Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
A Practical Tribute to the Career of Donald Antonioli, MD • Opening Remarks • Evaluation of the “Flat” Small-Intestinal Mucosal Biopsy: Contributions of Dr. Antonioli to SI Mucosal biopsy analysis – Rhonda Yantiss, MD • Donald Antonioli and Eosinophilic/Allergic Esophagitis – Jeff Goldsmith, MD Dr. Donald Antonioli Education/Training/Appointments • BSC, MD Tufts University 1964 • Internal medicine intern Tufts University 1965 • Pathology Beth Israel Hospital 1969 • Assistant/Associate/Full Professor HMS 1974/1980/1997 • Associate Chief, Dept Path BIH 1987-1996 • Head Anatomic Path BIH 1988-1990 • Director Residency Program BIH/BIDMC 1992-1996 • Associate Director Graduate BIDMC 2002 Medical Education Dr. Donald Antonioli Notable Research Contributions • Vaginal adenosis: characterization and neoplastic 1970’s complications • Early description of dysplasia in colitis 1977 • Post BII (bile reflux) gastric polyps 1978 • Esophageal squamous papillomas 1978 • DES associated dysplasia 1978 • Classification of intestinal ischemia/infarction 1981 • Upper GI (and non GI) manifestations of Crohn’s 70’s-80’s • Changing patterns/classification gastric cancer 1980’s • Liver Cancer post Hep C 1983 • Esophageal eosinophilia (GERD/EOE) 1986-2000 Dr. Donald Antonioli Notable Research Contributions, cont. • EM properties of Barrett’s precursors 1980’s-2000 • Observer variability Barrett’s dysplasia • Morphology of microscopic colitis, specificity 1988 1988-2000 • Characterization of allergic colitis 1990 •“Lymphocytic” esophagitis (“squiggly cells”) 1992 • Morphologic patterns of disease in treated colitis 1993 • Pediatric H. pylori gastritis 1990’s •“Short Segment” Barrett’s 1994 • UGI involvement in Celiac Disease 1996 • Dysplasia/DALMs in colitis and Barrett’s • Reflux/H. pylori carditis 1990’s-2000 2000’s Dr. Donald Antonioli General reviews/Editorials/Textbooks • Mucosal biopsies of the upper and lower GI tract • Contemporary aspects of gastric carcinoma • Association of Hep C with liver cancer • Chronic gastritis: a classification • Editor, GI section Sternbergs Diagnostic Surgical Human Path 1981 NEJM 1984 NEJM 1991 Bayliss 1994 1989, 1991,1999 Pathology • Gastric carcinoma and its precursors • Pathology of incipient neoplasia IAP Mono 1990 Major Prob Pathology 1993,2001 Dr. Donald Antonioli National/International Committees/Courses • Education committee GIPS • NIH study section on gastric cancer • Education committee USCAP • NIH review committee colon/pancreas cancer • NIH review committee Barrett’s • Nominating committee USCAP • >25 HMS steering/course committees • >15 Hospital committees • Associate director graduate medical education • Co-chair director graduate medical education 1979 1985 1993 1993 2001 2004 70’s-2000 2002 2003 • >20 Post grad courses • >15 Editorial boards Path/Gyn/GI journals 1980’s-2000’s Antonioli/Goldman GI Fellows Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center <1990 1990-91 Yogeshwar Dayal Larry Brown Helen Wang Formerly at Tufts BIDMC BIDMC Charles (Buddy) Andrews ? Georgia Robert Odze BWH 1991 Colleen Powell Ronnie Ray Delaware ------------- 1992 Rita Addison Sigfus Nikulasson Boston Iceland 1993 David Hurlbut Cristian Robiou Kingston, Canada Texas 1994 Nada Alsaigh Lilliane Yacoub Connecticut North Shore 1995 Franz Fogt Jennifer Lipman Philadelphia ----------------- Antonioli/Goldman GI Fellows Cont. 1996 Surendra Singh Ohio 1997 Shaun Walsh Scotland 1998 Amy Becker Northwest 1999 Gamze Ayata U. Mass 2000 Rhonda Yantiss Cornell 2001 Heather Crowley Jeremy Ditelberg John Hunt North Shore Worcester Springfield 2002 Joseph Grossman S. Carolina 2003 Maria Botero Barcelona, Spain 2004 Atoussa Goldar-Najaifi Lahey Clinic 2005 Tracy Challies BIDMC 2006 Saryn Doucette Providence, Rhode Island 2007 Matthew Turner U. Mass (July 1) Thoughts about Donald “Kind and thoughtful” “Love of life and people” “Gentleman scholar” “Mature, calm, sound judgment” “Generous, supportive, a laugh riot” “True gentleman, (except for the dirty jokes)” “Funny, kind” “Wonderful colleague, mentor, friend” “A practical tribute to the career of Donald Antonioli M.D.” Case #1 Rhonda Yantiss, MD Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY Clinical History A 66-year old male patient presented to the gastroenterologist with a four-month history of progressive watery diarrhea and 8-10 bowel movements/day. He was hospitalized twice during a 6-week period for dehydration and suffered a 40-pound weight loss. Stool studies demonstrated abundant fecal fat and negative cultures, and a C. difficile toxin assay was negative. Other laboratory results included a polyclonal hypergammaglobulinemeia, normal IgA, mildly elevated celiac markers (IgA and IgG gliadin, tTG) with negative HLA DQ2/8 haplotype, and normal serum chromogranin, gastrin, serotonin, and VIP levels. Mild thickening of the ileal wall was noted on abdominal imaging, but no other abnormalities were observed. Pertinent past medical history included pancreatic insufficiency requiring enzyme supplementation and mild hypothyroidism. Microscopic Examination Mucosal biopsy samples obtained from the duodenum and jejunum demonstrated complete villous shortening and crypt hyperplasia in association with marked lymphoplasmacytic inflammation in the lamina propria and relatively mild intraepithelial lymphocytosis (see figures 1 and 2). Paneth cells and goblet cells were entirely lacking in both the jejunum and duodenum, and endocrine cells were markedly diminished. The ileal mucosal biopsy samples similarly showed villous shortening as well as increased lamina propria inflammation, apoptotic crypt epithelial cells, a paucity of Paneth cells and goblet cells, and intraepithelial inflammation. Mild active colitis and gastritis were also present. Figure 1. Mucosal biopsy sample of the jejunum with complete villous shortening and marked mucosal inflammation. 