Advancing the understanding of the pathophysiology of eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE) and other eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases (EGIDs) has spurred research into targeted biological therapies, while the conclusive therapeutic efficacy of biologics remains uncertain. In this review, we conducted a meta-analysis of all RCTS of biologics in the treatment of EoE to evaluate their efficacy and safety and discussed their treatment of non-EoE EGIDs.

We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases. Double-blind randomized controlled trials comparing biologics with placebo in patients with EoE and non-EoE EGIDs were collected and further screened for inclusion and exclusion. The caliber of the included literature was evaluated using the Cochrane risk assessment tool findings. Data extraction and meta-analysis were conducted using RevMan 5.4 and Stata 17.0. Clinical response and histological remission were the major endpoints.

Our search retrieved 3,237 articles. There were seven trials in total, comprising 792 people with EoE. Key outcomes of this meta-analysis include the following: Anti-IL-5 biologics exhibited statistically significant benefits in histological remission (RR 2.03 [CI 1.45-2.85]; p < 0.0001) compared to the placebo, but there was no significant difference in symptom relief (RR 1.06 [CI 0.88 to 1.28]; p = 0.53); anti-IL-4/13 biologics had significant effects on histologic improvement (RR 10.48 [CI 5.54-19.82]; p < 0.00001) and symptom related score reduction (RR 1.44 [CI 1.08-1.93]; p = 0.01), with a better outcome for endoscopic remission than with placebo (SMD-1.06 [CI-1.26-0.86], p < 0.00001); no statistically significant differences in adverse effects were observed between the intervention and control groups.

Our findings suggest that the biologics currently being investigated are considered safe and effective treatments for EoE, while their efficiency varies. However, the discussion of biologics in non-pharyngitis EGID is hampered by a lack of research, necessitating more research in high-quality trials.

Eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorders, including eosinophilic esophagitis, are chronic Th2 mediated diseases. Establishing a diagnosis and initiating treatment is crucial to limit disease progression that may lead to tissue remodeling and the development of strictures that significantly impact patient quality of life. Expert consensus guidelines provide a framework for treating eosinophilic esophagitis with diet elimination, proton pump inhibitors, swallowed topical steroids, or dupilumab and for monitoring with sedated endoscopy for gross and histologic evaluation. While this provides an established algorithm for treating and monitoring eosinophilic esophagitis, there is less established for the rarer eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorders (eosinophilic gastritis, enteritis, and colitis). Research advancements continue to emerge at a rapid pace, identifying potential biomarkers, therapeutic targets, and monitoring strategies. In this article, we review the current accepted methods for treating and monitoring eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorders with a focus on eosinophilic esophagitis, assess what is currently under investigation, and provide an aspirational vision for future disease management with a streamlined algorithm of personalized medicine and less invasive monitoring.

Multiple pharmacological interventions have been studied for managing eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). We performed a comprehensive systematic review and network meta-analysis of all available randomized controlled trials (RCT) to assess the efficacy and safety of these interventions in EoE in adults and children.

We performed a comprehensive review of Embase, PubMed, MEDLINE OVID, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science through May 10, 2023. We performed frequentist approach network meta-analysis using random effects model. We calculated the odds ratio (OR) with 95% CI for dichotomous outcomes.

Our search yielded 25 RCTs with 25 discrete interventions and 2067 patients. Compared with placebo, the following interventions improved histology (using study definitions) in decreasing order on ranking: orodispersible budesonide (ODB) low dose, ODB high dose, oral viscous budesonide (OVB) high dose, fluticasone tablet 1.5 mg twice daily, fluticasone 3 mg twice daily, esomeprazole, dupilumab every 2 weeks, dupilumab weekly, OVB medium dose, fluticasone 3 mg daily, cendakimab 180 mg, prednisone, swallowed fluticasone, fluticasone tablet 1.5 mg daily, OVB low dose, reslizumab 3 mg/kg, reslizumab 1 mg/kg, and reslizumab 2 mg/kg.

Network meta-analysis demonstrates histological efficacy of multiple medications for EoE. Because of the heterogeneity and large effect size, we recommend more trials comparing pharmacotherapeutic interventions with each other and placebo. An important limitation of this study is absence of clinical efficacy data due to insufficient data. Other limitations include heterogeneity of operator, population, and outcome analysis.

Pediatric gastroenterology is entering a pivotal phase marked by significant challenges and emerging opportunities in treating conditions like celiac disease (CeD), eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), and autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) pose significant clinical hurdles, but new therapeutic avenues are emerging. Advances in precision medicine, particularly proteomics, are reshaping care by tailoring treatments to individual patient characteristics. For CeD, therapies like gluten-degrading enzymes (latiglutenase, Kuma030) and zonulin inhibitors (larazotide acetate) show promise, though clinical outcomes are inconsistent. Immunotherapy and microbiota modulation, including probiotics and fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT), are also under exploration, with potential benefits in symptom management. Transglutaminase 2 inhibitors like ZED-1227 could help prevent gluten-induced damage. Monoclonal antibodies targeting immune pathways, such as AMG 714 and larazotide acetate, require further validation in pediatric populations. In EoE, biologics like dupilumab, cendakimab, dectrekumab (IL-13 inhibitors), and mepolizumab, reslizumab, and benralizumab (IL-5/IL-5R inhibitors) show varying efficacy, while thymic stromal lymphopoietin (TSLP) inhibitors like tezepelumab are also being investigated. These therapies require more pediatric-specific research to optimize their use. For IBD, biologics like vedolizumab, ustekinumab, and risankizumab, as well as small molecules like tofacitinib, etrasimod, and upadacitinib, are emerging treatments. New medications for individuals with refractory or steroid-dependent AIH have been explored. Personalized therapy, integrating precision medicine, therapeutic drug monitoring, and lifestyle changes, is increasingly guiding pediatric IBD management. This narrative review explores recent breakthroughs in treating CeD, EoE, IBD, and AIH, with a focus on pediatric studies when available, and discusses the growing role of proteomics in advancing personalized gastroenterological care.

