Efficacy of endoscopic screening in an isolated island: a case-control study

Current Status of Gastric Cancer Screening and Future Perspectives

Gastric cancer (GC) remains a major global health concern, particularly in East Asia, Central Asia, and Eastern Europe, where its incidence and mortality rates are high. Helicobacter pylori infection is the primary cause of GC and leads to carcinogenic progression from nonatrophic gastritis to cancer. Although screening programs have been implemented in high-risk countries, such as Japan and South Korea, comprehensive strategies remain limited globally. This study reviewed the status of GC screening worldwide and prevention strategies in regions with different risks. Various GC screening methods have been developed, including H. pylori serology, serum pepsinogen testing, upper gastrointestinal contrast radiography, and endoscopy. Endoscopic screening has shown superior sensitivity and specificity, reducing GC mortality by up to 47% in South Korea and demonstrating higher detection rates than upper gastrointestinal contrast radiography and pepsinogen testing. However, cost-effectiveness remains a challenge, particularly in Western countries where the overall GC prevalence is lower. Risk stratification using a combination of H. pylori serology and pepsinogen testing has been adopted in Japan to optimize screening efficiency. Additionally, H. pylori eradication has been recognized as a cost-effective strategy to reduce the incidence of GC with economic benefits demonstrated in Japan and other high-risk regions. In the United States, targeted screening of high-risk immigrant populations has been suggested to enhance cost-effectiveness. GC screening strategies should consider developing epidemiological trends, cost-effectiveness, and risk-based approaches. Future efforts should focus on expanding targeted screening initiatives to high-risk groups to improve early detection and survival rates.

Asia-Pacific Survey on the Management of Helicobacter pylori Infection

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Gastric cancer (GC)-related incidence and mortality rates remain high owing to Helicobacter pylori infection in Asia, and the importance of primary and secondary prevention of GC has been well recognized. We aimed to investigate the extent of overall agreement among clinicians in the Asia-Pacific region regarding the management of H. pylori infection.

METHODS

The Upper Gastrointestinal (GI) Focus Group of the Asian Pacific Association of Gastroenterology-Emerging Leaders Committee developed an international survey, which was distributed to 98 clinicians in the Asia-Pacific region, compromising an online questionnaire focusing on the management of H. pylori infection.

RESULTS

Participants responded from Japan (15, 15.3%), Hong Kong (15, 15.3%), Thailand (33, 33.7%), Vietnam (23, 23.5%), Malaysia (4, 4.1%), Singapore (3, 3.1%), and others (5, 5.1%). The most common first-line eradication regimen was clarithromycin (CAM) triple therapy, including proton pump inhibitor (PPI), amoxicillin (AMPC), and CAM (64.3%) for 14 days (70.4%). The most common second-line eradication regimen was levofloxacin (LVX) triple therapy, including PPI, AMPC, and LVX (22.4%) for 14 days (67.3%). Eradication therapy was deemed necessary for all asymptomatic adults and minors (aged ≤ 17 years) currently infected with H. pylori by 81.6% and 64.3% of respondents, respectively, with 82.7% considering upper GI endoscopy for GC screening useful in the secondary prevention of GC.

CONCLUSION

There appears to be a growing consensus among clinicians, acknowledging the necessity of eradication therapy. We anticipate that this study will establish a new benchmark in preventive medicine aimed at eradicating GC in the Asia-Pacific region.

Efficacy evaluation of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy screening for secondary prevention of gastric cancer using the standardized detection ratio during a medical check-up in Japan

We used standardized detection ratio to evaluate the quality of nasal upper gastrointestinal endoscopy screening for the secondary prevention of gastric cancer, and examined the gastric cancer risk in the era of total Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) eradication. We performed 21,931 upper gastrointestinal endoscopies, 77 subjects were diagnosed with gastric cancer. Of these, 28 had gastric cancer after H. pylori eradication, 47 had gastric cancer with H. pylori-positive or others, and 2 had H. pylori-negative gastric cancer. The Standardized detection ratios for men and women were 5.33 and 4.82, respectively. Multivariable logistic regression analyses performed exclusively on first endoscopy subjects, excluding H. pylori-negative gastric cancer, revealed that smoking was a risk factor for developing gastric cancer (adjusted odds ratio, 3.31; 95% confidence interval, 1.65-6.64; p = 0.001). A statistically significant interaction was found between daily alcohol consumpption and H. pylori eradication on gastric cancer development (p = 0.005). In conclusion, relatively high standardized detection ratio values suggest that an appropriate endoscopic diagnosis of gastric cancer should be performed during a medical check-up. Smoking is a risk factor for developing gastric cancer, and continued alcohol consumption suggests a possible risk for developing gastric cancer after H. pylori eradication.

Clinicopathologic differences of gastric neoplasms between Helicobacter pylori-infected and -naïve patients: a multicenter retrospective analysis

BACKGROUND

The incidence of gastric neoplasms in Helicobacter pylori (Hp)-naïve patients has recently increased due to a remarkable decrease in the Hp-infected population in Japan. We investigated the clinicopathologic differences between Hp-infected gastric neoplasms (HpIGNs) and Hp-naïve gastric neoplasms (HpNGNs) that have not been fully elucidated so far.

METHODS

This retrospective multicenter study investigated 966 consecutive patients with 1131 gastric dysplasia or cancers who underwent endoscopic or surgical treatment for the recent decade. Clinicopathologic features were compared between HpIGN and HpNGN cases.

RESULTS

One thousand and sixty-eight HpIGNs in 916 patients included 877 differentiated types and 191 undifferentiated types. Sixty-three HpNGNs in 50 patients included 57 differentiated types (35 foveolar types, 15 intestinal types, 6 fundic-gland types, and 1 other differentiated type) and 6 undifferentiated types. HpNGNs occurred in younger (59.5 vs. 71.8 years, p < 0.05) and female patients (40.0% vs. 26.5%, p < 0.05), were found more frequently in the proximal compartment (p < 0.05), and had smaller size (median 4.0 vs. 20.0 mm, p < 0.05). Histologically, HpNGNs and HpIGNs both primarily consisted of differentiated type (90.5% vs. 82.1%, p = 0.089) and HpNGNs showed lower prevalence of invasive cancer (11.1% vs. 37.6%, p < 0.05) and lymphovascular invasion (1.6% vs. 31.6%, p < 0.05). Nearly all HpNGNs (62/63, 98.4%) were diagnosed in early pathological stage, while 16.1% (172/1068) of HpIGNs were diagnosed in advanced stage (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

HpNGNs is recently on the increase but shows lower malignant nature regardless of histologic type than HpIGN. Endoscopic gastric cancer screening will be reviewed via cost effectiveness for Hp-naïve individuals in future.

Environmental and Genetic Risk Factors for Gastric Cancer

Gastric cancer is a heterogeneous and prevalent disease. The traditional environmental exposures associated with elevated risk of gastric cancer are less prevalent in the USA today. Genetic risks and risks associated with inflammation remain. Most cases are sporadic, and familial clustering is observed in about 10% of the cases. Hereditary gastric cancer accounts for a very low percentage of cases. Here we review the genetic and environmental risk factors associated with the disease. In addition, we will review screening guidelines and current modalities that are available for screening in high-risk populations.

