| Literature DB >> 31587544 |
Ga Hee Kim1, Young Soo Park2, Kee Wook Jung1, Mimi Kim2, Hee Kyong Na1, Ji Yong Ahn1, Jeong Hoon Lee1, Do Hoon Kim1, Kee Don Choi1, Ho June Song1, Gin Hyug Lee1, Evan S Dellon3, Hwoon-Yong Jung1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIMS: The epidemiology and pathogenesis of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) remain unclear in Asian countries. We investigated clinicopathological characteristics and diagnostic trends of EoE, and evaluated 3 tissue biomarkers for correlation with disease activity and treatment response in Korean patients with EoE.Entities:
Keywords: Endoscopy; Eosinophilic esophagitis; Esophagus
Year: 2019 PMID: 31587544 PMCID: PMC6786448 DOI: 10.5056/jnm19066
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Neurogastroenterol Motil ISSN: 2093-0879 Impact factor: 4.924
Baseline Characteristics and Endoscopic Findings of the Study Patients
| Variable | Value (N = 72) |
|---|---|
| Age (yr) | 46.2 ± 14.4 |
| Sex (male) | 53 (73.6) |
| Symptoms | |
| Dysphagia/food impaction | 11 (15.3) |
| Epigastric pain | 23 (31.9) |
| Heartburn | 22 (30.6) |
| Dyspepsia | 16 (22.2) |
| Any allergic disease | |
| Asthma | 9 (12.5) |
| Allergic rhinitis | 12 (16.7) |
| Food allergy | 3 (4.2) |
| Atopic dermatitis | 1 (1.4) |
| None | 47 (65.3) |
| Endoscopic findings based on EREFS | |
| Fixed rings | |
| Grade 0: none | 46 (63.9) |
| Grade 1: mild | 19 (26.4) |
| Grade 2: moderate | 7 (9.7) |
| Grade 3: severe | 0 (0.0) |
| Exudates | |
| Grade 0: none | 27 (37.5) |
| Grade 1: mild | 40 (55.6) |
| Grade 2: severe | 5 (6.9) |
| Furrows | |
| Grade 0: absent | 22 (30.6) |
| Grade 1: present | 50 (69.4) |
| Edema | |
| Grade 0: absent | 32 (44.4) |
| Grade 1: present | 40 (55.6) |
| Stricture | |
| Grade 0: absent | 69 (95.8) |
| Grade 1: present | 3 (4.2) |
| Dilation | 1 (1.48) |
| Tested for eosinophilia | 60 (83.3) |
| Eosinophilia (> 500 eosinophils/μL) | 9 (12.5) |
EREFS, eosinophilic esophagitis endoscopic reference score.
Data are presented as mean ± SD or n (%).
Figure 1Comparison of esophageal biopsy rate and number of diagnosed eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) cases. P for trend < 0.001.
Biomarkers in Atopic and Non-atopic Patients With Eosinophilic Esophagitis at Baseline
| Variable | Total (n = 72) | Atopic (n = 25) | Non-atopic (n = 47) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (yr) | 46.2 ± 14.4 | 41.8 ± 10.0 | 48.4 ± 15.8 | 0.106 |
| Sex (male) | 53 (73.6) | 19 (76.0) | 34 (72.3) | 0.575 |
| Peak eosinophil count | 56.2 ± 77.8 | 78.6 ± 124.1 | 44.3 ± 29.5 | 0.523 |
| EDN stained cell count | 53.1 ± 85.3 | 74.6 ± 132.0 | 41.6 ± 41.9 | 0.986 |
| Tryptase stained cell count | 39.4 ± 27.8 | 39.6 ± 30.5 | 39.4 ± 26.7 | 0.937 |
| Eotaxin-3 stained score | 64.6 ± 43.1 | 70 ± 48.4 | 61.7 ± 40.3 | 0.491 |
| EREFS | 1.9 ± 1.2 | 2.1 ± 1.2 | 1.9 ± 1.2 | 0.441 |
| Endoscopic findings | ||||
| Normal | 8 (11.1) | 2 (8.3) | 7 (14.6) | 0.317 |
| Rings | 26 (36.1) | 10 (41.7) | 16 (33.3) | 0.637 |
| Exudates | 45 (62.5) | 16 (66.7) | 29 (60.4) | 0.712 |
| Furrows | 47 (65.3) | 15 (62.5) | 32 (66.7) | 0.795 |
| Edema | 8 (11.1) | 2 (8.3) | 6 (12.5) | 0.710 |
| Stricture | 2 (2.7) | 1 (4.2) | 1 (2.7) | > 0.999 |
| Symptomatic response | 55/59 (93.2) | 20/23 (86.9) | 35/36 (97.2) | |
| Endoscopic response | 26/31 (66.7) | 9/11 (81.8) | 17/20 (85.0) | |
Obtained using the chi-square test and analyzed using the Fisher exact test for categorical variables and, whereas were assessed using the Mann-Whitney U test for continuous variables.
