Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28181994›Full record

ArticleClinical and translational gastroenterology2017

A Gene Expression Panel is Accurate for Diagnosis and Monitoring Treatment of Eosinophilic Esophagitis in Adults.

Evan S Dellon, Ranjitha Veerappan, Sara R Selitsky, Joel S Parker, Leana L Higgins, RoseMary Beitia, Robert M Genta, Richard H Lash

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical and translational gastroenterology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Article
  3. Emerging Tissue and Blood Biomarkers for Eosinophilic Esophagitis.Gastroenterology clinics of North America · 2026
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Pre-treatment differential correlation of gene expression and response to topical steroids in eosinophilic esophagitis.Diseases of the esophagus : official journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Conserved IFN Signature between Adult and Pediatric Eosinophilic Esophagitis.Journal of immunology (Baltimore, Md. : 1950) · 2021
    Observational
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. A Conceptual Approach to Understanding Treatment Response in Eosinophilic Esophagitis.Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2019
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Clinical and Molecular Factors Associated With Histologic Response to Topical Steroid Treatment in Patients With Eosinophilic Esophagitis.Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2019
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Gene expression-phenotype associations in adults with eosinophilic esophagitis.Digestive and liver disease : official journal of the Italian Society of Gastroenterology and the Italian Association for the Study of the Liver · 2018
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Evan S DellonCenter for Esophageal Diseases and Swallowing, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
Ranjitha VeerappanMiraca Life Sciences Research Institute, Irving, Texas, USA.
Sara R SelitskyDepartment of Genetics, University of Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
Joel S ParkerDepartment of Genetics, University of Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
Leana L HigginsCenter for Esophageal Diseases and Swallowing, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
RoseMary BeitiaCenter for Esophageal Diseases and Swallowing, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
Robert M GentaMiraca Life Sciences Research Institute, Irving, Texas, USA.
Richard H LashMiraca Life Sciences Research Institute, Irving, Texas, USA.
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · USThe University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center · US

Funding

Virology Research Program (Program 4)P30CA016086 · NCI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI Deborah F. Tate · 1985 to 2026
$201.5M
UNC-CH CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH &SUSCEPTIBILITYP30ES010126 · NIEHS · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI Melissa A. Troester · 2001 to 2026
$36.3M
PILOT AND FEASIBILITY STUDIESP30DK034987 · NIDDK · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI ROBERT S. SANDLER · 1985 to 2026
$30.5M
Risk Factors and Biomarkers for Diagnosis & Treatment of Eosinophilic EsophagitisK23DK090073 · NIDDK · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI DELLON, EVAN SAMUEL · 2011 to 2013
$541k
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016086NIDDK NIH HHS K23 DK090073NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK034987NIEHS NIH HHS P30 ES010126
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveEosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) can be difficult to diagnose. We aimed to evaluate whether a gene expression score could differentiate adult EoE cases from non-EoE controls and to determine whether scores normalized after treatment for EoE.

methodsWe analyzed prospectively collected esophageal biopsies from EoE patients (diagnosed as per consensus guidelines and after a proton pump inhibitor trial) and non-EoE controls. Gene expression for a previously constructed 94 gene panel was quantified for a single RNA-later preserved biopsy. For diagnosis, a summary expression score and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) were calculated. For treatment response (defined as <15 eosinophils per high-power field), pretreatment and posttreatment EoE samples were compared.

resultsFor 91 EoE cases and 174 controls, gene scores for EoE cases were lower than non-EoE controls (mean 198 vs. 420; P<0.001), with an AUC of 0.927. A score ≤263 yielded a positive predictive value=91%; a score ≥349 yielded a negative predictive value=90%; only 12% of subjects had an indeterminate score (264-348) by this classification scheme. For the 89 EoE cases with paired pretreatment and posttreatment samples, overall gene scores improved after treatment from 199 to 343 (P<0.001). This normalization was seen only in cases with histological response (202 vs. 425; P<0.001); scores were unchanged in non-responders (189 vs. 226; P=0.25).

conclusionsA gene expression score has high diagnostic utility for distinguishing EoE patients from non-EoE controls in adults and can be used in clinical algorithms. Because it is highly responsive to treatment, the test could be used to monitor disease status.

Identifiers

PMID28181994
PMCPMC5387749
OpenAlexW2586579106

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.