Expression of Serpin Family E Member 1 (SERPINE1) Is Associated with Poor Prognosis of Gastric Adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

The aberrant expression of serpin family E member 1 (SERPINE1) is associated with carcinogenesis. This study assessed the alteration of SERPINE1 expression for an association with gastric adenocarcinoma prognosis.

METHODS

The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) dataset was applied to investigate the impact of SERPINE1 expression on the survival of patients afflicted with gastric cancer. Subsequently, 136 samples from the Affiliated Huaian No. 1 People's Hospital of Nanjing Medical University were subjected to qRT-PCR and Western blot to validate the expression level of SERPINE1 between tumor and adjacent normal tissues. The correlation between the expression of SERPINE1 with the clinicopathological features in TCGA patients was analyzed using Wilcoxon signed-rank and logistic regression tests. The potential molecular mechanism associated with SERPINE1 expression in gastric cancer were confirmed using gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA).

RESULTS

The TCGA data showed that SERPINE1 was overexpressed in tumor tissues compared to normal mucosae and associated with the tumor T stage and pathological grade. SERPINE1 overexpression was associated with the poor overall survival (OS) of patients. The findings were confirmed with 136 patients, that is, SERPINE1 expression was associated with poor OS (hazard ratio (HR): 1.82; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.84-1.83; p = 0.012)) as an independent predictor (HR: 2.11, 95% CI: 0.81-2.34; p = 0.009). The resulting data were further processed by GSEA showed that SERPINE1 overexpression was associated with the activation of EPITHELIAL_MESENCHYMAL_TRANSITION, TNFA_SIGNALING_VIA_NFKB, INFLAMMATORY_RESPONSE, ANGIOGENESIS, and HYPOXIA.

CONCLUSIONS

SERPINE1 overexpression is associated with a poor gastric cancer prognosis.

Radiographic and endoscopic screening to reduce gastric cancer mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Previous systematic reviews naïvely combined biased effects of screening radiography or endoscopy observed in studies with various designs. We aimed to synthesize currently available comparative data on gastric cancer mortality in healthy, asymptomatic adults by explicitly classifying the screening effects through study designs and types of intervention effects.

METHODS

We searched multiple databases through October 31, 2022 for this systematic review and meta-analysis. Studies of any design that compared gastric cancer mortality among radiographic or endoscopic screening and no screening in a community-dwelling adult population were included. The method included a duplicate assessment of eligibility, double extraction of summary data, and validity assessment using the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions tool. Bayesian three-level hierarchical random-effects meta-analysis synthesized data corrected for self-selection bias on the relative risk (RR) for per-protocol (PP) and intention-to-screen (ITS) effects. The study registration number at PROSPERO is CRD42021277126.

FINDINGS

We included seven studies in which a screening program was newly introduced (median attendance rate, 31%; at moderate-to-critical risk of bias), and seven cohort and eight case-control studies with ongoing screening programs (median attendance rate, 21%; all at critical risk of bias); thus, data of 1,667,117 subjects were included. For the PP effect, the average risk reduction was significant for endoscopy (RR 0.52; 95% credible interval: 0.39-0.79) but nonsignificant for radiography (0.80; 0.60-1.06). The ITS effect was not significant for both radiography (0.98; 0.86-1.09) and endoscopy (0.94; 0.71-1.28). The magnitude of the effects depended on the assumptions for the self-selection bias correction. Restricting the scope to East Asian studies only did not change the results.

INTERPRETATION

In limited-quality observational evidence from high-prevalence regions, screening reduced gastric cancer mortality; however, the effects diminished at a program level.

FUNDING

National Cancer Center Japan; and Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development.

Risk and prognostic factors of invasive gastric cancer detection during surveillance endoscopy: Multi-institutional cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVES

Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) is important for the detection of curable gastric cancer (GC). However, there are no appropriate surveillance data during routine endoscopic inspections. This study aimed to clarify the risk factors of pT1b or deeper GC detection during surveillance endoscopy.

METHODS

This was a retrospective, multicenter, cross-sectional study conducted in 15 Japanese hospitals. We retrospectively analyzed patients with GC who had previously undergone surveillance endoscopy at each institution from January 2014 to March 2020. Patients who had undergone gastrectomy, non-infection of Helicobacter pylori (Hp), and those with intervals <3 months or >10 years from a previous endoscopy were excluded.

RESULTS

In total, 1085 patients with GCs detected during surveillance endoscopy were enrolled. The multivariate logistic analysis revealed that current Hp infection (odds ratio [OR] 2.18; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.50-3.16) and a surveillance interval of >1.5 years (OR 1.96; 95% CI 1.35-2.84) were independent risk factors for pT1b or deeper GC. The 5-year disease-specific survival (5y-DSS) rate of GC was significantly lower in patients with surveillance interval of >1.5 years than in those with surveillance interval of ≤1.5 years (93.7% vs. 98.3%, P < 0.001). Similarly, the 5y-DSS rate of GC was significantly lower in patients with active Hp infection than in those without (93.7% vs. 99.4%, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

In this study, a surveillance interval of >1.5 years and current Hp infection were independent risk factors for detecting pT1b or deeper GC. Additionally, these factors were poor prognostic factors of the detected GC during surveillance endoscopy.

Forthcoming Step in Gastric Cancer Prevention: How Can Risk Stratification Be Combined with Endoscopic Screening for Gastric Cancer?

Although the concern for gastric cancer prevention has increased, gastric cancer has remained a heavy burden worldwide and is not just a local issue in East Asian countries. However, as several screening programs (listed below) have shown some success, it is important to determine whether the situation is changing in some other countries and whether similar methods should be recommended. Endoscopic screening has been performed as a national program in South Korea and Japan, and the results have shown a reduction in gastric cancer mortality. Although the efficacy of Helicobacter pylori eradication has been established, the efficacy of the screen-and-treat strategy is presently being evaluated in randomized controlled trials. The serum pepsinogen test and endoscopic examination can divide high-risk subjects with severe gastric atrophy from average-risk subjects. Risk stratification is anticipated to contribute to an efficient method of prediction of gastric cancer development when combined with endoscopic screening. Countries with a high incidence rate should realize the immediate need to reduce gastric cancer death directly by endoscopic screening and should recognize screen-and-treat as a second option to reduce future risk. However, all forms of gastric cancer prevention programs have some harms and potential to increase unnecessary examinations. A balance of the benefits and harms should be always considered. Although further study is needed to obtain sufficient evidence for gastric cancer prevention, the best available method should be examined in the context of each country.

Assigning a different endoscopist for each annual follow-up may contribute to improved gastric cancer detection rates

Background and study aims  Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) is an effective and important diagnostic tool to detect gastric cancer (GC). Although previous studies show that examiner, patient, and instrumental factors influence the detection of GC, we analyzed whether assigning a different examiner to surveillance EGD would improve the detection of GC compared to assigning the same examiner as in the previous endoscopy. Patients and methods  We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent two or more consecutive surveillance EGDs at a single center between 2017 and 2019. We identified factors associated with GC detection using multivariable regression analysis and propensity-score matching. Results  Among 7794 patients, 99 GC lesions in 93 patients were detected by surveillance EGD (detection rate; 1.2 %), with a mean surveillance interval of 11.2 months. Among the detected 99 lesions, 87 (87.9 %) were curatively treated with endoscopy. There were no differences in the clinicopathologic characteristics of GC detected by the same or different endoscopists. GC detection in the group examined by different endoscopists was more statistically significant than in the group examined by the same endoscopist, even after propensity-score matching (1.6 % and 0.7 %; P  < 0.05). Endoscopic experience and other factors were not statistically significant between the two groups. Conclusions  In surveillance EGD, having a different endoscopist for each exam may improve GC detection rates, regardless of the endoscopist's experience.

