1. Trang chủ
  2. » Giáo Dục - Đào Tạo

S11882-024-01142-0.Pdf Hội nghị nhi khoa

11 0 0
Tài liệu đã được kiểm tra trùng lặp

Đang tải... (xem toàn văn)

Tài liệu hạn chế xem trước, để xem đầy đủ mời bạn chọn Tải xuống

THÔNG TIN TÀI LIỆU

Thông tin cơ bản

Tiêu đề Minimally Invasive Approaches to Diagnose and Monitor Eosinophilic GI Diseases
Tác giả Ellie J. M. Furuta, Glenn T. Furuta, Robin Shandas
Trường học University of Colorado School of Medicine
Chuyên ngành Public Health
Thể loại review
Năm xuất bản 2024
Thành phố Aurora
Định dạng
Số trang 11
Dung lượng 782,92 KB

Nội dung

While no biomarkers have definitively met the diagnostic criteria for eosinophilic GI diseases, some biomarkers have been shown to be associated with disease activity.. Keywords Eosinoph

Trang 1

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11882-024-01142-0

REVIEW

Minimally Invasive Approaches to Diagnose and Monitor Eosinophilic

GI Diseases

Accepted: 12 March 2024 / Published online: 27 March 2024

© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2024

Abstract

offer a unique and non-invasive approach to tracking EoE disease progression While no biomarkers have definitively met the diagnostic criteria for eosinophilic GI diseases, some biomarkers have been shown to be associated with disease activity Here, we examine the potential of recently studied biomarkers

include mRNA analyses, protein fingerprinting, amplicon sequence variants (ASVs), T cells and IgE receptors, eosinophilic cationic proteins, cytokines, and nitric oxide exhalation

representation of biopsy-based results, in contrast to biomarkers obtained from indirect or peripheral (blood, breath) methods However, this is based on limited clinical studies without sufficient numbers to evaluate true diagnostic accuracy Large-scale randomized trials are needed to fully ascertain both the optimal sampling technique and the specific biomarkers that reflect diagnostic status of the disease

Keywords Eosinophil · Eosinophilic oesophagitis · Eosinophilic esophagitis · Eosinophilic gastritis · Eosinophilic

enteritis · Eosinophilic gastroenteritis · Eosinophilic colitis · Biomarker

Introduction

Eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases (EGIDs) are chronic

inflammatory diseases characterized histologically by

the dense intestinal eosinophilia Disease management

of EGIDs is challenging due to the lack of definitive

bio-markers outside of mucosal eosinophilia, which currently

require sedated endoscopy to obtain esophageal biopsies

This aspect of care greatly increases the cost and burden on

the patient, can diminish quality of life, and be associated with potential complications

Due to the negative effects surrounding multiple seda-tions, alternative methods for EGID management are necessary Biomarkers pose a promising alternative for disease management Biomarker retrieval can be non- or minimally invasive and can be obtained through a vari-ety of sampling techniques including blood draws, breath testing, luminal fluid sampling, mucosal surface brush-ing, and fecal testing Biomarker testing is less costly, faster, and minimally invasive, making it an important avenue of research However, currently, insufficient research has been done to determine diagnostic utility of these biomarkers, specifically for EGIDs Biomarkers can

be indicators of generalized inflammation, but may not show if inflammation is isolated to the intestinal tissue

As such, the need for a biomarker that is specific to the disease characteristics of EGIDs is necessary Currently, research in this area shows some advancement that will

be reviewed here

* Glenn T Furuta

glenn.furuta@childrenscolorado.org

1 Department of Public Health, University of Colorado School

of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA

2 Digestive Health Institute, Children’s Hospital Colorado,

Aurora, CO, USA

3 Gastrointestinal Eosinophilic Diseases Program, University

of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA

4 Department of Bioengineering, University of Colorado

Denver|Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, USA

Trang 2

What are Important Factors to Consider

When Measuring Biomarkers?

Biomarkers are measurable components of organisms or

biological processes that can have patterned, predictive

physi-ologic or pathophysiphysi-ologic events within the body, they

can serve to measure health, diagnose disease, or to

moni-tor the natural hismoni-tory of treated or untreated disease

When considering biomarkers as a way to understand

underlying biological processes, four items need to be

addressed First, what is the biomarker that will be

meas-ured? Selection relies on it providing a reliable,

repro-duceable, and validated reflection of the process to be

monitored For instance, hemoglobin A1c is a peripheral

biomarker that is a key component to detecting the body’s

ability to metabolize glucose properly and hence serves as

a screening for diabetes Another example pertaining to

the gastrointestinal (GI) tract relates to celiac disease Two

biomarkers used for celiac disease include the peripheral

measurement of tissue transglutaminase (ttg) that reflects

small intestinal damage and the histological assessment

of the small intestine for mucosal injury, specifically

vil-lous blunting and intraepithelial lymphocyte infiltration

Second, what sample needs to be collected to assay the

biomarker? This sample needs to reflect the biologic

pro-cess to be studied Some biological propro-cesses may express

biomarkers that circulate throughout the body and hence

blood samples may be adequate Diseases affecting the GI

tract may be reflected by peripheral biomarkers such as

blood or breath or may limit their release to local

microen-vironments In this case, stool, saliva, luminal fluids, and

tissue samples all have provided useful samples to

diag-nose or monitor diseases Furthermore, transport of the

biomarker from its emergent source to a peripheral

loca-tion may impact the utility of the sample for

understand-ing timunderstand-ing of disease progression For example, markers

found in the blood, sputum, or urine may not reflect early

disease if the source of the disease is separated from the

sampling milieu Regardless of source, the sample needs

to contain the biomarker of choice in quantity and quality

that reflects the process to be measured Third, what is

the best method to collect the biomarker? In this regard,

the two preceding questions will dictate the best

meth-odology Venipuncture is the best way to sample blood

and the natural expulsion is the easiest for breath, stool,

and urine Emerging methods such as luminal sampling

or epithelial cellular scraping may provide direct means

of obtaining esophageal samples that are still minimally

invasive More invasive measures may be needed to access

certain portions of the GI tract if that is the target Finally,

how will the biomarker be measured? Depending on the

biochemical properties, stability, and qualities of the bio-marker, any number of readily available techniques can be typically used for proteins including ELISA and point-of-care techniques such as lateral flow assays Conventional pathology may be used for cytology techniques In sum-mary, considerations for the analyses of biomarkers should address key questions of identification of the biomarker, targeting of the proper sample and determination of the best capture and analytical methods

What are Complexities of Assessing Biomarkers Relevant to Gastrointestinal Diseases?