Eosinophilic esophagitis is a chronic allergic inflammatory disease, and its incidence and prevalence have recently increased. Eosinophilic esophagitis has not become a rare disease; thus, knowledge for diagnosing it is needed in current clinical practice. The adequate management of endoscopic procedures is particularly important for the diagnosis and evaluation of inflammatory activity and therapeutic responses. The therapeutic options for eosinophilic esophagitis include anti-acid drugs such as proton pump inhibitors, potassium-competitive acid blockers, swallowed topical corticosteroids, biologics, and dietary elimination therapies. Moreover, endoscopic esophageal dilation is a therapeutic option for fibrotic strictures due to eosinophilic esophagitis to improve obstructive symptoms, such as dysphagia and food impaction. In this review, we describe the endoscopic characteristics of eosinophilic esophagitis, including an endoscopic reference score and an optimal biopsy protocol to diagnose and evaluate the therapeutic response. We also describe a current therapeutic management of eosinophilic esophagitis.

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic, immune-mediated disease marked by eosinophilic inflammation and esophageal dysfunction, with a significant impact on morbidity, quality of life, and health care utilization. Once considered rare, EoE has become increasingly prevalent, with global estimates exceeding 140 cases per 100,000 individuals. This rise highlights the need to better understand the natural history and disease course to inform diagnosis and management strategies. Evidence suggests that EoE is a progressive condition, such that untreated inflammation contributes to esophageal remodeling and fibrotic complications over years to decades. Patients can develop esophageal food impactions, leading to emergency department utilization and the need for emergent endoscopy. In addition, patients with fibrostenotic disease can require serial dilations. Long-term management, including dietary therapy, proton pump inhibitors, topical corticosteroids, and newer therapies such as dupilumab, demonstrate promise in altering the disease course. However, variability exists in the strength of evidence regarding each therapy's ability to halt or reverse fibrosis. Knowledge gaps persist, particularly in defining fibrosis, identifying phenotypes prone to progression, and tailoring therapies to individual patients. Addressing these gaps will require continued research into understanding fibrosis progression and how therapies alter this trajectory. These efforts are poised to significantly improve clinical care and enhance outcomes for patients with EoE.

The spectrum of non-IgE mediated conditions includes well-defined conditions like Food Protein-Induced Enterocolitis Syndrome (FPIES), Eosinophilic Oesophagitis (EoE), Food Protein-Induced Enteropathy, and Food Protein-Induced Allergic Proctocolitis, but also the more controversial food protein-induced dysmotility disorders like food protein-induced gastroesophageal reflux disease (FPGORD) and food protein-induced constipation (FPC). Typically, non-IgE mediated reactions are delayed, with symptom onset from hours to days after exposure to a culprit food. The diagnosis is mostly clinical, and food elimination followed by reintroduction is the primary diagnostic method. Apart from EoE, the diagnosis of these conditions remains challenging, and there is a need to develop specific diagnostic tests. Acute FPIES presents with distinct symptoms, but misdiagnosis is common due to poor recognition. In contrast, some presentations, particularly FPGORD and FPC, overlap with the common, often benign disorders of gut-brain interaction, previously known as functional gastrointestinal disorders. This raises concerns about overdiagnosis and can lead to an unnecessary restrictive diet in infants and breastfeeding mothers. A systematic approach to an elimination diet and the support of a registered dietitian/nutritionist are recommended to ensure nutritional adequacy, suitable alternatives, promote timely introductions when appropriate, support breastfeeding where required as well as prevent nutritional deficiencies and feeding difficulties. This publication aims to provide an update on the spectrum of non-IgE-mediated food allergic conditions and intends to provide clinicians with practical guidance on the diagnosis and management of each condition. The authors acknowledge the need for further research in a range of areas to inform best evidence-based practice.

Dupilumab is a monoclonal antibody targeting interleukin-4 and interleukin-13, approved for the treatment of multiple T2 diseases and more recently for Eosinophilic Esophagitis (EoE). EoE is a chronic T2 inflammatory disease, believed to be a member of the "atopic march", due to multiple similarities with other atopic diseases, ranging from epidemiology to genetics and pathophysiology. Although often co-existing in the same patient, these diseases are still treated as separated entities by different specialists, resulting in polypharmacy and chronic use of steroids. Thus, a shared-decision approach by a multidisciplinary team composed of different specialists might improve clinical management and outcomes. Yet, prospective data on the effectiveness of dupilumab as a single agent for multiple T2 inflammatory diseases are lacking, since only few case reports and small studies have been published so far reporting outcomes in patients affected by multiple T2 diseases. The purpose of this review is to illustrate the rationale and clinical evidence supporting the possibility of using dupilumab as a single therapeutic agent in those patients affected by multiple T2 diseases in addition to EoE.

