Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Comparisons of Fluticasone to Budesonide in the Treatment of Eosinophilic Esophagitis

Dustin Albert, Theresa A. Heifert, Steve B. Min, Corinne L. Maydonovitch, Thomas P. Baker, Yen Ju Chen, Fouad J. Moawad*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

36 Scopus citations

Abstract

Background: Topical steroids are first-line treatment agents for eosinophilic esophagitis; however, some studies have demonstrated modest efficacy in inducing histologic remission. Aims: The aim of this study was to determine response to two topical steroids (fluticasone and budesonide), compare their efficacy, and examine patient characteristics which could predict non-response to topical steroids. Methods: We performed a retrospective review of an established EoE registry. Inclusion criteria were patients >1 year of age who were diagnosed with EoE as defined by the most recent consensus guidelines. All patients were treated with an 8-week course of either swallowed fluticasone or viscous budesonide. Responders were defined as achieving <15 eosinophils per high-power field (eos/hpf) in both proximal and distal esophageal biopsies. Demographic, clinical, endoscopic, and histologic features were examined. Results: The study cohort included 75 EoE patients with a median age of 33 years (range 2–64 years), 71 % adults, 84 % male, and 76 % Caucasian. Overall histologic response rate to topical steroids was 51 %, while clinical response was 71 %. There was no significant differences in histologic response to treatment between children and adults (68 vs. 44 %, p = 0.111). There was no significant difference in response between males and females (47 vs. 73 %, p = 0.191) and between the two types of steroids (48 vs. 56 %, p = 0.632). Responders and non-responders were similar in clinical presentation and baseline endoscopic findings. Following treatment, responders had significantly less peak proximal (4.0 ± 4.4 vs. 46 ± 53, p < 0.001) and distal eosinophil counts (3.5 ± 3.8 vs. 60 ± 47, p < 0.001) compared to non-responders. There were no predictors of response to steroids identified. Conclusions: Histologic response to treatment was observed in approximately half the cohort, while more than two-thirds experienced clinical response to topical steroids. Response was similar between fluticasone and budesonide. Given the lack of differences in clinical presentation or endoscopic features, predictors of non-response were not seen.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1996-2001
Number of pages6
JournalDigestive Diseases and Sciences
Volume61
Issue number7
DOIs
StatePublished - 1 Jul 2016

Keywords

  • Budesonide
  • Eosinophilic esophagitis
  • Fluticasone
  • Predictors
  • Topical steroids

Cite this