hear patients asking but given my experience, I believe they should be asking?” In round 2, experts rated each question on a 5-point Likert scale, and responses rated as “essential” or “important” (determined by an a priori median threshold of ≥ 4.0) were accepted for the EoE QPL. Results: Ten esophageal experts participated in both rounds. Round 1 generated 100 questions. Questions were combined and modified to reduce redundancy, yielding 57 questions. After round 2, 51 questions (85%) were accepted for inclusion (median value ≥ 4.0) in the final QPL. Questions were then divided into 4 themes based on disease domains: (1) “What is EoE?,” (2) “Treatment Options,” (3) “Follow-up Surveillance and Long-term Risks,” and (4) “Allergy and Genetic Testing.” The largest number of questions covered was “What is EoE?” (16/51 or 31%). Questions with the highest agreement median (5.0) included examples such as “what should I do if I get a food impaction?” and “what are the treatment options?” Conclusion: This is the first preliminary EoE QPL developed in the field of medicine. We hope implementation enhances effective patient-physician communication by encouraging patients to ask relevant questions that experts prioritized. Future studies will aim to modify this communication tool by incorporating patient perspectives

SummaryBackgroundPredictive models for eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE) may not fully rule in the diagnosis.AimTo develop a reverse model that predicts against EoE to eliminate the need for oesophageal biopsies.MethodsIn this two‐centre study, a predictive model was developed (Mayo Clinic) and validated (University of North Carolina [UNC]). Cross‐sectional data from consecutive adult patients without prior EoE who underwent upper enoscopy with oesophageal biopsies were used. EoE cases had ≥15 eosinophils/high‐power field while controls had no eosinophils. Data were collected on patient clinical and endoscopic features. Multiple variable logistic regression was used to identify predictors of non‐EoE status while maintaining specificity ≥95%. A secondary model was developed to predict against the need for endoscopy in patients suspected of having EoE without alarm symptoms.ResultsThe Mayo and UNC cohorts consisted of 345 (EoE = 94, non‐EoE = 251) and 297 patients (EoE = 84, non‐EoE = 213), respectively. A primary model based on clinical and endoscopic features predicted against EoE with c‐statistic 0.92 (95% CI: 0.88–0.96), specificity 95%, and sensitivity 65%. This model was validated (UNC) with c‐statistic 0.87 (95% CI: 0.82–0.92). A simplified scoring system was created and a threshold of ≥12 points excluded EoE with 95% specificity and 50% sensitivity. A secondary model based on clinical characteristics alone predicted against EoE with c‐statistic 0.86 (95% CI: 0.82–0.90), specificity 95% and sensitivity 39% and validated (UNC) with c‐statistic 0.78 (95% CI: 0.71–0.85).ConclusionA simplified scoring system accurately identified a group of patients with a low likelihood of EoE where unnecessary oesophageal biopsies can be avoided, potentially resulting in resource and cost savings.