High placebo responses have limited drug development in eosinophilic oesophagitis. The optimal configuration of trial outcomes is uncertain.

To inform more efficient future trial designs, to characterise clinical, endoscopic and histologic placebo responses in eosinophilic oesophagitis randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

We updated a Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis, searching multiple databases to January 1, 2024, to identify placebo-controlled RCTs evaluating medical therapies for patients with eosinophilic oesophagitis. The primary outcome was the pooled proportion of study-defined clinical, endoscopic and histologic responders and remitters randomised to placebo, using an intention-to-treat approach and random-effects model. Sources of heterogeneity were explored using meta-regression.

We included 25 RCTs. The pooled proportion of clinical response was 41.0% [95% CI: 29.7%-52.8%] with substantial heterogeneity (I2 = 74.9%). On meta-regression, older age and a higher probability of being randomised to placebo reduced the likelihood of clinical response to placebo. The pooled proportion of histologic remission defined as a peak eosinophil count [PEC] ≤ 6 eosinophils per high power field [HPF] or ≤ 1 eosinophil/HPF was 4.3% [95% CI: 2.6%-6.2%] (I2 = 23.6%) and 1.3% [95% CI: 0.5%-2.5%] (I2 = 0%), respectively. The standardised mean difference in the Eosinophilic Oesophagitis Endoscopic Reference Score to placebo was -0.25 [95% CI: -0.41, -0.10].

Over 40% of patients in eosinophilic oesophagitis trials respond clinically to placebo, and this is associated with trial design factors such as randomisation ratio and trial population. Objective endoscopic and histologic measures are associated with very low placebo responses.

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is an atopic condition of the esophagus that has become increasingly recognized. Diagnosis of the disorder is dependent on the patient's clinical manifestations and must be confirmed by histologic findings on esophageal mucosal biopsies. The epidemiology, pathophysiology, diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis of EoE are discussed in this review.

Eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE) is a chronic, immune-mediated condition characterised by eosinophilic infiltration of the oesophagus, leading to significant morbidity due to oesophageal dysfunction. The pathogenic course of EoE begins with tissue injury, marked by the intricate interplay of oesophageal barrier dysfunction and T helper 2-mediated inflammation. In response to tissue damage, a subsequent phase of tissue remodelling features a complex interaction between epithelial cells and stromal cells, aimed at tissue repair. The persistence of inflammation drives these mechanisms towards oesophageal fibrostenosis, mainly through the transforming growth factor-dependent, myofibroblast-driven accumulation of the extracellular matrix. Currently, treatment options for EoE are limited, with dietary intervention, proton pump inhibitors and oral steroids serving as first-line therapies. Dupilumab, an antiinterleukin (IL) 4/IL-13 agent, is the only biologic that has been approved by European and American regulatory authorities. However, emerging OMIC technologies significantly advance our understanding of EoE pathogenesis, revealing novel cellular and molecular mechanisms driving the disease. This progress has accelerated the identification of new therapeutic targets and agents, some already under clinical investigation, potentially expanding our therapeutic arsenal and paving the way for more personalised approaches. In this evolving landscape, artificial intelligence (AI) has shown great potential to further elaborate on the complexities of EoE heterogeneity, offering standardised tools for diagnosis, disease phenotyping, and prediction of treatment response. Though still in their early stages, integrating OMICs and AI marks a pivotal step towards precision medicine in EoE.

Background: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a rare, chronic immune-mediated disorder with limited treatment options. Despite the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of dupilumab for EoE, other monoclonal antibodies remain unapproved and are used off-label with limited evidence on their efficacy and safety. This systematic review rigorously and comprehensively evaluates the evidence for monoclonal antibody therapies used off-label to treat EoE. Methods: We conducted a systematic review across PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central, and ClinicalTrials.gov, assessing the efficacy and safety of off-label monoclonal antibodies in EoE through clinical outcomes and the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) data. Results: Among ten monoclonal antibodies reviewed, mepolizumab that targets IL-5 showed the most promise with a moderate recommendation based on Level 2 evidence. Others like omalizumab (anti-IgE), dectrekumab (anti-IL-13), and reslizumab (anti-IL-5) showed limited utility. Safety evaluations via the FAERS database revealed significant adverse drug reactions, including serious events like asthmatic crises, pneumonia, and adrenal insufficiency for mepolizumab and reslizumab, as well as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and gastroenteritis for omalizumab. Dectrekumab's safety profile remains unclear due to a lack of data. Conclusions: While mepolizumab demonstrates potential as an off-label treatment, none of the antibodies reviewed have FDA approval for EoE. Clinicians should consider the balance between local and systemic effects and exercise caution, closely monitoring for adverse effects, particularly in patients with respiratory comorbidities. Continued research is crucial to establish a more robust evidence base for these therapies.

Eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases (EGIDs) encompass a group of disorders characterized by an abnormal accumulation of eosinophils in various parts of the gastrointestinal tract. EGIDs present with a wide range of symptoms such as abdominal pain, vomiting, diarrhea, difficulty swallowing, and food impaction. Monoclonal antibodies, targeting inflammatory cytokines or eosinophils, are the next emerging therapy for EGIDs. The only Food and Drug Administration-approved monoclonal antibody is dupilumab, and it has been approved for the treatment of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). In this article, the authors will discuss biologics that have been used in the treatment of eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases.

