Efficacy of Therapy for Eosinophilic Esophagitis in Real-World Practice.


Journal

Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association
ISSN: 1542-7714
Titre abrégé: Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101160775

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
12 2020
Historique:
received: 15 09 2019
revised: 07 01 2020
accepted: 17 01 2020
pubmed: 29 1 2020
medline: 19 8 2021
entrez: 29 1 2020
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Topical steroids, proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), and dietary interventions are recommended first- and second-line therapies for eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). We investigated differences in their effectiveness in a real-world, clinical practice cohort of patients with EoE. We collected data on the efficacy of different therapies for EoE (ability to induce clinical and histologic remission) from the multicenter EoE CONNECT database-a database of patients with a confirmed diagnosis of EoE in Europe that began in 2016. We obtained data from 589 patients, treated at 11 centers, on sex, age, time of diagnosis, starting date of any therapy, response to therapy, treatment end dates, alternative treatments, and findings from endoscopy. The baseline endoscopy was used for diagnosis of EoE; second endoscopy was performed to evaluate response to first-line therapies. After changes in treatment, generally because lack of efficacy, a last endoscopy was performed. The time elapsed between endoscopies depended on the criteria of attending physicians. Clinical remission was defined by a decrease of more than 50% in Dysphagia Symptom Score; improvement in symptoms by less than 50% from baseline was considered as clinical response. Histologic remission was defined as a peak eosinophil count below 5 eosinophils/hpf. A peak eosinophil count between 5 and 14 eosinophils/hpf was considered histologic response. We identified factors associated with therapy selection and effectiveness using χ2 and multinomial logistic regression analyses RESULTS: PPIs were the first-line treatment for 76.4% of patients, followed by topical steroids (for 10.5%) and elimination diets (for 7.8%). Topical steroids were most effective in inducing clinical and histologic remission or response (in 67.7% of patients), followed by empiric elimination diets (in 52.0%), and PPIs (in 50.2%). Among the 344 patients who switched to a second-line therapy, dietary interventions were selected for 47.1% of patients, followed by PPIs (for 29.1%) and topical steroids (for 18.6%). Clinical and histologic remission or response was achieved by 80.7% of patients treated with topical steroids, 69.2% of patients given PPIs, and 41.7% of patients on empiric elimination diets. Multivariate analyses found the stricturing phenotype of EoE to be associated with selection of topical steroids over PPIs as the first-line therapy; lack of fibrotic features at initial endoscopy was associated with selection of elimination diets over topical steroids as a second-line therapy. The recruiting center was significantly associated with therapy choice; second-line treatment with topical steroids or PPIs were the only variables associated with clinical and histologic remission. In an analysis of data from a large cohort of patients with EoE in Europe, we found topical steroids to be the most effective at inducing clinical and histologic remission, but PPIs to be the most frequently prescribed. Treatment approaches vary with institution and presence of fibrosis or strictures.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND & AIMS
Topical steroids, proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), and dietary interventions are recommended first- and second-line therapies for eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). We investigated differences in their effectiveness in a real-world, clinical practice cohort of patients with EoE.
METHODS
We collected data on the efficacy of different therapies for EoE (ability to induce clinical and histologic remission) from the multicenter EoE CONNECT database-a database of patients with a confirmed diagnosis of EoE in Europe that began in 2016. We obtained data from 589 patients, treated at 11 centers, on sex, age, time of diagnosis, starting date of any therapy, response to therapy, treatment end dates, alternative treatments, and findings from endoscopy. The baseline endoscopy was used for diagnosis of EoE; second endoscopy was performed to evaluate response to first-line therapies. After changes in treatment, generally because lack of efficacy, a last endoscopy was performed. The time elapsed between endoscopies depended on the criteria of attending physicians. Clinical remission was defined by a decrease of more than 50% in Dysphagia Symptom Score; improvement in symptoms by less than 50% from baseline was considered as clinical response. Histologic remission was defined as a peak eosinophil count below 5 eosinophils/hpf. A peak eosinophil count between 5 and 14 eosinophils/hpf was considered histologic response. We identified factors associated with therapy selection and effectiveness using χ2 and multinomial logistic regression analyses RESULTS: PPIs were the first-line treatment for 76.4% of patients, followed by topical steroids (for 10.5%) and elimination diets (for 7.8%). Topical steroids were most effective in inducing clinical and histologic remission or response (in 67.7% of patients), followed by empiric elimination diets (in 52.0%), and PPIs (in 50.2%). Among the 344 patients who switched to a second-line therapy, dietary interventions were selected for 47.1% of patients, followed by PPIs (for 29.1%) and topical steroids (for 18.6%). Clinical and histologic remission or response was achieved by 80.7% of patients treated with topical steroids, 69.2% of patients given PPIs, and 41.7% of patients on empiric elimination diets. Multivariate analyses found the stricturing phenotype of EoE to be associated with selection of topical steroids over PPIs as the first-line therapy; lack of fibrotic features at initial endoscopy was associated with selection of elimination diets over topical steroids as a second-line therapy. The recruiting center was significantly associated with therapy choice; second-line treatment with topical steroids or PPIs were the only variables associated with clinical and histologic remission.
CONCLUSIONS
In an analysis of data from a large cohort of patients with EoE in Europe, we found topical steroids to be the most effective at inducing clinical and histologic remission, but PPIs to be the most frequently prescribed. Treatment approaches vary with institution and presence of fibrosis or strictures.

