Browsing by Author "Alexander, Jeffrey A."

Now showing 1 - 5 of 5
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Development of a Core Outcome Set for Therapeutic Studies in Eosinophilic Esophagitis (COREOS)
    (Elsevier, 2021) Ma, Christopher; Schoepfer, Alain M.; Dellon, Evan S.; Bredenoord, Albert J.; Chehade, Mirna; Collins, Margaret H.; Feagan, Brian G.; Furuta, Glenn T.; Gupta, Sandeep K.; Hirano, Ikuo; Jairath, Vipul; Katzka, David A.; Pai, Rish K.; Rothenberg, Marc E.; Straumann, Alex; Aceves, Seema S.; Alexander, Jeffrey A.; Arva, Nicoleta C.; Atkins, Dan; Biedermann, Luc; Blanchard, Carine; Cianferoni, Antonella; Ciriza de los Rios, Constanza; Clayton, Frederic; Davis, Carla M.; de Bortoli, Nicola; Dias, Jorge A.; Falk, Gary W.; Genta, Robert M.; Ghaffari, Gisoo; Gonsalves, Nirmala; Greuter, Thomas; Hopp, Russell; Hsu Blatman, Karen S.; Jensen, Elizabeth T.; Johnston, Doug; Kagalwalla, Amir F.; Larsson, Helen M.; Leung, John; Louis, Hubert; Masterson, Joanne C.; Menard-Katcher, Calies; Menard-Katcher, Paul A.; Moawad, Fouad J.; Muir, Amanda B.; Mukkada, Vincent A.; Penagini, Roberto; Pesek, Robert D.; Peterson, Kathryn; Putnam, Philip E.; Ravelli, Alberto; Savarino, Edoardo V.; Schlag, Christoph; Schreiner, Philipp; Simon, Dagmar; Smyrk, Thomas C.; Spergel, Jonathan M.; Taft, Tiffany H.; Terreehorst, Ingrid; Vanuytsel, Tim; Venter, Carina; Vieira, Mario C.; Vieth, Michael; Vlieg-Boerstra, Berber; von Arnim, Ulrike; Walker, Marjorie M.; Wechsler, Joshua B.; Woodland, Philip; Woosley, John T.; Yang, Guang-Yu; Zevit, Noam; Safroneeva, Ekaterina; Medicine, School of Medicine
    Background End points used to determine treatment efficacy in eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) have evolved over time. With multiple novel therapies in development for EoE, harmonization of outcomes measures will facilitate evidence synthesis and appraisal when comparing different treatments. Objective We sought to develop a core outcome set (COS) for controlled and observational studies of pharmacologic and diet interventions in adult and pediatric patients with EoE. Methods Candidate outcomes were generated from systematic literature reviews and patient engagement interviews and surveys. Consensus was established using an iterative Delphi process, with items voted on using a 9-point Likert scale and with feedback from other participants to allow score refinement. Consensus meetings were held to ratify the outcome domains of importance and the core outcome measures. Stakeholders were recruited internationally and included adult and pediatric gastroenterologists, allergists, dieticians, pathologists, psychologists, researchers, and methodologists. Results The COS consists of 4 outcome domains for controlled and observational studies: histopathology, endoscopy, patient-reported symptoms, and EoE-specific quality of life. A total of 69 stakeholders (response rate 95.8%) prioritized 42 outcomes in a 2-round Delphi process, and the final ratification meeting generated consensus on 33 outcome measures. These included measurement of the peak eosinophil count, Eosinophilic Esophagitis Histology Scoring System, Eosinophilic Esophagitis Endoscopic Reference Score, and patient-reported measures of dysphagia and quality of life. Conclusions This interdisciplinary collaboration involving global stakeholders has produced a COS that can be applied to adult and pediatric studies of pharmacologic and diet therapies for EoE and will facilitate meaningful treatment comparisons and improve the quality of data synthesis.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Eosinophilic esophagitis: search for non-invasive techniques for long-term monitoring
    (Elsevier, 2016-02) Watts, Abhishek; Alexander, Jeffrey A.; Gupta, Sandeep K.; Department of Pediatrics, IU School of Medicine
    Comment on: Unsedated transnasal esophagoscopy for monitoring therapy in pediatric eosinophilic esophagitis. [Gastrointest Endosc. 2016]
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    International consensus recommendations for eosinophilic gastrointestinal disease nomenclature
