World Allergy Organization (WAO) Diagnosis and Rationale for Action against Cow's Milk Allergy (DRACMA) guideline update - XII - Recommendations on milk formula supplements with and without probiotics for infants and toddlers with CMA.

Background: Cow's milk allergy (CMA) is the most common food allergy in infants. The replacement with specialized formulas is an established clinical approach to ensure adequate growth and minimize the risk of severe allergic reactions when breastfeeding is not possible. Still, given the availability of multiple options, such as extensively hydrolyzed cow's milk protein formula (eHF-CM), amino acid formula (AAF), hydrolyzed rice formula (HRF) and soy formulas (SF), there is some uncertainty as to the most suitable choice with respect to health outcomes. Furthermore, the addition of probiotics to a formula has been proposed as a potential approach to maximize benefit. Objective: These evidence-based guidelines from the World Allergy Organization (WAO) intend to support patients, clinicians, and others in decisions about the use of milk specialized formulas, with and without probiotics, for individuals with CMA. Methods: WAO formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel balanced to include the views of all stakeholders and to minimize potential biases from competing interests. The McMaster University GRADE Centre supported the guideline-development process, including updating or performing systematic evidence reviews. The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes according to their importance for clinicians and patients. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used, including GRADE Evidence-to-Decision frameworks, which were subject to review by stakeholders. Results: After reviewing the summarized evidence and thoroughly discussing the different management options, the WAO guideline panel suggests: a) using an extensively hydrolyzed (cow's milk) formula or a hydrolyzed rice formula as the first option for managing infants with immunoglobulin E (IgE) and non-IgE-mediated CMA who are not being breastfed. An amino-acid formula or a soy formula could be regarded as second and third options respectively; b) using either a formula without a probiotic or a casein-based extensively hydrolyzed formula containing Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus GG (LGG) for infants with either IgE or non-IgE-mediated CMA.The issued recommendations are labeled as "conditional" following the GRADE approach due to the very low certainty about the health effects based on the available evidence. Conclusions: If breastfeeding is not available, clinicians, patients, and their family members might want to discuss all the potential desirable and undesirable consequences of each formula in infants with CMA, integrating them with the patients' and caregivers' values and preferences, local availability, and cost, before deciding on a treatment option. We also suggest what research is needed to determine with greater certainty which formulas are likely to be the most beneficial, cost-effective, and equitable.

Clinical and Molecular Correlates of the Index of Severity for Eosinophilic Esophagitis.

BACKGROUND: The Index of Severity for Eosinophilic Esophagitis (I-SEE) is a new expert-defined clinical tool that classifies disease severity of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine whether I-SEE is associated with patient characteristics and/or molecular features of EoE. METHODS: We analyzed a prospective cohort of patients with EoE from the Consortium of Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Disease Researchers (CEGIR). Associations between I-SEE and clinical and molecular features (EoE Diagnostic Panel [EDP]) were assessed. RESULTS: In 318 patients with chronic EoE (adults 209, children 109), the median total I-SEE score was 7.0, with a higher symptoms and complications score in children than adults (4.0 vs. 1.0; P < .001) and higher inflammatory and fibrostenotic features scores in adults than children (3.0 vs. 1.0 and 3.0 vs. 0.0, respectively; both P < .001). Total I-SEE score had a bimodal distribution with the inactive to moderate categories and severe category. EDP score correlated with total I-SEE score (r = -0.352, P < .001) and both inflammatory and fibrostenotic features scores (r = -0.665, P< .001; r = -0.446, P < .001, respectively), but not with symptoms and complications scores (r = 0.047, P = .408). Molecular severity increased from inactive to mild and moderate, but not severe categories. Longitudinal changes of modified I-SEE scores and inflammatory and fibrostenotic features scores reflected the histologic and molecular activity. CONCLUSIONS: I-SEE associated with select clinical features across severity categories and with EoE molecular features for non-severe categories, warranting further validation.

Non-epithelial Gene Expression Correlates with Symptom Severity in Adults with Eosinophilic Esophagitis.