With respect to the GI tract, several different anatomic and physiologic considerations need to be addressed when think-ing about biomarker detection The GI tract is a series of 4 luminal organs (esophagus; stomach; small intestine- duodenum, jejunum, ileum; and colon) that are connected to

2 solid organs (liver and pancreas) The esophagus carries food and secretions to the stomach where the mechanical and chemical process of digestion starts Chyme released into the small intestine is digested by the secretion of enzymes from the pancreas, liver, and gall bladder into the duodenal lumen As this process continues, selective absorption, along with mucous secretion, occurs thru the length of the duode-num, jejuduode-num, and ileum resulting in liters of effluent that are presented to the colon for desiccation and the eventual timely release of a small volume of fecal material Through-out this process, trillions of microbes reside in symbiosis and in varying distribution, providing key participants in the digestive process and when unbalanced, proposed contribu-tors to disease

Knowledge of this physiology is important to consider when thinking about the 4 key elements posed above to consider in biomarker selection In a GI disease, what bio-marker, where should it be measured, and how will it be collected to be reflective of health or disease in a specific organ? For instance, with respect to disaccharidase defi-ciency, lactase will be the relevant biomarker to assess as

it is key in sugar digestion and tissue samples should be collected from the small intestine since this is where the relevant underlying physiologic processes take place Given this information, it can be next ascertained that a method that directly samples small intestinal tissue would be opti-mal, which narrows the possible techniques to intestinal endoscopy Sampling of the gastric mucosa for lactase would not be helpful in this situation because it is not present in the stomach In another example, fecal calprotectin (FCP), a neutrophil enzyme that is a reliable biomarker for inflamma-tory bowel disease, can be assayed in the stool and collected

by naturally expelled samples In contrast, assay of the FCP

Trang 3

in the saliva would not be reliable as the release of FCP in

IBD occurs more distally in the gut Finally, measuring the

microbiome in the stool of a patient with celiac disease may

or may not reflect the actual microbiome relevant to a

dis-ease that manifests primarily in the small intestine In this

regard, a method that samples mucosal microbiome locally

from the small intestine may be ideal This review will focus

on these elements of measuring biomarkers as they pertain

Presently, diagnostic criteria for EGIDs require a mucosal

As scientific investigation refines criteria and regulatory

requirements adjust, alternative biomarkers and sampling

will permit new diagnostic algorithms, but for now,

defini-tive diagnosis requires presence of symptoms, a mucosal

biopsy that identifies dense eosinophilia and exclusion of

alternative causes for these two findings With respect to

monitoring therapeutic responses to treatments,

histologi-cal measures of eosinophilia are still required for regulatory

approval To address some cumbersome elements related to

endoscopy, emerging technical advancements and scientific

discoveries are shaping new approaches to capture viable,

newly discovered biomarkers

What are Eosinophilic GI Diseases?

EGIDs are a broad term used to define a group of

com-plex GI diseases, characterized by GI symptoms and

dense mucosal eosinophilia, and include a series of

dis-eases identified by their predominant site of inflammation

diagnosis of EGID, other causes of symptoms and mucosal

eosinophilia need to be ruled out While studies are

defin-ing gene panels that may provide diagnostic platforms,

underlying mechanism of EGIDs is currently thought to

esophagitis (EoE) is characterized by swallowing

prob-lems and food impaction in adults and vague symptoms

related to reflux, abdominal pain, and feeding

difficul-ties in children Eosinophilic gastritis (EoG) patients can

present with a broad array of common symptoms

Eosinophilic enteritis (EoN) is the rarest of the EGIDs

and patients may present with similar symptoms as EoG

and diarrhea with or without profound laboratory

Importantly, these lab abnormalities can occur with

min-imal to no symptoms Eosinophilic colitis (EoC) is the

least well understood and characterized of the EGIDs and

can present with mild symptoms of abdominal pain and

the EGIDs is also characterized by mucosal abnormali-ties that include thickening of the mucosa, exudates and ulcerations that are specific to the diseased organ To date, EGIDs appear to be chronic and thus require ongo-ing treatment to prevent complications that include growth failure and partially obstructive luminal strictures Treat-ments include dietary restriction of food allergens, topical steroids, proton pump inhibitors and recently the anti-IL-4

inflammation can correlate with complications, assess-ment of relevant biomarkers on a timely basis is critical

to provide optimal care The bulk of the current literature

on this topic focusses on EoE; since the prevalence of EGIDs are increasing, and they affect the whole of the GI tract, this review will report data specific to EoE but also generalize findings when relevant, to include and discuss how they may pertain to EGIDs

Why is it Important to Measure Biomarkers Associated with Eosinophilic GI Diseases?

This topic is of particular importance for several reasons First, EGIDs are an increasing group of diseases that affect

EGID biomarkers that can diagnose or track disease activity have not been identified or sufficiently validated to be used

tissue inflammation Fourth, EGIDs are chronic diseases that require chronic treatment and disease activity needs to be

date, disease activity requires inspection and sampling of the intestinal mucosa with endoscopy that can be costly, associated with complication and diminished quality of life

of biomarker detection could be transformative for patients with EGIDs

What are Biomarkers Associated with EGIDs?