    (Elsevier, 2022-02-16) Dellon, Evan S.; Gonsalves, Nirmala; Abonia, J. Pablo; Alexander, Jeffrey A.; Arva, Nicoleta C.; Atkins, Dan; Attwood, Stephen E.; Auth, Marcus K.H.; Bailey, Dominique D.; Biederman, Luc; Blanchard, Carine; Bonis, Peter A.; Bose, Paroma; Bredenoord, Albert J.; Chang, Joy W.; Chehade, Mirna; Collins, Margaret H.; Di Lorenzo, Carlo; Dias, Jorge Amil; Dohil, Ranjan; Dupont, Christophe; Falk, Gary W.; Ferreira, Cristina T.; Fox, Adam T.; Genta, Robert M.; Greuter, Thomas; Gupta, Sandeep K.; Hirano, Ikuo; Hiremath, Girish S.; Horsley-Silva, Jennifer L.; Ishihara, Shunji; Ishimura, Norihisa; Jensen, Elizabeth T.; Gutiérrez-Junquera, Carolina; Katzka, David A.; Khoury, Paneez; Kinoshita, Yoshikazu; Kliewer, Kara L.; Koletzko, Sibylle; Leung, John; Liacouras, Chris A.; Lucendo, Alfredo J.; Martin, Lisa J.; McGowan, Emily C.; Menard-Katcher, Calies; Metz, David C.; Miller, Talya L.; Moawad, Fouad J.; Muir, Amanda B.; Mukkada, Vincent A.; Murch, Simon; Nhu, Quan M.; Nomura, Ichiro; Nurko, Samuel; Ohtsuka, Yoshikazu; Oliva, Salvatore; Orel, Rok; Papadopoulou, Alexandra; Patel, Dhyanesh A.; Pesek, Robert D.; Peterson, Kathryn A.; Philpott, Hamish; Putnam, Philip E.; Richter, Joel E.; Rosen, Rachel; Ruffner, Melanie A.; Safroneeva, Ekaterina; Schreiner, Philipp; Schoepfer, Alain; Schroeder, Shauna R.; Shah, Neil; Souza, Rhonda F.; Spechler, Stuart J.; Spergel, Jonathan M.; Straumann, Alex; Talley, Nicholas J.; Thapar, Nikhil; Vandenplas, Yvan; Venkatesh, Rajitha D.; Vieira, Mario C.; von Arnim, Ulrike; Walker, Marjorie M.; Wechsler, Joshua B.; Wershil, Barry K.; Wright, Benjamin L.; Yamada, Yoshiyuki; Yang, Guang-Yu; Zevit, Noam; Rothenberg, Marc E.; Furuta, Glenn T.; Aceves, Seema S.; Pediatrics, School of Medicine
    Background & Aims Substantial heterogeneity in terminology used for eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases (EGID), particularly the catchall term “eosinophilic gastroenteritis”, limits clinical and research advances. We aimed to achieve an international consensus for standardized EGID nomenclature. Methods This consensus process utilized Delphi methodology. An initial naming framework was proposed and refined in iterative fashion, then assessed in a first round of Delphi voting. Results were discussed in two consensus meetings, the framework was updated, and re-assessed in a second Delphi vote, with a 70% threshold set for agreement. Results Of 91 experts participating, 85 (93%) completed the first and 82 (90%) completed the second Delphi surveys. Consensus was reached on all but two statements. “EGID” was the preferred umbrella term for disorders of GI tract eosinophilic inflammation in the absence of secondary causes (100% agreement). Involved GI tract segments will be named specifically and use an “Eo” abbreviation convention: eosinophilic gastritis (now abbreviated EoG), eosinophilic enteritis (EoN), and eosinophilic colitis (EoC). The term “eosinophilic gastroenteritis” is no longer preferred as the overall name (96% agreement). When >2 GI tract areas are involved, the name should reflect all of the involved areas. Conclusions This international process resulted in consensus for updated EGID nomenclature for both clinical and research use. EGID will be the umbrella term rather than “eosinophilic gastroenteritis”, and specific naming conventions by location of GI tract involvement are recommended. As more data are developed, this framework can be updated to reflect best practices and the underlying science.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Reliability and Responsiveness of Endoscopic Disease Activity Assessment in Eosinophilic Esophagitis
    (Elsevier, 2022) Ma, Christopher; Bredenoord, Albert J.; Dellon, Evan S.; Alexander, Jeffrey A.; Biedermann, Luc; Hogan, Malcolm; Guizzetti, Leonardo; Zou, Guangyong; Katzka, David A.; Chehade, Mirna; Falk, Gary W.; Furuta, Glenn T.; Gupta, Sandeep K.; Kagalwalla, Amir F.; Schoepfer, Alain M.; Miehlke, Stephan; Moawad, Fouad J.; Peterson, Kathryn; Gonsalves, Nirmala P.; Straumann, Alex; Wechsler, Joshua B.; Rémillard, Julie; Shackelton, Lisa M.; Almonte, Hector S.; Feagan, Brian G.; Jairath, Vipul; Hirano, Ikuo; Pediatrics, School of Medicine
    Background and Aims Endoscopic outcomes have become important measures of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) disease activity, including as an endpoint in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We evaluated the operating properties of endoscopic measures for use in EoE RCTs. Methods Modified Research and Development/University of California Los Angeles (RAND/UCLA) appropriateness methods and a panel of 15 international EoE experts identified endoscopic items/definitions with face validity, which were used in a 2-round voting process to define simplified (all items graded absent/present) and expanded versions (additional grades for edema, furrows, and/or exudates) of the EoE Endoscopic Reference Score (EREFS). Inter- and intra-rater reliability of these instruments (expressed as intraclass correlation coefficients [ICC]), were evaluated using paired endoscopy video assessments of two blinded central readers before and after 8 weeks of proton pump inhibitors, swallowed topical