1 Figure 2. The jejunum is infiltrated with a mononuclear cellrich inflammatory infiltrate that contains numerous plasma cells. Intraepithelial inflammation is not striking. The crypts show a paucity of Paneth cells and goblet cells. Diagnosis Adult-onset autoimmune enteropathy Clinical Features The term “autoimmune enteropathy” was first proposed by Unsworth and Walker-Smith to describe a disorder characterized by severe protracted diarrhea, extra-intestinal autoimmune disorders, and autoantibodies directed against enteric epithelial cells26,32. Since that time, slightly more than 100 cases have been reported in the literature. This disease most commonly occurs in young children (<1 year of age), either sporadically, or in association with a familial autoimmune disorder termed the Immunodysregulation, Polyendocrinopathy, and Enteropathy, X-linked (IDEX) syndrome23,27. Most affected children are males and harbor a spectrum of autoantibodies (anti-enterocyte, anti-goblet cell, anti-nuclear, anti-mitochondrial, antiendoplasmic reticulin, anti-parietal, anti-DNA, anti-smooth muscle, anti-gliadin, anti-tubular basement membrane, anti-islet cells). However, the detection of specific subtypes of autoantibody does not necessarily correlate with the presence of extra-intestinal immunemediated injury (i.e. patients with anti-tubular basement membrane antibodies may, or may not, have concomitant renal disease)20,24,26. Adult-onset autoimmune enteropathy is quite uncommon and fewer than thirty cases have been reported in the literature9,18. In contrast to pediatric patients, adult males and females are affected equally and may lack detectable anti-enterocyte antibodies in 10-15% of cases. Akram et al. comprehensively described a series of 15 patients with autoimmune enteropathy in the largest series of adult patients to date1. They found that most patients were older (mean age: 55 years), predominantly Caucasian, and often (87%) suffered from other autoimmune diseases. Interestingly, 33% had elevated tTG antibodies and biopsy findings that suggested concomitant gluten sensitive enteropathy. 2 Associated Diseases A wide variety of extra-intestinal immune-mediated diseases may be associated with autoimmune enteropathy, including pancreatic, renal, hepatic, and thyroid insufficiency, hemolytic anemia, thrombocytopenia, eczema, arthritis, and vasculitis11,15. Among these, insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus is most common and may precede the onset of diarrheal symptoms6,14. Patients with autoimmune enteropathy may also suffer from renal disorders, such as nephrotic syndrome, hematuria, membranous glomerulopathy or interstitial nephritis. These individuals often show granular IgG deposits in glomeruli or along the tubular basement membrane and have autoantibodies against the tubular epithelial brush border. Pathologic Features Biopsy samples from the small bowel demonstrate partial or complete villous shortening, crypt hyperplasia, a paucity of Paneth cells, and increased stromal mononuclear cell inflammation, with relatively little intra-epithelial inflammation2. Many cases, particularly those associated with high levels of circulating anti-goblet cell antibodies, show marked goblet cell depletion and apoptotic epithelial cell debris within the crypts. Diminished numbers of chromogranin-positive endocrine cells are also frequently noted. Immunohistochemical stains demonstrate that the inflammatory infiltrate largely consists of CD3 and CD4-positive T cells with the αβ receptor phenotype5. Intestinal epithelial cells may express aberrant HLA-DR and ICAM-1, and the lamina propria contains increase IL-2 receptor-positive cells5,12. Many patients also have concomitant mononuclear cell-predominant colitis and gastritis. Autoantibodies and Pathogenesis The presence of anti-enterocyte antibodies may be demonstrated by indirect immunofluorescence using serial dilutions of the patient’s serum applied to frozen tissue sections of normal human small bowel followed by incubating with fluorochrome-conjugated anti-human immunoglobulins. The tissue reaction is generally a linear pattern of fluorescence along the apex of the enterocyte brush border with less staining along the basolateral membrane10. Most antibodies are of the IgG subtype, but IgA and IgM have also been described7,19,28. Although autoantibodies are often present in the sera of patients with autoimmune enteropathy, they may disappear after the onset of treatment or clinical remission and it is not clear whether they are pathogenetic or merely represent an epiphenomenon related to an unidentified etiologic factor. Some investigators have shown that patients with IPEX syndrome have autoimmunity to a 75 kD protein expressed on renal tubular epithelium and enterocytes, which is encoded by a 21 exon region on chromosome 11p14.3. Recent studies have also shown that this disorder results from a mutation in the FOXP3 locus on gene Xp11.23-Xq13.313. FOXP3 is a member of the forkhead/winged-helix family of transcriptional regulators and encodes scurfin, a powerful transcriptional suppressor and modulator of T cell function expressed on CD4+/CD25+ regulatory T cells. Loss of FOXP3 presumably results in hyperimmune activity and immune dysregulation25 31. Differential Diagnosis The differential diagnosis of autoimmune enteropathy includes other forms of chronic enteritis that show villous