To date, biomarkers associated with EGIDs have been obtained from blood and intestinal tissue samples, but because of the inherent concerns about endoscopy, other sources have been assessed including saliva, intestinal flu-ids, and breath These biomarkers hold particular inter-est due to ease of retrieval and accuracy of measurement Below is a summary of the current biomarkers that have been measured, sample source, and methods used to ana-lyze and the samples

Trang 4

Eosinophil‑Derived Granule Proteins

(Eosinophil cationic proteins (ECP), eosinophil-derived

neurotoxin (EDN), eosinophil peroxidase (EPO) and major

basic protein (MBP))-ECP, EDN, EPO, MBP are

cytoplas-mic eosinophil-associated granule proteins that reflect the

presence of eosinophils in any sample analyzed including

tissue, saliva, blood, and tissue effluent Regardless of the

tissue examined, EDGPs can be recognized in the sample

by their eosin-stained characteristic appearance Detection

can be in improved by specialized antibody staining for the

specific protein although measurements are subjective based

adults and children, an EPX scoring system was developed

leading to the ability to detect disease activity based on

meas-urement of EPX in oral secretions does not provide a reliable

Blood sampling of EDGPs as well as eosinophil counts

Elevated levels of ECPs have been shown consistently in

EDN levels have shown differing results, but two studies

found higher plasma levels to be shown in EoE patients

EPO levels were significantly lower in EoE patients once

controlled for eosinophils MBP levels are varied and do not

provide enough consistency for predictive outcomes While

elevated in some patients, the specificity of this

periph-eral marker is challenging because of fact that many EGID

patients also suffer from allergic diseases also characterized

by eosinophilia, and thus, measurements may be only

indi-cating presence of active allergic disease somewhere in the

body Finally, newer methods such as the string test allow

minimally invasive sampling of intestinal effluents including

intraluminal samples, which allow EDGPs capture that

sig-nificantly associates with esophageal mucosal inflammation

can also be tested via feces, offering a wide range of testing

options but the specificity of this sample with respect to GI

organ is lacking

Mast Cells

Mast cell infiltration has been associated with EGIDs and as

a result of increased expression of their inflammatory

mol-ecules and association with tissue fibrosis and injury may

tryptase serves as a reliable biomarker of mast cell presence

and activation that can be detected in tissue and blood

sam-ples and when analyzed alone or in combination with other

analytical results may be accelerated with recent artificial

Molecular‑Based Biomarker Panels

A number of studies have used broad molecular approaches

to characterize the inflammatory profiles of patients with

and shown patterns supportive of diagnostic panels and EoE subphenotypes along with some that change follow-ing treatments Most recently, an oral buccal mucosa scrap-ing sample study used publicly available RNA seq data and found differences of CDH26, KCNJ2, and PLD1 in EoE patients compared to controls yielding potentially supportive model for minimally invasive diagnostics In another study,

18 CpG methylation biomarkers were used to successfully

small patient numbers and more work will be needed to vali-date these approaches

Extracellular Matrix Molecules

Examining protein biomarker levels associated with myofi-broblast and inflammatory cell concentrations associated with EoE have been measured in blood by protein finger-printing to ascertain whether they were associated with increased eosinophil numbers in the tissue EoE can cause extracellular matrix changes due to myofibroblast and inflammatory disruption from proteases In a study of 29

patients, higher levels of biomarkers (PRO-C3, PC3X, C3M, CTX-II, PRO-C4, C4M, PRO-C5, PRO-C6, C6M, VICM, VIM, and CPa9-HNEs) were associated with an eosinophil

intriguing biomarker because of it proposed role in

intralu-minal analysis of periostin show it to be increased during active inflammation and a correlation with stenotic EoE

protein analytic capacity

MicroRNAs

MiRs are a short RNA fragment that control biologic pro-cesses including allergic responses Mechanistically, these molecules may participate in the generation of the associated

a study of 22 adults, measurements of MiR-4688 was found

can regulate TGF-β signaling, a molecule associated with EoE TGF-β activation can lead to a loss of epithelial barrier

by disruption of tight junctional molecules thus allowing elevated allergens and / or microbes with intimate contact with epithelial surfaces and the subepithelial immunomilieu

In another study of 56 adult saliva samples, miR-205-5p was

the exact mechanism that TGF-β signaling affects MiR-4688

Trang 5

is unclear and the specificity of MiR-4688 for EoE is still not

certain, larger studies will be necessary to confirm EoE

phe-notypes as it relates to these specific MiRs will be needed

MiR testing can be completed using saliva or intraluminal

samples thus making it easy to collect but analysis will

require more sophisticated laboratory equipment

Microbiome Signals

A number of studies suggest alterations in the microbiome

are associated with EoE and may participate in the initiation

and perpetuation of esophageal inflammation and reflect

including RNA seq, have been used to analyze these

pat-terns from samples including saliva, tissue, and luminal

contents The advent of bioinformatics and

high-through-put sequencing will undoubtedly amplify this knowledge

non-invasive form of testing that in some circumstances my

Potential trigger bacteria include non-typeable H Flu,

Pro-teobacteria, and Pasturella with potential protection by H

pylori [58–60] A more recent study examined Amplicon

sequence variations, short, recovered DNA sequences from

genes of interest ASVs related to Streptococcus, Neisseria,

and Prevotella have been consistently higher among EoE

patients vs non EoE patients; the reasoning of elevated

lev-els is unknown and may be unrelated to disease effects and

Cytokines

T2 cytokines are synthesized and released in tissues affected

by EoE Assessment can be helpful to characterize the resident

immunomilieu but this may change rapidly Cytokine levels

(eotaxin-3, IL-4, IL-13, and IL-5) are shown to be elevated in

systemic allergic response can show similar cytokine levels

as EoE Most recently, peripheral analysis identified IL5RA

as a potential biomarker that can detect tissue inflammation

blood or saliva and are measured by ELISA

Cell Adhesion Molecules

CD41 is an integrin subunit that shows platelet

associa-tion specifically regarding the beta subunit of eosinophils

Increased levels of circulating CD41 proteins show increased

levels of eosinophils, a marker of EoE CD41 was shown to

CD41 can show increased eosinophil circulation in blood but

is unable to identify the origins of circulating eosinophils

This form of testing is non-predictive for EoE but could be confirmatory along with other factor Blood testing for CD41 offers a noninvasive form of testing

