4.7 Article

Clinical, pathologic, and molecular characterization of familial eosinophilic esophagitis compared with sporadic cases

期刊

CLINICAL GASTROENTEROLOGY AND HEPATOLOGY
卷 6, 期 6, 页码 621-629

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2008.01.004

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIAID NIH HHS [U19 AI070235-030002, U19 AI070235, U19 AI070235-020002, U19 AI070235-010002] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background & Aims: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EE) occurs in families. Methods: Record review confirmed patient kinship and provided clinical information. Slide review confirmed the diagnosis (threshold peak number :24 eosinophils/high-power field). Results: Fifty-nine members (41 males, 18 females) of 26 families were 3 months to 47 years of age (mean age, 10.3 y) at diagnosis. The only recorded race was Caucasian. In 4 families a parent of an affected male had EE. The most common complaint at diagnosis was dysphagia (68% of patients). Endoscopy showed esophageal mucosal furrows (93% of patients) and exudates (44%). Fifty-one percent had asthma. Skin prick tests to food and aeroallergens were positive in 76% and 71%, respectively. Familial EE characteristics (clinical, endoscopic, pathologic, and global esophageal transcript expression profile analysis) were similar to sporadic EE, except among patients with mucosal furrows: familial patients had lower peak eosinophil counts in the distal esophagus (P = .03) compared with sporadic patients. The basic characteristics of EE (eg, eosinophil levels, rate of atopy) did not vary with patient age. By using genome-wide microarray analysis, no significant differences (P < .05, false-discovery rate) were observed between familial and sporadic EE. Among all patients, chest pain was more common in females (P = .02), and thickened mucosa was more common in males (P = .006). Conclusions: These data support a familial pattern of inheritance of EE and a pathogenesis shared with sporadic EE. EE should be considered in symptomatic family members of patients who have EE.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据