An Approach to the Primary and Secondary Prevention of Gastric Cancer in the United States

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Gastric cancer (GC) remains a leading cause of mortality among certain racial, ethnic, and immigrant groups in the United States (US). The majority of GCs are diagnosed at advanced stages, and overall survival remains poor. There exist no structured national strategies for GC prevention in the US.

METHODS

On March 5-6, 2020 a summit of researchers, policy makers, public funders, and advocacy leaders was convened at Stanford University to address this critical healthcare disparity. After this summit, a writing group was formed to critically evaluate the effectiveness, potential benefits, and potential harms of methods of primary and secondary prevention through structured literature review. This article represents a consensus statement prepared by the writing group.

RESULTS

The burden of GC is highly inequitably distributed in the US and disproportionately falls on Asian, African American, Hispanic, and American Indian/Alaskan Native populations. In randomized controlled trials, strategies of Helicobacter pylori testing and treatment have been demonstrated to reduce GC-specific mortality. In well-conducted observational and ecologic studies, strategies of endoscopic screening have been associated with reduced GC-specific mortality. Notably however, all randomized controlled trial data (for primary prevention) and the majority of observational data (for secondary prevention) are derived from non-US sources.

CONCLUSIONS

There exist substantial, high-quality data supporting GC prevention derived from international studies. There is an urgent need for cancer prevention trials focused on high-risk immigrant and minority populations in the US. The authors offer recommendations on how strategies of primary and secondary prevention can be applied to the heterogeneous US population.

Effectiveness of endoscopic screening for gastric cancer: The Japan Public Health Center-based Prospective Study

Upper gastrointestinal endoscopy for gastric cancer screening has been implemented in Japan. However, its effectiveness for gastric cancer prevention has not been fully studied. We aimed to investigate the effectiveness of endoscopic screening to reduce mortality from gastric cancer. In a large prospective population‐based cohort study including 80,272 participants, we compared the risk of mortality and incidence of gastric cancer among participants who underwent endoscopic or radiographic screening compared with those who did not undergo any screening using multivariable Cox proportional hazards models. In the 1,023,364 person‐year observation period (median; 13.0 years), 1977 cases of gastric cancer were diagnosed, and 783 patients with gastric cancer died. In the endoscopic screening group, the mortality from gastric cancer and incidence of advanced gastric cancer were reduced by 61% (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.39 [95% CI: 0.30–0.51]) and 22% (HR = 0.78 [95% CI: 0.67–0.90]), respectively. The radiographic screening reduced the mortality from gastric cancer (HR = 0.63 [95% CI: 0.54–0.73]), but its effectiveness was lower than that of endoscopic screening. In conclusion, endoscopic screening reduced the incidence of advanced gastric cancer and mortality from gastric cancer in the Japanese population.

Gastric Cancer Screening in Japan: A Narrative Review

Gastric cancer is the second leading cause of cancer incidence in Japan, although gastric cancer mortality has decreased over the past few decades. This decrease is attributed to a decline in the prevalence of H. pylori infection. Radiographic examination has long been performed as the only method of gastric screening with evidence of reduction in mortality in the past. The revised 2014 Japanese Guidelines for Gastric Cancer Screening approved gastric endoscopy for use in population-based screening, together with radiography. While endoscopic gastric cancer screening has begun, there are some problems associated with its implementation, including endoscopic capacity, equal access, and cost-effectiveness. As H. pylori infection and atrophic gastritis are well-known risk factors for gastric cancer, a different screening method might be considered, depending on its association with the individual's background and gastric cancer risk. In this review, we summarize the current status and problems of gastric cancer screening in Japan. We also introduce and discuss the results of gastric cancer screening using H. pylori infection status in Hoki-cho, Tottori prefecture. Further, we review risk stratification as a system for improving gastric cancer screening in the future.

Identification of Helicobacter pylori-related gastric cancer risk using serological gastritis markers and endoscopic findings: a large-scale retrospective cohort study

Background

Gastric cancer remains a severe public health problem worldwide, particularly in Japan. Recent studies have demonstrated that serum markers are beneficial for risk stratification in gastric cancer development. We aimed to evaluate the usefulness of serum markers either alone or in combination (serum markers plus endoscopy) for effective risk stratification of gastric cancer development.

Methods

We enrolled 22,736 patients aged 20–95 years who underwent blood sampling and endoscopic examination at Hiroshima University Hospital in Japan between 1990 and 2014. The serum pepsinogen (PG) levels and anti-Helicobacter pylori antibody (Hp-Ab) titers were evaluated in each patient. The enrolled patients were matched with the database of the Hiroshima Prefecture Regional Cancer Registry. We processed the medical records and excluded patients with possible confounding factors for PG levels, such as proton pump inhibitor use, prior successful eradication therapy, post-gastrectomy, severe hepatorenal dysfunction, Zollinger–Ellison syndrome, and autoimmune gastritis. Among the remaining 5131 patients, we reviewed records of endoscopic examinations and selected 1507 patients (mean age, 62.5 years; 985 men and 522 women) who underwent endoscopic examination more than three months after blood sampling.

First, based on the ABC method, patients were classified as follows: High PG levels and negative Hp-Ab, group A, high PG levels and positive Hp-Ab, group B, low PG levels and positive Hp-Ab, group C, and low PG levels and negative Hp-Ab, group D. Group A was further classified into two subgroups using endoscopic findings: true A without atrophic gastritis and pseudo A with atrophic gastritis. All patients underwent annual endoscopy follow-up.

Results

Among the 1,507 patients (mean age, 62.5 years; 985 men), 24 were diagnosed with newly developed gastric cancer. No significant difference in cancer development was found between group A (PG negative and Hp-Ab negative) and the other groups. Remarkably, no true A group subjects developed gastric cancer.

Conclusions

The combination of serum markers and endoscopic findings is essential for the risk evaluation of gastric cancer.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12876-022-02381-z.

Advances in screening and detection of gastric cancer

With an estimated one million new cases and 769 000 deaths in 2020, gastric cancer is the fifth most frequent cancer and fourth leading cause of cancer death globally. Incidence rates are highest in Asia and Eastern Europe. This manuscript will review the current modalities of diagnosis, staging, and screening of gastric cancer. We will also highlight development of novel diagnostics and advancements in endoscopic detection of early gastric cancer.

Proposal of minimum elements for screening and diagnosis of gastric cancer by an international Delphi consensus

The World Endoscopy Organization Stomach and Duodenal Diseases Committee extracted minimum elements for screening and diagnosis of gastric cancer (GC) in aim to support countries that do not have national guidelines on screening and diagnosis of GC. Current national or international guidelines were collected worldwide and recommendations were classified according to the quality of evidence and were finalized through a modified Delphi method. The minimum elements consist of seven categories: [1] Extraction of high-risk patients of GC before esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD), [2] Patients who need surveillance of GC, [3] Method to ensure quality of EGD for detection of GC, [4] Individual GC risk assessment by EGD, [5] Extraction of high-risk patients of GC after EGD [6] Qualitative or differential diagnosis of GC by EGD, and [7] Endoscopic assessment to choose the therapeutic strategy for GC. These minimum elements will be a guide to promote the elimination of GC among countries with a high incidence of GC who lack national guidelines or screening programs.