T Cells

T cells react to immune responses from IgE antibodies IgE antibodies can be elevated in EoE patients but it is unclear as

to whether or not this is related to the underlying esophageal eosinophilia Elevated and activated T cells may indicate food sensitization and thus support some therapeutic interventions but presently are not helpful for diagnosis or monitoring of

cells in the blood may be indicative of EoE disease activity due to an increased presence of allergy response

Exhaled Nitric Oxide

Fractionated exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) is a byproduct of

examined the ability of breath measurements of FeNO to serve

with EoE, FENO was measured before and after treatment Despite histological response, no statistically significant

com-paring adults and children with EoE and not, after adjusting for other allergic diseases, FENO was found to be statistically

test-ing is an exhalation test that can be easily administered FeNO exhalation rates may provide insight into inflammation but are non-specific as to cause of inflammation or the location of inflammation, and thus, more studies are needed to eliminate confounding factors to use this as a biomarker or to utilize this

Plasma Urea Cycle Metabolites

Urea cycle metabolites can provide insight into the body’s energy expenditure, which may be upregulated with inflam-mation such as that in the esophagus associated with EoE Currently, no metabolomics have been identified as specific markers for EoE, but some have shown promising differ-ences in EoE patients vs controls such as dimethylarginine,

What are Current Advances in Capturing Biomarkers in EGIDs?

With respect to improving ways to capture EGID-related biomarkers, a number of different approaches have arisen that are designed to limit costs and complications related

to sedated endoscopy, reduce time to obtain results, target

Trang 6

specific upper intestinal organs, and improve patient

expe-riences Four approaches have been developed to directly

analyze eosinophil associated biomarkers that includes

unse-dated transnasal endoscopy, the esophageal string test, the

Transnasal Endoscopy (TNE)

TNE is a relatively straightforward, well-established

tech-nique which takes advantage of a narrow caliber endoscopic

device that can be easily passed thru the anesthetized nasal

and pharyngeal passages without sedation It has been used

to previously assess for esophageal cancer and other

proxi-mal esophageal diseases The TNE has revitalized care for

patients with EoE in that this unsedated endoscopy can

efficiently procure esophageal samples to monitor disease

to traditional endoscopy, TNE is able to assess the visual

appearance of the esophageal mucosa, obtain biopsy

sam-ples of similar size and has a limited side effect profile

In addition, the TNE was preferred by patients who had

Since these initial studies, TNEs have now been adopted

by a number of pediatric centers to monitor EoE patient’s

esophageal mucosal eosinophilia and track response to

bleed-ing, infection, and perforation all of which are unusual and

are outweighed by the benefits that include reduced cost

and complication rates, less time to complete, and potential

improvement in quality of life for patients undergoing

mul-tiple inspections

Cytosponge

In order to eliminate risks associated with endoscopy, at

least 3 devices have emerged as innovative approaches

to assess for disease activity in patients with EoE The

is composed of a capsule containing a 30-mm

polyure-thane sponge that is attached to a retrieval string After

an unsedated patient swallows the capsule, the capsule

dissolves in the stomach and the sponge is retrieved thru

the esophageal lumen capturing superficial epithelial

frag-ments and luminal contents Re-assembly of the fragfrag-ments

can be accomplished from the sponge and staining of the

fragments developed an inflammatory score based on the

proce-dure in adults poses minimal risks, with the low possibility

of esophageal bleeding, gagging, and vomiting and

pro-vides an excellent approach to obtaining mucosal cellular

samples for analysis

EsoCheck

The EsoCheck is an ingestible plastic balloon attached to a

balloon is swallowed and inflated in the lower esophagus

It is withdrawn while inflated so the exterior of the balloon retrieves esophageal cells The cells are then harvested and sent for examination of eosinophils Similar to the Cyto-sponge, this procedure poses minimal risks, with the low possibility of gagging, esophageal bleeding, and vomiting

Esophageal String Test

The esophageal string capsule is a minimally invasive device designed to sample intraluminal GI inflammation The cap-sule is filled with a string and the proximal extruding end

of the string is taped to the cheek The capsule is then swal-lowed, and the string is taped to the cheek of the patient

for eosinophil-associated proteins by ELISA to develop an EoE Score that reflects whether the esophageal mucosa con-tains more or less than 15 eosinophils/HPF, the diagnostic threshold for EoE Risks of the procedure include gagging, bleeding, and vomiting which are minimal; this procedure

is preferred over endoscopy by patients as well as parents

of children

Other Testing Modalities‑EndoFLIP, Esophagram and pH Impedance

Three other approaches have been used to assess esopha-geal function and structure in patients with EoE The End-oFLIP is a catheter based device that is designed to sense esophageal distensibility as a metric of esophageal function

encased within a buffer filled balloon When inserted into the esophagus, the balloon is insufflated with buffer and when adjacent to the esophageal wall, pressure is sensed by the biosensors, leading to a manometric tracing This tracing can be translated into a numerical score of distensibility that can reflect esophageal flexibility and fibrosis in adults and children with EoE Testing in adult and pediatric patients provides a data not obtainable presently by other techniques that reflect esophageal structure and function, especially as

esophageal perforation or bleeding and cost is associated with the device and need to perform during endoscopic procedures The barium esophagram with pill ingestion is

a radiographic test in which patients swallow barium dye and a dissolvable barium coated pill to trace the esopha-geal diameter and monitor the ability of the esophagus to transfer an object from its top to bottom Image analysis provides an esophageal diameter and timed analysis of pill