shortening and increased mononuclear cell inflammation, particularly gluten sensitive enteropathy. Autoimmune enteropathy may be distinguished from celiac disease 3 because the former shows a paucity, or absence, of Paneth, goblet, and endocrine cells, but relatively few surface intraepithelial lymphocytes. In contrast, although the surface epithelium may show features of injury, such as attenuation of the cytoplasm, gluten sensitive enteropathy does not result in a profound decrease in the number of specialized epithelial cells. In addition, many of the intraepithelial T cells in gluten sensitive enteropathy express the γδ receptor, rather than the αβ receptor. Common variable immunodeficiency may be considered in the differential diagnosis as well, but this entity typically shows decreased numbers of plasma cells within the lamina propria. However, as demonstrated by Akram et al., adult onset autoimmune enteropathy may coexist with either gluten sensitive enteropathy or common variable immunodeficiency and thus, show overlapping features with each of these entities1. Treatment and Outcome Autoimmune enteropathy has been historically associated with a high mortality, although the increasing use of immunosuppression in the management of this disorder has been met with increasing success14,21. Approximately one-third of patients may respond, at least initially, to dietary modification alone, but nearly half ultimately require additional therapy6,12,19,28. Monotherapy with corticosteroids has minimal utility, whereas the combined use of this agent with azathioprine and/or cyclophosphamide achieves better results6,8,12,22,26,28. Cyclosporine, sirolimus and tacrolimus have been reported to successfully induce and maintain remission of symptoms in patients who have failed other immunosuppressive agents4,29. Bone marrow or cord blood stem cell transplantation is usually reserved for individuals with IPEX syndrome who fail other treatment modalities3,16,17,30. References 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Akram S, Murray JA, Pardi DS, et al.: Adult Autoimmune Enteropathy: Mayo Clinic Rochester Experience. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2007 Al Khalidi H, Kandel G, Streutker CJ: Enteropathy with loss of enteroendocrine and paneth cells in a patient with immune dysregulation: a case of adult autoimmune enteropathy. Hum Pathol 2006, 37:373-6 Baud O, Goulet O, Canioni D, et al.: Treatment of the immune dysregulation, polyendocrinopathy, enteropathy, X-linked syndrome (IPEX) by allogeneic bone marrow transplantation. N Engl J Med 2001, 344:1758-62 Bindl L, Torgerson T, Perroni L, et al.: Successful use of the new immune-suppressor sirolimus in IPEX (immune dysregulation, polyendocrinopathy, enteropathy, X-linked syndrome). J Pediatr 2005, 147:256-9 Brousse N, Canioni D, Rambaud C, et al.: [Intractable infantile diarrhea. A framework to subdivide]. Ann Pathol 1994, 14:333-8 Catassi C, Mirakian R, Natalini G, et al.: Unresponsive enteropathy associated with circulating enterocyte autoantibodies in a boy with common variable hypogammaglobulinemia and type I diabetes. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 1988, 7:60813 Charritat JL, Polonovski C: [Pediatric autoimmune enteropathies with anti-cytoplasmic enterocytic auto-antibodies]. Ann Pediatr (Paris) 1987, 34:195-203 4 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. Colletti RB, Guillot AP, Rosen S, et al.: Autoimmune enteropathy and nephropathy with circulating anti-epithelial cell antibodies. J Pediatr 1991, 118:858-64 Corazza GR, Biagi F, Volta U, et al.: Autoimmune enteropathy and villous atrophy in adults. Lancet 1997, 350:106-9 Cutz E, Sherman PM, Davidson GP: Enteropathies associated with protracted diarrhea of infancy: clinicopathological features, cellular and molecular mechanisms. Pediatr Pathol Lab Med 1997, 17:335-68 Habib R, Beziau A, Goulet O, et al.: [Renal involvement in autoimmune enteropathies]. Ann Pediatr (Paris) 1993, 40:103-7 Hill SM, Milla PJ, Bottazzo GF, et al.: Autoimmune enteropathy and colitis: is there a generalised autoimmune gut disorder? Gut 1991, 32:36-42 Kobayashi I, Imamura K, Kubota M, et al.: Identification of an autoimmune enteropathyrelated 75-kilodalton antigen. Gastroenterology 1999, 117:823-30 Lachaux A: [Autoimmune enteropathy]. Arch Pediatr 1996, 3:261-6 Lachaux A, Bouvier R, Cozzani E, et al.: Familial autoimmune enteropathy with circulating anti-bullous pemphigoid antibodies and chronic autoimmune hepatitis. J Pediatr 1994, 125:858-62 Lucas KG, Ungar D, Comito M, et al.: Submyeloablative cord blood transplantation corrects clinical defects seen in IPEX syndrome. Bone Marrow Transplant 2007, 39:55-6 Mazzolari E, Forino C, Fontana M, et al.: A new case of IPEX receiving bone marrow transplantation. Bone Marrow Transplant 2005, 35:1033-4 Mirakian R, Collins P, Bottazzo GF: Autoimmune enteropathy in adults. Lancet 1997, 350:959-60 Mirakian R, Richardson A, Milla PJ, et al.: Protracted diarrhoea of infancy: evidence in support of an autoimmune variant. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1986, 293:1132-6 Moore L, Xu X, Davidson G, et al.: Autoimmune enteropathy with anti-goblet cell antibodies. Hum Pathol 1995, 26:1162-8 Ochs HD, Torgerson TR: Immune dysregulation, polyendocrinopathy, enteropathy, Xlinked inheritance: model for autoaggression. Adv Exp Med Biol 2007, 601:27-36 Pearson RD, Swenson I, Schenk EA, et al.: Fatal multisystem disease with immune enteropathy heralded by juvenile rheumatoid arthritis. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 1989, 8:259-65 Powell BR, Buist NR, Stenzel P: An X-linked syndrome of diarrhea, polyendocrinopathy, and fatal infection in infancy. J Pediatr 1982, 100:731-7 Rogahn D, Smith CP, Thomas A: Autoimmune enteropathy with goblet-cell antibodies. J R Soc Med 1999, 92:311-2 Ruemmele FM, Brousse N, Goulet O: Autoimmune enteropathy: molecular concepts. Curr Opin Gastroenterol 2004, 20:587-91 Russo P, Alvarez F: Autoimmune enteropathy: a review. Clinical and Applied Immunology Reviews 2002, 2:203-16 Satake N, Nakanishi M, Okano M, et al.: A Japanese family of X-linked auto-immune enteropathy with haemolytic anaemia and polyendocrinopathy. Eur J Pediatr 1993, 152:313-5 Savage MO, Mirakian R, Wozniak ER, et al.: Specific autoantibodies to gut epithelium in two infants with severe protracted diarrhoea. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 1985, 4:18795 5 29. 30. 31. 32. Seidman EG, Lacaille F, Russo P, et al.: Successful treatment of autoimmune enteropathy with cyclosporine. J Pediatr 1990, 117:929-32 Smyk-Pearson SK, Bakke AC, Held PK, et al.: Rescue of the autoimmune scurfy mouse by partial bone marrow transplantation or by injection with T-enriched splenocytes. Clin Exp Immunol 2003, 133:193-9 Torgerson TR, Ochs HD: Immune dysregulation, polyendocrinopathy, enteropathy, Xlinked: forkhead box protein 3 mutations and lack of regulatory T cells. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2007, 120:744-50; quiz 51-2 Unsworth J, Hutchins P, Mitchell J, et al.: Flat small intestinal mucosa and autoantibodies against the gut epithelium. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 1982, 1:503-13 Case #2 Jeffrey Goldsmith Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA Case History: A 13 year old male presented to his family practice physician with a 3-4 month history of difficulty swallowing. The patient reported an intermittent history of associated epigastric pain after eating which sometimes radiated to his back. Most recently, the patient had the feeling that food was ‘stuck in his throat’ while eating a steak dinner. The patient’s past medical history was significant for asthma since age 5. His asthma was well controlled. Due to the history of meat impaction, his primary care physician referred him to a gastroenterologist who was similarly concerned. An upper endoscopy was performed. The duodenum and stomach were grossly normal. However, the esophageal mucosa appeared pale with red streaks and areas of transverse mucosal folds (aka ‘feline esophagus’). These findings were most prominent in the distal 5 cm; however, the findings were present to lesser degree in the proximal esophagus. The endoscopist took multiple mucosal biopsies throughout the esophagus. Biopsies of the distal esophagus (37 cm), and proximal esophagus (22 cm) showed similar findings (see pictures below). The squamous epithelium exhibited marked regenerative changes; the epithelial cells displayed increased nuclear to cytoplasmic ratio throughout the entire thickness of the epithelium. Examination at higher power showed markedly increased numbers of intraepithelial eosinophils with up to 50 per high power field. Additionally, there were aggregates of 3-5 eosinophils in the superficial epithelium (termed ‘eosinophilic microabscesses’), extensive eosinophilic degranulation, and increased density of eosinophils in 6 the superficial epithelium compared with the basal epithelial cells. Focally, there was a crust adherent to the epithelium that was composed of fibrin with numerous admixed eosinophils and eosinophilic debris. 7 Based on these findings the following diagnoses were rendered: A. Esophagus, 38 cm, biopsy: Moderately active esophagitis; see note. B. Esophagus, 20 cm, biopsy: Moderately active esophagitis; see note. Note: The biopsy findings suggest allergic / eosinophilic esophagitis. However, severe reflux esophagitis cannot be entirely excluded. Clinical correlation is required to make this distinction. The patient was started in high-dose proton pump inhibitors. Despite three months of therapy, the patient’s symptoms persisted. The patient was given a presumptive diagnosis of allergic/eosinophilic esophagitis, and was started on topical corticosteroid therapy. Within one month of instituting this treatment, his symptoms significantly improved. Background & Pathogenesis: In a recent comprehensive review and consensus recommendation statement, Furuta et al., defined allergic / eosinophilic esophagitis (EE) as “a clinicopathologic disorder of the esophagus characterized by esophageal and/or upper gastrointestinal tract symptoms in association with esophageal mucosal biopsy specimens containing more than or equal to 15 intraepithelial eosinophils / high power field (HPF) in one or more biopsy specimens and absence of pathologic gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) as evidenced by a normal pH monitoring study of the distal esophagus or lack of response to high-dose proton pump inhibitor (PPI) medication1.” The epidemiologic characteristics of EE remain somewhat unknown. However, it is clear that EE more often affects males in both the pediatric and adult populations with up to 75% of EE patients being male2-7. Few studies have been performed that addressed the incidence and/or prevalence of disease; however, in a study performed on the population in Hamilton County, Ohio, the incidence of EE was up to 1.7 / 10,000 persons and the prevalence of disease was up to 3 / 10,000 people8; in longitudinal studies, the prevalence of disease has been noted to be increasing7. This is likely due to increasing recognition of disease; additionally, since EE is not associated with mortality, the prevalence of disease is expected to increase with time. It seems 8 that