Development and evaluation of a double-check support system using artificial intelligence in endoscopic screening for gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to prevent missing gastric cancer and point out low-quality images by developing a double-check support system (DCSS) for esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) still images using artificial intelligence.

METHODS

We extracted 12,977 still EGD images from 855 cases with cancer [821 with early gastric carcinoma (EGC) and 34 malignant lymphoma (ML)] and developed a lesion detection system using 10,994 images. The remaining images were used as a test dataset. Additional validation was performed using a new dataset containing 50 EGC and 1,200 non-GC images by comparing the interpretation of ten endoscopists (five trainees and five experts). Furthermore, we developed another system to detect low-quality images, which are not suitable for diagnosis, using 2198 images.

RESULTS

In the validation of 1983 images from the 124 cancer cases, the DCSS diagnosed cancer with a sensitivity of 89.2%, positive predictive value (PPV) of 93.3%, and an accuracy of 83.3%. EGC was detected in 93.2% and ML in 92.5% of cases. Comparing with the endoscopists, sensitivity was significantly higher in the DCSS, and the average diagnostic time was significantly shorter using the DCSS than that by the trainees. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and accuracy in detecting low-quality images were 65.8%, 93.1%, 79.6%, and 85.2% for "Blur" and 57.8%, 91.7%, 82.2%, and 78.1% for "Mucus adhesion," respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The DCSS showed excellent capability in detecting lesions and pointing out low-quality images.

Endoscopic screening for gastric cancer in Japan: Current status and future perspectives

The revised 2014 Japanese Guidelines for Gastric Cancer Screening approved gastric endoscopy for use in population-based screening. Thus, it is expected that gastric cancer will be detected earlier, and gastric cancer mortality further decreased, with the widespread use of endoscopy and Helicobacter pylori eradication therapy. However, due to an increasingly aging population and relatively low gastric cancer screening rates, gastric cancer remains the leading cause of cancer death in Japan. While the era of endoscopic gastric cancer screening has begun, it does present challenges, such as limited/varying regional availability of endoscopists. This review describes the history of gastric cancer screening in Japan, achievements in endoscopic gastric cancer screening in Japan and Korea, efforts underway to improve screening by stratifying individuals according to gastric cancer risk, and initiatives by the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society aimed at improving screening, including the implementation of a board certification program for screening endoscopists.

Epidemiological Trends and Future Perspectives of Gastric Cancer in Eastern Asia

BACKGROUND

The global epidemiological situation of gastric cancer has changed considerably over time, and it is essential to understand the epidemiological trends and future perspectives of gastric cancer.

SUMMARY

Although gastric cancer was common in the United States less than a century previously, it is no longer common in this country. Currently, over 60% of gastric cancers are found in Eastern Asia. In some Eastern Asian countries such as Japan and Korea, population-based gastric cancer screening has been conducted using upper gastrointestinal endoscopy or radiography to lower gastric cancer mortality. Due to earlier detection of gastric cancer, the survival of patients with gastric cancer is more favorable in these countries than in other Western countries. Even in Eastern Asia, a remarkable decrease in the age-standardized incidence and mortality of gastric cancer has been observed. This downward trend is mainly due to the reduced Helicobacter pylori infection, and this trend is considered to continue. Nevertheless, both the absolute number of incident cases and deaths of gastric cancer are still increasing at present due to the aging population. For the time being, the management of gastric cancer in elderly population is a critical issue in Eastern Asia. The absolute numbers of gastric cancer cases and deaths are believed to peak in the near future, following the decreasing age-standardized incidence and mortality. Key Messages: After a long period, gastric cancer may become a rare cancer even in Eastern Asia, and new efficient approaches for its prevention, screening, and treatment are warranted.

Association of Regular Endoscopic Screening with Interval Gastric Cancer Incidence in the National Cancer Screening Program

Although regular endoscopic screening may help in early detection of gastric cancer, interval cancer remains a problem in the screening program. This study evaluated the association between regular endoscopic screening and interval cancer detection in the Korean National Cancer Screening Program (KNCSP). We defined three groups (regularly, irregularly, and not screened) according to the screening interval, and the trends in the interval cancer rate (ICR) between the groups were tested using the Cochran-Armitage test. The influence of regular endoscopic screening on the risk of interval cancer was evaluated using multivariable logistic regression. Among the 11,642,410 participants who underwent endoscopy, the overall ICR was 0.36 per 1000 negative screenings. The ICR of the not screened group (0.41) was the highest among the three groups and the risk of interval cancer in this group was 1.68 times higher (p < 0.001) than that in the regularly screened group. Women in their 40s who had regular screening with no history of intestinal metaplasia and gastric polyps would have the lowest probability of having interval cancer (0.005%). Regular participation in endoscopic screening programs for reducing the risk of interval cancer may help to improve the quality of screening programs.

Trends in the Performance of the Korean National Cancer Screening Program for Gastric Cancer from 2007 to 2016

Purpose

The Korean National Cancer Screening Program (KNCSP) has implemented two screening methods for gastric cancer— upper gastrointestinal series (UGIS) and endoscopy—for Koreans aged ≥ 40 years. We aimed to assess performance trends for both screening methods.

Materials and Methods

The KNCSP database was used to evaluate individuals who underwent screening from 2007 to 2016. The final gastric cancer diagnosis was ascertained by linking with the Korean Central Cancer Registry. We conducted a prospective, cross-sectional analysis to estimate performance indicators of gastric cancer screening by UGIS and endoscopy, stratified by sociodemographic factors.

Results

We found that screening rates for gastric cancer increased from 28% to 51.7% between 2007 and 2016, and that the rate of endoscopy use for gastric cancer screening increased sharply. Cancer detection rates (CDR) of UGIS and endoscopy were 0.41 and 2.25 per 1,000 screens in 2007–2008 and 0.26 and 1.99 in 2015–2016, respectively. Interval cancer rates (ICR) per 1,000 negative screenings were 1.33 (2007–2008) and 1.21 (2015–2016) for UGIS and 1.14 (2007–2008) and 0.88 (2015–2016) for endoscopy. The sensitivity of UGIS decreased from 23.6% (2007–2008) to 17.6% (2015–2016), whereas that of endoscopy increased from 66.4% (2007–2008) to 69.3% (2015–2016). Specificity was maintained at > 99% for both methods over the study period.

Conclusion

The use of endoscopy for gastric cancer screening within the KNCSP has increased. Endoscopy has higher CDR, sensitivity, and specificity, and lower ICR estimates than does UGIS.

Endoscopic Screening and Surveillance for Gastric Cancer

Gastric cancer is one of the most common cancers worldwide. Gastric cancer is a multifactorial disease, and the incidence varies widely by geographic region, with half of new cases occurring in East Asia. Population-based nationwide screening for gastric cancer has been implemented in some Eastern Asian countries such as South Korea and Japan. In these countries, endoscopic screening decreased gastric cancer mortality. Endoscopic screening seems to be a cost-effective modality in countries with high incidence of gastric cancer. However, the usefulness of population-based screening has not yet been proved in countries with low incidence of gastric cancer.