BACKGROUND: The mechanistic basis of the variable symptomatology seen in eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) remains poorly understood. OBJECTIVE: We examined the correlation of a validated, patient-reported outcome (PRO) metric with a broad spectrum of esophageal transcripts to uncover potential symptom pathogenesis. METHODS: Data were extracted from 146 adults with EoE through the Consortium of Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Disease Researchers (CEGIR). Patients were subgrouped by esophageal dilation history. We compared a validated PRO metric, the EoE Activity Index (EEsAI), with a set of transcripts expressed in the esophagus of patients with EoE, the EoE Diagnostic Panel (EDP). We utilized single-cell RNA sequencing data to identify the cellular source of EEsAI-related EDP genes and further analyzed patients with mild and severe symptoms. RESULTS: The EEsAI correlated with the EDP total score, especially in patients without recent esophageal dilation (r = -0.31, P = .003). We identified 14 EDP genes that correlated with EEsAI scores (r ≥ 0.3, P < .05). Of these, 11 were expressed in non-epithelial cells and 3 in epithelial cells; during histologic remission, only 4/11 (36%) non-epithelial versus 3/3 (100%) epithelial genes had decreased expression to <50% of that in active EoE. Fibroblasts expressed 5/11 (45%) non-epithelial EEsAI-associated EDP genes. A subset of non-epithelial (8/11, 73%), but not EoE-representative (0/4, 0%; CCL26, CAPN14, DSG1, SPINK7), genes was upregulated in patients with EoE with the highest versus lowest symptom burden. CONCLUSION: The correlation of symptoms and non-epithelial esophageal gene expression substantiates that non-epithelial cells (e.g., fibroblasts) likely contribute to symptom severity.

Reducing Eosinophil Counts in Eosinophilic Esophagitis in Children Is Associated With Reduction in Later Stricture Development.

INTRODUCTION: There are limited longitudinal data on the impact of chronic therapy on the natural history of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), a chronic allergic disease of the esophagus. The purpose of this study was to evaluate if patients with well-controlled EoE were less likely to develop fibrostenotic complications. METHODS: Subjects were identified from a database of pediatric patients with EoE at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia started in 2000. Patients were then searched in adult medical records to identify patients who transitioned care. All office visits, emergency department visits, and endoscopic, histologic, and imaging reports were reviewed for the primary outcome of strictures and the secondary outcomes of food impactions and dysphagia. Cox proportional hazard regression was performed for outcomes. RESULTS: One hundred five patients were identified with the mean follow-up of 11.4 ± 4.9 years. 52.3% (n = 55) had a period of histologic disease control defined as ≥2 consecutive endoscopies with histologic remission. These patients were less likely to develop strictures compared with patients who did not have a period of histologic control (HR 0.232; 95% CI 0.084-0.64, P = 0.005). Patients who were diagnosed at younger ages were less likely to develop strictures. Presentation with dysphagia or impaction was associated with higher rate of stricture development. DISCUSSION: In this cohort study with > 10 years of follow-up, children with EoE with a period of histologic disease control and diagnosed at younger ages were less likely to develop esophageal strictures. While this suggests histologic remission is associated with reduction of remodeling complications, additional prospective data with long-term follow-up are needed.

Endoscopic and histologic utility of transnasal endoscopy in pediatric eosinophilic esophagitis.

Unsedated transnasal endoscopy (TNE) is an alternative method of examining the esophageal mucosa in pediatric patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), reducing cost, time, and risk associated with frequent surveillance esophagogastroduodenoscopies (EGD). Adequacy of transnasal esophageal biopsies for the evaluation of eosinophilic esophagitis histologic scoring system (EoEHSS) has not yet been evaluated. We compared procedure times, endoscopic findings, and EoEHSS scoring for EoE patients undergoing TNE versus standard EGD. Sixty-six TNE patients and 132 EGD controls matched for age (mean age 14.0 years) and disease status (29.3% active) were included. Compared to patients undergoing standard EGD, patients undergoing TNE spent 1.94 h less in the GI suite (p < 0.0001), with comparable occurrence rates of all visual endoscopic findings and most EoEHSS components. TNE serves as a useful tool for long-term disease surveillance, and consideration should be given to its use in clinical trials for EoE.

A case series of live attenuated vaccine administration in dupilumab-treated children with atopic dermatitis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Current regulatory labeling recommends avoiding live vaccine use in dupilumab-treated patients. Clinical data are not available to support more specific guidance for live or live attenuated vaccines administration in dupilumab-treated patients. METHODS: Children (6 months-5 years old) with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD) enrolled in a phase 2/3 clinical trial of dupilumab (LIBERTY AD PRESCHOOL Part A/B; NCT03346434) and subsequently participated in the LIBERTY AD PED-OLE (NCT02612454). During these studies, protocol deviations occurred in nine children who received measles, mumps, rubella (MMR) vaccine with or without varicella vaccine; five with a ≤12-week gap between dupilumab administration and vaccination and four with a >12-week gap after discontinuing dupilumab. RESULTS: Nine children (1 female; 8 male) had severe AD at baseline (8-56 months old). Of the nine children, five had a ≤12-week gap ranged 1-7 weeks between dupilumab administration and vaccination who received MMR vaccine (n = 2) or MMR and varicella vaccines (n = 3); among these, one resumed dupilumab treatment as early as 2 days and four resumed treatment 18-43 days after vaccination. No treatment-emergent adverse events, including serious adverse events and infections, were reported within the 4-week post-vaccination period in any children. CONCLUSIONS: In this case series of dupilumab-treated children with severe AD who received MMR vaccine with or without varicella vaccine, no adverse effects (including vaccine-related infection) were reported within 4 weeks after vaccination. Further studies are warranted to evaluate the safety, tolerability, and immune response to live attenuated vaccines in dupilumab-treated patients.

Omalizumab for the Treatment of Multiple Food Allergies.

BACKGROUND: Food allergies are common and are associated with substantial morbidity; the only approved treatment is oral immunotherapy for peanut allergy. METHODS: In this trial, we assessed whether omalizumab, a monoclonal anti-IgE antibody, would be effective and safe as monotherapy in patients with multiple food allergies. Persons 1 to 55 years of age who were allergic to peanuts and at least two other trial-specified foods (cashew, milk, egg, walnut, wheat, and hazelnut) were screened. Inclusion required a reaction to a food challenge of 100 mg or less of peanut protein and 300 mg or less of the two other foods. Participants were randomly assigned, in a 2:1 ratio, to receive omalizumab or placebo administered subcutaneously (with the dose based on weight and IgE levels) every 2 to 4 weeks for 16 to 20 weeks, after which the challenges were repeated. The primary end point was ingestion of peanut protein in a single dose of 600 mg or more without dose-limiting symptoms. The three key secondary end points were the consumption of cashew, of milk, and of egg in single doses of at least 1000 mg each without dose-limiting symptoms. The first 60 participants (59 of whom were children or adolescents) who completed this first stage were enrolled in a 24-week open-label extension. RESULTS: Of the 462 persons who were screened, 180 underwent randomization. The analysis population consisted of the 177 children and adolescents (1 to 17 years of age). A total of 79 of the 118 participants (67%) receiving omalizumab met the primary end-point criteria, as compared with 4 of the 59 participants (7%) receiving placebo (P<0.001). Results for the key secondary end points were consistent with those of the primary end point (cashew, 41% vs. 3%; milk, 66% vs. 10%; egg, 67% vs. 0%; P<0.001 for all comparisons). Safety end points did not differ between the groups, aside from more injection-site reactions in the omalizumab group. CONCLUSIONS: In persons as young as 1 year of age with multiple food allergies, omalizumab treatment for 16 weeks was superior to placebo in increasing the reaction threshold for peanut and other common food allergens. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03881696.).

Atopic dermatitis (eczema) guidelines: 2023 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology/American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters GRADE- and Institute of Medicine-based recommendations.

