BACKGROUND: Several dietary approaches have been used to induce remission in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), yielding varied results.
METHODS: We searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Scopus databases up to May 2024 to identify studies including dietary interventions for EoE used as monotherapy. Summary estimates with 95% CIs for achieving <15 eosinophils/HPF were calculated for each approach. Fixed or random effects models were used depending on heterogeneity (I2); publication bias risks were assessed using funnel plot analyses. Subgroup analyses results were compared using meta-regression.
RESULTS: Forty-three studies with 2825 patients were included in quantitative summaries. The overall rate of histologic remission was 60.6% (95% CI, 54.6-66.5%). Effectiveness rates were 94.5% (95% CI, 92.3-96.4%) for elemental diets, 63.9% (95% CI, 58.5-69.2%) for six-food elimination diets, 54.7% (95% CI, 45.7-63.6%) for four-food elimination diets, 44.3% (95% CI, 36.1-52.8%) for two-food elimination diets, 46.4% (95% CI, 40-52.9%) for one-food elimination diets, and 39.5% (95% CI, 30.3-49.2%) for allergy testing-directed food elimination diets. Overall, superior efficacy was noted in children than in adults and in retrospective compared to prospective studies.
CONCLUSIONS: Diet therapy remains an effective therapeutic asset for pediatric and adult patients with EoE, with increasing efficacy noted as the levels of dietary restriction increase.

OBJECTIVE: Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases (EGIDs) are complex, multifactorial chronic inflammatory disorders affecting the gastrointestinal tract. Their epidemiology, particularly for eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), is increasing worldwide, with a rise in the co-diagnosis of IBD and EGIDs. Both disorders share common risk factors, such as early exposure to antibiotics or specific dietary habits. Moreover, from a molecular perspective, eosinophilic infiltration is crucial in the diagnosis of eosinophilic disorders, and it also plays a pivotal role in IBD histological diagnosis. Indeed, recent evidence highlights the significant role of eosinophils in the health of the intestinal mucosal barrier and as mediators between innate and acquired immunity, even indicating a potential role in IBD pathogenesis. This narrative review aims to summarize the current evidence regarding the common clinical and molecular aspects of EGIDs and IBD and the current state of knowledge regarding overlap conditions and their pathogenesis.
METHODS: Pubmed was searched until May 2023 to assess relevant studies describing the epidemiology, pathophysiology, and therapy of EGIDs in IBD.
RESULTS: The immune pathways and mechanisms underlying both EGIDs and IBD remain partially known. An improved understanding of the role of eosinophils in overlapping conditions could lead to enhanced diagnostic precision, the development of more effective future therapeutic strategies, and a more accurate prediction of patient response. Consequently, the identification of red flags indicative of an eosinophilic disorder in IBD patients is of paramount importance and must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

Elemental diets have been employed for the management of various diseases for over 50 years, with several mechanisms mediating their beneficial effects. Yet, they are underutilized due to poor palatability, access, cost, and lack of awareness regarding their clinical efficacy. Therefore, in this review, we aimed to systematically search and review the literature to summarize the formulation variability, mechanisms of action, clinical applications, and tolerability of the elemental diets in gastrointestinal diseases. While large prospective trials are lacking, elemental diets appear to exhibit objective and subjective clinical benefit in several diseases, including eosinophilic esophagitis, eosinophilic gastroenteritis, inflammatory bowel diseases, small intestinal bacterial overgrowth, intestinal methanogen overgrowth, chemoradiotherapy-associated mucositis, and celiac disease. Although some data support the long-term use of elemental diets as an add-on supplement for chronic pancreatitis and Crohn\'s disease, most of the literature on exclusive elemental diets focuses on inducing remission. Therefore, subsequent treatment strategies for maintaining remission need to be adopted in chronic/relapsing diseases. Several mechanistic pathways were identified to mediate the effects of elemental diets, including food additive and allergen-free content, high passive absorption rate, and anti-inflammatory properties. High rates of intolerance up to 40% are seen in the trials where exclusive elemental diets were administered orally due to poor organoleptic acceptability; however, when tolerated, adverse events were rare. Other limitations of elemental diets are cost, access, and lifestyle/social restrictions. Moreover, judicious use is advised in presence of a concomitant restrictive food intake disorders. Elemental diets offer a potentially highly efficacious dietary intervention with minor side effects. Palatability, cost, access, and social restrictions are common barriers of use. Prospective clinical trials are needed to elucidate the role of elemental formulas in the management of individual diseases.