Identifiants

pubmed: 31988045
pii: S1542-3565(20)30103-8
doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2020.01.024
pii:
doi:

Substances chimiques

Proton Pump Inhibitors 0
Steroids 0

Types de publication

Journal Article Multicenter Study Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

2903-2911.e4

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2020 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

Emilio J Laserna-Mendieta (EJ)

Department of Gastroenterology, Hospital General de Tomelloso, Tomelloso, Spain; Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Princesa, Madrid, Spain. Electronic address: ejlaserna@sescam.jccm.es.

Sergio Casabona (S)

Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Princesa, Madrid, Spain; Department of Gastroenterology, Hospital Universitario La Princesa, Madrid, Spain.

Edoardo Savarino (E)

Department of Surgery, Oncology and Gastroenterology, Università di Padova, Padova, Italy.

Antonia Perelló (A)

Department of Gastroenterology, Hospital de Villadecans, Barcelona, Spain.

Isabel Pérez-Martínez (I)

Department of Gastroenterology, Hospital Universitario Central de Asturias, Oviedo, Spain.

Danila Guagnozzi (D)

Department of Gastroenterology, Hospital Universitario Vall d'Hebron, Barcelona, Spain.

Jesús Barrio (J)

Department of Gastroenterology, Hospital Universitario Río Hortega, Valladolid, Spain.

Antonio Guardiola (A)

Department of Gastroenterology, Hospital Universitario de Fuenlabrada, Fuenlabrada, Spain; Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Paz, Madrid, Spain.

Teresa Asensio (T)

Department of Allergy, Complejo Hospitalario Universitario de Albacete, Albacete, Spain.

Susana de la Riva (S)

Clínica Universitaria de Navarra, Pamplona, Spain.

Miriam Ruiz-Ponce (M)

Department of Gastroenterology, Hospital General de Tomelloso, Tomelloso, Spain.

Juan Armando Rodríguez-Oballe (JA)

Department of Gastroenterology, University Hospital Santa María - University Hospital Arnau de Vilanova, Lerida, Spain.

Cecilio Santander (C)

Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Princesa, Madrid, Spain; Department of Gastroenterology, Hospital Universitario La Princesa, Madrid, Spain; Centro de Investigacion Biomedica en Red Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas, Madrid, Spain.

Ángel Arias (Á)

Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Princesa, Madrid, Spain; Centro de Investigacion Biomedica en Red Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas, Madrid, Spain; Research Unit, Hospital General Mancha Centro, Alcázar de San Juan, Spain.

Alfredo J Lucendo (AJ)

Department of Gastroenterology, Hospital General de Tomelloso, Tomelloso, Spain; Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Princesa, Madrid, Spain; Centro de Investigacion Biomedica en Red Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas, Madrid, Spain. Electronic address: ajlucendo@hotmail.com.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH