Synopsis
Early authorities on eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) deemed it crucial to distinguish this disorder from gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). However, it has become clear that GERD and EoE are not mutually exclusive disorders, and that their interactions can be complex. The notion that GERD and EoE can be distinguished by the response to PPI treatment is based on the assumption that gastric acid suppression is the only important therapeutic effect of PPIs, and therefore only GERD can respond to PPIs. This assumption appears to be incorrect for two major reasons. First, there are multiple mechanisms whereby PPI-induced acid reduction might benefit patients with EoE. Second, PPIs have acid-independent, anti-inflammatory effects that might be beneficial both for GERD and for EoE. Since the PPIs have multiple effects that might benefit both diseases, for patients who have esophageal symptoms and esophageal eosinophilia, we feel that a clinical and/or histological response to PPIs does not rule in GERD, and does not rule out EoE. However, we do recommend a trial of PPI therapy for patients with symptomatic esophageal eosinophilia, even if the diagnosis of EoE seems clear-cut.
Keywords: gastroesophageal reflux disease, eosinophilic esophagitis, proton pump inhibitors, PPI-responsive esophageal eosinophilia
Introduction
Heartburn and dysphagia are frequent symptoms of both eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), and esophageal biopsies in both disorders can show epithelial infiltration by eosinophils. Therefore, it can sometimes be difficult to distinguish EoE from GERD. EoE was not described as a distinct clinico-pathological disorder until 1993,1 and confusion with GERD delayed appreciation that EoE was a burgeoning new esophageal ailment. Throughout the 1990s, pathologists and clinicians often attributed esophageal eosinophilia to GERD, and were either unaware of EoE or did not consider it seriously in the differential diagnosis.2 It was not until well into the new millennium, when a number of reports had accumulated describing patients with esophageal symptoms and eosinophilia refractory to anti-reflux therapy, but responsive to elemental diets and steroids, that clinicians generally became aware that EoE was a bona fide new disorder distinct from GERD.3–6
In 2007, a consensus report from the First International Gastrointestinal Eosinophil Research Subcommittee defined EoE as a primary clinicopathologic disorder of the esophagus characterized by esophageal and/or upper gastrointestinal symptoms, an esophageal biopsy showing ≥15 per high power field, and the absence of pathological GERD as evidenced by a normal esophageal pH monitoring study or lack of response to high-dose proton pump inhibitors (PPIs).7 This definition, which implied that EoE and GERD were mutually exclusive conditions, was formulated in an attempt to eliminate confusion between the two. However, other authorities soon challenged this definition, contending that the interactions between EoE and GERD could be complex, and that the notion of establishing a clear distinction between them was far too simplistic.8
A number of investigators chose simply to ignore the 2007 consensus definition and to include subjects with abnormal acid reflux in their series of patients with EoE.9–11 Others attempted to use clinical, endoscopic, histologic, and immunohistochemical features to distinguish GERD from EoE, with variable success.12–19 However, some of the histological and immunohistochemical differences described in those studies might have resulted merely from differences between GERD and EoE study subjects in their number of esophageal eosinophils rather than from differences in the disorders underlying the esophageal eosinophilia.20 In 2011, another consensus group (with the benefit of information on EoE pathogenesis not available in 2007) proposed a conceptual definition for EoE as “a chronic, immune/antigen-mediated esophageal disease characterized clinically by symptoms related to esophageal dysfunction and histologically by eosinophil-predominant inflammation.”21 This conceptual definition does not even mention GERD, and does not imply that GERD and EoE are mutually exclusive disorders.
Proposed Mechanisms Underlying an Association between Esophageal Eosinophilia and GERD
Four major mechanisms might explain an association between esophageal eosinophilia and GERD: 1) GERD causes esophageal eosinophilia in the absence of EoE, 2) GERD and EoE coexist but are unrelated, 3) EoE contributes to or causes GERD, 4) GERD contributes to or causes EoE.8
GERD causes esophageal eosinophilia in the absence of EoE
Since 1982, it has been appreciated that esophageal eosinophilia can be a manifestation of GERD.22 This eosinophilia is usually mild, with <7 eosinophils per high power field, and may occur because refluxed gastric juice stimulates the esophagus to produce substances that attract eosinophils. In cultures of human esophageal microvascular endothelial cells, acid exposure has been shown to induce the expression of VCAM-1, an adhesion molecule recognized by ligands on the eosinophil cell surface.23, 24 Studies using a preparation of human esophageal mucosa have found that acid stimulates the release of platelet activating factor (PAF), a phospholipid that can attract and activate eosinophils.25 Esophageal squamous epithelial cells in culture secrete IL-8 when they are exposed to acidified bile salts,26, 27 and HET-1A esophageal epithelial cells exposed to acid show upregulation of eotaxin-1, eotaxin-2, eotaxin-3 and macrophage inflammatory protein (MIP)-1α.28 Eotaxins and MIP-1α bind eosinophil chemokine receptors (CCR3 and CCR1, respectively) that play a key role in eosinophil chemotaxis.29 In patients with reflux esophagitis, furthermore, esophageal mucosal biopsy specimens show elevated levels of eosinophil chemoattractants such as IL-8 and RANTES.30 It is not known which, if any, of these factors underlie the esophageal eosinophilia of GERD.
GERD and EoE coexist but are unrelated
Since approximately 20% of adults in Western countries have GERD,31, 32 it would expected that, by chance alone, 20% of Western adults with EoE should have GERD. This might not be the case if GERD were to protect the esophagus from EoE but, presently, there is no evidence for such a protective effect. Indeed, some studies have suggested that pathological acid reflux is inordinately common in EoE.11, 33 For example, 24-hour esophageal pH monitoring revealed abnormal acid reflux in 10 (42%) of 24 adults with EoE in one study,33 and in 14 (56%) of 25 in another.11 Some studies have suggested that, unlike in adults, abnormal acid reflux is uncommon in pediatric patients with EoE.34–36 However, the accuracy of esophageal pH monitoring as a test for GERD in children is not well established.37 Further confounding interpretation of reports on the frequency of GERD in EoE is inconsistency among investigators regarding the criteria used to define EoE. According to the 2007 consensus statement, the frequency of abnormal acid reflux in EoE should be 0% since, by the 2007 definition, an abnormal esophageal pH monitoring study would preclude the diagnosis.7 The 2011 consensus definition has no such preclusion.21
EoE contributes to or causes GERD
Eosinophils produce a number of substances that might contribute to GERD by promoting gastroesophageal reflux and by impairing the ability of the esophagus to clear itself of noxious refluxed material. For example, eosinophils produce vasoactive intestinal peptide and PAF, which can reduce lower esophageal sphincter pressure and thereby predispose to reflux.38, 39 Eosinophils also secrete IL-6, a cytokine that weakens esophageal muscle contraction. This weak muscle contraction might impair peristalsis and delay esophageal acid clearance.40, 41 Furthermore, esophageal eosinophils can induce tissue remodeling with subepithelial fibrosis, and such fibrosis also conceivably might contribute to GERD by interfering with lower esophageal sphincter function and peristalsis.42
In addition to secreting substances that can promote reflux and delay esophageal acid clearance, eosinophils also produce cytotoxic substances that might render the esophageal epithelium more permeable and susceptible to injury by refluxed gastric material.43–46 For example, major basic protein has been shown to disrupt barrier function in monolayers of human colonic carcinoma cells.46 Eosinophil infiltration of the bronchial mucosa of asthmatic patients is associated with damage to cellular tight junctions and dilation of the intercellular spaces.47 Similar changes are found in the esophageal mucosa of patients with GERD, presumably as the result of acid-peptic damage to tight junctions. This tight junction damage increases mucosal permeability, which enables acid and other noxious molecules to reach nociceptors located deep in the epithelium, and these nociceptors might convey the sensation of heartburn.48 Perhaps increased mucosal permeability caused by cytotoxic eosinophil products underlies the hypersensitivity to esophageal acid perfusion that has been described in patients with EoE.49
GERD contributes to or causes EoE
While increased mucosal permeability caused by eosinophilia might contribute to GERD, it is also possible that increased esophageal mucosal permeability caused by GERD predisposes to the development of EoE. The normal esophageal mucosa is highly impermeable to large molecules like food allergens,50 which typically have a molecular weight between 3 and 90 kD.51 For example, Tobey et al. found that the normal rabbit esophagus was virtually impermeable to epidermal growth factor, a peptide with a molecular weight of 6 kD, and to dextrans with a molecular weight of 4 kD.50 After exposure to acid and pepsin, however, the rabbit esophageal mucosa became permeable to epidermal growth factor and to dextrans as large as 20 kD. By increasing esophageal permeability, therefore, GERD could render the squamous epithelium permeable to allergens that might cause EoE.
As discussed above, GERD might contribute to esophageal eosinophilia by inducing the expression of eosinophil chemoattractants. Refluxed gastric material also can cause the release of mast cell products and other substances that attract non-eosinophil immune cells to the esophagus, 26, 52 and it is conceivable that this immune response might contribute to the development of EoE. In addition, refluxed material can activate receptors that exacerbate EoE symptoms and inflammation. For example, reflux-induced activation of transient receptor potential cation channel, subfamily vanilloid member 1 (TRPV1) on esophageal neurons might contribute to the acid hypersensitivity that has been described in EoE patients,49 and activated TRPV1 has been linked to the release of eosinophil chemoattractants (IL-8, PAF, eotaxin-1, eotaxin-2, eotaxin-3, and MIP-1α) and other inflammatory mediators such as substance P and calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP). 28, 53 Also, the proteinase-activated receptor 2 (PAR2) on esophageal epithelial cells can be activated by refluxed proteolytic enzymes to cause production of IL-8.54–57
PPI-Responsive Esophageal Eosinophilia
Recent reports have described patients with a condition called “PPI-responsive esophageal eosinophilia” (PPI-REE).11, 21, 58–65 These patients have typical EoE symptoms and endoscopic abnormalities, no evidence of GERD by endoscopy or by esophageal pH/impedance monitoring, and nevertheless exhibit a clinical and histological response to PPI therapy. Studies in pediatric and adult patients with esophageal eosinophilia suggest that approximately 50% respond to PPIs, 11, 58, 60–65 and that no clinical or endoscopic feature independently distinguishes PPI responders from non-responders.64, 65 In some pediatric patients initially found to have PPI-REE, Dohil et al. observed the subsequent reaccumulation of eosinophils and other inflammatory cells in the esophagus over a period of 3 to 12 months despite ongoing PPI treatment.59 Thus, PPI-REE may be a transient condition. PPIs also might help to control esophageal symptoms, even if they do not cause resolution of esophageal eosinophilia. For example, Levine et al. found that PPI treatment of children with EoE failed to resolve their esophageal inflammation, but nevertheless resulted in long-term symptomatic improvement.61
It is possible that patients with PPI-REE simply have GERD that is not detected by conventional diagnostic tests, but that benefits from the acid-suppressive effects of PPIs. Alternatively, these patients may indeed have EoE or a related allergen-mediated process that responds to therapeutic effects of PPIs that are independent of gastric acid suppression (see below). Presently, the relative contributions of these acid-suppressive and acid-independent PPI actions are not clear.
