Diagnosis, Natural History and Treatment of Eosinophilic Enteritis: a Review
- 371 Downloads
Purpose of Review
To review recent findings regarding eosinophilic enteritis, including epidemiology, pathogenesis, natural history, and treatment.
A 2017 population-based study using a US healthcare system database identified 1820 patients with a diagnosis of eosinophilic enteritis among 35,826,830 individuals. The majority of patients with eosinophilic enteritis in this study were women (57.7%), Caucasian (77.5%), and adults (> 18 years of age) (83.5%). The overall prevalence of eosinophilic enteritis was estimated at 5.1/100,000 persons.
Eosinophilic enteritis, also known as eosinophilic gastroenteritis, is a rare primary eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorder (EGID) of unknown etiology characterized by the presence of an intense eosinophilic infiltrate on histopathological examination of the intestinal mucosa. The etiology of eosinophilic enteritis remains unknown. However, there is evidence to support the role of allergens in the pathogenesis of this disorder, as children and adults with EGIDs often have positive skin testing to food allergens and a family history of allergic diseases. Recent studies unraveling the role of IgE-mediated but also delayed Th2-type responses have provided insight into the pathogenesis of this disease. Eosinophilic enteritis causes a wide array of gastrointestinal symptoms such as abdominal pain, diarrhea, nausea, vomiting, bloating, or ascites, and its diagnosis requires a high degree of clinical likelihood, given the nonspecific clinical presentation and physical examination findings. Oral corticosteroids are considered to be the mainstay of treatment and are generally used for a short period with good response rates. Antihistamine drugs and sodium cromoglycate have also been used to treat patients with eosinophilic enteritis. Preliminary studies have demonstrated the potential benefit of biological therapies targeting the eosinophilic pathway such as mepolizumab, an anti-IL5 antibody, or omalizumab, an anti-IgE monoclonal antibody. Eosinophilic enteritis is generally considered to be a benign disease without relapse, but up to 50% of patients may present a more complex natural history characterized by unpredictable relapses and a chronic course.
KeywordsEosinophils Gastroenteritis Natural history Allergy Treatment Corticosteroids
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
Guillaume Pineton de Chambrun reports personal fees from MSD, Abbvie, Takeda, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, and Hospira as a lecturer and consultant, outside the submitted work.
Gaspard Dufour, Barbara Tassy, Benjamin Rivière, Najima Bouta, Michael Bismuth, Fabrizio Panaro, Natalie Funakoshi, Jeanne Ramos, Jean-Christophe Valats, and Pierre Blanc declare no conflict of interest.
Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent
This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.
Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: •• Of major Importance
- 1.•• Mansoor E, Saleh MA, Cooper GS. Prevalence of eosinophilic gastroenteritis and colitis in a population-based study, from 2012 to 2017. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2017;15(11):1733–41. This recent population-based study, using an United States healthcare system database, identified 1,820 patients with a diagnosis of EE among 35,826,830 individuals in the database from 2012 to 2017. The majority of patients with EE in this study were women (57.7%), Caucasian (77.5%), and adults (>18 years of age) (83.5%). The overall prevalence of eosinophilic enteritis was estimated to 5.1/100,000 persons.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 5.Kaijser R. Zur Kenntnis der allergischen Affektionen des Verdauungs-Kanals vom Standpunkt des Chirurgien aus. Arch Klin Chir. 1937;188:36–64.Google Scholar
- 7.Pineton de Chambrun G, Gonzalez F, Canva JY, Gonzalez S, Houssin L, Desreumaux P, et al. Natural history of eosinophilic gastroenteritis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol: the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association. 2011;9(11):950–6 e1, 956.e1.Google Scholar
- 8.•• Abou Rached A, El Hajj W. Eosinophilic gastroenteritis: approach to diagnosis and management. World J Gastrointest Pharmacol Ther. 2016;7(4):513–23. In this recent review of the literature, authors exhaustively summarized data about oesinophilic enteritis managment and treatments with comprehensive proposed algorithms.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 11.Lowichik A, Weinberg AG. A quantitative evaluation of mucosal eosinophils in the pediatric gastrointestinal tract. Mod Pathol 1996;9(2):110–114.Google Scholar
- 13.Desreumaux P, Colombel JF. Diagnostic étiologique d'une éosinophilie digestive. Rev Prat. 1992;171:668–73.Google Scholar
- 17.Kinoshita Y, Furuta K, Ishimaura N, Ishihara S, Sato S, Maruyama R, et al. Clinical characteristics of Japanese patients with eosinophilic esophagitis and eosinophilic gastroenteritis. J Gastroenterol. 2013;48(3):333–9.Google Scholar
- 18.Lee CM, Changchien CS, Chen PC, Lin DY, Sheen IS, Wang CS, et al. Eosinophilic gastroenteritis: 10 years experience. Am J Gastroenterol. 1993;88(1):70–4.Google Scholar
- 20.Zhang L, Duan L, Ding S, Lu J, Jin Z, Cui R, et al. Eosinophilic gastroenteritis: clinical manifestations and morphological characteristics, a retrospective study of 42 patients. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2011;46(9):1074–80.Google Scholar
- 21.•• 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. This recent study used databases representative of a U.S. national commercially-insured population containing medical and pharmaceutical claims for >75million individuals to identify cases of eosinophilic gastritis, gastroenteritis, and colitis. In this study, the standardized estimated prevalences of eosinophilic gastritis, gastroenteritis, and colitis were 6.3/100,000, 8.4/100,000, and 3.3/100,000, respectively. The prevalence of eosinophilic gastroenteritis was highest among children age < 5 years. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 22.Spergel JM, Book WM, Mays E, Song L, Shah SS, Talley NJ, et al. Variation in prevalence, diagnostic criteria, and initial management options for eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases in the United States. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2011;52(3):300–6.Google Scholar
- 23.Chang JY, Choung RS, Lee RM, Locke GR 3rd, Schleck CD, Zinsmeister AR, et al. A shift in the clinical spectrum of eosinophilic gastroenteritis toward the mucosal disease type. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol: the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association. 2010;8(8):669–75. quiz e88Google Scholar
- 27.Desreumaux P, Seguy D, Dutoit E, Dubucquoi S, Colombel JF. La gastroentérites à éosinophiles. Hépato-Gastro. 1996;3(4):279–86.Google Scholar
- 28.Torpier G, Colombel JF, Mathieu-Chandelier C, Capron M, Dessaint JP, Cortot A, et al. Eosinophilic gastroenteritis: ultrastructural evidence for a selective release of eosinophil major basic protein. Clin Exp Immunol. 1988;74(3):404–8.Google Scholar
- 30.•• Shoda T, Matsuda A, Arai K, Shimizu H, Morita H, Orihara K, et al. Sera of patients with infantile eosinophilic gastroenteritis showed a specific increase in both thymic stromal lymphopoietin and IL-33 levels. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2016;138(1):299–303. This recent study analyzed the sera of 13 infants with EE and demonstrated an increase level of thymic stromal lymphopoietin and IL-33 which are recognized as key cytokines in allergic disorders. Google Scholar
- 31.•• Song DJ, Shim MH, Lee N, Yoo Y, Choung JT. CCR3 monoclonal antibody inhibits eosinophilic inflammation and mucosal injury in a mouse model of eosinophilic gastroenteritis. Allergy Asthma Immunol Res. 2017;9(4):360–7. This recent study investigated the role of CCR-3 which acts as the receptor of eotaxine-1 in the development of eosinophilic gastrointestinal disease. This experimental study demonstrated that anti-CCR3 antibody significantly reduced the severity of eosinophilic inflammation, mucosal injury, and diarrhea in a mouse model of food allergen induced GI eosinophilic inflammation. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 32.•• Reed C, Woosley JT, Dellon ES. Clinical characteristics, treatment outcomes, and resource utilization in children and adults with eosinophilic gastroenteritis. Dig Liver Dis. 2015;47(3):197–201. This recent retrospective cohor study identified patients with oesinophilic enteritis based on Pathology reports of all patients who had undergone upper endoscopy with biopsy between 2000 and 2013. In this study, 44 patients were diagnosed with oesinophilic enteritis and were evaluated with a mean follow-up of 26.2 months. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 33.Coton T. Gastroentérite à éosinophiles. Encyclopédie Médico-chirurgicale. 2009;[9–089-C-40].Google Scholar
- 36.Endo H, Hosono K, Inamori M, Kato S, Uchiyama T, Iida H, et al. Capsule endoscopic evaluation of eosinophilic enteritis before and after treatment. Digestion. 2011;83(1–2):134–5.Google Scholar
- 37.Attar A, Cazals-Hatem D, Ponsot P. Videocapsule endoscopy identifies stenoses missed by other imaging techniques in a patient with eosinophilic gastroenteritis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol: the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association. 2011;9(1):A28.Google Scholar
- 47.Straumann A, Conus S, Grzonka P, Kita H, Kephart G, Bussmann C, et al. Anti-interleukin-5 antibody treatment (mepolizumab) in active eosinophilic oesophagitis: a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial. Gut. 2010;59(1):21–30.Google Scholar
- 48.Foroughi S, Foster B, Kim N, Bernardino LB, Scott LM, Hamilton RG, et al. Anti-IgE treatment of eosinophil-associated gastrointestinal disorders. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2007;120(3):594–601.Google Scholar
- 49.Turner D, Wolters VM, Russell RK, Shakhnovich V, Muise AM, Ledder O, et al. Anti-TNF, infliximab, and adalimumab can be effective in eosinophilic bowel disease. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2013;56(5):492–7.Google Scholar