Utility of Kyoto Classification of Gastritis in subjects with a high-negative titer of anti-Helicobacter pylori antibody during a medical check-up

Subjects with a high-negative titer (3-9.9 U/ml) of serum anti-Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) antibody represent a heterogeneous group of currently H. pylori-infected, H. pylori-uninfected, and previously H. pylori-infected cases. We investigated the characteristics of subjects with a high-negative titer during a medical check-up and the utility of H. pylori infection score, the sum of scores of endoscopic findings based on the Kyoto Classification of Gastritis, for diagnosing H. pylori infection. Subjects with ¹³C-urea breath test-positive or H. pylori stool antigen test-positive were diagnosed as currently H. pylori-infected. Although around half of subjects with a high-negative titer were after eradication therapy (48.6%), currently H. pylori-infected were considerably confirmed (11.7%). H. pylori infection score showed a high value of area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [0.92; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.84-1.00] with the most suitable cut-off value of 1.0 (sensitivity: 0.92; specificity: 0.90). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that H. pylori infection score was an independent factor associated with increased prevalence of H. pylori infection (odds ratio, 9.53; 95% CI, 2.64-34.40; p<0.001). Currently H. pylori-infected subjects were considerably included among the subjects with a high-negative titer, and the Kyoto Classification of Gastritis was useful to predict current H. pylori infection.

A protocol of systematic review and meta-analysis of narrow band imaging endoscopy in detection of early gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Early gastric cancer is the fifth common malignancy and the third leading cause of cancer death throughout the world. However, it is not clear how endoscopic screening for early gastric cancer affects incidence or mortality. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the relationship between endoscopic screening for the mortality and incidence of early gastric cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This protocol established in this study has been reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols. Web of Science, PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched for cohort and case-control studies in cases without early gastric cancer until March 31, 2020. We will use a combination of Medical Subject Heading and free-text terms with various synonyms to search based on the Eligibility criteria. Two investigators independently reviewed the included studies and extracted relevant data. The relative risk and 95% confidence intervals were used as effect estimate. I-square test, substantial heterogeneity, sensitivity analysis, and publication bias assessment will be performed accordingly. Stata 15.0 and Review Manger 5.3 are used for meta-analysis and systematic review.

RESULTS

The results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.

CONCLUSION

The results of this review will be widely disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations. This evidence may also provide helpful evidence of whether endoscopic screening would reduce the mortality and incidence of early gastric cancer.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020171053.

Guidelines for endoscopic diagnosis of early gastric cancer

The Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society developed the Guideline for Endoscopic Diagnosis of Early Gastric Cancer based on scientific methods. Endoscopy for the diagnosis of early gastric cancer has been acknowledged as a useful and highly precise examination, and its use has become increasingly more common in recent years. However, the level of evidence in this field is low, and it is often necessary to determine recommendations based on expert consensus only. This clinical practice guideline consists of the following sections to provide the current guideline: [I] Risk stratification of gastric cancer before endoscopic examination, [II] Detection of early gastric cancer, [III] Qualitative diagnosis of early gastric cancer, [IV] Diagnosis to choose the therapeutic strategy for gastric cancer, [V] Risk stratification after endoscopic examination, and [VI] Surveillance of early gastric cancer.

Low baseline awareness of gastric cancer risk factors amongst at-risk multiracial/ethnic populations in New York City: results of a targeted, culturally sensitive pilot gastric cancer community outreach program

Background and Aims: There are limited efforts to address modifiable risk factors for gastric cancer (GC) among racial/ethnic groups at higher GC risk, which may reflect decreased public awareness of risk factors. Our primary aim was to assess baseline awareness of GC risk factors and attitudes/potential barriers for uptake of a GC screening program among high-risk individuals.Methods: Participants attended a linguistically and culturally targeted GC educational program in East Harlem (EH)/Bronx and Chinatown communities in New York City. Demographic information and relevant behavioral/lifestyle habits were collected. Participants' ability to identify GC risk factors and attitudes/barriers surrounding GC screening were assessed before and after the program.Results: Of the 168 included participants, most were female with 77% above age 70. Nearly half of participants in the EH/Bronx programs identified themselves as black and 63% as Hispanic/Latino; 93% of the Chinatown participants identified as Chinese. Among EH/Bronx participants, the majority correctly identified older age, smoking, alcohol, H. pylori, family history, race/ethnicity, excess salt, and preserved foods as risk factors. Among Chinatown participants, the majority correctly identified smoking, alcohol, race/ethnicity, and excess salt, although only 53% and 57.8% correctly identified H. pylori and preserved foods, respectively; the majority incorrectly answered that older age was not a major risk factor. The majority in both groups failed to identify male gender as higher risk and incorrectly identified stress and obesity as major risk factors. Participants were more concerned about the potential findings on GC screening tests than the risks and costs or having to take time off work.Conclusion: Among multiracial/ethnic groups of individuals presumably at higher risk for GC, we identified several gaps in baseline knowledge of both modifiable and non-modifiable GC risk factors. Culturally and linguistically appropriate educational interventions may be a worthwhile adjunctive intervention within the context of a targeted GC screening program.

The long-term population impact of endoscopic screening programmes on disease burdens of gastric cancer in China: A mathematical modelling study

BACKGROUND

Gastric cancer (GC) incidence and mortality in China remained high due to delayed diagnosis and accounted for about half of the world's GC cases and deaths. Early detection with endoscopic screening and consequent timely treatment can significantly improve survival. This study aimed to explore the long-term population impact of endoscopic screening on national GC disease burdens in China.

METHODS

Most of previous studies investigated the disease burdens of cancer using Markov model or age-period-cohort (APC) model, which are difficult to estimate the population size of undiagnosed cases. In this paper, we proposed a new dynamic compartmental model based on GC natural history and calibrated model outputs to diagnosed GC cases and GC-related death counts using Markov Chain Monte Carlo methods. We investigated the impact of screening strategies with various coverage (10%, 40%, 70%) and frequency (every 1, 3, 5 years) on disease burdens.

RESULTS

We estimated that 2.22 (95%CI: 1.97-2.47) million Chinese are living with GC in 2019, among which, 42.7% (40.3-45.0%) remained undiagnosed. Without systematic screening, we projected 10.46 (9.07-11.86) million incident cases and 7.35 (6.59-8.11) million GC-related deaths over the next 30 years (2019-2049). Screening with coverage rate at 10%, 40%, 70% every 3 years could prevent 0.85 (0.63-1.06), 2.32 (1.79-2.86), and 3.04 (2.38-3.70) million incident cases, and prevent 1.17 (1.01-1.32), 3.08 (2.70-3.46), and 3.93 (3.46-4.40) million deaths respectively, compared with 'no screening' scenario. Screening would substantially increase the number of diagnosed GC cases within the first three years of program initiation, but this number would quickly reduce below 'no screening' scenario. Three-yearly screening at the above coverage rates would reduce the proportion of undiagnosed GC cases to 38.8% (36.9-40.7%), 25.5% (23.4-27.6%), and 17.8% (16.0-19.6%) by 2049, respectively. Delaying implementation of the screening program would substantially reduce its effectiveness.