Eosinophilic Esophagitis is a widely-recognized immune-mediated esophagus disease with distinct clinical and histopathological features, exhibiting an increased global incidence. Therapeutic options encompass either dietary measures or pharmacological approaches, including proton pump inhibitors and topical corticosteroids. The use of monoclonal antibodies is currently under comprehensive evaluation, with a plethora of ongoing clinical trials designed to determine their clinical efficacy. The present case report demonstrates an exceptional case of refractory Eosinophilic Esophagitis, unresponsive to conventional treatment, achieving both clinical and histopathological remission subsequent to initiation of benralizumab treatment. Concurrently, our case underscores the necessity for continued research in the field of monoclonal antibodies for their use as a future treatment approach against Eosinophilic Esophagitis.

This chapter presents an overview of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) for the Primary Care Practitioner (PCP). The focus is on helping PCPs keep it in their differential diagnosis by discussing the spectrum of clinical presentations, how to screen for EoE in at-risk populations and subsequently manage the patient with this condition. The authors review epidemiology, risk factors and associated conditions, pathology, clinical presentation, diagnosis, and management options.

Introduction Previous studies have demonstrated an increased incidence of gastrointestinal (GI) pathologies, specifically celiac disease (CD) and eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), in patients with cystic fibrosis (CF). However, there is minimal data available regarding endoscopic findings in pediatric patients with CF and GI mucosal disease.  Methods A retrospective chart review was performed on patients with CF under 18 years of age who underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) or colonoscopy with biopsy over a 15-year period at our institution. Patient characteristics including assigned sex at birth, CF genetic mutations (if identified), and cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) modulator use were recorded. Data obtained at the time of biopsy included body mass index (BMI), indication for the procedure, exocrine pancreatic status, visual endoscopic findings, and histologic findings. Results A total of 72 patients with CF were included in the study. 24% (n=17) were found to have abnormal endoscopic biopsy results. EoE (13% of all patients, n=9) and CD (6% of all patients, n=4) were the most common GI diagnoses present on endoscopic biopsy. All 3 patients taking CFTR modulator medications at the time of endoscopy had normal biopsy results. Of the 17 patients found to have abnormal pathology results, 14 (82%) were taking proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) medication at the time of endoscopy. Conclusion This study highlights the probable increased frequency of GI disease in the pediatric CF population. These findings underscore the importance of maintaining a broad differential diagnosis while considering utilization of endoscopy with biopsy in pediatric patients with CF who have GI symptoms.

UNASSIGNED: The demographic characteristics of patients with eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases (EGIDs) are poorly understood. Population-based assessments of EGID demographics may indicate health disparities in diagnosis.
UNASSIGNED: We aimed to characterize the demographic distribution of EGIDs and evaluate the potential for bias in reporting patient characteristics.
UNASSIGNED: We conducted a systematic review, extracting data on age, sex, gender, race, ethnicity, body mass index, insurance, and urban/rural residence on EGID patients and the source population. Differences in proportions were assessed by chi-square tests. Demographic reporting was compared to recent guidelines.
UNASSIGNED: Among 50 studies that met inclusion/exclusion criteria, 12 reported ≥1 demographic feature in both EGID and source populations. Except for age and sex or gender, demographics were rarely described (race = 4, ethnicity = 1, insurance = 1) or were not described (body mass index, urban/rural residence). A higher proportion of male subjects was observed for EoE or esophageal eosinophilia relative to the source population, but no difference in gender or sex distribution was observed for other EGIDs. \"Sex\" and \"gender\" were used interchangeably, and frequently only the male proportion was reported. Reporting of race and ethnicity was inconsistent with guidelines.
UNASSIGNED: Current data support a male predominance for EoE only. Evidence was insufficient to support enrichment of EGIDs in any particular racial, ethnic, or other demographic group. Population-based studies presenting demographics on both cases and source populations are needed. Implementation of guidelines for more inclusive reporting of demographic characteristics is crucial to prevent disparities in timely diagnosis and management of patients with EGIDs.