The etiology of allergy is closely linked to type 2 inflammatory responses ultimately leading to the production of allergen-specific immunoglobulin E (IgE), a key driver of many allergic conditions. At a high level, initial allergen exposure disrupts epithelial integrity, triggering local inflammation via alarmins including IL-25, IL-33, and TSLP, which activate type 2 innate lymphoid cells as well as other immune cells to secrete type 2 cytokines IL-4, IL-5 and IL-13, promoting Th2 cell development and eosinophil recruitment. Th2 cell dependent B cell activation promotes the production of allergen-specific IgE, which stably binds to basophils and mast cells. Rapid degranulation of these cells upon allergen re-exposure leads to allergic symptoms. Recent advances in our understanding of the molecular and cellular mechanisms underlying allergic pathophysiology have significantly shaped the development of therapeutic intervention strategies. In this review, we highlight key therapeutic targets within the allergic cascade with a particular focus on past, current and future treatment approaches using monoclonal antibodies. Specific targeting of alarmins, type 2 cytokines and IgE has shown varying degrees of clinical benefit in different allergic indications including asthma, chronic spontaneous urticaria, atopic dermatitis, chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps, food allergies and eosinophilic esophagitis. While multiple therapeutic antibodies have been approved for clinical use, scientists are still working on ways to improve on current treatment approaches. Here, we provide context to understand therapeutic targeting strategies and their limitations, discussing both knowledge gaps and promising future directions to enhancing clinical efficacy in allergic disease management.

Eosinophils are elusive cells involved in allergic inflammation. Single-cell RNA-sequencing (scRNA-seq) is an emerging approach to deeply characterize cellular properties, heterogeneity, and functionality.

We sought to comprehensively characterize the transcriptome and biological functions of human eosinophils at a site of severe allergic inflammation in the esophagus (ie, eosinophilic esophagitis [EoE]).

We employed a gravity-based scRNA-seq methodology to sequence blood eosinophils from patients with EoE and control individuals compared to a reanalyzed public scRNA-seq dataset of human esophageal eosinophils of EoE patients. We used flow cytometry, immunostaining, and a stimulation assay to verify mRNA findings.

In total, scRNA-seq was obtained from 586 eosinophils (188 from blood [n = 6 individuals] and 398 from esophagus [n = 6 individuals]). The esophageal eosinophils were composed of a population of activated eosinophils (enriched in 659 genes compared with peripheral blood-associated eosinophils) and a small population of eosinophils resembling peripheral blood eosinophils (enriched in 62 genes compared with esophageal eosinophils). Esophageal eosinophils expressed genes involved in sensing and responding to diverse stimuli, most notably IFN-γ, IL-10, histamine and leukotrienes, and succinate. Esophageal eosinophils were most distinguished from other esophageal populations by gene expression of the receptors CCR3, HRH4, SUCNR1, and VSTM1; transcription factors CEBPE, OLIG1, and OLIG2; protease PRSS33; and the hallmark eosinophil gene CLC. A web of bidirectional eosinophil interactions with other esophageal populations was derived. Comparing esophageal eosinophils and mast cells revealed that esophageal eosinophils expressed genes involved in DNAX-activation protein-12 (also known as TYROBP) interactions, IgG receptor-triggered events, immunoregulation, and IL-10 signaling.

In EoE, esophageal eosinophils exist as 2 populations, a minority population resembling blood eosinophils and the other population characterized by high de novo transcription of diverse sensing receptors and inflammatory mediators readying them to potentially intersect with diverse cell types.

Dysphagia is the hallmark symptom in eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). However, data are limited regarding the overall prevalence and potential implications of atypical symptoms like odynophagia and retrosternal pain.

Patients enrolled into the Swiss EoE cohort study (SEECS) were analyzed regarding the presence of odynophagia and retrosternal pain. Demographics, other EoE-related symptoms, histologic and endoscopic activity were compared between EoE-patients with vs. without odynophagia and/or retrosternal pain.

474 patients (75.2% male) were analyzed. In their individual course of disease 110 (23.2%) patients stated to have ever experienced odynophagia and 64 (13.5%) retrosternal pain independent of food intake, 24 (5%) patients complained about both symptoms. Patients with odynophagia consistently scored higher in symptom severity (p < 0.001), EREFS score (median 3.0 vs. 2.0, p = 0.006), histologic activity and a lower quality of life (p = 0.001) compared to patients without odynophagia. Sex, age at diagnosis, EoE-specific treatment, complications such as candida or viral esophagitis and disease duration were similar in patients with vs. without odynophagia. Also patients with retrosternal pain scored higher in symptom severity (2.0 vs. 1.0, p = 0.001 and 2.0 vs. 1.0, p < 0.001 in physician and patient questionnaire assessment, respectively). However, there was neither a difference in endoscopic/histologic disease activity nor in quality of life according to presence or absence of retrosternal pain. Due to logistic reasons, a stratification regarding the presence of concomitant dysphagia was not possible.

Odynophagia and swallowing-independent retrosternal pain are common symptoms in patients with EoE, associate with an overall higher EoE-related symptom severity and for the case of odynophagia lower quality of life. However, the influence of concomitant dysphagia and its severity remains unclear and needs to be included in future analyses.

