比较布地奈德治疗嗜酸性粒细胞食管炎的效果:专科中心队列与人群队列。

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q3 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology Pub Date : 2024-10-26 DOI:10.1080/00365521.2024.2419060
Line Tegtmeier Frandsen, Katrine Krogh Sørensen, Lasse Ellingsøe Vistisen, Laura Gruchot Olandersen, Mathilde Laustsen, Mette Norstrand Bang, Dorte Melgaard, Anne Lund Krarup
{"title":"比较布地奈德治疗嗜酸性粒细胞食管炎的效果:专科中心队列与人群队列。","authors":"Line Tegtmeier Frandsen, Katrine Krogh Sørensen, Lasse Ellingsøe Vistisen, Laura Gruchot Olandersen, Mathilde Laustsen, Mette Norstrand Bang, Dorte Melgaard, Anne Lund Krarup","doi":"10.1080/00365521.2024.2419060","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic immune-mediated disease. The budesonide orodispersible tablet (BOT) is recommended as second-line treatment according to the Danish guideline. This study aimed to compare potential treatment disparities before BOT initiation, follow-up practices, clinico-histologic remission rates during BOT treatment, and adherence to the national guideline between the highly specialized EoE-Cph cohort and the population-based DanEoE cohort.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>This cohort study compared 65 adult patients from the EoE-Cph cohort with 65 patients from the DanEoE cohort. All patients were diagnosed between 2015-2021. The diagnosis of EoE was defined according to the AGREE consensus. Data were extracted manually from medical records and registries.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the EoE-Cph cohort, 88% were prescribed proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) before started on BOT compared to 100% in the DanEoE cohort (p = 0.0035). Symptomatic follow-up occurred in 89% of EoE-Cph patients compared to 97% of DanEoE patients after BOT treatment (p = 0.0841). No difference was found between patients who underwent histologic follow-up after topical steroid treatment (83% versus 82%, p = 0.8162). Complete clinico-histologic remission was frequently observed, and no significant difference was observed between the two cohorts (67% versus 80%, p =0.1789). One out of four patients had conflicting symptomatic and histological responses.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study did not provide conclusive evidence favoring the treatment of EoE patients exclusively at highly specialized EoE centers. However, the authors acknowledge that further evidence is necessary before considering changes in clinical practice. Conflicting treatment responses, and discontinuation of treatment due to side effects remains a notable concern.</p>","PeriodicalId":21461,"journal":{"name":"Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology","volume":" ","pages":"1-7"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparing budesonide treatment in eosinophilic esophagitis: a specialized center cohort versus a population-based cohort.\",\"authors\":\"Line Tegtmeier Frandsen, Katrine Krogh Sørensen, Lasse Ellingsøe Vistisen, Laura Gruchot Olandersen, Mathilde Laustsen, Mette Norstrand Bang, Dorte Melgaard, Anne Lund Krarup\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00365521.2024.2419060\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic immune-mediated disease. The budesonide orodispersible tablet (BOT) is recommended as second-line treatment according to the Danish guideline. This study aimed to compare potential treatment disparities before BOT initiation, follow-up practices, clinico-histologic remission rates during BOT treatment, and adherence to the national guideline between the highly specialized EoE-Cph cohort and the population-based DanEoE cohort.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>This cohort study compared 65 adult patients from the EoE-Cph cohort with 65 patients from the DanEoE cohort. All patients were diagnosed between 2015-2021. The diagnosis of EoE was defined according to the AGREE consensus. Data were extracted manually from medical records and registries.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the EoE-Cph cohort, 88% were prescribed proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) before started on BOT compared to 100% in the DanEoE cohort (p = 0.0035). Symptomatic follow-up occurred in 89% of EoE-Cph patients compared to 97% of DanEoE patients after BOT treatment (p = 0.0841). No difference was found between patients who underwent histologic follow-up after topical steroid treatment (83% versus 82%, p = 0.8162). Complete clinico-histologic remission was frequently observed, and no significant difference was observed between the two cohorts (67% versus 80%, p =0.1789). One out of four patients had conflicting symptomatic and histological responses.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study did not provide conclusive evidence favoring the treatment of EoE patients exclusively at highly specialized EoE centers. However, the authors acknowledge that further evidence is necessary before considering changes in clinical practice. Conflicting treatment responses, and discontinuation of treatment due to side effects remains a notable concern.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21461,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-7\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00365521.2024.2419060\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00365521.2024.2419060","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:嗜酸性粒细胞食管炎(EoE)是一种慢性免疫介导疾病。根据丹麦指南,布地奈德口崩片剂(BOT)被推荐为二线治疗药物。本研究旨在比较高度专业化的EoE-Cph队列与基于人口的DanEoE队列之间在开始BOT治疗前的潜在治疗差异、随访方法、BOT治疗期间的临床组织学缓解率以及对国家指南的遵守情况:这项队列研究比较了 65 名来自 EoE-Cph 队列的成年患者和 65 名来自 DanEoE 队列的患者。所有患者均在 2015-2021 年间确诊。EoE的诊断是根据AGREE共识定义的。数据由人工从医疗记录和登记处提取:在EoE-Cph队列中,88%的患者在开始使用BOT前服用了质子泵抑制剂(PPI),而在DanEoE队列中,这一比例为100%(P = 0.0035)。89%的EoE-Cph患者在接受BOT治疗后出现症状,而97%的DanEoE患者在接受BOT治疗后出现症状(p = 0.0841)。局部类固醇治疗后进行组织学随访的患者之间没有差异(83% 对 82%,p = 0.8162)。临床组织学完全缓解的情况很常见,两组患者之间无明显差异(67% 对 80%,p =0.1789)。四名患者中有一人的症状和组织学反应相互矛盾:这项研究并未提供确凿证据,证明咽喉炎患者只应在高度专业化的咽喉炎中心接受治疗。然而,作者承认,在考虑改变临床实践之前,还需要进一步的证据。治疗反应不一致以及因副作用而中断治疗仍是一个值得关注的问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Comparing budesonide treatment in eosinophilic esophagitis: a specialized center cohort versus a population-based cohort.