CONCLUSIONS

Initiating national endoscopic screening programmes would likely have a major effect on reducing GC incidence and mortality in China. Health resources should be substantially increased and directed to treatment of GC to cope with the initial rise in diagnosed GC cases.

British Society of Gastroenterology guidelines on the diagnosis and management of patients at risk of gastric adenocarcinoma

Gastric adenocarcinoma carries a poor prognosis, in part due to the late stage of diagnosis. Risk factors include Helicobacter pylori infection, family history of gastric cancer-in particular, hereditary diffuse gastric cancer and pernicious anaemia. The stages in the progression to cancer include chronic gastritis, gastric atrophy (GA), gastric intestinal metaplasia (GIM) and dysplasia. The key to early detection of cancer and improved survival is to non-invasively identify those at risk before endoscopy. However, although biomarkers may help in the detection of patients with chronic atrophic gastritis, there is insufficient evidence to support their use for population screening. High-quality endoscopy with full mucosal visualisation is an important part of improving early detection. Image-enhanced endoscopy combined with biopsy sampling for histopathology is the best approach to detect and accurately risk-stratify GA and GIM. Biopsies following the Sydney protocol from the antrum, incisura, lesser and greater curvature allow both diagnostic confirmation and risk stratification for progression to cancer. Ideally biopsies should be directed to areas of GA or GIM visualised by high-quality endoscopy. There is insufficient evidence to support screening in a low-risk population (undergoing routine diagnostic oesophagogastroduodenoscopy) such as the UK, but endoscopic surveillance every 3 years should be offered to patients with extensive GA or GIM. Endoscopic mucosal resection or endoscopic submucosal dissection of visible gastric dysplasia and early cancer has been shown to be efficacious with a high success rate and low rate of recurrence, providing that specific quality criteria are met.

Upper Endoscopy up to 3 Years Prior to a Diagnosis of Gastric Cancer Is Associated With Lower Stage of Disease in a USA Multiethnic Urban Population, a Retrospective Study

OBJECTIVES

In the USA, certain races and ethnicities have a disproportionately higher gastric cancer burden. Selective screening might allow for earlier detection and curative resection. Among a USA-based multiracial and ethnic cohort diagnosed with non-cardia gastric cancer (NCGC), we aimed to identify factors associated with curable stage disease at diagnosis.

METHODS

We retrospectively identified endoscopically diagnosed and histologically confirmed cases of NCGC at Mount Sinai Hospital in New York City. Demographic, clinical, endoscopic and histologic factors, as well as grade/stage of NCGC at diagnosis were documented. The primary outcome was the frequency of curable-stage NCGC (stage 0-1a) at diagnosis in patients with versus without an endoscopy negative for malignancy prior to their index exam diagnosing NCGC. Additional factors associated with curable-stage disease at diagnosis were determined.

RESULTS

A total of 103 racially and ethnically diverse patients were included. Nearly 38% of NCGC were stage 0-Ia, 34% stage Ib-III, and 20.3% stage IV at diagnosis. A significantly higher frequency of NCGC was diagnosed in curable stages among patients who had undergone an endoscopy that was negative for malignancy prior to their index endoscopy that diagnosed NCGC, compared to patients without a negative endoscopy prior to their index exam (69.6% vs. 28.6%, p=0.003). A prior negative endoscopy was associated with 94.0% higher likelihood of diagnosing curable-stage NCGC (p=0.003). No other factors analyzed were associated with curable-stage NCGC at diagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic screening and surveillance in select high-risk populations might increase diagnoses of curable-stage NCGC. These findings warrant confirmation in larger, prospective studies.

Early gastric cancer diagnostic ability of ultrathin endoscope loaded with laser light source

BACKGROUND

Conventionally, the low luminous intensity, low image resolution, and difficulty in operation have been reported with the ultrathin endoscope. However, it has markedly advanced recently. The improvement of the diagnostic ability is expected.

AIM

To compare the early gastric cancer diagnostic ability of an ultrathin endoscope loaded with a laser light source and that of the conventional endoscope.

METHODS

The target subjects were 375 consecutive patients who underwent endoscopy at our hospital for post-endoscopic submucosal dissection follow-up of gastric cancer from January to August 2018. During endoscopy, the ultrathin endoscope was used in 140 patients (37.3%), and the conventional endoscope was used in 235 patients (62.7%). Patient background was adjusted using the propensity score matching method, and gastric cancer detection ability was evaluated in the two groups.

RESULTS

The gastric cancer detection rate was 7.8% in the ultrathin endoscope group and 7.0% in the conventional endoscope group, and the mean intragastric observation time was 4.1 ± 1.7 min in the ultrathin endoscope group and 4.1 ± 1.9 min in the conventional endoscope group, showing no significant differences between the groups. Moreover, the biopsy implementation rate was 31.8% in the ultrathin endoscope group and 41.1% in the conventional endoscope group, and the biopsy prediction rate was 17.9% and 13.2%, respectively, showing no significant differences between the groups.

CONCLUSION

The gastric cancer diagnostic ability of the ultrathin endoscope loaded with a laser light source was comparable to that of the conventional endoscope. The observation time was also comparable. Thus, endoscopy using the ultrathin endoscope loaded with the laser light source would be the first option in screening examinations of gastric cancer due to its low invasion.

Differences in upper gastrointestinal neoplasm detection rates based on inspection time and esophagogastroduodenoscopy training

Background and study aims  Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) has utility in early detection of upper gastrointestinal (UGI) neoplasms. However, previous studies report shorter inspection times and inexperienced endoscopists contribute to overlooking gastric neoplasms. We investigated neoplasm detection rates according to inspection time and extent of EGD training. Patients and methods  In this retrospective observational study, we reviewed routine EGDs for 3,925 consecutive cases between October 2014 and March 2015. We divided the endoscopists into three groups based on median inspection time during EGD without undergoing biopsy. Using cut-off median inspection times of 7 and 10 minutes, three, five, and eight endoscopists were classified into the fast, moderate, and slow groups, respectively. We compared detection rates according to inspection time and the extent of EGD training. Results  The median inspection time among all endoscopists was 9.3 minutes (range, 6.6 - 12.0 min). The detection rate for UGI neoplasms was as follows: fast group, 3.6%; moderate group, 3.3 %; and slow group, 3.1 % ( P  = 0.807). The median inspection time was significantly shorter among the intensive training ≥ 1-year group than among the < 1-year group (< 1-year: median 6.3 min; range 8.2 - 13.9 min, ≥ 1-year: median 8.9 min; range 6.4 - 11.4 min, P  < 0.001). The detection rate for UGI neoplasms was significantly higher among the intensive training ≥ 1-year group than among the < 1-year group (< 1-year: 2.2 %; ≥ 1-year: 3.7 %, OR = 1.65, 95 % CI: 1.02 - 2.68, P  = 0.041). Conclusions  There was no association between inspection times and neoplasm detection rates. The quality of EGD, as measured by neoplasm detection rates, may be improved by ≥ 1-year of intensive training.