there is significant ethnic variation in the distribution of EE with a majority of cases reported in Caucasians; however this topic has not been extensively studied. Unlike long-standing GERD, which has an association with the development of Barrett’s esophagus, dysplasia, and adenocarcinoma, a long history of EE predisposes patients to esophageal mural fibrosis that results in stricture formation7,9. These patients with strictures are more likely to suffer from dysphagia and food impaction. To date, an association with neoplasia has not been observed. The pathogenesis of EE remains relatively unclear. However, it is relatively certain that EE is an allergic disease since most patients have a history of environmental hypersensitivity as evidenced by positive radioallergosorbent (RAST) testing and/or positive skin prick testing10. Additionally, changes identical to EE can be reproduced in mouse models by exposing the animals to various allergens after sensitization11. It also seems that EE is associated with cytokines secreted by TH2 lymphocytes that directly act on and recruit eosinophils. These cytokines include IL-4, IL-5, and IL-13 and their secretion may act to recruit eosinophils to the squamous epithelium via the secretion of eosinophil-specific chemokines, the eotaxins, in appropriately stimulated hosts12,13. Additionally, there has been an association with a single nucleotide polymorphism of the eotaxin-3 gene12. However, this genetic mutation has not been causally associated with the development of EE, and may predispose patients to the development of EE. Diagnosis of Eosinophilic / Allergic Esophagitis: Clinical Findings & Laboratory Studies: Classically, symptoms of EE closely mimic GERD, with substernal chest pain and referred pain to the back being common symptoms in both children and adults. However, dysphagia is the most frequent symptom in patients with EE in adults. Food impaction is also closely associated with EE, and was seen in 50% of patients in one case series of adult patients5. In children, feeding intolerance, failure to thrive, and vomiting can also be seen14. Intraesophageal pH probe monitoring is considered the gold standard for the diagnosis of acid reflux. In the early studies of EE, pH probe studies were performed to exclude GERD, and are negative in up to 80% of adult and pediatric patients with EE15-17. However, the current 9 standard of care is to give patients a trial of proton-pump inhibitors to exclude GERD. If patients respond to this treatment, GERD is the presumed diagnosis9. Endoscopic findings: Endoscopically, a host of abnormal findings can be seen which include pale mucosa, white exudates, longitudinal furrows, strictures, and ‘crepe paper esophagus’. The presence of multiple, transient mucosal rings, termed ‘feline esophagus,’ has also been reported in EE. Of these findings, the presence of longitudinal furrows and ‘crepe paper’ changes, in which the esophageal mucosa becomes pale and fragile-appearing, are most suggestive of EE15,18. However, none of these findings are diagnostic. Histologic findings: In general, biopsy findings in patients with EE include reactive squamous epithelium, increased length of the submucosal papillae, and significant numbers of intraepithelial eosinophils. The intraepithelial eosinophils number in excess of 15 eosinophils per high-power field, and are typically distributed preferentially toward the luminal ½ or 1/3 of the squamous epithelium19,20. Additionally, extensive eosinophilc degranulation6 and collections of over 4 eosinophils, typically present in the superficial epithelium, termed ‘eosinophilic microabscesses,’ can be seen in EE16. Perhaps the most specific finding of EE is the presence of a superficial exudate of fibrin, eosinophils, and eosinophilic debris that is adherent to the epithelial surface; however, this finding is uncommonly seen. The distribution of eosinophilic inflammation along the esophageal length is typically uniform with similar numbers of intraepithelial eosinophils in both proximal and distal esophageal biopsies16. Lamina propria, when present, may show increased fibrosis21. Differential Diagnosis Gastroesophageal reflux disease Gastroesophageal reflux disease can closely mimic EE. The histologic overlap between GERD and EE is sufficient such that a definitive pathologic diagnosis of EE or GERD should never be made when over 15 intraepithelial eosinophils per hpf are seen22. Rather, a description of the histologic findings should be given and an appropriate differential diagnosis should be 10 given (see index case above). In general, however, the following histologic findings help to separate EE from GERD: 1. Numbers of intraepithelial eosinophils: EE generally has over 15-20 intraepithelial eosinophils per high-power field, whereas biopsies of GERD typically have substantially less than this number. When using this criterion, one should report the maximal number of eosinophils seen in a particular biopsy, not the average. 2. Distribution of eosinophils along the esophagus: When well-informed clinicians suspect EE based on clinical findings or the endoscopic appearance, they usually take biopsies from both the distal and proximal esophagus. In cases of GERD, the intraepithelial eosinophilia is most often exclusively present in the distal biopsy. If eosinophils are present in proximal biopsies, there are significantly reduced in number when compared to the distal biopsy. In cases of EE, the numbers of intraepithelial eosinophils remains relatively constant throughout the entire length of the esophagus. 