Reed Craig C, LaFata Sean S, Gee Timothy S, Thel Hannah L, Cameron Brenderia A, Xue Angela Z, Kiran Akshatha, Ocampo Adolfo A, McCallen Justin, Lee Christopher J, Borinsky Stephanie A, Redd Walker D, Barlowe Trevor, Kaakati Rayan N, Cotton Cary C, Eluri Swathi, Dellon Evan S
Center for Esophageal Diseases and Swallowing, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Pediatric Gastroenterology, Department of Pediatrics, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2025 May;23(6):946-953.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2024.10.016. Epub 2024 Nov 17.
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Few data compare topical corticosteroid (tCS) dosing regimens and outcomes. We aimed to compare treatment outcomes in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) by once or twice daily dosing regimens.
We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the UNC EoE Clinicopathologic Database of newly diagnosed patients with EoE treated with a tCS who had a follow-up endoscopy with biopsy. Baseline data and outcomes were extracted. Bivariate and multivariate analyses compared patients at baseline and following initial tCS given as a once or twice daily dose.
A total of 522 patients met inclusion criteria, 122 patients on once daily dosing (72% male; 91% white) and 400 patients on twice daily dosing (66% male; 89% white). Patients on twice daily dosing were older (28.8 ± 18.2 vs 24.3 ± 18.0; P = .01) and reported more heartburn (40% vs 25%; P = .004). On bivariate analysis, global symptomatic response (78% vs 76%; P = .82), posttreatment eosinophil count (20.8 ± 27.2 vs 25.6 ± 39.4; P = .21), posttreatment EoE Endoscopic Reference Score (2.2 ± 1.8 vs 2.2 ± 2.0; P = .92), and histologic response (<15 eos/hpf; 56% vs 58%; P = .66) did not differ by dosing frequency. Candida was less frequent with daily dosing (2% vs 8%; P = .04). In multivariate analysis, the odds of histologic response did not differ by dose groups (adjusted odds ratio, 1.03; 95% confidence interval, 0.67-1.60).
EoE outcomes did not differ by daily or twice daily dosing regimens. These results inform tCS dosing regimens and reassure that both are effective.
比较局部用皮质类固醇(tCS)给药方案及治疗结果的数据较少。我们旨在比较每日一次或两次给药方案治疗嗜酸性粒细胞性食管炎(EoE)患者的治疗结果。
我们进行了一项回顾性队列研究,使用北卡罗来纳大学EoE临床病理数据库中接受tCS治疗且进行了随访内镜活检的新诊断EoE患者。提取基线数据和治疗结果。双变量和多变量分析比较了基线时以及初始接受每日一次或两次剂量tCS治疗后的患者。
共有522例患者符合纳入标准,122例患者每日一次给药(72%为男性;91%为白人),400例患者每日两次给药(66%为男性;89%为白人)。每日两次给药的患者年龄较大(28.8±18.2岁 vs 24.3±18.0岁;P = 0.01),且报告烧心症状的更多(40% vs 25%;P = 0.004)。双变量分析显示,总体症状缓解情况(78% vs 76%;P = 0.82)、治疗后嗜酸性粒细胞计数(20.8±27.2 vs 25.6±39.4;P = 0.21)、治疗后EoE内镜参考评分(2.2±1.8 vs 2.2±2.0;P = 0.92)以及组织学反应(<15个嗜酸性粒细胞/高倍视野;56% vs 58%;P = 0.66)在给药频率上无差异。念珠菌感染在每日一次给药时较少见(2% vs 8%;P = 0.04)。多变量分析中,组织学反应的几率在剂量组间无差异(调整后的优势比为1.03;95%置信区间为0.67 - 1.60)。
EoE的治疗结果在每日一次或两次给药方案之间无差异。这些结果为tCS给药方案提供了依据,并证实两种方案均有效。