Trang 7

Facilities needs

Used in adults and c

Trang 8

passage The value of this test lies in its ability to perform

a topographic analysis of the esophageal lumen and

real-life analysis of the esophageal function Studies in children

and adults identify esophageal narrowing or Schatzki rings

that may not be readily apparent at the time of endoscopy

indi-cating esophageal dysfunction or occult narrowing in EoE

Finally, pH impedance catheters have been used to assess

mucosal integrity in patients with EoE to analyze

epithe-lial barrier function Results are supportive in being able to

detect differences during eosinophilic inflammation

The above components represent important requirements

for developing diagnostic and monitoring tools for EGID

However, it is also important to consider the patient

perspec-tive when developing diagnostic tools Methods that are

bur-densome on patients and their families may not be adopted

in a timely manner Such burdens lie not only in the potential

cost but also in other factors such as needing to take time

off from school or work, risks of frequent, repeat testing,

and requirements for the facility and personnel—which may

increase cost, extent of pre-procedure fasting, and

many of these key factors for sample capture methods that

are either clinically available or are being evaluated for

diag-nosis or monitoring EGID These also represent important

requirements for developing new methods

Conclusion

Due to the complexities of repeat invasive procedures to

man-age EGIDs, minimally and non-invasive approaches to EGID

management are a worthwhile investment for further

investiga-tion Multiple endoscopies can have a negative effect on the

mental wellness of patients Biomarkers are a novel approach to

diagnosing and managing EGIDs Biomarkers can be examined

via the blood, luminal fluid, mucosal scraping, or from physical

properties of the esophageal mucous Some of this testing can

be administered in a primary care setting and thereby provide

more accessible methods for EGID management

Current research regarding EGID biomarkers has not

involved testing in medicated and unmedicated populations

of EGIDs Large-scale, randomized control trails using these

populations will provide more definitive results regarding

biomarkers that are specific to disease activity Further,

bio-marker research has yet to find an esophageal-specific

inflam-mation marker While these biomarkers are accurate

indica-tors for inflammation, they lack specificity for esophageal

inflammation, a key marker of EGIDs Further investigation

to identify a biomarker of esophageal inflammation would be

effective for EGID management Biomarker research presents

the opportunity to reduce the burden of testing and sedation administered to EGID patients Current methodologies provide promising advancements that should be further investigated

Author Contributions All authors contributed to the conception, writ-ing and reviewwrit-ing this manuscript

Funding This work was supported by the Silverman Chair in Pediatrics.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest EJMF declares no competing interests GTF is the Chief Medical Officer of EnteroTrack RS is the Chief Executive Of-ficer of EnteroTrack.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent All reported stud-ies/experiments involving human or animal subjects performed by the authors were in accordance with the ethical standards of institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declara-tion and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

References

1 Biomarkers National Institute of Environmental Sciences: National Institute of Environmental Sciences; 2023 [updated August 2, 2023] Available from: https:// www niehs nih gov/ health/ topics/ scien ce/ bioma rkers

2 McGowan EC, Aceves SS Noninvasive tests for eosinophilic esophagitis: ready for use? Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 2022;129(1):27–34.

3 Hines BT, Rank MA, Wright BL, Marks LA, Hagan JB, Straumann

A, et al Minimally invasive biomarker studies in eosinophilic esophagitis: A systematic review Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 2018;121(2):218–28.

4 Visaggi P, Solinas I, Baiano Svizzero F, et al Non-Invasive and Minimally Invasive Biomarkers for the Management of Eosino-philic Esophagitis beyond Peak Eosinophil Counts: Filling the Gap in Clinical Practice Diagnostics (Basel) 2023;13(17):2806.

5 Papadopoulou A, Amil-Dias J, Auth MK, et al Joint ESPGHAN/ NASPGHAN guidelines on childhood eosinophilic gastrointesti-nal disorders beyond eosinophilic esophagitis J Pediatr Gastro-enterol Nutr 2024;78(1):122–52.

6 Jensen ET, Aceves SS, Bonis PA, Bray K, Book W, Chehade M,

et al High patient disease burden in a cross-sectional, multicenter contact registry study of eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 2020;71(4):524–9.

7 Shoda T, Rochman M, Collins MH, Caldwell JM, Mack LE, Osswald GA, et al Molecular analysis of duodenal eosinophilia

J Allergy Clin Immunol 2023;151(4):1027–39.

8 Shoda T, Wen T, Caldwell JM, Collins MH, Besse JA, Osswald

GA, et al Molecular, endoscopic, histologic, and circulating bio-marker-based diagnosis of eosinophilic gastritis: multi-site study

J Allergy Clin Immunol 2020;145(1):255–69.

9 Shoda T, Wen T, Aceves SS, Abonia JP, Atkins D, Bonis PA, et al Eosinophilic oesophagitis endotype classification by molecular, clinical, and histopathological analyses: a cross-sectional study Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol 2018;3(7):477–88.

10 Shoda T, Collins MH, Rochman M, Wen T, Caldwell JM, Mack

LE, et al Evaluating eosinophilic colitis as a unique disease using colonic molecular profiles: a multi-site study Gastroenterology 2022;162(6):1635–49.

Trang 9

11 Low EE, Dellon ES Review article: Emerging insights into

the epidemiology, pathophysiology, diagnostic and therapeutic

aspects of eosinophilic oesophagitis and other eosinophilic

gastro-intestinal diseases Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2024;59(3):322–40.

12 Hirano I, Collins MH, King E, Sun Q, Chehade M, Abonia JP,

et al Prospective endoscopic activity assessment for

eosino-philic gastritis in a multisite cohort Am J Gastroenterol

2022;117(3):413–23.

13 Jensen ET, Martin CF, Kappelman MD, Dellon ES Prevalence of

eosinophilic gastritis, gastroenteritis, and colitis: estimates from

a national administrative database J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr

2016;62(1):36–42.