3. Distribution of eosinophils throughout the epithelial thickness: In EE, the eosinophils show increased density towards the luminal aspect of the epithelium. Whereas, in GERD eosinphils are distributed evenly thought the epithelium. 4. Eosinophilic microabscesses: Aggregates of more than 4 intraepithelial eosinophils within the superficial epithelium are more highly associated with EE. 5. Eosinophilic degranulation: Typically, biopsies of patients with EE show, sometimes extensive, eosinophilic degranulation. This is much less commonly seen in GERD. There is some recent evidence, however, that artifactual eosinophilic degranulation may be induced by biopsy procurement and/or manipulation of the biopsy specimen at the grossing bench23,24. 6. “Eosinophilic Exudate”: The presence of an adherent exudate composed of eosinophils, eosinophilic debris, and fibrin seems to be the most specific finding for the diagnosis of EE. However, this assertion requires further study. Sadly, however, this seems to be a specific, but not sensitive criterion. 11 Other Mimics of EE Although GERD is the most common mimic of EE, other esophagitides also enter the differential diagnosis. Other inflammatory conditions that may induce an eosinophilic response include the following: 1. Infections: While the inflammatory infiltrate in infectious esophagitis typically is composed of neutrophils, eosinophils can sometimes predominate. In these cases, the finding of the infectious organism, most commonly Candida pseudohyphae, would obviously help to arrive at the correct diagnosis. Other infectious organisms that might induce an inflammatory infiltrate composed partly of eosinophils include herpes simplex virus, and, less commonly, cytomegalovirus. Again, the finding of neutrophils within the inflammatory infiltrate should prompt a thorough search for an infectious etiology25. It is important to note that Candida esophagitis and EE can be coincident, since the main treatment for EE is topical steroid therapy which predisposes patients to esophageal candidiasis. 2. Crohn’s Disease: Crohn’s disease uncommonly involves the esophagus. Biopsies of esophageal involvement by Crohn’s disease typically show ulceration with a brisk lymphocytic infiltrate; non-necrotizing granulomas are rarely seen. In a minority of cases, eosinophils may be a minor constituent of the infiltrate26. 3. Other diseases: For completeness sake, other diseases, such as chemical induced esophagitis, radiation damage, drugs, graft-versus-host disease, and various connective tissue diseases may cause eosinophilic inflammation in the esophagus. In these rare cases, the eosinophilic infiltrate is typically found in combination with other findings that lead to the correct diagnosis. For example, in radiation-induced esophagitis, the epithelium may contain a polymorphic infiltrate, including eosinophils. However, the submucosal tissue would contain the vascular changes, and atypical stromal cells typical of radiation-induced esophagitis. Treatment Eosinophilic/allergic esophgitis is typically treated with topical steroid therapy. Patients orally instill topical steroids from a metered dose inhaler. Instead of inhaling this preparation, patients swallow it. This action coats the esophageal mucosa with steroids which decreases 12 intraepithelial inflammation. Little of this swallowed steroid is absorbed systemically. Using this therapy, all patients studied to date have had a significant decrease in their symptoms, and about 75% of patients had complete symptomatic resolution27-29. Other treatments include systemic corticosteroids and dietary therapy. Systemic corticosteroids are not typically used due to long-term systemic side effects. However, if patients present with severe symptoms of EE, systemic corticosteroids may be used on a short-term basis to relieve acute symptoms. Institution of a food elimination diet has had variable success in the treatment of EE. However, the use of an amino acid-based diet is quite effective in treating EE with up to 98% of patients responding to this treatment modality30. However, this treatment is quite expensive and often requires installation through a nasogastric or percutaneous gastrostomy tube because the aminoacid based diet is unpalatable. References 1. Furuta GT, Liacouras CA, Collins MH, Gupta SK, Justinich C, Putnam PE, Bonis P, Hassall E, Straumann A, Rothenberg ME: Eosinophilic esophagitis in children and adults: a systematic review and consensus recommendations for diagnosis and treatment. Gastroenterology 2007, 133:1342-1363 2. Attwood SE, Smyrk TC, Demeester TR, Jones JB: Esophageal eosinophilia with dysphagia. A distinct clinicopathologic syndrome. Dig Dis Sci 1993, 38:109-116. 3. Baxi S, Gupta SK, Swigonski N, Fitzgerald JF: Clinical presentation of patients with eosinophilic inflammation of the esophagus. Gastrointest Endosc 2006, 64:473-478 4. Croese J, Fairley SK, Masson JW, Chong AK, Whitaker DA, Kanowski PA, Walker NI: Clinical and endoscopic features of eosinophilic esophagitis in adults. Gastrointest Endosc 2003, 58:516-522. 5. Desai TK, Stecevic V, Chang CH, Goldstein NS, Badizadegan K, Furuta GT: Association of eosinophilic inflammation with esophageal food impaction in adults. Gastrointest Endosc 2005, 61:795-801 6. Parfitt JR, Gregor JC, Suskin NG, Jawa HA, Driman DK: Eosinophilic esophagitis in adults: distinguishing features from gastroesophageal reflux disease: a study of 41 patients. Mod Pathol 2006, 19:90-96 13 7. Straumann A, Spichtin HP, Grize L, Bucher KA, Beglinger C, Simon HU: Natural history of primary eosinophilic esophagitis: a follow-up of 30 adult patients for up to 11.5 years. Gastroenterology 2003, 125:1660-1669. 8. Noel RJ, Putnam PE, Rothenberg ME: Eosinophilic esophagitis. N Engl J Med 2004, 351:940-941. 