Per high-power field.
EDN, eosinophil-derived neurotoxin; EREFS, eosinophilic esophagitis endoscopic reference score.
Data are presented as mean ± SD or n (%).
Figure 2Scatter plot comparing (A) tryptase levels and peak eosinophil count (PEC), (B) eosinophil-derived neurotoxin (EDN) levels and PEC, (C) Eotaxin-3 levels and PEC, (D) tryptase levels and inflammatory scores of eosinophilic esophagitis endoscopic reference score (EREFS), (E) EDN levels and inflammatory scores of EREFS, (F) eotaxin-3 levels and inflammatory scores of EREFS, and (G) PEC and inflammatory scores of EREFS. Eos, eosinophil; HPF, high-power field. P-values were analyzed by Spearman rank-order correlation.
Figure 3Histologic findings before and after treatment in a patient with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). (A) Hematoxylin and eosin staining shows an elevated eosinophil counts (×400) and normalization after therapy (×400). (B) The tryptase staining shows elevated number of stained cells and normalization after therapy (×400). (C) The eosinophil-derived neurotoxin staining shows an elevated number of stained cells (×400) and normalization after therapy (×400). (D) Eotaxin-3 staining shows elevated number of stained cells (×400) and normalization after therapy (×400).
Histologic Response After Treatment in 18 Patients With Eosinophilic Esophagitis
| Variable | Responders (n = 12) | Non-responders (n = 6) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (yr) | 46.3 ± 13.3 | 46.1 ± 11.9 | 0.972 |
| Sex (male) | 0 (0.0) | 4 (66.7) | 0.137 |
| Peak eosinophil count | 87.9 ± 172.6 | 42.7 ± 40.6 | > 0.999 |
| EDN stained cell count | 83.6 ± 172.7 | 45.6 ± 56.5 | 0.084 |
| Tryptase stained cell count | 48.0 ± 31.3 | 54.4 ± 45.4 | 0.784 |
| Eotaxin-3 stained score | 53.3 ± 35.8 | 78.3 ± 43.5 | 0.131 |
| Post eosinophil count | 2.3 ± 4.6 | 35.4 ± 12.3 | < 0.001 |
| Post EDN stained cell count | 6.7 ± 15.2 | 45.6 ± 56.5 | 0.047 |
| Post tryptase stained cell count | 21.5 ± 27.1 | 34.3 ± 31.5 | 0.219 |
| Post Eotaxin-3 stained score | 43.8 ± 26.4 | 69.2 ± 62.6 | 0.538 |
| EREFS | 1.2 ± 1.3 | 1.4 ± 1.6 | 0.441 |
| Symptomatic response | 12 (100) | 5 (83.3) | 0.137 |
| Endoscopic response | 9 (75) | 5 (83.3) | > 0.999 |
Obtained using the chi-square test and analyzed using the Fisher exact test for categorical variables and, whereas were assessed using the Mann-Whitney U test for continuous variables.
Per high-power field.
EDN, eosinophil-derived neurotoxin; EREFS, eosinophilic esophagitis endoscopic reference score.
Data are presented as mean ± SD or n (%).