BACKGROUND: Guidance addressing atopic dermatitis (AD) management, last issued in 2012 by the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology/American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology Joint Task Force, requires updating as a result of new treatments and improved guideline and evidence synthesis methodology. OBJECTIVE: To produce evidence-based guidelines that support patients, clinicians, and other decision-makers in the optimal treatment of AD. METHODS: A multidisciplinary guideline panel consisting of patients and caregivers, AD experts (dermatology and allergy/immunology), primary care practitioners (family medicine, pediatrics, internal medicine), and allied health professionals (psychology, pharmacy, nursing) convened, prioritized equity, diversity, and inclusiveness, and implemented management strategies to minimize influence of conflicts of interest. The Evidence in Allergy Group supported guideline development by performing systematic evidence reviews, facilitating guideline processes, and holding focus groups with patient and family partners. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach informed rating the certainty of evidence and strength of recommendations. Evidence-to-decision frameworks, subjected to public comment, translated evidence to recommendations using trustworthy guideline principles. RESULTS: The panel agreed on 25 recommendations to gain and maintain control of AD for patients with mild, moderate, and severe AD. The eAppendix provides practical information and implementation considerations in 1-2 page patient-friendly handouts. CONCLUSION: These evidence-based recommendations address optimal use of (1) topical treatments (barrier moisturization devices, corticosteroids, calcineurin inhibitors, PDE4 inhibitors [crisaborole], topical JAK inhibitors, occlusive [wet wrap] therapy, adjunctive antimicrobials, application frequency, maintenance therapy), (2) dilute bleach baths, (3) dietary avoidance/elimination, (4) allergen immunotherapy, and (5) systemic treatments (biologics/monoclonal antibodies, small molecule immunosuppressants [cyclosporine, methotrexate, azathioprine, mycophenolate, JAK inhibitors], and systemic corticosteroids) and UV phototherapy (light therapy).

Persistent esophageal changes after histologic remission in eosinophilic esophagitis.

BACKGROUND: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is characterized by persistent or relapsing allergic inflammation, and both clinical and histologic features of esophageal inflammation persist over time in most individuals. Mechanisms contributing to EoE relapse are not understood, and chronic EoE-directed therapy is therefore required to prevent long-term sequelae. OBJECTIVE: We investigated whether EoE patients in histologic remission have persistent dysregulation of esophageal gene expression. METHODS: Esophageal biopsy samples from 51 pediatric and 52 adult subjects with EoE in histopathologic remission (<15 eosinophils per high-power field [eos/hpf]) and control (48 pediatric and 167 adult) subjects from multiple institutions were subjected to molecular profiling by the EoE diagnostic panel, which comprises a set of 94 esophageal transcripts differentially expressed in active EoE. RESULTS: Defining remission as <15 eos/hpf, we identified 51 and 32 differentially expressed genes in pediatric and adult EoE patients compared to control individuals, respectively (false discovery rate < 0.05). Using the stringent definition of remission (0 eos/hpf), the adult and pediatric cohorts continued to have 18 and 25 differentially expressed genes (false discovery rate < 0.05). Among 6 shared genes between adults and children, CDH26 was upregulated in both children and adults; immunohistochemistry demonstrated increased cadherin 26 staining in the epithelium of EoE patients in remission compared to non-EoE controls. In the adult cohort, POSTN expression correlated with the endoscopic reference system score (Spearman r = 0.35, P = .011), specifically correlating with the rings' endoscopic reference system subscore (r = 0.53, P = .004). CONCLUSION: We have identified persistent EoE-associated esophageal gene expression in patients with disease in deep remission. These data suggest potential inflammation-induced epigenetic mechanisms may influence gene expression during remission in EoE and provide insight into possible mechanisms that underlie relapse in EoE.

Validation of the novel Eosinophilic Esophagitis Impact Questionnaire.

