Kara L Kliewer, J Pablo Abonia, Seema S Aceves, Dan Atkins, Peter A Bonis, Kelley E Capocelli, Mirna Chehade, Margaret H Collins, Evan S Dellon, Lin Fei, Glenn T Furuta, Sandeep K Gupta, Amir Kagalwalla, John Leung, Sabina Mir, Vincent A Mukkada, Robbie Pesek, Chen Rosenberg, Tetsuo Shoda, Jonathan M Spergel, Qin Sun, Joshua B Wechsler, Guang-Yu Yang, Marc E Rothenberg
{"title":"One-food versus 4-food elimination diet for pediatric eosinophilic esophagitis: A multisite randomized trial.","authors":"Kara L Kliewer, J Pablo Abonia, Seema S Aceves, Dan Atkins, Peter A Bonis, Kelley E Capocelli, Mirna Chehade, Margaret H Collins, Evan S Dellon, Lin Fei, Glenn T Furuta, Sandeep K Gupta, Amir Kagalwalla, John Leung, Sabina Mir, Vincent A Mukkada, Robbie Pesek, Chen Rosenberg, Tetsuo Shoda, Jonathan M Spergel, Qin Sun, Joshua B Wechsler, Guang-Yu Yang, Marc E Rothenberg","doi":"10.1016/j.jaci.2024.08.023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>A 6-food elimination diet in pediatric eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is difficult to implement and may negatively affect quality of life (QoL). Less restrictive elimination diets may balance QoL and efficacy.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>We performed a multisite, randomized comparative efficacy trial of a 1-food (milk) elimination diet (1FED) versus 4-food (milk, egg, wheat, soy) elimination diet (4FED) in pediatric EoE.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients aged 6 to 17 years with histologically active and symptomatic EoE were randomized 1:1 to 1FED or 4FED for 12 weeks. Primary end point was symptom improvement by Pediatric Eosinophilic Esophagitis Symptom Score (PEESS). Secondary end points were proportion experiencing histologic remission (<15 eosinophils per high-power field); change in histologic features (histology scoring system), endoscopic severity (endoscopic reference score), transcriptome (EoE diagnostic panel), and QoL scores; and predictors of remission.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sixty-three patients were randomly assigned to 1FED (n = 38) and 4FED (n = 25). In 4FED versus 1FED, mean PEESS improved -25.0 versus -14.5 (P = .04), but remission rates (41% vs 44%; P = 1.00), histology scoring system (-0.25 vs -0.29; P = .77), endoscopic reference score (-1.10 vs -0.58; P = .47), and QoL scores were similar between groups. The EoE transcriptome normalized in those with histologic response to both diets. Baseline peak eosinophil count predicted remission (odds ratio, 0.975 [95% confidence interval, 0.953-0.999], P = .04; cutoff ≤42 eosinophils per high-power field). The 4FED withdrawal rate (32%) exceeded that of 1FED (11%) (P = .0496).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although 4FED moderately improved symptoms compared with 1FED, the histologic, endoscopic, QoL, and transcriptomic outcomes were similar in both groups. 1FED is a reasonable first-choice therapy for pediatric EoE, given its effects, tolerability, and relative simplicity.</p>","PeriodicalId":14936,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":11.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaci.2024.08.023","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ALLERGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: A 6-food elimination diet in pediatric eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is difficult to implement and may negatively affect quality of life (QoL). Less restrictive elimination diets may balance QoL and efficacy.
Objective: We performed a multisite, randomized comparative efficacy trial of a 1-food (milk) elimination diet (1FED) versus 4-food (milk, egg, wheat, soy) elimination diet (4FED) in pediatric EoE.
Methods: Patients aged 6 to 17 years with histologically active and symptomatic EoE were randomized 1:1 to 1FED or 4FED for 12 weeks. Primary end point was symptom improvement by Pediatric Eosinophilic Esophagitis Symptom Score (PEESS). Secondary end points were proportion experiencing histologic remission (<15 eosinophils per high-power field); change in histologic features (histology scoring system), endoscopic severity (endoscopic reference score), transcriptome (EoE diagnostic panel), and QoL scores; and predictors of remission.
Results: Sixty-three patients were randomly assigned to 1FED (n = 38) and 4FED (n = 25). In 4FED versus 1FED, mean PEESS improved -25.0 versus -14.5 (P = .04), but remission rates (41% vs 44%; P = 1.00), histology scoring system (-0.25 vs -0.29; P = .77), endoscopic reference score (-1.10 vs -0.58; P = .47), and QoL scores were similar between groups. The EoE transcriptome normalized in those with histologic response to both diets. Baseline peak eosinophil count predicted remission (odds ratio, 0.975 [95% confidence interval, 0.953-0.999], P = .04; cutoff ≤42 eosinophils per high-power field). The 4FED withdrawal rate (32%) exceeded that of 1FED (11%) (P = .0496).
Conclusions: Although 4FED moderately improved symptoms compared with 1FED, the histologic, endoscopic, QoL, and transcriptomic outcomes were similar in both groups. 1FED is a reasonable first-choice therapy for pediatric EoE, given its effects, tolerability, and relative simplicity.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology is a prestigious publication that features groundbreaking research in the fields of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology. This influential journal publishes high-impact research papers that explore various topics, including asthma, food allergy, allergic rhinitis, atopic dermatitis, primary immune deficiencies, occupational and environmental allergy, and other allergic and immunologic diseases. The articles not only report on clinical trials and mechanistic studies but also provide insights into novel therapies, underlying mechanisms, and important discoveries that contribute to our understanding of these diseases. By sharing this valuable information, the journal aims to enhance the diagnosis and management of patients in the future.