Comparison of Esomeprazole to Aerosolized, Swallowed Fluticasone for Eosinophilic Esophagitis

NCT ID: NCT00123656

Last Updated: 2008-01-16

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

PHASE2

Total Enrollment

30 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2004-08-31

Study Completion Date

2006-12-31

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EE) is a recently recognized entity. It has been thought to be related to both allergies and acid reflux. There have been reports that both swallowed, aerosolized steroids and proton pump inhibitors have been effective treatments. The researchers propose to directly compare the efficacy of aerosolized fluticasone to esomeprazole in the treatment of eosinophilic esophagitis. The hypothesis is that aerosolized fluticasone (Flovent) will be more effective in relieving symptoms of EE than esomeprazole (Nexium) treatment. Patients will undergo endoscopy, pH monitoring and manometry for diagnosis. Following diagnosis of EE by pathology (biopsy of esophagus), patients will be randomized to esomeprazole or swallowed fluticasone for 8 weeks. At the end of 8 weeks, subjects will be asked to repeat upper endoscopy with biopsies. Three questionnaires (dysphagia, gastroesophageal reflux disease \[GERD\], and allergy) will be completed by the patient at the first endoscopy and at the end endoscopy. The primary objective is to measure change in eosinophil infiltration of the esophagus in response to treatment of allergy (swallowed fluticasone) versus treatment for reflux (esomeprazole) in EE patients.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

This is a randomized, non-blinded, multicenter treatment trial to demonstrate and compare the efficacy of esomeprazole and fluticasone in the treatment of eosinophilic esophagitis.

Following the initial diagnostic EGD with four quadrant biopsy, serum eosinophil count and serum IgE levels will be measured. Patients will undergo 24 hour pH study to determine the incidence of reflux in this population. Clinical assessment will be performed with validated questionnaires quantifying dysphagia, GERD, and allergy/atopy. Patients will be randomized to 8 weeks of either esomeprazole versus swallowed aerosolized fluticasone. After 8 weeks of therapy, upper endoscopy will again be performed. Eosinophils per high power field will be quantified, and biopsies will be stained for major basic protein. Dysphagia, GERD, and allergy/atopy questionnaires will be repeated, as will serum eosinophil counts and IgE measurements.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Esophagitis

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

NONE

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

1

fluticasone

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

fluticasone

Intervention Type DRUG

fluticasone dosed 220 mcg 2 puffs swallowed BID for 8 weeks

2

esomeprazole

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

esomeprazole

Intervention Type DRUG

esomeprazole dosed qam for 8 weeks

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

esomeprazole

esomeprazole dosed qam for 8 weeks

Intervention Type DRUG

fluticasone

fluticasone dosed 220 mcg 2 puffs swallowed BID for 8 weeks

Intervention Type DRUG

Other Intervention Names

Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.

Nexium Flovent

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* Patients aged 18-80 with EE, defined as: a) dysphagia, food impaction or other upper gastrointestinal symptoms (chest pain, heartburn, regurgitation); b) multiple esophageal rings or furrows; c) the presence of \>20 eosinophils/high power field in the squamous epithelium or deeper tissues of the esophagus
* Ability to undergo esophageal manometry and ambulatory pH monitoring
* No history of bleeding diathesis, significant cardiopulmonary disease, or other contraindication to upper endoscopy
* Those who have had a one month holiday from either esomeprazole therapy or fluticasone if they have been prescribed this prior to enrollment

Exclusion Criteria

* Contraindication to proton pump inhibitors or swallowed fluticasone
* Need for immediate esophageal dilation at enrollment due to food impaction at the discretion of the performing endoscopist
* Inability to pass endoscope
* Pregnancy
* Incarceration
* Inability to provide informed consent
* History of esophago-gastric surgery or prior history of abdominal surgery with subsequent strictures or symptoms of obstruction such as abdominal pain and bloating
* Presence of other esophageal pathology that could account for patients' symptoms as determined by histological interpretation by the pathologist
* History of esophageal spasm resulting in trouble swallowing foods larger than 1 cm in diameter
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Maximum Eligible Age

80 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

OTHER

Sponsor Role collaborator

University of Utah

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

University of Utah HSC

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

John C. Fang, M.D.

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

University of Utah HSC

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

University of Utah HSC

Salt Lake City, Utah, United States

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

United States

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

12790

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.