BACKGROUND: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) has a detrimental effect on health-related quality of life (HRQOL). The Eosinophilic Esophagitis Impact Questionnaire (EoE-IQ) is a novel patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure assessing the impact of EoE on HRQOL. To assess suitability of the EoE-IQ, its measurement properties were evaluated. METHODS: Using baseline and week 24 data from the pivotal, randomized, placebo-controlled, multinational phase 3 R668-EE-1774 trial (NCT03633617) of dupilumab, we evaluated EoE-IQ's measurement properties (including reliability, construct and known-groups validity, and ability to detect change) and established the threshold for change in scores that can be considered clinically meaningful. RESULTS: The analysis population comprised 239 adults and adolescents with EoE. Mean age was 28.1 (standard deviation, 13.14) years; 63.6% were male, and 90.4% were White. Reliability estimates for the EoE-IQ average score exceeded acceptable thresholds for patients who were stable as indicated by ratings of Patient Global Impression of Severity (PGIS) and Change (PGIC) (intraclass correlation coefficients, 0.75 and 0.81). Construct validity correlations with other EoE-specific PRO scores were moderate at baseline (|r|= 0.44-0.60) and moderate to strong at week 24 (|r|= 0.61-0.72). In known-groups analysis, EoE-IQ average score discriminated among groups of patients at varying EoE severity levels defined by PGIS scores. A ≥ 0.6-point reduction in EoE-IQ average score (where scores range from 1 to 5, with higher scores indicating worse HRQOL) from baseline to week 24 can be considered clinically meaningful. CONCLUSIONS: The EoE-IQ's measurement properties are acceptable, making it a valid, reliable measure of the HRQOL impacts of EoE among adults and adolescents. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03633617. Registered August 14, 2018, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT03633617 .

Topical treatments for atopic dermatitis (eczema): Systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized trials.

BACKGROUND: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a common skin condition with multiple topical treatment options, but uncertain comparative effects. OBJECTIVE: We sought to systematically synthesize the benefits and harms of AD prescription topical treatments. METHODS: For the 2023 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology and American College of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters AD guidelines, we searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL, LILACS, ICTRP, and GREAT databases to September 5, 2022, for randomized trials addressing AD topical treatments. Paired reviewers independently screened records, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Random-effects network meta-analyses addressed AD severity, itch, sleep, AD-related quality of life, flares, and harms. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach informed certainty of evidence ratings. We classified topical corticosteroids (TCS) using 7 groups-group 1 being most potent. This review is registered in the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/q5m6s). RESULTS: The 219 included trials (43,123 patients) evaluated 68 interventions. With high-certainty evidence, pimecrolimus improved 6 of 7 outcomes-among the best for 2; high-dose tacrolimus (0.1%) improved 5-among the best for 2; low-dose tacrolimus (0.03%) improved 5-among the best for 1. With moderate- to high-certainty evidence, group 5 TCS improved 6-among the best for 3; group 4 TCS and delgocitinib improved 4-among the best for 2; ruxolitinib improved 4-among the best for 1; group 1 TCS improved 3-among the best for 2. These interventions did not increase harm. Crisaborole and difamilast were intermediately effective, but with uncertain harm. Topical antibiotics alone or in combination may be among the least effective. To maintain AD control, group 5 TCS were among the most effective, followed by tacrolimus and pimecrolimus. CONCLUSIONS: For individuals with AD, pimecrolimus, tacrolimus, and moderate-potency TCS are among the most effective in improving and maintaining multiple AD outcomes. Topical antibiotics may be among the least effective.

Systemic treatments for atopic dermatitis (eczema): Systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized trials.

