Association Between Endoscopic and Histologic Findings in a Multicenter Retrospective Cohort of Patients with Non-esophageal Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Disorders.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the endoscopic and histologic findings of non-esophageal eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases (EGID). AIM: To characterize the presenting endoscopic and histologic findings in patients with eosinophilic gastritis (EG), eosinophilic gastroenteritis (EGE), and eosinophilic colitis (EC) at diagnosis and 6 months after initiating the treatment. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study at 6 US centers associated with the Consortium of Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Researchers. Data abstracted included demographics, endoscopic findings, tissue eosinophil counts, and associated histologic findings at diagnosis and, when available, after initial treatment. RESULTS: Of 373 subjects (317 children and 56 adults), 142 had EG, 123 EGE, and 108 EC. Normal endoscopic appearance was the most common finding across all EGIDs (62% of subjects). Baseline tissue eosinophil counts were quantified in 105 (74%) EG, 36 (29%) EGE, and 80 (74%) EC subjects. The mean peak gastric eosinophil count across all sites was 87 eos/hpf for EG and 78 eos/hpf for EGE. The mean peak colonic eosinophil count for EC subjects was 76 eos/hpf (range 10-500). Of the 29% of subjects with post-treatment follow-up, most had an improvement in clinical, endoscopic, and histologic findings regardless of treatment utilized. Reductions in tissue eosinophilia correlated with improvements in clinical symptoms as well as endoscopic and histologic findings. CONCLUSIONS: In this large cohort, normal appearance was the most common endoscopic finding, emphasizing the importance of biopsy, regardless of endoscopic appearance. Decreased tissue eosinophilia was associated with improvement in symptoms, endoscopic, and histologic findings, showing that disease activity is reversible.

Increasing Rates of Diagnosis, Substantial Co-Occurrence, and Variable Treatment Patterns of Eosinophilic Gastritis, Gastroenteritis, and Colitis Based on 10-Year Data Across a Multicenter Consortium.

OBJECTIVES: The literature related to eosinophilic gastritis (EG), gastroenteritis (EGE), and colitis (EC) is limited. We aimed to characterize rates of diagnosis, clinical features, and initial treatments for patients with EG, EGE, and EC. METHODS: In this retrospective study, data were collected from 6 centers in the Consortium of Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Researchers from 2005 to 2016. We analyzed demographics, time trends in diagnosis, medical history, presenting symptoms, disease overlap, and initial treatment patterns/responses. RESULTS: Of 373 subjects (317 children and 56 adults), 38% had EG, 33% EGE, and 29% EC. Rates of diagnosis of all diseases increased over time. There was no male predominance, and the majority of subjects had atopy. Presenting symptoms were similar between diseases with nausea/vomiting and abdominal pain, the most common. One hundred fifty-four subjects (41%) had eosinophilic inflammation outside of their primary disease location with the esophagus the second most common gastrointestinal (GI) segment involved. Multisite inflammation was more common in children than in adults (68% vs 37%; P < 0.001). Initial treatment patterns varied highly between centers. One hundred-nine subjects (29%) had follow-up within 6 months, and the majority had clinical, endoscopic, and histologic improvements. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort, EG, EGE, and EC were diagnosed more frequently over time, and inflammation of GI segments outside the primary disease site co-occurrence of atopy was common with a lack of male predominance. Symptoms were similar between diseases, and initial treatment strategies were highly variable. Future investigation should assess the cause of the increased prevalence of eosinophilic GI disorders and prospectively assess outcomes to establish treatment algorithms.