corticosteroids, or dietary elimination. Responsiveness was measured using the standardized effect size (SES). Results The appropriateness of 41 statements relevant to EoE endoscopic activity (endoscopic items, item definitions/grading, and other considerations relevant for endoscopy) was considered. The original and expanded EREFS demonstrated moderate-to-substantial inter-rater reliability (ICCs 0.472-0.736, and 0.469-0.763, respectively) and moderate-to-almost perfect intra-rater reliability (ICCs 0.580-0.828, and 0.581-0.828, respectively). Strictures were least reliably assessed (ICCs 0.072-0.385). The original EREFS was highly responsive (SES 1.126 [95% CI 0.757, 1.534]), although both expanded versions of EREFS, scored based on worst affected area, were numerically most responsive to treatment (expanded furrows, SES 1.229 [95% CI: 0.858, 1.643]; all items expanded, SES 1.252 [95% CI: 0.880, 1.667]). The EREFS and its modifications were not more reliably scored by segment, and also not more responsive when proximal and distal EREFS scores were summed. Conclusions EREFS and its modifications were reliable and responsive, and the original or expanded versions of the EREFS may be preferred in RCTs. Disease activity scored based on the worst affected area optimizes reliability and responsiveness.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Variation in Endoscopic Activity Assessment and Endoscopy Score Validation in Adults with Eosinophilic Esophagitis
    (Elsevier, 2018) Schoepfer, Alain M.; Hirano, Ikuo; Coslovsky, Michael; Roumet, Marie C.; Zwahlen, Marcel; Kuehni, Claudia E.; Hafner, David; Alexander, Jeffrey A.; Dellon, Evan S.; Gonsalves, Nirmala; Leung, John; Bussmann, Christian; Collins, Margaret H.; Newbury, Robert O.; Smyrk, Thomas C.; Woosley, John T.; Yang, Guang-Yu; Romero, Yvonne; Katzka, David A.; Furuta, Glenn T.; Gupta, Sandeep K.; Aceves, Seema S.; Chehade, Mirna; Spergel, Jonathan M.; Falk, Gary W.; Meltzer, Brian A.; Comer, Gail M.; Straumann, Alex; Safroneeva, Ekaterina; Medicine, School of Medicine
    Background & Aims Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is assessed endoscopically (endoscopic activity), based on grades of edema, rings, exudates, furrows, and strictures (EREFS). We examined variations in endoscopic assessments of severity, developed and validated 3 EREFS-based scoring systems, and assessed responsiveness of these systems using data from a randomized placebo-controlled trial of patients with EoE. Methods For the development set, 5 gastroenterologists reviewed EREFS findings from 266 adults with EoE and provided endoscopist global assessment scores (EndoGA, scale of 0 to 10); variation (ΔEndoGA) was assessed using linear regression. We evaluated simple scores (features given arbitrary values from 0 to 3) and developed 2 scoring systems (adjusted score range, 0–100). We then fitted our linear regression model with mean EndoGA to data from 146 adults recruited in centers in Switzerland and the United States between April 2011 and December 2012. For the validation set, we collected data from 120 separate adults (recruited in centers in Switzerland and the United States between May 2013 and July 2014), assessing regression coefficient-based scores using Bland-Altman method. We assessed the responsiveness of our scoring systems using data from a randomized trial of patients with EoE given fluticasone (n=16) or placebo (n=8). Results The distribution of EndoGA values differed among endoscopists (mean ΔEndoGA, 2.6±1.8; range 0–6.6). We developed 2 regression-based scoring systems to assess overall and proximal and distal esophageal findings; variation in endoscopic features accounted for more than 90% of the mean EndoGA variation. In the validation group, differences between mean EndoGA and regression-based scores were small (ranging from –4.70 to 2.03), indicating good agreement. In analyses of data from the randomized trial, the baseline to end of study change in patients given fluticasone was a reduction of 24.3 in simple score (reduction of 4.6 in patients given placebo, P=.052); a reduction of 23.5 in regression-based overall score (reduction of 6.56 in patients given placebo, P=.12), and a reduction of 23.8 (reduction of 8.44 in patients given placebo, P=.11). Conclusion Assessments of endoscopic activity in patients with EoE vary among endoscopists. In an analysis of data from a randomized controlled trial, we found that newly developed scoring systems are no better than simple scoring system in detecting changes in endoscopic activity. These results support the use of a simple scoring system in evaluation of endoscopic activity in patients with EoE.