Search

Background: The demographic characteristics of patients with eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases (EGIDs) are poorly understood. Population-based assessments of EGID demographics may indicate health disparities in diagnosis., Objectives: We aimed to characterize the demographic distribution of EGIDs and evaluate the potential for bias in reporting patient characteristics., Methods: We conducted a systematic review, extracting data on age, sex, gender, race, ethnicity, body mass index, insurance, and urban/rural residence on EGID patients and the source population. Differences in proportions were assessed by chi-square tests. Demographic reporting was compared to recent guidelines., Results: Among 50 studies that met inclusion/exclusion criteria, 12 reported ≥1 demographic feature in both EGID and source populations. Except for age and sex or gender, demographics were rarely described (race = 4, ethnicity = 1, insurance = 1) or were not described (body mass index, urban/rural residence). A higher proportion of male subjects was observed for EoE or esophageal eosinophilia relative to the source population, but no difference in gender or sex distribution was observed for other EGIDs. "Sex" and "gender" were used interchangeably, and frequently only the male proportion was reported. Reporting of race and ethnicity was inconsistent with guidelines., Conclusion: Current data support a male predominance for EoE only. Evidence was insufficient to support enrichment of EGIDs in any particular racial, ethnic, or other demographic group. Population-based studies presenting demographics on both cases and source populations are needed. Implementation of guidelines for more inclusive reporting of demographic characteristics is crucial to prevent disparities in timely diagnosis and management of patients with EGIDs., Competing Interests: Supported by U54AI117804 (Consortium of Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Disease Researchers), which is part of the Rare Disease Clinical Research Network, an initiative of the Office of Rare Disease Research, National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS), and is funded through collaboration between the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, NCATS, and patient advocacy groups including the American Partnership for Eosinophilic Disorders, Campaign Urging Research for Eosinophilic Disease (CURED), and Eosinophilic Family Coalition (EFC). This work was also funded in part by the Division of Intramural Research, NIAID, National Institutes of Health. Disclosure of potential conflict of interest: M. Chehade served as consultant for Regeneron, Allakos, Adare/Ellodi, Shire/Takeda, AstraZeneca, Sanofi, Bristol Myers Squibb, Phathom, Recludix Pharma, and Nexstone Immunology; and received research funding from Regeneron, Allakos, Shire/Takeda, AstraZeneca, Adare/Ellodi, Danone, and Bristol Myers Squibb. A. B. Muir has served on medical advisory board for Bristol Myers Squibb and Nexstone Immunology; and has received research funding from Morphic. M. H. Collins has received research funding from AstraZeneca, Ception, GSK, Meritage Pharma Inc, Receptos/Celgene/BMS, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals and Shire, a Takeda company; and is consultant for Allakos, Arena Pharmaceuticals, AstraZeneca, Calypso Biotech, EsoCap Biotech, GlaxoSmithKline, Receptos/Celgene/BMS, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Robarts Clinical Trials Inc/Alimentiv Inc and Shire, a Takeda company. C. M. Davis has received research funding from the National Institutes of Health/National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease (Consortium of Food Allergy Research/Consortium of Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Researchers), DBV Technologies, DBV, Aimmune Therapeutics, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, and Allergenis. G. T. Furuta is chief medical officer at EnteroTrack; consultant for Shire/Takeda; and has received grant funding from Arena and Holoclara. S. Gupta is consultant/data safety and monitoring board member or author for Adare, BMS, QOL, Takeda, MedScape, PVI, ViaSkin, and UpToDate; and has received research support from Allakos, Ellodi, and AstraZeneca. P. Khoury has received research funding from American Partnership for Eosinophilic Disorders. K. A. Peterson is consultant or served as advisor for AGA, Alladapt, AstraZeneca, Allakos, Bristol Meyers Squibb, Ellodi, Lucid, Nexstone, Peerview, Regeneron, Takeda, and WebMD; has received research support from AstraZeneca, Allakos, Adare, Regeneron-Sanofi, and Revolo; served as speaker for AGA, Regeneron, Peerview, Takeda, Allakos, and WebMD; received grant support (unrestricted) from Allakos and Chobani; and holds equity in Nexeos Bio. E. T. Jensen has received consultant fees from Regeneron, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, and TARGET-RWE. The rest of the authors declare that they have no relevant conflicts of interest., (© 2024 The Author(s).)

Although eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases, including eosinophilic esophagitis, have been described over the past 2 to 3 decades, barriers to diagnosis and treatment are common and compounded by issues related to social determinants of health, race, ethnicity, and access to care. These barriers contribute to delays in diagnosis, resulting in persistent inflammation in the gastrointestinal tract, which can have significant consequences, including fibrostenotic complications in adults, failure to thrive in children, and decreased quality of life in all affected patients. In this commentary, we summarize gaps in knowledge regarding the epidemiology of eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases, highlight barriers to diagnosis, discuss potential approaches based on best practices in other atopic and chronic gastrointestinal diseases, and provide recommendations for reducing barriers to timely diagnosis of eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases in underserved populations., (Copyright © 2023 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. All rights reserved.)

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic allergic inflammatory disease requiring maintenance therapy. Traditionally, EoE has been a contraindication to oral immunotherapy (OIT) and a rationale for discontinuing treatment because OIT may induce EoE. Most, but not all patients with OIT-induced EoE experience symptom resolution and histologic remission after discontinuing OIT. Recent studies report OIT continuation even after EoE onset, despite the previously accepted standard of care. This creates clinical as well as ethical challenges for allergists treating these patients. Considering the published literature on EoE and OIT and the primary medical ethics principles of beneficence, nonmaleficence, autonomy, and justice, we discuss the ethical implications of pursuing desensitization despite the potential complications associated with EoE. When ethical principles are in opposition, shared decision-making should be employed to determine whether OIT should be continued after an EoE diagnosis. This article highlights the ethical dilemmas allergists face when determining whether patients with a diagnosis of EoE should continue OIT., (Copyright © 2023 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)