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) and allergic rhinitis (AR) usually represent the latest manifestations of the atopic march, sharing a common type 2 inflammation response. A relevant prevalence of AR in EoE cohorts has been widely confirmed. An increasing literature assessed the involvement of aeroantigens in EoE pathogenesis, focusing foremost on the seasonality of new diagnoses, symptoms, and response to therapy. Unfortunately, no diriment direction has been achieved, probably due to the retrospective design of the studies so far available, which chose surrogate markers of EoE activity (mostly the date of new diagnosis) which may be affected by geographical, logistic and personal factors, probably not dependent by the disease itself. EoE exacerbations reported in the context of the pollen levels (preferably pollen counts) may represent a more reliable marker. AR might promote the onset and the re-exacerbation of EoE through mechanisms that are both local (ie, massive exposure to airborne antigens mediated by post-nasal drip) and systemic (type 2 inflammation). Furthermore, AR may facilitate EoE onset by predisposing to pollen food allergic syndrome (PFAS), and EoE patients with PFAS reported higher rate of AR, thus suggesting a bond among these 3 conditions whose causative relationship have still to be ascertained. In addition, because of its shifting activity from Th2 to Th1 inflammation, several case reports focused on the effect of allergen immunotherapy (AIT) employed to treat AR in EoE patients. Also in this instance, no certainties could be guaranteed, although sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) is more frequently reported to exacerbate EoE, while SCIT is mostly described as a remission adjuvant. The real life experience reported from our allergy service appears to confirm such hypothesis. Finally, a watchful eye should be reserved to monoclonal antibodies as a potential future option for concomitant EoE and AR. In light of all this, an attentive evaluation of allergic history of EoE patients should be relevant. Future perspectives should be addressed on prospective studies targeted to shed light on causative relations among airborne antigens, AR and EoE, and to viable comprehensive treatments.

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic inflammatory disorder of the esophagus. EoE shares a common pathogenetic mechanism with other chronic disorders pertaining to the type 2 inflammatory spectrum, such as atopic dermatitis (AD), allergic rhinitis (AR), asthma, and chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP). The recent advancements in EoE pathogenesis understanding have unveiled new molecular targets implied within the "atopic march" picture as well as specific to EoE. These discoveries have led to the clinical evaluation of several novel drugs (monoclonal antibodies and immune modulators), specifically aimed at the modulation of Th2 inflammation. In this comprehensive review, we have focused on the subtle mechanisms of type 2 inflammatory disorders, highlighting the similarities and differences with EoE, taking a deeper look into the evolving field of biologic therapies, already approved or under current investigation.

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are chronic inflammatory disorders of the gastrointestinal tract, with EoE predominantly provoked by food and aeroallergens, whereas IBD is driven by a broader spectrum of immunopathological and environmental triggers. This review presents a comprehensive comparison of the pathophysiological and therapeutic strategies for EoE and IBD. We examine the current understanding of their underlying mechanisms, particularly the interplay between environmental factors and genetic susceptibility. A crucial element in both diseases is the integrity of the epithelial barrier, whose disruption plays a central role in their pathogenesis. The involvement of eosinophils, mast cells, B cells, T cells, dendritic cells, macrophages, and their associated cytokines is examined, highlighting the importance of targeting cytokine signaling pathways to modulate immune-epithelial interactions. We propose that advances in computation tools will uncover the significance of G-protein coupled receptors (GPCRs) in connecting immune and epithelial cells, leading to novel therapies for EoE and IBD.

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic inflammatory disease of the esophagus characterized by symptoms of esophageal dysfunction and histologically by predominantly eosinophilic infiltration of the squamous epithelium. European Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition (ESPGHAN) published a guideline in 2014; however, the rapid evolution of knowledge about pathophysiology, diagnostic criteria, and therapeutic options have made an update necessary.

A consensus group of pediatric gastroenterologists from the ESPGHAN Working Group on Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Diseases (ESPGHAN EGID WG) reviewed the recent literature and proposed statements and recommendations on 28 relevant questions about EoE. A comprehensive electronic literature search was performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases from 2014 to 2022. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation system was used to assess the quality of evidence and formulate recommendations.

A total of 52 statements based on the available evidence and 44 consensus-based recommendations are available. A revision of the diagnostic protocol, options for initial drug treatment, and the new concept of simplified empiric elimination diets are now available. Biologics are becoming a part of the potential armamentarium for refractory EoE, and systemic steroids may be considered as the initial treatment for esophageal strictures before esophageal dilation. The importance and assessment of quality of life and a planned transition to adult medical care are new areas addressed in this guideline.

Research in recent years has led to a better understanding of childhood EoE. This guideline incorporates the new findings and provides a practical guide for clinicians treating children diagnosed with EoE.

Rare eosinophil-associated disorders (EADs), including hypereosinophilic syndrome, eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis, and eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorders, are a heterogeneous group of conditions characterized by blood and/or tissue hypereosinophilia and eosinophil-related clinical manifestations. Although the recent availability of biologic therapies that directly and indirectly target eosinophils has the potential to dramatically improve treatment options for all EADs, clinical trials addressing their safety and efficacy in rare EADs have been relatively few. Consequently, patient access to therapy is limited for many biologics, and the establishment of evidence-based treatment guidelines has been extremely difficult. In this regard, multicenter retrospective collaborative studies focusing on disease manifestations and treatment responses in rare EADs have provided invaluable data for physicians managing patients with these conditions and helped identify important questions for future translational research. During the Clinical Pre-Meeting Workshop held in association with the July 2023 biennial meeting of the International Eosinophil Society in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, the successes and limitations of pivotal multicenter retrospective studies in EADs were summarized and unmet needs regarding the establishment of guidelines for use of biologics in rare EADs were discussed. Key topics of interest included (1) clinical outcome measures, (2) minimally invasive biomarkers of disease activity, (3) predictors of response to biologic agents, and (4) long-term safety of eosinophil depletion. Herein, we report a summary of these discussions, presenting a state-of-the-art overview of data currently available for each of these topics, the limitations of the data, and avenues for future data generation through implementation of multidisciplinary and multicenter studies.