Potential Acid-Dependent Effects of PPIs in Esophageal Eosinophilia
PPIs target gastric H+/K+-ATPase, the “proton pump” of the parietal cells responsible for gastric acid secretion. In the acidic environment of functioning parietal cells, PPIs are acid-activated and covalently bind to cysteine residues on the H+/K+-ATPase, rendering the pumps inactive.66 Without PPIs, the distal esophagus is exposed to refluxed acid for up to approximately 5% of the day in normal adults, and for 8% to 13% of the day in normal newborns and infants.67, 68 As discussed above, there are a number of mechanisms whereby acid reflux might contribute to esophageal eosinophilia and to esophageal infiltration by non-eosinophil immune cells. Thus, patients who have EoE and no evidence of GERD still might benefit from acid suppression to control their normal acid reflux.8 Additionally, patients with EoE can have hypersensitivity to acid-induced esophageal pain.49 Therefore, PPIs might provide symptomatic relief even for patients with “normal” esophageal acid exposure.
Potential Acid-Independent, Anti-Inflammatory Effects of PPIs in Esophageal Eosinophilia
PPIs might benefit patients with esophageal eosinophilia through effects that are entirely independent of gastric acid suppression. Th2 cytokines such as IL-4 and IL-13, which can be overproduced in allergic disorders, stimulate esophageal epithelial cells to secrete the potent eosinophil chemoattractant eotaxin-3.69–72 This mechanism is thought to contribute importantly to the esophageal eosinophilia of EoE. Two recent studies using esophageal epithelial cells in culture have shown that PPIs inhibit the Th2 cytokine-stimulated secretion of eotaxin-3.72, 73 This inhibition occurs with omeprazole in concentrations as low as 1μM, which are readily achieved in blood with conventional oral dosing, and with lansoprazole, suggesting a PPI drug class effect.74, 75 Mechanistically, the inhibitory effect of PPIs seem to involve chromatin remodeling of the eotaxin-3 promoter that blocks binding by its regulatory transcription factor STAT6, thereby reducing eotaxin-3 transcription.
The PPIs are pro-drugs that require acid activation to exert their anti-secretory and their anti-inflammatory effects.72, 73 This acid activation occurs readily in the acidic microenvironment of the functioning parietal cell, but it is not clear whether PPI acid activation can occur in the esophagus. Conceivably, gastroesophageal acid reflux might acidify the esophageal microenvironment sufficiently to achieve PPI acid activation. In addition, the Na+/H+ exchanger on esophageal epithelial cell membranes can extrude intracellular protons that accumulate in the setting of injury, thereby acidifying the microenvironment.76 Eosinophils and neutrophils can also release protons from their exocytic granules and lysosomes into the microenvironment,77–79 and microenvironment acidification has been well documented in the setting of inflammation.80–82 Thus, there are a number of plausible mechanisms whereby PPIs might be activated in the diseased esophagus of EoE.
Other Anti-inflammatory Effects of PPI
A number of other potentially beneficial, acid-independent, anti-inflammatory effects of PPIs have been described (Table 1).83 For example, PPIs have anti-oxidant properties including their ability to scavenge hydroxyl radicals, to increase the bioavailability of sulfhydryl compounds, and to induce heme oxygenase 1.84–88 PPIs can inhibit the oxidative burst, migration, and phagocytosis in neutrophils and monocytes.89–91 In epithelial cells and endothelial cells, PPIs can decrease expression of adhesion molecule and pro-inflammatory cytokines (e.g., IL-8, IL-6, tumor necrosis factor-α),83, 92, 93 and inhibit Th2 cytokine-driven STAT6 signaling.94 These acid-independent, anti-inflammatory effects could potentially benefit esophageal inflammation caused by GERD as well as by EoE.
Table 1.
Potential Mechanisms Underlying Beneficial PPI Effects in Esophageal Eosinophilia
Acid-Dependent Effects
|
|
Acid-Independent, Anti-Inflammatory Effects Effects on Epithelial Cells
|
Anti-Oxidant Effects
|
Effects on Inflammatory Cells (Neutrophils, Monocytes)
|
Effects on Endothelial Cells
|
PPI Use Might Predispose to the Development of EoE
Although PPIs are used to treat esophageal eosinophilia, there are also intriguing data to suggest that PPIs might predispose to the development of celiac disease, food allergies, and EoE.95, 96 The human diet contains numerous proteins with the potential to evoke immunological responses. Digestion of these potential food allergens normally begins in the stomach through the action of pepsin proteinases in acidic gastric juice.95, 97 By raising the gastric pH to levels above 4 at which pepsin activity ceases, PPIs might enable food allergens to escape peptic digestion. In addition, PPIs have been shown to increase gastric mucosal permeability,98, 99 which might facilitate the absorption of undigested food allergens and their exposure to the immune cells that mediate allergy development. Also, gastric acid suppression by PPIs causes changes in the microbiome of the upper gastrointestinal tract that conceivably could alter mucosal immune responses.100, 101
There is experimental and clinical evidence that PPI treatment can have immunological consequences. Untersmayr and her colleagues have shown that mice fed parvalbumin while treated with omeprazole develop parvalbumin-specific IgE antibodies,102 and that mice fed hazelnut extract while treated with omeprazole developed anaphylactogenic IgG1 antibodies and type I skin reactivity to hazelnut.103 In one study of 152 allergy-free adults who were treated with acid suppressive medications for 3 months, 10% showed a rise in blood IgE antibody levels and 15% developed new, food-specific IgE antibodies.104
PPIs were introduced into clinical practice in the United States in 1989, and the time course of their introduction and rising usage parallels the emergence and rising incidence of EoE. Although this association fits well with the hypothesis that PPIs play an etiological role in EoE, a plausible association does not establish cause and effect. Further studies on the role of PPIs in the development of EoE clearly are warranted. While it might seem paradoxical that a medication used to treat EoE also might cause EoE, there is no paradox because the proposed mechanisms are very different. A remote exposure to PPIs (e.g. in infancy or childhood) might trigger the food allergy that causes EoE, which might respond later to the anti-inflammatory effects of PPIs described above.
