Adriana Ortega Larrode

Background: Swallowed topical corticosteroids (tC) are common therapy for patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). Widely heterogeneous results have occurred due to their active ingredients, formulations and doses.Objective: To assess the effectiveness of topical corticosteroid therapy for EoE in real‐world practice.Methods: Cross‐sectional study analysis of the multicentre EoE CONNECT registry. Clinical remission was defined as a decrease of ≥50% in dysphagia symptom scores; histological remission was defined as a peak eosinophil count below 15 per high‐power field. The effectiveness in achieving clinico‐histological remission (CHR) was compared for the main tC formulations.Results: Overall, data on 1456 prescriptions of tC in monotherapy used in 866 individual patients were assessed. Of those, 904 prescriptions with data on formulation were employed for the induction of remission; 234 reduced a previously effective dose for maintenance. Fluticasone propionate formulations dominated the first‐line treatment, while budesonide was more common in later therapies. A swallowed nasal drop suspension was the most common formulation of fluticasone propionate. Doses ≥0.8 mg/day provided a 65% CHR rate and were superior to lower doses. Oral viscous solution prepared by a pharmacist was the most common prescription of budesonide; 4 mg/day provided no benefit over 2 mg/day (CHR rated being 72% and 80%, respectively). A multivariate analysis revealed budesonide orodispersible tablets as the most effective therapy (OR 18.9, p < 0.001); use of higher doses (OR 4.3, p = 0.03) and lower symptom scores (OR 0.9, p = 0.01) were also determinants of effectiveness.Conclusion: Reduced symptom severity, use of high doses, and use of budesonide orodispersible tablets particularly were all independent predictors of tC effectiveness.

We present the case of a 62-year-old patient who developed melenas and in whom conventional endoscopic tests could not detect any bleeding lesion. In our case, capsule endoscopy and enteroscopy were the pivotal elements in establishing the diagnosis of a neuroendocrine tumour with an atypical location. As a result, it was possible to surgically remove the lesions at an early stage of the malignancy without metastatic disease and without the need for adjuvant therapy. Our case demonstrates the need for these new techniques in tumours of atypical location and aggressive course. Otherwise, this malignancy may be underdiagnosed until an advanced stage.