Interleukin-5 functions as a B-cell differentiation factor, but more importantly, in the context of this review, it plays a variety of roles in eosinophil biology, including eosinophil differentiation and maturation in the bone marrow, and facilitates eosinophil migration to tissue sites, usually in the context of an allergic reaction. Given the availability of selective anti-IL-5 drugs such as mepolizumab and reslizumab, as well as the IL-5 receptor antagonist benralizumab, it is worth investigating whether they could be used in some cases of allergic disease. Asthma has a well-documented involvement of IL-5 in its pathophysiology and has clear benefits in the case of anti-IL-5 therapy; therefore, current knowledge is presented to provide a reference point for the study of less-described diseases such as atopic dermatitis, chronic rhinosinusitis, chronic spontaneous urticaria, and its association with both IL-5 and anti-IL-5 treatment options. We then review the current literature on these diseases, explain where appropriate potential reasons why anti-IL-5 treatments are ineffective, and then point out possible future directions for further research.

The present document constitutes Part 2 of the EoETALY Consensus Statements guideline on the diagnosis and management of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) developed by experts in the field of EoE across Italy (i.e., EoETALY Consensus Group). Part 1 was published as a different document, and included three chapters discussing 1) definition, epidemiology, and pathogenesis; 2) clinical presentation and natural history and 3) diagnosis of EoE. The present work provides guidelines on the management of EoE in two final chapters: 4) treatment and 5) monitoring and follow-up, and also includes considerations on knowledge gaps and a proposed research agenda for the coming years. The guideline was developed through a Delphi process, with grading of the strength and quality of the evidence of the recommendations performed according to accepted GRADE criteria.This document has received the endorsement of three Italian national societies including the Italian Society of Gastroenterology (SIGE), the Italian Society of Neurogastroenterology and Motility (SINGEM), and the Italian Society of Allergology, Asthma, and Clinical Immunology (SIAAIC). The guidelines also involved the contribution of members of ESEO Italia, the Italian Association of Families Against EoE.

Eosinophilic gastritis (EoG) and duodenitis (EoD) are rare conditions that are poorly understood. Our aim was to describe the natural history of children with varying degrees of gastric or duodenal eosinophilia with respect to disease complications and histologic and endoscopic longitudinal trajectories.

The electronic medical record at a tertiary children's hospital was queried to identify patients with EoG, EoD, or EoG + EoD who were cared for between January 2010 and 2022. Multiple logistic regression was performed to explore associations between baseline features and persistence/recurrence of eosinophilia or complications remote from diagnosis.

We identified 151 patients: 92 with EoG, 24 with EoD, 12 with EoG + EoD, and 23 with tissue eosinophilia but did not meet histologic criteria for EoG or EoD (low grade). The average age at diagnosis was 10.6 years, and average follow-up was 5.8 years. Twenty-five percent of patients with EoG or EoD had persistence/recurrence of eosinophilia; this was associated with increases in the EoG Endoscopic Reference Score (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.34, confidence interval [CI] 1.03-1.74) on diagnostic endoscopy. Eighteen percent suffered from disease complications, and development of late complications was associated with presenting with a complication (aOR 9.63, CI 1.09-85.20), severity of duodenal endoscopic abnormalities (aOR 8.74, CI 1.67-45.60), and increases in the EoG Endoscopic Reference Score (aOR 1.70, CI 1.11-2.63).

Patients with gastric and duodenal eosinophilia should be followed closely to monitor for recurrence and complications, especially those presenting with endoscopic abnormalities or complications.

Eosinophilic esophagitis is an antigen-mediated chronic inflammatory disorder that has risen in incidence and prevalence over the past 2 decades. The clinical presentation is variable and consists of mainly esophageal symptoms such as dysphagia, heartburn, food impaction, and vomiting. Current management relies on dietary elimination, proton-pump inhibitors, and topical corticosteroids with different response rates and relapses after treatment discontinuation. With a better understanding of the underlying pathophysiology, many molecules emerged recently as targeted treatment including dupilumab (IL4/IL13 blocker), as the first FDA-approved biological treatment, which has changed the management paradigm.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Benralizumab is an eosinophil-depleting anti-interleukin-5 receptor α monoclonal antibody. The efficacy and safety of benralizumab in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis are unclear.

In a phase 3, multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, we assigned patients 12 to 65 years of age with symptomatic and histologically active eosinophilic esophagitis in a 1:1 ratio to receive subcutaneous benralizumab (30 mg) or placebo every 4 weeks. The two primary efficacy end points were histologic response (≤6 eosinophils per high-power field) and the change from baseline in the score on the Dysphagia Symptom Questionnaire (DSQ; range, 0 to 84, with higher scores indicating more frequent or severe dysphagia) at week 24.