OBJECTIVE: Monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) have clinical benefits for treating several atopic diseases. However, consensus on its use for eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is lacking. The present meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of MAbs versus placebo for treating EoE.
METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The primary outcomes were changes in peak esophageal eosinophils count/high power field (HPF) and mean esophageal eosinophils count/HPF. The secondary outcomes were changes in the EoE-Histology Scoring System (EoE-HSS), Endoscopic Reference Score (EREFS), dysphagia score, and adverse events (AEs). We compared binary outcomes using risk ratio (RR) and continuous outcomes using mean difference (MD) or standardized mean difference (SMD), with 95% confidence interval (CI). Considering the diversity of mechanistic properties of MAbs, a pre-specified subgroup analysis by MAb mechanism of action was performed for all outcomes, provided that at least two studies were in each subgroup. Heterogeneity was assessed using Cochran\'s Q test and I2 statistics.
RESULTS: 6 RCTs were included (533 patients). Compared to placebo, MAbs led to a significant reduction in peak esophageal eosinophils count/HPF (MD -0.78; CI 95% -0.87, -0.6801) and mean esophageal eosinophils count/HPF (SMD -0.79; CI 95% -1.5, -0.08). Moreover, MAbs significantly reduced EoE-HSS scores (grade score: SMD -9.31; 95% CI -13.95, -4.6701; stage score: SMD -10.18; 95% CI -15.06, -5.31), EREFS (SMD -5.95; CI 95% -9.19, -2.71) and dysphagia score (SMD -1.79; CI 95% -3.36, -0.23) without increasing AEs compared to placebo. Among those MAbs whose mechanism of action includes the blockage of the receptor for IL-13 (Dupilumab, QAX576, and RPC4046), the scores of EoE-HSS grade, EoE-HSS stage, EREFS, and dysphagia were significantly reduced, and they presented a similar risk of overall and serious AEs compared to placebo.
CONCLUSIONS: MAbs seem effective and safe in reducing esophageal eosinophil infiltrate, EoE-HSS score, EREFS score, and dysphagia symptoms in patients with EoE. However, further evidence is needed to establish its place in EoE management.

Proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) are the most administered first-line treatment for eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). However, only around half of EoE patients respond histologically to a double dosage of PPI. In addition, 70% of responders maintain EoE in remission after tapering the PPI dose. In order to avoid endoscopy with biopsies-the only accurate method of assessing PPI response-efforts have been made to identify PPI responder patients. The clinical or endoscopic features and biomarkers evaluated so far, however, have not proven to be sufficient in predicting PPI response. Although new approaches based on omics technologies have uncovered promising biomarkers, the specialized and complex procedures required are difficult to implement in clinical settings. Alternatively, PPI pharmacogenetics based on identifying variations in CYP2C19 and STAT6 genes have shown promising results in EoE, and could easily be performed in most laboratories. Other genetic variations have also been associated with PPI response and may explain those cases not related to CYP2C19 or STAT6. Here, we provide an overview of PPI treatment in EoE and evidence of how genetic variations in CYP2C19 and other genes could affect PPI effectiveness, and also discuss studies evaluating the role of pharmacogenetics in predicting PPI response in patients with EoE.

Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Disorders (EGIDs) are a group of conditions characterized by abnormal eosinophil accumulation in the gastrointestinal tract. Among these EGIDs, Eosinophilic Esophagitis (EoE) is the most well documented, while less is known about Eosinophilic Gastritis (EoG), Eosinophilic Enteritis (EoN), and Eosinophilic Colitis (EoC). The role of endoscopy in EGIDs is pivotal, with applications in diagnosis, disease monitoring, and therapeutic intervention. In EoE, the endoscopic reference score (EREFS) has been shown to be accurate in raising diagnostic suspicion and effective in monitoring therapeutic responses. Additionally, endoscopic dilation is the first-line treatment for esophageal strictures. For EoG and EoN, while the literature is more limited, common endoscopic findings include erythema, nodules, and ulcerations. Histology remains the gold standard for diagnosing EGIDs, as it quantifies eosinophilic infiltration. In recent years, there have been significant advancements in the histological understanding of EoE, leading to the development of diagnostic scores and the identification of specific microscopic features associated with the disease. However, for EoG, EoN, and EoC, precise eosinophil count thresholds for diagnosis have not yet been established. This review aims to elucidate the role of endoscopy and histology in the diagnosis and management of the three main EGIDs and to analyze their strengths and limitations, their interconnection, and future research directions.