9. Liacouras CA, Wenner WJ, Brown K, Ruchelli E: Primary eosinophilic esophagitis in children: successful treatment with oral corticosteroids. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 1998, 26:380-385. 10. Fox VL, Nurko S, Furuta GT: Eosinophilic esophagitis: it's not just kid's stuff. Gastrointest Endosc 2002, 56:260-270. 11. Mishra A, Hogan SP, Brandt EB, Rothenberg ME: An etiological role for aeroallergens and eosinophils in experimental esophagitis. J Clin Invest 2001, 107:83-90 12. Blanchard C, Wang N, Stringer KF, Mishra A, Fulkerson PC, Abonia JP, Jameson SC, Kirby C, Konikoff MR, Collins MH, Cohen MB, Akers R, Hogan SP, Assa'ad AH, Putnam PE, Aronow BJ, Rothenberg ME: Eotaxin-3 and a uniquely conserved geneexpression profile in eosinophilic esophagitis. J Clin Invest 2006, 116:536-547 13. Straumann A, Bauer M, Fischer B, Blaser K, Simon HU: Idiopathic eosinophilic esophagitis is associated with a T(H)2-type allergic inflammatory response. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2001, 108:954-961 14. Sant'Anna AM, Rolland S, Fournet JC, Yazbeck S, Drouin E: Eosinophilic esophagitis in children: symptoms, histology and pH probe results. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 2004, 39:373-377 15. Remedios M, Campbell C, Jones DM, Kerlin P: Eosinophilic esophagitis in adults: clinical, endoscopic, histologic findings, and response to treatment with fluticasone propionate. Gastrointest Endosc 2006, 63:3-12 16. Walsh SV, Antonioli DA, Goldman H, Fox VL, Bousvaros A, Leichtner AM, Furuta GT: Allergic esophagitis in children: a clinicopathological entity. Am J Surg Pathol 1999, 23:390-396. 17. Steiner SJ, Gupta SK, Croffie JM, Fitzgerald JF: Correlation between number of eosinophils and reflux index on same day esophageal biopsy and 24 hour esophageal pH monitoring. Am J Gastroenterol 2004, 99:801-805. 14 18. Kaplan M, Mutlu EA, Jakate S, Bruninga K, Losurdo J, Keshavarzian A: Endoscopy in eosinophilic esophagitis: "feline" esophagus and perforation risk. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2003, 1:433-437. 19. Furuta GT, Straumann A: Review article: the pathogenesis and management of eosinophilic oesophagitis. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2006, 24:173-182 20. Potter JW, Saeian K, Staff D, Massey BT, Komorowski RA, Shaker R, Hogan WJ: Eosinophilic esophagitis in adults: an emerging problem with unique esophageal features. Gastrointest Endosc 2004, 59:355-361. 21. Straumann A, Rossi L, Simon HU, Heer P, Spichtin HP, Beglinger C: Fragility of the esophageal mucosa: a pathognomonic endoscopic sign of primary eosinophilic esophagitis? Gastrointest Endosc 2003, 57:407-412. 22. Ngo P, Furuta GT, Antonioli DA, Fox VL: Eosinophils in the esophagus--peptic or allergic eosinophilic esophagitis? Case series of three patients with esophageal eosinophilia. Am J Gastroenterol 2006, 101:1666-1670 23. DeBrosse CW, Case JW, Putnam PE, Collins MH, Rothenberg ME: Quantity and distribution of eosinophils in the gastrointestinal tract of children. Pediatr Dev Pathol 2006, 9:210-218 24. Kato M, Kephart GM, Morikawa A, Gleich GJ: Eosinophil infiltration and degranulation in normal human tissues: evidence for eosinophil degranulation in normal gastrointestinal tract. Int Arch Allergy Immunol 2001, 125 Suppl 1:55-58 25. Fenoglio-Preiser CM (editor): Gastrointestinal Pathology. Philadelphia, Lippincott-Raven Publishers, 1999 26. Ruuska T, Vaajalahti P, Arajarvi P, Maki M: Prospective evaluation of upper gastrointestinal mucosal lesions in children with ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 1994, 19:181-186 27. Arora AS, Perrault J, Smyrk TC: Topical corticosteroid treatment of dysphagia due to eosinophilic esophagitis in adults. Mayo Clin Proc 2003, 78:830-835 28. Teitelbaum JE, Fox VL, Twarog FJ, Nurko S, Antonioli D, Gleich G, Badizadegan K, Furuta GT: Eosinophilic esophagitis in children: immunopathological analysis and response to fluticasone propionate. Gastroenterology 2002, 122:1216-1225. 15 29. Noel RJ, Putnam PE, Collins MH, Assa'ad AH, Guajardo JR, Jameson SC, Rothenberg ME: Clinical and immunopathologic effects of swallowed fluticasone for eosinophilic esophagitis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2004, 2:568-575. 30. Markowitz JE, Spergel JM, Ruchelli E, Liacouras CA: Elemental diet is an effective treatment for eosinophilic esophagitis in children and adolescents. Am J Gastroenterol 2003, 98:777-782 16 Evaluation of the “Flat” Small-Intestinal Mucosal Biopsy Contributions of Dr. Donald A. Antonioli to Small-Intestinal Mucosal Biopsy Analysis Rhonda K. Yantiss, MD Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine Weill Cornell Medical College New York, NY Case Presentation Clinical history – 66 year old male with hypothyroidism and pancreatic insufficiency – 8-10 episodes of watery diarrhea/day – Approximately 40 pound weight loss over 4 months Radiology – Small bowel follow through and CT imaging Multifocal ileal thickening without ulceration or fistulae Laboratory studies – Normal serum chromogranin, gastrin, serotonin, VIP – Polyclonal hypergammaglobulinemia – Mildly elevated celiac markers (IgA and IgG gliadin, tTG) with negative HLA-DQ2 and HLA-DQ8 haplotypes – Abundant fecal fat Differential Diagnosis Injury of proximal small bowel and extra-intestinal inflammation Chronic enteritis with villous shortening and crypt hyperplasia Inflammatory bowel disease Celiac disease Autoimmune enteropathy Common variable immunodeficiency Refractory sprue Infection Tropical sprue Bacterial overgrowth Microvillous inclusion disease Protein intolerance Nutritional