BACKGROUND: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is an inflammatory skin condition with multiple systemic treatments and uncertainty regarding their comparative impact on AD outcomes. OBJECTIVE: We sought to systematically synthesize the benefits and harms of AD systemic treatments. METHODS: For the 2023 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology and American College of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters AD guidelines, we searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, Web of Science, and GREAT databases from inception to November 29, 2022, for randomized trials addressing systemic treatments and phototherapy for AD. Paired reviewers independently screened records, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Random-effects network meta-analyses addressed AD severity, itch, sleep, AD-related quality of life, flares, and harms. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach informed certainty of evidence ratings. This review is registered in the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/e5sna). RESULTS: The 149 included trials (28,686 patients with moderate-to-severe AD) evaluated 75 interventions. With high-certainty evidence, high-dose upadacitinib was among the most effective for 5 of 6 patient-important outcomes; high-dose abrocitinib and low-dose upadacitinib were among the most effective for 2 outcomes. These Janus kinase inhibitors were among the most harmful in increasing adverse events. With high-certainty evidence, dupilumab, lebrikizumab, and tralokinumab were of intermediate effectiveness and among the safest, modestly increasing conjunctivitis. Low-dose baricitinib was among the least effective. Efficacy and safety of azathioprine, oral corticosteroids, cyclosporine, methotrexate, mycophenolate, phototherapy, and many novel agents are less certain. CONCLUSIONS: Among individuals with moderate-to-severe AD, high-certainty evidence demonstrates that high-dose upadacitinib is among the most effective in addressing multiple patient-important outcomes, but also is among the most harmful. High-dose abrocitinib and low-dose upadacitinib are effective, but also among the most harmful. Dupilumab, lebrikizumab, and tralokinumab are of intermediate effectiveness and have favorable safety.