Alignment of parent- and child-reported outcomes and histology in eosinophilic esophagitis across multiple CEGIR sites.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcome metrics for eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) have been developed and validated but not used in a multicenter pediatric population or systematically aligned with histology. OBJECTIVE: We sought to understand (1) the potential of caregiver report to predict patient self-reported symptoms and (2) the correlation of patient-reported outcome domains with histology. METHODS: Patients with EoE (n = 310) and their parents participating in the Consortium of Gastrointestinal Eosinophilic Disease Researchers (CEGIR) observational clinical trial were queried for baseline patient symptoms and quality of life (QOL) by using the Pediatric Eosinophilic Esophagitis Symptom Score, version 2 (PEESSv2.0), and the Pediatric QOL EoE module (PedsQL-EoE), and biopsy specimens were analyzed by using the EoE Histology Scoring System. RESULTS: PEESSv2.0 parental and child reports aligned across all domains (r = 0.68-0.73, P < .001). PedsQL-EoE reports correlated between parents and children across ages and multiple domains (r = 0.48-0.79, P < .001). There was a tight correlation between symptoms on PEESSv2.0 and their effects on QOL both on self-report and parental report (P < .001). Self-reported symptoms on PEESSv2.0 (positively) and PedsQL-EoE (inversely) showed a weak correlation with proximal, but not distal, peak eosinophil counts and features and architectural tissue changes on the EoE Histology Scoring System (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Parents of children with EoE aged 3 to 18 years accurately reflected their children's disease symptoms and QOL. Self- and parent-reported symptoms correlate with proximal esophageal histology. Our data suggest that parental report in young children can function as an adequate marker for self-reported symptoms and that self-reported symptoms can reflect changes in tissue histology in the proximal esophagus. These findings should be considered during clinical trials for drug development.

Eosinophilic oesophagitis endotype classification by molecular, clinical, and histopathological analyses: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Eosinophilic oesophagitis is understood in terms of quantifiable histological, endoscopic, and molecular features. Data are scant for inter-relations of these features and their potential to identify distinct disease endotypes. We aimed to identify clinical-pathological correlations between endoscopic and histological disease variables by transcription profiling of the oesophagus of patients with eosinophilic oesophagitis of varying severity and disease activity states. METHODS: We did a cross-sectional study across ten hospital sites in the USA associated with the Consortium of Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Disease Researchers. We analysed oesophageal biopsy specimens taken from paediatric and adult patients with eosinophilic oesophagitis (discovery cohort), using the eosinophilic oesophagitis diagnostic panel (EDP), a set of 96 informative transcripts. Histological and endoscopic features were assessed by quantification of oesophageal eosinophils and use of the eosinophilic oesophagitis histology scoring system (HSS) and the eosinophilic oesophagitis endoscopic reference score (EREFS). Associations among the various histological, endoscopic, and molecular features were analysed by Spearman correlation. Results were replicated in a biologically independent, single-centre, validation cohort of patients with active eosinophilic oesophagitis. FINDINGS: The discovery cohort contained 185 samples and the validation cohort comprised 100 specimens. In the discovery cohort, EDP showed intersite consistency, significant correlation with oesophageal eosinophils (p<0·0001), and similar findings between paediatric and adult patients. Of eight HSS domains, basal zone hyperplasia correlated with the EDP (median Spearman ρ 0·47 [IQR 0·36-0·60]). Of five EREFS features, distal furrows correlated with the EDP (median Spearman ρ 0·42 [0·32-0·50]). By analysing active eosinophilic oesophagitis in the discovery cohort, the EDP identified three clusters associated with distinct endotypes (termed EoEe1-3) despite similar eosinophil levels. EoEe1 was associated with a normal-appearing oesophagus (risk ratio [RR] 3·27, 95% CI 1·04-10·27; p=0·0443), an inverse association with a history of oesophageal dilation (0·27, 0·09-0·82; p=0·0105) and showed relatively mild histological, endoscopic, and molecular changes. EoEe2 showed an inflammatory and steroid-refractory phenotype (RR 2·77, 95% CI 1·11-6·95; p=0·0376) and had the highest expression of inflammatory cytokines and steroid-responding genes. EoEe3 was associated with a narrow-calibre oesophagus (RR 7·98, 95% CI 1·84-34·64; p=0·0013) and adult onset (2·22, 1·19-4·12; p=0·0155), and showed the highest degree of endoscopic and histological severity and the lowest expression of epithelial differentiation genes. These endotypes were replicated in the validation cohort by clustering and with an eosinophilic oesophagitis endotype-prediction algorithm. INTERPRETATION: Our new disease classification stratifies patients with eosinophilic oesophagitis into subgroups with potential clinical and therapeutic significance and provides a framework for a precision medicine approach to eosinophilic oesophagitis. FUNDING: National Institutes of Health.