14 Uchida AM, Burk CM, Rothenberg ME, Furuta GT, Spergel JM

Recent advances in the treatment of eosinophilic esophagitis J

Allergy Clin Immunol Pract 2023;11(9):2654–63.

15 Chehade M, McGowan EC, Wright BL, et al Barriers to timely

diagnosis of eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases J Allergy Clin

Immunol Pract 2024;12(2):302–8.

16 Rabinowitz S, Yu L, Hahm E, Schwarz SM, Park SS, Bukhari Z,

et al Pediatric eosinophilic esophagitis: searching for serologic

markers Ann Clin Lab Sci 2022;52(4):642–50.

17 Quinn LA, Burger C, Nguyen B, et al Natural histories and

dis-ease complications in a cohort of 151 children with gastric or

duodenal eosinophilia Am J Gastroenterol Published online

Feb-ruary 5, 2024.

18 Wright BL, Doyle AD, Shim KP, Pai RK, Barshow SM,

Horsley-Silva JL, et al Image analysis of eosinophil peroxidase

immuno-histochemistry for diagnosis of eosinophilic esophagitis Dig Dis

Sci 2021;66(3):775–83.

19 Hasan SH, Taylor S, Garg S, Buras MR, Doyle AD, Bauer CS,

et al Diagnosis of pediatric non-esophageal eosinophilic

gastro-intestinal disorders by eosinophil peroxidase

immunohistochem-istry Pediatr Dev Pathol 2021;24(6):513–22.

20 Protheroe C, Woodruff SA, de Petris G, Mukkada V, Ochkur SI,

Janarthanan S, et al A novel histologic scoring system to evaluate

mucosal biopsies from patients with eosinophilic esophagitis Clin

Gastroenterol Hepatol 2009;7(7):749-55 e11.

21 Schroeder S, Ochkur SI, Shim KP, Galvin KM, Bauer CS, Lee

JJ, et al Throat-derived eosinophil peroxidase is not a reliable

biomarker of pediatric eosinophilic esophagitis J Allergy Clin

Immunol Pract 2017;5(6):1804–5.

22 Wright BL, Ochkur SI, Olson NS, et al Normalized serum

eosinophil peroxidase levels are inversely correlated with

esoph-ageal eosinophilia in eosinophilic esophagitis Dis Esophagus

2018;31(2):dox139.

23 Furuta GT, Kagalwalla AF, Lee JJ, Alumkal P, Maybruck BT,

Fillon S, et al The oesophageal string test: a novel, minimally

invasive method measures mucosal inflammation in eosinophilic

oesophagitis Gut 2013;62(10):1395–405.

24 Ackerman SJ, Kagalwalla AF, Hirano I, Gonsalves N, Katcher PM,

Gupta S, et al One-hour esophageal string test: a nonendoscopic

minimally invasive test that accurately detects disease activity in

eosinophilic esophagitis Am J Gastroenterol 2019;114(10):1614–25.

25 Otani IM, Anilkumar AA, Newbury RO, Bhagat M, Beppu LY,

Dohil R, et al Anti-IL-5 therapy reduces mast cell and IL-9 cell

numbers in pediatric patients with eosinophilic esophagitis J

Allergy Clin Immunol 2013;131(6):1576–82.

26 Reed CC, Genta RM, Youngblood BA, Wechsler JB, Dellon ES

Mast cell and eosinophil counts in gastric and duodenal biopsy

specimens from patients with and without eosinophilic

gastroen-teritis Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2021;19(10):2102–11.

27 Bolton SM, Kagalwalla AF, Arva NC, Wang MY, Amsden K,

Melin-Aldana H, et al Mast cell infiltration is associated with

persistent symptoms and endoscopic abnormalities despite

reso-lution of eosinophilia in pediatric eosinophilic esophagitis Am J

Gastroenterol 2020;115(2):224–33.

28 Rawson R, Anilkumar A, Newbury RO, Bafna V, Aquino M, Palmquist J, et al The TGFbeta1 promoter SNP C-509T and food sensitization promote esophageal remodeling in pediatric eosino-philic esophagitis PLoS One 2015;10(12): e0144651.

29 Strasser DS, Seger S, Bussmann C, Pierlot GM, Groenen PMA, Stalder AK, et al Eosinophilic oesophagitis: relevance of mast cell infiltration Histopathology 2018;73(3):454–63.

30 Dellon ES, Woosley JT, McGee SJ, Moist SE, Shaheen NJ Utility

of major basic protein, eotaxin-3, and mast cell tryptase staining for prediction of response to topical steroid treatment in eosino-philic esophagitis: analysis of a randomized, double-blind, double dummy clinical trial Dis Esophagus 2020;33(6):doaa003.

31 Zhang S, Caldwell JM, Rochman M, Collins MH, Rothenberg

ME Machine learning based identification and characterization

of mast cells in eosinophilic esophagitis J Allergy Clin Immunol Published online February 21, 2024.

32 Menard-Katcher C, Liu C, Galbraith MD, Benson T, Burger

C, Dobias D, et al Fibrostenotic eosinophilic esophagitis phe-notype is defined by a proliferative gene signature Allergy 2023;78(2):579–83.

33 Shoda T, Wen T, Caldwell JM, Ben-Baruch Morgenstern N, Osswald GA, Rochman M, et al Loss of endothelial TSPAN12 promotes fibrostenotic eosinophilic esophagitis via endothelial cell-fibroblast crosstalk Gastroenterology 2022;162(2):439–53.

34 Dunn JLM, Shoda T, Caldwell JM, Wen T, Aceves SS, Collins

MH, et al Esophageal type 2 cytokine expression heterogeneity

in eosinophilic esophagitis in a multisite cohort J Allergy Clin Immunol 2020;145(6):1629-40 e4.