Efficacy and safety of dupilumab up to 52 weeks in adults and adolescents with eosinophilic oesophagitis (LIBERTY EoE TREET study): a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Long-term management options that specifically target the underlying inflammation in eosinophilic oesophagitis are needed. Dupilumab blocks the shared receptor component for interleukin (IL)-4/IL-13; we aimed to assess its long-term efficacy and safety in adults and adolescents with eosinophilic oesophagitis enrolled in part B of the LIBERTY EoE TREET study who continued to part C (part B-C). METHODS: LIBERTY EoE TREET was a three-part, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study conducted at 65 hospitals and private clinics across ten countries in Australia, Canada, Europe, and the USA. Adults or adolescents (aged ≥12 years) with a diagnosis of eosinophilic oesophagitis by endoscopic biopsy (peak oesophageal intraepithelial eosinophil count ≥15 eosinophils per high-power field [eos/hpf]) from at least one oesophageal region despite 8 weeks of high-dose proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) and a Dysphagia Symptom Questionnaire (DSQ) score of at least 10 at baseline were eligible. In part B, patients were randomly (1:1:1) assigned to receive subcutaneous dupilumab 300 mg either weekly or every 2 weeks or weekly placebo until week 24. Randomisation was done centrally by interactive voice response system/web response system (IVRS/IWRS) in blocks and stratified according to age (<18 years vs ≥18 years) and use of PPI at randomisation (yes vs no). Patients, study sponsors, and investigators involved in the study were masked to the randomisation outcome. Eligible patients who received placebo in part B and continued to part C were randomly assigned again (1:1) to either weekly dupilumab (placebo/weekly dupilumab group) or dupilumab every 2 weeks (placebo/dupilumab every 2 weeks), with matching placebo alternating with dupilumab doses. Patients who were randomly assigned to one of the dupilumab dose regimens in part B remained on the same regimen in part C for an additional 28 weeks (weekly dupilumab/weekly dupilumab group or dupilumab every 2 weeks/dupilumab every 2 weeks group). Treatment assignment in part C was managed by IVRS/IWRS to maintain blinding of treatment assignment in part B. The primary endpoint of this trial has been reported; here, we report the week 52 outcomes of part B-C. Efficacy and safety analyses were done in the part C safety-analysis set, which included all patients who were randomised in part B, entered part C, and received any study drug in part C. This completed trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT03633617. FINDINGS: Between Aug 12, 2019, and March 11, 2021, 240 patients were randomly assigned into part B, of whom 227 (74 in placebo group, 74 in weekly dupilumab group, and 79 in dupilumab every 2 weeks group) continued into part B-C and were included in the current analysis. 37 patients switched from placebo to weekly dupilumab, and 37 from placebo to dupilumab every 2 weeks; 74 patients continued on weekly dupilumab and 79 continued on dupilumab every 2 weeks. Of the patients who entered part B-C, 75 (33%) were adolescents, 145 (64%) male, 82 (36%) female, and 206 (91%) White. At week 52, 55 (85%) patients in the weekly dupilumab/weekly dupilumab group, 25 (68%) in the placebo/weekly dupilumab group, 54 (74%) in the every 2 weeks dupilumab/every 2 weeks dupilumab group, and 23 (72%) in the placebo/every 2 weeks dupilumab group achieved a peak oesophageal intraepithelial eosinophil count of 6 eos/hpf or less. Mean percent change from part B baseline in peak eosinophil count was -95·9% (95% CI -96·9 to -94·9) in the weekly dupilumab/weekly dupilumab group, -84·2% (-98·3 to -70·2) in the placebo/weekly dupilumab group, -84·8% (-94·3 to -75·2) in the every 2 weeks dupilumab/every 2 weeks dupilumab group, and -91·2% (-95·9 to -86·5) in the placebo/every 2 weeks dupilumab group at week 52. At week 52, mean change from part B baseline in eosinophilic oesophagitis Histology Scoring System (HSS) grade score was -1·0 point (95% CI -1·1 to -0·9) in the weekly dupilumab/weekly dupilumab group and -0·9 points (-1·0 to -0·8) in the placebo/weekly dupilumab group; mean change in eosinophilic oesophagitis HSS stage score was -0·9 points (-1·0 to -0·8) in the weekly dupilumab/weekly dupilumab group and -0·9 points (-1·0 to -0·8) in the placebo/weekly dupilumab group. Similar improvements were observed in the every 2 weeks dupilumab groups. Mean absolute change from part B baseline in DSQ score was -30·3 points (95% CI -34·5 to -26·1) in the weekly dupilumab/weekly dupilumab group, -27·3 points (-32·1 to -22·4) in the placebo/weekly dupilumab group, -20·9% (-25·4 to -16·3) in the every 2 weeks dupilumab/every 2 weeks dupilumab group, and -23·7% (-29·1 to -18·3) in the placebo/every 2 weeks dupilumab group at week 52. Mean change from part B baseline in endoscopic reference score was -5·4 points (95% CI -6·1 to -4·6) in the weekly dupilumab/weekly dupilumab group, -6·1 points (-7·3 to -4·9) in the placebo/weekly dupilumab group, -5·2% (-6·0 to -4·4) in the every 2 weeks dupilumab/every 2 weeks dupilumab group, and -4·3% (-5·4 to -3·1) in the placebo/every 2 weeks dupilumab group at week 52. During part B-C, one (3%) patient in the placebo/weekly dupilumab group, one (1%) in the weekly dupilumab/weekly dupilumab group, and one (3%) in the placebo/every 2 weeks dupilumab group received rescue medication. One (3%) patient in the placebo/every 2 weeks dupilumab group and one (1%) in the dupilumab every 2 weeks/dupilumab every 2 weeks group underwent a rescue oesophageal dilation procedure. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were injection-site reactions (ten [14%] in the weekly dupilumab/weekly dupilumab group and four [11%] in the placebo/weekly dupilumab group). INTERPRETATION: Improvements in histological, symptomatic, endoscopic, and molecular features of eosinophilic oesophagitis observed after 24 weeks of weekly dupilumab treatment were maintained or continued to improve to week 52. These findings reinforce the importance of weekly dupilumab, rather than every 2 weeks, for the improvement of symptoms in adults and adolescents with eosinophilic oesophagitis. FUNDING: Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc.

Breakthroughs in understanding and treating eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases presented at the CEGIR/TIGERs Symposium at the 2022 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology Meeting.

The Consortium of Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Diseases and The International Gastrointestinal Eosinophil Researchers organized a day-long symposium at the 2022 Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. The symposium featured a review of recent discoveries in the basic biology and pathogenesis of eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases (EGIDs) in addition to advances in our understanding of the clinical features of EGIDs. Diagnostic and management approaches were reviewed and debated, and clinical trials of emerging therapies were highlighted. Herein, we briefly summarize the breakthrough discoveries in EGIDs.