Conclusions
GERD and EoE are not mutually exclusive disorders, and their interactions can be complex. The notion that GERD and EoE can be distinguished by the response to PPI treatment is based on the assumption that gastric acid suppression is the only important therapeutic effect of PPIs, and therefore only GERD can respond to PPIs. This assumption appears to be incorrect for two major reasons. First, there are multiple mechanisms whereby PPI-induced acid reduction might benefit patients with EoE. Second, PPIs have acid-independent, anti-inflammatory effects that also might be beneficial both for GERD and for EoE. Since the PPIs have multiple effects that might benefit both diseases, for patients who have esophageal symptoms and esophageal eosinophilia, we feel that a clinical and/or histological response to PPIs does not rule in GERD, and does not rule out EoE. For these reasons, we recommend a trial of PPI therapy for patients with symptomatic esophageal eosinophilia, even if the diagnosis of EoE seems clear-cut.
Key Points.
EoE and GERD are not mutually exclusive disorders, and their interactions can be complex.
The notion that EoE and GERD can be distinguished by the response to PPI therapy has been challenged by the recognition of patients with PPI-responsive esophageal eosinophilia who exhibit a clinical and histological response to PPIs even though they have no evidence of GERD.
In addition to inhibiting gastric acid production, PPIs have acid-independent, anti-inflammatory effects.
Both the acid-inhibitory and the anti-inflammatory effects of PPIs might benefit patients with EoE as well as patients with GERD.
For patients with esophageal symptoms and eosinophilia, we feel that a clinical and/or histological response to PPIs does not rule in GERD, and does not rule out EoE.
Footnotes
Publisher's Disclaimer: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final citable form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
References
- 1.Attwood SE, Smyrk TC, Demeester TR, et al. Esophageal eosinophilia with dysphagia. A distinct clinicopathologic syndrome. Dig Dis Sci. 1993;38:109–16. doi: 10.1007/BF01296781. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.DeBrosse CW, Collins MH, Buckmeier Butz BK, et al. Identification, epidemiology, and chronicity of pediatric esophageal eosinophilia, 1982–1999. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2010;126:112–9. doi: 10.1016/j.jaci.2010.05.027. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Kelly KJ, Lazenby AJ, Rowe PC, et al. Eosinophilic esophagitis attributed to gastroesophageal reflux: improvement with an amino acid-based formula. Gastroenterology. 1995;109:1503–12. doi: 10.1016/0016-5085(95)90637-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Liacouras CA, Wenner WJ, Brown K, et al. Primary eosinophilic esophagitis in children: successful treatment with oral corticosteroids. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 1998;26:380–5. doi: 10.1097/00005176-199804000-00004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Ruchelli E, Wenner W, Voytek T, et al. Severity of esophageal eosinophilia predicts response to conventional gastroesophageal reflux therapy. Pediatr Dev Pathol. 1999;2:15–8. doi: 10.1007/s100249900084. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Teitelbaum JE, Fox VL, Twarog FJ, et al. Eosinophilic esophagitis in children: immunopathological analysis and response to fluticasone propionate. Gastroenterology. 2002;122:1216–25. doi: 10.1053/gast.2002.32998. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Furuta GT, Liacouras CA, Collins MH, et al. Eosinophilic esophagitis in children and adults: a systematic review and consensus recommendations for diagnosis and treatment. Gastroenterology. 2007;133:1342–63. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2007.08.017. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Spechler SJ, Genta RM, Souza RF. Thoughts on the complex relationship between gastroesophageal reflux disease and eosinophilic esophagitis. Am J Gastroenterol. 2007;102:1301–6. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2007.01179.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Rodrigo S, Abboud G, Oh D, et al. High intraepithelial eosinophil counts in esophageal squamous epithelium are not specific for eosinophilic esophagitis in adults. Am J Gastroenterol. 2008;103:435–42. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2007.01594.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Shah A, Kagalwalla AF, Gonsalves N, et al. Histopathologic variability in children with eosinophilic esophagitis. Am J Gastroenterol. 2009;104:716–21. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2008.117. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Peterson KA, Thomas KL, Hilden K, et al. Comparison of esomeprazole to aerosolized, swallowed fluticasone for eosinophilic esophagitis. Dig Dis Sci. 2010;55:1313–9. doi: 10.1007/s10620-009-0859-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Parfitt JR, Gregor JC, Suskin NG, et al. Eosinophilic esophagitis in adults: distinguishing features from gastroesophageal reflux disease: a study of 41 patients. Mod Pathol. 2006;19:90–6. doi: 10.1038/modpathol.3800498. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Bhattacharya B, Carlsten J, Sabo E, et al. Increased expression of eotaxin-3 distinguishes between eosinophilic esophagitis and gastroesophageal reflux disease. Hum Pathol. 2007;38:1744–53. doi: 10.1016/j.humpath.2007.05.008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Mueller S, Neureiter D, Aigner T, et al. Comparison of histological parameters for the diagnosis of eosinophilic oesophagitis versus gastro-oesophageal reflux disease on oesophageal biopsy material. Histopathology. 2008;53:676–84. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2559.2008.03187.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Dellon ES, Gibbs WB, Fritchie KJ, et al. Clinical, endoscopic, and histologic findings distinguish eosinophilic esophagitis from gastroesophageal reflux disease. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2009;7:1305–13. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2009.08.030. quiz 261. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Protheroe C, Woodruff SA, de Petris G, et al. A novel histologic scoring system to evaluate mucosal biopsies from patients with eosinophilic esophagitis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2009;7:749–55. e11. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2009.03.022. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Dellon ES, Chen X, Miller CR, et al. Tryptase staining of mast cells may differentiate eosinophilic esophagitis from gastroesophageal reflux disease. Am J Gastroenterol. 2011;106:264–71. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2010.412. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Dellon ES, Chen X, Miller CR, et al. Diagnostic utility of major basic protein, eotaxin-3, and leukotriene enzyme staining in eosinophilic esophagitis. Am J Gastroenterol. 2012;107:1503–11. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2012.202. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Mulder DJ, Hurlbut DJ, Noble AJ, et al. Clinical features distinguish eosinophilic and reflux-induced esophagitis. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2013;56:263–70. doi: 10.1097/MPG.0b013e3182794466. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Sridhara S, Ravi K, Smyrk TC, et al. Increased numbers of eosinophils, rather than only etiology, predict histologic changes in patients with esophageal eosinophilia. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2012;10:735–41. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2012.01.008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Liacouras CA, Furuta GT, Hirano I, et al. Eosinophilic esophagitis: updated consensus recommendations for children and adults. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2011;128:3–20. e6. doi: 10.1016/j.jaci.2011.02.040. quiz 21–2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Winter HS, Madara JL, Stafford RJ, et al. Intraepithelial eosinophils: a new diagnostic criterion for reflux esophagitis. Gastroenterology. 1982;83:818–23. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Rafiee P, Theriot ME, Nelson VM, et al. Human esophageal microvascular endothelial cells respond to acidic pH stress by PI3K/AKT and p38 MAPK-regulated induction of Hsp70 and Hsp27. Am J Physiol Cell Physiol. 2006;291:C931–45. doi: 10.1152/ajpcell.00474.2005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Barthel SR, Annis DS, Mosher DF, et al. Differential engagement of modules 1 and 4 of vascular cell adhesion molecule-1 (CD106) by integrins alpha4beta1 (CD49d/29) and alphaMbeta2 (CD11b/18) of eosinophils. J Biol Chem. 2006;281:32175–87. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M600943200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Cheng L, Cao W, Behar J, et al. Acid-induced release of platelet-activating factor by human esophageal mucosa induces inflammatory mediators in circular smooth muscle. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 2006;319:117–26. doi: 10.1124/jpet.106.106104. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Souza RF, Huo X, Mittal V, et al. Gastroesophageal reflux might cause esophagitis through a cytokine-mediated mechanism rather than caustic acid injury. Gastroenterology. 2009;137:1776–84. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2009.07.055. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Lampinen M, Rak S, Venge P. The role of interleukin-5, interleukin-8 and RANTES in the chemotactic attraction of eosinophils to the allergic lung. Clin Exp Allergy. 1999;29:314–22. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2222.1999.00390.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Ma J, Altomare A, Guarino M, et al. HCl-induced and ATP-dependent upregulation of TRPV1 receptor expression and cytokine production by human esophageal epithelial cells. Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol. 2012;303:G635–45. doi: 10.1152/ajpgi.00097.2012. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Luster AD, Rothenberg ME. Role of the monocyte chemoattractant protein and eotaxin subfamily of chemokines in allergic inflammation. J Leukoc Biol. 1997;62:620–33. doi: 10.1002/jlb.62.5.620. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Isomoto H, Wang A, Mizuta Y, et al. Elevated levels of chemokines in esophageal mucosa of patients with reflux esophagitis. Am J Gastroenterol. 2003;98:551–6. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2003.07303.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Locke GR, 3rd, Talley NJ, Fett SL, et al. Prevalence and clinical spectrum of gastroesophageal reflux: a population-based study in Olmsted County, Minnesota. Gastroenterology. 1997;112:1448–56. doi: 10.1016/s0016-5085(97)70025-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Shaheen N, Provenzale D. The epidemiology of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Am J Med Sci. 2003;326:264–73. doi: 10.1097/00000441-200311000-00002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Remedios M, Campbell C, Jones DM, et al. Eosinophilic esophagitis in adults: clinical, endoscopic, histologic findings, and response to treatment with fluticasone propionate. Gastrointest Endosc. 2006;63:3–12. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2005.07.049. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.Sant’Anna AM, Rolland S, Fournet JC, et al. Eosinophilic esophagitis in children: symptoms, histology and pH probe results. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2004;39:373–7. doi: 10.1097/00005176-200410000-00013. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35.Steiner SJ, Gupta SK, Croffie JM, et al. Correlation between number of eosinophils and reflux index on same day esophageal biopsy and 24 hour esophageal pH monitoring. Am J Gastroenterol. 2004;99:801–5. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2004.04170.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Steiner SJ, Kernek KM, Fitzgerald JF. Severity of basal cell hyperplasia differs in reflux versus eosinophilic esophagitis. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2006;42:506–9. doi: 10.1097/01.mpg.0000221906.06899.1b. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37.Vandenplas Y, Rudolph CD, Di Lorenzo C, et al. Pediatric gastroesophageal reflux clinical practice guidelines: joint recommendations of the North American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition (NASPGHAN) and the European Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition (ESPGHAN) J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2009;49:498–547. doi: 10.1097/MPG.0b013e3181b7f563. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Cheng L, Harnett KM, Cao W, et al. Hydrogen peroxide reduces lower esophageal sphincter tone in human esophagitis. Gastroenterology. 2005;129:1675–85. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2005.09.008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39.Farre R, Auli M, Lecea B, et al. Pharmacologic characterization of intrinsic mechanisms controlling tone and relaxation of porcine lower esophageal sphincter. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 2006;316:1238–48. doi: 10.1124/jpet.105.094482. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40.Cao W, Cheng L, Behar J, et al. IL-1beta signaling in cat lower esophageal sphincter circular muscle. Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol. 2006;291:G672–80. doi: 10.1152/ajpgi.00110.2006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41.Cao W, Cheng L, Behar J, et al. Proinflammatory cytokines alter/reduce esophageal circular muscle contraction in experimental cat esophagitis. Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol. 2004;287:G1131–9. doi: 10.1152/ajpgi.00216.2004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42.Cheng E, Souza RF, Spechler SJ. Tissue remodeling in eosinophilic esophagitis. Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol. 2012;303:G1175–87. doi: 10.1152/ajpgi.00313.2012. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43.Tai PC, Hayes DJ, Clark JB, et al. Toxic effects of human eosinophil products on isolated rat heart cells in vitro. Biochem J. 1982;204:75–80. doi: 10.1042/bj2040075. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44.Motojima S, Frigas E, Loegering DA, et al. Toxicity of eosinophil cationic proteins for guinea pig tracheal epithelium in vitro. Am Rev Respir Dis. 1989;139:801–5. doi: 10.1164/ajrccm/139.3.801. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45.Young JD, Peterson CG, Venge P, et al. Mechanism of membrane damage mediated by human eosinophil cationic protein. Nature. 1986;321:613–6. doi: 10.1038/321613a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 46.Furuta GT, Nieuwenhuis EE, Karhausen J, et al. Eosinophils alter colonic epithelial barrier function: role for major basic protein. Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol. 2005;289:G890–7. doi: 10.1152/ajpgi.00015.2005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 47.Ohashi Y, Motojima S, Fukuda T, et al. Relationship between bronchial reactivity to inhaled acetylcholine, eosinophil infiltration and a widening of the intercellular space in patients with asthma. Arerugi. 1990;39:1541–5. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 48.Orlando RC. Pathophysiology of gastroesophageal reflux disease. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2008;42:584–8. doi: 10.1097/MCG.0b013e31815d0628. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 49.Krarup AL, Villadsen GE, Mejlgaard E, et al. Acid hypersensitivity in patients with eosinophilic oesophagitis. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2010;45:273–81. doi: 10.3109/00365520903469931. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 50.Tobey NA, Hosseini SS, Argote CM, et al. Dilated intercellular spaces and shunt permeability in nonerosive acid-damaged esophageal epithelium. Am J Gastroenterol. 2004;99:13–22. doi: 10.1046/j.1572-0241.2003.04018.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 51.Untersmayr E, Jensen-Jarolim E. The effect of gastric digestion on food allergy. Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol. 2006;6:214–9. doi: 10.1097/01.all.0000225163.06016.93. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 52.Paterson WG. Role of mast cell-derived mediators in acid-induced shortening of the esophagus. Am J Physiol. 1998;274:G385–8. doi: 10.1152/ajpgi.1998.274.2.G385. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 53.Yoshida N, Kuroda M, Suzuki T, et al. Role of nociceptors/neuropeptides in the pathogenesis of visceral hypersensitivity of nonerosive reflux disease. Dig Dis Sci. 2013;58:2237–43. doi: 10.1007/s10620-012-2337-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 54.Kandulski A, Wex T, Monkemuller K, et al. Proteinase-activated receptor-2 in the pathogenesis of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Am J Gastroenterol. 2010;105:1934–43. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2010.265. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 55.Souza RF. Bringing GERD Management up to PAR-2. Am J Gastroenterol. 2010;105:1944–6. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2010.272. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 56.Yoshida N, Katada K, Handa O, et al. Interleukin-8 production via protease-activated receptor 2 in human esophageal epithelial cells. Int J Mol Med. 2007;19:335–40. doi: 10.3892/ijmm.19.2.335. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 57.Shan J, Oshima T, Chen X, et al. Trypsin impaired epithelial barrier function and induced IL-8 secretion through basolateral PAR-2: a lesson from a stratified squamous epithelial model. Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol. 2012;303:G1105–12. doi: 10.1152/ajpgi.00220.2012. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 58.Molina-Infante J, Ferrando-Lamana L, Ripoll C, et al. Esophageal eosinophilic infiltration responds to proton pump inhibition in most adults. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2011;9:110–7. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2010.09.019. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 59.Dohil R, Newbury RO, Aceves S. Transient PPI Responsive Esophageal Eosinophilia May Be a Clinical Sub-phenotype of Pediatric Eosinophilic Esophagitis. Dig Dis Sci. 2011 doi: 10.1007/s10620-011-1991-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 60.Dranove JE, Horn DS, Davis MA, et al. Predictors of response to proton pump inhibitor therapy among children with significant esophageal eosinophilia. J Pediatr. 