35 Kottyan LC, Maddox A, Braxton JR, Stucke EM, Mukkada V, Putnam PE, et al Genetic variants at the 16p13 locus confer risk for eosinophilic esophagitis Genes Immun 2019;20(4):281–92.

36 Sherrill JD, Kc K, Wang X, Wen T, Chamberlin A, Stucke

EM, et al Whole-exome sequencing uncovers oxidoreductases DHTKD1 and OGDHL as linkers between mitochondrial dysfunc-tion and eosinophilic esophagitis JCI Insight 2018;3(8):e99922.

37 Wen T, Stucke EM, Grotjan TM, Kemme KA, Abonia JP, Putnam

PE, et al Molecular diagnosis of eosinophilic esophagitis by gene expression profiling Gastroenterology 2013;145(6):1289–99.

38 Jensen ET, Langefeld CD, Howard TD, Dellon ES Validation

of epigenetic markers for the prediction of response to topical corticosteroid treatment in eosinophilic esophagitis Clin Transl Gastroenterol 2023;14(9): e00622.

39 Pehrsson M, de Rooij WE, Bay-Jensen AC, Karsdal MA, Mortensen

JH, Bredenoord AJ Extracellular matrix remodeling proteins as bio-markers for clinical assessment and treatment outcomes in eosino-philic esophagitis BMC Gastroenterol 2023;23(1):357.

40 Dellon ES, Higgins LL, Beitia R, Rusin S, Woosley JT, Veerappan

R, et al Prospective assessment of serum periostin as a biomarker for diagnosis and monitoring of eosinophilic oesophagitis Ali-ment Pharmacol Ther 2016;44(2):189–97.

41 Vimalathas P, Farris A, Letner D, Deshpande V, Yajnik V, Shreffler

W, et al Integrin alphaM activation and upregulation on esopha-geal eosinophils and periostin-mediated eosinophil survival in eosinophilic esophagitis Immunol Cell Biol 2018;96(4):426–38.

42 Duong LD, Rawson R, Bezryadina A, Manresa MC, Newbury RO, Dohil R, et al TGFbeta1 single-nucleotide polymorphism C-509T alters mucosal cell function in pediatric eosinophilic esophagitis Mucosal Immunol 2020;13(1):110–7.

43 Blanchard C, Mingler MK, McBride M, Putnam PE, Collins MH, Chang G, et al Periostin facilitates eosinophil tissue infiltration

in allergic lung and esophageal responses Mucosal Immunol 2008;1(4):289–96.

44 Muir AB, Ackerman SJ, Pan Z, Benitez A, Burger C, Spergel JM,

et al Esophageal remodeling in eosinophilic esophagitis: rela-tionships to luminal captured biomarkers of inflammation and periostin J Allergy Clin Immunol 2022;150(3):649-56 e5.

Trang 10

45 Zahm AM, Menard-Katcher C, Benitez AJ, Tsoucas DM, Le Guen

CL, Hand NJ, et al Pediatric eosinophilic esophagitis is

associ-ated with changes in esophageal microRNAs Am J Physiol

Gas-trointest Liver Physiol 2014;307(8):G803-12.

46 Markey GE, Donohoe CL, McNamee EN, Masterson JC

MicroRNA dysregulation and therapeutic opportunities in

esophageal diseases Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol

2023;325(1):G1–13.

47 Markey GE, Ryan S, Furuta GT, Menard-Katcher C, McNamee

EN, Masterson JC Hypoxia-inducible microRNA-155 negatively

regulates epithelial barrier in eosinophilic esophagitis by

sup-pressing tight junction claudin-7 FASEB J 2024;38(1): e23358.

48 Lu S, Mukkada VA, Mangray S, Cleveland K, Shillingford N, Schorl

C, et al MicroRNA profiling in mucosal biopsies of eosinophilic

esophagitis patients pre and post treatment with steroids and

rela-tionship with mRNA targets PLoS One 2012;7(7): e40676.

49 Bhardwaj N, Sena M, Ghaffari G, Ishmael F MiR-4668 as a novel

potential biomarker for eosinophilic esophagitis Allergy Rhinol

(Providence) 2020;11:2152656720953378.

50 Jhaveri PB, Lambert KA, Bogale K, Lehman E, Alexander C,

Ishmael F, et al Salivary microRNAs in pediatric eosinophilic

esophagitis Allergy Asthma Proc 2023;44(2):145–52.

51 Brusilovsky M, Bao R, Rochman M, Kemter AM, Nagler CR,

Rothenberg ME Host-microbiota interactions in the esophagus

during homeostasis and allergic inflammation Gastroenterology

2022;162(2):521-34 e8.

52 Ravi A, Marietta EV, Alexander JA, Murray JA, Katzka DA H

influ-enzae LPS colocalization with Toll-like receptor 4 in eosinophilic

esophagitis J Allergy Clin Immunol Glob 2023;2(4): 100151.

53 Massimino L, Barchi A, Mandarino FV, Spano S, Lamparelli LA,

Vespa E, et al A multi-omic analysis reveals the esophageal

dys-biosis as the predominant trait of eosinophilic esophagitis J Transl

Med 2023;21(1):46.

54 Furuta GT, Fillon SA, Williamson KM, Robertson CE, Stevens

MJ, Aceves SS, et al Mucosal microbiota associated with

eosino-philic esophagitis and eosinoeosino-philic gastritis J Pediatr

Gastroen-terol Nutr 2023;76(3):347–54.

55 Laserna-Mendieta EJ, FitzGerald JA, Arias-Gonzalez L, Ollala

JM, Bernardo D, Claesson MJ, et al Esophageal microbiome in

active eosinophilic esophagitis and changes induced by different

therapies Sci Rep 2021;11(1):7113.

56 Parashette KR, Sarsani VK, Toh E, Janga SC, Nelson DE, Gupta

SK Esophageal microbiome in healthy children and esophageal

eosinophilia J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 2022;74(5):e109–14.