A total of 211 patients underwent randomization: 104 were assigned to receive benralizumab, and 107 were assigned to receive placebo. At week 24, more patients had a histologic response with benralizumab than with placebo (87.4% vs. 6.5%; difference, 80.8 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 72.9 to 88.8; P<0.001). However, the change from baseline in the DSQ score did not differ significantly between the two groups (difference in least-squares means, 3.0 points; 95% CI, -1.4 to 7.4; P = 0.18). There was no substantial between-group difference in the change from baseline in the Eosinophilic Esophagitis Endoscopic Reference Score, which reflects endoscopic abnormalities. Adverse events were reported in 64.1% of the patients in the benralizumab group and in 61.7% of those in the placebo group. No patients discontinued the trial because of adverse events.

In this trial involving patients 12 to 65 years of age with eosinophilic esophagitis, a histologic response (≤6 eosinophils per high-power field) occurred in significantly more patients in the benralizumab group than in the placebo group. However, treatment with benralizumab did not result in fewer or less severe dysphagia symptoms than placebo. (Funded by AstraZeneca; MESSINA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04543409.).

While eosinophilic esophagitis (EOE) is defined by histologic presence of eosinophils, a few studies have established the presence of mast cells in EOE and even shown their correlation with symptom persistence despite resolution of eosinophils. Expression of aberrant mast cell markers CD25 and CD2 have not been studied in EOE. This study quantifies the number of hotspot cells per high power field expressing CKIT/CD117, tryptase, CD25, CD2 and CD3 by immunohistochemical stains in endoscopic esophageal biopsies of the following three cohorts: (1) established and histologically confirmed EOE, (2) suspected EOE with biopsies negative for eosinophils, and (3) no history of or suspicion for EOE with histologically unremarkable biopsies. In this study, mast cells were highlighted by CKIT and tryptase in EOE, and not seen in other clinically mimicking cases. There were also significantly higher densities of CD25 and pan-T-cell marker staining in EOE cases. These findings suggest an inflammatory cellular milieu in EOE, beyond just eosinophils, that can be demonstrated by immunohistochemistry, and that invite further study into the role that these cells may play in EOE.

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic inflammatory, disabling disorder characterized by prominent eosinophilic inflammation of the esophagus, leading to troublesome symptoms including dysphagia and food impaction. The natural history of EoE is poorly known, but it may lead to esophageal strictures. The therapeutic armamentarium is expected to grow in the near future, especially due to the availability of novel biological therapies targeting crucial inflammatory pathways of EoE.

In this review, we discuss the main clinical features and natural history of EoE, focusing on the current therapeutic strategies, as well as past and current trials investigating biologics for its treatment.

Dupilumab has been the first approved biologic drug for the treatment of EoE; long-term studies assessing how it could change the natural history of EoE are awaited. Novel biological drugs or other molecules are currently under study and could change the current treatment algorithms in the near future. Proper drug positioning and long term 'exit strategies' are yet to be defined.

Eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases (EGIDs) are a group of diseases characterized by selective eosinophil infiltration of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract in the absence of other causes of eosinophilia. These diseases are generally driven by type 2 inflammation, often in response to food allergen exposure. Among all EGIDs, the clinical presentation often includes a history of atopic disease with a variety of GI symptoms. EGIDs are traditionally separated into eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) and non-EoE EGIDs. EoE is relatively better understood and now associated with clinical guidelines and 2 US Food and Drug Administration-approved treatments, whereas non-EoE EGIDs are rarer and less well-understood diseases without US Food and Drug Administration-approved treatments. Non-EoE EGIDs are further subclassified by the area of the GI tract that is involved; they comprise eosinophilic gastritis, eosinophilic enteritis (including eosinophilic duodenitis), and eosinophilic colitis. As with other GI disorders, the disease presentations and mechanisms differ depending on the involved segment of the GI tract; however, the differences between EoE and non-EoE EGIDs extend beyond which GI tract segment is involved. The aim of this article is to summarize the commonalities and differences between the clinical presentations and disease mechanisms for EoE and non-EoE EGIDs.

Monoclonal antibodies targeting interleukin (IL)-5 pathways have revolutionized the treatment expectations for eosinophilic-associated conditions, particularly in patients with respiratory involvement. Mepolizumab (IL-5 antagonist monoclonal antibody), benralizumab (IL-5 receptor blocker monoclonal antibody), and reslizumab (IL-5 antagonist monoclonal antibody) have collectively contributed to the overall improvement of the disease burden in various conditions. Eosinophilic asthma currently boasts the most robust evidence across all age groups: all three biologics are approved for adults (aged ≥18 years); mepolizumab is approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) also in children (aged ≥ 6 years), while bernalizumab was recently approved by the FDA for patients aged ≥6 years in the USA. In chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps, subcutaneous mepolizumab is the only anti-IL-5 therapy approved so far and can be used in adult patients (aged ≥18 years). For eosinophilic esophagitis, conflicting evidence surrounds both mepolizumab, reslizumab, and benralizumab, leading to non-approval of these agents by the FDA/EMA. Recently, mepolizumab was approved for eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis patients aged ≥6 years or older and for hypereosinophilic syndrome adult patients. A phase III trial proving noninferiority of benralizumab versus mepolizumab in eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis has been recently published, while evidence on reslizumab is scant. Overall, current evidence on anti-IL-5 biologics for eosinophilic-associated disorders is mostly focused on adults, whereas data for individuals aged under 18 years and over 65 years are scarce, resulting in a lack of evidence, particularly regarding efficacy, for the use of anti-IL-5 agents in these specific patient populations. This review addresses high-quality evidence from randomized controlled trials and real-world post-marketing studies regarding the use of anti-IL-5 therapies for eosinophilic-associated disorders across all age groups, spanning childhood, adulthood, and older age.

