This was a randomized controlled trial of swallowed fluticasone vs. placebo for eosinophilic esophagitis. Eosinophilic esophagitis is an inflammatory condition in which the wall of the esophagus becomes filled with large numbers of eosinophils, a type of white blood cell. Patients who have this condition have difficulty in swallowing (dysphagia) solid food.

Prior to treatment the patients had biopsies of their esophagus and took questionnaires regarding their symptoms. Treatment was given for 6 weeks, after which biopsies were taken from the esophagus to measure any changes in the tissue from before treatment. The primary endpoint was improvement in dysphagia as measured by the validated Mayo Dysphagia Questionaire. Secondary outcomes included partial symptom response, and histologic (tissue) response to treatment.

This was a double-blind randomized placebo controlled trial to evaluate the effect of aerosolized fluticasone therapy on symptomatic dysphagia and histologic eosinophilia in adults newly diagnosed with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). Participants were randomized to receive aerosolized swallowed fluticasone 880 mcg bid or placebo inhaler swallowed bid for 6 weeks.

Four mid esophageal biopsies were obtained from 10 cm above the squamo-columnar junction; then formalin-fixed and stained with hematoxylin and eosin. All esophageal biopsies were read and scored by a single expert gastrointestinal pathologist. The formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded esophageal biopsies were retrieved and underwent standard major basic protein (MBP) immunofluorescence staining. All special stain slides were then read and scored by another pathologist. 24-hour urine was collected for free cortisol by the standard technique. The original endoscopy was performed before the patient was enrolled in the trial by standard clinical technique. The endoscopy post treatment was done in the clinical research unit by the principal investigator.

Patients kept compliance logs that were reviewed at phone interviews at 2 and 4 weeks time and at the end of study evaluation. Ninety percent compliance was required for study inclusion.

At the end of 6 weeks, a 24-hour urine cortisol was done, and patients underwent a repeat endoscopy while still on treatment. Mid-esophageal biopsies were obtained and evaluated for eosinophil density and mast cell degranulation. At this visit the patients returned dysphagia and side effects questionnaires.

Inclusion Criteria:

• > 20 eosinophils / hpf on biopsies from mid esophagus (hpf = high-powered field)
• Abnormal dysphagia questionnaire (question 1a "yes", question 1c > "moderate" and question 2 > "less than once a week") on Mayo Dysphagia Questionnaire.

Exclusion Criteria:

• Clinical evidence of infectious process potentially contributing to dysphagia (e.g., candidiasis, cytomegalovirus, herpes)
• Systemic or topical steroid therapy for any reason over the past 3 months
• Previous steroid treatment for Eosinophilic Esophagitis
• Intolerance to steroid therapy in the past
• Other cause of dysphagia identified at endoscopy (e.g., reflux esophagitis, stricture, web, ring, achalasia, esophageal neoplasm)
• Dilatation of esophagus at time of index endoscopy

8 weeks

Safety was assessed with the side effect questionnaire at weeks 2 and 4 completed by a structured phone interview. The side effect questionnaire had questions on sore throat, hoarseness, white spots in the mouth, irritability, leg swelling, sleep disturbance, appetite change, acne, headache, diarrhea, nausea, and other new symptoms.

The relatively small sample size; unexpected high dropout rate in the placebo group; study commenced before the consensus definition of EoE advising exclusion of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) was established.