57 Facchin S, Calgaro M, Pandolfo M, Caldart F, Ghisa M, Greco E,

et al Salivary microbiota composition may discriminate between

patients with eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE) and non-EoE

sub-jects Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2022;56(3):450–62.

58 Dellon ES, Peery AF, Shaheen NJ, Morgan DR, Hurrell JM, Lash

RH, et al Inverse association of esophageal eosinophilia with

helicobacter pylori based on analysis of a US pathology database

Gastroenterology 2011;141(5):1586–92.

59 Harris JK, Fang R, Wagner BD, Choe HN, Kelly CJ, Schroeder S,

et al Esophageal microbiome in eosinophilic esophagitis PLoS

One 2015;10(5): e0128346.

60 Benitez AJ, Hoffmann C, Muir AB, Dods KK, Spergel JM, Bushman

FD, et al Inflammation-associated microbiota in pediatric

eosino-philic esophagitis Microbiome 2015;3:23.

61 Grueso-Navarro E, Navarro P, Laserna-Mendieta EJ, Lucendo

AJ, Arias-Gonzalez L Blood-based biomarkers for eosinophilic

esophagitis and concomitant atopic diseases: a look into the

poten-tial of extracellular vesicles Int J Mol Sci 2023;24(4):3669.

62 Sninsky JA, Tsai YS, Liu S, Parker JS, Corcoran D, Dellon ES

Peripheral blood IL5RA gene expression as a diagnostic

bio-marker for eosinophilic esophagitis Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol

2023;S1542–3565(23):00911–4.

63 Johansson MW, McKernan EM, Fichtinger PS, Angulo EL, Bagley

JL, Lee KE, et al alpha(IIb)-Integrin (CD41) associated with blood eosinophils is a potential biomarker for disease activity in eosino-philic esophagitis J Allergy Clin Immunol 2020;145(6):1699–701.

64 Adel-Patient K, Campeotto F, Grauso M, Guillon B, Moroldo

M, Venot E, et al Assessment of local and systemic signature of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) in children through multi-omics approaches Front Immunol 2023;14:1108895.

65 Maniscalco M, Fuschillo S, Mormile I, Detoraki A, Sarnelli G, Paulis A, et al Exhaled nitric oxide as biomarker of type 2 dis-eases Cells 2023;12(21):2518.

66 Kaur P, Chevalier R, Friesen C, Ryan J, Sherman A, Page S Diagnostic role of fractional exhaled nitric oxide in pediatric eosinophilic esophagitis, relationship with gastric and duodenal eosinophils World J Gastrointest Endosc 2023;15(5):407–19.

67 Leung J, Nguyen-Traxler A, Lee EM, Yip JS, Weinstock JV, Chan

WW, et al Assessment of fractionated exhaled nitric oxide as a biomarker for the treatment of eosinophilic esophagitis Allergy Asthma Proc 2012;33(6):519–24.

68 Johnson K, Iyer V, Katzka D, Ravi K, Lennon R, Pendegraft R,

et al Poor relationship between fractionated exhaled nitric oxide and disease activity in eosinophilic esophagitis Dysphagia 2019;34(1):138–44.

69 Josyabhatla R, Abrenica C, Mai T, Hashmi SS, Liu Y, Mosquera

R, et al Plasma biomarkers and fractional exhaled nitric oxide in the diagnosis of eosinophilic esophagitis J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 2023;76(1):59–65.

70 Moye LM, Liu Y, Coarfa C, Putluri N, Rhoads JM Plasma urea cycle metabolites may be useful biomarkers in children with eosinophilic esophagitis Front Pediatr 2018;6:423.

71 Nguyen N, Mark J, Furuta GT Emerging role of transnasal endoscopy in children and adults Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2022;20(3):501–4.

72 Venkatesh RD, Leinwand K, Nguyen N Pediatric unse-dated transnasal endoscopy Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am 2023;33(2):309–21.

73 Sabe RMM, Elzayat A, Buckley A, Shah JR, Khalili AS, Sferra TJ Transnasal endoscopy for children and adolescents with eosino-philic esophagitis: a single-center experience Gastroenterology Res 2022;15(4):155–61.

74 Friedlander JA, Fleischer DM, Black JO, Levy M, Rothenberg

ME, Smith C, et al Unsedated transnasal esophagoscopy with virtual reality distraction enables earlier monitoring of dietary therapy in eosinophilic esophagitis J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract 2021;9(9):3494–6.

75 Friedlander JA, DeBoer EM, Soden JS, Furuta GT, Menard-Katcher CD, Atkins D, et al Unsedated transnasal esophagos-copy for monitoring therapy in pediatric eosinophilic esophagitis Gastrointest Endosc 2016;83(2):299-306 e1.

76 Nguyen N, Lavery WJ, Capocelli KE, Smith C, DeBoer EM, Deterding R, et al Transnasal endoscopy in unsedated children with eosinophilic esophagitis using virtual reality video goggles Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2019;17(12):2455–62.

77 Katzka DA, Geno DM, Ravi A, Smyrk TC, Lao-Sirieix P, Miremadi

A, et al Accuracy, safety, and tolerability of tissue collection by cytosponge vs endoscopy for evaluation of eosinophilic esophagitis Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2015;13(1):77-83 e2.

78 Katzka DA, Smyrk TC, Alexander JA, Geno DM, Beitia RA, Chang AO, et al Accuracy and safety of the Cytosponge for assessing histologic activity in eosinophilic esophagitis: a two-center study Am J Gastroenterol 2017;112(10):1538–44.

79 Januszewicz W, Tan WK, Lehovsky K, Debiram-Beecham I, Nuckcheddy T, Moist S, et al Safety and acceptability of esoph-ageal Cytosponge cell collection device in a pooled analysis

of data from individual patients Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2019;17(4):647-56 e1.

Ngày đăng: 12/12/2024, 10:28

w