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is diagnosed and monitored using esophageal eosinophil levels; however, EoE also exhibits a marked, understudied esophageal mastocytosis.

Using machine learning, we localized and characterized esophageal mast cells (MCs) to decipher their potential role in disease pathology.

Esophageal biopsy samples (EoE, control) were stained for MCs by anti-tryptase and imaged using immunofluorescence; high-resolution whole tissue images were digitally assembled. Machine learning software was trained to identify, enumerate, and characterize MCs, designated Mast Cell-Artificial Intelligence (MC-AI).

MC-AI enumerated cell counts with high accuracy. During active EoE, epithelial MCs increased and lamina propria (LP) MCs decreased. In controls and EoE remission patients, papillae had the highest MC density and negatively correlated with epithelial MC density. MC density in the epithelium and papillae correlated with the degree of epithelial eosinophilic inflammation, basal zone hyperplasia, and LP fibrosis. MC-AI detected greater MC degranulation in the epithelium, papillae, and LP in patients with EoE compared with control individuals. MCs were localized further from the basement membrane in active EoE than EoE remission and control individuals but were closer than eosinophils to the basement membrane in active EoE.

Using MC-AI, we identified a distinct population of homeostatic esophageal papillae MCs; during active EoE, this population decreases, undergoes degranulation, negatively correlates with epithelial MC levels, and significantly correlates with distinct histologic features. Overall, MC-AI provides a means to understand the potential involvement of MCs in EoE and other disorders.

Microscopic examination of esophageal biopsies is essential to diagnose eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). Eosinophil inflammation is the basis for the diagnosis, but additional abnormalities may contribute to persistent symptoms and epithelial barrier dysfunction. Both peak eosinophil count and assessments of additional features should be included in pre-therapy and post-therapy pathology reports. Pathologic abnormalities identified in esophageal biopsies of EoE are reversible in contrast to esophageal strictures.

Most of the major clinical signs and consequences of eosinophilic esophagitis seem to be related to tissue remodeling. Important data on remodeling activity in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis are provided by a range of current and new biologic markers and diagnostics. To completely clarify the possible advantages and restrictions of therapeutic approaches, clinical studies should take into consideration the existence and reversibility of esophageal remodeling. The degree of mucosal or submucosal disease activity may not be reflected by epithelial eosinophilic inflammation, which is used to define one criterion of disease activity".

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), swallowed topical corticosteroids (STSs), and dupilumab are highly effective therapies for the treatment of eosinophilic esophagitis. Shared decision-making informs the choice of therapy and factors such as ease of use, safety, cost, and efficacy should be addressed. PPIs are the most common medication utilized early in the disease course; however, for nonresponders, STSs are an excellent alternative. Dupilumab is unlikely to replace PPIs or STSs as first-line therapy, except in highly specific circumstances. Identification of novel biologic pathways and the development of small molecules may lead to a wider range of treatment options in the future.

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is an increasingly common inflammatory condition of the esophagus; however, the underlying immunologic mechanisms remain poorly understood. The epithelium-derived cytokine IL-33 is associated with type 2 immune responses and elevated in esophageal biopsy specimens from patients with EoE.

We hypothesized that overexpression of IL-33 by the esophageal epithelium would promote the immunopathology of EoE.

We evaluated the functional consequences of esophageal epithelial overexpression of a secreted and active form of IL-33 in a novel transgenic mouse, EoE33. EoE33 mice were analyzed for clinical and immunologic phenotypes. Esophageal contractility was assessed. Epithelial cytokine responses were analyzed in three-dimensional organoids. EoE33 phenotypes were further characterized in ST2-/-, eosinophil-deficient, and IL-13-/- mice. Finally, EoE33 mice were treated with dexamethasone.

EoE33 mice displayed ST2-dependent, EoE-like pathology and failed to thrive. Esophageal tissue remodeling and inflammation included basal zone hyperplasia, eosinophilia, mast cells, and TH2 cells. Marked increases in levels of type 2 cytokines, including IL-13, and molecules associated with immune responses and tissue remodeling were observed. Esophageal organoids suggested reactive epithelial changes. Genetic deletion of IL-13 in EoE33 mice abrogated pathologic changes in vivo. EoE33 mice were responsive to steroids.

IL-33 overexpression by the esophageal epithelium generated immunopathology and clinical phenotypes resembling human EoE. IL-33 may play a pivotal role in the etiology of EoE by activating the IL-13 pathway. EoE33 mice are a robust experimental platform for mechanistic investigation and translational discovery.

Endoscopic evaluation with biopsies is a mainstay of the diagnosis of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) and non-EoE eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases (EGIDs). Increasing knowledge has resulted in the development of 2 standardized scoring systems: the Endoscopic REFerence Score (EREFS) for EoE and the EG-REFS for eosinophilic gastritis, although the latter has not been validated. In EGIDs, diagnosis and follow-up focus on eosinophil infiltration in biopsies. In this article, we will discuss the most commonly used endoscopic scores in EoE and non-EoE EGIDs, their validity for the diagnosis and follow-up of disease activity, as well as endoscopic interventions and areas of uncertainty.