Cost Effectiveness of Gastric Cancer Screening According to Race and Ethnicity

BACKGROUND & AIMS

There are marked racial and ethnic differences in non-cardia gastric cancer prevalence within the United States. Although gastric cancer screening is recommended in some regions of high prevalence, screening is not routinely performed in the United States. Our objective was to determine whether selected non-cardia gastric cancer screening for high-risk races and ethnicities within the United States is cost effective.

METHODS

We developed a decision analytic Markov model with the base case of a 50-year-old person of non-Hispanic white, non-Hispanic black, Hispanic, or Asian race or ethnicity. The cost effectiveness of a no-screening strategy (current standard) for non-cardia gastric cancer was compared with that of 2 endoscopic screening modalities initiated at the time of screening colonoscopy for colorectal cancer: upper esophagogastroduodenoscopy with biopsy examinations and continued surveillance only if intestinal metaplasia or more severe pathology is identified or esophagogastroduodenoscopy with biopsy examinations continued every 2 years even in the absence of identified pathology. We used prevalence rates, transition probabilities, costs, and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) from publications and public data sources. Outcome measures were reported in incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, with a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/QALY.

RESULTS

Compared with biennial and no screening, screening esophagogastroduodenoscopy with continued surveillance only when indicated was cost effective for non-Hispanic blacks ($80,278/QALY), Hispanics ($76,070/QALY), and Asians ($71,451/QALY), but not for non-Hispanic whites ($122,428/QALY). The model was sensitive to intestinal metaplasia prevalence, transition rates from intestinal metaplasia to dysplasia to local and regional cancer, cost of endoscopy, and cost of resection (endoscopic or surgical).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on a decision analytic Markov model, endoscopic non-cardia gastric cancer screening for high-risk races and ethnicities could be cost effective in the United States.

Endoscopic Screening in Asian Countries Is Associated With Reduced Gastric Cancer Mortality: A Meta-analysis and Systematic Review

BACKGROUND & AIMS

It is not clear how endoscopic screening for gastric cancer affects incidence or mortality. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the relationship between endoscopic screening for gastric cancer and mortality and incidence.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search of PubMed and EMBASE for published cohort and case-control studies of adults without gastric cancer who underwent endoscopic screening at least once that included a comparator and reported outcomes of mortality or incidence through March 8, 2018. Two investigators independently reviewed the included studies and extracted relevant data. The effect estimate of interest was the relative risk (RR). We used a random effects model to combine RRs and 95% confidence intervals (Cis).

RESULTS

Our final analysis included 6 cohort studies and 4 nested case-control studies comprising 342,013 individuals, all from Asia. The combined result (RR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.49-0.73) indicated that endoscopic screening was associated with a 40% RR reduction in gastric cancer mortality. We did not observe an association between endoscopic screening and incidence (RR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.93-1.40). Subgroup analysis showed significant reductions in gastric cancer mortality after endoscopic screening compared with no screening (RR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.48-0.70) or radiographic screening (RR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.12-0.91). However, endoscopic screening did not significantly reduce mortality compared with expected deaths (RR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.38-1.16).

CONCLUSIONS

In a systematic review and meta-analysis, we found that endoscopic screening may reduce the risk of death from gastric cancer and not affect incidence in Asian countries. Population-based prospective cohort studies are warranted to confirm our findings.

Update version of the Japanese Guidelines for Gastric Cancer Screening

BACKGROUND

Although the incidence and mortality of gastric cancer have gradually decreased, its burden remains in East Asian countries. Gastric cancer screening has been performed in Japan since 1983, and the introduction of new screening techniques has been eagerly anticipated.

OBJECTIVE

To promote evidence-based screening, the Japanese guidelines for gastric cancer screening have been revised based on the new studies.

METHODS

The guidelines for gastric cancer screening have been developed according to a previously established method. To assess evidence regarding the effectiveness of the screening methods, a systematic review was conducted based on an analytic framework including clinical questions aiming at reducing mortality from gastric cancer. The following methods were assessed for gastric cancer screening: upper gastrointestinal series (radiographic screening), gastrointestinal endoscopy (endoscopic screening), Helicobacter pylori antibody test and serum pepsinogen tests. Based on the balance of the benefits and harms of each screening method, recommendations for population-based and opportunistic screenings were formulated.

FINDINGS

After the Japanese guidelines for gastric cancer screening were published in 2005, several observational studies on radiographic and endoscopic screenings have been reported. Three case-control studies have evaluated mortality reduction from gastric cancer by endoscopic screening. Notably, evidence of the H. pylori antibody and serum pepsinogen tests was insufficient. Although false-positive results, false-negative results, and complications were observed in endoscopic and radiographic screenings, the complication rates were higher in endoscopic screening than in radiographic screening. Overdiagnosis was not estimated directly in both methods.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Radiographic and endoscopic screenings for gastric cancer are recommended for population-based and opportunistic screenings. The H. pylori antibody and serum pepsinogen tests are not recommended for population-based screening because of insufficient evidence.

Cancer screening guidelines and policy making: 15 years of experience in cancer screening guideline development in Japan

Cancer deaths have remained a heavy burden in Japan, thus cancer screening has been anticipated to be a practical strategy for reducing mortality from cancers. The Basic Plan to Promote Cancer Control Program published in 2006 stated that evidence-based cancer screening is required. At the conception of national cancer screening programs, there were no cancer screening assessments. From 1998 to 2001, Hisamichi formed committees for the assessment of cancer screening and published three reports. These reports were the cornerstone in assessing primary studies of cancer screening in Japan which served as a stimulus for the development of cancer screening guidelines. Since 2003, research groups funded by the National Cancer Center have developed cancer screening guidelines based on established methods in reference to international standards. Screening guidelines for the following cancers have been published: gastric, colorectal, lung, prostate, cervical and breast cancers. Recommendations for screening are made following assessment of the balance of benefits and harms. The recommendation has been divided for population-based screening and opportunistic screening. New screening techniques with insufficient evidence have been suggested to further undergo research. The national committee has continued to appraise their evidence for cancer screening based on established guidelines and has discussed implementation problems. The screening methods for breast and gastric cancers have been revised based on cancer screening guidelines. Cancer screening guidelines have increasingly contributed to the promotion of evidence-based cancer screening for national programs. To provide appropriate cancer screening evidence, additional studies to further improve the methodology for guideline development are warranted.

Diagnostic performance of routine esophagogastroduodenoscopy using magnifying endoscope with narrow-band imaging for gastric cancer

BACKGROUND AND AIM

In Japan, an increase in the number of routine esophagogastroduodenoscopy procedures is expected because several studies have reported that endoscopy screening has reduced gastric cancer mortality. Magnifying narrow-band imaging has been reported to be effective for accurate diagnosis of gastric abnormalities such as cancers, adenomas, and intestinal metaplasia. However, the efficacy of this method in routine esophagogastroduodenoscopy has not been clarified.

METHODS

We divided 3763 patients into two groups. The non-magnification group included 1842 patients who underwent endoscopy screening using GIF-H260/LUCERA-SPECTRUM between October 2014 and February 2015, whereas the magnification group included 1921 patients who underwent screening using GIF-H290Z/LUCERA-ELITE between March 2015 and May 2015. In the magnification group, diagnosis of cancer was conducted using the VS classification system. We did not carry out a biopsy when results were confirmed as non-cancer using magnifying narrow-band imaging. If cancer was diagnosed, or when a cancer or non-cancer diagnosis was difficult, we carried out a biopsy. We analyzed and compared the diagnostic performance between the two groups.