Recent Advances in the Treatment of Eosinophilic Esophagitis.

Eosinophilic esophagitis is an increasingly common inflammatory allergic disease of the esophagus characterized by esophageal eosinophilia and symptoms of esophageal dysfunction. The therapeutic landscape has rapidly evolved for this emerging type 2 inflammatory disorder. We review traditional therapies including updates and expert opinions in addition to promising therapies on the horizon and the history of therapies that failed to meet end points and highlight knowledge gaps for future investigations.

Phenotypic and Endotypic Determinants of Atopic Dermatitis Severity From the Atopic Dermatitis Research Network (ADRN) Registry.

BACKGROUND: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic inflammatory skin condition with a highly variable clinical phenotype. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to identify historical and clinical features and biomarkers associated with AD severity. METHODS: A US registry of extensively phenotyped AD participants (aged 0.73-80 years) were enrolled at 9 academic centers. Information on family and personal medical history, examination, skin swabs (culture), and serum biomarkers was collected to evaluate their association with AD severity. RESULTS: Participants with AD (N = 2862) whose disease was categorized as mild (11.6%), moderate (58.0%), or severe (30.4%) based on Rajka-Langeland scoring were enrolled. The trend test, when adjusting for gender, race, and age, demonstrated that severity was strongly (P ≤ .04) associated with a personal/family history of allergic disorders, history of alopecia, exposure to passive smoke, ocular herpes infection, skin bacterial and viral infections, and history of arrhythmia. Features observed more frequently (P ≤ .002), as a function of severity, included skin infections (impetigo, human papillomavirus, and molluscum contagiosum virus), Staphylococcus aureus colonization, excoriations, hyperlinear palms, ichthyosis, blepharitis, conjunctivitis, ectropion, and wheezing. Serum IgE, allergen and food (≤6 years) Phadiatop, and eosinophilia were strongly linked to severity (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: In a diverse US AD population, severity was associated with a history of atopic disorders, skin and extracutaneous bacterial and viral infections (by history and physical examination), higher IgE, eosinophilia and allergen sensitization, atopic skin manifestations (ie, excoriation, hyperlinear palms, and ichthyosis), and atopic ocular features (ie, blepharitis, conjunctivitis, and ectropion) as well as asthma findings (ie, wheezing). Data from our prospective registry significantly advance our understanding of AD phenotypes and endotypes, which is critical to achieve optimal management.

IgA deficiency destabilizes homeostasis toward intestinal microbes and increases systemic immune dysregulation.

The ability of most patients with selective immunoglobulin A (IgA) deficiency (SIgAD) to remain apparently healthy has been a persistent clinical conundrum. Compensatory mechanisms, including IgM, have been proposed, yet it remains unclear how secretory IgA and IgM work together in the mucosal system and, on a larger scale, whether the systemic and mucosal anti-commensal responses are redundant or have unique features. To address this gap in knowledge, we developed an integrated host-commensal approach combining microbial flow cytometry and metagenomic sequencing (mFLOW-Seq) to comprehensively define which microbes induce mucosal and systemic antibodies. We coupled this approach with high-dimensional immune profiling to study a cohort of pediatric patients with SIgAD and household control siblings. We found that mucosal and systemic antibody networks cooperate to maintain homeostasis by targeting a common subset of commensal microbes. In IgA-deficiency, we find increased translocation of specific bacterial taxa associated with elevated levels of systemic IgG targeting fecal microbiota. Associated features of immune system dysregulation in IgA-deficient mice and humans included elevated levels of inflammatory cytokines, enhanced follicular CD4 T helper cell frequency and activation, and an altered CD8 T cell activation state. Although SIgAD is clinically defined by the absence of serum IgA, the symptomatology and immune dysregulation were concentrated in the SIgAD participants who were also fecal IgA deficient. These findings reveal that mucosal IgA deficiency leads to aberrant systemic exposures and immune responses to commensal microbes, which increase the likelihood of humoral and cellular immune dysregulation and symptomatic disease in patients with IgA deficiency.