2009;154:96–100. doi: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2008.07.042. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 61.Levine J, Lai J, Edelman M, et al. Conservative long-term treatment of children with eosinophilic esophagitis. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2012;108:363–6. doi: 10.1016/j.anai.2012.02.024. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 62.Moawad FJ, Veerappan GR, Dias JA, et al. Randomized controlled trial comparing aerosolized swallowed fluticasone to esomeprazole for esophageal eosinophilia. Am J Gastroenterol. 2013;108:366–72. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2012.443. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 63.Sayej WN, Patel R, Baker RD, et al. Treatment with high-dose proton pump inhibitors helps distinguish eosinophilic esophagitis from noneosinophilic esophagitis. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2009;49:393–9. doi: 10.1097/MPG.0b013e31819c4b3e. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 64.Schroeder S, Capocelli KE, Masterson JC, et al. Effect of proton pump inhibitor on esophageal eosinophilia. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2013;56:166–72. doi: 10.1097/MPG.0b013e3182716b7a. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 65.Dellon ES, Speck O, Woodward K, et al. Clinical and Endoscopic Characteristics do Not Reliably Differentiate PPI-Responsive Esophageal Eosinophilia and Eosinophilic Esophagitis in Patients Undergoing Upper Endoscopy: A Prospective Cohort Study. Am J Gastroenterol. 2013;108:1854–60. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2013.363. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 66.Sachs G, Shin JM, Howden CW. Review article: the clinical pharmacology of proton pump inhibitors. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2006;23 (Suppl 2):2–8. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2036.2006.02943.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 67.Richter JE, Bradley LA, DeMeester TR, et al. Normal 24-hr ambulatory esophageal pH values. Influence of study center, pH electrode, age, and gender. Dig Dis Sci. 1992;37:849–56. doi: 10.1007/BF01300382. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 68.Vandenplas Y, Goyvaerts H, Helven R, et al. Gastroesophageal reflux, as measured by 24-hour pH monitoring, in 509 healthy infants screened for risk of sudden infant death syndrome. Pediatrics. 1991;88:834–40. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 69.Straumann A, Bauer M, Fischer B, et al. Idiopathic eosinophilic esophagitis is associated with a T(H)2-type allergic inflammatory response. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2001;108:954–61. doi: 10.1067/mai.2001.119917. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 70.Straumann A, Kristl J, Conus S, et al. Cytokine expression in healthy and inflamed mucosa: probing the role of eosinophils in the digestive tract. Inflamm Bowel Dis. 2005;11:720–6. doi: 10.1097/01.mib.0000172557.39767.53. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 71.Blanchard C, Wang N, Stringer KF, et al. Eotaxin-3 and a uniquely conserved gene-expression profile in eosinophilic esophagitis. J Clin Invest. 2006;116:536–47. doi: 10.1172/JCI26679. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 72.Cheng E, Zhang X, Huo X, et al. Omeprazole blocks eotaxin-3 expression by oesophageal squamous cells from patients with eosinophilic oesophagitis and GORD. Gut. 2013;62:824–32. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2012-302250. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 73.Zhang X, Cheng E, Huo X, et al. Omeprazole blocks STAT6 binding to the eotaxin-3 promoter in eosinophilic esophagitis cells. PLoS One. 2012;7:e50037. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0050037. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 74.Li XQ, Andersson TB, Ahlstrom M, et al. Comparison of inhibitory effects of the proton pump-inhibiting drugs omeprazole, esomeprazole, lansoprazole, pantoprazole, and rabeprazole on human cytochrome P450 activities. Drug Metab Dispos. 2004;32:821–7. doi: 10.1124/dmd.32.8.821. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 75.Cederberg C, Thomson AB, Mahachai V, et al. Effect of intravenous and oral omeprazole on 24-hour intragastric acidity in duodenal ulcer patients. Gastroenterology. 1992;103:913–8. doi: 10.1016/0016-5085(92)90025-t. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 76.Tobey NA, Koves G, Orlando RC. Human esophageal epithelial cells possess an Na+/H+ exchanger for H+ extrusion. Am J Gastroenterol. 1998;93:2075–81. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.1998.00596.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 77.Kurashima K, Numata M, Yachie A, et al. The role of vacuolar H(+)-ATPase in the control of intragranular pH and exocytosis in eosinophils. Lab Invest. 1996;75:689–98. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 78.Lafourcade C, Sobo K, Kieffer-Jaquinod S, et al. Regulation of the V-ATPase along the endocytic pathway occurs through reversible subunit association and membrane localization. PLoS One. 2008;3:e2758. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0002758. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 79.Bankers-Fulbright JL, Kephart GM, Bartemes KR, et al. Platelet-activating factor stimulates cytoplasmic alkalinization and granule acidification in human eosinophils. J Cell Sci. 2004;117:5749–57. doi: 10.1242/jcs.01498. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 80.Dubos RJ. The micro-environment of inflammation or Metchnikoff revisited. Lancet. 1955;269:1–5. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(55)93374-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 81.Hunt JF, Fang K, Malik R, et al. Endogenous airway acidification. Implications for asthma pathophysiology. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2000;161:694–9. doi: 10.1164/ajrccm.161.3.9911005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 82.Ward TT, Steigbigel RT. Acidosis of synovial fluid correlates with synovial fluid leukocytosis. Am J Med. 1978;64:933–6. doi: 10.1016/0002-9343(78)90446-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 83.Kedika RR, Souza RF, Spechler SJ. Potential anti-inflammatory effects of proton pump inhibitors: a review and discussion of the clinical implications. Dig Dis Sci. 2009;54:2312–7. doi: 10.1007/s10620-009-0951-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 84.Takagi T, Naito Y, Yoshikawa T. The expression of heme oxygenase-1 induced by lansoprazole. J Clin Biochem Nutr. 2009;45:9–13. doi: 10.3164/jcbnSR09-28. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 85.Lapenna D, de Gioia S, Ciofani G, et al. Antioxidant properties of omeprazole. FEBS Lett. 1996;382:189–92. doi: 10.1016/0014-5793(96)00155-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 86.Blandizzi C, Fornai M, Colucci R, et al. Lansoprazole prevents experimental gastric injury induced by non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs through a reduction of mucosal oxidative damage. World J Gastroenterol. 2005;11:4052–60. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v11.i26.4052. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 87.Simon WA, Sturm E, Hartmann HJ, et al. Hydroxyl radical scavenging reactivity of proton pump inhibitors. Biochem Pharmacol. 2006;71:1337–41. doi: 10.1016/j.bcp.2006.01.009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 88.Biswas K, Bandyopadhyay U, Chattopadhyay I, et al. A novel antioxidant and antiapoptotic role of omeprazole to block gastric ulcer through scavenging of hydroxyl radical. J Biol Chem. 2003;278:10993–1001. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M210328200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 89.Wandall JH. Effects of omeprazole on neutrophil chemotaxis, super oxide production, degranulation, and translocation of cytochrome b-245. Gut. 1992;33:617–21. doi: 10.1136/gut.33.5.617. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 90.Agastya G, West BC, Callahan JM. Omeprazole inhibits phagocytosis and acidification of phagolysosomes of normal human neutrophils in vitro. Immunopharmacol Immunotoxicol. 2000;22:357–72. doi: 10.3109/08923970009016425. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 91.Ohara T, Arakawa T. Lansoprazole decreases peripheral blood monocytes and intercellular adhesion molecule-1-positive mononuclear cells. Dig Dis Sci. 1999;44:1710–5. doi: 10.1023/a:1026604203237. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 92.Sasaki T, Yamaya M, Yasuda H, et al. The proton pump inhibitor lansoprazole inhibits rhinovirus infection in cultured human tracheal epithelial cells. Eur J Pharmacol. 2005;509:201–10. doi: 10.1016/j.ejphar.2004.12.042. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 93.Yoshida N, Yoshikawa T, Tanaka Y, et al. A new mechanism for anti-inflammatory actions of proton pump inhibitors--inhibitory effects on neutrophil-endothelial cell interactions. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2000;14 (Suppl 1):74–81. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2036.2000.014s1074.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 94.Cortes JR, Rivas MD, Molina-Infante J, et al. Omeprazole inhibits IL-4 and IL-13 signaling signal transducer and activator of transcription 6 activation and reduces lung inflammation in murine asthma. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2009;124:607–10. 10 e1. doi: 10.1016/j.jaci.2009.06.023. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 95.Merwat SN, Spechler SJ. Might the use of acid-suppressive medications predispose to the development of eosinophilic esophagitis? Am J Gastroenterol. 2009;104:1897–902. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2009.87. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 96.Lebwohl B, Spechler SJ, Wang TC, et al. Use of proton pump inhibitors and subsequent risk of celiac disease. Dig Liver Dis. 2013 doi: 10.1016/j.dld.2013.08.128. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 97.Roberts NB. Review article: human pepsins - their multiplicity, function and role in reflux disease. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2006;24 (Suppl 2):2–9. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2036.2006.03038.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 98.Mullin JM, Valenzano MC, Whitby M, et al. Esomeprazole induces upper gastrointestinal tract transmucosal permeability increase. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2008;28:1317–25. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2036.2008.03824.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 99.Hopkins AM, McDonnell C, Breslin NP, et al. Omeprazole increases permeability across isolated rat gastric mucosa pre-treated with an acid secretagogue. J Pharm Pharmacol. 2002;54:341–7. doi: 10.1211/0022357021778583. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 100.Theisen J, Nehra D, Citron D, et al. Suppression of gastric acid secretion in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease results in gastric bacterial overgrowth and deconjugation of bile acids. J Gastrointest Surg. 2000;4:50–4. doi: 10.1016/s1091-255x(00)80032-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 101.Williams C, McColl KE. Review article: proton pump inhibitors and bacterial overgrowth. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2006;23:3–10. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2036.2006.02707.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 102.Untersmayr E, Scholl I, Swoboda I, et al. Antacid medication inhibits digestion of dietary proteins and causes food allergy: a fish allergy model in BALB/c mice. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2003;112:616–23. doi: 10.1016/s0091-6749(03)01719-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 103.Scholl I, Untersmayr E, Bakos N, et al. Antiulcer drugs promote oral sensitization and hypersensitivity to hazelnut allergens in BALB/c mice and humans. Am J Clin Nutr. 2005;81:154–60. doi: 10.1093/ajcn/81.1.154. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 104.Untersmayr E, Bakos N, Scholl I, et al. Anti-ulcer drugs promote IgE formation toward dietary antigens in adult patients. Faseb J. 2005;19:656–8. doi: 10.1096/fj.04-3170fje. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