RESULTS

Gastric biopsy rate was significantly lower in the magnification group (29%) than in the non-magnification group (41%) (P < 0.001). Positive predictive value (PPV) for gastric cancer was significantly higher in the magnification group (5.5%) than in the non-magnification group (2.5%) (P < 0.001). Furthermore, PPV for gastric epithelial neoplasia was significantly higher in the magnification group (7.9%) than in the non-magnification group (3.2%) (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Magnifying narrow-band imaging improves the diagnostic performance of routine esophagogastroduodenoscopy.

Effectiveness of Gastric Cancer Screening on Gastric Cancer Incidence and Mortality in a Community-Based Prospective Cohort

Purpose

This study was performed to investigate the effectiveness of gastric cancer (GC) screening methods in a community-based prospective cohort of the Korean Multi-center Cancer Cohort (KMCC) with over a 10-year follow-up.

Materials and Methods

A total 10,909 and 4,773 subjects from the KMCC with information on gastroendoscopy (GE) and upper gastrointestinal series (UGIS) were included in this study. Cox proportional hazard model adjusted for age, sex, Helicobacter pylori infection, cigarette smoking, and alcohol drinking was used to estimate the hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence interval (CI).

Results

The GE screened subjects had almost half the risk of GC-specific death than that of unscreened subjects (HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.94). Among the GC patients, GE screenees had a 2.24-fold higher survival rate than that of the non-screenees (95% CI, 1.61 to 3.11). In particular, GE screenees who underwent two or more screening episodes had a higher survival rate than that of the non-screenees (HR, 13.11; 95% CI, 7.38 to 23.30). The effectiveness of GE screening on reduced GC mortality and increased survival rate of GC patients was better in elderly subjects (≥ 65 years old) (HR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.24 to 0.95 and HR, 8.84; 95% CI, 3.63 to 21.57, respectively) than that in younger subjects (< 65 years old) (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.34 to 1.29 and HR, 1.83; 95% CI, 1.24 to 2.68, respectively). In contrast, UGIS screening had no significant relation to GC mortality and survival.

Conclusion

The findings of this study suggest that a decreased GC-specific mortality and improved survival rate in GC patients can be achieved through GE screening.

Benefits and harms of endoscopic screening for gastric cancer

Gastric cancer has remained a serious burden worldwide, particularly in East Asian countries. However, nationwide prevention and screening programs for gastric cancer have not yet been established in most countries except in South Korea and Japan. Although evidence regarding the effectiveness of endoscopic screening for gastric cancer has been increasingly accumulated, such evidence remains weak because it is based on results from studies other than randomized controlled trials. Specifically, evidence was mostly based on the results of cohort and case-control studies mainly conducted in South Korea and Japan. However, the consistent positive results from these studies suggest promising evidence of mortality reduction from gastric cancer by endoscopic screening. The major harms of endoscopic screening include infection, adverse effects, false-positive results, and overdiagnosis. Despite the possible harms of endoscopic screening, information regarding these harms remains insufficient. To provide appropriate cancer screening, a balance of benefits and harms should always be considered when cancer screening is introduced as a public policy. Quality assurance is very important for the implementation of cancer screening to provide high-quality and safe screening and minimize harms. Endoscopic screening for gastric cancer has shown promising results, and thus deserves further evaluation to reliably establish its effectiveness and optimal use.

The Influence of Gastric Cancer Screening on the Stage at Diagnosis and Survival: A Meta-Analysis of Comparative Studies in the Far East

Gastric cancer is the fifth most common cancer and the second most common cause of cancer-related death worldwide. The aim of this review was to evaluate the effect of gastric cancer screening on the stage at diagnosis and survival from disease. A systematic review of the literature between January 1995 and December 2014 was performed. Studies that compared screened versus nonscreened populations for the diagnosis of gastric cancer and included the stage at diagnosis were analyzed. The QUADAS-2 and the ROBANS tools were used to assess the quality of the studies. A total of 11 studies from the Far East comprising 4039 participants in the screened and 6635 in the nonscreened groups were included. Screening was associated with a significant increase in the detection of early gastric cancer (EGC) [pooled odds ratio (POR)=3.90; 95% confidence interval (CI), 3.01-5.06; P<0.0001] and reduction in the incidence of advanced gastric cancer (POR=0.27; 95% CI, 0.20-0.35; P<0.0001). Furthermore, screening improved the 5-year survival significantly (hazard ratio=0.56; 95% CI, 0.48-0.66; P<0.0001). About 73% of the screened patients were found to have EGC compared with 43% of the nonscreened patients. About 8% of the screened patients were found to have advanced gastric cancer compared with 54% of the nonscreened patients. Screening for gastric cancer is useful in detecting asymptomatic patients with EGC in high-prevalence areas. This in turn increases the number of treatable cancers and improves the 5-year survival. There is a need for the development and the validation of alternative risk-stratification tools in low-incidence areas to allow for similar benefits.

Impact of endoscopic screening on mortality reduction from gastric cancer

AIM

To investigate mortality reduction from gastric cancer based on the results of endoscopic screening.

METHODS

The study population consisted of participants of gastric cancer screening by endoscopy, regular radiography, and photofluorography at Niigata city in 2005. The observed numbers of cumulative deaths from gastric cancers and other cancers were accumulated by linkage with the Niigata Prefectural Cancer Registry. The standardized mortality ratio (SMR) of gastric cancer and other cancer deaths in each screening group was calculated by applying the mortality rate of the reference population.

RESULTS

Based on the results calculated from the mortality rate of the population of Niigata city, the SMRs of gastric cancer death were 0.43 (95%CI: 0.30-0.57) for the endoscopic screening group, 0.68 (95%CI: 0.55-0.79) for the regular radiographic screening group, and 0.85 (95%CI: 0.71-0.94) for the photofluorography screening group. The mortality reduction from gastric cancer was higher in the endoscopic screening group than in the regular radiographic screening group despite the nearly equal mortality rates of all cancers except gastric cancer.

CONCLUSION

The 57% mortality reduction from gastric cancer might indicate the effectiveness of endoscopic screening for gastric cancer. Further studies and prudent interpretation of results are needed.

Current issues and future perspectives of gastric cancer screening

Gastric cancer remains the second leading cause of cancer death worldwide. About half of the incidence of gastric cancer is observed in East Asian countries, which show a higher mortality than other countries. The effectiveness of 3 new gastric cancer screening techniques, namely, upper gastrointestinal endoscopy, serological testing, and "screen and treat" method were extensively reviewed. Moreover, the phases of development for cancer screening were analyzed on the basis of the biomarker development road map. Several observational studies have reported the effectiveness of endoscopic screening in reducing mortality from gastric cancer. On the other hand, serologic testing has mainly been used for targeting the high-risk group for gastric cancer. To date, the effectiveness of new techniques for gastric cancer screening has remained limited. However, endoscopic screening is presently in the last trial phase of development before their introduction to population-based screening. To effectively introduce new techniques for gastric cancer screening in a community, incidence and mortality reduction from gastric cancer must be initially and thoroughly evaluated by conducting reliable studies. In addition to effectiveness evaluation, the balance of benefits and harms must be carefully assessed before introducing these new techniques for population-based screening.