Objective: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic immune-mediated disease. The budesonide orodispersible tablet (BOT) is recommended as second-line treatment according to the Danish guideline. This study aimed to compare potential treatment disparities before BOT initiation, follow-up practices, clinico-histologic remission rates during BOT treatment, and adherence to the national guideline between the highly specialized EoE-Cph cohort and the population-based DanEoE cohort.

Material and methods: This cohort study compared 65 adult patients from the EoE-Cph cohort with 65 patients from the DanEoE cohort. All patients were diagnosed between 2015-2021. The diagnosis of EoE was defined according to the AGREE consensus. Data were extracted manually from medical records and registries.

Results: In the EoE-Cph cohort, 88% were prescribed proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) before started on BOT compared to 100% in the DanEoE cohort (p = 0.0035). Symptomatic follow-up occurred in 89% of EoE-Cph patients compared to 97% of DanEoE patients after BOT treatment (p = 0.0841). No difference was found between patients who underwent histologic follow-up after topical steroid treatment (83% versus 82%, p = 0.8162). Complete clinico-histologic remission was frequently observed, and no significant difference was observed between the two cohorts (67% versus 80%, p =0.1789). One out of four patients had conflicting symptomatic and histological responses.

Conclusions: This study did not provide conclusive evidence favoring the treatment of EoE patients exclusively at highly specialized EoE centers. However, the authors acknowledge that further evidence is necessary before considering changes in clinical practice. Conflicting treatment responses, and discontinuation of treatment due to side effects remains a notable concern.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
5.30%
发文量
222
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology is one of the most important journals for international medical research in gastroenterology and hepatology with international contributors, Editorial Board, and distribution
期刊最新文献
Endoscopic indicators of insulin resistance: associations with erosive esophagitis and regular arrangement of collecting venules (RAC). High neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio at Helicobacter pylori eradication increases the risk of eradication failure and post-eradication gastric cancer. Novelty in the gut: a review of the gastrointestinal manifestations of syphilis. Effects of an anti-inflammatory diet (AID) on maternal and neonatal health outcomes in pregnant Chinese patients with inflammatory bowel disease treated with infliximab (IFX). Pyloric index, a new parameter: predicting perioperative prognosis in neonates with hypertrophic pyloric stenosis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1