Comorbid Diagnosis of Eosinophilic Esophagitis and Inflammatory Bowel Disease in the Pediatric Population.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The incidence and prevalence of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are rising with similar patterns. Co-occurrence of both diseases in the same patient has been increasingly reported. We sought to examine the pediatric population with both EoE and IBD to better understand the epidemiology and clinical implications of this overlap. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective case-control study at 2 tertiary care children's hospitals. Subjects with both EoE and IBD were identified and compared with randomly selected controls with EoE and IBD alone in terms of: demographics, atopic conditions, IBD classification, location and phenotype of Crohn disease (CD), IBD medications, endoscopic findings, and histopathology. Descriptive statistics summarized the data. RESULTS: Sixty-seven subjects with dual-diagnosis were identified across both institutions. The prevalence of IBD in the EoE population was 2.2% and EoE in IBD was 1.5%. Subjects with both diseases were more likely to have IgE-mediated food allergy compared with IBD alone (36% vs 7%, P < 0.001). Subjects with CD-EoE were less likely to have perianal disease than CD alone (2% vs 20%, P = 0.004). There was no difference in fibrostenotic EoE between the dual-diagnosis group and EoE alone. Treatment with a TNF-alpha inhibitor (anti-TNF) for management of preexisting IBD was protective against development of EoE with a relative risk of 0.314 [95% confidence interval [CI] 0.159-0.619]. CONCLUSIONS: This is a unique population in whom the underlying pathway leading to dual-diagnosis is unclear. Concomitant atopic conditions, especially IgE-mediated food allergy, and medication exposures, particularly anti-TNFs, may help predict likelihood of developing dual-diagnosis.

Longitudinal Growth Outcomes Following First-line Treatment for Pediatric Patients With Eosinophilic Esophagitis.

OBJECTIVES: No formal comparative effectiveness studies have been conducted to evaluate the effect of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) treatment choice on long-term growth in pediatric patients. Long-term studies of inhaled corticoid steroids in asthma, however, suggest possible effects on linear growth. The aim of this study was to compare longitudinal, anthropometric growth in children with EoE according to treatment approach. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, multicenter cohort study of anthropometric growth (height and body mass index [BMI] z scores) in pediatric (<18 years of age) patients newly diagnosed with EoE across 5 clinical sites between 2005 and 2014. We compared differences in growth according to treatment approach over a 12-month period. Modification by sex and age was examined and sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess robustness of results given study assumptions. RESULTS: In the 409 patients identified, the mean age and proportion male differed by treatment (P =  < 0.01 and P = 0.04, respectively). Baseline growth measures were associated with slight impairment of height at diagnosis (median baseline height z score of -0.1 [interquartile range -0.9, 0.8]). In general, treatment approach was not associated with any significant increase or decrease in expected growth over a 12-month period. Subtle decrease in linear growth was observed with treatment using a combined elemental and topical steroid (Δ height z score [adjusted]: -0.04; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.08, -0.01). Differences in linear growth differed by sex (P for interaction <0.01). For elemental formula in combination with topical steroids, only girls exhibited a significant decline in linear growth (Δ height z score [adjusted]: -0.24; 95% CI: -0.32, -0.17). A slight reduction in BMI was observed for patients treated with a combination of elemental diet and dietary elimination (Δ BMI z score [adjusted]: -0.07; 95% CI: -0.13, -0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of EoE, in general, is not associated with major anthropometric growth changes in most pediatric patients. Slight linear growth impairment was observed for topical steroid treatment, and sex differences in growth by treatment approach were observed. Future prospective studies should evaluate the effect of treatment on optimal growth and development and over a longer period of follow-up.

Practice Pattern Variation in Pediatric Eosinophilic Esophagitis in the Carolinas EoE Collaborative: A Research Model in Community and Academic Practices.

OBJECTIVES: Differences in the initial management of pediatric eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) by practice setting have not been well characterized. We aimed to characterize these differences for sites in the Carolinas EoE Collaborative (CEoEC), a multicenter network of academic and community practices. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of pediatric EoE patients at five CEoEC sites: University of North Carolina (UNC) Hospital, Charlotte Asthma and Allergy Specialists, Greenville Health Systems, Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center, and the Medical University of South Carolina Hospital. Cases of EoE were defined by consensus guidelines. Data were extracted from electronic medical records. We tested for differences among sites and used a multinomial model (polytomous regression) to assess associations between treatment and site, adjusting on patient factors. RESULTS: We identified 464 children with EoE across the CEoEC sites. The median age was highest at Wake Forest (11.4 years), the median eosinophil count was highest at UNC (69 eos/hpf), and UNC had the most male patients (82%). UNC used topical steroids for initial treatment in 86% of cases, compared with <1% in Greenville (P < 0.01). Greenville used dietary elimination more frequently than UNC (81% vs 2%, P < 0.01). Differences in treatment approach held after adjusting for potential baseline confounders. There was no significant association between patient factors and initial treatment approach. CONCLUSIONS: Significant differences in EoE patient factors and treatment approaches were identified across CEoEC sites and were not explained by patient or practice factors. This suggests that institutional or provider preferences drive initial treatment approaches, and that more data are needed to drive best practice decisions.

Safety and Efficacy of Reslizumab for Children and Adolescents With Eosinophilic Esophagitis Treated for 9 Years.

BACKGROUND: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic disease characterized by infiltration of eosinophils in the esophageal epithelium. There are limited treatment options for EoE. The rationale of the study was to evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy of reslizumab (RSZ) in pediatric patients who received RSZ in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) and expanded access program. METHODS: Records of patients who received RSZ in our center were reviewed. Patients received RSZ 2 mg/kg (or placebo) every 4 weeks as part of the RCT, open-label extension (OLE), and compassionate use (CU). Data were analyzed as of their most recent evaluation in August 2017. Labwork, history, and examinations were conducted every 12 weeks. Biopsy results were compared from baseline (before RCT) and at the most recent evaluation. Adverse events (AE) were recorded. RESULTS: Twelve patients entered the RCT at our center; 6 patients completed the OLE and 4 received RSZ through CU. Between the RCT, OLE, and CU periods, patients received 549 doses of RSZ (median 37, range 2-116). No serious AE were attributed to RSZ. Symptoms improved on treatment: dysphagia (42% vs 0%), abdominal pain (58% vs 0%), heartburn (18% vs 0%), vomiting (67% vs. 17%), reflux (58% vs. 0%). Median esophageal eosinophil count improved (35 eosinophils per high-power field vs 3, P < 0.001). Patients receiving RSZ maintain a relatively unrestricted diet. CONCLUSIONS: RSZ appears to be safe in children with EoE over 9 years of treatment experience. Symptoms and eosinophil count improved considerably during treatment with RSZ despite a relatively unrestricted diet.