deficiency Medications Inflammatory bowel disease Celiac disease Autoimmune enteropathy Common variable immunodeficiency Refractory sprue Overlapping Features of Immune-Mediated Small-Intestinal Diseases Autoimmune Enteropathy Common Variable Immunodeficiency Crohn’s Disease Celiac Disease Pediatric and adult patients + + + + Malabsorption/diarrhea + + + + Weight loss/failure to thrive + + + + Other autoimmune disorders + + + + FOXP3 (IPEX syndrome) TACI, BAFF, APRIL Dysregulation of T cells Abnormal B cell maturation Clinical Features Pathogenesis Molecular predisposition Mechanism NOD2, TLR4 HLA-DQ2, HLA-DQ8 Defective immune response to environmental antigens Serologic Markers Anti-tissue transglutaminase <5% + 30% unreliable Anti-endomysial IgA antibody +/- + +/- unreliable Anti-gliadin IgG antibody +/- + +/- unreliable 30% +/- unreliable 50-90% +/- Anti-Saccharomyces cerevisiae Anti-enterocyte antibody 40-90% Crohn’s Disease Autoimmune Enteropathy Celiac Disease Common Variable Immunodeficiency “Lymphocytic Gastritis” May Reflect Immune-Mediated Gastrointestinal Injury Gastric Intraepithelial Lymphocytes in Pediatric Celiac Disease 33 pediatric biopsies evaluated for gastric intraepithelial lymphocytes (IELs) – – – 23 patients with celiac disease 10 normal controls Assessed for IELs/100 epithelial cells Gluten Sensitivity Mean IELs (range) 21 (4-50) Controls P Value 3 (1-8) <0.01 – 70% of celiac disease cases had >8 IELs/100 epithelial cells – Re-biopsy after gluten withdrawal showed decreased gastric lymphocytosis (mean: 20 versus 4, n=4) Lymphocytic gastritis present in – 4% of patients with Helicobacter pylori infection – 33% of patients with celiac disease Alsaigh N, Odze R, Goldman H, Antonioli DA, Ott MJ, Leichtner A. Am J Surg Pathol 1996; 20: 865-870. Wu, T, Hamilton, S. Am J Surg Pathol 1999; 23(2): 153-158. Immune-Mediated Disorders May Manifest as Lymphocytic Colitis Ileal Lymphocytosis Occurs in “Microscopic” Colitis Mean Lymphocytic Colitis Collagenous Colitis Controls p Value 11.8+1.8 10.3+1.9 2.2+0.2 <0.01 Sapp H, Ithamukkala S, Brien TP, Ayata G, Shaz B, Dorfman DM, Wang HH, Antonioli DA, Farraye FA, Odze RD. Am J Surg Pathol 2002; 26:1484-1492. Manifestations of Immune-Mediated Diseases in the GI Tract Crohn’s Disease Celiac Disease Autoimmune Enteropathy Common Variable Immunodeficiency Chronic non-specific inflammation + + + + Chronic active gastritis, severe + - + + Lymphocytic gastritis - + + + Non-specific colitis + - + + Lymphocytic colitis + + + + Chronic colitis + - + + + + + + Stomach Colon Duodenum/jejunum Chronic enteritis with villous shortening Specific Interrelationships Celiac disease 0.85% Crohn’s disease Common variable immunodeficiency Jevremovic, D, et al. Am J Surg Pathol. 2006; 30 (11): 1412-1419. Leeds, JS, et al. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2007;42(10):1214-1220. Akram, S, et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2007; 4(11): 1282-90. Daniels, J, et al. Am J Surg Pathol. 2007;31(12):1800-12. 13% 1.7% 13% Evaluation of Small-Intestinal Mucosal Biopsies Checklist – Architecture – Distribution (diffuse or patchy) – Location of inflammation Superficial or deep lamina propria Surface, crypts or both – Nature of inflammation Lymphocyte predominant Neutrophilic cryptitis – Other abnormal features Apoptosis Infection (CMV) – Presence of normal elements Plasma cells Goblet, Paneth, endocrine cells Crohn’s Disease of the Proximal Small Bowel Bousvaros, A, Antonioli, DA, Colletti, RB, Dubinsky, MC, Glickman, JN, Gold, BD, Griffiths, AM, Jevon, GP, Higuchi, LM, Hyams, JS, Kirschner, BS, Kugathasan, S., Baldassano, RN, Russ, PA. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2007;44:653-674. Antonioli, DA. Pediatr Dev Pathol. 2005;8:2-19. Crohn’s Disease of the Proximal Small Bowel Histologic Features of Celiac Disease Antonioli, DA. Mod Pathol 2003; 16(4):342-346. Celiac Disease Autoimmune Enteropathy Autoimmune Enteropathy Common Variable Immunodeficiency Common Variable Immunodeficiency Common Variable Immunodeficiency Classification of Chronic Enteritis Crohn’s disease Mixed inflammation Multifocal neutrophilic cryptitis Granulomas Celiac disease Surface and crypt lymphocytosis No neutrophilic cryptitis Chronic enteritis with villous shortening and crypt hyperplasia Associated gastric and/or colonic injury Relative sparing of surface epithelium Crypt neutrophils Apoptosis Loss of goblet, endocrine, and Paneth cells Autoimmune enteropathy Relative sparing of surface epithelium Crypt neutrophils Apoptosis Lymphoid aggregates Decreased plasma cells Associated Giardia and/or CMV infection Common variable immunodeficiency Case Case Autoimmune Enteropathy Summary and Conclusions Contributions of Dr. Donald A. Antonioli The diagnostician – Methodical approach to mucosal biopsy analysis Villous architecture Distribution of disease Location of inflammation Nature of inflammation Presence of other features - Apoptosis or infection Presence of normal elements - Paneth, goblet, and plasma cells – Interpretation in combination with clinical features The educator – More than 100 lectures – 9 USCAP courses The academician – More than 100 original articles – More than 30 reviews and book chapters Many thanks to our teacher, colleague and friend & & Jeffrey D Goldsmith MD Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center Children’s Hospital Boston Harvard Medical School Boston, MA “PubMed = (“Allergic” or “Eosinophilic”) + “Esophagitis” 120 80 "Allergic" "Eosinophilic" 60 40 20 07 20 06 20 05 20 04 20 03 20 02 20 01 20 00 20 99 19 98 0 19 Number of Manuscripts 100 Histology of GERD v EE GERD EE pH Probe Testing PPI Therapy